Latest CPU & GPU Discussion (Intel/AMD/Nvidia)

Thread Rating: 5 votes, 5.00 average.
(5 votes)
Results 14,526 to 14,550 of 14567

  1. Post
    Wait, I thought the 1660ti was nearly a GTX 1080?

  2. Smile
    nzbleach wrote:
    Wait, I thought the 1660ti was nearly a GTX 1080?
    The user bench marks say otherwise, But with newer drivers in the coming months i could imagine that may change.

    Don't know in all honesty.

  3. Post
    nzbleach wrote:
    Wait, I thought the 1660ti was nearly a GTX 1080?
    Sort of not really.

    Goes like 1660 < 1660Ti < RTX 2060 < GTX 1080 < RTX 2070, like 5-10 percent bump between each card.

  4. Post
    Why is it so difficult to find a Vega 56 anywhere?

  5. Post
    Not a lot of them sold

  6. Post
    I don't think NZ has ever had much inventory of the RX Vega cards. Without much stock/parts I can't imagine the warranty support is great either.

  7. Post
    They were also a bit of a hard sell due to pricing at the time of release. 1070 was the same price when I got my Vega56, which is why the 1070Ti was invented. Nvidia will always have more demand though due to mind share. The ASUS one @ ComputerLounge is on special every so often (Vega64). So that is likely the best way to get one. Other than that, they probably aren't demanded much, thus supply isn't going to be there.
    Last edited by Fragluton; 22nd March 2019 at 5:20 pm.

  8. Post
    Hackers get malware onto half a million devices and ASUS is all hushed up about it :/

    lol ASUS

  9. Post
    Looks like it's going to be a big computex for AMD, 8 weeks till Navi/eypic/ryzen 3000 possible release we will probably get leaks about it in the upcoming weeks.

    https://www.anandtech.com/show/14160...9-lead-keynote

  10. Post

  11. Post
    Interesting, no RTX or AMD in the top 15.

  12. Post


    Looks like Vega making some gains on Pascal

  13. Post
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/14256...cpus-announced

    Oh my god, Intel Gen 9 is still not Cannon Lake.

    Assuming Gen 10 is (can't guarantee it these days), 6 years of 14nm.

  14. Post
    suntoucher wrote:
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/14256...cpus-announced

    Oh my god, Intel Gen 9 is still not Cannon Lake.

    Assuming Gen 10 is (can't guarantee it these days), 6 years of 14nm.
    I only skimmed the article but aren't Intel just filling in the SKU's from the current gen there? You'd expect them to be 14nm.

    Rumour has it that Intel are still struggling with yields so are stock piling 10nm cpus so they actually have stock to sell when gen 10 is released. So I wouldn't expect them to be cheap.

  15. Post
    Bought metro exodus.

    All settings on maximum including RTX Ultra @ 3440x1440. My monitor is only 60Hz, so I've got vsync on, and it's never dropped below 60 once. Maybe I should turn it off just to see where it's sitting.

  16. Post
    Bobs wrote:
    I only skimmed the article but aren't Intel just filling in the SKU's from the current gen there? You'd expect them to be 14nm.

    Rumour has it that Intel are still struggling with yields so are stock piling 10nm cpus so they actually have stock to sell when gen 10 is released. So I wouldn't expect them to be cheap.
    I guess he was hoping we might get SOME 10nm in gen 9.

  17. Post
    iRoN wrote:
    I guess he was hoping we might get SOME 10nm in gen 9.
    sounds like laptops only atm for a long time

  18. Post
    Siris Le Osiris wrote:
    sounds like laptops only atm for a long time
    This year will probably be even bigger for AMD if they pull off ZEN 2 well..
    Im amazed how fabs like TSMC and Samsung have leapfrogged intel because of the cellphone market primarily did intel really get that complacent and strip money from RnD? they have the capital to compete with TSMC.

  19. Post
    Looking forward to the next generation of AMD chip. I need a new MOBO and CPU at the moment, and having compatibility with the new chips makes a huge difference. I am on the FM2 chipset currently, and when I purchased this was the last chip that fitted that socket, so I am a bit screwed in that to upgrade I need to replace the MOBO, CPU and RAM.

    I am looking at the AMD Ryzen5 2600x at around $300 seems very good value with a good clock speed, then in the future upgrade to either a Ryzen7 or the next generation chips without having to replace everything again!

  20. Post
    Here's my kind of article, but I don't agree with the conclusion.
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/14043...bridge-in-2019

    He says, "Keep it if you game at 4K" when I think it should be, "Keep it if you game at 60FPS". The results all point to the newer hardware better feeding the GPU above 60FPS, but he just compares systems being let loose at low quality settings to achieve whatever FPS they can.

  21. Post
    If you were doing a CPU benchmark, would you not want to remove the GPU bottleneck as much as you can? Can't really trust any of the numbers, especially those at high. Would be like doing a GPU benchmark with a CPU that can't keep up surely. A GTX1080 is not a 4k ultra card, so it is 100% skewing the results to the point they are useless.

    Someone like Hardware Unboxed, always remove the bottleneck of what they aren't testing as much as they can. So a CPU test bed would included a 2080Ti. Certainly not a 1080 that doesn't have a hope at 4k.
    Last edited by Fragluton; 12th May 2019 at 6:05 pm.

  22. Post
    suntoucher wrote:
    He says, "Keep it if you game at 4K" when I think it should be, "Keep it if you game at 60FPS". The results all point to the newer hardware better feeding the GPU above 60FPS.
    And how many GPUs can do above 60FPS at 4K?

    Actually how many monitors will do above 60Mhz at 4K resolution?

    If you can afford the latest and greatest then you obviously wouldn't be holding onto an old i7-2600K...

  23. Post
    brand wrote:
    And how many GPUs can do above 60FPS at 4K?

    Actually how many monitors will do above 60Mhz at 4K resolution?

    If you can afford the latest and greatest then you obviously wouldn't be holding onto an old i7-2600K...
    Someone running say, a 1050 Ti or 1060 (likely with a 2600K) would be perfectly fine at 1080p60 if his results are anything to go by.

    Fragluton wrote:
    If you were doing a CPU benchmark, would you not want to remove the GPU bottleneck as much as you can? Can't really trust any of the numbers, especially those at high. Would be like doing a GPU benchmark with a CPU that can't keep up surely. A GTX1080 is not a 4k ultra card, so it is 100% skewing the results to the point they are useless.

    Someone like Hardware Unboxed, always remove the bottleneck of what they aren't testing as much as they can. So a CPU test bed would included a 2080Ti. Certainly not a 1080 that doesn't have a hope at 4k.
    Not if you're testing to see whether something is real world capable, rather than maximum possible. Real world capable would be a realistic workload being tested, and a realistic workload would be tuning the benchmark to output 60p.

    He's saying the CPU matters if you're running the lower resolutions which is false, because no one is running their game at 200FPS.

  24. Post
    So yes the new processor is more powerful, but in a real world scenario for the games he tested, it's more power that's not being used. At 60p, regardless of resolution, the 9700K will probably be sitting at 50% whilst the 2600K would be sitting at 90%, but the output is identical.

  25. Post
    suntoucher wrote:
    So yes the new processor is more powerful, but in a real world scenario for the games he tested, it's more power that's not being used. At 60p, regardless of resolution, the 9700K will probably be sitting at 50% whilst the 2600K would be sitting at 90%, but the output is identical.
    Doesn't this all change when adding in something like VR that is very CPU intensive?