|
Munkeymon posted:Maybe their BIOS authors just suck? Maybe I should stop buying Asus? Only time will tell. Of course I also overclock too so it could easily be just that and none of it happens enough to be a real problem so I don't care much, just pointing out problems like these are everywhere and not much you can do but shrug about it. VealCutlet posted:you could also add more voltage to the RAM but I'm not 100% sure what is safe for 24/7 usage on DDR4. Go to 5:30 for where he talks about RAM overclocking in general. 6:00 for talk about RAM overvolting and "safe" ranges. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZgpHTaQ10k tl&dr for OC'ing Ryzen: vCore 1.4v, vSoC 1.1v, vDRAM 1.4-5v = 4Ghz most every time. He talks about a few other things but that is the main take away. PC LOAD LETTER fucked around with this message at 01:46 on May 19, 2017 |
#
?
May 19, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 14:21 |
|
|
SoC will only help mem stability right? It won't help with CPU? My 1600 is a bit of a pig and I doubt I could get to 4GHz but I haven't pushed the SoC past 1.05
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 02:14
|
|
|
It can help with both. Exactly how much? Dunno, probably varies per chip. Going by the video it doesn't seem an issue to set it to 1.1v though.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:It can help with both. Exactly how much? Dunno, probably varies per chip. Going by the video it doesn't seem an issue to set it to 1.1v though. Might give it a crack over the w/e. Highest stable I got for cinebench was 3.9 but at stupid volts.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Another RAM related question: is RAM timing in the BIOS accurate? My timing should be 15-17-17-35 but instead the MSI BIOS insists on displaying it at 15-15-15-36. Should I be concerned? Should I manually enter timing info?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
My kit's XMP profile says 15-16-16-35 and the BIOS on my board bumps it to 16-16-16. Maybe CL, TRCD, and TRP need to be set equal with this version of AGESA?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Oh hey, I didn't notice that this week AMD released the AMD Optimizing C/C++ Compiler, AOCC. The Intel compiler is pretty well known for turning out better performance on their platform, so a similar move could be good for AMD.quote:https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-ryzen-aocc&num=5 Dammit, AMD. Kazinsal posted:We need an :amd: like we have a
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
SamDabbers posted:My kit's XMP profile says 15-16-16-35 and the BIOS on my board bumps it to 16-16-16. Maybe CL, TRCD, and TRP need to be set equal with this version of AGESA? Turdsdown Tom posted:Another RAM related question: is RAM timing in the BIOS accurate? My timing should be 15-17-17-35 but instead the MSI BIOS insists on displaying it at 15-15-15-36. Should I be concerned? Should I manually enter timing info? It should be accurate in the BIOS but if what is in the BIOS and on the RAM sticker itself don't match then I wouldn't be concerned unless you're not stable at the clocks you want. Then I'd manually set them to what the sticker says and see what happens. I don't think anyone actually knows what or how exactly AMD's current version of AGESA is setting the timings. About all you can seem to say is that it really likes to push tighter timings as much as possible. There is an update that is supposed to be coming soon that should allow lots more flexibility there but I don't think anyone knows exactly when its supposed to be out.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
Rastor posted:Oh hey, I didn't notice that this week AMD released the AMD Optimizing C/C++ Compiler, AOCC. The Intel compiler is pretty well known for turning out better performance on their platform, so a similar move could be good for AMD. It'd be surprising if AMD had the resources to release a compiler that actually did emit code that ran better on their hardware 
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
My desktop has bluescreened on my twice in the last twelve hours, so I might have to upgrade a few months early and as of right now I'm leaning AMD, satan help me.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
Sorry, there are actually legitimate mainstream reasons for building an AMD rig now.
SwissArmyDruid fucked around with this message at 22:12 on May 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Yeah, AMD distinctly doesn't suck in the CPU department anymore. GPUs are still a disillusioned sigh at the top end though.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:Yeah, AMD distinctly doesn't suck in the CPU department anymore. Weird strategy to release the mid tier first.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
It's not that surprising that AMD has trouble building a compiler that outperforms LLVM; LLVM has decent code generation, Ryzen's scheduling requirements can't be that different from Core's or they'd suck wind on existing software, and AMD doesn't afaik have a serious compiler team. What's surprising is that they'd build a wet fart of a compiler and then actually release it. Why bother? How do they gain?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Weird strategy to release the mid tier first. They thought that was such a great strategy, they did it twice.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Weird strategy to release the mid tier first. Works for NVIDIA with GPUs.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:They thought that was such a great strategy, they did it twice. Eh, I don't mind my RX 460, but I got it entirely because my i7 6800k build didn't have an integrated GPU, I wanted open source drivers on Linux, and the heftiest 3D program I run is Dolphin. In literally any other circumstances I would have bought something else.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:What's surprising is that they'd build a wet fart of a compiler and then actually release it. Why bother? How do they gain? I was wondering the same thing. Maybe it is a checkbox on some big contract(s) they really want to land?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:Yeah, AMD distinctly doesn't suck in the CPU department anymore. Oh yeah, don't get me wrong - I upgraded to a 1070 last year. Gonna continue to not bother with ATI no matter who's name is on the door
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Works for NVIDIA with GPUs. Ah yes the mid tier card the Titan Z, X, XP.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
The 1080 is not mid tier
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
PerrineClostermann posted:The 1080 is not mid tier 1070 wasnt at launch either considering it was matching the high tier 980ti. It still isnt really mid tier if you consider the whole lineup on both sides
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
Fauxtool posted:1070 wasnt at launch either considering it was matching the high tier 980ti. Also, a GTX 1050 isn't really low-end when you consider that it matches a high-tier GTX 580. In fact, even integrated graphics are high-end if we measure against a Voodoo 5. Really makes you think, huh? quote:It still isnt really mid tier if you consider the whole lineup on both sides The fact that AMD's lineup has been clownshoes does not change the fact that the 1070 is a mid-tier graphics card. There are 2 cards above it in the lineup, that reach performance levels 60% higher than the 1070. Prices are hanging out just above $300 right now. It's exactly in the middle of NVIDIA's lineup. It's a mid-tier card. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 04:13 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
Maybe in a rich man's world.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
PerrineClostermann posted:Maybe in a rich man's world. Yes, the x70 GPU, traditionally the best-selling price point in the entire lineup, is truly a status symbol for wealthy gamers. AMD's lack of offerings above the RX 480 is causing some serious sour grapes for you guys. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 05:24 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
It is at its launch price, yes. And I say that as someone who owns a water cooled 1070
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 05:24
|
|
|
Nah, a $350-400 launch price is the norm for x70 cards dating back to the GTX 470. Go look it up if you like. This poo poo is why Intel doesn't ever lower their prices: if they ever raise them back up then people will throw a temper tantrum. So Intel competes based on features/performance rather than pricing. Frankly the whole thing is comical to me because NVIDIA has actually been the one driving increased consumer value in the GPU market for at least 3 years now. AMD is still peddling the same 290-performance-for-$200 offering they were 2 years ago, and rebranding has become AMD's norm. At this point they essentially just follow NVIDIA's pricing structure, and the only time they really lower prices is when NVIDIA comes out with a newer/faster/cheaper offering that forces their hand. In the GPU market: AMD is basically what people imagine Intel to be. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 05:46 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 05:44
|
|
|
...And a 300+ launch price is not mid-tier.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 05:46
|
|
|
PerrineClostermann posted:...And a 300+ launch price is not mid-tier. The $330 970 was perhaps their best selling card ever though, it's been #1 on the steam hardware survey for ages. What defines mid-tier?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:The $330 970 was perhaps their best selling card ever though, it's been #1 on the steam hardware survey for ages. What defines mid-tier? My understanding it that the card that most closely matches the average performance of both companies current line up is the mid tier. Just about everything from AMD is low to mid and nvidia is generally speaking low to high. I would call the rx580 4gb and 1060 3gb mid tier Fauxtool fucked around with this message at 06:02 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:The $330 970 was perhaps their best selling card ever though, it's been #1 on the steam hardware survey for ages. What defines mid-tier? Well by basing the performance scales on the classic everyman's GPU, the Rage 128 Pro: you can clearly see that the current offerings all fall into the super-ultra-platinum tier, the mega-super-titanium tier, and the hyper-giga-ultra tier. Serious answer: it's arbitrary to slice them into 3 performance tier to begin with, each model of GPU in the lineup is pretty much exactly 25-30% faster than the last (apart from 1050 Ti). So really they're all their own "category" if you want to look at it like that, there are really like 5 performance categories (low/low-mid/upper-mid/lower-highend/upper-highend). That puts the 1070 as an "upper-mid" tier, which sounds correct to me given the x70's mainstream popularity. This question really also involves an implicit judgement on what resolutions/refresh rates are low-range, mid-range, and high-end. After all, a 1060 is a pretty decent GPU for 1080p... not so much for 1440p or even 1080p high-refresh. From a 1080p perspective I can certainly see the 1070 being high-end, but at 1440p it's the entry-level offering for a decent experience, whereas the 1060 would definitely be low-end. But this is where people dig in their heels and start screaming about how the Steam Hardware Survey says if you own anything higher than 1080p60 then you deserve the guillotine. (as if the Steam Hardware Survey isn't totally dominated by laptops with integrated graphics and other PCs that are laughably unable to handle modern gaming) Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 06:39 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:17
|
|
|
Fauxtool posted:My understanding it that the card that most closely matches the average performance of both companies current line up is the mid tier. I would call that "bare minimum for a dGPU" tier, and strongly encourage the buyer to do whatever is necessary for a few extra bucks to get a 480/580 8GB or 1060 6 GB.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:20
|
|
|
one issue is that most of us are enthusiasts and view tiering entirely different to the mass market. A solid 60fps at 1080p is a premium experience to most people. I figure many of us, me included consider something like 120fps gsync at 1440p the minimum i would be willing to accept because im not willing to downgrade to a lesser setup once I have experienced the nice stuff Fauxtool fucked around with this message at 06:42 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:35
|
|
|
Eh, I'm planning on building a new desktop this year around Ryzen, and moving my current 1060 6GB over to it. I plan on sticking at 1080p for some time, so it provides me with more than adequate horsepower. If the stars align to the point that I can get a more serious monitor then I would start considering a more serious videocard.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:43
|
|
|
I actually believe that 1080p60 should be the absolute minimum, and that's where I base my scaling from. Consoles have been trying to promise 1080p for god knows how long now, and they're still continuing to fail at it. They need to get with the times, they're holding everyone back.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:I actually believe that 1080p60 should be the absolute minimum, and that's where I base my scaling from. Consoles have been trying to promise 1080p for god knows how long now, and they're still continuing to fail at it. They need to get with the times, they're holding everyone back. its probably not going to happen, instead they will fail at 4k30fps while being able to do 1080p60fps but not offering it anymore.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
In my mind, now that monitor prices have dropped significantly in the past two years, mid tier is either 1440p @ 60hz or 1080ps @ 144hz.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 07:10
|
|
|
Fauxtool posted:its probably not going to happen, instead they will fail at 4k30fps while being able to do 1080p60fps but not offering it anymore. The sad part is, you're probably right. The only people who are going to do 1080p60 are going to be the character action devs, i.e, Platinum.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 08:02
|
|
|
Fauxtool posted:its probably not going to happen, instead they will fail at 4k30fps while being able to do 1080p60fps but not offering it anymore. If Destiny 2 is any indication then consoles are becoming CPU bottlenecked which would explain why the game is locked to 30 fps at any resolution (correct me if I'm wrong). Guess that's what happens when you bump up the GPU performance and neglect the CPU during the mid-cycle refreshes. Scorpio is also based on Jaguar with a clockspeed bump so same story there. We'll have to wait for Zen APUs to see another meaningful improvement. (PS5 next year?) IGN Destiny 2 interview posted:IGN: "Why did you make that decision. You're like 'We're going to lock it at 4K/30 max on consoles.' Is it just like, you don't want to push the consoles too hard, or why do you make that choice?" The good thing to come out of this for the PC is that multithreading will be more important than ever.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 08:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 14:21 |
|
|
I don't even understand this half-step generation bullshit. There was literally no reason to do any of it, the stupid console makers heard "VR" and their goddamn genitals overrode their good sense and decided they needed to half-step so they could force VR where it wasn't a good fit. The REAL thing to do would be to clean sheet both consoles and start with a Raven Ridge part, assuming that Raja hasn't been talking out his rear end for the past year+, and whatever GPU silicon they're working on now can actually hold up their end of the bargain. But I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir. SwissArmyDruid fucked around with this message at 10:09 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 10:04
|
|