PC Pc Gaming/building thread

[Mr_Moogle]

Yeah me too 100%. Next year's Zen 2 Ryzen 3000 series will be looking the goods. Intel are goneski. Everything they are doing is reactionary to Zen and even though they are still in front, they are miles behind Zen's scaleability and infinity fabric.

If you told me a few years ago that AMD would start dominating the CPU space, I would have laughed at you. I'm bloody greatful we have some fierce competition in the CPU market these days though. We will no longer have to endure years and years of 4 core CPU's.

As a gamer, part of me still prefers the high clock speeds Intel provides but the value proposition of Ryzen is too good to ignore. Recently I saw a Ryzen 5 1600 being sold new on ebay for $140. Even though that part is a year and a half old, that's just insanely good value for money.

It's just a shame about RAM and GPU prices.

 

[dwwaino]

If AMD can pull their finger out on the GPU front like they have CPU then fingers crossed we start seeing some competitive pricing again.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

If AMD can pull their finger out on the GPU front like they have CPU then fingers crossed we start seeing some competitive pricing again.

They still have a long way to go with their GPU's but I'm hearing their 7nm stuff will be much more competitive.

 

[Gold Member]

If AMD can pull their finger out on the GPU front like they have CPU then fingers crossed we start seeing some competitive pricing again.

I'm hoping the incoming money stream from desktop & especially server CPUs can translate into GPU R&D spending in a year or 2. If infinity fabric works on gpus then look out

 

[dav3]

Yeah me too 100%. Next year's Zen 2 Ryzen 3000 series will be looking the goods. Intel are goneski. Everything they are doing is reactionary to Zen and even though they are still in front, they are miles behind Zen's scaleability and infinity fabric.

It's a cycle, AMD catch up and become the go-to product for a little while, then Intel comes back and slaughters them for the next 5-10 years. Same with ATI vs. Nvidia.

Years ago Intel lead the way with Pentiums up to the P4, then AMD brings out the cheaper Athlon XP and Opteron CPUs that you could happily overclock the s**t out of, particularly if you used a pencil or some tape to unlock the multiplier. Then Intel hit back and it's only just starting to swing back to AMD again now.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

It's a cycle, AMD catch up and become the go-to product for a little while, then Intel comes back and slaughters them for the next 5-10 years. Same with ATI vs. Nvidia.

Years ago Intel lead the way with Pentiums up to the P4, then AMD brings out the cheaper Athlon XP and Opteron CPUs that you could happily overclock the s**t out of, particularly if you used a pencil or some tape to unlock the multiplier. Then Intel hit back and it's only just starting to swing back to AMD again now.

Yep. It's a boom/bust cycle. The exact same thing happens with videogame consoles. Somebody corners the market, starts to get arrogant, their competitor capitalises on their mistakes and becomes the big dog in town and the cycle repeats.

 

[dav3]

Yep. It's a boom/bust cycle. The exact same thing happens with videogame consoles. Somebody corners the market, starts to get arrogant, their competitor capitalises on their mistakes and becomes the big dog in town and the cycle repeats.

I just hope that AMD/ATI have finally got their s**t together because the last time I went down that path their drivers weren't that flash...... particularly ATI drivers, and from what I've seen at work from the workstation class cards, they still have some work to do.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

I just hope that AMD/ATI have finally got their s**t together because the last time I went down that path their drivers weren't that flash...... particularly ATI drivers, and from what I've seen at work from the workstation class cards, they still have some work to do.

I think most of AMD's driver issues aren't really a problem anymore. I didn't have any issues when I was still running my 280X. Oddly enough I think it's Nvidia who has a bad reputation for drivers now.

 

[Gold Member]

It's a cycle, AMD catch up and become the go-to product for a little while, then Intel comes back and slaughters them for the next 5-10 years. Same with ATI vs. Nvidia.

Years ago Intel lead the way with Pentiums up to the P4, then AMD brings out the cheaper Athlon XP and Opteron CPUs that you could happily overclock the s**t out of, particularly if you used a pencil or some tape to unlock the multiplier. Then Intel hit back and it's only just starting to swing back to AMD again now.

This will be a generational change not just a cyclical one.
Intel are stuck in yesterday's tech. They have yield issues at 14nm because they are still making huge monolithic chips in one piece. They can't shrink their fab to 10nm because it adds about 1000 manufacturing steps in. Each step with it's own tiny % chance of introducing defects and each shrink adds an exponential number of manufacturing steps. Their current 10nm 2 core chip is yielding at 60%. They will not magically start yielding huge monolithic 16 core chips for the desktop for years.

The era of monolithic chips is coming to an end in front of our eyes, Moore's law is finished.

AMD are driving the industry forward now with their accidental discovery of chiplets and their implementation of interposers to make several chiplets work together to function as one chip with near perfect scalability.

Each Zen chip is a 4 core chiplet common to Ryzen, Threadripper and the Eypc server stuff. They are fabbing 1 chiplet and scaling it accross mainstream desktop, high end desktop and server. All possible with their use of the Infinity Fabric interposer.
1 architecture. 1 fab process. Tiny chiplets with crazy high yields. And the interposer is cheap as chips being on a much older fab process.

Intel will absolutely not get smaller than 10nm without changing to chiplets and interposers because the next shrink will add 2000 maunafacturing steps, then the next shrink 4000 steps and every step has an inherent risk of creating defects...

 

[Gold Member]

I think most of AMD's driver issues aren't really a problem anymore. I didn't have any issues when I was still running my 280X. Oddly enough I think it's Nvidia who has a bad reputation for drivers now.

Yeah Radeon drivers have been proven to be more stable since around the time Shadowplay and ReLive were introduced.

 

[dav3]

I think most of AMD's driver issues aren't really a problem anymore. I didn't have any issues when I was still running my 280X. Oddly enough I think it's Nvidia who has a bad reputation for drivers now.

Personally I reckon the last ATI card (other than some shitty cheap one that sat in a HTPC) I used was a Radeon 9500 Pro many moons ago and that thing had the odd issue. Other than that we have a lot of FirePro and entry level cards in our fleet and drivers have been a common issue.

 

[dav3]

This will be a generational change not just a cyclical one.
Intel are stuck in yesterday's tech. They have yield issues at 14nm because they are still making huge monolithic chips in one piece. They can't shrink their fab to 10nm because it adds about 1000 manufacturing steps in. Each step with it's own tiny % chance of introducing defects and each shrink adds an exponential number of manufacturing steps. Their current 10nm 2 core chip is yielding at 60%. They will not magically start yielding huge monolithic 16 core chips for the desktop for years.

The era of monolithic chips is coming to an end in front of our eyes, Moore's law is finished.

AMD are driving the industry forward now with their accidental discovery of chiplets and their implementation of interposers to make several chiplets work together to function as one chip with near perfect scalability.

Each Zen chip is a 4 core chiplet common to Ryzen, Threadripper and the Eypc server stuff. They are fabbing 1 chiplet and scaling it accross mainstream desktop, high end desktop and server. All possible with their use of the Infinity Fabric interposer.
1 architecture. 1 fab process. Tiny chiplets with crazy high yields. And the interposer is cheap as chips being on a much older fab process.

Intel will absolutely not get smaller than 10nm without changing to chiplets and interposers because the next shrink will add 2000 maunafacturing steps, then the next shrink 4000 steps and every step has an inherent risk of creating defects...

The last swings were generational too, AMD Palomino overtook Intel thanks to a new manufacturing process that let them shrink to 180nm, then Intel Northwood overtook Thoroughbred with the help of virtualized cores being added to consumer grade CPUs for the first time. AMD look to be jumping ahead again (although who knows how their yields will go) but Intel won't be far behind with 10nm slated for Q4 2019

 

[Gold Member]

The last swings were generational too, AMD Palomino overtook Intel thanks to a new manufacturing process that let them shrink to 180nm, then Intel Northwood overtook Thoroughbred with the help of virtualized cores being added to consumer grade CPUs for the first time. AMD look to be jumping ahead again (although who knows how their yields will go) but Intel won't be far behind with 10nm slated for Q4 2019

Wouldn't the last generational change be the Intel Core series and specifically the 4 core i5 & i7?
A process shrink is hardly a generational change.

You gotta stop using the Intel Roadmaps for 10nm. This article is 8 months old and nothing much has changed...
https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-cannon-lake-igpu

 

[dav3]

Wouldn't the last generational change be the Intel Core series and specifically the 4 core i5 & i7?
A process shrink is hardly a generational change.

You gotta stop using the Intel Roadmaps for 10nm. This article is 8 months old and nothing much has changed...
https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-cannon-lake-igpu

Probably, and if I'd mentioned anything about the last generational change then that probably would have been the example I'd use

And who said I'm using roadmaps as the sole source of information?
https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-says-...-on-track-as-it-deals-with-14nm-cpu-shortage/

 

[Gold Member]

Probably, and if I'd mentioned anything about the last generational change then that probably would have been the example I'd use

And who said I'm using roadmaps as the sole source of information?
https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-says-...-on-track-as-it-deals-with-14nm-cpu-shortage/

Haha Intel 10nm is coming because Intel loosely said it is, like they said last year, and the year before and back in 2015!!
Technically they are telling the truth, because 10nm core 2 duos with the gpu disabled and running AMD graphics in shitty low spec chromebooks are available.

Truth be told Intel's 10nm won't even compete with their own 14nm+++ until we see 10nm+.
We won't see a 10nm+ until they get 10nm right.
Do you honestly expect Intel to launch 10nm i7 Ice Lake with no tangible IPC increase that has a reduced 3.5ghz base and 4.5ghz boost?

The 10nm core 2 I keep mentioning is relevant to the discussion because they are struggling badly to get acceptable yields on a sub 30mm2 die, hence fusing off the graphics. The current i7 8700k is a 149mm2 die, yes it will shrink, however competition WILL force them to up the core count so will it really get any smaller?
The mere thought of Intel yielding a die 5x bigger than what they are managing now in a marketable and competitive format sometime in the foreseeable future is pure fantasy.

Intel's word and PR spin isn't worth a pinch of s**t and the tech media are finally cottoning on to this fact.

 

[Gold Member]

Zen 2 rumours are reporting a 13% increase in IPC in unspecified server workloads. How that translates into gaming we will have to wait and see, but it bodes well in conjunction with the increased clock speeds the TSMC 7nm node will bring...

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...e_reportedly_offers_a_13_ipc_boost_over_zen/1

 

[dwwaino]

:3

 

[Gold Member]

:3

View attachment 575962

Drove past your house, good to see you're all prepped for Halloween...

 

[Gold Member]

9th Gen looking dead on arrival.
Adds virtually nothing to 8th Gen except for power draw and heat.

 

[Gold Member]

LoL hit 115c in Aida64 in TechYesCity's video on an H110i 280mm AIO. No point being an unlock K chip when it's already going molten pulling 232 watts a 4.9ghz with MCE enabled.

 

[dwwaino]

MCE overvolts and Asus will probably release a bios update for 390 like they had to 370 so that’s no surprise on a synthetic bench.

What was happening on the early 370 bios version was it was boosting all cores to the max single core turbo. On the Intel turbo it will only boost to the max turbo clock if it’s the only core in use, then steps down for each core being loaded. So mine was overvolting and boosting all cores to 4.7. Since the update they changed the default core ratio setting from ‘sync all cores’ to ‘per core’ and it will boost to max highest core speed so now MCE only boosts to 4.4 if all 6 cores are being used (not hard with a game running and a browser, some game launchers and antivirus and stuff running).

This is a huge concession by Asus that the feature is horribly broken on 8th (and sounds like 9th too) gen. I didn’t notice until after a couple days of doing stuff, checked my monitoring programs and it wouldn’t break 4.4 and I could then only get it to hit 4.7 on single core stress test in Cinebench then did some research. Funnily enough it hasn’t affected a single frame in any game, even AC Odyssey which is a CPU whore. I guess even stock still has more headroom than a 1080ti needs at 1440p. I’ll probably still be looking at a CPU/mobo and GPU upgrade by 2020 so Intel and AMD can fight it out for my love

 

[Gold Member]

MCE overvolts and Asus will probably release a bios update for 390 like they had to 370 so that’s no surprise on a synthetic bench.

What was happening on the early 370 bios version was it was boosting all cores to the max single core turbo. On the Intel turbo it will only boost to the max turbo clock if it’s the only core in use, then steps down for each core being loaded. So mine was overvolting and boosting all cores to 4.7. Since the update they changed the default core ratio setting from ‘sync all cores’ to ‘per core’ and it will boost to max highest core speed so now MCE only boosts to 4.4 if all 6 cores are being used (not hard with a game running and a browser, some game launchers and antivirus and stuff running).

This is a huge concession by Asus that the feature is horribly broken on 8th (and sounds like 9th too) gen. I didn’t notice until after a couple days of doing stuff, checked my monitoring programs and it wouldn’t break 4.4 and I could then only get it to hit 4.7 on single core stress test in Cinebench then did some research. Funnily enough it hasn’t affected a single frame in any game, even AC Odyssey which is a CPU whore. I guess even stock still has more headroom than a 1080ti needs at 1440p. I’ll probably still be looking at a CPU/mobo and GPU upgrade by 2020 so Intel and AMD can fight it out for my love

Not gonna be much to fight for in 2020 if Zen 3 (Ryzen 4000 series) can stay on track which Zen 2 is so I see no reason not. If Intel have 10nm out by then I'll shout you a new SSD.

 

[Gold Member]

Joker has a good video that provides a little balance. 1080p High graphics with an RTX 2080ti. Watch frame rates, CPU speed & temps...

 

[Gold Member]

Intel are gonna be copping some major blowback shortly if not already..

 

[Ry009]

SSDs falling at a decent rate, can get a 500GB 860 EVO for $108 off ebay now!