Any PC Gamers Around?

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by spcmafia

Like yeah, they seem to outperform AMD, but what I found interesting is that they tested most of their products on Windows 11 where AMD is still nerfed. .

I keep reading this, but I've been running W11 on my AMD gaming system since the first preview edition, and haven't seen a noticeable degradation in speed.

Then again, I didn't run any benchmarks either.

[spcmafia]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I keep reading this, but I've been running W11 on my AMD gaming system since the first preview edition, and haven't seen a noticeable degradation in speed.

Then again, I did run any benchmarks either.

Actually, it seems like AMD just came up with a fix. But I highly doubt Intel waited for that before coming up with their own benchmarks.

[spcmafia]

Exert from Toms Hardware Article:
"Intel measured performance against the Ryzen 9 5950X but admitted that it tested without the Windows 11 patch that fixes an L3 cache and boost clock issue with AMD's chips. Intel told us during briefings that it will retest with the patch once it is available (it has since become available) and update these benchmarks if there are any material changes. (We've tested the Windows 11 and AMD patches and haven't seen any drastic improvements in our own testing.
Intel also displayed a multi-tasking workload that consisted of simultaneously gaming while streaming and recording with OBS, with the latter two functions running on the E-cores while the P-cores ran the game code. Intel claimed that the Core i9-12900K provided 84% higher fps than the 11900K during this test.

Intel's content creation benchmarks avoided any direct comparisons with AMD's competing processors and consisted entirely of applications that benefit from optimizations for hybrid architectures. That means these tests aren't indicative of what you can expect with most applications, but we'll suss that out in our coming review."


Ryzen 5950X: $799
Intel i9 12900K: $589 MSRP, currently listed at newegg for $649, sold-out. (DDR5 capable).

Cost/Performance seems to be in favor of Intel, considering the ability to support DDR5. Again, further benchmark testing is necessary. Upgrading would mean getting a new MOBO, RAM (To make the most out of DDR5 capabilities), cooling, possibly a new case?
Takes about 2 years for newer generation components to level out and be easily acquirable and affordable for majority of the market. Considering the current market, I don't think a whole lot of customers will be affordably and easily upgrading their systems. Scalpers even got a hold of Razer RGB Masks and selling them over 300% MSRP.

[alphasaur]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I keep reading this, but I've been running W11 on my AMD gaming system since the first preview edition, and haven't seen a noticeable degradation in speed.

Then again, I didn't run any benchmarks either.

At this level of performance, you're not going to see differences without benchmarks.

[weederr33]

Oh I'm gonna milk my Ryzen 9 as much as possible. I'm still hoping for graphics cards to come back in stock regularly.

[Yoshoobaroo]

I’m hoping my R7 3800X and my RTX 2080S get me to 2025 at least. I have roughly the same computing power as a PS5, so anything that comes out this Gen should work fine. It’d be nice if I don’t need to upgrade for TES6 and HL3.

[alphasaur]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

I’m hoping my R7 3800X and my RTX 2080S get me to 2025 at least. I have roughly the same computing power as a PS5, so anything that comes out this Gen should work fine. It’d be nice if I don’t need to upgrade for TES6 and HL3.

It's really going to be resolution dependent, if youre 1440p and under you're likely fine till that date. The 2080s is an OKAYish 4k card today, likely won't be a viable 4k card in 2023.

R9 290 8GB cards were released 2013 and are still solid medium-high setting 1080p cards.

Stuff like DLSS will also stretch the legs of your card.

[spcmafia]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

I’m hoping my R7 3800X and my RTX 2080S get me to 2025 at least. I have roughly the same computing power as a PS5, so anything that comes out this Gen should work fine. It’d be nice if I don’t need to upgrade for TES6 and HL3.

You should be fine, considering that AMD FidelityFX and NVIDIA DLSS seem to boost the performance while maintaining a good level of quality of many tittles with cards such as a 1080ti or 1660 Super. Unless you're looking for a 100 FPS+ on 4K.

[Captain Snooze]

105.8 hours on HZD and it's becoming monotonous.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

105.8 hours on HZD and it's becoming monotonous.

Don't most open world games reach that at some point?

[Captain Snooze]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Don't most open world games reach that at some point?

Yeah but there seems to be even less variation in tasks/scenery in this game. I guess because I've been playing this fairly continuously it has worn out pretty quickly. I haven't really been doing much else with my time. I only bought it 10 days ago.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

Yeah but there seems to be even less variation in tasks/scenery in this game. I guess because I've been playing this fairly continuously it has worn out pretty quickly. I haven't really been doing much else with my time. I only bought it 10 days ago.

It typically takes me weeks if not months to finish these types of games because I usually play less than an hour in any given session. That breaks it up for me so they don't feel so repetitive. It's one of the reasons I tend to prefer open world games because I can get in, accomplish something or two, and get out.

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by Captain Snooze

105.8 hours on HZD and it's becoming monotonous.

How are you not done after 106 hours? I did 2 full playthroughs with frozen wilds in ~150.

Are you 100%-ing the game? I can’t do that for any game honestly, it gets too monotonous .

[spcmafia]

The computer-1 by Teenage Engineering. For all you Mini-ITX lovers.