I'm sure in your mind you think you are making a valid point, but I can assure you it has no bearing whatsoever on the implications on the bill this thread is discussing.
So everyone is excited about the HEDT platform again? Cool. Just a few months ago before Ryzen launched everyone was saying how overbuilt and overblown HEDT chips were and how no one wants them anymore and it is a dying market. Forgive me if it's hard to keep up.
That said, it will be...
I used to use 760 SLI and I definitely know micro-stuttering. It was atrocious in BF4. It got to the point I sold them and bought a 980. In fact, a single 760 delivered better game play with lower fps than SLI. Maybe enabling 'threaded optimization' in the Nvidia control panel helps...and...
As I said...I see no choppiness in BF1 with fast sync getting 125 fps or with frame capping at 65 fps. No stuttering at all either way. I use it explicitly...all the time. Not just a couple of days...but for the last two months (new pc build). Anyway, let me educate you on something. When...
Fast sync in my experience does not make games choppier. I say it improves the gaming experience because it eliminates tearing and on my system it is still butter smooth. Fast sync only works when your fps is above your refresh rate...My monitor is only 60hz. Not sure why you question my...
I would not be surprised at all by this as well. My 7700K is butter smooth...especially with 'threaded optimization' on and 'fast sync' on in the Nvidia control panel.
Not sure, but it appears his overclocking results were not just a matter of hitting the silicon lottery. Most reviewers reviewed the 1700X or 1800X first so in a few days we should know more on how well the 1700 over clocks, but things appear promising.
That is both good and bad news for AMD...
If this has been posted, I apologize...the thread is rather long at this point...but check out this review of the R7 1700. Legit Reviews got their to 4ghz stable on all cores...besting even Joker's R7 1700 at 3.9ghz...and temps were held in check pretty well with the Corsair H110i.
So, it...
Because AMD needs to be called out on their BS for spreading FUD over Intel trying to influence reviews when it was AMD themselves who were trying to do it...not Intel.
Ryzen is a good chip, but now that NDA is up the truth is being exposed.
Cue GamersNexus latest video and JayzTwoCents video...
If you go by price, then it would be the 7700K. It is definitely overall a better cpu for production type workloads that can leverage the extra cores...but for the use most 'enthusiasts' are going to use it...gaming...it is not really a better value. From a server standpoint though...the 1700...
I say they are good cpus because while they lag behind in gaming, they are competitive in all other categories that utilize all their cores. Also, I was saying that the 6/12 architecture of Broadwell-E 6800K does not make the Intel chip a lesser value even though it has less cores and threads...
Lol...the 1700 and 1700X are only $20 bucks cheaper than their intel counterparts. The number of cores is irrelevant. It's the performance in the end that matters most. Guess people are being 'encouraged' some how or another to regurgitate the 6900Ks price compared to the 1800X. These cpus...
Good deal. Of course these Ryzen chips do offer some value...I was just having some fun with how over blown some were making the savings out to be. Why do you need two 1080s? Cuda acceleration?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.