i would think about 60% of peopleWho the heck plays at 1080p these days?
Last edited:
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.
i would think about 60% of peopleWho the heck plays at 1080p these days?
Going by the steam hardware list 56.98% use 1080P as their primary resolutionWho the heck plays at 1080p these days?
lol just wowIs there a way to see the stats for 'proper' countries?
It depends on CPU usage, current Intel chips tend to have more cores. Future software will probably make more use of the extra cores. It would be interesting to see how Bulldozer does against Skylake now.1080p is important to test cpu limits. AMD fans complained about the same with 720p test in 2017 where Skylake obliterated Bulldozer. Is a pretty good indicator of CPU longevity. Right now Zen5 3D has a potential longer lifespan than ARL…
Have you heard anything like competitive gaming? I am not referring to Super Mario, Alan Wake or Civilization type of games. It's crazy how people get pursued easily by the Nvidia & AMD adverts to make a purchase. Let's go 4K now! Without a proper display port bandwidth. No 10-Bit support but, only DSC. Just to have it, right?Who the heck plays at 1080p these days?
Going by the steam hardware list 56.98% use 1080P as their primary resolution
Yeah, no point having hardware like that if your gaming at 1080PI highly doubt most of those people have anything like an AMD 7000 series let alone a 9800X3D or a 4000 series GPU though.
A lot of that is probably people playing on laptops with 5+ year old specs.
I have two displays (1440p,1200p). I play games on my 1200p as the colours are better and as a bonus, its less demanding on the GPU so uses less power.Yeah, no point having hardware like that if your gaming at 1080P
Precisely. An 8/12 thread Skylake is still a viable CPU, Bulldozer isn’t. Not making the same comparison, ARL is closer (in some areas even ahead) to Zen5 than Bulldozer ever was to SKL.It depends on CPU usage, current Intel chips tend to have more cores. Future software will probably make more use of the extra cores. It would be interesting to see how Bulldozer does against Skylake now.
its less demanding on the GPU so uses less power.
At the time, Bulldozer was competing against the Intel quad core's, bit of a cheat to compare it to the 8 core that probably cost 2x and was a HEDT platform.Precisely. An 8/12 thread Skylake is still a viable CPU, Bulldozer isn’t. Not making the same comparison, ARL is closer (in some areas even ahead) to Zen5 than Bulldozer ever was to SKL.
I’m 90% sure ARL will have easily a 5 year lifespan. But the 9800X3D is starting to look like the i7-3770K.
I’m purely speaking about the architecture without any other consideration. Bulldozer was a bad CPU and a bad investment. ARL is imo a good CPU -not excellent by any means- and a bad investment at these prices.At the time, Bulldozer was competing against the Intel quad core's, bit of a cheap to compare it to the 8 core that probably cost 2x and was a HEDT platform.
I don't have much, the GPU(6900XT) uses < 100W for most games at 1200p (60Hz). The CPU is always < 90W as its running ECO 65W but I think its < 60W for most games, not looked into it that much.id like to see some number around this, and the extra CPU load power usage
Bulldozer was a bad CPU, for me, power consumption and heat was the main reason I did not get one. It was the same when I did my last upgrade, 13900K was hot and power hungry though performance was very good. I went with AMD but it was a close call. ARL looks good to me, I want one just to play around with but I would not get one for my work PC, too much risk at the moment.I’m purely speaking about the architecture without any other consideration. Bulldozer was a bad CPU and a bad investment. ARL is imo a good CPU -not excellent by any means- and a bad investment at these prices.
Not when you frame cap it, my 4090 draws less quite a bit less power in games like Destiny 2 or The Division 2 than what my 3090 did as the 4090 is able to reach my 4K 120fps cap much easier, so less power, less heat and a quieter system. For the 5090 my power draw in the same games should be even lower. If max the card out in newer games or ones that need path tracing then yes my power draw will be the same or more, but a faster card is great for older games if you want a quieter air cooled system.id like to see some number around this, and the extra CPU load power usage
Aren't the steam stats heavily swayed by developing countries?
Is there a way to see the stats for 'proper' countries?
What you still play at 720pWho the heck plays at 1080p these days?