LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Let the games begin.
Read more.Let the games begin.
Not sure of the value of this, given what's coming in a few days.
Hexus, on the control page you state:
but your graph actually has AMD ahead at QHD unless the labels on the graph bars are wrong?Intel enjoys a small lead at FHD and QHD, but it's not large enough to be perceptible during gameplay.
Tarinder (07-10-2020)
It's the current state of play. Whichever AMD CPU comes out in a couple of weeks will be added to this to show how Ryzen has progressed. Consider this a baseline article.Originally Posted by kalniel
If your spending £5-600 on a CPU and £1400 on a GPU you are not gaming at 1080p or 1440p - so surely a pretty pointless exercise other than to show intel in better light??
We thought that, but there games where fps is king, typically played at the lower resolutions. It also taps into the recent influx of high-framerate FreeSync/G-Sync monitors.
I'm personally more intrigued to see where upcoming Zen 3 sits in all this; a final nail in the 14nm+++++++++++++++++++++ coffin, perhaps.
Fair point - didn't really think of that angle.We thought that, but there games where fps is king, typically played at the lower resolutions. It also taps into the recent influx of high-framerate FreeSync/G-Sync monitors.
The FHD graph on the Tomb Raider page has the colours mixed up.
Not really, if the 3090 gave me a solid 144fps with all the eye candy at QHD, I'd opt for that over all the eye candy and lower fps at UHD. Personal preference obviously.
They don't. It's an anomaly of the game that the minimum is reported as more than the maximum. Only happens on the AMD platform.
yes indeed looking forward to that one, though I think if using gaming benchmarks the 3080 is more relevant
Ah right, fair enough. That's very odd!
Yup, will switch to an RTX 3080 for that one - R9 3950X vs R9 59xx vs i9-10900K. Framerates will be around 10 percent lower.
Iota (11-10-2020)
Would have been nice to have some benchmarks that weren't focused on gaming especially seeing as Nvidia are promoting the 3090 towards content creators... just so we could see gpu processing is affected by the cpu etc.
Last edited by LSG501; 07-10-2020 at 06:05 PM.
Ah, that fully automatic nail gun coming into play again...We thought that, but there games where fps is king, typically played at the lower resolutions. It also taps into the recent influx of high-framerate FreeSync/G-Sync monitors.
I'm personally more intrigued to see where upcoming Zen 3 sits in all this; a final nail in the 14nm+++++++++++++++++++++ coffin, perhaps.
I'd pay that happily and buy a $1200 1600p monitor for it (cmon dell, with gsync chip!), but be happy on my 1200p monitor for a while longer even. 4k means nothing to most people. Get over it. Wake us when it hits 10% of the market, until then 1080p is what 66% of those buyers are doing pretty much. Right now 1440p+4k users don't hit 7% IIRC (checked a week or two ago). Close enough. AMD is advertising cpus at 1080p with the 5000's because that is what people are using 2/3 of the time. 4k just won't mean much to me for a few years at least. My games look great maxed at 1080 (nothing down), and I won't play a game unless I CAN do that 100%. I wait for the right card to get that done. Everyone I grew up with playing games, building pc's, all do the same today. They want to see what they dev built.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote