*Official Benchmark Thread* - Post it here or it didn't happen :D

[ryan]

lol. I wonder what my temps are after adding them for 40 hours, because this helps me err..it helps me how? solves what again. its just too dumb

[Izy]

welp tried my best so far

highest multicore 1910
highest single core 114
highest gpu 18410

 

promptly crashed after the multicore lul, either way i need to figure out to squeeze more performance out of cinebench, other than killing all my processes and setting prio above normal/high

 

also need @seanwee to give me his finalized ram tuning values he used in Universal Amd Form Browser 

so i can use them as a starting baseline when my kit arrives in the next couple of days

[Mr. Fox]

Just now, ryan said:

lol. I wonder what my temps are after adding them for 40 hours, because this helps me err..it helps me how? solves what again. its just too dumb

Maybe if I use sub-zero cooling it will make accumulated negative numbers. 

 

Tin foil hat causes me to wonder if maybe ASUS is collecting data for nefarious purposes like excuses to deny warranty. The Armory Crate and MyASUS malware applications collect data.

[tps3443]

3 hours ago, electrosoft said:

HUB confirming What GN found about CPU performance in Starfield....it is a very heavy CPU influenced title and Intel rules the roost.

 

Especially the 5800X3D just gets wrecked....

 

Seriously, Starfield loves Intel CPUs....that has to be a weird win some / lose some for AMD who sponsored the PC version.

 

(Eyes the SP115 13900KS sitting on the shelf in the MSI Z790i Edge motherboard atm doing nothing)

 

 

 

Memory findings in line with GN meaning much smaller gains going from 4800 -> 7200 (but again, I'd like to see 7600 or 8000+. Maybe take a looksy at memory benefits @tps3443 and let us know).

 

 

 

 

I’ll play around with it today. My whole system fell apart recently stability wise. I kinda let it go in to the abyss of normal life and using it for just work and no play. Then it just started crashing left and right under normal loads with DDR5 8800. And CPU freezes in R23. My SP rating actually dropped in the bios to SP96 Global lol. It said my E-Cores were like SP60 😂 (Never seen anything like this before) (Not even kidding)

 

(1st) issue: Super Cool Direct Die cold plate was clogged completely. 
(2nd) issue: Liquid Metal was hard as stone. Oops.

 

I put new LM, cleaned my direct die fins, put all back together SP rating said the same thing. I pulled the chip again and pulled the battery on the motherboard and it finally came back to life as an SP104. And it’s solid again yay 🙂.  Seriously though, I thought my cpu just up and fell over on me. But this SP104 is still a beast. And she’s back to 100%. This really was strange seeing a SP just up

and go down on only the E-Cores. Temps were always pretty good during all of this. So I’m not sure why it happen. 

 

 

 

[Reciever]

1 hour ago, Rage Set said:

I've been trying to convince the purchasing dept and a few dept heads from the school district we support to not buy Dell Alienware R15/R16 desktops. They want gaming desktops for the high schools with RGB EVERYTHING. Of course, my boss points them to me because of my former business and current small SI business. 

 

One of the bidders is offering a Dell R15 with a 13600KF and 4070 TI for 3200. Another is offering a Dell R16 with a 12600KF and 4070 TI for 3050 each. I mean, I never realized how bad some of these vendors could be. It is interesting to be on the other side of a bidding process. 

 

Any reason not to go with Dell proper? Not high volume or just keeping it local?

[electrosoft]

10 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

I’ll play around with it today. My whole system fell apart recently stability wise. I kinda let it go in to the abyss of normal life and using it for just work and no play. Then it just started crashing left and right under normal loads with DDR5 8800. And CPU freezes in R23. My SP rating actually dropped in the bios to SP96 Global lol. It said my E-Cores were like SP60 😂 (Never seen anything like this before) (Not even kidding)

 

(1st) issue: Super Cool Direct Die cold plate was clogged completely. 
(2nd) issue: Liquid Metal was hard as stone. Oops.

 

I put new LM, cleaned my direct die fins, put all back together SP rating said the same thing. I pulled the chip again and pulled the battery on the motherboard and it finally came back to life as an SP104. And it’s solid again yay 🙂.  Seriously though, I thought my cpu just up and fell over on me. But this SP104 is still a beast. And she’s back to 100%. This really was strange seeing a SP just up

and go down on only the E-Cores. Temps were always pretty good during all of this. So I’m not sure why it happen. 

 

 

 

 

Whoa but yeah the smallest (or not so small) deviations when running such tight tolerances can derail your setup. See: MSI AIO clogging debacle.

 

I had the same happen to my Hyte R3 13900ks setup and out of the blue crashes and run away temps and I finally had to abandon that chassis. I'll put up a post later about what happened.

 

 

[Papusan]

It’s always everyones turn. Only for the chosen ones. The Cablemod jockeys 🙂

And right in time after MSI won’t pay for others failures  

Starfield dlss 3 mod for free… https://wccftech.com/starfield-dlss-3-mod-by-lukefz-now-available-for-free/

 

just like PureDark's mod, this one also suffers from continuous crashing whenever loading or switching to a menu. It's a known issue that affects several people at random, myself included. Hopefully, a fix will be eventually found.

 

Amd too afraid for more noise after previous failure with Starfield?

AMD-Sponsored Star Wars Jedi: Survivor Gets Surprising DLSS 3 Update and Game Optimizations

[Mr. Fox]

23 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

I’ll play around with it today. My whole system fell apart recently stability wise. I kinda let it go in to the abyss of normal life and using it for just work and no play. Then it just started crashing left and right under normal loads with DDR5 8800. And CPU freezes in R23. My SP rating actually dropped in the bios to SP96 Global lol. It said my E-Cores were like SP60 😂 (Never seen anything like this before) (Not even kidding)

EXACTLY the same thing happened to me, just out of the blue, and it was the BIOS. I tried reflashing and clearing CMOS and nothing worked, I went back to the older BIOS (v0904) and everything was back to normal. Not sure why it suddenly changed. Kind of messed up, but it's ASUS so I don't have a surprised look on my face. I don't hate it, but in hindsight I would have been better off just buying another Z690 Dark instead of the Apex. 

[tps3443]

17 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

EXACTLY the same thing happened to me, just out of the blue, and it was the BIOS. I tried reflashing and clearing CMOS and nothing worked, I went back to the older BIOS (v0904) and everything was back to normal. Not sure why it suddenly changed. Kind of messed up, but it's ASUS so I don't have a surprised look on my face. I don't hate it, but in hindsight I would have been better off just buying another Z690 Dark instead of the Apex. 

My motherboard has been okay, I can’t really find fault the board primarily because my Liquid Metal was gone completely, and my cold plate was completely clogged. I think my BSOD’s in windows and weird system issues not loading windows just messed something up momentarily.
 

After cleaning my cold plate, and installing new Liquid Metal, pulling battery, I was back in business. Maybe it’s Intels new Microcode that is causing this. I read something about that Intel latest microcode causing BSOD’s. 
 

[Etern4l]

On 9/5/2023 at 1:06 AM, electrosoft said:

It is an expensive hobby because laws of diminishing returns are grossly in play for the top end same as if you want a Ferrari over a Camry or first class over economy. To be the best you pay the best sometimes crazily so.

 

Sure, we know there is a premium to pay, the problem is that NVidia raised prices of products across the board to create an illusion of necessity to purchase the top end card, as everything else seems like bad value. This and the other unhealthy practices have hurt the entire PC market, which is already in a worrying state of decline. So Level 2 thinking here would be to avoid supporting a company which acts to the detriment of the entire community (if not humanity). Sure, people can be selfish, myopic and just pay up the extra $400-500 over par, if that makes them feel as if they were driving a Ferrari among plebs in packed Camrys lol, but will this help move the world in the right direction? 

 

On 9/5/2023 at 1:06 AM, electrosoft said:

Nvidia isn't ripping anybody off. Nobody is forcing you to purchase their GPUs. This is a capitalistic world. You look at the product and determine if you want it or not at the price offered based upon your own criteria. All Nvidia can do is offer their goods at their selected price points and let the consumer decide.

 

You probably meant to say "this is a free market". Well, it's not exactly, because NVidia is a pseudo-monopolist. They are in a position to rip people off by charging excessively for their products. They are doing so without regard for us, the enthusiasts, or the PC market, because Jensen has his head stuck high up in the clouds, hoping for AI-driven world dominance. It's only us, the consumers, who can bring him down a peg or two.

 

On 9/5/2023 at 1:06 AM, electrosoft said:

I don't subscribe to the nonsense that consumers don't know what they're doing. They're making educated purchasing decisions based upon their own purchasing power, preferences and buying criteria. Their  preferences and criteria are allowed to be different than yours. It doesn't make yours right or theirs wrong.

 

People make their decisions based on a plethora of fuzzy factors: their knowledge, their CPU characteristics, the information in their possession, their habits, and crucially - their emotions. Arguably, what's often missing is long-term thinking. I mean we know for example that people make decisions they later regret, buyer's remorse is a thing. But sometimes, there is no remorse even if the consequences are bad - that's flawed human nature, we tend to love ourselves the most, sometimes in situations where actually helping others would be more beneficial. 

 

All of this can be far from optimal, it's impossible to even argue that the decisions people take are always right and optimal for them. The best we can do is think about our decisions and constantly try to improve our decision making, knowing full well it's necessarily flawed to some extent... 

 

If we look a few steps ahead certain sets of criteria might be globally better than others. I don't want to go as far as invoking any of the striking examples of application of people's flawed criteria leading to various historical disasters, however, there are some future paths where supporting NVidia in any way could lead to very much unintended and undesirable consequences. Less drastically, and more immediately, NVidia clearly isn't helping our beloved PC world flourish.

 

 

On 9/5/2023 at 1:06 AM, electrosoft said:

 

I never said or intimated there is nothing that can be done. As always, you vote with your purchasing power. Enough have spoken to let Nvidia know their pricing is still acceptable. When it is not and/or they feel enough competition/threat they will adjust accordingly as we just saw the 4060ti drop to $430 with AMDs announcement of their 7800xt along with lackluster sales. Hopefully we see more of this.

 

Well, words are cheap, I don't own any AMD GPUs either (harder constraints unfortunately), but the least we can do is avoid helping NVidia by hyping up their products.

 

On 9/5/2023 at 1:06 AM, electrosoft said:

Just for clarity before proceeding,  architecturally speaking, you are claiming the 7900xtx ~= 4090 in raw rasterization and the 4090 overall wins because of software and optimizations?

 

Yes, based on the theoretical performance numbers sources from the links I posted earlier. I have used techpowerup GPU specs page quite a bit when comparing GPUs - if there is a major flaw in the methodology, I would like to know.

 

You can see for example that the 7900XTX has a higher pixel rate (the GPU can render more pixels than NVidia's top dog), but lower texture rate (NVidia can support more or higher res textures, by about 25%). Compute specs are mostly in favour of the 7900XTX, except for FP32, where the 4090 is in the lead. The differences either way can be fairly large, which suggests there exist architectural differences between the GPUs which might also explain differences in game performance depending on the engine or content type.

 

Based on the specs alone, the 4090 should be priced maybe within 10%, certainly not 60%, of the 7900XTX. The 50% excess constitutes software and "inventory management" premiums, neither of which should really be applicable in a healthy market (to be fair, the software part of it could - to some extent - be AMD's own goal as per @Mr. Fox, I have yet to see bro @Raiderman jump in to the drivers' defence).

 

[electrosoft]

3 hours ago, Reciever said:

 

Any idea if they apply any tuning to the 5800X3D? Had to use the PBO2 Utility to apply the -30 offset to hit 4.450 otherwise its all over the place.

 

Not really interested in the title perse, just curious. There are definitely games that just prefer the raw Mhz over L3 Cache

 

Bethesda and their Creation Engine is a great example of the blessing and curse of the 3D cache model.

 

Creation Engine 1 and ES5 along with Fallout 4/76 was a blessing as it was extremely single threaded but more important, instructions and assets were so much smaller since it was basically using a ~12yr old engine that everything could sit in the cache and performance was greatly bumped. Even now, I'd recommend a 5800X3D or 7800X3D system for Fallout 3/4/76.

 

Creation Engine 2 has been massively overhauled and upgraded in regards to multithreaded support and more importantly much larger asset and instructions per thread  handling and it clearly can't sit in the cache in a large enough or meaningfully way to impact performance to a major degree. We can see this as the 7800X3D is ~10% faster than the 7700X. I'd like to look more indepth in the 7950X3D vs 7950X and their near identical scores as this may be a case of massive thread utilization and problems with some being on the cache enable CCD and others not or gamebar issues. I'd like to see Lasso at work there just as a checksum.

 

Based on how Starfield feels and plays, they clearly masively overhauled CE1 probably the same way Blizzard overhauled their WoW Engine to modernize it but it still has its roots in its original 2004 design.

 

I'd like to see how some tight 3800 on a 5800X3D along with an optimized PBO and/or CO deals with it but there obviously won't be any miracles to close that massive gap (108fps vs 65fps)

 

I'm sure we'll revisit this months down the road as patches, and upgrades and optimizations (oh my!) are implemented and we may find the 4090 properly moving ahead along with the gap between AMD and Intel CPUs closing.

 

 

 

 

[Mr. Fox]

38 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

My motherboard has been okay, I can’t really find fault the board primarily because my Liquid Metal was gone completely, and my cold plate was completely clogged. I think my BSOD’s in windows and weird system issues not loading windows just messed something up momentarily.
 

After cleaning my cold plate, and installing new Liquid Metal, pulling battery, I was back in business. Maybe it’s Intels new Microcode that is causing this. I read something about that Intel latest microcode causing BSOD’s. 
 

Maybe, but I always select the oldest micro-code in the BIOS for both of my motherboards (along with disabling security mitigations in Windows and Linux). I consider that an overclocker best practice. Maybe just the mere presence of the newest cancer screwed it up, even though it wasn't selected. The clogged cold plate and dried up liquid metal wouldn't change your SP rating, and since I had the same problem without the issues you corrected I think it has to be something they have buggered up in the current firmware.

 

I really find it annoying that the new Cinebench refuses to remember my settings. If I don't deliberately set the duration to "off" manually every time I launch Cinebench it defauts to the looped version.

 

[ryan]

popcorn!

 

Why tacitly call someone wrong then say your not calling them out and saying its wrong .

 

consumers have general knowledge.  Alot more people are educated with computers than not. I don't buy this whole people are consumer zombies randomly buying electronics and losing because of one mans greed. I don't own a 4090 because I don't want/ can't afford it. does this mean the 4090 is a bad price or that I don't know anything about the 4090? most people own 1650s and as it stand they are the best bang for the buck, so yeah consumers kinda do know what they are doing as a whole, also im not interested in being called an idiot or saying that clear facts like steam games charts are unreliable or from uncredible sorce. like holy cow man. have a shot of jack daniels.

[Reciever]

15 minutes ago, electrosoft said:

 

Bethesda and their Creation Engine is a great example of the blessing and curse of the 3D cache model.

 

Creation Engine 1 and ES5 along with Fallout 4/76 was a blessing as it was extremely single threaded but more important, instructions and assets were so much smaller since it was basically using a ~12yr old engine that everything could sit in the cache and performance was greatly bumped. Even now, I'd recommend a 5800X3D or 7800X3D system for Fallout 3/4/76.

 

Creation Engine 2 has been massively overhauled and upgraded in regards to multithreaded support and more importantly much larger asset and instructions per thread  handling and it clearly can't sit in the cache in a large enough or meaningfully way to impact performance to a major degree. We can see this as the 7800X3D is ~10% faster than the 7700X. I'd like to look more indepth in the 7950X3D vs 7950X and their near identical scores as this may be a case of massive thread utilization and problems with some being on the cache enable CCD and others not or gamebar issues. I'd like to see Lasso at work there just as a checksum.

 

Based on how Starfield feels and plays, they clearly masively overhauled CE1 probably the same way Blizzard overhauled their WoW Engine to modernize it but it still has its roots in its original 2004 design.

 

I'd like to see how some tight 3800 on a 5800X3D along with an optimized PBO and/or CO deals with it but there obviously won't be any miracles to close that massive gap (108fps vs 65fps)

 

I'm sure we'll revisit this months down the road as patches, and upgrades and optimizations (oh my!) are implemented and we may find the 4090 properly moving ahead along with the gap between AMD and Intel CPUs closing.

 

 

 

 

Tried to see if my RAM would hit that but no dice, like, at all.

 

If there is interest I can try the 4400Mhz DDR4 kit from @Mr. Fox kit that he sold me some time ago. Im not sure why but some people on OCN were saying to increase the IF speed to 1900Mhz+ but from what I understand there is only one CCD so, no resource sharing. Would it be worth it to try 4000Mhz with 2000Mhz IF perhaps? Likely would be instable which is why I would guess that 3800/1900 tends to be the goal? 

[Mr. Fox]

38 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

Yes, based on the theoretical performance numbers sources from the links I posted earlier. I have used techpowerup GPU specs page quite a bit when comparing GPUs - if there is a major flaw in the methodology, I would like to know.

 

You can see for example that the 7900XTX has a higher pixel rate (the GPU can render more pixels than NVidia's top dog), but lower texture rate (NVidia can support more or higher res textures, by about 25%). Compute specs are mostly in favour of the 7900XTX, except for FP32, where the 4090 is in the lead. The differences either way can be fairly large, which suggests there exist architectural differences between the GPUs which might also explain differences in game performance depending on the engine or content type.

 

Based on the specs alone, the 4090 should be priced maybe within 10%, certainly not 60%, of the 7900XTX. The 50% excess constitutes software and "inventory management" premiums, neither of which should really be applicable in a healthy market (to be fair, the software part of it could - to some extent - be AMD's own goal as per @Mr. Fox, I have yet to see bro @Raiderman jump in to the drivers' defence).

I am not sure you can say that the 7900 XTX matches 4090 by any measurement other than results, and based on results it isn't a match for it. Maybe 4080. Mr. Azor tried that, lied to everyone about it in public, and we all saw that it just didn't work for Frankie-boy. The only way to compare them is results, not specs. It doesn't matter if the specs are the same or theoretically better if the results don't show it. Effort is good if one is satisfied receiving only an honorable mention, but reward follows results.

 

I certainly don't like supporting NVIDIA, but I also don't want to settle for (or support) AMD. That's why I am open to Battlemage. Otherwise, I would be gritting my teeth and sticking with the Green god of Greed's grossly overpriced silicon. But, my next GPU would most likely be a secondhand 3090 if not Battlemage.  If I had to choose between 4080 and 7900 XTX, I would take the 4080. NVIDIA sells a better product and I am not interested is showing charity to the underdog.

[electrosoft]

17 minutes ago, Reciever said:

Tried to see if my RAM would hit that but no dice, like, at all.

 

If there is interest I can try the 4400Mhz DDR4 kit from @Mr. Fox kit that he sold me some time ago. Im not sure why but some people on OCN were saying to increase the IF speed to 1900Mhz+ but from what I understand there is only one CCD so, no resource sharing. Would it be worth it to try 4000Mhz with 2000Mhz IF perhaps? Likely would be instable which is why I would guess that 3800/1900 tends to be the goal? 

 

I would definitely try the 4400 sticks to remove that as a bottleneck and see how far you can push the 5800X3D keeping IF:FSR 1:2 intact. The good thing is that while your CPU will give up the ghost at 3800-4000, you can then tighten the timings on those sticks to really dial them in with the 5800X3D.

 

3800/1900 was routinely the cap for the bulk of AM4 chips with some dips into slightly higher frequencies. Some could hit 4000 but they basically had golden IMCs. I know my 5800X capped out around 3866 IRC on known, good B-die sticks even in a SR 2x8GB config to lessen the load on the IMC.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mr. Fox]

1 minute ago, electrosoft said:

3800/1900 was routinely the cap for the bulk of AM4 chips with some dips into slightly higher frequencies.

Exactly right. That was like the threshold for my 5950X. Going any higher than 1900 FCLK just made a mess of things, and latency spirals out of control (along with WHEA errors) if you try to push the memory and/or FCLK too hard. It just doesn't cooperate.

[Etern4l]

27 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

I am not sure you can say that the 7900 XTX matches 4090 by any measurement other than results, and based on results it isn't a match for it. Maybe 4080. Mr. Azor tried that, lied to everyone about it in public, and we all saw that it just didn't work for Frankie-boy. The only way to compare them is results, not specs. It doesn't matter if the specs are the same or theoretically better if the results don't show it. Effort is good is one is satisfied receiving honorable mention, but reward follows results.

 

I don't want to support NVIDIA, but I also don't want to settle for (or support) AMD. That's why I am open to Battlemage. Otherwise, I would be gritting my teeth and sticking with the Green god or Greed's grossly overpriced junk. But, my next GPU would most likely be a secondhand 3090 if not Battlemage. 

 

Are you sure Azor is in any way involved in this? He is not a GPU designer.

 

Anyway, ideally we would have more of an in-depth explanation as to why the theoretical performance figures are not reliable. We see that the 7900 XTX can perform extremely well in some cases. 

 

The question is whether there exists any bias in the body of results that point to the 4090s advantage. Were the tests equally well optimized for AMD and NVidia to make any comparison meaningful?

 

Clearly, any results based on any variants of DLSS would be invalid, unless compared with an alternative technology from AMD.

 

We would need a heavyweight game engine dev insider to weight in here, any of whom would be under many NDAs anyway, so I guess a bit of an open question. Having seen many NVidia logos in game intros over the years, I am worried those titles wouldn't perform particularly well on AMD HW and vice versa. Again, it could be the case of people subsidising NVidia, so they can pay devs to optimise stuff for their HW alone (and vice versa, although one might worry the $50B Goblin Chieftain would be hard to beat on bribes).

 

If the above is not far from the truth, then we should be even more appreciative of Intel's efforts to enter the crooked market.

[Reciever]

8 minutes ago, electrosoft said:

 

I would definitely try the 4400 sticks to remove that as a bottleneck and see how far you can push the 5800X3D keeping IF:FSR 1:2 intact. The good thing is that while your CPU will give up the ghost at 3800-4000, you can then tighten the timings on those sticks to really dial them in with the 5800X3D.

 

3800/1900 was routinely the cap for the bulk of AM4 chips with some dips into slightly higher frequencies. Some could hit 4000 but they basically had golden IMCs. I know my 5800X capped out around 3866 IRC on known, good B-die sticks even in a SR 2x8GB config to lessen the load on the IMC.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ok, i'll probably save that for this weekend as I want to make some progress on my professional development through the week. Im using the same 'meh' RAM I bought when I got the AM4 system, for daily driving 32GB has definitely been preferred for some time. That being said it'll be addition to my comparison thread :) 

 

5 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

Exactly right. That was like the threshold for my 5950X. Going any higher than 1900 FCLK just made a mess of things, and latency spirals out of control (along with WHEA errors) if you try to push the memory and/or FCLK too hard. It just doesn't cooperate.

Right now I think I have IF set to 1933, one more thing to add to the list is to try 1600:3200 then

[Mr. Fox]

18 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Are you sure Azor is in any way involved in this? He is not a GPU designer.

 

Anyway, ideally we would have more of an in-depth explanation as to why the theoretical performance figures are not reliable. We see that the 7900 XTX can perform extremely well in some cases. 

 

The question is whether there exists any bias in the body of results that point to the 4090s advantage. Were the tests equally well optimized for AMD and NVidia to make any comparison meaningful?

 

Clearly, any results based on any variants of DLSS would be invalid, unless compared with an alternative technology from AMD.

 

We would need a heavyweight game engine dev insider to weight in here, any of whom be under many NDAs anyway, so I guess a bit of an open question. Having seen many NVidia logos in game intros over the years, I am worried those titles wouldn't perform particularly well on AMD HW and vice versa. Again, it could be the case of people subsidising NVidia, so they can pay devs to optimise stuff for their HW alone (and vice versa, although one might worry the $50B Goblin Chieftain would be hard to beat on bribes).

 

If the above is not far from the truth, then we should be even more appreciative of Intel's efforts to enter the crooked market.

Mr. Azor is a PR hack that says whatever he thinks will be sufficient to trick people into buying stuff from the company he works for. Accuracy is not important.

 

Indeed, our industry is overrun by shysters and I think being one is a pre-requisite to participation. Mr. Green Jeans (dang Huang wang) just happens to be a king among liars, LOL. But, it doesn't matter what company you're talking about, they're all dishonest and misrepresent their overpriced products. Some are both dishonest and produce less desirable products. 

 

Don't believe for a minute that if 7900 XTX was a 4090 competitor that AMD would be selling it for substantially less. They'd be raping their customers to the same degree, without batting an eye. They are not an honorable company. None of them are. They are charging as much as they believe they can to move the product. Consumers are tasked with picking their own poison.

[tps3443]

7 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

Mr. Azor is a PR hack that says whatever he thinks will be sufficient to trick people into buying stuff from the company he works for. Accuracy is not important.

 

Indeed, our industry is overrun by shysters and I think being one is a pre-requisite to participation. Mr. Green Jeans (dang Huang wang) just happens to be a king among liars, LOL. But, it doesn't matter what company you're talking about, they're all dishonest and misrepresent their overpriced products. Some are both dishonest and produce less desirable products. 

 

Don't believe for a minute that if 7900 XTX was a 4090 competitor that AMD would be selling it for substantially less. They'd be raping their customers to the same degree, without batting an eye. They are not an honorable company. None of them are. They are charging as much as they believe they can to move the product. Consumers are tasked with picking their own poison.

Not gonna lie, just my RTX3090 KP at 4K is extremely comparable to a 7900XT. Of course, not in Starfield though 🫣

[Reciever]

I'll settle for a Root Beer, much cheaper. :) 

 

 

12 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

Consumers are tasked with picking their own poison.

[tps3443]

@electrosoft How do I even test 1% lows and 99% lows? Do I set a frame cap? Adaptive sync on? It seems this number can be so easily influenced. I can set adaptive sync with a frame cap with lower graphics and it’s gonna be really good. VS no frame cap will hurt the lows a little. 
 

I don’t even know where to start, I get I’ll be testing against my self, but I appreciate any tips for best results.

[Mr. Fox]

2 minutes ago, Reciever said:

I'll settle for a Root Beer, much cheaper. 🙂

Also less likely to cause heartburn, nausea or diarrhea. 😜

[Mr. Fox]

4 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

@electrosoft How do I even test 1% lows and 99% lows?

Doesn't that show in HWiNFO64? Down in the RTSS section? I think that was added as a new feature.

 

Edit:
 

 

Edited September 6, 2023 by Mr. Fox
screenshot