Last edited:
-
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.
Intel Core Ultra 9 285k 'Arrow Lake' Discussion/News ("15th gen") on LGA-1851
- Thread starter Dave2150
- Start date
So you'd buy the one that's slower even if it's similar priced or the faster one is cheaper because it's at 1080p
Even if I don't play at 1080p I'd know which I'd choose
But if you have already something from previous generation probably not
Last edited:
technically I am. 4k dlss performance renders at 1080p
Soldato
I get their point but don't agree with them, providing what the customer needs is more valuable than being a purist about it.
IMO the version with both 1080p and 4K is much more useful than the 1080p only version. It needs 1440p in the middle because more people have that than 4K. There is no point telling people a cpu is 50% better when it's 5% better when they install it, if manufacturers did that we'd call it false advertising.
this is somthing that a lot of people dont understand.
they all claim to be a 4k or 2k but there using DLSS, actually in most cases there at 1080 or lower.
i game at 2k with all the FSR stuff off so I'm actually at 2k, ill use FSR in the future when i drop below 100fps at native
Last edited:
Caporegime
Is it that you want them to run 4K benchmarks along side 1080P and 1440P or do you want them to remove 1080P off the charts? The former is fine i can get behind that, the latter is asinine.
Last edited:
Soldato
I want all three resolutions on the same slide, the comparison is what tells the full picture.
I have nothing against 1080p being included, a lot of people use it, and it helps to tell cpus apart which perform equal on other resolutions so the customer can tell which is actually better.
![[Death]](/styles/overclockers/avatars/4.png){kind=avatar}
Associate
all 3 would be fine m i play 4k, no dlss, just raw 4k 
, Be nice to see the difference, Yes i know its very minimal at these resolutions. I havent played 1080p in years
, Be nice to see the difference, Yes i know its very minimal at these resolutions. I havent played 1080p in years
Caporegime
Soldato
If you can't use the review to work out if you want to buy the product then what value is the review providing?
hype to encourage people to buy new shiny things
That's not a failing on the reviewer's part.
Soldato
I think they are missing the point.
Many people don't care how CPU performs. The question they are trying to answer, is "is it a worthwhile upgrade".
They want a visible difference over their existing CPU. Not next year, not when they buy a new graphics card, they want to know what will happen right now. And these tests don't answer that.
The testers can argue all they like, but they are not providing the information many people want.
Last edited:
The problem is a lot of people want reviews catering for their very specific requirements. Reviewers can't and wont provide that so they offer the information that's relevant to most people.
The main issues I see when people complain about how CPUs are reviewed usually boil down to "I have this CPU, this GPU and I play this specific game at this resolution and I want to know what FPS increase I will receive." That isn't going to happen so they give baseline results and you can make an educated guess from their relative numbers.
The main issues I see when people complain about how CPUs are reviewed usually boil down to "I have this CPU, this GPU and I play this specific game at this resolution and I want to know what FPS increase I will receive." That isn't going to happen so they give baseline results and you can make an educated guess from their relative numbers.
the problem is right now if you have a 5700x3d or 5800x3d there is no real reason to upgrade for gaming.
so if you have a 13900 and or 7800x3d, there is ever less reason to upgrade for gaming.
CPU's have mostly got to a point right now where there all ok.
i recently got to opportunity to go from a 5700x3d to a 13900kf and there is zero differance in games.
the swap worked out to be free in the end and i wanted to play with an i9...
so the answer to your question is depending on what you have there is no real reason to upgrade
7800x3d to 9800x3d is just silly
14900k to 9800x3d again is just not needed
if your have an 2600x and or i5 8600 then yes you could do with an upgrade.
so if you have a 13900 and or 7800x3d, there is ever less reason to upgrade for gaming.
CPU's have mostly got to a point right now where there all ok.
i recently got to opportunity to go from a 5700x3d to a 13900kf and there is zero differance in games.
the swap worked out to be free in the end and i wanted to play with an i9...
so the answer to your question is depending on what you have there is no real reason to upgrade
7800x3d to 9800x3d is just silly
14900k to 9800x3d again is just not needed
if your have an 2600x and or i5 8600 then yes you could do with an upgrade.
Last edited:
Caporegime
It's still, by far, the most common resolution to game at. 1440p is next, whilst 4k remains a niche concern.
Soldato
Yes, I did, but I still think they are answering the wrong question. People aren't complaining because they don't understand what the test is, they are complaining because the test is of no use to them.
What they want may well be unanswerable, but their complaints are still valid - the tests aren't helping them make a decision.
I, personally, find some of the comparison tests more helpful. Where you have a youtuber running side-by-side comparisons in a number of games. I can usually find something that is comparable to my system, running games I am aware of.
But this 1080P testing is completely useless to me. It's an almost abstract test that has no useful meaning at all.
Last edited: