Slaughtahouse

To your point, I am sure the community would understand and appreciate anyone who keeps the site running, even if in skeleton crew / value-engineered mode. Beyond any technical reasons that I dont understand, there are likely some other benefits (redundancy, services, maintenance) when hosting offsite . Pragmatically, you'll save the most operating costs (long term) if the new owner can find a way to host it locally but it comes with trade offs. AKA more effort. E mentioned in the post that he will help with the transition and support any value engineering from the awarded bidder. I know nothing about running a forum and don't want to take on that scope, but I'll remain active here until the lights turn off.

It still holds up very well! I dropped a screenshot in a separate thread from one of the premade scenarios. I don't have the time to commit to a full city but it's fun to mess around with.

GOG’s Preservation Program is the DRM-free store refocusing on the classics ARSTECHNICA.COM A firm literally named for “Good Old Games” is returning to that idea, spending its own resources to keep... For context, GoG has been working towards bringing classics games to modern platforms without mods, tweaks, or significant effort from the consumer. I can personally vouch for SimCity 3000. One of their “GOG Stamped” games. It runs on Windows 10 without issue. Further, if you follow their support page, they even provide a link to download a modified .exe to run the game at modern, wide screen resolutions. No manual ini file tweaks or hex editors needed. Just a few clicks and you’re good to go. For more info, you can read their press release here.

If you're at 4K, most games (AAA, high render cost, technically impressive games etc.) will immediately benefit from a GPU. CPU should only be prioritized at that resolution, in my opinion, if you're running into other system bottlenecks. Or in other words, its still not smooth enough after a GPU upgrade.

You're not the only one(s). I also game at 4K, just not exclusively (4K TV along side 1440p monitor) Simply moving from Zen 2 3800X to 5800X3D was very noticeable, across all games I play. If 9800X3D were on AM4, I'd do the swap today. With the platform change, I am content to wait until costs come down or performance increase.

Agreed that its to the point but I also see more value in CPU benchmarks with GPU bottlenecks removed (as much as humanly possible). These should always be treated as the most extreme examples but a users experience (today) will certainly vary. Anything less than a 4090, you're guaranteed to see less of an improvement on the average framerate.

Side discussion (not challenging or questioning your point quoted): Guru3D's charts aren't the most effective at communicating the experience when upgrading a CPU for gaming in my opinion. The charts lack information including 1% lows and frame persistence / consistency. Other sources like Digital Foundry, Gamers Nexus, and HWUB provide more necessary context to help consumers make informed decisions. Eurogamer's article, sourced by Digital Foundry, has a very user friendly graph (please enable functional cookies) to compare lowest 5% and 1%. Even at 4K, we have differentials that are 25%+ improvements vs. relevant comparables (Raptor Lake, Arrow Lake , Zen 4, Zen 3 etc.) depending on the title. Ill share two examples from very different style of games. CP2077 first and CS-2 following. Both at 4K, comparing 1% lows. My point is, if you're considering an upgrade, check multiple sources and look specifically at the software you prefer or intend to run. Sometimes averages from one source don't tell the full story. Page 4 | AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D review: obliterating the competition WWW.EUROGAMER.NET The Digital Foundry CPU review of the Intel AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D, with the test rig, content creation benchmarks and much more.

That’s actually pretty interesting. I have a hammer drill and oscillating tool, both m18 Milwaukee. USB-C is hella more convenient and likely lighter but the M18 tool probably has a lot more power (voltage) and more versatile. Appreciate both recommendations Gotta read up on this m18 version.

@UltraMega Correct me if I am wrong but did you buy one of those portable / battery air dusters? I recall having a discussion here some months ago. Curious how it’s holding up. I realized I need to winterize some water lines (remove water before it freezes) and figured I’d buy something that can work for PCs too and I don’t want to buy canned air or an air compressor.

Done and done! Nice catch, I was subtracting the values in the wrong order. It now shows correctly

Sounds frustrating… Let us know how it is! I haven’t played CoD since Black Ops (1). So I am a little out of touch but was tempted to resign Gamepass to give it a go.

I’ve made some small tweaks to the language. It’s not as short as Id like it but I feel it’s clearer. Looking for feedback here if there is better verbiage. - For all columns highlighting the % of the specification (when compared to the flagship of that generation), I removed “difference” and revised to “Available (vs. flagship)”. Since “difference” wasn’t objectively accurate and I want to highlight how much of a given specification is available or remaining after a graphics card is cutdown or modified by Nvidia vs the flagship of that gen. Example: A 4080 Super’s CUDA core count is effectively 63% of a 4090’s CUDA core count. 10240 are available out of the possible 16348. I also included a new column at the very end which highlights the average, absolute difference. In other words, it tells you much a card is cut down. So if the average available specs of RTX 4080 Super is 62% (CUDA cores , bus width, RT cores, Tensor cores, SMUs, ROPs etc.) vs. a 4090, the average absolute difference is 38%. Just a different way to express the same information. Really comes down to if you’re a glass half full or half empty kinda person XD

Sure but other hardware is very comparable, more efficient, cheaper, or all the above. The good news is that if you’re willing to “invest” in the new platform, you’re still getting a very performant system. Just wouldn’t be my first pick without knowing how the platform will shake out all things considered. Unless budget was of no concern and my workload was predominantly ones that favoured Arrowlake. Guru3Ds highlights these wins very clearly. Review: Core Ultra 9 285K Processor: Blazing Speed, But Energy Efficiency Falls Short (Page 8) WWW.GURU3D.COM Intel today unleashes its Core Ultra 200 series processors, we start with two reviews, this one will entail the...

It's not a complete disaster but why be a first adopter on these technologies if they perform by and large similar or worse than competitors that are cheaper, more efficient? The only reason really would be is that you simply have a preference for Intel and you want to buy into a new platform for X reasons. That's likely a really small group. Most users will likely just go to LGA 1700 or AM5 because it's cheaper, more performant, and/or has more long term potential (AM5).

At face value it’s disappointing but hopefully this is one of the first steps to change course. It’s not all doom and gloom and its clear certain work loads reap benefits. Do we know if the socket (LGA 1851) will go beyond the typical two CPU generations? That’s really why Zen was so successful. AM4 supported 3 generations and 2 mid gen uplifts (2000 series, 5000 X3D) all on one platform. Ignoring any investments in my current system, the question I would ask myself “why would I opt for an Intel platform today when AMD platform and offerings are more flexible (workstation 9950X / gaming 9800 X3D) and will likely last longer?” Hope they improve on this front to keep the market competitive and innovative.

That reminds me, I’ll add MSRP!

Hi all, I've drafted a Google Sheet to document various desktop, gaming Nvidia graphics cards. Items italicized are rumoured or unconfirmed specs, products. The reason for doing this was to help provide a quick overview of a comparison between graphics cards and their GPUs (size, features etc.) for discussion. This is a live file that will be continuously updated over time. Subject to change: As of today, you'll see two (2) tabs. One (1) providing an overview of all the detailed specifications for the RTX series. Another tab quickly pulling that data to outline the difference (%) in specifications between the flagship graphics card of a specific series (20, 30, 40 series etc.) and all the other cards of that series. I've opted to draw the comparison against the flagship graphics card vs. the GPU since some GPUs (full dies) never make it to products. Example: There is no RTX series graphics card that features a full Ada Lovelace GPU (AD102). The RTX 4090 is used as the baseline (100%) and all other GPUs in the 40 series are compared against. A column has been added to average the difference between all the specs; No weight has been provided to each spec. See the RTX Series sheet for detailed comparisons and differences between specifications like core count. All specifications have been manually sourced from websites including but not limited to: Videocardz and Techpowerup.

https://videocardz.com/pixel/nvidia-ceo-confirms-there-was-a-design-flaw-in-blackwell-chip-now-fixed

Since I am in sheets / excel all the time, thought it'd be interesting to make one to highlight the differentials between GPUs. Edit: Sheet now updated with info from various sources including Videocardz and Techpowerup. Items italicized are rumoured and to be confirmed (TBC).

2024-10-20_Fall Preview Update to the list for noteworthy titles releasing this fall I'll follow up with an edit to embedded it in this post (requires formatting). Edit: Excerpt from the sheet below of notable titles to be released from now until winter holidays. For all details, see the Google Sheet (post #2).

Reminds me to update the sheet Small correction: CoD: BO6 comes out Oct 25th (5 days from now).

Silent Hill 2 4K (XeSS Ultra Quality), Ultra Settings, RT Enabled (Hardware Lumen) ~10 hrs in. Horror is cranking up to 11.

Nothing more to add to the discussion above. Simply adding the latest table from Videocardz to compare all rumoured specs: Source: https://videocardz.com/newz/rumors-suggest-nvidia-could-launch-rtx-5070-in-february-rtx-5060-series-already-in-march If we want to quickly compare against past few gens... Ada: https://videocardz.net/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090 Ampere: https://videocardz.net/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-ti Turing: https://videocardz.net/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080ti

70 series was never mid and that’s the Nvidia effect. 90 was halo / flagship 80 was high / enthusiast 60 was always mid 50 was budget 40 was low 70 series dating back to Fermi (470, 570) we’re always for that segment between mid and high. A sweet spot for perf and IQ. They always were an upsell for the mid range. Spend the extra $50 or $100 and get the bigger chip, wider bus, more vram etc. Going from 70 to 80 was typically harder to justify and there was less value ($/perf). A 12GB card in 2025 is not sweet spot. It’s the min. needed for the features they’re advertising like RT at resolutions like 1440p. Agree with everything you’re saying, except I believe the 3070 at $500 (theoretical) MSRP was as close as we got in a long time. So tired of these games from Nvidia. Hopefully after the data center clients are saturated with a metric tonne of Hopper and Blackwell GPUs, they pull back on spend and the market returns back to normal. I’m still ready to “side grade” my 7900 XTX to Blackwell, but I aint going below 16gb of VRAM. Still happy with what I have but more and more games will be built on RT and I feel it’s now time to jump back to Nvidia. If a 4070 Ti is matching or beating a 7900 XTX in RT heavy loads, safe to say a 5070 / Ti will be near or above 4080 Super RT perf. A 5080 would be perfect but like everyone knows… it looks terrible on paper. AGAIN…. Let’s see how this all shakes out but not looking good for enthusiasts or budget minded gamers