Recent content by Ghost of Cyrix

G
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

I wish the Cannonlake wafer image was higher res... looks like Intel are hiding the die layout according to the article. Methinks someone is trying to hide potential Cannonlake core counts.
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #526
- Sep 19, 2017
- Forum: CPUs and Overclocking
G
Who's buying a 6 core Coffee Lake CPU? (Poll Inside)

Cores. No one wants to upgrade for the first core bump in the mainstream in a decade only to have their purchase eclipsed by the next core bump a mere year later.
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #289
- Sep 18, 2017
- Forum: CPUs and Overclocking
G
A History of Nvidia GeForce

Agreed wholeheartedly. AMD's purchase of ATi was a huge mistake and not just for ATi's well-being either. ATi were once Nvidia's fierce and respectable competitor. Now they've simply been sucked dry by the figurative leech that is AMD's historically-troubled CPU division and history of failed...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #58
- Sep 18, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Who's buying a 6 core Coffee Lake CPU? (Poll Inside)

I changed my vote from yes to no in light of this morning's news regarding the octocore i7 and Z390. Also, while I certainly wouldn't bother with Ryzen with its current per-core performance limitations and am looking forward to mainstream higher core counts with more Kaby Lake levels of per-core...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #286
- Sep 18, 2017
- Forum: CPUs and Overclocking
G
NVIDIA Volta Rumor Thread

Maxwell/Pascal were holding up (or rather, dominating) impressively enough, but Volta looks to be even further beyond and appears to be very impressive indeed. Nvidia's improvements have been nothing short of amazing these past few years. I don't take any pleasure in it, but honestly, RTG seem...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #285
- Sep 18, 2017
- Forum: Nvidia
G
A History of Nvidia GeForce

The bolded never happened. This is what actually happened: Custom AIB 980 Tis at stock beating the Fury X by ~23% or so and having 50% more VRAM to boot while costing only like 5% more (if even that). Stock 980 Tis or basic AIB designs at the same price as the Fury X... with like 25-30%...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #56
- Sep 18, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

Yes. AMD being in an even worse position relative to Nvidia this year relative to the past wouldn't be a new thing at all. They've been lagging further and further behind since around the time Maxwell first launched. Arguably even earlier than that when you consider how long GK110 had free reign...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #223
- Mar 2, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

I don't claim it's under the 1080, just around (certainly think it's closer to the 1080 than either the 1070 or 1080 Ti, AIB to AIB). +/- 5 to 10% in either direction is effectively the same level and there hasn't been a direct comparison yet, just ballparks in the same area. So I wouldn't try...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #221
- Mar 2, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

Tidbits? Sure. Numberless demo? Okay. Even a demo with an FPS counter showing a capped 60 FPS but without any indication of the GPU's max capabilities? Fine. But 3 words: uncapped FPS counter. That changes perception about a product immensely and professional marketers know it. Again, the demos...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #213
- Mar 2, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

See, this justification still somehow persists. What part of "AMD don't sandbag data and here's a bunch of consistent evidence" is difficult to understand? It's basic marketing and something AMD have been very consistent about. You don't use "Fiji drivers" with a GPU of a completely different...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #211
- Mar 2, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

I'm not talking about "estimates" based on some nebulous combination of workloads, I'm talking about the actual benchmark data they gave us from very specific workloads before release. And as I said, AMD do not sandbag their benchmark data. Polaris was best-case, Fiji was best-case, Ryzen was...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #207
- Mar 2, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

No, my argument is more akin to "look at the performance figures AMD gave us for Ryzen, they're fairly accurate representations of Ryzen's best-case scenarios just like Polaris and Fiji's marketing material and really those of every hardware company ever; there's no reason for AMD's marketers to...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #204
- Mar 2, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

So no compelling arguments then? Another year, another round of people trying to discredit speculation and disappointment from past patterns based on instinctual hope rather than sense.
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #201
- Mar 2, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

If you need a psychic to form an opinion on performance figures given freely by AMD, I'm a bit concerned. AMD demoed Vega, they chose the game(s) most friendly to their hardware (Doom), they stated the settings (ultra), they left the FPS counter up (knowing full well that it gives performance...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #194
- Mar 2, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards
G
Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

I'm not thinking it, I'm seeing it. It's right there. You can see it too. And yeah about AMD's engineers and their financial ability to produce competitive consumer chips, actually. Considering how massively Maxwell/Pascal thrash every derivative of GCN in efficiency (transistor count, power...
- Ghost of Cyrix
- Post #181
- Mar 2, 2017
- Forum: Graphics Cards

RESOURCES

Top Bottom