Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [pcgames] Zen engineering samples in the wild. Units up to the 32 core are being tested.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[pcgames] Zen engineering samples in the wild. Units up to the 32 core are being tested. - Page 21

post #201 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

I think you might need to take another look at what motivated you to respond to Master_shake's post.

He provided a spurious rebuttal to a tactless, but essentially accurate, post. My response was a counter to a statement I found to be fairly ridiculous...not because it wasn't technically true, but because it was utterly beside the point and didn't address what it purported to be a response to.

The bottom line is that Vishera is, and has generally always been, a poor choice for a games where the CPU actually matters. It had it's niche, but gaming wasn't it. It can generally game well enough, but you were still silly if you built a new system around an FX explicitly for gaming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

You responded to a "spurious" post with one of your own..... ( yes you did, no matter what lengths you go to to try to justify it).

Truth , transparency and fairness are what motivated me to respond to your post.

I believe that you believe that.

However, your interpretation doesn't make my statements inaccurate or misleading, nor does it make the statement I originally responded to any less spurious.

Fair enough smile.gif
Ryzen Shine!
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1800X @ 4125mhz 1.432 Volts MSI X370 Titanium   Fury  G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin... 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 pro Hp 1260 I liquid unobtanium Koolance 480mm radiator, 39... Win 7 HP/Winspy 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
24" hp @ 1900x1200 Logitech G19 PC power and cooling 910 watt silencer Thermaltake P5 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech MX 518 fUnc industries 
  hide details  
Reply
Ryzen Shine!
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1800X @ 4125mhz 1.432 Volts MSI X370 Titanium   Fury  G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin... 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 pro Hp 1260 I liquid unobtanium Koolance 480mm radiator, 39... Win 7 HP/Winspy 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
24" hp @ 1900x1200 Logitech G19 PC power and cooling 910 watt silencer Thermaltake P5 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech MX 518 fUnc industries 
  hide details  
Reply
post #202 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikjadoon View Post

  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I apologize. I misunderstood your tone. frown.gif

A few points:

See, I don't think a lot of 120/144Hz owners know that, though (or they didn't realize it until after they bought it and started testing). They know it's "twice" as hard as 60Hz (hopefully), but they likely presume its again just GPU horsepower, like going from 1080p to 2160p. But, no...your CPU is actually quite important, too.

Like, I imagine, if we did a poll of "average PC gamers" and we asked, "when should you consider upgrading your CPU?" I don't think many of them would realize that "if I want to play at 120Hz/144Hz @ 120/144FPS" is a very valid answer. They'd probably just say "if I play strategy games", "if I want to increase my benchmark scores", "if I edit video or pictures", etc.

You know, I'm curious how much of a niche it is. I bet more than a dollar that more people own 120Hz monitors than people who own 4K 60Hz monitors. Yet most websites were happy to add 4K testing and I've hardly seen a single reputable review site even begin to address the 120Hz population (for either CPU or GPU reviews).

---

Sure--I'm working within the constraints of the data provided. An average is not ideal, either, though. Those minimums could be happening every few seconds, yet only occupy ~30-40ms of the 1000ms in a single second, thus removing any influence they would have on the average (even if the playing experience was nearly objectively worse). FPS over time would be preferable, but we didn't have that. I agree: a few dips to 27FPS are not bad. But, how many were there? From my quick Google'ing, nobody is giving FPS over time with CPU benchmarks! frown.gif Why?.... That would be quite helpful..

Err, I agree. FX processors are not bad or terrible, either. It's simply another decent option, especially at 60Hz. And I agree; there are few cases when one should be upgrading their CPU yearly (on a price/performance over time metric, excluding selling old parts) or even once every two years.

I completely agree with you at 60Hz. But, I think the 120/144Hz users are a silent, but growing population and there isn't enough rigorous analysis on that kind of system performance, unlike the cumulative books written online about 4K performance. 4K sold a lot of ads, but not a lot of panels.

 

 

I agree entirely. I am honestly surprised that we don't see more 1080/1440p testing done at 100+ FR-capable versus 4k @ 60Hz. 2160p is an absolute niche at the moment where higher-refresh-rate monitors are becoming more popular due to the success of the pro-gaming scene, and people are discovering the aesthetic and performance benefits. That means that we should only see adoption rate improve.

 

I definitely sympathise with the 144Hz warriors, as my next monitor will be 34" +, Ultrawide, curved, 4k @ 120Hz. Whichever company can put that product out without charging multiple children's souls, an ounce of unmelting ice, and three drops of the elder blood will have my money in their pockets so fast they'll think I stole it.

     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4.0 GHz 1.37v o/s  Biostar X370 GT7 Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB HBM2 G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) @ 32... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Biostar M200-240 240GB m.2 SATA SSD (Win) Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (Linux) SanDisk Ultra II 480GB SSD (Games) Seagate 2TB SSHD (Storage) 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD RW Swiftech H220-X2 Swiftech Komodo RX-ECO Vega Water Block XSPC EX240 Rad 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Gentle Typhoon 120mm x4 Ubuntu 17.10 w/ custom kernel Windows 10 Pro Pixio PX277 27" 1440p 144Hz DP-Adaptive Sync w... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
JAR-OWL J1 Rainbow LED Mechanical SeaSonic X-Series 1050w Gold+ Corsair 760T Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Razer Firefly Plantronics Rig 500e Gaming Headset Marantz Pro MPH-1 Monitoring Headphones S.M.S.L SD-793II Audio DAC + Headphone Amplifier 
Other
Xbox One Controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4790k @ 4.6GHz Asrock Z97 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 1070 SC Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x8GB) @ 2133 10-10-10-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 530 Series 480GB SSD Seagate 2TB SSHD LG DVD RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 40" Vizio HDTV HP Generic EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650w 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide 300R Logitech Generic HyperX Cloud 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6300 @ 4.3GHz 1.35v Biostar TA970 v5.3 MSI HD 6950 2GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z 16GB (4x4GB) 1600 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Cryorig H5 Ultimate Corsair AF120 (White LED) x3 Corsair AF140 (White LED) x2 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2440L Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 EVGA B2 850w Corsair 300R 
Mouse
SteelSeries Rival 300 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4.0 GHz 1.37v o/s  Biostar X370 GT7 Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB HBM2 G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) @ 32... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Biostar M200-240 240GB m.2 SATA SSD (Win) Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (Linux) SanDisk Ultra II 480GB SSD (Games) Seagate 2TB SSHD (Storage) 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD RW Swiftech H220-X2 Swiftech Komodo RX-ECO Vega Water Block XSPC EX240 Rad 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Gentle Typhoon 120mm x4 Ubuntu 17.10 w/ custom kernel Windows 10 Pro Pixio PX277 27" 1440p 144Hz DP-Adaptive Sync w... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
JAR-OWL J1 Rainbow LED Mechanical SeaSonic X-Series 1050w Gold+ Corsair 760T Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Razer Firefly Plantronics Rig 500e Gaming Headset Marantz Pro MPH-1 Monitoring Headphones S.M.S.L SD-793II Audio DAC + Headphone Amplifier 
Other
Xbox One Controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4790k @ 4.6GHz Asrock Z97 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 1070 SC Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x8GB) @ 2133 10-10-10-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 530 Series 480GB SSD Seagate 2TB SSHD LG DVD RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 40" Vizio HDTV HP Generic EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650w 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide 300R Logitech Generic HyperX Cloud 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6300 @ 4.3GHz 1.35v Biostar TA970 v5.3 MSI HD 6950 2GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z 16GB (4x4GB) 1600 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Cryorig H5 Ultimate Corsair AF120 (White LED) x3 Corsair AF140 (White LED) x2 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2440L Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 EVGA B2 850w Corsair 300R 
Mouse
SteelSeries Rival 300 
  hide details  
Reply
post #203 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperZan View Post

I agree entirely. I am honestly surprised that we don't see more 1080/1440p testing done at 100+ FR-capable versus 4k @ 60Hz. 2160p is an absolute niche at the moment where higher-refresh-rate monitors are becoming more popular due to the success of the pro-gaming scene, and people are discovering the aesthetic and performance benefits. That means that we should only see adoption rate improve.

I definitely sympathise with the 144Hz warriors, as my next monitor will be 34" +, Ultrawide, curved, 4k @ 120Hz. Whichever company can put that product out without charging multiple children's souls, an ounce of unmelting ice, and three drops of the elder blood will have my money in their pockets so fast they'll think I stole it.

4k is certainly more popular than high refresh rate monitors. Though I'm not Nostradamus I can see a ratio of 5:1 (4k to 120hz+) in less than a year being very likely, if not already the case. Resolution has typically always dominated the market and I don't see it changing. My next monitor will be both 4k and 120hz+, but I'm not going to go to a lower res at this point for a faster refresh rate. I'm not gaming competitively and the resolution is way more beneficial to me.
The Struggle (4k)
(20 items)
 
File Server
(12 items)
 
Lenovo G50-45
(6 items)
 
CPUGraphicsRAMOS
Athlon II X2 250u Nvidia 6150SE  2gb DDR3 1066mhz Windows 10 Home 64 bit 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
AMD A8-6410 AMD R5 Crucial Ballistix 8GB DDR3L 1866 CAS10 Crucial BX100 250gb 
Optical DriveOS
DVD Windows 10 Home 
  hide details  
Reply
The Struggle (4k)
(20 items)
 
File Server
(12 items)
 
Lenovo G50-45
(6 items)
 
CPUGraphicsRAMOS
Athlon II X2 250u Nvidia 6150SE  2gb DDR3 1066mhz Windows 10 Home 64 bit 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
AMD A8-6410 AMD R5 Crucial Ballistix 8GB DDR3L 1866 CAS10 Crucial BX100 250gb 
Optical DriveOS
DVD Windows 10 Home 
  hide details  
Reply
post #204 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post


Indeed, if you absolutely need to ensure a certain minimum frame rate, fo high refresh displays or VR, CPU speed is often important. This niche market is already buying the absolute best lightly threaded performance they can get, and rightly so.

Most people aren't nearly so picky. I'm more discerning than most and I can't really tell the difference between any of my remotely recent desktops when it comes to gaming, in and of it self, with the fastest single GPU I own. Certain multi-tasking scenarios that involve gaming (such as streaming/recording) can certainly reveal distinct differences though.

Whoops, missed this post. frown.gif

As mentioned above, though, I'm not so sure it is a niche market. And, does that niche market already buy those components? Why would they? I've not seen a single benchmark ever that showed 120Hz performance comparison between CPUs and GPUs. Not a single one. Not to harp on the point so much, hahaha, but I've already seen 4K benchmarked about 10 times already today just by browsing threads and some reviews.

With 4K, you can be more sure. The mantra is very clear, "buy the fastest GPU(s) you can." With 120Hz...in our collective mind of enthusiasts, I don't think there is a clear mantra. Plenty of people still talk about/use 4c/4t CPUs for 144Hz; for some games, sure, no problem. However, for some other games, it's quite difficult if not impossible---unless of course you overclock.

Hmm....I think it's different, though, when you are playing at 120Hz. Everything is far smoother to begin with, so even frame drops to 60FPS (I know, haha, that's a "frame drop") are noticeably less smooth.

For anybody with a 60Hz monitor, definitely. Any more FPS and you just get more tearing, at best.
The 2013 Build
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
--- SOLD --- --- SOLD ---  --- SOLD --- --- SOLD --- 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB ASUS DRW-24B3ST (24X DVD burner) Noctua NH-U14S w/ NH-T1 TIM Windows 10 Pro (x64) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VG248QE w/ Lightboost @ 120Hz Ducky Shine III (MX Brown w/ Red backlights) Kingwin LZP-1000 (1000W) PSU Corsair Carbide Air 540 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus (Precision Control model) - Sta... 
  hide details  
Reply
The 2013 Build
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
--- SOLD --- --- SOLD ---  --- SOLD --- --- SOLD --- 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB ASUS DRW-24B3ST (24X DVD burner) Noctua NH-U14S w/ NH-T1 TIM Windows 10 Pro (x64) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VG248QE w/ Lightboost @ 120Hz Ducky Shine III (MX Brown w/ Red backlights) Kingwin LZP-1000 (1000W) PSU Corsair Carbide Air 540 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus (Precision Control model) - Sta... 
  hide details  
Reply
post #205 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperZan View Post

I agree entirely. I am honestly surprised that we don't see more 1080/1440p testing done at 100+ FR-capable versus 4k @ 60Hz. 2160p is an absolute niche at the moment where higher-refresh-rate monitors are becoming more popular due to the success of the pro-gaming scene, and people are discovering the aesthetic and performance benefits. That means that we should only see adoption rate improve.

I definitely sympathise with the 144Hz warriors, as my next monitor will be 34" +, Ultrawide, curved, 4k @ 120Hz. Whichever company can put that product out without charging multiple children's souls, an ounce of unmelting ice, and three drops of the elder blood will have my money in their pockets so fast they'll think I stole it.

Agreed. frown.gif I see 120Hz and 144Hz growing for exactly the same reasons. Kind of like high resolution: once you use it, it's hard to go back down. But, I see little benchmarking and just a smattering of YouTube videos. But, well, everyone likes to talk about the halo product and for now, that's 4K. frown.gif

hahaha, right? If I had the GPU power to push 4K @ 120Hz (now or the foreseeable future), I'm not you could pry me off the computer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoloCamo View Post

4k is certainly more popular than high refresh rate monitors. Though I'm not Nostradamus I can see a ratio of 5:1 (4k to 120hz+) in less than a year being very likely, if not already the case. Resolution has typically always dominated the market and I don't see it changing. My next monitor will be both 4k and 120hz+, but I'm not going to go to a lower res at this point for a faster refresh rate. I'm not gaming competitively and the resolution is way more beneficial to me.

Really? Costs will go down, of course, but 4K monitors are still $300+ and a $250 GPU will only give you 35-65FPS on low (from the quick GTX 1060 4K benchmarks I looked at).

I think you'd hinge on the fact that the fidelity of 4K is enough for gamers to either #1, be OK with sizeable frame drops and low settings at the same time or #2 upgrade to much costlier GPUs (the GTX 1070 runs $400+).

In other words, if you have $600 to spend on a new GPUs and a new monitor: if you go for 4K @ 60Hz, you are getting bottom-of-the-rung performance & graphical settings & panel quality with excellent resolution. If you go 1080p @ 120Hz: decent performance, decent graphical settings, decent panel quality, low "lag", and weak resolution.

That does not sound like a big market, even in a year. IMO, 1440p @ 120Hz has a chance.

I wish the Steam Hardware Survey would include refresh rates. frown.gif


---

Why do you say resolution has typically dominated the market? I think only recently have consumers actually had a choice between high refresh rate vs high resolution density. Before, it was only resolution density. Unless, you're talking about CRTs? That is too far removed from current games and performance, though, IMO. If you have more recent data, I'd be interested.
Edited by ikjadoon - 7/26/16 at 11:42am
The 2013 Build
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
--- SOLD --- --- SOLD ---  --- SOLD --- --- SOLD --- 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB ASUS DRW-24B3ST (24X DVD burner) Noctua NH-U14S w/ NH-T1 TIM Windows 10 Pro (x64) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VG248QE w/ Lightboost @ 120Hz Ducky Shine III (MX Brown w/ Red backlights) Kingwin LZP-1000 (1000W) PSU Corsair Carbide Air 540 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus (Precision Control model) - Sta... 
  hide details  
Reply
The 2013 Build
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
--- SOLD --- --- SOLD ---  --- SOLD --- --- SOLD --- 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB ASUS DRW-24B3ST (24X DVD burner) Noctua NH-U14S w/ NH-T1 TIM Windows 10 Pro (x64) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VG248QE w/ Lightboost @ 120Hz Ducky Shine III (MX Brown w/ Red backlights) Kingwin LZP-1000 (1000W) PSU Corsair Carbide Air 540 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus (Precision Control model) - Sta... 
  hide details  
Reply
post #206 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikjadoon View Post

As mentioned above, though, I'm not so sure it is a niche market.

Those that are seriously looking for 120 fps + as a minimum frame rate are absolutely a niche market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikjadoon View Post

And, does that niche market already buy those components? Why would they?

If I were looking for such minimum frame rates, I'd be running the absolute fastest 6700k setup I could manage (I'd be shooting for 4.6-4.8GHz and be using the fastest DDR4 I could afford to bin), because I know what I already have isn't quite sufficient.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikjadoon View Post

I've not seen a single benchmark ever that showed 120Hz performance comparison between CPUs and GPUs. Not a single one. Not to harp on the point so much, hahaha, but I've already seen 4K benchmarked about 10 times already today just by browsing threads and some reviews.

It doesn't need to be a 120Hz comparison specifically, because most benchmarks published don't feature any sort of frame rate cap.

It's pretty much a given that the CPU that pushes out the most frames in low resolution/CPU bound scenarios is the one that is going to do best for those looking to run high refresh rates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikjadoon View Post

Hmm....I think it's different, though, when you are playing at 120Hz. Everything is far smoother to begin with, so even frame drops to 60FPS (I know, haha, that's a "frame drop") are noticeably less smooth.

Back when I was still on CRTs I usually gamed at 120-170Hz. I had a few games that I could run at extreme frame rates, but to be honest, I've always been pretty content with ~60fps, even in those situations where I can percieve a difference between 60 and much higher frame rates. The high refresh rate was simply to avoid flickering, which isn't a problem on LCDs...so I've mostly used 60Hz LCDs since ~2006 when I dumped my last high-end Trinitron.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikjadoon View Post

For anybody with a 60Hz monitor, definitely. Any more FPS and you just get more tearing, at best.

If you aren't using some form of syncing you will always be experiencing some degree of tearing, and it's generally most noticeable at low frame rates or those close to your refresh rate. Vastly higher frame rates aren't so bad, because the frames aren't likely to be different enough from each other to be really distracting.

I generally don't run any sort of vsync or frame rate cap; tearing doesn't bother me as much as the added input lag and potential hitching that using vsync often entails...though such latency decreases as frame rate increases, so if I did have a 120Hz+ display and a setup that could consistently push 120fps in the games I was playing, I'd probably use vsync in most titles.
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #207 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

Those that are seriously looking for 120 fps + as a minimum frame rate are absolutely a niche market.
If I were looking for such minimum frame rates, I'd be running the absolute fastest 6700k setup I could manage (I'd be shooting for 4.6-4.8GHz and be using the fastest DDR4 I could afford to bin), because I know what I already have isn't quite sufficient.
It doesn't need to be a 120Hz comparison specifically, because most benchmarks published don't feature any sort of frame rate cap.

It's pretty much a given that the CPU that pushes out the most frames in low resolution/CPU bound scenarios is the one that is going to do best for those looking to run high refresh rates.
Back when I was still on CRTs I usually gamed at 120-170Hz. I had a few games that I could run at extreme frame rates, but to be honest, I've always been pretty content with ~60fps, even in those situations where I can percieve a difference between 60 and much higher frame rates. The high refresh rate was simply to avoid flickering, which isn't a problem on LCDs...so I've mostly used 60Hz LCDs since ~2006 when I dumped my last high-end Trinitron.
If you aren't using some form of syncing you will always be experiencing some degree of tearing, and it's generally most noticeable at low frame rates or those close to your refresh rate. Vastly higher frame rates aren't so bad, because the frames aren't likely to be different enough from each other to be really distracting.

I generally don't run any sort of vsync or frame rate cap; tearing doesn't bother me as much as the added input lag and potential hitching that using vsync often entails...though such latency decreases as frame rate increases, so if I did have a 120Hz+ display and a setup that could consistently push 120fps in the games I was playing, I'd probably use vsync in most titles.

I'll be honest. I'm too tired to quote as nicely as you, so I'll just go down the points. frown.gif

Sure, 120FPS as a minimum, yes, niche. But, even 60FPS feels "laggy" on a 120Hz monitor. That's the entire reason I commented, that it was an "academic" distinction if it was more than 60FPS.

Sure. I didn't mention anything about your setup (or wait, did I? I didn't mean to); I don't know your needs or preferences for games.

True, they usually don't cap the frames. But, here's the issue: many benchmarks are done in GPU-bound situations. That may be intentional, but I'm surprised not even one review site caters to the 120/144Hz crowd, which is almost always a CPU-bound situation. That's all I'm saying; sure, let 95% of review sites show how this $450 GPU is faster than this $250 GPU. I'm cool with that. But I'd like more reputable testing, even just 5%, for CPU-bound situations.

These GPU-bound situations are exactly where that "RAM doesn't matter" mantra began. It was true for 60Hz, but not for 120Hz.

Err, see, that's what I'm talking about, "It's pretty much a given that the CPU that pushes out the most frames in low resolution/CPU bound scenarios is the one that is going to do best for those looking to run high refresh rates." Two issues: I do not think many PC gamers realize when they have a CPU bottleneck vs a GPU bottleneck. Then, CPU bottlenecks are becoming more common as GPUs target 4K, while most individuals still have lower-end monitors.

I'm not saying you don't know this. You get it, maybe because of your previous experiences with CRTs which was the last time people actually could play around with refresh rates. I'm talking about the general "PC hardware buying populace", where people upgrade to GTX 1080s (on "awesomely fast i5-6600Ks") on 144Hz 1080p monitors and are curious why they still get 90FPS.

Sure, we could tell them, "upgrade to a 1440p monitor", but I think that presumes they prefer resolution over motion clarity.

Sure, but I think you're possibly in a minority if you've actually experienced both 60Hz and 120Hz, yet prefer 60Hz. See this article.
Quote:
It became clear pretty fast during the event that most people were able to see the difference between 60 Hz and 120 Hz monitors. In the course of the afternoon there were enough participants that came to the conclusion on their own that it was high time to invest in a 120 Hz display. More than a few only needed a few seconds to say whether they preferred this or the previous monitor.

In the end, 43 out of the 50 participants (86%) indicated in the questionnaire that they preferred gaming on a 120 Hz monitor. Several of the seven gamers that said otherwise used the justification that they had achieved a higher kill-ratio on the 60 Hz screen. The people who did prefer 120 Hz, tended to call the experience smoother and more fluid. Many also noticed fewer instances of tearing, described in a number of different ways.

Nothing wrong with you preferring 60Hz, though. I trust your came to that conclusion from your own experiences as you've actually used 120Hz.

Right, tearing is less common, agreed. I run a frame-rate cap, though, even at 120FPS @ 120Hz because, IIRC, V-Sync limits a few other things (like mouse polling rate? I feel like I read that somewhere) to 120Hz.
The 2013 Build
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
--- SOLD --- --- SOLD ---  --- SOLD --- --- SOLD --- 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB ASUS DRW-24B3ST (24X DVD burner) Noctua NH-U14S w/ NH-T1 TIM Windows 10 Pro (x64) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VG248QE w/ Lightboost @ 120Hz Ducky Shine III (MX Brown w/ Red backlights) Kingwin LZP-1000 (1000W) PSU Corsair Carbide Air 540 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus (Precision Control model) - Sta... 
  hide details  
Reply
The 2013 Build
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
--- SOLD --- --- SOLD ---  --- SOLD --- --- SOLD --- 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB ASUS DRW-24B3ST (24X DVD burner) Noctua NH-U14S w/ NH-T1 TIM Windows 10 Pro (x64) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VG248QE w/ Lightboost @ 120Hz Ducky Shine III (MX Brown w/ Red backlights) Kingwin LZP-1000 (1000W) PSU Corsair Carbide Air 540 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus (Precision Control model) - Sta... 
  hide details  
Reply
post #208 of 212
C'mon , i cant event stand dragging my mouse on a 60hz monitor after buying a 144hz one 2 years ago, how can someone not notice the difference or prefer 60hz?thinking.gif
post #209 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikjadoon View Post

Sure, but I think you're possibly in a minority if you've actually experienced both 60Hz and 120Hz, yet prefer 60Hz.

I'd prefer a 600Hz monitor and definitely prefer 120Hz to 60Hz. I spent nearly a decade gaming at 120Hz+ (essentially from the time Windows 95 became my primary OS to the time my last good CRT died) and transitioning to 60Hz was not desirable, it was simply necessary.

The reason I'm not using a 120Hz display now is that there were zero 120Hz+ displays that met my criteria when I purchased my current display, and even today, finding a 32" or larger, VA or OLED, 1440p or 4k, display that can do 120Hz+ that also does not cost an absolute fortune is difficult.

On an LCD, or any other display technology that doesn't flicker, I'm more willing to sacrifice refresh rate than display size, contrast ratio, black levels, or resolution.
Edited by Blameless - 7/26/16 at 6:13pm
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #210 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

The reason I'm not using a 120Hz display now is that there were zero 120Hz+ displays that met my criteria when I purchased my current display, and even today, finding a 32" or larger, VA or OLED, 1440p or 4k, display that can do 120Hz+ that also does not cost an absolute fortune is difficult.

 

Agreed, I can't be bothered to upgrade my display again until I can find a large 4k curved 100+Hz, preferably OLED, though that might be a minute yet. When such a display can be had for ~£700 or less I'll be all over it.

     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4.0 GHz 1.37v o/s  Biostar X370 GT7 Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB HBM2 G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) @ 32... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Biostar M200-240 240GB m.2 SATA SSD (Win) Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (Linux) SanDisk Ultra II 480GB SSD (Games) Seagate 2TB SSHD (Storage) 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD RW Swiftech H220-X2 Swiftech Komodo RX-ECO Vega Water Block XSPC EX240 Rad 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Gentle Typhoon 120mm x4 Ubuntu 17.10 w/ custom kernel Windows 10 Pro Pixio PX277 27" 1440p 144Hz DP-Adaptive Sync w... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
JAR-OWL J1 Rainbow LED Mechanical SeaSonic X-Series 1050w Gold+ Corsair 760T Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Razer Firefly Plantronics Rig 500e Gaming Headset Marantz Pro MPH-1 Monitoring Headphones S.M.S.L SD-793II Audio DAC + Headphone Amplifier 
Other
Xbox One Controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4790k @ 4.6GHz Asrock Z97 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 1070 SC Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x8GB) @ 2133 10-10-10-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 530 Series 480GB SSD Seagate 2TB SSHD LG DVD RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 40" Vizio HDTV HP Generic EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650w 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide 300R Logitech Generic HyperX Cloud 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6300 @ 4.3GHz 1.35v Biostar TA970 v5.3 MSI HD 6950 2GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z 16GB (4x4GB) 1600 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Cryorig H5 Ultimate Corsair AF120 (White LED) x3 Corsair AF140 (White LED) x2 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2440L Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 EVGA B2 850w Corsair 300R 
Mouse
SteelSeries Rival 300 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4.0 GHz 1.37v o/s  Biostar X370 GT7 Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB HBM2 G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) @ 32... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Biostar M200-240 240GB m.2 SATA SSD (Win) Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (Linux) SanDisk Ultra II 480GB SSD (Games) Seagate 2TB SSHD (Storage) 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD RW Swiftech H220-X2 Swiftech Komodo RX-ECO Vega Water Block XSPC EX240 Rad 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Gentle Typhoon 120mm x4 Ubuntu 17.10 w/ custom kernel Windows 10 Pro Pixio PX277 27" 1440p 144Hz DP-Adaptive Sync w... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
JAR-OWL J1 Rainbow LED Mechanical SeaSonic X-Series 1050w Gold+ Corsair 760T Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Razer Firefly Plantronics Rig 500e Gaming Headset Marantz Pro MPH-1 Monitoring Headphones S.M.S.L SD-793II Audio DAC + Headphone Amplifier 
Other
Xbox One Controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4790k @ 4.6GHz Asrock Z97 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 1070 SC Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x8GB) @ 2133 10-10-10-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 530 Series 480GB SSD Seagate 2TB SSHD LG DVD RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 40" Vizio HDTV HP Generic EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650w 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide 300R Logitech Generic HyperX Cloud 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6300 @ 4.3GHz 1.35v Biostar TA970 v5.3 MSI HD 6950 2GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z 16GB (4x4GB) 1600 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Cryorig H5 Ultimate Corsair AF120 (White LED) x3 Corsair AF140 (White LED) x2 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2440L Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 EVGA B2 850w Corsair 300R 
Mouse
SteelSeries Rival 300 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [pcgames] Zen engineering samples in the wild. Units up to the 32 core are being tested.