AwesomeOcelot

I had a Ice Giant ProSiphon on pre order, already paid for, but had to cancel it because they kept delaying it, until it would unlikely come this year. Since I hope to build in at least December, it would have held me back. It wasn't that much more expensive than a good air cooler so I would have been happy with it, but I think the next generation will be even better, with more heat pipes and more copper. I was thinking about people complaining about the pricing, but it's only really bad on the 3600x, then I saw that it's the only one with a cooler. If the cooler is good enough, and it's worth $25, then I think the pricing is fine. What cooler comes with the 10700?

7 Zen CPUs were released within just over a month of each other. 1400-1600X 11th April, 1700-1800X 2nd March. I wouldn't bet against at least 1 more CPU being released this year on Zen 3, and a Zen 2 refresh or 2 that fills out the budget market. What are their options for cutting down Zen 2 CPUs?

Can the Zen 3 launch really consist of 4 CPUs? Zen was about 9, Zen 2 was 5. Intel had about 5 billion.

Considering how many hours I put into Witcher 3, that would save me a year of my life.

I imagine the price of them will decrease year on year in the next 5 years. The way I look at it is, I could spend twice as much on a SSD now, or I could spend half now half in 5 years time, and have twice the capacity, the same speed for half of it. I understand not wanted to upgrade every 5 minutes, but if we're talking 5 years, I'll probably be looking at replacing everything anyway.

I have ordered a Gigabyte AORUS 1TB M.2 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe, Samsung's 980 Pro 250GB, and a Sabrent Rocket Q 2TB. I am betting on only needing the AORUS for RTX IO/DirectStorage. I may expand with another 980 Pro or Rocket 4 Plus 1TB if necessary. Real world applications for me aren't benefitted much from PCIe 4.0. The 980 Pro and Rocket 4 Plus look really good in synthetics, but unless you're editing a lot of video in 4K/8K, I can't really see the use case compared to cheaper drives, even PCIe 3.0. I doubt you could notice the difference.

I think the higher price is probably down to unified CCX greatly decreasing yields. That 19% increase in IPC came at a cost. If that gives them the gaming crown in most benchmarks, I know that's the only thing a lot of enthusiasts care about. You also have the option of Zen 2 discounts, which I imagine for those more interested in multithread workloads, will be very alluring. It could be a red wall when these go on sale, with Zen 2 and 3 filling a lot of gaps in the market. We will also see more CPUs being launched in a month or so, one or two will target the 10600K. The 3600, 3300x, and 1200AF were incredible value propositions, wiped the floor with Intel. The 5000 series so far seems to have an early adopter and premium tax. I can't imagine AMD not positioning some value options by the end of the year.

I don't see how decreasing their margins is going for the jugular, they're not going to be able to supply the demand. It's not going to in anyway deny market share to Intel. We'll wait to see how well it performs in benchmarks. It has some platform advantages like PCIe 4.0. I too, would like for the things I buy to be cheaper. I hope that it's not a paper launch like 3300x, that thing was unavailable for months, with incredible price/performance.

I don't doubt for a second that the benchmarks are highly selective, I know Nvidia's were. I would be surprised if big Navi matches the 3080 in 3rd party reviews. As for the pricing, that's always more down to supply and demand, the competition, than anything else. The only way to push them down is if Intel does something in Q1 with a 5600X challenger.

19% higher IPC. Damn. I've already ordered all my parts apart from 5900X and x570 MoBo. This actually a lot better than expected, beats the 10900K in single core.

Wait, what? 16 cores?

I haven't seen any improvements on DLSS 2.1 over 2.0. The features of DLSS 2.1 are ultra performance mode for 8K, VR support, and dynamic resolution. I can't tell the difference between DSR off or on when DLSS 2.1 quality mode is engaged, like in the video. I haven't actually seen anyone showcase VR support and dynamic resolution on DLSS 2.1.

DLSS 2.1 is insane, not necessarily useful to anyone outside of 8K, but damn interesting what it can do to 240p content. If I was on a budget, with a 3060, I might consider 1080p -> 2160p DLSS ultra performance as a viable option over 1440p. I can't really see any benefit to DSR super sampling combined with DLSS ultra performance compared to just using balanced and quality DLSS, it's just a obsolete better than TAA solution.

It looks like I'm going to be trying to get a 5900X the end of October. The leaks don't look unbelievable if the focus has been on architecturally improving single core performance, while also offering more cores, multi core improvement isn't even that impressive. AMD were eventually going to get ahead of Intel.

Slowly getting through my backlog, marathon sessions completely Dishonored, Dishonored 2, and Black Mesa. The Dishonored games are some of the best games I've played, in terms of gameplay and story, both have strengths and weaknesses, I actually went through 2 twice, it's a short game but has lots of replayability. I waited for patches to Black Mesa because I didn't trust it to not be a mess, it's surprisingly solid now, although 3 areas tank my fps for no reason. It's a better experience than the original game while being very familiar, it's surprising how a game from 1998 just works in terms of gameplay, concepts, puzzles, and story. I thought Xen looked awesome, it was a little long and repeating, the bosses were a little modern, too much scripted set piece which is not what HL games are about. Better than most of the original Xen though.

Nvidia's new driver seems to have sorted the issue, without degrading performance in games. Most experts are blaming Nvidia for not providing third party partners with real drivers. My 3080 FE arrived today. Now I just need to wait to see what AMD announces.

Microcenter has created a settlement outside their store as people wait for 3090s to drop.

EVGA 6 POSCAPs were review cards only, they didn't sell any. So I think all ASUS, FE, and EVGA cards should be good.

My FE should have 2/6 expensive, and the EVGA had 1/6 (just saw some are 2/6). The ones effected most are the 0/6. I hope it's a simple fix for people, just limit the boost clocks. I think people will make a massive deal out of nothing like the 970 memory, and the "Zen 2" (not sure which Ryzen tbh) boost clock controversy. We don't even know how widespread the problem is though.

They should treat 16:9 the same as a normal screen, just not use 2 portions either side (on most monitors I've used), the same way 4:3 would display on a 16:9 display. VDM can give you virtual displays on the same monitor. Haven't used it personally though, I use Divvy to divide my screen. Some TV's have picture in picture, I haven't tried it, but mine does support it, and it would be cool to output from 2 ports on my graphics card to the same monitor.

Would a super ultra wide be the equivalent?

Apparently some 3080 cards have problems crashing when they hit high boosts. Allegedly the EVGA card I still have on pre-order. Good job I have a FE on order now. Which was also over $100 cheaper. Yep, I almost always have 2 20" 1080p windows top left and right, and a ultra wide window at the bottom. It works as 4 1080p monitors really well, that was the plan as I was replacing a multi-monitor setup. I've had a multi-monitor set up since 1996. It's not quite as good at single window workflow, as a small monitor would be, it's just OK, but I can imagine the problems being exaggerated with a monitor twice the size.

His movies? Yes. Anal rape and drugging of a thirteen year old? Not so much. Have I missed MCA developments?!?

It is equivalent to 5K with AI upscaling. Which is fine, definitely an acceptable use case for a 8K TV as it's better than 5K, but it's not true 8K, so shouldn't be marketed as 8K. I actually think that true resolutions aren't that important, dynamic res, checkerboarding, and DLSS aren't going to be noticeably worse in a lot of scenarios of real world gaming. Digital Foundry talked about max res being a "canvas" and games don't have to strictly abide by it to get the best overall experience. Sacrificing res for post processing or frame rate when required. I have my doubts that 80-100" screens are going to be an acceptable experience for PC gaming (i.e. desk with mouse and keyboard), 48" is on the edge of acceptable for me. Definitely not a good general PC experience, 48" is a bit too big, 32" is probably the ideal max, or ultra wide. As a console replacement (i.e. couch with gamepad) should be OK, but there aren't many games I'd choose to play that way personally.

GN throwing shade on Nvidia's 8K marketing, as the performance isn't great. Not many games are actually playable, 1 out of their 6 game suite. The EVGA 3090 in the UK is 2142 USD. Probably more than my entire build will be with a 3080. No one should buy this card for gaming.