Gaming Hardware discussion (& Hardware Sales) thread

No more thermal paste TIM
tenor.gif
 
What’s up with only supporting 2666 ddr4??
 
I’m out of the loop in intel stuff but wasn’t the i7 8700k previously 8/16, so the “new” i9 is just an i-7 with higher clock speeds and the i7 no longer has hyperthreading?


Edit: never mind I see it was 6/12 like an r5. But still would it not have been better to stay 6/12 with higher boost clock than 8/0, and have I-9 be 8/16??


Dah fak is going on??
 
I’m out of the loop in intel stuff but wasn’t the i7 8700k previously 8/16, so the “new” i9 is just an i-7 with higher clock speeds and the i7 no longer has hyperthreading?

Edit: never mind I see it was 6/12 like an r5. But still would it not have been better to stay 6/12 with higher boost clock than 8/0, and have I-9 be 8/16??

Dah fak is going on??
No, the i7-8700k was a 6c/12t processor, and the i5-8600K was a 6c/6t processor.

The defining difference between the Core i5 & Core i7 series since their release has been that the i7's hyperthreaded while the i5's did not, so with this 9th Gen release on the LGA 1155 socket:
  • i9 has supplanted i7
  • i7 has supplanted i5
  • i5 occupies a new middle ground that previously didn't exist because there wasn't so many core offerings
That Intel 8th Gen was Intel's first core shift since the advent of their Core series itself in 2008. So this core shift was simply massive to overall performance, and now we've gotten yet another shift in the consecutive generation (which is actually just a generational refresh): no clearer indication of the impact of Ryzen. Simultaneously, the boost to Turbo clocks has been just as significant. Study the below:

f46383d5-4971-493f-9a9c-f448f301a243.png


If you start with Sandy Bridge, Intel walked up the All-Core Turbo from 3.6GHz to 4.4GHz (+800MHz) in a 6 year period. Suddenly, in the past 1 1/2 years, they have doubled the cores while increasing that all-core Turbo another +300MHz.

Simultaneously the progression of AAA gaming demands has slowed greatly. This 9900K is going to have an extremely long relevance. Expect it to grow as long in the tooth as that legendary Sandy Bridge 2700K itself, but with no manual overclocking required.
What’s up with only supporting 2666 ddr4??
That doesn't really matter anymore. What matters is how quickly you can run a certain stick of RAM on your motherboard, and the Intel motherboards maintain RAM overclocks well.
 
Last edited:
What is the recommended gaming wheel right now for Forza?
 
You have to appreciate that they didn't hide their methodology even if it was deliberately engineered to favor the Intel processors they were reviewing. The tech blogosphere did a wonderful job of calling it out.
 
Last edited:

I'm 18 minutes in, and yeah, this is demonstrating how by being transparent with their methodology they weren't able to fudge the independent reviewer community. This reinforces what I read yesterday at Tom's Hardware, IIRC, that mentioned the Hardware Unboxed video and other reviewer feedback.

For example, "median vs. average" was specified in the report. Steve asks, "Why not use average instead of median", when averages obviously make more sense for multiple test runs on a single processor versus, for example, comparing two different processor models by virtue of median performance across a single benchmark across hundreds or thousands of each model. The guy offers a bullshit defense, "I could make an argument for either one", and what else can he do? They didn't hide their unctuous tactics in the report. They just leveraged them.

Next, Steve asks him if they used the same coolers for the AMD as the Intel, and the co-founder says, "Yeah, I think they did," to which Steve immediately points out the Noctua NH-U14S cooler used for the Intel processors isn't compatible with the Threadripper, and apparently they didn't specify which cooler was used for that CPU, but later he reads back to the guy directly from PT's own document that PT tested the 2700X with the stock cooler. So that's another example of where they were transparent in their testing methodology for the Ryzen processors, and the reviewers caught it. Only whatever cooler they used for the Threadripper appears to be opaque because Steve isn't sure what it is.

At the end of the day I don't see why AMD fans are freaking out about R7-2700X vs. i9-9900K comparisons, anyway. Who cares if they're both 8c/16t processors? They're in completely different price classes! It's stupid to compare them.
  • AMD R7-2700X
    • $329 MSRP
    • $319 effective current market price (which is cresting; we were seeing $230-$270 sales all last month)
  • Intel i9-9900K
    • $488-$499 MSRP
    • $530 effective current market pre-order price
    • Does not include the price of the CPU cooler
    • General motherboard premium on LGA socket feature-for-feature

I do love this interview so far. Steve is amazing. Pure rational calm. This is why he's my #1 go-to among the video review community (while Anandtech is my #1 print source).


*Edit* LOL, so I clicked to follow-through to the actual YouTube video instead of continuing inline close to the half hour mark. I noticed there are 38 downvotes for the video. I think I may have an idea of the exact number of employees employed by Principled Technologies.
 
Last edited:
I'm 18 minutes in, and yeah, this is demonstrating how by being transparent with their methodology they weren't able to fudge the independent reviewer community. This reinforces what I read yesterday at Tom's Hardware, IIRC, that mentioned the Hardware Unboxed video and other reviewer feedback.

For example, "median vs. average" was specified in the report. Steve asks, "Why not use average instead of median", when averages obviously make more sense for multiple test runs on a single processor versus, for example, comparing two different processor models by virtue of median performance across a single benchmark across hundreds or thousands of each model. The guy offers a bullshit defense, "I could make an argument for either one", and what else can he do? They didn't hide their unctuous tactics in the report. They just leveraged them.

Next, Steve asks him if they used the same coolers for the AMD as the Intel, and the co-founder says, "Yeah, I think they did," to which Steve immediately points out the Noctua NH-U14S cooler used for the Intel processors isn't compatible with the Threadripper, and apparently they didn't specify which cooler was used for that CPU, but later he reads back to the guy directly from PT's own document that PT tested the 2700X with the stock cooler. So that's another example of where they were transparent in their testing methodology for the Ryzen processors, and the reviewers caught it. Only whatever cooler they used for the Threadripper appears to be opaque because Steve isn't sure what it is.

At the end of the day I don't see why AMD fans are freaking out about R7-2700X vs. i9-9900K comparisons, anyway. Who cares if they're both 8c/16t processors? They're in completely different price classes! It's stupid to compare them.
  • AMD R7-2700X
    • $329 MSRP
    • $319 effective current market price (which is cresting; we were seeing $230-$270 sales all last month)
  • Intel i9-9900K
    • $488-$499 MSRP
    • $530 effective current market pre-order price

I do love this interview so far. Steve is amazing. Pure rational calm. This is why he's my #1 go-to among the video review community (while Anandtech is my #1 print source).


On the median vs average, I wish Steve would have asked if they normally publish there results in median or average. There's a couple other things I wish Steve would have asked, but he did an amazing job in this interview.
There are some things with the testing methodology that don't pass the smell test, but I'm going to wait for responses from PT before casting judgement.
Hopefully they do do the same sort of interviews with any new hardware releases if things look funny, all the manufacturers have been getting away with this shit for too long.

You knew, I knew, the man on the moon knew that AMD fans were going to nitpick every single little thing. No matter what they would have done, AMD fanboys would have bellered.
What's great about all this is that we have competition now, 2 years we wouldn't be having this conversation. AMD has basically overtaken the main stream gamer CPU market. There's really no reason to buy an Intel chip that's under the $300 price point. Yeah there is the i5-8400 at the $200, but I'd still go with a Ryzen 7 1700 for the same price.
Personally I don't like Steve. I love the work Gamers Nexus does, but I can't stand his personality. The Cooler Master H500 is what tipped the scale for me. Kyle is getting that way as well and has gotten to the point where I don't Awesome Hardware anymore because of it.
Launch days I go to Hardware Unboxed, then Paul for videos. They usually give me the info I'm looking for. Outside of launch days, I really don't watch the big guys like Jay or Hardware Cunucks. I've found smaller guys like Tech Deals, Timmy Joe, and Science Studios provide more of the content I like.
 
On the median vs average, I wish Steve would have asked if they normally publish there results in median or average. There's a couple other things I wish Steve would have asked, but he did an amazing job in this interview.
There are some things with the testing methodology that don't pass the smell test, but I'm going to wait for responses from PT before casting judgement.
Hopefully they do do the same sort of interviews with any new hardware releases if things look funny, all the manufacturers have been getting away with this shit for too long.
Oh, they deliberately engineered the test to favor Intel. It's obvious that none of these Intel-favoring methodologies were mistakes or coincidences. They knew what they were doing. If they didn't, it's actually worse, because it indicates they're incompetent and don't understand what they're doing, but of course no intelligent observer would conclude that because the apparent mistakes/coincidences all favored Intel while Intel commissioned the report.
You knew, I knew, the man on the moon knew that AMD fans were going to nitpick every single little thing. No matter what they would have done, AMD fanboys would have bellered.
What's great about all this is that we have competition now, 2 years we wouldn't be having this conversation. AMD has basically overtaken the main stream gamer CPU market. There's really no reason to buy an Intel chip that's under the $300 price point. Yeah there is the i5-8400 at the $200, but I'd still go with a Ryzen 7 1700 for the same price.
Surprised to hear you say that. Definitely a strong argument for that, but I think for pure gamers who game at stock there is still a very strong argument for a lot of the Intel offerings across the board. Nevertheless, Ryzen has definitely disrupted their unbridled dominance by virtue of their hybrid "good enough for gaming" value-based approach that leans on editing superiority and assumptions towards superior longevity. Obviously it's user to user.
Personally I don't like Steve. I love the work Gamers Nexus does, but I can't stand his personality. The Cooler Master H500 is what tipped the scale for me. Kyle is getting that way as well and has gotten to the point where I don't Awesome Hardware anymore because of it.

Launch days I go to Hardware Unboxed, then Paul for videos. They usually give me the info I'm looking for. Outside of launch days, I really don't watch the big guys like Jay or Hardware Cunucks. I've found smaller guys like Tech Deals, Timmy Joe, and Science Studios provide more of the content I like.
I enjoy Paul's channel though I don't watch him much. I don't care for Steve at Hardware Unboxed, but I'll watch him because he does good work and will be the only one with a video that addresses a specific question that arises from me, despite that he sometimes bewilders me with his concluding opinions (as with his "I was wrong!" about the NVIDIA RTX series-- terrible). Agreed on Hardware Canucks. They've become too shilly.

Personality wise, my favorites are probably Bitwit and Luke from LTT, but personality doesn't drive my preferences with this stuff. It's their mindset in how they choose to approach and review the tech. Steve is a very no-frills guys like me, who doesn't care much about aesthetics, either, so I think that's why I favor his approach, and perhaps explains why you might disfavor him, relatively. So I'll go check out the Cooler Master H500 review.

Generally speaking, I spend more time with print.
 
There is a lot to process here and I’m gonna need to take some time to look into it but it does look shady given the details.

If infact the i-9 is superior in better metrics why lean the test towards the i-9 to give it more advantage? To make the price gap seem less important?

Basically to show even more superiority to make the price difference worth while?

Do any members here have an r7 2700x and ran any of these benchmarks themselves?

@jefferz , you still have r5 right not an r7 yet?
 
Oh, they deliberately engineered the test to favor Intel. It's obvious that none of these Intel-favoring methodologies were mistakes or coincidences. They knew what they were doing. If they didn't, it's actually worse, because it indicates they're incompetent and don't understand what they're doing, but of course no intelligent observer would conclude that because the apparent mistakes/coincidences all favored Intel while Intel commissioned the report.

They were definitely biased, no question. There's some things I'd like to see answered like why 64gb ram, why Ryzen memory was tested at a higher speed, etc.

Surprised to hear you say that. Definitely a strong argument for that, but I think for pure gamers who game at stock there is still a very strong argument for a lot of the Intel offerings across the board. Nevertheless, Ryzen has definitely disrupted their unbridled dominance by virtue of their hybrid "good enough for gaming" value-based approach that leans on editing superiority and assumptions towards superior longevity. Obviously it's user to user.

Just from the upgrade perspective, Ryzen to me makes it the obvious choice. If Intel continues their trend, the 10th series stuff will require a new board. Ryzen should have at least another release in their boards.
Intel still wins in IPC, there's no denying that. The AMD options aren't that far behind though.
Techdeals just did a video showing off Intel's IPC lead with the i3-8350k. In certain games that only use 2 or 4 cores like LOL, Overwatch, Rocket League, and other esports titles the 8350k will beat anything that AMD offers in the desktop platform. But when you switch to modern AAA games that use more than 4 cores, AMD stuff will beat the pants off of it. Even if I only played the games listed, would I buy the 8350k? Definitely not.
I don't think we're going to see anything game changing with the rest of this gen Intel lineup. Everything will probably get a 0.2ghz bump and that's about it. I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't soldered.
I still stand by the Ryzen 7 1700 being $200 is still one of the best deals of the century. 8 cores, 16 threads. Every chip will overclock to 3.8ghz on all cores with the stock RGB cooler. I really think it will last for years just like the i7-3770k has.

I enjoy Paul's channel though I don't watch him much. I don't care for Steve at Hardware Unboxed, but I'll watch him because he does good work and will be the only one with a video that addresses a specific question that arises from me, despite that he sometimes bewilders me with his concluding opinions (as with his "I was wrong!" about the NVIDIA RTX series-- terrible). Agreed on Hardware Canucks. They've become too shilly.

Personality wise, my favorites are probably Bitwit and Luke from LTT, but personality doesn't drive my preferences with this stuff. It's their mindset in how they choose to approach and review the tech. Steve is a very no-frills guys like me, who doesn't care much about aesthetics, either, so I think that's why I favor his approach, and perhaps explains why you might disfavor him, relatively. So I'll go check out the Cooler Master H500 review.

Generally speaking, I spend more time with print.

Hardware Unboxed is my go to because on launch day they usually have the most games tested.
I like Jason (Tech Deals) for the same reason you like Steve. He hates RGB, they're making videos to present the data, there's no bullshit, etc. Jason covers a lot of the lower end stuff that fills the void from the big guys. Jason has mentioned before that he's turned down custom loop sponsorship before because he has no interest in them.
I like Timmy Joe because he shows older stuff that's on the verge of playable. Like today's video was a 650ti on modern games like PUBG, Fortnite, GTA V, R6 Siege, and BF1.
 
I want the real deal. 200-300 budget.
Logitech G29 if you have a Playstation, Logitech G920 if you have an XBOX. Buy the add on shifter. They both work on PC.
From what I've read, stepping up to those is one of those times where spending more money on something drastically gives you a higher quality product for your money.
Mid to higher end stuff like this is a very niche market. Used wheels are usually a great option, check Craigslist. People are willing to sell it cheap because they've been trying to sell it for awhile.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top