Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by WMGroomAK

  1. 41 minutes ago, firelighter487 said:

    what a coincidence.... *tinfoil hat intensifies*

    The BBC Article on this has a link to a Nintendo of America Twitter post welcoming him where he has Mario & Luigi tied up in the background...  Also didn't Nintendo recently release another Mario game involving Bowser?  






  2. 1 hour ago, CharminUltraStrong said:

    I understand this but time and time again they botch high end gpu releases. They don't need 16 gigs of hbm2 especially if it costs 350 or 250 USD that's ridiculous! It's basically a Vega 64ti. It's disappointing because they hyped it up to be much more than that and they said themselves it'd be a 2080 "competitor". If i could take a 2070 or vii I'd take the 2070 any day. Much more robust feature set and as a consumer, 16 gigs of hbm2 won't even cross my mind in day to day use. They're trying to be a titan and 2080 all at once. 

    While not necessary for gaming, I guess the 16 GB of HBM2 do have an impact on video editing in Adobe when dealing with long high resolution files...  That might make it worth while for someone getting into performing 4K gaming and video editing as it is a cheaper solution.



  3. What I found interesting about the card disassembly is that there appears to be space on the board for additional power delivery (looks like 4 rectifiers and chokes?)...  Not sure if this is because they are borrowing from the Instinct board layout but would be interesting to know what the current power delivery potential is versus what it could be.

  4. I switched to Android from an iPhone 3GS and one of the deciding factors was that Android appeared to work a lot better with the Windows ecosystem than iTunes.  It was easier for me to transfer music, photos and videos from device to PC and vice versa than going through iTunes, where at least once a month, Apple would ask for me to re-register the same computer that was already registered and add that registration on the number of concurrent uses that iTunes allowed.  Hardware wise, I never had too many issues with the Apple hardware, but having the MicroSD card slot or having the removable battery at the time was a nice feature.  Still like being able to get devices with MicroSD support.  I also like the ability to organize the icons on Android and navigate the system menus better than what iOS had.  

  5. Kind of disappointing that they are not discounting the F-series by at least $10 to $20...  If they are truly doing this because the iGPU has issues and it allows them to still use the silicon, I would be suspicious of other silicon defects. I'm trying to remember, but I thought there were some actual use cases where you could shuffle some of the encoding off to the iGPU for things like streaming and still keep performance up in other applications.  As it is, selling for the same price seems to set up the F-series to mean Fail... 

  6. In case people were curious, here is the EETimes article that HotHardware based theirs off of:



    This article is more focused on the perceived lack of showing from Intel at CES vs a stronger showing from AMD and the idea that Intel without a strong CEO may be interested in trying to acquire AMD's CEO...  A couple of key sentences in the article:


    Asked about the potential of an Intel-AMD merger, Krewell told us to “file it under fiction.” He noted, “It would give Intel complete dominance of PCs and servers and be considered anticompetitive.” Jon Peddie, President of Jon Peddie Research, also told us, “Not in a million trillion light years.”


    Both noted that the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) would never allow it.


    However, one CEO who teased the Intel-AMD deal begged to differ. “The semiconductor market today is no longer limited to CPUs for PCs,” he said. With Nvidia’s strength in GPUs for AIs and data centers, the Intel vs. AMD duo play is no longer monopolizing the market.


    Kathleen Maher, vice president at Jon Peddie Research and the editor-in-chief of JPR's TechWatch Report, told us, “Obviously, the idea of Intel acquiring AMD is something that bubbles up from time to time, as does the idea of Nvidia acquiring AMD. But in that [latter] case, forget the FTC, Europe would have a cow (or whatever).”


    However, even those who don’t buy the Intel-AMD rumor are open to the suggestion that Intel wants Lisa Su more than it wants AMD.



    The Intel-AMD merger rumor that swirled among C-level executives at CES might be just the predictable tech speculation that happens when industry types gather. But one thing’s for sure: CES last week put the weakening of Intel in plain sight, for everyone to see.


  7. Yeah, this ain't going to happen, especially with AMD beginning to show profits...  The more likely scenario (still doubtful) would be the mention of Intel trying to poach Lisa Su as their new CEO.  There would be no benefit to Intel as a corporation in outright purchasing AMD.  Feels more like tech clickbait article.

  8. AnandTech is saying that they've seen documents that Intel may be releasing a core i9-9990XE in the future as a highly binned, auction only to System Integrator part.  This will supposedly be a highly binned 9940X, with 14 cores/28 threads with a base frequency of 4.0 Ghz and Turbo of 5.0 Ghz and a 255 W TDP.  




    AnandTech has seen documents and supporting information from multiple sources that show that Intel is planning to release a new high-end desktop processor, the Core i9-9990XE. These documents show that the processors will not be sold at retail; rather they will only be sold to system integrators, and then only through a closed online auction.


    This new processor will be the highest numbered processor in Intel's high-end desktop line. The current top processor is the i9-9980XE, an 18 core part with a base frequency of 3.5 GHz and a turbo frequency of 4.0 GHz. The i9-9990XE, on the other hand, is not simply the 9980XE with an increase in frequency. 


    The Core i9-9990XE will be a 14 core processor, but with a base frequency of 4.0 GHz and a turbo frequency of 5.0 GHz. This makes it a super-binned 9940X.


    Intel is listing this processor as 'off roadmap', meaning it won't come to retail. Instead of selling to end users directly, Intel will offer it to select OEMs via a series of auctions, held once a quarter, with the first auction scheduled for the third week of 2019. This means the price of the processor is not fixed, and will depend on how much each system integrator is willing to pay. We also learned that only three system integrators will be at the first auction.


    Overall, this method means that Intel does not have to commit to volume sales: because these chips are super binned, they likely can only build a few hundred a quarter, hence the one auction per quarter. 


    Other details about the chip that we have learned include that it will have a listed TDP of 255W, which means the peak power will be higher. Motherboard vendors will have to support 420 amps on the power delivery for the chip (which at 1.3 volts would be 546 watts), and up to 30 amps per core. It will be for the socket 2066 X299 motherboards already on the market, and perhaps importantly, there is no warranty from Intel. This means that system builders will not be able to recoup costs on dead silicon, but they might give their own warranty to end users.


    Well this is interesting. We have reached out to Intel for comments.


    Considering that the 9980XE is a $2000.00 part, I can't imagine this being auctioned for any less than $2300.00 and it being a super-limited edition piece, so probably a bit higher.  Of course, I also can't figure out who this part is for, except for somebody with a lot more money than I've got in reserve...  If this is true, it could be interesting to see if someone gets a hold of the motherboard for this and tries a regular 9940X in it to see what that part can achieve manually...

  9. Originally found the link to this story over at HardOCP, but thought it was kind of interesting...  In the updates released for iOS 12, tvOS 12 & watchOS 5, Apple has included a new provision of using an abstracted summary of phone calls & emails to prevent iTunes fraud.  These scores are used to determine a device trust to verify that the owner/user of the iTunes account is legitimate.  Based on the article, this could be fallout from an iTunes fraud issue in Singapore from earlier this year.  




    Apple’s promise of transparency regarding user data means that any new privacy policy update might reveal that it’s doing something new and weird with your data. Alongside yesterday’s releases of iOS 12, tvOS 12, and watchOS 5, Apple quietly updated some of its iTunes Store terms and privacy disclosures, including one standout provision: It’s now using an abstracted summary of your phone calls or emails as an anti-fraud measure.

    The provision appears in the iTunes Store & Privacy windows of iOS and tvOS devices:


    To help identify and prevent fraud, information about how you use your device, including the approximate number of phone calls or emails you send and receive, will be used to compute a device trust score when you attempt a purchase. The submissions are designed so Apple cannot learn the real values on your device. The scores are stored for a fixed time on our servers.


    Updated September 19 at 12:48 p.m.: An Apple spokesperson reached out to confirm that the device trust score is indeed new in iOS 12, and clarified that it was designed to detect fraud in iTunes purchases, as well as to reduce false positives in fraud detection. It apparently gives Apple a better likelihood of accurately determining whether content is being bought by the actual named purchaser, an issue that notably made headlines earlier this year.

    Singapore iTunes fraud article:  https://venturebeat.com/2018/07/23/singaporean-banks-aid-itunes-fraud-victims-as-apple-denies-responsibility/


    Dozens of Singaporean iTunes customers have been forced to seek assistance from their banks after their credit and debit cards were used for iTunes purchases, Channel News Asia reports. Apple has denied responsibility for the mass of unauthorized charges, but is “looking into” the issue.

    Customers of Chinese and Singaporean banks including HSBC, UOB, OCBC, Maybank, and DBS have discovered iTunes charges on their accounts totaling as much as $7,200 in Singaporean currency ($5,273 U.S.). In the worst cases, credit cards and debit cards have been hit with multiple charges of a repeating amount in excess of $100 — in one case across 45 separate iTunes

    OCBC alone reported that 58 cardholders were affected by the fraudulent transactions this month, while Maybank said that “less than 70” of its customers were impacted. Affected customers are finding the charges on their bank accounts, but not on their iTunes accounts, as scammers are apparently using fraudulently established iTunes accounts to make purchases.

    Each of the banks has instituted chargebacks and card replacements for customers impacted by the fraud. But Apple has apparently disclaimed responsibility for the charges: An unnamed victim said that a “senior adviser” at Apple “repeatedly” claimed that the company was “unable” to refund over $7,000 in fraudulent charges to her HSBC account, saying that it was “not due to Apple and/or iTunes at all.” However, another report suggests that Apple has issued refunds on request.

    It’s unclear how exactly the card data is getting compromised, and what the precise link is to Apple’s online stores. While some victims are said to have used their cards for App Store purchases, others have said that they don’t use their compromised cards with Apple. Their only common link is that the unauthorized charges were made by iTunes. Singaporean police, the banks, and Apple are all said to be looking into the issue at this point.

    payments before the bank stopped “suspicious transactions.”

    While I approve of Apple trying to take measures to ensure that iTunes purchases are not fraudulent, the idea of having my device scan what my usage is and report it back as a part of my account information to verify who I am for purchases that I make seems kind of weird...  Of course Google is probably doing the same thing...  Maybe they can release how they perform the scoring in detail, make a deal with the telecoms and you would see people competing for high scores. xD

  10. 8 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

    Obviously, the 2080 Ti is massively more powerful, but, still, it's a hot & hungry card that's a bad value proposition at the price.

    Not sure if you have it up, but GN is currently livestreaming their OC attempt for the 2080Ti.  Should be interesting to watch...



  11. Maybe it's just me, but on the LTT video, when they were showing the FFXV benchmark (around 11:00 mark), it looked like the DLSS rendering had a lot more issues with tearing and stuttering than the non-DLSS run...  Could just be due to the benchmark itself but it looked off...  Haven't had a chance to see if any of the other reviews have run that yet.

  12. An interesting security report was recently released concerning a new botnet being labelled as Fbot that appears to be targeting a seperate botnet for removal.  According to a report from security firm Netlab, this botnet is a variant of the ADBminer software that appears to only have the purposed of seeking out ad removing the com.ufo.miner botnet and may have links to the original Satori botnet.




    Botnets consist of dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of internet-connected devices which are then used to carry out to send spam messages en masse or to launch distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, crashing online services. CCN has reported before on how botnets infected millions of computers last year with cryptojacking software designed to siphon CPU power for and use it to secretly mine crypto for the malware owners.


    A particularly notorious botnet called ‘Mirai’ famously hijacked IoT devices to mine Bitcoin – while IoT devices are individually extremely ineffective, Mirai is a particularly virulent piece of malware that infected thousands of devices in a short space of time to take small profits from all of them. While the term botnet understandably carries a malicious connotation, one botnet seems to be breaking the mold and is seemingly forcing its way into user computers without to infect them – with crypto antivirus software.


    Security research firm Netlab released a report describing the malware which they have dubbed ‘Fbot’, a variant of the legitimate ADBminer software designed to mine cryptocurrencies.

    “There are 3 interesting aspects about this new botnet:

    • First, so far the only purpose of this botnet looks to be just going after and removing another botnet com.ufo.miner.
    • Second, the bot does not use traditional DNS to communicate with the C2, instead, it utilizes block-chain DNS to resolve the non-stand C2 name musl.lib. (see below for details)
    • Third, this bot appears to have strong links to the original satori botnet.”

    The botnet cleanses the ‘infected’ computers of the notoriously widespread cryptojacking malware and so far doesn’t seem to be leaving anything behind in its place, leading some to believe that the botnet may even be designed with that single benign purpose in mind.


    However, it’s possible that there’s more to the software that meets the eye, or that it’s simply the first phase of a larger plan. The botnet could potentially be clearing competing crypto-malware only to pave the way for a fresh wave of attacks of its own, systematically eliminating the competition. Botnets take time, effort, and funding to operate which makes it hard to believe that an anonymous botnet could be working out there simply to help people.


    I'm left to wonder if this is a legitimate attempt to have a botnet clean up another botnets mess or is it merely establishing itself and waiting for future deployment potential. Would be nice if it's just the former, but hard to trust.  It is kind of interesting though that someone is using a botnet to kill another botnet.


    Netlab report: https://blog.netlab.360.com/threat-alert-a-new-worm-fbot-cleaning-adbminer-is-using-a-blockchain-based-dns-en/

  13. In sad news for fans of the Dead Rising Series, it appears that the Dead Rising franchise may be dead for a while as Capcom has decided to close the Capcom Vancouver office (formerly Blue Castle Games).  Capcom has officially stated that they are cancelling development of projects in Vancouver and concentrating on major titles in Japan.  Not really much to say or in the article, but kind of sad that they are closing shop...  Would be nice if the 158 people (or at least some of them) could pool together resources and reopen Blue Castle Games or a new studio.  




    Japanese video game giant Capcom closed its Burnaby studio Tuesday, leaving 158 people out of work.

    The studio, which first opened in 2005 as Blue Castle Games before being purchased by Capcom in 2011, was responsible for producing the popular Dead Rising franchise and the free-to-play Puzzle Fighter.

    Operations at Capcom Vancouver are being suspended immediately and projects are being moved to Japan, the company says.

    “Capcom has been focused on increasing the efficiency and growth of its game development operations. To support this objective, new R&D facilities and annual hiring have been underway at the Osaka headquarters,” Capcom said in a statement.

    “In consideration of this process, as a result of reviewing titles in development at Capcom Vancouver, Capcom has decided to cancel the development projects at this studio and will concentrate development of major titles in Japan.

    “As part of this overall direction, the Capcom Vancouver studio will suspend operations, effective today, so the current staff will be laid off and the office will be closed.”

    In February, Capcom cut 30 per cent of its Burnaby staff as part of a “restructuring.”

    The company says laid-off staff will receive severance packages


  14. 1 hour ago, leadeater said:

    2080 Ti is not the maximum GT102 SM/CUDA core configuration, that is the Quadro RTX 6000 and if (unlikely) the Titan is going to be based off GT102 it'll use that configuration not the 2080 Ti configuration.


    If there is going to be a Turing Titan it'll be a GT100 part or GT102 (fully unlocked) part likely at similar prices to the Titan V, the 2080 Ti is what it is and it's time to get used to it.

    This has been my take on it...  I would not be surprised if nVidia releases an RTX Titan sometime in 2019 (maybe in Q1?) that consists of a fully unlocked TU102 part with 12 GB of RAM.  My best guess is that nVidia will either decrease the MSRP of the 2080 Ti to 900 or 1000 and release any RTX Titan at $1300 or keep the 2080 Ti price the same and release a Titan part at around $1500...  It would be interesting to see the performace of two 2080 Ti linked via NVLink versus a single Quadro RTX 6000.  Would you be able to get equivalent or better performance out of the $2500 for the 2080 Tis and the NVLink bridge than the $6300 for the Quadro? 

  15. 3 minutes ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

    And RT can't come soon enough, though I am fine with "only" Global Illumination.

    I couldn't care less about RT in gaming however I am definitely looking forward to seeing scientific models being built able to utilize these cores...  I can think of some geologic modelling that would probably benefit from using these, like ore deposit & oil well mapping and seismic surveying.

  16. 1 minute ago, pas008 said:

    i'm thinking dgx does their thing to make use of it in the matrix form and passes it to the users and the users tensor handles all aa after fact

    One thing that will be interesting is whether all of this is optimized back into the game code, becomes a part of the nVidia Driver version or has some other implementation.  I could see this becoming a part of the game drivers as that would allow for easier optimizations after game release.

  17. 5 minutes ago, geo3 said:

    The performance increase and cost increase aren't even remotely inline with each other. This is what most people are upset over.

    Just did a quick spreadsheet of the numbers that Vidoecardz provided on their graphs as being from nVidia and comparing that to the price increase, the big issue really is with the Ti card...  The average increase in performance for the 2080 from the 1080 is around 49%, the 2080 Ti from the 1080 Ti is about 45%.  The average cost increase on the other hand is 45% from 1080 to 2080 and 71% from 1080 Ti to 2080 Ti.  So, if we actually put any sort of trust in these numbers, I don't see an issue with the 2080 price.  Just wouldn't look at the 2080 Ti yet...

  18. 3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

    Why would videocardz put their name on graphs assembled with other peoples data?   


    My best guess is that nVidia didn't supply the actual graphs, just the numbers/scores and Videocardz assembled that into the graphs.  Could be wrong though...



    The graphs are based on values (framerate/scores) provided by NVIDIA for their recommended titles. Yes, the word recommended is rather important here too.


  19. Videocardz has an article up that is supposedly sharing some of the reference performance numbers from nVidia's Reviewer's Guide for the 2080 & 2080 Ti.  Based on the graphs assembled from nVidia's supplied numbers, in the games that nVidia has for their recommended titles, the 2080 should be expected to perform between approximately 5 and 20 % better than the 1080 Ti with the 2080 Ti being substantially higher.  



    The data we are sharing with you today comes from official Reviewers’ Guide. The numbers in this guide are only a reference for further benchmarking. It is probably an important thing to say that those numbers are should not be taken very seriously. Each reviewer has a different testing methodology (different scenario, different testing equipment, a different list of games).


    The graphs are based on values (framerate/scores) provided by NVIDIA for their recommended titles. Yes, the word recommended is rather important here too.


    In GeForce RTX reviewer’s guide, NVIDIA is not using any other resolution than 4K. So all benchmarks (except VRMark Cyan Room) were performed at 3840×2160 resolution. In fact, the RTX 2080 series were ‘designed for 4K’, as the document claims.


    NVIDIA reference system includes: X299 Rampage VI Apex, Core i9-7900X 3.3 GHz, Corsair 16GB DDR4 (no frequency specified), Windows 10 (v1803), NVIDIA 411.38 drivers.

    I would definitely take any of these numbers with a large serving of salt, but they do look like a good starting point... Most of the titles, it appears that the 2080 can possibly hit 60 FPS with a couple of them it lacking behind, but not far behind, like ME:A, Shadow of War & Shadow of the Tomb Raider.  Also, originally saw this posted over on HardOCP


    Below are a couple of the graphs from the Videocardz site:







    For the more numerically inclined, here is a spreadsheet of the numbers provided on the charts with the MSRP for the cards and the average increase in performance & price from 1080 to 2080, 1080 Ti to 2080 Ti and 1080 Ti to 2080.  I'll admit that this is my personal plotting so may not have everything correct and my version of Stats can always be wrong as well as we are basing this off of best case nVidia numbers...