- Oct 16, 2013
- 383
- 25
- 91
He did DOOM with Vulkan. Deux Ex MD, GoW4, and RoTR were tested with DX12.I was watching on my phone so the audio was crap, why did he not test dx12
Also his choice of amd components is... odd
it would be GPU limited thenI see he overclocked the FX to 4.5 I hope he disabled APM and wasn't throttling. A Biostar 970 board is an interesting choice. Does it even have a heat sink on the VRMs?
As for Battlefield being the biggest difference it's not surprising considering who the developer is.
It would have been nice to see 1440 or higher resolution testing.
IF would have the minimum FPS really low and AVG lower than they are, but there is a chance that it could be not really 100% CPU Bound for example in Crysis 3If he is using that Biostar board and not the AsRock, though, I'd be definitely concerned about VRM throttling at 4.5. I'd also be concerned with the Biostar board. 4.5 GHz doesn't sound like much but when you're dealing with an 8 core CPU at 32nm the VRM system needs to be decent and, especially, needs to have active cooling. I don't know if he put a fan onto the VRM sink or not. Throttling VRMs certainly won't help performance.
Every system balances price and performance. If you own a 1440 or 4K monitor and want to know if it's a good value to get one or the other who cares if it's GPU limited. These are not synthetic benchmarks. They're practical ones.it would be GPU limited then
the difference would be smaller unless games is multithreaded, then the G4560 would perform as bad regardless resolutionEvery system balances price and performance. If you own a 1440 or 4K monitor and want to know if it's a good value to get one or the other who cares if it's GPU limited. These are not synthetic benchmarks. They're practical ones.
Knowing to what extent the games would be GPU limited is very useful.
You're saying the GPU would make the delta between the CPUs smaller at higher resolutions and settings? Ok. And?the difference would be smaller unless games is multithreaded
Makes the CPU comparison pointless and hides the bottleneckYou're saying the GPU would make the delta between the CPUs smaller at higher resolutions and settings? Ok. And?
if the CPU would be in multiplayer in BF4 or some CPU bound scene in Crysis 3 it would have gotten stutering anywayOne thing I remember is how the Anniversary Pentium did OK at lower quality settings and resolutions (using a 750 Ti) and then, paired with a better GPU, stuttered all over in the Eurogamer tests in Crysis 3 and BF4. Architectural difference...
He used 1866 CAS 9 as I already posted. If you're running 1600 you want to run 8-8-8, 8-9-8 at the worst.1800 ram with CAS 10 in theory is slower in most games than 1600 CAS 9, the 990fx board will be better for overclocking and the fx-8320 is a better processor
Hardly pointless when the bottleneck doesn't exist.Makes the CPU comparison pointless and hides the bottleneck
4.5, especially on an E processor, is not terribly demanding. 990 boards are not necessary to hit that level of overclock. The 970 Aura board has better VRMs than some 990 boards. It has a native 7+1 digital configuration.http://www.gskill.com/en/product/f3-1866c10d-16gab
Check the latencies. 10-11-10-30-2N
990FX boards tend to have more power phases, better vrm cooling etc.
Yeah, I said that in my opening post.That biostar board has 4+1 and whilst it has heatsinks on the VRMs people don't recommend going over 1.35v on it. Personally, I think this poor is a poor choice for this comparison.
]Plus, if you want to base the decision on cost, an overclocked FX will use a lot more power than a Pentium or i3.
I remember that which is why I say "If one has access to a Micro Center". Clearly, FX is generally less optimal when purchased elsewhere.One must remember that a lot of users don't have access to a microcenter.
Considering that the i3 costs twice as much if one has a Micro Center available I suppose. However, it's good for people to know what kind of performance they can expect if they go in one direction or the other. The thing that's most disappointing about his roundup is that he stuck with just 1080 resolution. A dual 480 test would have also been good because a lot of people scored those on sale on Black Friday for low cost.Those two CPUs are at polar opposite ends as far as desktop CPUs are concerned. It is like this:
The 'tubers' motive, methodology, as well as the results are all questionable.