AMD Reveals Next-Gen Desktop Processors for Extreme PC Gaming
amd.com
amd.com
Perhaps there just isn't enough of a market, but ASRock made a series of nice little machines they called DeskMinis with 5x5in motherboards that were a bit larger than NUCs, but in the extra space could fit a socketed 65W chip and quiet low-profile cooler (NUCs I've used were noisy under load), two full-length NVMe M.2 disks, and two 2.5" SATA drives.
An updated AM5 version could potentially ditch SATA to be smaller, since there isn't a huge premium on NVMe capacity now. I wonder if they could also handle some non-G chips, since those now have very basic iGPUs (though power and/or chipset requirements could still limit that).
One issue is that AM5 is still the relatively expensive option; AMD is still adding new AM4 5xxx SKUs because there's still seemingly a market for them. The DeskMini systems could be economical, and if a similar AM5 system couldn't be, due to the mobo itself needing to be pricy or the 8xxxG + DDR5 SODIMM cost, maybe it's hard to sell enough of them to get it to make sense. Still, it's a fun idea, and if you're listening, ASRock, I can promise you'd sell at least one.
Some other stories like https://videocardz.com/newz/asrock-announces-deskmeet-deskmi... suggest the DeskMini and DeskMeet can take a non-G 7000 CPU up to 65W; the 12-core 7900 would fit, though there's some substantial tradeoffs to doing that.
Any reason to think integrated graphics will be the future of top-end gaming hardware?
More channels may not even be physically possible in AM5. And economically any big change to build a super-iGPU has to compete with just not taping a bigger APU out and letting folks who want lots of oomph go discrete.
The other thing that can maybe help is cache. AMD uses cache dies in their datacenter APUs (very unlike laptop APUs) and of course their dGPUs. Way back, Intel also made a product with eDRAM to boost effective memory bandwidth (Crystalwell). For an integrated chip, that could also act as an "L4" for the CPU and help with its bandwidth needs, though the impact there will be lower than for the GPU.
All the games market has been chasing graphically is diminishing returns in terms of pumping rasterized polygons. 4k gaming is kind of stupid.
Now the real time raytracing they are starting to do is interesting, but I noticed that has faded from the headlines as NVidia's stock exploded due to AI coprocessors.
The 8700G should be seen as a successor of that I think.
Enough to play a huge amount of games nicely under 1080p.
But in a certain way at the lowest end of desktop gaming.
Still better then the low-mid range of gaming on a laptop, tho.
But for a lot of people that is exactly the right balance of what they get to what they pay. Weather that's because they don't have a lot money or they don't do a lot gaming and don't want to wast money.
The main "problem" the 8700G might run into is I guess that the cost of AM5 motherboards and RAM.
Also AMD (and I think Intel, too) have in recent years slowly worked to take advantage of integrated graphics even if you have also dedicated graphics (of the same vendor) if that sees some more improvements the 8700G could also become interesting in some use-case you wouldn't expect today. We will see.
https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-5600-ryzen-5-5000-series/... $150
https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007709%20601394871&Order=1 starts at $210 indeed.
People might argue the 5600 is Zen 3 where the 8700G is Zen 4.
And 8500G is $176 also with stock cooler.
At least if the infos in this interview with someone from AMD hold up until marked release: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNrOY9YCRSs (2min in)
the 8600G seem to be $229 instead of $299, which seem to have been a mistake of the interviewer in the video
the 8500G seem to be $179 instead of $176 which was a typo on my side
Like OP mentioned they have only 8 and 4 CUs respectively.
In comparison the Steam Deck has 8 (RDNA2) CUs, so while you can't really call a 8600G a "desktop gaming" APU it still can somewhat run a lot of games, enough for many very causal gamers.
For comparison the minimal GPUs in the 7x00X CPUs have 2 (RDNA2) CUs, which is still enough for most office PCs and still can run stuff like Dead Cell on 1080p reasonable well. Now Dead Cell is highly optimized but what I'm trying to say is: If you get yourself a cheap office PC or update of one and want to sometimes play some simpler older games a 8500G can still be all you need.
That combination uses more than a little extra power, relative to the APU.
The dGPUs have more cores and wider memory buses/dedicated memory which delivers higher performance than the space constrained integrated GPUs.
Last time I checked, AMD's support was terrible.
In the same post they also wrote that they are gonna look at integrating more of those "unsupported" cards into their suite.
Honestly, I hope they change their wording for this to something like "validated", "supported" and "unsupported" with actual explenations what each of these mean (fully tested, works theoretically, does not work even theoretically)
Edit: I actually found the post I was talking about https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-d...
There's also questionable OS compatiblity. ROCm is Linux-based and has extremely limited and rather experimental Windows support. Their fancy new neural processing unit is Windows-only, tied in with a Microsoft framework, and they don't seem to have any kind of definite plan for supporting it elsewhere. So there's quite possibly no single OS where all the hardware that theoretically could be used for machine learning and AI in these chips actually has even vaguely functioning code that works on that OS to make it work that way.
What they did was embed their Vitis IP in their CPUs. Those IP modules have been available in ASIC accelerator cards from AMD or their Xilinx FPGA offerings for a while now and have Linux support.
So they are releasing these APUs (which are primarily focused at a windows audience) with Windows support via ONNX. And then once there are chips in circulation, AMD can get Linux Vitis support for these chips set up with members of the Linux community being able to review and validate those patchsets.
They should be able to afford testers, doing both manual and automated testing on a wide range of cards.
ROCm's "supported hardware" list is small to the point of concerning.
More cards also means more testers outside of AMD itself.
> AMD is also bringing the power of a dedicated AI neural processing unit (NPU) to desktop PC processors for the first time with the introduction of Ryzen™ AI
AMDs wording isn't helping either of course.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_graphics_process...
The integrated GPUs of the 7000 serious (not APUs) are maximal minimalist to a point I think they couldn't have shrunken them more without running into unusual issues (assuming not changing the architecture/design). They are only suited for web browsing, office use-cases and debugging (but also kinda where made only for that use-case). Well I guess Dead Cells and similar "low requirement/high optimized" games still run nicely on it on 1080p.
Still nice to have them if you only have such use-cases saves a ton of money.
> integrated GPUs of the 7000 serious (not APUs) are maximal minimalist to a point I think they couldn't have shrunken them more
Right, because these are meant as a backup display output in parts that are aimed at the gaming market, where they will almost always be paired with a GPU. Comparable parts in prior Ryzen generations didn't even have an iGPU. Intel offers you the choice (no GPU in the "K" SKU) which is nice.
sure, the point is that not all integrated graphics are better, only such which try to do so, which happens to be marketed as APUs
Seriously? I'm through with buying expensive space heaters. These CPUs are 65 W so I might upgrade the cpu with integrated graphics in my x86 box with them.
And my main entertainment is games.
Besides, APUs really got good for gaming unless you push resolution high.
Integrated GPUs are becoming far more appealing to the general consumer, including (especially?) gamers, with how fucking expensive discrete GPUs are getting these days (AMD is part of that problem).
We might just witness dGPUs becoming the sound cards of this decade.
Maybe a Radeon 6500XT or a Arc A380; Geforce 1650 are still kind of a lot of money, and you're looking at at Geforce 1030 if you want something for not a lot of money. But why buy a Geforce 1030, unless you really just need something low profile.
... has similar performance than 480/580 or what's expected from these APUs.
The APU is cheaper overall, uses less power (even cheaper!), and has a clear upgrade path (add beefy discrete GPU or otherwise replace with newer APU).
That is bullshit expensive. It's still nowhere near as bad as during the cryptomining craze, but remember a GTX 1080 MSRP'd for about $430 back in the old days. An RTX 4080 for context is around $1,500 to $2,000 right now.
If I'm just looking to game and only have a reasonable budget like most people, I'll just grab some AMD APU and be done with it. Better yet just go and buy a console or game on my phone.
A bunch of handhelds (Steam Deck , Asus ROG Ally) that can comfortably run even AAA games with 30fps+ on small screens (as an example Red Dead Redemption 2 runs with 50fps on my LCD Deck) with battery and thermal limitations would imply that desktop versions would be totally acceptable, unless you're looking at 4K on the latest big titles.
Lol?
It's another ~$100 what would not yield you any performance gains.
Older 5700G was ~$300 so it was hardly a part of a budget build, but 5 5500GT is $125 (and would probably drop below $100 in a half/year) and would clearly offer at least 30fps on FullHD[0] and you would buy it anyway because it's a CPU.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-5600g-revie...
This is the part that needs to be emphasized more, that iGPU is practically free because it comes with the CPU we're buying anyway.
It's already hard enough to compete with free, but on top of that dGPUs are asking for Keksimus Maximus monies. The value proposition for gamers, let alone most consumer users, is very strongly favored towards iGPUs.
Free means you aren't going to pay anything.
Remember that AMD Radeon 7600XT (16GB vram, faster than 4060) is a dramatically better option than that, at $330.
* Their naming scheme is undiluted nonsense.
* Their software is jank, which makes their hardware also jank.
* I don't have time for jank anymore; I'm an ancient geezer in his mid-thirties, not a teenager with acne and far too much time I need to waste.
* They aren't providing any meaningful competition to Nvidia nor Intel with regards to pricing.
[0]Which currently sees me playing a whole bunch of Rule the Waves 3..... poor underutilized 3080.
Let's also add Genshin Impact and Honkai Star Rail to the list.
Based in Tokyo, actually.
I hope you're not flying anything you cannot afford to lose in Eve Online.
...Probably.
:V
When humanity eventually collapses in on itself due to resource exhaustion or outright hubris, our heavenly benefactors will zoom into our tech tree and say "Damn! They were just about to unlock interstellar travel and goodwill towards all mankind. What the hell were they speccing into earlier?"
So does x-plane.
Of course, Rimworld, Prison Architect and such are fortunately lightweight.
That depends entirely upon how deep into the modding rabbit hole you go.
<Typed on my iPhone while Rimworld loads through a couple hundred mods>
These RDNA iGPUs and the Meteor Lake Arc graphics are going to be the baseline that a lot of kids with hand-me-down laptops are going to end up with.
And when they inevitably will go onto whatever replaces reddit in the next 5y and ask "can I play X on this", a lot of the time, the answer will be "yes, kind of".
I believe these integrated graphics may do more for PC gaming than all those $2000 graphics cards ever did.
They'll make PC gaming accessible to more people, who have been priced out of the market for years now.
Integrate graphics will be the default in the future with discrete GPUs used only by the niche gamers and AI developer.
Lowest common denominator consoles like the Series S and Steam Deck are also contributing to this push as gamedevs are forced to optimize for integrated AMD graphics.
We are reaching a point where these integrated graphics are "good enough". Something that wasn't possible before.
It is going to change the gaming landscape.
I had a 13500K, and I've played many not-so-demanding games which I should expect at least 30fps at lowest video setting, while in reality I have something like 5fps.
But that perception has shifted over the past few generations, especially on the AMD side, but increasingly also on the Intel side (and given the new Arc integrated graphics perform similarly to and sometimes even better than the current top end 780M, this trend should continue).
Things like GPU scarcity and increasing prices have obviously also contributed to this.
The pipelines of developing a videogame are quite long, so we are only now seeing releases of a lot of titles that have been developed against these new realities. And especially for indie titles, they don't see a lot of optimization after release, since the studios typically don't have the budget / staff to improve existing titles and work on new ones at the same time.
Looking in the market for a PC rig (used), and I'm wondering about the state of used GPUs. I recall the consensus years ago was used GPU are useless since they were being (over)used for crypto mining -- but I wonder if this argument a) is still valid now and b) shouldn't that substantially reduce the GPU costs?
I think we’ll see more and more RTX style GPU architectures become integrated as NVidia et al push AI cards on us next year. It won’t be crazy to see 512GB GPU ram with 64GPU cores in the next 5-10 years.
Top end $300+ chips (like 7800x3d) are safe.
---------
I'm seriously considering the $250 5700x3d for my nieces, or maybe something cheaper. They don't need the latest-and-greatest PC. But having something "pretty good" (and the 5700x3d will be pretty good) is surely going to be appreciated.
Still great against Zen4, just not against an x3d Zen4.
This was a feature I thought would appear on mainstream Intel systems first for the longest time. But no, Intel decided to leave it on higher-end Xeons only...
But I plan on zen5 x3d (at a minimum), or Zen6 if I can hold for that long.
Zen+ laptop and some old board with 4790k cover the gap. I'll probably get a RX 7600XT for that haswell.
These are less important CPUs in this lifecycle though, usually the G series are pretty good for a small computer where you don't want a dedicated tiny GPU, but all but one Ryzen 7000 desktop CPUs had integrated graphics (though, much fewer CUs).
Also I read that only one set of 6 cores as full access to cache while the other doesn't or has partial access.
Granted, I don't think I'm running anything so CPU intensive that I'll be able to tell. For gaming, I was more interested in the DDR5 memory than in worrying about the L3 cache. For everything else I do (including running LLMs and compilers) it's beyond adequate.
For a mere $20K I could have had an overall slower gaming experience but be able to locally run things like the Goliath 120B model, but that seemed like a poor trade-off.
Another big advantage is that to get them to work, they need to use higher bin chips. CCX overheats easily because the stacked cache acts like a heat shield, so you get the most power efficient ones.
[1] 16 B/cycle write vs 32 B/cycle read per CCD https://www.servethehome.com/amd-ryzen-7000-series-platform-...
And note that the infinity fabric and memory controller don't run on the same clock. The fabric tops out at ~2200 (though testing shows sweet spot at 2033 usually) and the memory controller usually tops out at ~3100 (DDR5-6200).
Just not yet.
I can't believe anyone actually said this with a straight face.
You only have 12 CUs, 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs but huge amounts of cheap memory. I'm not sure where the bottleneck is but at least it won't crash and burn if you ask it to start neural network training routine that requires 100 GB of RAM, and you don't have to take out a second mortgage for a video card with the requisite amount of graphics memory.
One of the ways folks do this now is use the Mac M* chips, since they have so much combined RAM. The raw performance isn’t as high as GPUs, but they can fit substantially larger models in memory.
That said, I think AMD's chiplet strategy might come into play. I could see AMD release a 4 core 8 thread processor with increased on die cache and other chiplets being neural compute units.
My 7800X3D has 96MB of L3 and a golden-bin DDR5 overclock, but its absolutely dreadful for inference.
In practice no one uses AMD/Intel IGPs because no knows about the mlc-llm vulkan backend. llama.cpp is en vogue on the desktop, which does not support IGPs outside of Apple, and otherwise people use backends targeted at server GPUs.
It's a pretty high-end CPU though, and the graphics support AV1 encode/decode. This would be perfect for software development, video production, or pretty much anything but high-end gaming.
I'm pretty sure the Mac Pro is a desktop. I'm pretty sure the M2 Ultra configuration includes an integrated graphics processor. And I'm pretty sure it's faster than the 780M in almost every workload.
AMD marketing team needs to be a bit less wrong. At least add a "PC" caveat.
The last gen of those was Zen3, 5000G series. These are now Zen4 and also RDNA3 instead of Vega. So new generations in cpu and gpu.
Maybe the technically inclined of us would expect Zen 5 because we're keeping note of CPU uArches but to the general public they won't care. They will just see it's the biggest numbered AMD chip and expect it to be their best offering - which for integrated graphics on the desktop it is.
As I have said before, HN needs a "misleading title" flag.
Of course, you won't be putting a 65W CPU into a Steam Deck, but if it scales down nicely, it's an amazing news. Steam Deck already enables playing the vast majority of current gen games (it was my Baldurs Gate 3 machine when BG came out); jumping in power so that I can enjoy some better graphics would be excellent.
Wait, what? New chips for the old platform? I wonder what the driving factor even is to compel them to produce these?
"Motherboard prices is why I haven't upgraded my CPU. More important things going on right now."
[1]https://hardforum.com/threads/amd-and-intel-motherboard-pric...
Memory bound software like OpenFOAM saturates memory bandwidth already on 6-8 cores with 2-channel memory [1]. So actually we should have got 4-channel with first 16-cores CPUs long ago.
[1] https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/hardware/198378-openfoam-b...
More like AM5r2, AM5 has a few ID pins reserved.
Something is always the bottleneck. On these 2-channel modern CPU, it's usually the concurrency of software; sometimes the throughput of the CPU cores; and very occasionally memory bandwidth, that sounds like a reasonably balanced system which the right amount of resources committed to each area.
Insightful thought.
A lot of people are already using AM4 socket and might not want to do a socket upgrade, but want a new CPU.
Also, I seem to remember AMD made a commitment before/at AM4 launch that they would support it for at least N years, but don't remember the details about that. Maybe that could be related?
AM4 came out in 2016, supporting it with new CPUs for over 7 years is unheard of in the PC industry.
LOL. Intel's LGA-775 which span support for CPUs from single core Pentium 4, to dual core Core-2-Duo, to quad core Core-2-Quad would like to have a word with you.
And 7 years back in those days was equivalent to an etternity in today's tech progress.
Genuine question because I've now built several desktops in the Intel 'Core iX' era and have never truly had on opportunity to reuse a mobo.
Mechanically inserting and actually running is a different things.
There may also be some hesitance since while AMD technically did support AM4 for longer than the promised duration, they tried to pull out of it halfway through and overall it was kind of a mess for a while in terms of compatibility with chipset revision.
Perhaps releasing new SKUs on the "old" platform is a way to bump up the numbers even more: "see we supported AM4 for 5+ generations!"
I might upgrade my 2400G, but I'd want 8 cores in 65W which is sadly not an option.
5700G is 8 cores, with graphics, 65w tdp, released in 2021. This release also includes the 5700 (no letters) with no graphics at 65w tdp. Looks like 5700X is also 65w tdp? Also, you can usually set a 65w power limit on a cpu with a higher tdp and get most of the performance.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/21208/amd-unveils-ryzen-8000g...
Extreme gaming is close to maxing out currently available performance oriented hardware regardless the cost so unless those APUs can produce results comparable to top of the line CPU paired with something like RTX4090, it doesn't belong with "extreme gaming" in any way.
iGPUs are useful, they just aren't great value for budget gaming PCs (unless we're talking super-duper low budget, where a $50 used GPU is really going to break the bank). HTPC/NAS that's going to run Jackbox at 4K occasionally? Great use case for an R5 with an iGPU.
While I agree that buying a used GPU will be probably net you better performance per dollar, the 1050Ti is significantly slower than the 780M and even 760M and uses significantly more power.
Some benchmarks can be seen here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n1Cjnep8j-o
The real value option is buying an older platform (AM4) and a used discrete GPU, from back when prices were more sane.
Power efficiency wise, a discrete GPU won't compare favorably.
Assume mid range 200w gpu. Assume 20 eurocents per kWh (I live in the northern europe and pay about as much on a flexible contract). Assume a decent PSU. A year of gaming (assume, very optimistically, 365hrs) is circa 17 eur for the electricity. Considering relative perf differences, I'd say a discrete GPU compares favourably.
I had a 5700G (I think) last year and the system would go up to 150W max. I could survive about 2-3h of no electricity with my small inverter battery setup if I kept usage minimal (no work, no gaming). Handy performance wise for a mostly work machine with some indie gaming on the side, but these 8000 series are under half that wattage.
Admittedly this isn't the most common need/concern, but it's good to know options are getting better all the time.
The only actual issues I ran into were when I tried running it for PCVR (Quest 2) because the latest drivers actually cause crashes and instability, although I could fix that by rolling back to either the 2020 or 2022 drivers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38870500
Sometimes hardware from generations ago is not only decently affordable, but also sufficient for what you want to do, as long as your standards aren't super high. Getting some of that hardware with no previous owners also feels a bit interesting, albeit I've also bought used CPUs off of AliExpress for my homelab servers with no issues either.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/375175111524?hash=item575a2de364:g:...
But, I believe you that they're out there.
I’m sure at some point we’ll see Intel based APU equivalents on desktop with some teeth. Intel needs to solve their driver issues first.
It depends. If you're truly performance insensitive and have to buy new, maybe, but these APUs are extremely slow compared to even older, low end discrete GPUs.
AM5 is an expensive platform. The total cost of a DDR4 platform is peanuts in comparison.
On AM4, pcpartpicker says I can get an A520M board for $70, and 2x16GB DDR4-3600 CL18 for $55; total $125
On AM5, an A620M board is $75, and 2x16GB DDR5-5600 starts at $76; total $151.
The real question is where the Microcenter bundle pricing will end up, if you live near a Microcenter.
This is pretty close to my 2070 GPU does, which cost me $400+ a couple years ago and uses 215W. My CPU also uses 100W, so about 300W compared to 65W for very roughly similar performance (in some games) is still pretty incredible.
Now GPUs are almost twice that for that xx70's and xx80's cards. I don't know what market this is aimed at, but this is very impressive for an APU. There's a pretty strong budget PC gamer community that could benefit from this. There are a lot of people who can't afford gaming PCs anymore and this could be a big seller to the budget community. Also at 65TDP power supply and fans and ventilation costs will be low, so they can be sold in cheap and modest cases and ps's.
I'm not sure if these chips translate into laptops, but a laptop that games well is always desirable in the gaming market.
Not even remotely close. It's equivalent to an RX570 or 580, which is roughly 1050 territory. Your 2070 is equivalent roughly to a 1080, plus raytracing.
> Cyberpunk when it came out [..] unplayable but on the most powerful PCs is incredibly impressive without a GPU.
The game has seen numerous patches in the last three years since it was released that have significantly increased its performance.
RX 6500, in more recent parlance.
I would however wait for third party reviews on these SoCs. They promise performance that's simply unheard of, for an APU. Best to be skeptic than else.
Cyberpunk got a ton of (performance) fixes after release, so not exactly relevant.
https://store.nfc-systems.com/products/skyreach-4-tiny
with purely vanilla off-the-shelf parts - I definitely do. I will take these APUs every day of the week and so would millions of people for whom this is the new extreme in their PC system configuration space.
[LM: liquid metal, gallium-indium alloy with high conductivity but liquid at room temperature, and conductive, which makes it tedious and exacting to apply etc, but it's the only way to keep pushing thermal density upwards to that degree. PS5 used it as well, and that's part of how they pushed form factor down a ton in a fairly high-TDP product.]
Minisforum also had a laptop CPU on a mITX board which frankly is also an underexplored niche, why is that one chinese company (edit: erying) the only ones putting tiger lake onto a socket etc? Atoms etc aren't the only way that low-end market can be tapped, and big chipsets with tons of IO don't make sense on that kind of product anyway. Even the ryzen desktop chips provide a "SOC platform" that can do USB, ethernet, and a few other things iirc - it's used in things like the DeskMini/Deskmeet X300 series, look at the addons they need, it does pull the mobo cost way down.
(AMD does not allow X300 to be used in this way, X300 mobos cannot be sold standalone, has to be integrated into a product which is licensed separately, can't lose the bundled sale. Imagine if those firewall appliances etc could run a 5700X3D or 7940HS instead of a 1165G7 or 1125G4 or whatever. that would be awful.)
Long-term support is not great (things fall off pretty quickly from what I've heard) and really ideally I'd also like to see them support ECC (7940HS supports it) to open up the homelab market a little more. Because they're doing these really zany powerful things, they crammed a 7940HS into a NUC formfactor and routed it out efficiently into things for people who want to expand, etc. They're cooking, and as the oculink and MCIO and other breakout ecosystems start to mature things are gonna get interesting for the NUC market. And they're already interesting for GENOAD8X-2T and so on too. People are realizing the need for this to be more modular than PCIe edge card/ATX allow in a regular tower form factor. The children yearn for PCIe lanes, they just don't know why or how.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nu-GKq58Og
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IfArhUdAm8
(this can be extended to an interleaved network of 5 nodes, where with only 2 links per node you are tolerant to no more than 1 node failing yet only 2 hops to any other node) https://i.imgur.com/i56PdsC.png
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O08LG64fvqI
https://www.servethehome.com/asrock-rack-genoad8x-2t-bcm-rev...
Doesn't seem to be an issue for the X600. You may have seen this review [1]. The AM5D4ID-2T/BCM isn't cheap, but it doesn't have a real chipset either.
[1] https://www.servethehome.com/asrock-rack-am5d4id-2t-bcm-revi...
good point, hadn't considered that board. I do hope they loosen up, but a high-end server market board is not completely the same thing either.
[0] https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=https://static.twe...
[1] https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=https://static.twe...
[2] https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=https://static.twe...
[3] https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=https://static.twe...
[4] https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=https://static.twe...
[5] https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=https://static.twe...
[6] https://www.supermicro.com/en/products/motherboard/x13sae-f
(please read the reviews of the site whose effort i've leached forever, and it's actual old-school good review content)
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7112/asrock-x99e-itx-ac-mi...
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8404/asrock-x299e-itx-ac-m...
The Asrock Rack series are really really good now and I think both their AM4 and SP3 platforms are really appealing. ROMED8-2T is everything a motherboard should be. Except for SFP+, of course. But Asrock Rack's design teams really have a good pulse on what the prosumer/homelab/soho market wants, they have been pumping out a ton of great designs lately.
https://www.asrockrack.com/general/productdetail.asp?Model=R...
99%ile (or even minimum) would be far more interesting
Recall that a lot of games ran at 30fps in the PS3 era. Back then people would unironically say "the human eye can't see 60fps". Even today a lotta gamers have never experienced low latency
Extreme PC Gaming in 2024 is not 60fps at 1080p, it wasn't even in 2018
AMD marketing had to dig pretty deep to find decent numbers...4-5 year old games. Metro Exodus? Shadow of the Tomb Raider? GTA 5? And some random kid's game nobody has ever heard of?
Given the choices are between "buggy as hell" (Intel) "space heater and slightly buggy" (AMD discreet) and "good but stupidly overpriced" (Nvidia), a fourth option, for the low end of the market, is welcome.
Edit: since I'm being downvoted for claiming the games listed aren't relevant: go look at steamcharts. GTA5 and Dota are the only top 25 games; Cyberpunk is #26. The rest aren't even top 100 games.
My 2070 barely handles those games at that fps.
Yes those are older games because this APU is not going to play modern AAA at 4k, but it can handle some pretty hefty games fairly well and might be tempting to budget gamers especially when mid-tier cards start at $500-600 nowadays.
There are a million people playing CS2. Fortnite sees about 2.6 million and peaks at eleven million.
The Finals has 70,000+ people playing.
Tiny Tina has about 1/5th of the player count it would need to be in the top 100. So yes, AMD marketing was pretty fucking desperate when they listed that game.
The game is cross-platform and available on PS4/PS5, Xbox X/S, Xbox One, Steam and Epic Store. And on top of that it is a paid game. I'm not even aware what this game is, but I'm aware of Borderlands franchise and they're quality games.
Why would you compare player numbers to top f2p games is beyond me.
Look at any third-party review and you'll find a very similar selection.
"and/or have a benchmark built in" doing a whole lot of lifting...
Maybe you should make an actual performance argument instead of a popularity contest.