|
Munkeymon posted:
Desktop composition is very bad and it almost certainly does affect you.
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2018 19:49
|
|
10 works fine for me? I even have a high-DPI, high-refresh monitor and an older very-much-neither-of-those-things monitor next to it. Granted, I don't see the point of playing a game windowed if you have a second monitor, but live your best life, I guess.
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
LTT is great, in a unique way. Linus shows you the dumb poo poo people actually do when they get an idea in their head. The man has zero shame, and is simultaneously smart and stupid enough to make content that is really entertaining for a lot of people. You could almost call him a metaphor for AMD CPU design.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2018 03:52
|
|
|
I would tend to guess that the problems are lack of CPU and RAM, and perhaps some degree of GPU horsepower, not storage speed. E:D is extremely procedural, so even more than an average game "loading" stuff is very, very computationally expensive.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2018 15:32
|
|
|
I really doubt that AMD has an early ES going 4.5ghz. Makes the whole story sound fake. It's like the exact opposite of what you do with engineering samples.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Hey guys I'm here today with a quick tutorial on how to build a PC for a game. Step 1 : Forget about buying a computer until a month or two before the game comes out. Seriously the only reason to keep track of hardware that you aren't going to use right away is because it's fun. Never ever buy poo poo in advance, yeah there are plenty of times when prices have gone up but the odds are buying hardware you aren't going to use right away is just throwing money away.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2018 16:01
|
|
|
No, you would be playing with a capped framerate and vsync off at sub minimum detail no matter what your config. Having a higher refresh rate reduces latency, and CRTs don't have any of the persistence issues that make it hard to properly drive LCDs to really high refresh rates. The actual visual benefits of refresh rate increases aren't linear, but probably exist up to around 1000hz anyway. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Nov 11, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2018 04:10
|
|
|
monsterzero posted:So, after VEGA VII, do you think the 8C Matisse going to be priced like a 2700x or a 9900k? AMD is not going to take the lead and undercut Intel on price - although total system cost will still likely be the same/lower with AMD's cheaper platform.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2019 00:28
|
|
|
It could literally be a retarded fast L4 cache, high latency high bandwidth.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2019 20:52
|
|
|
That's not what he said. He said there will be 12 and 16 core processors in addition to the 8 cores we already know about, not that 8 cores is the baseline. Those are going to be the ultra-high end super expensive ones, maybe the TR binnings that clock 100mhz higher.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2019 07:06
|
|
|
It's really not, especially not in current year. If you have the best product, you price that motherfucker sky high and sell off the halo effect.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2019 04:36
|
|
|
People keep buying Intel because their CPUs are still dramatically superior for gaming. It's not that complicated. If Zen2 changes that, AMD will sell like mad.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2019 22:23
|
|
|
It's not an exaggeration at all, the 9900k takes a giant dump on the 2700X in games. It's more typically in the range of 25-50% faster when you're CPU bound. Yes, a lot of people are going to wind up GPU bound and not have it matter a lot, but it's really silly to pretend that there isn't still a big rear end performance gap between AMD and Intel when trying to explain why Intel still dominates. The appeal of halo products filters down, and AMD is still not even close to competitive at the high end of gaming. e - people buying CPUs expecting they will last through several GPUs is also a big factor. When you expect to become more CPU bound over time, Intel's value proposition improves a lot. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Jan 27, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
Why do you buy a new CPU to begin with? You get more CPU bound when you buy a new GPU and/or play newer games.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2019 23:29
|
|
|
If you're upgrading, the delta from your current CPU to a 2700X is probably similar to 2700X to 9900k. The performance delta per dollar is not great for AMD. AMD makes sense when you're replacing nothing with something, a 2600/rx 580 or whatever is a great first gaming computer for your kid or something. It's not great when you built a nice PC 4-6 years ago and want to replace it with something that can probably last that long again without the hassle of upgrading.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
Sure, you can take your pick of trustworthy review sources. Here's essentially the same source as that video doing a review, here's GN's review, I'm sure you can find others. When you get CPU bound, Intel still wins out big. Their hardware is just more refined as well as having a significant process advantage. Zen 2 may well close that gap right up, which would be fantastic for consumers, but it won't bring prices down as much as people expect. Right now AMD is cheaper because it's simply not as good, they're putting their products at the price point where they'll sell in the volumes they can produce them, same as Intel. If you keep in mind what you're upgrading from and look at it of performance delta per dollar rather than simply performance per dollar, and understand that as time passes and your CPU isn't as relatively fast as it used to be (and things like the next gen consoles bump up the load on CPUs), you're going to become CPU bound in more and more places, and similar deltas will start to show up everywhere. Intel certainly isn't terrible value, people aren't just idiots who buy Intel CPUs for no good reason. Also, as an aside, the 9700k is generally a better buy than the 9900k but I'm just trying to show that Intel's value proposition isn't the garbage people seem to think.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2019 02:13
|
|
|
You guys are missing the point. The CPU bound tests are the only ones that are telling you the actual performance of the CPUs. The others are just telling you how fast the GPU is, which is not useful when you're trying to determine how many months of acceptable CPU performance you're going to get per dollar, or however you want to look at it. Yes, you aren't going to see 25-50% higher framerates in typical use TODAY, because GPUs aren't fast enough and a lot of current games are very CPU-light because we're at the tail end of a console generation. That just means those games are lovely benchmarks for determining how long a piece of hardware will be relevant to you. The games showing the big performance deltas are the ones that are representative of what will happen as those CPUs age - one will last MUCH longer than the other, whether you're looking at it in terms of "I want to always be GPU bound" or "I want to maintain X FPS in whatever game I play". e - and again, it's always worth mentioning because people never seem to understand this no matter how often it's said - assuming you're upgrading, only performance delta is relevant. If your current hardware does X, everything up to X is not relevant performance. It's only the step up that's benefiting you, everything else is just money you're throwing away. You wouldn't be upgrading if X was acceptable, and the minimum bar for what currently acceptable performance means to you is going to constantly increase over time. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 04:43 on Jan 28, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2019 04:37
|
|
|
ConanTheLibrarian posted:The TDPs are officially worthless at this stage. 3600X -> 3700X is a jump of 50% more cores and 200 MHz, but somehow only takes only 10W more power They're going to 7nm.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2019 01:03
|
|
|
I think it's probably due to businesses looking at the switch as a way to save money rather than a way to do stuff better. There's plenty of good hardware, but if you say you want to work on PC, will you actually get it?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2019 19:32
|
|
|
Only if you also have some incredibly cheap audio cables that I can twist around all my other wires for maximum interference.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
The difference is very small in cinebench, but in some other stuff (especially games) Intel still has quite a significant IPC lead. Even if Zen 2 doesn't seem to show much IPC gain where it's already close, AMD has probably focused on improving the areas where they lag behind since those are the obvious low hanging fruit. As long as the CPUs are powerful enough to last through the next console generation (and the high end SKUs probably are), it's very likely Zen 2 turns out to be a very good buy. Probably the biggest thing that will hold back sales is the fact that even Nvidia doesn't have appealing GPUs to sell right now, so a lot of people will probably delay upgrades until the full system looks more promising. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 05:40 on May 4, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 4, 2019 05:37
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:Twelve feet or more? Not babby sized. The average american is a lot wealthier than the average european, and housing also tends to cost a lot less because most residential areas are <100 years old instead of >500. It flips the other way in NYC and SF which are some of the most expensive places to live in the world, but the US population is much less urban than europe in general. Australia is the same way, huge country, lots of room, not as urban = giant houses cuz why not?
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
It depends, because in the modern era people tend to go through at least 2-3 GPUs on one CPU. Intel's performance lead current gen has kept them a solid value proposition, since the hardware will last much longer before becoming frequently CPU bound, and the things that are CPU bound already are faster. Zen 2 will probably close the gap enough that the value proposition for Intel becomes pretty garbage, but we can't really be sure of anything until it's actually out.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2019 02:02
|
|
|
Adored is an absurd AMD fanboy who makes poo poo up 24/7. If he's the source for something, it's a lie, end of story.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
Zen2 will probably be the end of the line for the current socket, or at best one small-ish upgrade will follow. That said, AMD motherboards are always far cheaper than their Intel alternatives and any kind of moderate/high end CPU now tends to last forever anyway.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2019 08:02
|
|
|
I put my fingers into fans on purpose all the time. Easiest way to tell which one is noisy is by stopping them one at a time.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2019 21:32
|
|
|
It's an expensive design. For the price of all those windings and magnets, you could probably make a conventional fan with a real bearing and have it last 50 years.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2019 00:40
|
|
|
Really loving sucks that we're back to loving tiny piece of poo poo fans on motherboards again. What motherboard to buy is going to be pretty much be decided by which one is easiest to strip to a passive cooler.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2019 19:18
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:Serious talk: why would anybody have a glass panel on their case? There are a lot of bad people in the world. RGB and glass panels are there so we can tell who they are.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 00:10
|
|
|
It is annoying that the most important things in cases, airflow and silence, have taken HUGE backseats to external and internal aesthetics and you now have to spend 2-3 times as much as you should to get a basic, functional case.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 15:55
|
|
|
Maybe the gimpy garbage ram on the Intel platform has a lot to do with it.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
Measly Twerp posted:Gamers Nexus says Ryzen 3000 announcement is June 10th and that we should only expect X570 launch now, preorders will be on July 1st, July 7th will be the launch date. Only officially supporting DDR4-3200 is pretty ugh, hopefully at least 3600 is reliable in practice.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2019 16:43
|
|
|
Broken Machine posted:With the slower timings on faster memory, past about 2400 or 2666 it's often slower or equal performance at higher cost. Check some benchmarks. Absolutely not even close to true, and never has been. The goon advice to just buy slow ram has been bad advice going back to at least Sandy Bridge and you still see people giving it. There are actually a lot of games that benefit a lot from higher memory speed, and consistently more of them as time goes on. Especially with ram prices having come down a ton, it's foolish to be telling people to cheap out. 20 bucks for a 5-10% performance improvement is a really good deal. e - and to be clear, this is platform agnostic. If anything it applies more on Intel because their CPUs are faster and are able to chew through data faster. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 19:39 on May 26, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 26, 2019 19:34
|
|
|
Broken Machine posted:Ok then, prove it. Show me some real actual benchmarks showing significantly increased performance. https://www.techspot.com/article/1171-ddr4-4000-mhz-performance/page3.html For one. Note that this is on a 4.5ghz skylake, on a 5ghz 9700k/9900k you'd see even more scaling. Also I can't be hosed to dig them up, but several people have done benchmarks showing how if you bought 1866 mhz ram with your Sandy Bridge, 5 years later you had like a 10%+ average performance advantage over people who went with 1333, which was like half the gap to new hardware at the time. Games have been consistently becoming more and more bandwidth hungry for a long time, and while the bottlenecks rarely show up when a system is new, they become dramatic over time. There's a reason even the slow-to-update parts picking thread OP has recommended everyone get 3200+ for a while now.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2019 20:02
|
|
|
And RX 680 announcement.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
You don't understand. The R0 stepping he's talking about is already in the wild. It's just a replacement for the previous stepping, it happens all the time. It's the same product, same price, just a new version of it. Intel did some things - probably to increase yields - and wound up significantly increasing how well the average CPU overclocks.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
ItBreathes posted:Eh? The 5ghz all cores is a new SKU. You really need to go back and re-read the conversation, you're arguing with something you imagined.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
OK fine I'll tldr the whole conversation : Malcom : wow this new 5.0 all core part is nuts Paul : actually it's not all that nuts, R0 stepping 9900k pretty much all clock insanely well iospace : but it's going to cost 2 grand! Malcolm : but I think they can't do what the publicly available R0 9900k already proves is easily doable. Intel is hosed despite the fact that a 9900k is already faster than Zen2 will be and just got faster. Paul : why would they need to charge a ton? They already did a new stepping that clocks high, this is just a new top-bin like the 8086k that will have a maybe a $100 price premium. iospace : nah it's going to cost $650-1000 despite there being no reason for anyone to purchase it at that price point since it's just a mildly binned R0 9900k Me : Paul is right, new 9900k are really good, this binning isn't as crazy as you think, it won't be that expensive. ItBreathes : but it's a new sku! (presumably meaning you agree with the guys saying it's going to cost $1-2k) I get it, Paul posts a lot of dumb poo poo, but he's completely right about this. Intel is not panicking (other than over being unable to make enough CPUs to sell), and this new CPU is going to cost at most $100 more than a 9900k because all it is is the new 8086k, if Intel tries to charge a ton for it people will just buy vendor-binned R0 9900k instead. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 00:43 on May 27, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 27, 2019 00:40
|
|
|
Rabid Snake posted:12 core is still pretty cool. I still feel dumb for buying the 9900k after all of the exploits. I mean I might have to turn off hyper threading. I just wished the lower end models hit 5 ghz Do not feel dumb. You already have a CPU. The exploits are irrelevant as a consumer. If someone is running local code on your machine you are already completely owned. None of these new processors will be as good as a 9900k for gaming, even AMD's next generation after this probably won't peak out as well as a 9900k for gaming. With the enormity of the spike in motherboard prices, AMD will only really be beating Intel as a value proposition by having more plentiful and appealing midrange options.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2019 23:18
|
|
|
Lambert posted:The exploits are relevant because all the necessary mitigations reduce the performance of the CPU a great deal. You can turn the mitigations off, even with them on AMD isn't catching up on single thread performance, and browsers have internal patches for the very small number of cases where theoretically you could use one of these exploits (in practice you straight up cannot use them). They're a huuuge deal for datacenters, and Rome is going to take a giant poo poo on Intel in that segment, but for home power users it's still going to be Intel on top and AMD producing a cheaper, slower, viable alternative. Based on what we've seen so far, if you're in the market for a 9900k you should still buy one, if you're looking below that you should be waiting for real Zen2 benches/real world prices to decide. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 23:36 on May 27, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 27, 2019 23:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
I'd assume it's a 12c part based on the cinebench vs 9900k. AMD isn't suddenly beating Intel 13% clock for clock in cinebench.. Those clocks are pretty solid looking for a 12c part, especially given that it's a (probably late) ES and the retail products will probably be slightly better. Really interested to see how well the memory controller does.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2019 19:39
|
|