just waitin for FX CPU prices to drop so I can get my brother's PC back up to 8 cores.

On the competition front:



Yes, $4800.00 (not really intended for consumer market). In any case, the high end Vega GPU is rumored to be just slightly faster in some respects (I always expect the top Nvidia GPU to have the highest gaming FPS - even if by only an inconsequential amount - its Nvidia's selling point). I ass-u-me the top Vega GPU will be approximately $1000.00 (may be less - AMD is "bang for buck").

But, with all the rumors and speculations, I may have something out of wack. We'll see -- more Vega and Ryzen info is expected in just about 10 days.

Fury GPUs are down to $250 and lower w/ MIR

Fury X water cooled, some venders have for $309, also with $20-30 MIR

(Some Vendors are still asking full price)

Generally interesting rumor/speculation that potentially impacts all CPUs and GPUs to some extent -- but, I'm speculating, will be more important to weaker gaming systems.

the dll is in the tester builds already,

prioritizes DirectX and other Game Related Services to a higher priority level when it detects application running.

Rumors coming from friends of Ryzen hitting 5.0GHz on Air...

Wow! I hope mine does that -- or even 4.5GHz would be great. I do plan to water cool it.

3.4 GHz at sub 95w, so 4.5/5.0 GHz at 120w would be easy.

they said lil to no mV increases to 4.2, just adjustments to MP and FSB, 5.0 needed a smidge, but no where near as much as FX83xx

The 5GHz OC number has become public:



Electromigration becomes a bigger issue as architecture shrinks (Ryzen is 14nm), I speculate. This causes premature aging. However, its a trade off -- that fanatics may be willing to accept

This is the week of CES. So, the leaks are more solid (but, still rumor -- not established fact).

I own Polaris (so, I know its good) -- plays all my games at max settings at 1440p. Vega is all new and 2X, 4X, 8X times better (or so they say).

Just for some perspective here.....A GTX 970 (which I used to own) has roughly the same performance as the 480 (better/worse in some cases) and like almost every graphics card on the planet it will play or at least let you select 1440p and probably 2160p (4K) for any game you may choose. However the frame rate at maximum settings will vary and may only be 'acceptable' depending on the user expectations and requirements. One of the reasons why I moved on was because 1440p is most definitely the limit for these cards and struggling to maintain good framerates in recent titles.

Given that the spec in your sig is driving multiple monitors and especially if you're using eyefinity to drive a single logical screen in games I don't believe for a second that many people would take the performance you have as acceptable at all (totaly dependent on which games you're playing of course).

I totally buy into your 'competition is good' theme, however I don't believe for one minute that your primary objective within this thread is do anything other than sell the virtues of AMD as a company.

For your sake, let's hope that Zen comes up with the goods because this relentless pursuit and hope of having an AMD product that finally competes with Intel otherwise you're going to give yourself a hernia amongst the rumour and speculation articles and links.

When I say 1440p, I mean the single monitor at 1440p (which is the standard meaning of 1440p). I try to use standard terminology.

I'm a game mod addict who adds all the high textures and extras that "third party" modders add to "stock" games (where its possible). So, that drops FPS -- measurably, but rarely perceptibly (to me).

For example, Fallout 4 was running above 60fps (my max monitor refresh rate). I added all the third party bells and whistles. In the worst case, FPS dropped to a minimum of 14 or so in one very limited scene. In other places it dropped to a minimum of just under 30fps. Those were not averages -- they were minimums. Only the 14FPS area looked "jerky" to my eyes. But, other eyes would vary.

Playing Skyrim SE lately. Again above 60 until I loaded it up. Now in the 40s. Looks good to me.

Yes, this is the AMD fan thread

But, I have tried to make it clear that "until we see the unbiased, 3d party tests" we won't know. So, I always poke in the words -- rumor, speculation, leak, etc. I would hate for someone to buy something because I personally misrepresented it. Rather, my aim is to provide fun information.

We'll see how it all turns out later when the Ryzen and Vega actually are being sold to the public.

Meantime, I assume Intel CPUs will still provide an edge in most games. And, Nvidia will do what it has to do to provide a card that beats AMD in FPS. However, I expect the "bang for buck" odds to favor AMD. We'll see if my "speculation" turns out true or false

By the way, in the context of what's presented in this thread.

Skatezilla started this thread and the thread is Skatezilla's thread. I only contribute. We don't have any private conversations about it.

I get up early (by USA standards). The first thing I do is check the internet technical sites, then political sites, then science sites. That all takes very few clicks.

Then I come to SimHQ and "report" if I see anything that seems like an incremental advancement of knowledge. So, because I get up early, maybe I get things posted before others have a chance to do it. But, I'm nobody special on this thread -- Skatezilla is the instigator, owner, and AMD insider on this AMD fanbase thread.

There could equally well be an Intel thread and an Nvidia thread on SimHQ -- if someone wanted to start them.

The Title of the Thread is "Current and Future Status of AMD".


What Else is there to discuss?

Too much info there: you need not to be apologetic or even explanatory.
You are doing very fine, as Skatezilla is and both in an "AMD appreciative" yet very objective manner and I thank you both for that, so much that I do not let myself skip a single post.

I tried it just now on the last two computers in the house on Windows 7. I'm upgrading to Windows 10 for free.

Its taking the usual very long time but seems to be working. Because it takes so long, I'm posting now (before I am positive how it turns out) -- in case anyone wants to take advantage tonight. Its really easy to initiate -- just go to the W10 site linked in the article and make a few quick clicks.

As noted before, W10 has a W7-like mode and a W8-like mode. In my opinion, its better than both -- unless you have software that simply will not run on W10 (Microsoft Media Center is the only app we used that doesn't work on W10).

So if you missed the chance to upgrade for free and thereby save up to $120, here's the

Article

[Edit] WHOOPS. Posted a few minutes too soon. A last minute hang up during installation. We'll see if it is fixable or fixes itself.

[Edit 2] IT WORKED on the second try.

Im not ready to put my Windows 7 out to pasture.. lol...