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

pas008

Member
  • Content Count

    3,623
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Agree
    pas008 reacted to leadeater in RDNA2 VRAM Leaks: Go buy AMD cards if you want more than 10GB.   
    Nothing today would require you to, future is future. Like I said everything could change so worrying about what might happen later is pointless, just buy the next new GPU at that point.
     
    But also no, the difference some setting make is literally zero visually, when going from Ultra to High.
  2. Agree
    pas008 reacted to LAwLz in RDNA2 VRAM Leaks: Go buy AMD cards if you want more than 10GB.   
    I'd like to remind everyone that we do not actually know how much VRAM is "enough VRAM".
    Only people who have done deep analysis like those at Nvidia and possibly game developers (or some super nerdy hobby person) knows this.
     
    You can NOT, and I repeat, you can NOT, look at task manager, see that your VRAM is at 90% usage and then say "I am using 90% so therefore if I turn settings up I will get bottlenecked".
    VRAM, just like RAM, scales depending on how much you have. It costs processing cycles to flush your VRAM, so your GPU will rather just save a bunch of junk data it doesn't need than to actually flush it and only store what is necessary. You might be sitting at 9GB used on your 10GB card and think "holy crap I am almost maxing out!" while your GPU is thinking "I only need 3GB but why waste power flushing the other 6GB of of memory when I still got 1 whole GB left that I can fill?".
     
    It's the same with regular RAM in Windows. I have pretty much nothing running on my PC right now but it's still using 6GB. That's because Windows thinks "I am only using 20% of the available RAM so why waste power and performance doing cleanup so that I got like 90% free? I'll just keep stuff loaded in case it is necessary, and I'll clean the cached stuff if I have to".
     
    So, unless you have actually done some type of analysis which involves actually looking at what data is loaded in the VRAM, you can not say "we need X amount of VRAM and Y is a bottleneck".
    Either that, or use the exact same graphics card but with different VRAM config and compare performance. You can not compare two different cards with different GPU cores and different memory amounts to draw any meaningful conclusions about how much VRAM is necessary. Especially not when comparing different GPU generations or brands since they use widely different memory compression and 1GB of VRAM on Ampere for example can be used to store more textures data than 1GB of VRAM on let's say an AMD card from a couple of generations ago.
  3. Agree
    pas008 reacted to SolarNova in RDNA2 VRAM Leaks: Go buy AMD cards if you want more than 10GB.   
    You can have all the VRAM in the world, but if u cant suitably push the FPS at resolutions high enough to need the VRAM in the 1st place, its essentially useless.
     
    I hope AMD can "bring it" to Nvidia, i really do. We NEED the competition, prices are getting insane. At no point should we be seeing Single Chip consumer grade gaming cards above $800.
    Dual Chip (essentially SLI) cards at $1000, sure we've seen those before, but $1200 and $1500 single chip consumer cards are obscene and only the result of no competition. We havnt seen such absurd prices ,in mainstream full production cards, in over 2 decades of GPUs, even when u take into account inflation.
  4. Agree
    pas008 reacted to porina in RDNA2 VRAM Leaks: Go buy AMD cards if you want more than 10GB.   
    Yeah, this is not the first time it has been discussed on this forum. I think it is a bit of FUD being thrown around that if you have any less than whatever AMD gives, it'll be junk. To me, the worst that happens is you turn selected settings down a notch. Only if you need best of best might it make some difference eventually.
  5. Informative
    pas008 reacted to Soppro in 3080 benchmarks are in! Are they good?   
    If anyone wants to know how it scales with PCIe 4.0: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-pci-express-scaling/
  6. Informative
    pas008 reacted to TomvanWijnen in 3080 benchmarks are in! Are they good?   
    Here are some written numbers: https://tweakers.net/reviews/8152/1/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-maakt-nvidia-de-hoge-verwachtingen-waar-inleiding.html quite a few written numbers, actually. It's in Dutch, but with google translate or so you'll get quite far, and the graphs should be understandable anyways.
  7. Informative
    pas008 reacted to xAcid9 in 3080 benchmarks are in! Are they good?   
    https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-founders-edition/
  8. Agree
    pas008 reacted to Fatih19 in Scalpers Sell $1200+ Preorders of GeForce RTX 3080   
    Demand comes first before supply. The fact that someone sell 3080 for 1200 dollars tells you that there are people willing to pay for it. Let them get ripped off.
  9. Agree
    pas008 reacted to Action_Johnson in Scalpers Sell $1200+ Preorders of GeForce RTX 3080   
    If someone really wants to pay $1200 for a 3080, let them. Let it be their problem. 
  10. Agree
    pas008 reacted to DrMacintosh in Scalpers Sell $1200+ Preorders of GeForce RTX 3080   
    If you don't want people to scalp GPUs, convince people that they don't need a new GPU. Consumerism is what causes this. 
  11. Agree
    pas008 reacted to Kisai in Nvidia 30 Series unveiled - RTX 3080 2x faster than 2080 for $699   
    The problem is that DLSS is very easy to optimize against a benchmark, so I would probably suggest any benchmarks run with the card test DLSS off only, RT features off and DLSS off, and both on.
  12. Agree
    pas008 reacted to mr moose in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    I don't think that was his point.  His point was if you are on android you don't have to buy software from google, if you are on windows you don't have to buy software from MS, if you are on Linux you don't have to buy software from Linus Torvalds.  
     
    But if you are on ios you can only buy from apple, which means that apple controls who sells, and how you sell it.  It is a controlled market, it should be the same market as android, but its not the same as android in this regard.  And that is a very important distinction.
     
    I don't like the car analogies,  when you buy a car you have multiple options for spare parts, you can drive it anywhere, you can fill it anywhere, you don't have to pay the manufacturer a fee if you take it to a 3rd party mechanic for modification or repairs.  I just don't see how that analogy works. 
     
     
     
     
  13. Agree
    pas008 got a reaction from mr moose in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    if they were direct competitors then why cant i install my andriod apps on my idevice?
    or vice versa?
    oh wait its completely locked down
     
    meaning ios is its own market sector
     
    windows linux and android all have multiple stores/ways to acquire software for their os
    does ios?
     
     
  14. Agree
    pas008 reacted to LAwLz in Apple is Preparing its Own Search Engine   
    It depends on how they do it. I edited my post to include that part but I'll write it again in this post and word it a bit differently.
     
    You are not allowed, under antitrust laws, to use your dominance in one market (for example smartphone OSes) to disadvantage competitors for your own gains in another market (for example search engines).
    If Apple launches their own search engine and then prevents Google from operating on iOS, they are potentially breaking antitrust laws.
     
    This law might seem restrictive at first, but it's a very important law because otherwise companies would be abusing and shitting on everyone at all times. We would live in a dystopian nightmare if they were allowed to do those things.
    It's not a coincident that pretty much all countries in the world have gone "okay, this type of laws are very good and we should have them".
     
     
    If Apple just launch their own search engine, make it the default, but still allow Google to be an alternative on the platform then I think this could be a very good thing and help bolster competition.
     
     
    Also, have you been living under a rock or something? Google are constantly being (rightfully) bombarded with antitrust cases and investigations from both the EU and the US. 
    For example in 2018 Google were fined about 5 billion dollars for requiring certain apps be preloaded on Android phones. If OEMs did not comply with Google's demands to for example have Chrome preinstalled, then Google would block the play store from working.
    This is illegal and therefore Google were found guilty.
  15. Agree
    pas008 got a reaction from Dean0919 in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    oh wow
    they are the sole seller on ios
    meaning they have a monopoly on ios
    if they allowed some 3rd party ones and they beat them out naturally then yes thats a natural monopoly
    but they dont allow anyone which is anti competitive
     
    amazon  allow 3rd party, how about newegg walmart android windows etc?
     
    so with your logic ms could make all surfaces require ms store only
    or samsung do the same with their phones
    making users use their store only with all those devices?
     
     
  16. Like
    pas008 got a reaction from mr moose in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    Here is an article that states this
    “So the question is: Without competition, where does that 30% come from?” the judge said. “Why isn’t it 10, 15, 20? How is the consumer at all benefiting from the fact that you get to say what you want it to be?”
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-08-24/apple-judge-inclined-to-unblock-epic-tools-but-not-fortnite
  17. Agree
    pas008 got a reaction from Dabombinable in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    defintion the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service
    A monopoly refers to when a company and its product offerings dominate one sector or industry. Monopolies can be considered an extreme result of free-market capitalism and are often used to describe an entity that has total or near-total control of a market.
     
    ios and the apple app store has exclusive control of that market
    tell me where this is anywhere else? windows? linux? andriod? please tell me
     
    geez the word monopoly means single seller
    which is what is happening they are the only seller
     
  18. Agree
    pas008 reacted to mr moose in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    A monopoly exists everywhere, sure, but it becomes anti trust when that monopoly is used in a way that disadvantages another business or effects the ability for others to participate in trade.  That is the definition.  Yes LTT has a monopoly over he ltt forums, but that monopoly does not effect anyone else's ability to create a forum or for people to move between forums or even use multiple forums. 
     
    This is the crux of the issue here,  apple can control another persons business,  as the judge has decreed, by apple banning UE on ios they have the ability to do irreparable damage to countless businesses.  That can only happen in a situation of antitrust which is a result of using a monopoly.
     
    The problem many people have understanding this is they can't get their heads around the concept of a monopoly. Having a monopoly in and of itself is not illegal, using that monopoly to further your own business by controlling other business is antitrust.  Like what apple are doing here, they are using their monopoly of the app store to control other business (threatening to ban UE).
     
     
     
  19. Agree
    pas008 got a reaction from mr moose in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    oh wow
    they are the sole seller on ios
    meaning they have a monopoly on ios
    if they allowed some 3rd party ones and they beat them out naturally then yes thats a natural monopoly
    but they dont allow anyone which is anti competitive
     
    amazon  allow 3rd party, how about newegg walmart android windows etc?
     
    so with your logic ms could make all surfaces require ms store only
    or samsung do the same with their phones
    making users use their store only with all those devices?
     
     
  20. Agree
    pas008 got a reaction from mr moose in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    defintion the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service
    A monopoly refers to when a company and its product offerings dominate one sector or industry. Monopolies can be considered an extreme result of free-market capitalism and are often used to describe an entity that has total or near-total control of a market.
     
    ios and the apple app store has exclusive control of that market
    tell me where this is anywhere else? windows? linux? andriod? please tell me
     
    geez the word monopoly means single seller
    which is what is happening they are the only seller
     
  21. Agree
    pas008 got a reaction from Dean0919 in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    defintion the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service
    A monopoly refers to when a company and its product offerings dominate one sector or industry. Monopolies can be considered an extreme result of free-market capitalism and are often used to describe an entity that has total or near-total control of a market.
     
    ios and the apple app store has exclusive control of that market
    tell me where this is anywhere else? windows? linux? andriod? please tell me
     
    geez the word monopoly means single seller
    which is what is happening they are the only seller
     
  22. Agree
    pas008 reacted to mr moose in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    At this point you are just speaking nonsense.  People already have the iphone, they CANNOT just buy a new phone.  No one should.  If that is your argument then you are literally arguing for why it is a monopoly,  because if the only way to avoid the app store is to buy a new phone, then the app store is restrictive and controlling of other peoples trade PERIOD.
     
    The silliest thing in these threads is that the only argument anyone has made for it not being a monopoly can only be made because it is a monopoly.
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
  23. Agree
    pas008 reacted to mr moose in Judge delivers split decision on Epic vs Apple - more positive than negative for Epic   
    Amazon don't lock their customers to only buying from amazon. Apple are locking consumers from buying from any other store.   Why are you people being so intentionally ignorant of that fact? 
    They absolutely do, they dictate what apps have to include and what they can't include, They dictate that if you use an iphone you can't get software from anywhere but the app store.  That is dictating what software they can and can't buy.  you can only buy what they permit in the app store, you can't buy anything from anywhere else.
    But it seems you are happy to advise others to do just that.  You wouldn't buy a new device because your device was locked to one store, but you argue other people should do it so you can rationalize your argument. 
     
     
     
     
     
     
  24. Agree
    pas008 got a reaction from Blademaster91 in Microsoft joins Epic on the fight against Apple   
    doesnt matter they still allow 3rd party
  25. Agree
    pas008 reacted to Blademaster91 in Microsoft joins Epic on the fight against Apple   
    No I don't own the device if a company decides to lock all app purchases into one store with no option to sideload.
    The term monopoly is being used and what Apple is doing is anti-trust, developers can't avoid the 30% fee on every purchase, and choosing not to sell on one platform definitely isn't an option. The "just don't buy it" voting with your wallet doesn't work either.
    As already mentioned Microsoft got sued for including IE, and Google got fined $5 billion for having Google search and Chrome on Android, so there are laws on having too much control over a platform for very good reasons.
     
×