totjup5

27 minutes ago, dexxterlab97 said:

Don't get the ASUS. 192 bit will be worse than a regular 1060. Slower

All 1060s have a 192 bit bus......

It's most likely a cpu bottleneck. The game has serious issues with cpu bottlenecking in areas like geothermal valley. I even get occasional framedrops in that area of the map in dx11 with 2 1080s and my 3770k @ 4.8ghz.

16 minutes ago, Energycore said:

 

 

Yes, I challenge you to paint mine

Mission Accomplished  

This is the first thing that came to mind when I read Microsoft oneclip lol https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/fGCqYlVtWqQjy0WE5JiZNDz7Hov-gM4Ilcjn74I_-aNBQOpzFbSqJvXo9IQ11T33SxrGbnGDVRdSJSz_AiAPyuef2IBAT_VekPZ8nWkR82w2loCUPuuo9hskbw

That's great news for AMD. I just hope Vega can perform. 

29 minutes ago, Aaron1001 said:

I honestly cant tell if you are trolling or if you are serious. But, if you really are serious, I propose a question. Why would they underclock the intel chip and not overclock theirs? If everyone saw a 3.6ghz amd zen beating out a 3.6ghz 6900k, EVERYONE would be losing their shit at how amazing this new chip is. but they didnt. why not?

Because one is a released product and one is an early engineering sample. The chip isn't finalized yet and they probably haven't hit final clock speeds. They did it to provide a 1:1 comparison and demonstrate the IPC of the zen chip vs the Intel chip. There's no use arguing over it when we don't know what the release version of zen will be capable of. The point is, clock for clock, according to AMD, zen is ahead of broadwell e. Unless you are a horrible fanboy that should excite you. We won't know whether the clock speeds will be able to match Intel's offerings until launch but based on my past experience over clocking AMD CPUs I'm hopeful they will. However, even if the clock speeds aren't up with intel it could still provide some much needed competition in the CPU marketplace if they price it right, and force Intel to respond in a more meaningful way than sitting on their asses like they have basically since sandy bridge. No matter how you look at it, even if this chip can't go much higher than 3.2, this is a good step for AMD and a good sign for tech enthusiasts.

Just now, ivan134 said:

You realize it was a joke right?

Kind of hard to tell with the amount of uneducated blind and hate that goes on on this forum. Maybe try notating with /s next time.

6 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

RIP AMD

You realize this is about their stock going UP right?

12 hours ago, Coaxialgamer said:

My 3770k is currently on life support and my board isn't doing great either . Holding out until zen or kaby lake .

My 3770k is still alive and kicking but I'm really looking forward to zen. If these numbers hold true that's my next upgrade path regardless of what Intel brings to the table. If AMD is making this strong of a push I want to support them.

Extreme first world problems man.... 

On 8/12/2016 at 1:50 PM, AuraDesru said:

Bruh

I just bought my 1070 today

wtf

That's how I felt when the Titan x was announced month after I bought two 1080s....

It runs really well on my desktop. constant 60fps. I plan to try it on my laptop later. My two biggest problems with the game right now is that it has semi frequent crashes to the desktop, and that the FOV slider doesn't work...

18 minutes ago, Nineshadow said:

It runs like crap on my Lenovo Y50.

Under 30 fps on any settings, massive stuttering, bad controls with mouse and keyboard.

Disappointing tbh. And yes, my laptop might not be the best gaming machine ever, and I'm not expecting to run everything at ultra and 60+ fps, but I CAN play any game I want. No Man's Sky...not so much.

Did you disable the 30fps cap in the settings menu....

11 hours ago, SLAYR said:

I kinda want to see what it would do at 5GHz though (new 9590?), any word on the TDP.

 

and really the only way to not have a bias, and actually find out how good the IPC really is would be to run cpu benchmarks like Cinebench.

It's supposed to be 95w i'm pretty sure 

970, rx480, or a 1060 would all do it.

there may be an alternate port you can use on one of the machines to solve this issue. I had a similar problem in DayZ standalone.

I had 2 970s, does that mean I can claim 60$?

Arma 3 is really dependent on cpu per core performance. FX chips really struggle with it.

3 hours ago, SamStrecker said:

So still not enough for 4K. Wow

As long as the game scales well it is. I've been able to play games like star wars battlefront at 5k with DSR and get over 60fps.

your benchmarking a has really gotten lazy.... 3 games? really? how about other games that scale with sli like battlefield, battlefront, witcher 3? honestly... as someone who has been running an sli setup for the last 4 years you did a terrible job with this video. and your ending note was even more irritating. "the two games it works with" really? sli support in modern AAA titles has gotten a lot better over the years and even if it doesn't work right at launch usually big titles have multi GPU support fairly quickly. I agree multi GPU isn't for everyone, but there's no reason to eternalize stereotypes.
 

4 hours ago, ShadowCaptain said:

I recommend

 

not buying on G2A

Good for you

Both are great games. Witcher 3 is better though IMO. It also has a lot more content and is better optimized. In the end though it's up to you, and what you want to play.

5 hours ago, RuLeZ said:

Stop spreading misinformation, AMD Drivers are fine right now, they were bad for a time in the past.

True. Honestly these days I have more issues with Nvidia drivers than AMD drivers.

I would use it to upgrade my htpc which currently is using intel graphics.