|
On January 17 2013 05:53 baoluvboa wrote:
Do you guys know when the next line of CPUs from AMD and Intel are coming out? Would AMD be competitive in term of performance in the future unlike the failure of Bulldozer?
Intel's Haswell, also known as their 4th Generation Core processors are being released in the second quarter of this year. June 2nd was the last reported rumoured date iirc. AMD isn't expected to release Steamroller until 2014 the last time I heard and chances are very slim (non-existent) that it will be competitive with Intel's Haswell.
|
Intel's got Haswell coming up around June. Around 5W on up to the top performance mainstream desktop parts. Ivy Bridge-E might be in the second half of the year, though that should be worse than Haswell unless you need the extra cores / memory throughput / PCIe lanes. 2nd-gen architecture for Atom is coming late this year I think, finally on 22nm, for lower power than that.
AMD's got 3rd-gen APUs (CPU with large integrated graphics) coming with the 3rd-gen Bulldozer iteration, Steamroller, also late this year. The FX-series parts based on that should be in 2014.
All of the above is subject to change.
AMD's most likely never going to be competitive again in terms of per-core x86 CPU performance. At certain prices, if you need more cores for certain very specific workloads, they should continue to be competitive for at least a while.
|
Does anyone know what wondershare is? My dad uses it for video editing. I'm building him a computer, just curios how much ram you need for such a build
|
I do not know if this is simple question simple answer but here it goes.
I built a new computer a few days ago and bought a new monitor. Everything runs great but if the computer turns off for more than 10 minutes when i turn everything back on the monitor flashes what my screen should look like for 2 seconds then turns off. The only way i can get it to work again is unplugging and re plugging the monitor. Tomorrow I am going to test a friends monitor but i was wondering if you guys had an answer already known.
Thank you.
|
Major FPS drops after an update in SC2. Before update my average FPS was 60.
I5-3470
550ti
Anyone else experiencing FPS drops? It might be my connection, because I did not try an offline game.
|
Hello guys! I want to replace my video card. I will buy either GTX 460 (80 % will buy this one) or ASUS GTX650TI (20 %) but my PC has PCI Express 1.0 . If I buy GTX650 will it work (Requies PCI e 3.0) and if it works on my 1.0 will it be slowed down (and how much?) Gtx 460 requies PCI e 2. Same question how much will slow it down? (Excuse my bad english and thanks if you answer  )
|
What games at what resolution do you want to play and on what level of graphics?
(and a gtx650 does not require PCIe 3.0, they're all compatible)
|
On January 16 2013 13:06 LgNKami wrote:
Is anything in my system causing a bottleneck? Im happy with the way it performs but, I just want to know if there are any issues.
i5 2320 3 Ghz
HD 5850 (Stock but can bios mod and set to 5870 speeds)
6 GB ddr3 ram
H61 motherboard (not planning on overclocking my cpu at all. not that I could anyway)
Anything (specifically between my GPU and CPU) bottlenecking each other?
There's a difference between different definitions of bottlenecking. If you mean the correct (according to me) definition, then no.
Correct definition: A bottleneck is a result of one piece of hardware not permitting another to function at its full capacity in any circumstance.
Correct definition example: You have a SATA3 SSD plugged into a SATA2 port on your motherboard. The SATA2 port is bottlenecking your SSD - you can never get faster than SATA2 speeds out of it, even though the SSD could perform much better.
Solution: Plug the SSD into a SATA3 port, possibly requiring a motherboard upgrade.
HOWEVER, lots of people use a different definition of bottlenecking. According to me, the incorrect one.
Incorrect definition: A bottleneck is when one piece of hardware is not performing up to its maximum potential in a specific task because another piece of hardware can't keep up.
Incorrect definition example: You have a 5850, which is capable (or nearly so) of displaying SC2 at maximum graphics settings at your monitor's resolution & maximum refresh rate (best possible image quality at maximum effective FPS), however, because your CPU (i5-2320) cannot run SC2 at maximum FPS (your monitor's refresh rate) when large armies are on the field, you aren't getting maximum theoretical potential out of your 5850.
The difference is that the second (incorrect) definition is task-specific. Sure in SC2, there's a CPU "bottleneck," but for the vast majority of games it's the opposite: your i5-2320 is more than enough power to do everything you want other games to do, but your 5850 will hold you back.
So to answer your question:
Your system has no bottlenecks (first, correct definition).
Your question is meaningless without giving us context in terms of what software you're running (second, more common but incorrect definition).
The reason the term bottlenecking bugs me so much is that people hear they have a bottleneck (incorrect definition) and assume they have a bottleneck (correct definition) and that there are magic hardware configurations that will never have bottlenecks (incorrect definition) when that outcome is, in fact, impossible.
|
On January 18 2013 02:27 Rachnar wrote:
What games at what resolution do you want to play and on what level of graphics?
(and a gtx650 does not require PCIe 3.0, they're all compatible)
The resolution Im using now is 1360x768 (its not my native resolution) my native is 1440x900 but thats a long story. And the game.. ofc Starcraft 2 on low no matter how fast my pc is I'll always play on low . Does it really matter (I mean the resolution etc? I've heard that a video card on pci e 1 (lets say gtx 460) is slowed like 5-10 % MAX? So you're saying That gtx650Ti will work on my PC without problems even thought it requies 3.0?? :D
|
Yes, but what is your PSU?
and for that resolution and for SC2 on low, you really don't need a GPU that expensive, a very cheap one will be neough (hd 6670/gts 450)
|
Q: Would it be possible for the TL webmasters to add total event viewer count to the event title mouse-over in the calendar bar?
|
On January 18 2013 03:46 KatuStarcraft wrote:
Q: Would it be possible for the TL webmasters to add total event viewer count to the event title mouse-over in the calendar bar?
The answer is probably yes, but if you want it to happen you should probably post in the Website Feedback forum & include an explanation of the (many, I'm sure) benefits of including that information in addition to the viewer counts already provided when mousing over stream links.
|
19.5" x 17.3" x 7.7" - This is a regular ATX tower, not a microATX right?
|
|
|
Thanks Skyr, I have another follow up question.
So most motherboards should fit my case, regardless of whether they are mATX or ATX?
|
Yep, mATX will also fit into an ATX case. Just make sure to use the proper standoff positions as mATX does vary slightly from ATX.
|
Canada16217 Posts
On January 18 2013 02:37 TheLastNagual wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2013 02:27 Rachnar wrote:
What games at what resolution do you want to play and on what level of graphics?
(and a gtx650 does not require PCIe 3.0, they're all compatible) The resolution Im using now is 1360x768 (its not my native resolution) my native is 1440x900 but thats a long story. And the game.. ofc Starcraft 2 on low no matter how fast my pc is I'll always play on low . Does it really matter (I mean the resolution etc? I've heard that a video card on pci e 1 (lets say gtx 460) is slowed like 5-10 % MAX? So you're saying That gtx650Ti will work on my PC without problems even thought it requies 3.0?? :D
If you use a PCIE 1.1 x16 slot it shouldn't be affected if it's a PCIE 1.1 x8 slot the performance you lose is insignificant if any.
Either way you are fine!
|
Newegg has shell shocker deal going on right now, Kingston HyperX Beast 2x 4GB 1600 DDR3 for $40, is it a good deal? It's exactly the type of RAM I was looking for, for my next build (DDR3 1600Mhz, 2x4GB).
|
1600MHz cas9 1.65v with ugly heatsinks for $40 is beyond terrible.
|
On January 19 2013 12:05 skyR wrote:
1600MHz cas9 1.65v with ugly heatsinks for $40 is beyond terrible.
Okay, didn't want to spend $40 unexpectedly. Any recommendations? I'm not planning on buying right now right now, but I figured I'd get a deal if I could.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
