Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2014
- Posts
- 5,109
Just going on past releases as a reference, do you think there'll there be much in the way of ITX boards for X570, and would they likely be available at launch?
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***
- Thread starter Jamin280672
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 2,620
- Location
- East Sussex
Asrock will probably have a go, they seam have managed ITX for everything other than the newest Xeon sockets and TR4/SP3
Asus and Asrock have been pretty quick out of the gate. I fully expect a Strix X570 at launch with a B550 coming about 6 weeks later. Would be surprised if Asrock didn't have a X570 ITX Phantom Gaming cued up too. Don't forget that Gigabyte also did a couple of ITX boards also (the B450I is wonderful) as did MSI and even Biostar.
But bear in mind there's almost no point in doing X chipset for ITX. Look at the Strix X470 and B450 and Asrock X470 and B450 Gaming for instance; what precisely is the difference between them? What benefit do you get for the X chipset that's worth a £30+ premium? It'll be the same for 500 series I reckon, which is why I'll be waiting for the B chipsets (unless X570 truly brings something remarkable to the table that can also be properly utilised on the ITX form factor).
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2014
- Posts
- 5,109
Arguing over benchmarks is utterly pointless there are so many back room deals to optimise one over another that the whole thing has lost credibility at this point. It's no different now then it's always been research thoroughly the hardware your thinking of upgrading too and go from there never ever taking one or two opinions as the whole story that way you might not end up with the current favourites on enthusiast forums but you'll likely end up with what works for you. Not mentioning companies because i cannot be bothered with triggered fanbois but the whole tech sector right now is smoke and mirrors and as mentioned back room deals that just exist to confuse and rip off customers. I think the biggest change in my 6-7 years break from PC tech is the tone of discussions now it gets very petty and hostile sometimes aggressively hostile very quickly and I've found it very off-putting during this upgrade cycle and while ocuk forums are very far from the worst i spent much less time on forums this time before buying my components.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2018
- Posts
- 2,895
Half this post was meant for the div 2 thread?
No he was fighting off fanbois for suggesting Cinebench wasn't the be all and end all. With turrets
I often feel like that in this section too.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,578
Impressive that you've spent 60 hours a week on one game, when do you manage to do your homework?because i7s are faster ?as some of your benchmarks show and from playing over 3000 hrs on it i can tell you the difference. depending on where they bench the game what map and how they bench , can mean massive fps differences.ive done it on numerous intel cpus against my amd ryzen rig as said 30 fps difference in some parts. now to some that may not matter especially on lower hz screens or to casual players but for players like me and there is plenty i play with many every day most of the day they want that extra performance and no or as little drops in fps as possible. how i have mine set up im close to 200 fps constant even dips never lower than 150 yet many amd cpus cant even do 144hz solid. that is the difference ! it doesnt cater for everyone im just talking about the players who want that extra performance which amd cant give you. only intel can provide that. so you go with intel. its not a bias brand loyalty. its a performace thing . a tool as i said previously.
Tbf it is more relevant than most of the last 20 or so posts
ta
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 895
The latest Agesa I believe has been confirmed to allow the use of Ryzen 3000 series on existing boards. It is 16Mb in size and would fit the B350 with 16Mb size ROM. Of course, we still have to consider how capable the boards though. That's just common sense.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,563
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Cinebench is great for CPU performance when it comes in to performance per core for gaming.
Indeed per core performance difference in it has matched quite nicely biggest advantage Intel has had in games.
Yep. People are getting confused between tests that compare CPUs with different number of cores (e.g. R7 1800X vs i7-7700K when it came out) and a like-for-like comparison like the Ryzen 3 demo. It should be very indicative.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 2,620
- Location
- East Sussex
Not yet, but hopefully will in the future
For current games no.
But for 2+ year time scale and games made for next-gen consoles, I would say definitely yes.
Advance of game development basically died for decade when desktop high end was limited to four cores and cheap PCs to two cores until two years ago, courtesy of Intel's greed.
That has changed now and at the latest next-gen consoles will give game developers big kick forward, when they have quaranteed higher amount of high performance cores available to use.
Also extra cores minimize effect of any background stuff to game performance.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2015
- Posts
- 18,512
@EsaT
getting there - double edge sword DX12. great for 4 core 8 thread intel's but helps ryzen 8 core pull away....
though must console ports will still follow the trend of being useless ports =/