Desktop Computers

mkopec said:

Totally wrong. If you do nothing but game, lb per lb Intel still has AMD beaten. Its only wen you add in streaming and other productivity shit where multi core performance comes into play AMD takes the lead.

I would stake my i5 9600K 6 core that I have @ 5ghz over any of your 30 core AMD chips in pure game performance.

On top of this Intel is just easier. Plug and play. AMD is still janky as fuck. With Intel I didnt have to fuck around looking for new AMD 3 compatible boards, I did not have to flash my motherboard to latest, I did not have to buy expensive ass xt3900 ram or whatever the fuck. I plugged it all in and it just worked. Something that AMD still has to get right so people are not fucking around to make their shit work.

BTW the x3700 system I built for my kid is still runnig great, but there is still something fucked with how hot that chip gets. I looked that shit up to and im not the only one experiencing those problems with heat and AMD x3700

Click to expand...

You are disregarding price for performance. And if we are being anecdotal, I have had zero issues with my Ryzen 5 3600 and 5700XT on an X470 board.

And I've definitely had issues with Intel in the past, because PC part manufacturers all suck sometimes.

mkopec said:

Totally wrong. If you do nothing but game, lb per lb Intel still has AMD beaten. Its only wen you add in streaming and other productivity shit where multi core performance comes into play AMD takes the lead.

Click to expand...

3700X v 9600K, both with 2080 TI & both with 1080 TI, Timespy:

3700X v 9600K, both with 2080 TI & both with 1080 TI, Firestrike:

3700X v 9600K, both with 2080 TI & both with 1080 TI, Firestrike Extreme:

Getting this:

Bought this:


Something fucky?

Hatorade said:

Getting this:
View attachment 228699
Bought this:
View attachment 228700

Something fucky?

Click to expand...

Need to enable the 3600 XMP profile in the BIOS.

mkopec said:

I dont care about your 3dmark bullshit, show me some real game benchmarks. Oh and BTW, price vs performance this is a $230 Intel chip vs $350 AMD

Click to expand...

Not sure what to tell you if you disregard across-the-board 3dMark results. You're the one mentioning the 3700X, but it's much the same result with the 3600X:


MIGA?

mkopec said:

Because I dont build computers to test them and post 3dmark results, I build them to play games on. Those numbers dont mean anything to me. Again, show me some real world FPS test results in some real games. Bottom line Intel still shits on AMD chips regarding gaming. (but they have come closer) Add in some productivity in there and you got a case.

Regardless, this point is about some douche saying hurr, dont buy intel, hurr they are junk now, lul.

As you can tell I have both in my house I built. Im not a proc racist.

Click to expand...

I don't subscribe to brand loyalty, either, but there is some merit to 3dMark because the top scores are tweaked systems and competitive. IMO, 3DMark scores represent better uses of the hardware than the typical reviewer's.

I don't think gamers should want a thread count barely above old quad cores with all the headaches it'll inevitably cause in a few years. Just because something doesn't run well on your I5 doesn't make it shitty.

mkopec said:

Regardless, this point is about some douche saying hurr, dont buy intel, hurr they are junk now, lul.
As you can tell I have both in my house I built. Im not a proc racist.

Click to expand...

I'm not a CPU racist or fanboy either. My snappy one-liner was aimed squarely at Intel for only now getting around to discounting some of their desktop processors.

What I could have said in more words was: FUCK INTEL, they don't deserve anyone's money. They've been getting fatter and lazier for nearly a decade now, and haven't released a truly impressive desktop CPU since the 2600K. That was nearly NINE years ago. I had one (overclocked), and replaced it recently with the 2700X. Intel finally has some really serious competition on their hands, and they've been sandbagging for so long, that they have nothing new or innovative to offer in reply, and probably won't have for some time to come.

As far as I'm concerned they should have to pay the piper now, should be extremely embarrassed about it for as long as possible, and just maybe, they might learn a lesson.

There's only a single case where giving Intel money might make sense to me right now; if I was building a Top Shelf, 1080p only, Competitive FPS rig w/Ultra High refresh monitor.
I don't even game at 1080p anymore and I'm certainly no "Shroud wannabe", so they have nothing to offer me at any price.

Also, many games properly utilise all 16 threads on my 2700X. To name just a few; Witcher 3, Battlefield 1, the Tomb Raider games, DOOM, Ghost Recon Wildlands, Destiny 2.

Guess I'm a douche. =P

jooka said:

The 34-inch Mi Surface Display marks Xiaomi's debut into gaming monitors

On the surface, it would seem that Xiaomi's minimalist looking Mi Surface Display won't cater to gamers, but its clean appearance, devoid of angles and creases, comes...

www.techspot.com

Interesting 34" widescreen, not sure about the company tho.

• 3440 x 1440
• 144 Hz
• AMD's FreeSync
• 1500R curvature

Price - ¥2,500 (~ $312) seems pretty good if it reviews well.

Click to expand...

Bit late to this. The company is mainly known for smartphones here, check out the Xiaomi phones. I imagine their monitor will not be total shit.

ver_21 Intrinsic thanks, worked fine after windows install.
Lanx Was to install windows, since removed.
All is well, messing with how far I can overclock now.