Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Oct 1, 2018.
Dats The spirit
They are just stupid dont need to smoke anything
For any other use case than gaming I'd agree with you and get the 2920x tbh.
As for the part in bold: how about half the streamers out there that can hit worth a damn in games?
Like I said, the market might be pushing to 4K, but players in reality are still sticking with 1080p, which will most likely remain until anything higher becomes more achievable for everyone in terms of framerates.
Streamers are a tiny minority. And as I said elsewhere, most players game at 1080p because they have mid-range hardware. Those with high-end hardware (those paying $600 for a CPU) are most likely gaming at 1440p or above.
But I'm not.
Stop defending your use case scenarios to me, they're completely different.
Price is dumb on the 9900K, but i do wonder how Zen2 will perform in gaming, it's the only real weakness of Ryzen(and poor OC).
As i'm with the 4790K, there is zero need for upgrade, but since i do a lot of heavy RAW processing(Lightroom files that are over 100mb), the 4790K isn't speedy, and the 980TI has a compute problem that nVidia ignores.
Oh, that´s nasty...
Maybe they should start smoking something. Crazy ideas are likely better than stupid, because crazy has wide variety and may randomly bring some good.
the octabox is cool and highly desirable. but so is anything in a Cartier box...excepting Cartier doesn't put out rhinestones in place of diamonds.
1680x1050 is in steam stats because it become common resolution after 2010 for laptops. LCDs for PC were not that popular at that resolution. Because 1600x1200, 1280x1024 were 1st ones to come and dominated. At time 16:9 and 16:10 became popular there was solid competition in form of 1920x1080, 1920x1200.
Today, there is like 100 times more 1080p monitor models than there are 1680x1050 models. Yet, go to notebook market and it still lives there.
So while you may have been one of few people playing on desktop monitor with 1680x1050 resolution, those steam stats have almost nothing in common with desktop popularity of that resolution. Therefore that resolution is irrelevant in discussion about Desktop processor and monitor used with it.
You do not get it. Just because you had desktop monitor with that resolution does not mean that those 2.56% on steam stats are desktop users.
On desktop it was very unpopular resolution. And idea that someone is going to play games with modern and expensive CPU on 10+ years old LCD monitor which had poor pixel response and blurring out of the box and very likely backlight about to die... In contrast to up to 4 years old notebook.
Those steam stats for given resolution are 99% notebooks. Not desktop based.
Can you try to express your thoughts more clearly? That kind of prevents such little misunderstandings. And it seems bit too repetitive to write TL;DR for two very short paragraphs.
Take care, don't get self triggered.
I also wonder if they will gimp this somehow as it can not eat up any workstation platform market share.
There are some games out there that are very taxing on CPUs these days. Like FFXV for example. But at the end of the day it boils down to what games are you playing. There are alot of modern titles that can take advantage of 8 threads these days. But the only thing that I can think of that you probably need more than 4 cores other than video editing or live streaming would be higher end emulation like Wii-U or PS3 for example.
Yes i agree with you but it´s intel and dat´s the problem.
That is far from octagon. It is platonic solid called pentagonal dodecahedron (it has deeper meaning than just a shape).
Buy it now! In a few months they will have to make em at 22nm or more. I hear it will include a line level and carpenters square to install them. Included of course.
Lol if you buy it later as 22nm you get bonus troll inside spectre and meltdown compatible