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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About AluminiumTech

  • Title

Contact Methods

  • Discord
  • Steam
  • Origin
  • UPlay
  • Xbox Live
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • Heatware

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Technology and Gaming
  • Occupation
    Student at Uni


  • CPU
    AMD Ryzen 7 1700X
  • Motherboard
    MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon
  • RAM
    32GB DDR4-2666 (2x 16GB) Corsair Vengeance LPX
  • GPU
    Asus ROG Strix Radeon RX Vega 56
  • Case
    NZXT S340 Elite
  • Storage
    500GB Samsung 860 EVO, 6TB Seagate Barracuda 5400rpm (2020)
  • PSU
    Corsair RM850i
  • Display(s)
    2560x1440 27" Gigabyte G27QC 165Hz VA with FreeSync Premium + Asus VX 238H 23" secondary monitor
  • Cooling
    1x Corsair ML 140 Pro, 1x Corsair ML 120 Pro, 1x Corsair H100i v2
  • Keyboard
    Corsair K70 LUX RGB MX Brown
  • Mouse
    Logitech G903 Wireless
  • Sound
    Sennheiser HD 450BT Wireless Headphones
  • Operating System
    Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
  • Phone
    iPhone 8 Plus 64GB Gold

Recent Profile Visitors

388,945 profile views

Single Status Update

See all updates by AluminiumTech

  1. Let's try this again, since my 3 or 4 previous attempts to make this status update failed very epically for whatever reason.


    These requirements are a big joke and a mess.



    There is no universe where a 290X performs similarly to a GTX 960. If they wanted to show a 4GB card then they could have shown a GTX 1050Ti 4GB or a GTX 970.


    Similarly, there is no universe where a Radeon VII performs similarly to a 2080Ti, nor is there one where a 9600K is an equivaent to a 3600. A 9600K is inferior in multi-thread, the same was a 9700K is worse in multi-thread than a 3700X.


    I feel like for 4K ultra with or without ray tracing they should have recommended 32GB Dual Channel RAM.


    And of course as I scribbled on the image, this is potentially for 60fps. If you want 120-144fps you'll need a time machine to travel to the future when 3090s are actually available cos you'll likely need both Zen3 or Rocket Lake core i9 and a 3090 for high framerates


    I seriously hope to god that Ubisoft is using Anvil Next 2.0 on this instead of re-cycling Disrupt Engine for a 3rd time when it was shown both times to run badly.

    1. Show previous comments  3 more
    2. Zando Bob

      Zando Bob

      Games will use threads, yes. Doesn't mean performance scales with them. Unless games actually scale performance wise past 6 threads, faster cores = better. 

    3. AluminiumTech


      The difference between Intel and AMD cores isn't that much these days.


      Intel has the ability to run their CPU clockspeeds up a wall and so that's how they can run 240Hz or 300Hz quite well.


      Otherwise they're quite similar in per core performance from Zen2 onwards.

    4. Zando Bob

      Zando Bob

      Yep, gap has narrowed. Intel still has a clockspeed lead + lower core-core and RAM latencies that make more of an impact in most games than what AMD has to offer so they remain slightly ahead (and are best in class when you're talking 240Hz and higher, though that's obviously not the target for this kind of game). A 9600K is an Intel equivalent to the 3600 (as is the 10600K but I assume they thought more people had 9th/8th gen stuff so they went with that) both price and often pure gaming performance wise (again, most games do not performance scale very well past 4-6 threads or so) so that'd be why it's on the chart.