PC gaming change focus just to APUs and Laptops? We should stop thinking of GPU's as gaming hardware. Change my mind.

[FakeATF]

2 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said:

Here are the facts: 

• Most PC users of any kind just have one laptop. 
• That laptop has a smallish screen which is used at arms length.  Where it is a mathematical fact that 4k resolution will make no discernible difference. 
• Those PC's all use either a Ryzen APU or intel graphics or have a discrete but mobile GPU which performs just a little better than an APU. 
• Most of the rest buy prebuilt from major names. 

The above are statements of fact.   Below here is an opinion. 
 

I wouldn't call these "facts".

[Uttamattamakin]

 

Angular resolution of the human eye not being good enough to actually see the individual pixels all else being equal is a law of optics not an opinion. 

Angular resolution = Wavelenght of the light being observed  divided by the diameter of the light collecting area (in this case your pupil.) 

 

How to Calculate Angular Resolution (sciencing.com)

 

That most people use laptops.  I can cite many sources for this all you have to do is go look around any computer store and see what they are selling.  IF that is not good enough here is another source for that. Mobile vs. Desktop Usage in 2019 / Perficient, Inc.

 

 

Everything else follows from those basic laws of physics and also the fact that laptops don't have desktop GPU's in them. 

Mean while we keep scrapping for and paying the price of a whole entire PC to buy a GPU on the grey market. 

[Uttamattamakin]

1 hour ago, Moonzy said:

While I don't agree to this extreme level

 

Getting used to lower end is something that SOME of us in the community should really practice, especially when getting a higher end GPU for gaming nowadays is not worth (imo) the asking price.

Instead of bitching about the availability and scalpers.

EXACTLY.    This is what I am talking about.  Most games are not even written with the idea that a gamer is going to have such a card.  Look at the video Linus did.  Most gamers are using a low spec 5 year old card.  A 1060.  I'd wager my APU is as good for games as a 1050 at least.  My linux box has a Nvidia 1050 to be able to use a little bit of CUDA and also NVENC.  Games on it VS the APU look the same. 

[WhitetailAni]

Just now, Uttamattamakin said:

Most gamers are using a low spec 5 year old card.  A 1060.

Most of those people bought it when it was new, and didn't upgrade because they didn't need to.

I'm using 7-year-old cards, and not even amazing ones at that. GTX 650 Ti BOOST, 1st-generation Kepler.

Do I want to upgrade?
Yes/no (I'd like better performance, but I'd like to stick with NVIDIA and only Kepler supports macOS Big Sur).

Do I need to upgrade?
Not really.

[Uttamattamakin]

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

You said in your main post "change my mind", normally this means you're open to listening to other opinions. But I don't think you want to have your mind changed, I don't think I've seen a response acknowledging another opinion that wasn't just "no, but..." 

 

If looking at the current state of things made you think that the rational alternative is to drop all GPU gaming and return to pixel and ps1 style games is an actual solution, then I don't think we can change your mind, because that is one hell of a weird leap to take. 

 

With that said, I would love to see a laptop with the SoC from the Series X

I am open to being convinced.  

Arguments that deny the mathematical and physical limits of the human eye which can be easily calculated by well known formulas aren't convincing.  Things don't fall up because we'd like them to sometimes.   Physics is what it is. 

 

I am open to being convinced.  Please One I don't have time to respond to because I need to leave the dance studio and get on the road home.... cited a pie chard and write soemthing long and toughtful I look forward to responding to.  Try more of that:) 

[Moonzy]

2 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

EXACTLY.    This is what I am talking about.  Most games are not even written with the idea that a gamer is going to have such a card.  Look at the video Linus did.  Most gamers are using a low spec 5 year old card.  A 1060.  I'd wager my APU is as good for games as a 1050 at least.  My linux box has a Nvidia 1050 to be able to use a little bit of CUDA and also NVENC.  Games on it VS the APU look the same. 

This is very subjective and it's up to the individual to think what they want to think

 

A 1060 can play cp2077 at low settings 30fps, that's not a great gaming experience imo, but it may be acceptable by some

I personally still game on a 970, and the games I play (heaviest would be MHW) is running at acceptable level to me

 

Long story short, if you want better experience, then pay the price for it

If you don't think it's worth it, then wait for the experience to become affordable to you

[BabaGanuche]

While only somewhat related to this topic, when talking about the smallest details someone can see eveyone forgets about  Vernier acuity (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernier_acuity) "misalignment of borders can be detected with a precision up to 10 times better than visual acuity"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperacuity_(scientific_term)

 

I can easily read a vernier caliper which has 0.001 inch (39.7 microns) resolution at about 40 cm. So a screen like my phone at this same distance, this is about how far I am from the screen as I write this, would need to be at least 1000 ppi to be the same as this. So no we do not have screen that are better than human vision.

 

Just being unable to resolve a single pixel is not enough to be able to display everything a normal human can.

[Jtalk4456]

Quote

The above are statements of fact. 

yeah seeing how you proposed this whole "change my mind" experiment, you bear the burden of proof of these "facts" as you call them. Doesn't sound like facts to me, pure conjecture until shown otherwise with fact. 
I would wager that even if your assumptions are correct, which I doubt personally, that does not mean that everyone should just stop buying GPU's. Laptop graphics are not good enough for a lot of people. Even if the majority does X, that doesn't make X right for everyone. These vast generalizations are not productive and utter nonsense.

Most people have an IQ lower than a genius. We should ALL try to NOT be geniuses! That's exactly what these kind of posts sounds like. Not everyone needs a GPU, but then again not everyone should pretend a subpar laptop is good enough. Also your second point about 4k not making a difference is very literally an opinion. There are plenty of people that can say they feel a difference. therefore your statement is not only opinion but provably false. 
Furthermore I think this is all a big troll and you know it. I've seen plenty of the change my mind videos because I like seeing the different viewpoints and hearing what evidence they bring. You know what I've never seen? Never seen him even remotely come close to changing his mind. Why? because he has no intention of changing his mind. Are we all just so dumb and he's a f***ing genius? No, he intentionally plays it as a challenge. He is set in his opinion, believes he is right and no matter what you say, he says you're wrong and here's why. except a lot of his beliefs are just that, belief. When does a fetus start feeling and thinking (abortion videos), that's his guess, we don't know for sure. we don't know if a plant feels pain when vegeterians eat them. he has his beliefs and he is using a challenge to change everyone elses minds with his "facts". he has no option for being open and in my opinion neither do you. It's a propganda campaign more than a discussion, otherwise it would be titled "Is abortion right?" "Do we need to keep buying GPUS?" You haven't posted a question to discuss. You posted a statement to argue and fight about

[BabaGanuche]

21 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

 

Angular resolution of the human eye not being good enough to actually see the individual pixels all else being equal is a law of optics not an opinion. 

Angular resolution = Wavelenght of the light being observed  divided by the diameter of the light collecting area (in this case your pupil.) 

 

How to Calculate Angular Resolution (sciencing.com)

 

That most people use laptops.  I can cite many sources for this all you have to do is go look around any computer store and see what they are selling.  IF that is not good enough here is another source for that. Mobile vs. Desktop Usage in 2019 / Perficient, Inc.

 

 

Do you have any data for gaming not web browsing? I think most of us in this thread would agree that a discrete gpu is not necessary for web browsing. Just using my personal experience, while I do lots of web browsing on my phone, I do zero gaming. 

 

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam

 

Based on more gaming oriented data there are 21 gpu models with combined share of 58% before the first apu/igpu appears on the list. The share of people who use steam who have a discrete gpu, is way higher than that but I can't be botherer to summ up more of the list and the data already makes my point. People generally do not think an apu/igpu provides an acceptable level of performance or why else would they buy them.

 

Also see my post up thread. There is more to human vision than just the angular resolution of the light receptors in our eyes. There are types of things we can see up to ten times smaller than that limit.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5990881/

[Uttamattamakin]

46 minutes ago, BabaGanuche said:

Also see my post up thread. There is more to human vision than just the angular resolution of the light receptors in our eyes. There are types of things we can see up to ten times smaller than that limit.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5990881/

The diffraction limit on the ability of any optical system to distinguish between objects is determined by the wavelength of the light and the aperture of the optical system.  This is a law of physics and human vision does not break it.   Here is a simple version of it in words that are not mine. 

optics - Is the human eye diffraction limited, or is there another limiting factor? - Physics Stack Exchange

 

The Rayleigh Criterion (gsu.edu)

 

Resolving Power of the Eye (byu.edu)

 

Limits of Resolution: The Rayleigh Criterion – College Physics (opentextbc.ca)

 

There is no physics based counter to the idea that a person can see the dots on a screen that is less than about 15 inches, held at arms length with 1080p resolution or greater.  You cannot see the individual pixels.  However, because you know how these displays work you think you can.   My stating this fact is not presumptuous it is just physics ... it is like the world being round or climate change being real ... but far simpler. 

 

That said YOU made a great point

 

52 minutes ago, BabaGanuche said:

Do you have any data for gaming not web browsing? I think most of us in this thread would agree that a discrete gpu is not necessary for web browsing. Just using my personal experience, while I do lots of web browsing on my phone, I do zero gaming. 

 

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam

 

Based on more gaming oriented data there are 21 gpu models with combined share of 58% before the first apu/igpu appears on the list. The share of people who use steam who have a discrete gpu, is way higher than that but I can't be botherer to summ up more of the list and the data already makes my point. People generally do not think an apu/igpu provides an acceptable level of performance or why else would they buy them.

Lets consider what those GPU's are VS what a modern APU like say a Ryzen 4700G or even a 3400G or the engineering sample of a 5700G could be able to do.  Let alone the inevitable Navi based APU's that will be on socket AM5.  Not to mention the strong play Intel is making in integrated graphics.  

 

If  you can game well on a RX 570 or a GTX 1050 or 1060.  The 1060 being the most popular GPU on Steam.  Then I have news for you.  Take an unbiased look at a 1050 VS a Ryzen 3200G.  The quality of the graphics in gaming is nearly indistinguishable...assuming you have a respectable amount of system memory, and good cooling.   A 3200G or 3400G paired with 16 or 32 GB of ram dedicating 2-4 GB of that to video with beefy air cooling or AIO water cooling will game just fine for most people. 

 

*That said I realized tonight a really good argument against my own original point. 

[Uttamattamakin]

1 hour ago, Jtalk4456 said:

yeah seeing how you proposed this whole "change my mind" experiment, you bear the burden of proof of these "facts" as you call them. Doesn't sound like facts to me, pure conjecture until shown otherwise with fact. 

The fact people keep trying to argue is that their eyes have more angular resolution than the laws of optical physics would allow them to have.  

Then there is the fact people keep trying to attack... that most people just buy a laptop as their one and only computer.  I mean ... LTT forum users surely realize we aren't the average user.   Look up any reputable sales figure or better still go in person to a computer store.  Does anyone think if there was not overwhelming demand for laptops that the stores would still have mostly laptops?  

 

 

[FakeATF]

2 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said:

 

Angular resolution of the human eye not being good enough to actually see the individual pixels all else being equal is a law of optics not an opinion. 

Angular resolution = Wavelenght of the light being observed  divided by the diameter of the light collecting area (in this case your pupil.) 

 

How to Calculate Angular Resolution (sciencing.com)

 

That most people use laptops.  I can cite many sources for this all you have to do is go look around any computer store and see what they are selling.  IF that is not good enough here is another source for that. Mobile vs. Desktop Usage in 2019 / Perficient, Inc.

 

 

Everything else follows from those basic laws of physics and also the fact that laptops don't have desktop GPU's in them. 

Mean while we keep scrapping for and paying the price of a whole entire PC to buy a GPU on the grey market. 

Let's say that you could not see the difference from 1080p and 4k, for the sake of argument. 

 

4k is still useful in other situations, for instance, video editing.

 

As for your data, Moblie vs Desktop, it says that less than the majority of time spent online is moblie.

Also, what does mobile even mean? Laptops? Or Mobile devices? Also, as pointed out above, this is just for web browsing as opposed to game time.

I think your ideas are simply far fetched and unfeasable. Just because a gaming experience is "acceptable" does not mean enjoyable. Just because someoone purchases a cheap laptop doesn't neccesarily mean they are gaming on it. If I am going to play games, I want a device that can handle it. My laptop is usde pretty much excusively for web browsing. 

[Uttamattamakin]

4 hours ago, The_russian said:

While it does show that mobile makes up more market share, that is for overall use and doesn't help prove your overall point which is about gaming. I would guess that most people that are buying laptops are using it either for work or personal use, not gaming. Here's a study that showed laptop market share by end use in 2017:

Source: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/laptop-market

 

While the data is from 2017, I would guess that the overall market share hasn't changed much, and if anything the gaming share probably dropped because of people working and learning from home. Since I haven't bothered looking for a more recent market share breakdown though, I'm not going to say that is a fact, like some people might *cough* *cough* .

That article describes what a Retina display is, it does not mathematically prove that 4k resolution will make no discernible difference.

You didn't give a source for your claim that mobile GPUs perform only "a little better" than an APU. You also made another claim (most gamers are regular people who will just buy their do it all laptop at Walmart, Target, or Best Buy) without a source. 

While you still didn't provide a source, this claim doesn't really make sense for your overall point. Like someone has already mentioned, a lot of those prebuilt gaming PCs will have a discrete graphics card, so this doesn't prove your point that no one has a need for anything better than an iGPU or APU unless they are making money from it. 

I wanted to acknowedge this is a really good post and it did change my mind a bit.  As for a source about AGPU's performing almost as well as GPU's lets consider the GPU's people are actually using right now.  Not Nvidia unobtanium series GPU's. 

 

 

(7) Desktop Ryzen 4700G Graphics Beats Radeon RX 550/GTX 950 In Graphics Benchmarks! - YouTube

 

(7) AMD Ryzen 7 4700G Renoir APU Approaching Discrete GPU Performance Levels - YouTube

 

(7) Ryzen 7 4700G APU With Vega 8 Overclocked vs. GTX 1050 - YouTube

 

AMD Ryzen 7 5800H Review, The Best Mainstream Laptop CPU - YouTube

 

Of course compared to a Nvidia Unobtainum 3060ti   or 2060 super or whatever it won't compare ... but a 1050   a 1060  It'll be the same if not better in some respects due to having a direct channel to the CPU on the same package if not the same chip VS having to go via the chipset. 

 

 

[FakeATF]

7 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

I wanted to acknowedge this is a really good post and it did change my mind a bit.  As for a source about AGPU's performing almost as well as GPU's lets consider the GPU's people are actually using right now.  Not Nvidia unobtanium series GPU's. 

 

 

(7) Desktop Ryzen 4700G Graphics Beats Radeon RX 550/GTX 950 In Graphics Benchmarks! - YouTube

 

 

RTX 2060 is only 5th on the list. It also doesn't say what kind of games people are playing. Those 1060's can probably handle Colonel Sanders' dating sim just fine. And the point isn't about bleeding edge RTX 3090's. It's about how IGPU's aren't a suitable option for a lot of people who play more demanding titles.

[Uttamattamakin]

6 minutes ago, EjectedCasings said:

Let's say that you could not see the difference from 1080p and 4k, for the sake of argument. 

 

The key to this is not just 4k.  On a large screen or up very close you can see the pixels.  On a large screen 4k is useful.   However, the average users laptop has a small screen.  Most of the laptops I see in classes or on campus even the "gaming" ones are 15 inch screen or very often less.  The only times I've even noticed the pixels on the screen it was on exceedingly cheap <200 pr <300 dollar Chromebooks.  There is issue isn't resolution but a low quality panel. 

 

For 550 nanometer light  and an apeture size of at most 10 mm with your pupil fully dillated do the math   500nm / 10mm  then convert radians to degrees.  Then consider that much of the time your pupil is contracted to less than 10 mm.  

 

A small ish screen like on a laptop.  2-3 feet from your face.  At that angular resolution you are not able to see the pixels.  If things look less sharp on your 4k screen when you lower the resolution it is because of two things. 

 

Your 4k desktop screen is LARGE. 

Your 4k desktop screen is natively 4k, and you notice the fuzzyness that results from working at a non native resolution.  A smaller natively 1080p screen or 1440p for a desktop gaming monitor will be just as sharp.  Unless you put your face right up against it.  At which point your eye will loose focus. 

 

 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

5 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said:

fact. 

Your facts seems to not be factual.

1. most modern discrete gpus are better then a Ryzen apu.
2. I’m not too sure on the math, but 1080p vs 4K, on, say, a 15in screen, at arms length there is definitely a discernible difference. I’m discounting 1440p as I’ve never heard of a laptop with one. Not to say they aren’t, but I’ve not seen any.
3. Bish try to use a laptop at arms length. It’s impossible.

[Uttamattamakin]

Here is a fact I did not consider.  It is impossible to buy an APU to use in your own build or upgrade of a computer.  For the last two generations 4000 series and 5000 series the desktop APU has not or quite likely is not ever going to come.  Therefore, there is no choice but to buy a video card to get some sort of video output much less game.  Which is a problem since one can find the GT 1030 in stock OR the Quadro  RTX 5000 or RTX4000 or some such in stock.... and NOTHING in between that makes actual sense to use. 

 

If you are building a computer right now this is what can be done with obtainable part.  Maybe not cheap or economically attainable.... but this is based on parts that actually exist to buy at or near MSRP which can be bought in regular order.   

Something like pairing a 5800X with a GT 1030 and OR with a Quadro. 

 

Ridiculous! 

At this point the only reasonable way to get the unobtainable parts is to buy a pre built ... and cannibalize it.... or just live with it. 

 

 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Uttamattamakin
I am going to mark my own reason for why I was wrong as the real reason.

[Jtalk4456]

28 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

The fact people keep trying to argue is that their eyes have more angular resolution than the laws of optical physics would allow them to have.  

Then there is the fact people keep trying to attack... that most people just buy a laptop as their one and only computer.  I mean ... LTT forum users surely realize we aren't the average user.   Look up any reputable sales figure or better still go in person to a computer store.  Does anyone think if there was not overwhelming demand for laptops that the stores would still have mostly laptops?  

Interesting how you ignored my entire point and tried to focus on arguing a point which I didn't even mention or rebuke. I never said we were the average user. I pointed out that claiming all users should act as an average user is just silly at best. I'm not gonna try and argue the optics point, I got out of physics class years ago and have no intention to rejoin, but I will remind you the placebo effect is a scientific phenomenon. So to argue there's no value in people thinking it makes a difference when the thought makes them happy is discounting valid science. Not the point, but whatever. Even IF your assumptions about everyone only using one laptop and everything else are factually true, which seems questionable at best, you've completely ignored my point that not everyone needs to follow the average. Your reply here has pretty much further proved the rest of my point. I'm about to be out of work, so not gonna bother with this pretend openness anymore. Peace out.

[Jtalk4456]

4 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

Here is a fact I did not consider.  It is impossible to buy an APU to use in your own build or upgrade of a computer.

ok still leaving in a few, but i saw this as soon as i clicked submit. Holy "Facts" batman! I'm sorry why is it impossible to buy an apu to use in your build?? there are apus on the market right now. Here's a whole article about them!
https://www.wepc.com/reviews/best-apu-gaming/
OK I'm really gone this time, gotta drive home soon, but dear lord your perception of absolute fact needs some work

[Uttamattamakin]

10 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

Your facts seems to not be factual.

1. most modern discrete gpus are better then a Ryzen apu.
2. I’m not too sure on the math, but 1080p vs 4K, on, say, a 15in screen, at arms length there is definitely a discernible difference. I’m discounting 1440p as I’ve never heard of a laptop with one. Not to say they aren’t, but I’ve not seen any.
3. Bish try to use a laptop at arms length. It’s impossible.

Of course "modern" as in new top of the line.  Look at the Steam data... almost no one uses a "modern" graphics card. Most are still using mid-low range 10 series and will be for another five years. 

 

The math is sound  (550nm/10mm)radians to degrees - Wolfram|Alpha  

 

Meaning you can not distinguish with your eyes between objects with a smaller angular separation than 11.34 arc seconds.  Since the dot pitch on a 1080p screen is measured in fractions of a millimeter ... at arms length you cannot see the pixels.   It is all in your head.  

If the laws of physics and mathematics won't do ... how about the word of our Lord and Savior.   

How has EVERYONE overlooked this?? - ASUS Strix Scar II 240Hz - CES 2019 - YouTube

Linus Sebastian  (peace be upon him)  

 

Using a lap top at "arms length" is pretty much what you do when you use it by typing on it.    If you call me anything it would not be "Bish".  

[Uttamattamakin]

3 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

ok still leaving in a few, but i saw this as soon as i clicked submit. Holy "Facts" batman! I'm sorry why is it impossible to buy an apu to use in your build?? there are apus on the market right now. Here's a whole article about them!
https://www.wepc.com/reviews/best-apu-gaming/
OK I'm really gone this time, gotta drive home soon, but dear lord your perception of absolute fact needs some work

Existing on paper VS being in stock anywhere ever.  

Right now there is one and ONLY one supported boxed, on the shelf (theoretically) APU  with 4 processing cores... the Ryzen 3400G.  It is all there is.  That and black market 4700G or even Blacker market engineering samples of the 5700G. 

 

When I think of something being available I think of being able to buy it, and put it in my computer and use it.  Not having it exist only on paper. 

[The_russian]

18 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

I wanted to acknowedge this is a really good post and it did change my mind a bit.  As for a source about AGPU's performing almost as well as GPU's lets consider the GPU's people are actually using right now.  Not Nvidia unobtanium series GPU's. 

 

*snip*

 

(7) Desktop Ryzen 4700G Graphics Beats Radeon RX 550/GTX 950 In Graphics Benchmarks! - YouTube

 

(7) AMD Ryzen 7 4700G Renoir APU Approaching Discrete GPU Performance Levels - YouTube

 

(7) Ryzen 7 4700G APU With Vega 8 Overclocked vs. GTX 1050 - YouTube

 

AMD Ryzen 7 5800H Review, The Best Mainstream Laptop CPU - YouTube

 

Of course compared to a Nvidia Unobtainum 3060ti   or 2060 super or whatever it won't compare ... but a 1050   a 1060  It'll be the same if not better in some respects due to having a direct channel to the CPU on the same package if not the same chip VS having to go via the chipset. 

 

 

In your initial list of "facts", you claimed that mobile GPUs perform "just a little better than an APU". Now I'm confused why you are trying to prove that APUs have equivalent or better performance when compared to a discrete graphics card, which you yourself prove is false, but lets disprove this claim as well. 

 

The first 2 videos are for leaked benchmarks of engineering samples. In general you shouldn't trust leaks, but since the product has already been released I especially don't see why you would link to leaked benchmarks. I'll get back to the third one in a bit. The fourth one is comparing APUs to other APUs, as well as to other CPUs. Correct me if I am wrong, but I skimmed through the video and did not see at any point the APU graphics compared to discrete graphics. Back to the third one, this actually helps disprove your claim by showing that modern APUs like the 4700G have worse graphical performance when compared to even a GTX 1050. The video shows the 4700G has lower 1% low FPS, average FPS, and a higher frame time than the 1050, a 4.5 year old card with an MSRP of $110. I don't see how "It'll be the same if not better in some respects". 

 

 

[Uttamattamakin]

9 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

Interesting how you ignored my entire point and tried to focus on arguing a point which I didn't even mention or rebuke. I never said we were the average user. I pointed out that claiming all users should act as an average user is just silly at best. I'm not gonna try and argue the optics point, I got out of physics class years ago and have no intention to rejoin, but I will remind you the placebo effect is a scientific phenomenon. So to argue there's no value in people thinking it makes a difference when the thought makes them happy is discounting valid science. Not the point, but whatever. Even IF your assumptions about everyone only using one laptop and everything else are factually true, which seems questionable at best, you've completely ignored my point that not everyone needs to follow the average. Your reply here has pretty much further proved the rest of my point. I'm about to be out of work, so not gonna bother with this pretend openness anymore. Peace out.

The average user is what companies target with their products. 

 

To companies people like us on this forum have value as a sort of ... marketing.  Before there were youtubers like Linus there were people like him, and you and me who are sort of the ... tech guru among people we know.  I am just old enough for the time when knowing how email work made one a "nerd" or "geek" and it was NOT a compliment.  

Now when anyone who knows you is thinking about a computer buy they may think "What computer does Jtalk use".  They may even just ask for your advice.  For AMD NVIDIA and Intel that was the real value of providing the relatively low margin boxed components for builds. 

 

It was like an advertisement that we would pay them for the privilege of displaying. 

 

Litterally... we build computers with see through panels and light them like a Christmas tree. 

 

Now they have realized they don't need to do that anymore.  It is time for us to realize that maybe we shouldn't go along with it anymore.   I just came from a Microcenter to look into better cooling for my 3200G to squeeze all I can out of it.  They said most of the 3060's they got were at a price of over 600 USD.     

Like I said though what is the choice.  Pay that absurd price or get a Quadro at a reasonable price for something that is like driving a tank on the expressway. 

[Uttamattamakin]

3 minutes ago, The_russian said:

In your initial list of "facts", you claimed that mobile GPUs perform "just a little better than an APU". Now I'm confused why you are trying to prove that APUs have equivalent or better performance when compared to a discrete graphics card, which you yourself prove is false, but lets disprove this claim as well. 

 

It is a fact that most people buy laptops.  Thus most games are actually written with an eye towards the computers that most people have. 

 

Creating the greatest game in the world that no one can run is only useful if you want to be the new meme.   Being the next "can it run Crysis" might be fun ... but that hasn't really worked out for CP 2077 has it?   The game would be making more money and more enjoyable for more people if it had been written with say a 1060 as "medium" and a 2060 as maximum.  With people who have a 30 series card being able to get a better experience... and people gaming on their Ryzen 4700G or 3400G having a good time as well. 

 

A few FPS difference which no one notices when actually playing a game instead of looking at it like an oil painting. 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

7 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

ourse "modern" as in new top of the line.  Look at the Steam data... almost no one uses a "modern" graphics card. Most are still using mid-low range 10 series and will be for another five years. 

No, I meant modern asin mobile 1060 and up. I believe the mobile 1060s are about half as good as a desktop, and a Vega 11 is about half as good as a desktop 1060.

 

Don't use Linus as a source. His videos are consistently inconsistent.

 

Also, id refer type a 5000 word easy with voice type than type with my arms straight out for that long.