Intels CPUs have been stagnant since Sandy Bridge.
It isn't like AMD did something amazing to catch Intel, it's that Intel has been coasting on 5% yoy improvements since what 2011?
Yawn for sure.
On the GPU side Nvidia was able to lock out overclocking and charge double for their mid range GPU making it the new $500 card from $250 and inventing a new segment that hasn't gone anywhere.
Nothing is good about this situation from a consumer perspective. We're seeing losses on abilities because Nvidia desires to rule us with an iron fist and AMD can't supplant them and generally is a follower doing whatever Nvidia does too.
I'm not happy, are you happy? PC hardware has been BORING now for years imo, probably half the reason this forum is so dead nobody even cares anymore.
How true what you stated. These forms are dead since Intel and AMD also Nvidia resorted to overclocking according clock speed, core voltage and temperatures like we do. There is not much more room for us to overclock do to heat, unless you buy a i5 k or i3 k.
I'm not happy with the performance of new models, performance innovation is dead for components. What I hate the most is the prices are insane for Video cards and more cores in processors. I can't believe I had to pay $529.20 for RTX 2070 ultra for only 25% performance increase upgrading from GTX 1070.
Can we forget about whether the peen of FreeSync or G-Sync is larger and talk about Intel's 'discount' for partners being 10 times larger than AMD's whole net income?
While I didn't always agree with what he had to share (Disclaimer: I own NVIDIA and Intel products myself), I miss Bennett's regular broadcasts. For the most part, he wasn't afraid to call a spade a spade:
my 1080tis have been more temperamental and touchy than any other NV gpu i've owned.
and the crisis bug? i 100% remember that, as I experienced it with my GK110s. I got good @ alt-tabbing to prevent total crash though. The game would pop back up & continue to fly.
Same here. I had two diff ones and they were pretty much a constant pain. I run two systems one with a 5700xt and one with a 2080ti(sold a week ago and replaced for a 2070super) at the moment and have had so many cards from both brands it's too many to list. The main issue I see with NV is their texture quality(in performance modes respectively) and color compression(seems to require digital vibrancy tweaks to compete with AMD defaults). Keep in mind these cards were tested on the same panels etc. Both have been known to have serious driver issues for way too long so neither is better there overall it's just down to what you play the most game wise. I always have at least one or two of my fav games that just never play on NV cards in the past few years no matter what I try and thus I use both. I am sure that issue exists for AMD users that like other games I do not.
AMD does not have the rights to Adaptive sync, It is a displayport slandered.
"DisplayPort version 1.2a was released in January 2013 and may optionally include VESA's Adaptive Sync. AMD's FreeSync uses the DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync feature for operation. FreeSync was first demonstrated at CES 2014 on a Toshiba Satellite laptop by making use of the Panel-Self-Refresh (PSR) feature from the Embedded DisplayPort standard, and after a proposal from AMD, VESA later adapted the Panel-Self-Refresh feature for use in standalone displays and added it as an optional feature of the main DisplayPort standard under the name "Adaptive-Sync" in version 1.2a. As it is an optional feature, support for Adaptive-Sync is not required for a display to be DisplayPort 1.2a-compliant." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort