Quantcast
Carzy Zarx's PC gaming emporium - Catch up on all the latest PC Gaming related news

Forums - PC Discussion - Carzy Zarx's PC gaming emporium - Catch up on all the latest PC Gaming related news

Zarx changed his avatar again. Thoughts?

Noice 243 61.99%
 
So soon? I just got used to the last one 13 3.32%
 
it sucks 21 5.36%
 
Your cropping skills are lacking 13 3.32%
 
Too noisy, can't tell WTF it even is 12 3.06%
 
Meh 29 7.40%
 
Total:331

^Not a bad game.

Talking about the Steam sale, what do you (all) think about it? Did you get something?

Personally, I found them to be quite average. Good but not great. Of course, that hasn't stopped me from getting 5 games, and for less than 10 €.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

Around the Network
JEMC said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:
*snip*

Well the RX 680 would be a refresh of a refresh, as such 15% ain't that bad.

However, really wish Navi would come soon. Probably struggling to get the PC version running as expected. After all, PC games need a monolithic GPU, as they consider a setup like Epyc or Threadripper a Multi-GPU setup. So they possibly had to reconsider late into development and create multiple mask sets instead of just one

I didn't post the new about the Intel CEO because it wasn't "hardware related".

As for the AMD new mobile chips, it doesn't really affects us much as few people here game on a laptop, at least as far as I know. I'm more interested in the new 4-core Ryzen desktop chips.

And regarding the GPUs, maybe AMD should reconsider the way they develop GPUs and go back to a single, scalable architecture, and forget to develop two archs for the mainstream and high-end market. It saddens me to say this, but they seem to lack the resources to do it.

VGPolyglot said:
I wonder if PUBG will ever get a retail release on PC, if it does I may end up getting it to try it out.

A physical launch won't do much for them, specially with stores having less and less space for PC games.

I am of two minds about Quad-Cores these days.
In a laptop they can get away with higher clocks... Which is important for single threaded performance... But on the other hand... It's a Quad-Core. In 2018. Yuck.
Give me a Hex and I will think about it, give me an Octo and call me keen, maybe next year when Intel start pushing 10nm.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

AMD is doing that. The problem was more that they couldn't afford development of both a complete lineup of chips and their masks. As a result AMD had to develop only partly releases, with the gaps getting bigger and bigger over time. They had to reduce in size between 2008-2017, so AMD couldn't develop both a new CPU and a new GPU in parallel at full steam. So after they developed Bulldozer and GCN, they had to choose which one to develop first. Considering GCN was doing well originally but Bulldozer was pretty much the definition of a development fail, it was clear the CPU would come first. Hence why the later GCN developments were mostly pretty small. Vega was the last one where they had all possible ressources bound by the CPU development

It will still have an effect on Navi, GPU's have extremely long development cycles, so something that happened a few years ago can have an effect today.
Navi is still a derivative of GCN, it's another iterative refinement just like Fury, Vega, Polaris was and so on.
Graphics Core Next is getting old and tired at this point.

Where all bets are off is with AMD's next-gen GPU architecture, which is hopefully what comes after Navi.


Bofferbrauer2 said:

Every release after the first gen  (Radeon HD 7xxx) had just some new GPUs, and the rest were rebrands. Second Gen was first Bonaire, followed a couple months later with Hawaii. Third gen was Tonga, followed a year later with Fiji. Fourth Gen, Polaris, had 2 chips at first(RX480/470 and RX 460), followed by a very slow one (RX 550) a year later. Vega only has the high-end chip for now apart from the variants in the APUs.

Graphics Core Next is actually an extremely modular design, so what AMD could/did do is make an update to one part of the chip like the geometry engines whilst leaving the rest of the chip alone... And dropping that as a new high-end offering.
So it made sense they would take things in that direction while the company was hemorrhaging cash.

AMD also tried to replicate what they did with RV770 and that was to adopt the latest DRAM technology to get a leg up over the competition... Unfortunately for AMD's sake, nVidia was making their GPU's more efficient by implementing Delta Colour Compression and Tiled Rasterization which allowed for better culling which saves on bandwidth anyway.

AMD "Tried" to catch up with Vega by implemented it's Primitive Shaders and Draw Stream Binning Rasterization, except they either made it so Developers had to opt-in to use the feature or never bothered to implement it in drivers, meaning it was a waste of time from a gamers perspective, maybe with Navi they might fix that shit.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Polaris had those small chips mostly to get rid of their 1./2. gen entry level chips (Oland, Cape Verde and Bonaire), which went through several generations and rebrandings, especially as mobile chips. Especially Oland (which got similarly developed to get rid of the old Terascale chips in the lineup) really had to go, as it couldn't keep up anymore with the APUs, even when bottlenecked, and even Cape verde was getting too slow for them. Btw, when you put a RX460 against Bonaire and a RX 550 against Cape Verde, you can see that AMD was improving GCN quite a lot - just not enough to keep up with NVidia.

They were reserved for OEM's. OEM's need "higher numbers" every year in order to advertise their new products every cycle, even if it's the exact same chip, sometimes they might have a significant inventory of stored chips as well.

RX 550 is the lowest us mere-mortals can get our hands on through regular channels, meaning the entire 500 series is all GCN 4.0 based in public channels.

No one doubts that GCN hasn't seen great strides in efficiency and performance over the years, but compared to nVidia they are just slower at making those incremental improvements.

Ultimately though... I would like AMD to return to it's small-die strategy that they employed with Terascale, it worked and it was great.


Bofferbrauer2 said:

With the resources from the CPU architecture development being freed up since Zen got feature complete in early 2016, Navi certainly did profit from the additional work and will probably either come with a full lineup or with radically different chips in PC and server segments (where they can bring the announced scalability without the problems they would have in a PC), and possibly both.


It's not just a freeing up of resources (AMD is hard at work building the next several Zen lineups.) but they can afford to bring in additional resources as they have drastically increased profits.

JEMC said:

I'm glad to see AMD doing well enough to actually start hiring again. Hopefully they hire the right people for the right jobs.

And of course Intel will have to face AMD with whatever they had in their roadmap for the time being, but they had to do that no matter the CEO, right? So it doesn't matter who's at the helm as long as he/she doesn't start messing around.

For now, Intel has the 9xxx series, which by the looks of it is just the same processors with a 100/200 MHz increase and the launch of the 8 core part.


Intel actually has a strong Micro-architecture, certainly has an edge over AMD, albeit slight. It's just they aren't offering the core counts to match AMD.
They stagnated and tried to profit as much as they can for as long as they can while AMD fumbled.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

JEMC said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Keller only came in April and thus probably is working on the next architecture after Tiger Lake. While with him it's probably going to end up great, it's still many years away. Don't forget he joined AMD in 2012 to design Zen, a full 5 years before it's release. Until then, AMD can wreak some havok among Intel's plans

I'm glad to see AMD doing well enough to actually start hiring again. Hopefully they hire the right people for the right jobs.

And of course Intel will have to face AMD with whatever they had in their roadmap for the time being, but they had to do that no matter the CEO, right? So it doesn't matter who's at the helm as long as he/she doesn't start messing around.

For now, Intel has the 9xxx series, which by the looks of it is just the same processors with a 100/200 MHz increase and the launch of the 8 core part.

Not so sure about the octacore just yet. For now, only the i3 and i5 have been officially announced, with most of them only being a 100Mhz base clock speedbump (i5 9500 doesn't even have that) and 100-200mhz turboclock boost.

This year is mainly a speedbump it seems, both at AMD and Intel. At least the speedbumps in the Ryzen 2000 line were a bit more substantial and the improved turbo now keeps the boost speed much better than before.



Bofferbrauer2 said:
JEMC said:

I'm glad to see AMD doing well enough to actually start hiring again. Hopefully they hire the right people for the right jobs.

And of course Intel will have to face AMD with whatever they had in their roadmap for the time being, but they had to do that no matter the CEO, right? So it doesn't matter who's at the helm as long as he/she doesn't start messing around.

For now, Intel has the 9xxx series, which by the looks of it is just the same processors with a 100/200 MHz increase and the launch of the 8 core part.

Not so sure about the octacore just yet. For now, only the i3 and i5 have been officially announced, with most of them only being a 100Mhz base clock speedbump (i5 9500 doesn't even have that) and 100-200mhz turboclock boost.

This year is mainly a speedbump it seems, both at AMD and Intel. At least the speedbumps in the Ryzen 2000 line were a bit more substantial and the improved turbo now keeps the boost speed much better than before.

Most of AMD's gains seem to have come from improved latency in Zen+.
Zen2 should be interesting, that's for sure.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Not so sure about the octacore just yet. For now, only the i3 and i5 have been officially announced, with most of them only being a 100Mhz base clock speedbump (i5 9500 doesn't even have that) and 100-200mhz turboclock boost.

This year is mainly a speedbump it seems, both at AMD and Intel. At least the speedbumps in the Ryzen 2000 line were a bit more substantial and the improved turbo now keeps the boost speed much better than before.

Most of AMD's gains seem to have come from improved latency in Zen+.
Zen2 should be interesting, that's for sure.

That, and the much improved Precision boost 2

I expect Zen 2 to beat Intel's offerings in IPC (though only slightly and not in every scenario), but not in clock speed, reversing the situation during Bulldozer and bringing back memories of the good old Athlon vs Pentium 4



Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
JEMC said:

I'm glad to see AMD doing well enough to actually start hiring again. Hopefully they hire the right people for the right jobs.

And of course Intel will have to face AMD with whatever they had in their roadmap for the time being, but they had to do that no matter the CEO, right? So it doesn't matter who's at the helm as long as he/she doesn't start messing around.

For now, Intel has the 9xxx series, which by the looks of it is just the same processors with a 100/200 MHz increase and the launch of the 8 core part.

Not so sure about the octacore just yet. For now, only the i3 and i5 have been officially announced, with most of them only being a 100Mhz base clock speedbump (i5 9500 doesn't even have that) and 100-200mhz turboclock boost.

This year is mainly a speedbump it seems, both at AMD and Intel. At least the speedbumps in the Ryzen 2000 line were a bit more substantial and the improved turbo now keeps the boost speed much better than before.

While it hasn't been confirmed yet, I'm sure Intel will launch an 8 core part. Those big, and dominant, companies like Intel and Nvidia always feel the need to outdo the competition to assert their dominant position. That's why Nvidia launched the 1070Ti when Vega 56 appeared and it's the reason why Intel will launch and 8-core part in the mainstream market.

They simply can't allow AMD (or any other competitor) the chance to brag about having the best "insert product here", and that's what AMD is doing with their 8-core Ryzen parts when multi-threading is involved.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

JEMC said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Not so sure about the octacore just yet. For now, only the i3 and i5 have been officially announced, with most of them only being a 100Mhz base clock speedbump (i5 9500 doesn't even have that) and 100-200mhz turboclock boost.

This year is mainly a speedbump it seems, both at AMD and Intel. At least the speedbumps in the Ryzen 2000 line were a bit more substantial and the improved turbo now keeps the boost speed much better than before.

While it hasn't been confirmed yet, I'm sure Intel will launch an 8 core part. Those big, and dominant, companies like Intel and Nvidia always feel the need to outdo the competition to assert their dominant position. That's why Nvidia launched the 1070Ti when Vega 56 appeared and it's the reason why Intel will launch and 8-core part in the mainstream market.

They simply can't allow AMD (or any other competitor) the chance to brag about having the best "insert product here", and that's what AMD is doing with their 8-core Ryzen parts when multi-threading is involved.

The problem is however that Intel would need new masks for an 8-core chip unless rebranding and capping one of their LLC HEDT chips, which NVidia didn't need when bringing the 1070Ti (which is mostly an underclocked 1080). Creating those takes time, too much time to come out with those in just a couple weeks. If Intel didn't start working on those masks before Ryzen got released, they won't be able to bring an octacore just yet



^Well, we'll see soon enough.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

Damn I have an absolute blast playing The Division. I think buying it cheap after all update and seeing the full package instead of buying early and coming back to the game after each update makes it a better, straightforward experience.

I love the seamless drop in drop out experience, I kinda had to join multiplayer session for hard mission, then once I had good loot out of those, I could do the smaller one easily rince and repeat. The game is a tad repeatitive, but shooting baddies in the face never gets old. Positioning, flanking, trapping is all very important to succeed,

Had I a group of friend to play this it would have been so sweet !



JEMC said:

 

They simply can't allow AMD (or any other competitor) the chance to brag about having the best "insert product here", and that's what AMD is doing with their 8-core Ryzen parts when multi-threading is involved.

That has always been AMD's M.O. Offer more cores for your dollar.
Heck, AMD had the first Quad-Core CPU under $100.

Ryzen mixes things up because of it's strong single threaded performance.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--