Tech Gaming Hardware discussion (& Hardware Sales) thread
- Thread starter Madmick
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 34,510
- Reaction score
- 27,368
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 34,950
- Reaction score
- 26,148
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 34,950
- Reaction score
- 26,148
AMD really nailed 1080p gaming at the right price point with the RX series. They're starting to fall behind a little these days on new AAA games for 1080p 60fps but if they can do the same thing for the next gen they should gain even more market share.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2017
- Messages
- 9,036
- Reaction score
- 6,327
Noob here with a question.
I’ve been staring at YT videos of 30fps vs 60fps games and I just can’t tell the difference.
Yet everyone swears it’s a major improvement.
What gives ?
Is it like a 3D TV thing where some people just can’t see it ?
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 66,112
- Reaction score
- 37,428
WHY TFLOPS MATTER: GPU LIKE WINE
AMD is gaining market share because for the casual market their cards are priced more attractively in prebuilds, and for the hardcore market of builders their cards are a better investment long term versus their NVIDIA peers.
To iterate what I said on the last page, advanced features like DLSS 2.0 amount to impractical vaporware similar to the best APIs (i.e. Vulkan, DX12) with miniscule real-world gaming presence (e.g. three games currently); RTX voice is attractive mostly to a niche market like streamers; GeForce Now isn't a service targeting powerful desktop owners; Ray-tracing is a gimmick in cards that don't have sufficient power to turn it on while still maintaining desirable framerates on higher graphical preset settings (a flaw roundly highlighted when the RTX cards launched). Moreover, power efficiency and TDPs are not the concern they were long ago during the GTX 400 series, and even with the inflated price of PSUs, there isn't a premium offsetting the AMD price advantage with the demand for beefier PSUs.
The most significant long-term concern with the RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT has been excessive heat. Yet when you see some of the best triple-fan 5700 XT variants selling for $370 that stay in the low-70C's under load in testing it's impossible not to see a clear market winner. The baseline RTX 2060 Super offerings starting around $400 are pitiful in comparison.
After all, there may be no better example than the RX 580 8GB vs. GTX 1060 6GB. Back when the GTX 1060 6GB launched, a month after the RX 480, nobody would recommend the RX 480. A year later, when the 580 launched, which was identical to the RX 480 but clocked faster thanks to better fabrication, many would still recommend the GTX 1060 6GB even if it was $20 or so more costly because it still held the advantage in games (~1%-3% across most reviews).
A year later that gap had mostly closed, and four years later, the advantage the GTX 1060 held over the RX 480 has flipped in the RX 580's favor. The 580's 2GB VRAM advantage remains, and this contributes to its even greater advantage at 1440p. Anyone who hasn't upgraded that bought an RX 480 8GB in 2016 or RX 580 in 2017 made the better buy.
Techspot RX 480 & 580 vs. GTX 1060 6GB, then & today
Release Dates
October 3, 2016
RX 480 = -6% (@1080p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
RX 480 = -10% (@1440p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
"The Radeon RX 480 was originally intended to do battle with Nvidia’s upcoming Pascal-based GTX 1060, released only a month later. At the time, the 8GB RX 480 was priced at $240 and the GTX 1060 6GB was sold for $250. Three months after release we compared the two, head to head in 22 games and found on average that the GeForce GPU was 6% faster."
Techspot also noted a sign of the early promise from its processing power advantage, but the fulfilment of this came from better drivers on traditional APIs, not the maturation of those advanced APIs like Vulkan which remain largely irrelevant:
"We noted then that in more recent titles, based on modern DX12 and Vulkan APIs, the RX 480 was almost always faster. Half a dozen of the titles tested supported a modern API and when comparing the data from those select titles, the GTX 1060 6GB was actually 5% slower on average. It seemed like over time, the Radeon RX 480 would end up being the faster product, while the GTX 1060 was more efficient and therefore AIB models generally ran cooler and quieter."
May 5, 2017
RX 580 8GB = +2.5% (@1080p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
RX 580 8GB = +1.8% (@1440p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
February 28, 2020
RX 580 8GB = +5.1% (@1080p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
RX 580 8GB = +8.0% (@1440p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
This is why FLOPs shouldn't be overlooked even if they're not everything:
Thus, if one is looking at the 1440p cards starting around the $400 range today:
Our immediate history offers wisdom.
In fact, Navi (RX 5700 & 5700 XT) doesn't suffer the real-world gaming performance deficit per FLOP against NVIDIA that Polaris did (RX 580/480), and that's why it's already whomping the RTX 2060 Super by ~10% in games today. This advantage will only grow with time.
AMD is gaining market share because for the casual market their cards are priced more attractively in prebuilds, and for the hardcore market of builders their cards are a better investment long term versus their NVIDIA peers.
To iterate what I said on the last page, advanced features like DLSS 2.0 amount to impractical vaporware similar to the best APIs (i.e. Vulkan, DX12) with miniscule real-world gaming presence (e.g. three games currently); RTX voice is attractive mostly to a niche market like streamers; GeForce Now isn't a service targeting powerful desktop owners; Ray-tracing is a gimmick in cards that don't have sufficient power to turn it on while still maintaining desirable framerates on higher graphical preset settings (a flaw roundly highlighted when the RTX cards launched). Moreover, power efficiency and TDPs are not the concern they were long ago during the GTX 400 series, and even with the inflated price of PSUs, there isn't a premium offsetting the AMD price advantage with the demand for beefier PSUs.
The most significant long-term concern with the RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT has been excessive heat. Yet when you see some of the best triple-fan 5700 XT variants selling for $370 that stay in the low-70C's under load in testing it's impossible not to see a clear market winner. The baseline RTX 2060 Super offerings starting around $400 are pitiful in comparison.
After all, there may be no better example than the RX 580 8GB vs. GTX 1060 6GB. Back when the GTX 1060 6GB launched, a month after the RX 480, nobody would recommend the RX 480. A year later, when the 580 launched, which was identical to the RX 480 but clocked faster thanks to better fabrication, many would still recommend the GTX 1060 6GB even if it was $20 or so more costly because it still held the advantage in games (~1%-3% across most reviews).
A year later that gap had mostly closed, and four years later, the advantage the GTX 1060 held over the RX 480 has flipped in the RX 580's favor. The 580's 2GB VRAM advantage remains, and this contributes to its even greater advantage at 1440p. Anyone who hasn't upgraded that bought an RX 480 8GB in 2016 or RX 580 in 2017 made the better buy.
Techspot RX 480 & 580 vs. GTX 1060 6GB, then & today
Release Dates
- RX 480 = June 29, 2016
- GTX 1060 = July 19, 2016
- RX 580 = April 18, 2017
October 3, 2016
RX 480 = -6% (@1080p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
RX 480 = -10% (@1440p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
"The Radeon RX 480 was originally intended to do battle with Nvidia’s upcoming Pascal-based GTX 1060, released only a month later. At the time, the 8GB RX 480 was priced at $240 and the GTX 1060 6GB was sold for $250. Three months after release we compared the two, head to head in 22 games and found on average that the GeForce GPU was 6% faster."
Techspot also noted a sign of the early promise from its processing power advantage, but the fulfilment of this came from better drivers on traditional APIs, not the maturation of those advanced APIs like Vulkan which remain largely irrelevant:
"We noted then that in more recent titles, based on modern DX12 and Vulkan APIs, the RX 480 was almost always faster. Half a dozen of the titles tested supported a modern API and when comparing the data from those select titles, the GTX 1060 6GB was actually 5% slower on average. It seemed like over time, the Radeon RX 480 would end up being the faster product, while the GTX 1060 was more efficient and therefore AIB models generally ran cooler and quieter."
May 5, 2017
RX 580 8GB = +2.5% (@1080p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
RX 580 8GB = +1.8% (@1440p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
February 28, 2020
RX 580 8GB = +5.1% (@1080p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
RX 580 8GB = +8.0% (@1440p) vs. GTX 1060 6GB
This is why FLOPs shouldn't be overlooked even if they're not everything:
- 6.175 TFLOPs = RX 580 8GB
- 5.834 TFLOPs = RX 480 8GB*
- 4.375 TFLOPs = GTX 1060 6GB
Thus, if one is looking at the 1440p cards starting around the $400 range today:
- 9.754 TFLOPs = RX 5700 XT
- 7.181 TFLOPs = RTX 2060 Super
Our immediate history offers wisdom.
In fact, Navi (RX 5700 & 5700 XT) doesn't suffer the real-world gaming performance deficit per FLOP against NVIDIA that Polaris did (RX 580/480), and that's why it's already whomping the RTX 2060 Super by ~10% in games today. This advantage will only grow with time.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 34,950
- Reaction score
- 26,148
60fps makes everything feel and look smoother.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 34,510
- Reaction score
- 27,368
Those things are kinda like toys compared to full size pinball or arcade cabinets. I'm talking about full coin operation custom games "I wrote my own Iphone based pinball machine using an open source tool for producing iPhone games'. It took around a week and around 1,200 lines of code and a lot of debugging and png image creation. It came out looking pretty good though I would not have sold it I would have had to spend a solid year working on it and making tons of levels.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2017
- Messages
- 9,036
- Reaction score
- 6,327
Yes I heard that but I’m saying I can’t tell the difference on YouTube videos.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 34,950
- Reaction score
- 26,148
The production virtual cabinets use Pinball FX.
I would try to play a virtual before building one. They suck tbh.
Hopefully it was because of disagreements with management and not health reasons.
You can test it yourself. Google FPS limiter and follow the instructions.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 34,950
- Reaction score
- 26,148
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2009
- Messages
- 11,351
- Reaction score
- 2,666
Not that I have any other recent cards to compare it with, but I've been happy with my RX 5700. I play older games (too cheap to pay full price for new releases) and I've been pulling 144Hz+ @1440p on most of the ones that I've been playing.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 34,510
- Reaction score
- 27,368
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 34,950
- Reaction score
- 26,148
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2013
- Messages
- 4,781
- Reaction score
- 2,510
Been trying to get a power supply for new build for weeks and NADA. At least not the reliable good quality power supplies like the corsiar RM series. And the few ones that are available have an insane price hike.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 34,950
- Reaction score
- 26,148
Have you checked your local independent owned stores?
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2013
- Messages
- 4,781
- Reaction score
- 2,510
Yup. Frys electronics, best buy, and a few small computer stores and nothing. Sold out or overpriced.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 66,112
- Reaction score
- 37,428
Yeah, PSU pricing is pretty insane atm.
How much wattage do you need? Because this 650W Silverstone Strider is a fully modular, Platinum-rated unit for $122 manufactured by Sirtec that can be preordered, and is advertising that it will be back in stock on June 23rd. So that's a week away.
www.amazon.com/dp/B017WL5UFO?tag=pcpapi-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1
This specific unit wasn't reviewed by JonnyGuru, but two others from the same line also manufactured by Sirtec were. The 750W scored an 8.1, and the 550W scored a tremendous 9.3:
http://www.jonnyguru.com/blog/2016/03/06/silverstone-strider-platinum-st55f-pt-550w-power-supply/
http://www.jonnyguru.com/blog/2016/01/17/silverstone-strider-platinum-st75f-pt-750w-power-supply/
As you can see from the 550W review there is excellent quality of components and construction:
http://www.jonnyguru.com/blog/2016/03/06/silverstone-strider-platinum-st55f-pt-550w-power-supply/5/
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 34,950
- Reaction score
- 26,148
I've been seeing a lot of people complaining that their PSU orders have been pushed back even farther than the anticipated arrival date.
