Why can't nvidia into DX12?
>>53200068
Pascal will fix that,pajeet.
>>53200068
I want that pc.
Using an Intel ™ CPU.
Stuff like this only hurts AMD.
>>53200324
This.
Just stick an fx 8370 in there and it'll be perfectly fine.
It'll outperform an i5 4460.
It'll be pretty close to an i7 4770 in newer games.
Or you know a 5ghz fx 4300.
>>53200324
They don't have mass produced zen chips yet
>>53200485
>fx 8370
>outperform an i5 4460
>>53200068
nvidia scheme is to shine on DX11 games + jew works to gimp AMD cards
you literally can't be more jew than this
>2016
>still using directsux
>>53200584
It can in games that take advantage of more than 4 threads.
Like directx12 games. Or some of the more recent games like black ops 3, battlefield 4, crysis 3, etc.
>>53200604
>and G-Sync
literally nothing wrong with g-sync.
>>53200739
>4670k has higher number than FX-8350
>placed lower on the graph
put it in the fucking garbage
>>53200823
The average is lower by 1
>>53200823
It has a lower min fps.
>>53200765
Its closed, and costs extra unneeded money to achieve the same thing on regular monitors with freesync.
>>53200846
>>53200856
>>53200823
ya min, not average
either way those benchmarks are always retarded
>>53200485
I own both a FX8350 and a i5 4440 and the i5 will win 90% of the time even when the FX8350 is overclocked to 4.5.
AMD CPUs are just garbage man.
>>53200874
it's superior to freesync and has actually been a working thing much longer. the only reason freesync exists is because nvidia fixed the problem first.
>>53200880
I have an fx 8320 and I think you're full of shit.
In a properly threaded game the fx 8350 will be closer to an i7 4770 than it will to an i5 4460.
>>53200539
Implying Zen will beat Intel CPU's
Implying it won't be just AMD playing catch up
Implying anything will change and now just be another cpu for budget people
>>53200919
I think you're full of shit since I own both CPUs and I know exactly how the behave in real usage.
>>53200946
define "real usage"
>>53200946
My fx 8320 at stock matches my i7 870 at 4.2ghz in battlefield 4 and plannetary annihilation.
I can't vouch for any other processors or titles, but at 4.2ghz i would hope the i7 is As fast as an i5 4460.
>>53200926
that's all AMD needs to do to be competitive, so long as it's around haswell levels of CPU speed it'll be fine for gaming again as well as other tasks, zen APUs with HBM on die would basically kill the entry level gaming market.
>>53201004
The i7 is 2.9ghz at stock by the way.
>>53200911
FreeSync and G-Sync are just different implementations of Adaptive Sync, which is a Display Port standard. Neither company invented the tech.
Literally the only difference between the two implementations is that G-sync MIGHT perform SLIGHTLY on SOME monitors because Nvidia has enough money to release optimized settings for individual monitors, much like their game-ready drivers.
The reason FreeSync exists is because Nvidia was attempting to hijack part of the Display Port specification and pass it off as their own invention, which makes AMD look incompetent, even though Nvidia didn't do anything important.
FreeSync is the better implementation because it's open source. Nvidia can use it if they want and it's just as good as G-sync because both are just Adaptive Sync.
>>53201004
an i5 4440 is just a little bit faster than a 2500k stock.
>>53200911
It functions exactly the same as free-sync, free-sync just needed time for firmware to be made for existing controllers rather than adding a custom chip.
So long as the free-sync range on a monitor is solid they're functionally identical.
Also a while back I believe intel was working on support free-sync
and Nvidia already uses Free-sync in their "Mobile G-sync" laptops
>>53201020
my pentium 4 is 3.2GHz
>>53201141
Then an fx 8320 is going to perform well enough for a few more years thanks to dx12 and vulkan.
>>53201221
Congratulations.
>>53201124
Stop spreading misinformation. G-sync came before adaptive sync. Nvidia invented G-sync. G-sync is also an umbrella brand, unlike freesync which is just a single feature. Most GSync monitors features frame synchronization, backlight strobing, and 3d.
>>53200874
>>53201288
>implying opinions matter
>>53201288
The free-sync display used in that test only went up to 90hz for free-sync, if you had actually read the article, aside from just shit posting, you'd know that
Acer now makes a 1440p 144hz IPS display that goes to 144hz for free-sync, and it's $200 less than the G-sync version
Free-sync $550
https://pcpartpicker.com/part/acer-monitor-xf270hu
G-sync $750
https://pcpartpicker.com/part/acer-monitor-xb270hubprz
Who cares. AMD will continue to be the underdog, but still fall behind nvidia and faggots on /g/ will continue to root for them because everyone is a contrarian faggot.
>>53201270
Nvidia didn't invent shit. They were porting the specification from eDP for their own uses instead of asking VESA to port it. When AMD and VESA caught wind of what was going on, they just ported the technology themselves.
Tell me, do you HONESTLY think that Nvidia could port the technology from eDP to DP better than the company that created the technology in the first place? No, I'm pretty sure VESA's port is better, even if it's insignificantly better.
>misinformation
Here's my source, pal:
http://www.vesa.org/news/vesa-adds-adaptive-sync-to-popular-displayport-video-standard/
Where's yours?
>>53200919
shut up retard
>>53201989
You shut up retard
