The quad-core is dead! Long live the hex-core!

[Deadpool2onBlu-Ray]

13 minutes ago, Helpful Tech Wiard said:

i disagree suggesting to go console if you looking to build a pc at that budget. If you want to build a pc, theres probably a reason. Say you want to play a pc only game, like cs, league, or val. Or you want to have more options like full kb/m support.
I think that the 3050 and 6600 are decent cards if you can get them for there supposed pricess. The only new card thats not worth it even for at msrp (which it is at) is the 6500xt. That cards slower than mine sometimes.

Don't get me started on that card. It's worse than the 480/580 from like YEARS ago. For MORE money. That card should be like $150 max if it has any reason to exist at all. The consoles have like rtx 2060 super/2070 esque performance, so why bother? Even if you're playing league or CSGO, you can run that on integrated graphics and have a fine experience. Any sort of AAA title at any resolution higher than 1080p would bring a 3050/6600, and ESPECIALLY, a 6500xt to it's knees. If I were to say, be building a $500 system. I would mega cheap out on 90% of the system. I'd get like a haswell or skylake dirt cheap one off facebook marketplace or ebay with no gpu. Then I'd throw a 3060 or 3060ti in there and have a way better experience than, lets say, a 12100f and a 6500xt or what have you. At that budget, you need to be REALLY creative. I know from experience helping my little bro build one. 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

8 minutes ago, Ryan829 said:

Eh, the 3050 is decent so is the 6600. I just don't like AMD cards. Not even fanboy reasons. Every AMD card I've ever had has had issues. The 3050 should be $199 then it would be a great value. The 3060 is a scam at $329 when the 3060ti is $399 for 40% more performance almost. I guess a 3050/12100f system would be around a series x price in theory if you mega cheaped out on everything else. I just personally think the lowest "cost of entry" into decent pc gaming in 2022 is around a 1k system, which is double the price of the consoles, and even then you'd have to get a 3060ti at MSRP. 

 

huh. 
ive never really had issues with my 480, sans me having overheating issues becasue the stock fan curve is like 30%rpm @ 90c. 
but thats fixed buy not using the stock curve

[Deadpool2onBlu-Ray]

Just now, Helpful Tech Wiard said:

huh. 
ive never really had issues with my 480, sans me having overheating issues becasue the stock fan curve is like 30% 90c. 
but thats fixed buy not using the stock curve

It seems to be luck of the draw. I had a reference 6800xt. I wish I could use it. I'd LOVE to have double the VRAM as my 3070ti founders, but it crashed so much it was unusable. 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

Just now, Ryan829 said:

It seems to be luck of the draw. I had a reference 6800xt. I wish I could use it. I'd LOVE to have double the VRAM as my 3070ti founders, but it crashed so much it was unusable. 

i feel like there was a issue that wasnt the card itself here, but thats just me

[Deadpool2onBlu-Ray]

1 minute ago, Helpful Tech Wiard said:

i feel like there was a issue that wasnt the card itself here, but thats just me

Hmm. I doubt it but I guess you never know. At the time, I was running a 5600x/6800xt. I was using the same 750 watt EVGA P2 LTT A tier PSU. Those two components together are nowhere near 750w. 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 minute ago, Ryan829 said:

Hmm. I doubt it but I guess you never know. At the time, I was running a 5600x/6800xt. I was using the same 750 watt EVGA P2 LTT A tier PSU. Those two components together are nowhere near 750w. 

yes but amd drivers can be a bit picky.
ie the drivers on my pc right not are incompatible with adrenaline after me dduing the drivers which makes no sense...

[Deadpool2onBlu-Ray]

7 minutes ago, Helpful Tech Wiard said:

yes but amd drivers can be a bit picky.
ie the drivers on my pc right not are incompatible with adrenaline after me dduing the drivers which makes no sense...

That's kind of my whole point. Not worth the hassle. Nvidia cards perform perfectly and AMD doesn't even undercut them in price really anymore. I really can see AMD in the next five years or so switch their focus to CPUs (if it's not already) and then Nvidia and Intel will be the two big players in the GPU space 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 minute ago, Ryan829 said:

That's kind of my whole point. Not worth the hassle. Nvidia cards perform perfectly and AMD doesn't even undercut them in price really anymore. I really can see AMD in the next five years or so switch their focus to CPUs (if it's not already) and then Nvidia and Intel will be the two big players in the GPU space 

tf you mean the intel gpu drivers are ass. If amds are bad intels are just abysmal

[SimplyChunk]

I'm wondering if Quad will make a comeback..IF Intel finally bites the bullet and puts out a quad core pentium with HT and no turbo

 

Edit:

 

Imagine a PENTIUM being 'enough' for gaming again XD 

[Heliian]

18 hours ago, tim0901 said:

balls-to-the-walls compute monsters,

Probably repurposed servers.  

[leadeater]

9 hours ago, Ryan829 said:

That's kind of my whole point. Not worth the hassle. Nvidia cards perform perfectly and AMD doesn't even undercut them in price really anymore. I really can see AMD in the next five years or so switch their focus to CPUs (if it's not already) and then Nvidia and Intel will be the two big players in the GPU space 

 

9 hours ago, Helpful Tech Wiard said:

tf you mean the intel gpu drivers are ass. If amds are bad intels are just abysmal

Personally I've never really had AMD GPU driver issues, I know there have been some especially the RX 5000 series, but I have been using AMD GPUs a really long time.

 

X800 GTO, 4670 Fanless (HTPC), 4850, 6970, 2x 290X, 6800 XT and never had any major issues with any of them. I've also used them with multiple monitor setups, multiple monitor with HDMI audio out to receiver etc, the stuff that normally hits bugs.

 

I hear people complain about AMD GPU drivers a lot and well I always have to question what on earth they are doing, I never even go in to my driver settings at all.

 

It's not like I haven't used Nvidia GPUs either, 6600 GT, 8800 GTS, 8600/9600 Fanless (HTPC). Only listing my personal ones, used a ton of low and and high end Quadros and Tesla compute also.

 

Honestly the only real problems I've had is the HTPC use case decoding live TV streams from tuner cards and switching between channels that use different standards i.e. between interlaced and non-interlaced.

 

Not like there isn't plenty of driver issue reports from both sides of Red Team/Green Team.

 

Honestly I think sometimes it's more a case of leave well enough alone, you don't need to update the GPU driver which is where most issues come from.

[Forbidden Wafer]

20 hours ago, LAwLz said:

MacOS for x86 and MacOS for the M1 are essentially the same OS though.

With SteamOS, they have the same name but are completely different in core aspects. 

 

I don't think it matters that much since the original SteamOS was a flop, but calling the Arch-based SteamOS for "SteamOS 2" would have cleaned up some confusion.

They called the Deck steam os of Steam OS 3.

 

https://www.steamdeck.com/en/tech

 

https://9to5linux.com/valve-says-steamos-3-0-will-be-available-for-everyone-to-download-and-install

 

https://www.pcgamer.com/steam-deck-enthusiasts-are-booting-steamos-30-up-on-random-devices-but-no-toasters-yet/

 

 

[ryao]

On 4/7/2022 at 3:34 AM, RejZoR said:

The fact numbers are at least equalized means quad cores are in decline and only reason they are around are because people still have them. This number will never increase again if hexa cores reached that point, meaning they are more accessible and more popular.

I blame AMD. They did not ship any Zen 3 quad core CPUs (ignoring the ones with integrated graphics).

[porina]

5 minutes ago, ryao said:

I blame AMD. They did not ship any Zen 3 quad core CPUs (ignoring the ones with integrated graphics).

Don't think that would have made any difference if they did. Since Zen 3 launch, who would have bought a quad core? I can think of two main scenarios: either that is all the CPU that is needed, or they can't afford anything better. A full fat Zen 3 quad would not offer value over an APU, Zen 2 or Intel quad if budget is the primary limit.

[ryao]

24 minutes ago, porina said:

Don't think that would have made any difference if they did. Since Zen 3 launch, who would have bought a quad core? I can think of two main scenarios: either that is all the CPU that is needed, or they can't afford anything better. A full fat Zen 3 quad would not offer value over an APU, Zen 2 or Intel quad if budget is the primary limit.

The 3300X was amazing in games. A zen 3 version would be equally amazing. Plus, the cost savings from a quad core would help with buying a GPU. AMD would rather be paid more for the CPU though.

[RejZoR]

I already had hexa core with Core i7 5820K back in the day. Going with 5600X didn't even feel like an upgrade so I went with 5800X. So I at least get some extra cores, some clock bump and higher IPC. Relative got Ryzen 2600X for his first own PC. It was a hexa core on the budget that perfomed about the same if not slightly better than my old overclocked 5820K. Not bad for how little they cost back then.