UltraMega

AMD's stock has gone up 21.5% in the last month. Seems like Investors are anticipating some real competition in AI from AMD. Nvidia's stock is also up by 11% over the last month. Intel's stock is up 15.3% over the last month. Could be the start of a new revolution in AI hardware. Once we have all three of these companies consistently able to compete with each other with good AI hardware, it's going to be very interesting times.

Why do you need that?

https://www.techspot.com/news/101435-amd-latest-radeon-rx-7600-xt-double-vram.html If AMD launched a few more cards like this, they might have a good answer to the Super cards.

Less than $300? That seems pretty high. $150 should be enough for a good Intel board. Just avoid ASRock.

I think it's highly likely that AMD will lower prices.

Why not use a drip if you're using a kettle?

How do you guys determine the used prices? Do you guys usually sell your GPUs on Ebay? I feel like it is absolutely essential to be effectively upgrading when you are in the high end.

haha yea I guess that makes sense.

Hmm, I never would have guessed that. I wonder why that is.

KInda a side note that your comment made me think about, what do you guys usually do with your old GPU when you upgrade? For a long time now I have been in the habit of selling my old GPU right after I get a new one, so the price to upgrade is only ever as high as the difference between what I can sell my old one for and what the new one costs. Because of Covid/mining, when I sold my 1080Ti and upgraded to an RX6800, I actually made a little bit of money (like $10). After that I sold my RX6800 for $400 and bought the 7900XT for $800. Do you guys do this sort of thing?

Instant coffee? At home? Instant coffee is for camping, isn't it? I have a cold brew maker, which is really just a pitcher with a coffee filter in it, so I drink cold brew at home. Supposedly cold brew is less acidic than hot coffee.

You can apparently still download and install SteamOS: SteamOS (steampowered.com) These devices are just small AMD (usually) PCs with laptop CPUs and GPUs. Windows works normally on them. No idea if other manufacturers would be able to just ship SteamOS devices if they wanted to, but I don't think of it as a real selling point. Valve has refined SteamOS on the Steam Deck to an impressive degree, but it's still a long way off from Windows.

I agree, definitely not an innovative game. I think steam awards go out based on total players and playtime to some degree, and a lot of people played Starfield for a good amount of time before realizing it was pretty disappointing.

I just started playing Mars First Logistics, an early access game on Steam. Super fun. Game is only like 300MBs but the map is huge. Supports seamless coop.

Thanks E. My stance on this is that it's not really an issue because any game that runs well on 7 should also run well on 10, with the exception of games that were designed for XP and had been "ported" to 7. Since any of these particular games could be considered retro games, they don't need enthusiasts level hardware just to run today, and that's what I meant by my earlier comment about retro vs enthusiasts. Poorly worded at the time. If anyone does know of a game that consistently runs fine on 7 but not 10, I'd be curious to know what it is. I think some of you may be forgetting just how hard Microsoft pushed to make 10 perform as well as 7, and with similar hardware requirements.

Windows 10 ran fine on my mom's old core 2 Due E6600. Even played games on it. Windows 10 will do a lot more with the cpu when it's idle than windows 7 will tho. I'm not saying performance is the same, but it's not that bad. Win7 and 10 are pretty similar, or at least the earlier versions of 10. Windows really hasn't gotten that much more taxing on hardware in and of itself since Vista. Retro gaming aside, I wouldn't be surprised if 10 runs better than 7 and Vista for a lot of things. Edit: actually performance is virtually the same, at least for games that don't have compatibility issues. So I guess if I have a point, it's that almost all of the games someone would want to play on Steam on windows 7 would also work fine on 10. I'm sure there are a few exceptions, but they should be rare. Since we're talking about software here I think it's a lot more important that people can still play the older games vs use vintage hardware, as you put it. Sure running two 4870s is neat, but hardly required just to play these older games.

I simply mean Retro hardware is old and weak, which is the opposite of enthusiast hardware. I'm not saying people can't be into both. Lets move on.

OK? Are we done here yet? Is this level of scrutiny really required? I was hardly saying anything here at all and it snowballed simply because of the technicalities.

I was responding to Pio's claim that there is a "ton" of hardware locked to windows 7. That simply isn't true.

I don't really have a perspective on this. I simply stated that any PC that runs 7 can run 10. I have a few opinions about 7 vs 10 but I'm not trying to debate any of them. I was unaware of the issues about 64 bit specifically with these specific CPUs, but it doesn't make what I said wrong either since they can still run windows 10, just not 64-bit. Retro and Enthusiast are opposite end of the spectrum anyway.

I never personally owned any AMD CPUs back then, but again the CPUs in question can run 10, just not the 64-bit version of 10. However, it does seem like a pretty rare occurance to me since 64-bit didn't even really take off until the windows 10 era. Can't imagine there are many people affected by this issue. I'd call that rare. I'd be curious just to know what would happen if you tried to upgrade from 7 to 10 64-bit on one of those CPUs instead of doing a clean install. I'm guessing it still doesn't work, but maybe it makes an exception for upgrade installs.

All I said was any hardware that can do 7 can do 10. I didn't say anything about all hardware that can do 7 64-bit being able to do 10 64-bit. Makes sense that there might be a few very unique CPUs that can't do the 64-bit version of 10, but can still do the 32-bit just fine. I my experience 7 and 10 run about the same on old hardware. Definitely differences in what they do while idle tho. Been quite a while since I used 7 extensively.

The instruction set you mentioned is only required for 64-bit. perhaps that particular CPU specifically is in an extremely rare spot of being able to run XP-64 bit but only 10 32-bit, but it can still run 10, just not 64-bit. The other CPUs you mentioned can all run 10 64-bit no problem. I also think I was remembering running into issues installing 10 64-bit on a P4, which was later upgraded to a core 2 duo. P4 still worked with 32-bit tho, and subsequently so did the Core 2 Duo.

I'm not arguing 10 is great for retro gamers, but it's a fact that any PC that can run 7 can also run 10. I mealy mentioned this and you insisted it wasn't true, yet I know that it is so I am simply trying to get you to see that. If you want to send me your 939 board, I'll install windows 10 on it.

I get that, but there is nothing that will run on 7 but not 10 after doing an upgrade install. Meaning upgrading a machine with 7 on it to 10. Whatever games are in the machine will still run after the upgrade. A clean install might be different. Some games might have some very specific bugs on 10 that don't exist on 7, and vice versa. I'm not saying there are zero issues for retro gamers, I'm just saying any machine running 7 can be upgraded to 10.