a new type of shilling - game developer locks content to specific Intel i7 CPUs [updated]

[Godlygamer23]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

I got a 6700k, and nothing better to do. Count me in if need be. 

The more data we get, the better.

[Drak3]

Just now, Godlygamer23 said:

I'm open to running other benchmarks.

 

Just now, MageTank said:

I got a 6700k, and nothing better to do. Count me in if need be. 

If you do, please PM me the results, preferably as a link to a thread.

I'd like to have some real numbers regarding hyperthreading in the future.

As it stands, based on Godly's single benchmark, there is a 5.3% difference between HTT and no HTT.

[MageTank]

1 minute ago, Godlygamer23 said:

The more data we get, the better.

We establishing any baselines? Should be run JEDEC speeds or are overclocks allowed? Perhaps I should run with both my memory overclock and JEDEC speeds?

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

We establishing any baselines? Should be run JEDEC speeds or are overclocks allowed? Perhaps I should run with both my memory overclock and JEDEC speeds?

A set of numbers for JEDEC and a set for OCs would be preferable. More data to draw conclusions is never a bad thing.

[Godlygamer23]

Just now, MageTank said:

We establishing any baselines? Should be run JEDEC speeds or are overclocks allowed? Perhaps I should run with both my memory overclock and JEDEC speeds?

My build is running its RAM at 1333MHz, and unfortunately the RAM will not overclock at all. I'd personally like to see how RAM speeds can affect single-threaded performance, and as far as CPU overclocks are concerned, you can certainly overclock, but I request that you also run the CPU at stock speeds with the same benchmarks, and possibly even a 3.4GHz baseline to match the 3240. But then when you run your benchmarks, include both overclocked memory and JEDEC speeds.

 

If you see any errors with the above, or would like to suggest a change, name it.

[MageTank]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

A set of numbers for JEDEC and a set for OCs would be preferable. More data to draw conclusions is never a bad thing.

Should the overclocks be XMP? Or are manual overclocks requested? They don't exactly sell kits like my manual overclock (3600 C14-14-14-28-2, with super tight tertiary's). It's XMP is 3200 C14, which is pretty common for G Skill kits with Samsung B Die. 

1 minute ago, Godlygamer23 said:

My build is running its RAM at 1333MHz, and unfortunately the RAM will not overclock at all. I'd personally like to see how RAM speeds can affect single-threaded performance, and as far as CPU overclocks are concerned, you can certainly overclock, but I request that you also run the CPU at stock speeds with the same benchmarks, and possibly even a 3.4GHz baseline to match the 3240. But then when you run your benchmarks, include both overclocked memory and JEDEC speeds.

 

If you see any errors with the above, or would like to suggest a change, name it.

Sounds good to me. Is cinebench the only benchmark we are using? Or do you have others in mind?

[Drak3]

Just now, MageTank said:

Should the overclocks be XMP? Or are manual overclocks requested? They don't exactly sell kits like my manual overclock (3600 C14-14-14-28-2, with super tight tertiary's). It's XMP is 3200 C14, which is pretty common for G Skill kits with Samsung B Die. 

I'd say both are acceptable IF they are noted as such in the results.

[patrickjp93]

51 minutes ago, christianled59 said:

Do you have any information to suggest otherwise? I'm still waiting on that video you told me about earlier. I'm sick of your bullshit dude. You've claimed moments earlier that Nvidia and AMD do the same (which they really don't). But following that logic, Intel are the one's to blame. Incompetent? I thought this was a good decision. At least, that's what you've been claiming.

 

Also, after playing the game, the only bottleneck I've discovered (using a 4690k) was the gpu actually. A 970 had issues running the better shadows, draw distance, and resolutions as opposed to the 1070 and 1080 I've tested. The "intel advanced settings" didn't change much at all. 

I'm using yours nd the community's reaction (which is to say this was a bad move). Do you struggle with English and Logic as much as you struggle with technical proficiency?

[MageTank]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

I'd say both are acceptable IF they are noted as such in the results.

I'll start with XMP. If I note any significant changes going from XMP, to manual, i'll report them.

[Godlygamer23]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

Sounds good to me. Is cinebench the only benchmark we are using? Or do you have others in mind?

What other benchmarks are free? AIDA64 can probably be used for the free trial duration(I don't own it), and CPU-Z is another one we can use.

[Drak3]

Just now, MageTank said:

I'll start with XMP. If I note any significant changes going from XMP, to manual, i'll report them.

Alright. I suppose I should revert all my CPU affinity settings and run some benches on my 5930K.

[MageTank]

Just now, Godlygamer23 said:

What other benchmarks are free? AIDA64 can probably be used for the free trial duration(I don't own it), and CPU-Z is another one we can use.

Well, I have the paid version of Aida64, if you'd like my results from that. I can do CPU-Z as well. Maybe blender? They have benchmark components with that as well. 

[patrickjp93]

45 minutes ago, MageTank said:

It's not Patrick I worry about. We've gone too far, and derailed this thread several pages ago. The fact that a mod has been lurking for quite some time, means cleanup is inevitable. Perhaps it's time we dial back on our fun, and make their jobs easier, lol. 

Why bother? They don't do their jobs of maintaining community standards all that well to begin with. To the letter, three people who've posted on this thread are infracting the harassment guidelines, and two of those are certainly guilty of derailing the thread. I'm guilty of neither, yet I'm the one getting the warning (and no, it wasn't Godly, the only remaining phantom of objectivity and integrity left among the mods).

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

and no, it wasn't Godly, the only remaining phantom of objectivity and integrity left among the mods.

You know what they say, when everyone around you is the asshole....you're probably the asshole. 

[Godlygamer23]

5 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Well, I have the paid version of Aida64, if you'd like my results from that. I can do CPU-Z as well. Maybe blender? They have benchmark components with that as well. 

I can also do Blender.

[christianled59]

3 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

I'm using yours nd the community's reaction (which is to say this was a bad move). Do you struggle with English and Logic as much as you struggle with technical proficiency?

On 12/8/2016 at 3:14 PM, patrickjp93 said:

IT was a good idea. It just should have been disclosed.

Yeah, it was a bad move. You suggested it's not. 

 

Please, for the love of all fucking god drop the ad hominem. I'm tired of seeing it your replies. I asked for a link to a youtube video ages ago, and for whatever reason you cannot supply it. You're really unfair and close minded when it comes to debates..

[patrickjp93]

Just now, djdwosk97 said:

You know what they say, when everyone around you is the asshole....you're probably the asshole. 

I have standards. If that makes me an asshole, I don't care. What I won't tolerate is being called a fool and liar when all the evidence is to the contrary.

[christianled59]

5 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Why bother? They don't do their jobs of maintaining community standards all that well to begin with. To the letter, three people who've posted on this thread are infracting the harassment guidelines, and two of those are certainly guilty of derailing the thread. I'm guilty of neither, yet I'm the one getting the warning (and no, it wasn't Godly, the only remaining phantom of objectivity and integrity left among the mods).

You called me:

clueless

not proficient

and without standards. 

 

You also just questioned my logic and english skills. Come on. 

[patrickjp93]

1 minute ago, christianled59 said:

Yeah, it was a bad move. You suggested it's not. 

 

Please, for the love of all fucking god drop the ad hominem. I'm tired of seeing it your replies. I asked for a link to a youtube video ages ago, and for whatever reason you cannot supply it. You're really unfair and close minded when it comes to debates..

Because it's not from a logical perspective.

 

I haven't used ad hominem. I gave you 3.

[patrickjp93]

Just now, christianled59 said:

You called me:

clueless

not proficient

and without standards. 

 

You also just questioned my logic and english skills. Come on. 

About certain subjects, and I proved it.

 

About certain subjects, and I proved it.

 

You have me there, but haven't demonstrated any.

 

Because your replies merit that question.

[christianled59]

Just now, patrickjp93 said:

Because it's not from a logical perspective.

 

I haven't used ad hominem. I gave you 3.

Look, I'm all for having a debate. This, isn't a debate anymore. You never given me a video. You've given others videos over the topic of cache and hyperthreading but not when I asked for the video of the game hitting 65 fps. Or any proof that this wasn't intels doing.

 

[goodtofufriday]

1 minute ago, christianled59 said:

You called me:

clueless

not proficient

and without standards. 

 

You also just questioned my logic and english skills. Come on. 

Its concerning as Luke has said many times on the wan show that on his forum won't let users attack other users. 

Yet this guy is still here despite his consistantcy and absurdity.  

[christianled59]

3 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

About certain subjects, and I proved it.

 

About certain subjects, and I proved it.

 

You have me there, but haven't demonstrated any.

 

Because your replies merit that question.

How have you proved I'm clueless about optimization? (the only subject you've claimed I'm clueless in (not plural; don't exaggerate).

 

I honestly thought we've been in agreement with what Intel could and couldn't do for them. 

 

Please just please quote yourself. I must have misread. Dm me if it's going to be rude. I'm trying my hardest to have a civil discussion. 

[patrickjp93]

1 minute ago, goodtofufriday said:

Its concerning as Luke has said many times on the wan show that on his forum won't let users attack other users. 

Yet this guy is still here despite his consistantcy and absurdity.  

Because I haven't attacked him. I've attacked his abilities, which so far show as lacking. I didn't call him stupid, hopeless, or any number of qualities that are inborn, unprovable, and un-disprovable. I took him to task for his lack of engaging in thoughtful debate on merit. Yes, I did it in a very blunt way, but I don't care if you think I'm an asshole. So do my colleagues, and yet I got the major Christmas bonus because I deliver more than they do.

 

I care about competency. If all you care about it is who's going to kiss your ass the best, I do not care what you think. I'm not coddling christian, and I'm not coddling you.

[patrickjp93]

3 minutes ago, christianled59 said:

How have you proved I'm clueless about optimization? (the only subject you've claimed I'm clueless in (not plural; don't exaggerate).

 

I honestly thought we've been in agreement with what Intel could and couldn't do for them. 

 

Please just please quote yourself. I must have misread. Dm me if it's going to be rude. I'm trying my hardest to have a civil discussion. 

I also heavily implied you were clueless about how the industry works w.r.t. the former. Seriously, keep up. 

 

Intel can't wave a magic wand and optimize all the code in a few weeks, and a 6-month delay would be financially punishing for a studio fresh on its feet.

 

I'm being civil. Uncivil wouldn't be fit for a fiction novel. I'm just not letting anyone off easy.