Crashman :
somebodyspecial :
So just get Ryzen or Z170 as it won most of the games and scores 104% perf just like the rest...
and here I thought you were somebodyspecial. Ordinary people can see that games are limited by the GPU first
We mostly include them because you expect us to.
So I just did a test on a $150 Z270 board. It's almost identical to a $145 Z170 board, except that it can host one more NVMe SSD. It's probably worth $5 to have those four lanes wired into
something, so why would anyone bother buying a Z170 board?
Nope, only took the nick because nobodyspecial was already gone (which is my nick on many places)...LOL. Besides, you're missing the point. Z170 means you can run kaby on win7 and it beat 2 out of 3 Z270 boards in your review here running the same cpu/gpu. The point isn't which is the limiter cpu or gpu, it's that the motherboard is NOT the limiter. 50% of desktops are running win7 and would like to avoid another $90-135 right (I'm not counting enterprise here, they're near zero win10)? My comment was mostly regarding the fact that you don't have to PAY or DEAL with windows 10 as the next few sentences you ignored were meant show. The whole paragraph was about win10. IF you're not trying to avoid win10 my guess was ryzen then since it is likely AM4+Ryzen will be cheaper than Z270+Kaby right? You might even get that extra port for the same price
Raise your hand if you care (or even have enough drives to care) about missing an NVMe port. I don't see many people with hands up.
I have an SSD as a boot drive, but I still have 3 other drives in my PC and 19 externals that are NOT SSD. I simply can't afford to buy 5TB external SSD's right and left like I do mechanical drives for $110-120. I bought 3 for xmas alone, which would have cost me a mint on SSD, screw speeds I need TB's! 5TB HGST Nas drives were selling for $99 at Fry's over xmas here (bought 2 to upgrade externals). As long as I can hook up one for a boot drive (on whatever board I buy), I'm not sure I'll care for the foreseeable future about more NVMe ports. I'm far more concerned with being forced onto win10 just to get that port.
http://www.pcgamer.com/best-nvme-ssds/
Pretty much sums up all you need to know about NVMe (a dozen drives, higher prices, AM4 likely having it anyway and likely cheaper if you're chasing that, etc). This is about like needing another gpu slot for most of us. Most of us are NOT running 2 or more gpus. As he says in the article, you're not going to notice if you're not hitting the disk with heavy workloads (how many times do you install the an app? I install it ONCE
). To even see much of that speed you'll likely need to be coming from yet another NVMe drive right (and it's really not that much better anyway even when it is faster in Intel's case here)? I'm not going to likely be downloading 50GB games to that drive and then installing to it also. Not at the price of these things, or heck any SSD really, as they're all just too expensive for massive games these days and I rarely install anything other than apps to my SSD. Are we running a server here that hammers our drive or a home PC? Are you imaging 100pc's from it over 10gbit ethernet (or dual's) or something? Lowest 512GB on newegg is $170 for the Intel 600p ($240 for a step up to the real deal). An Evo 850 runs the same and actually wins quite a few tests at anandtech if I actually required that extra port:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10850/the-intel-ssd-600p-512gb-review/6
Random read/writes kind of suck (20-30% slower than evo) and for that matter so does sequential writes in iometer anyway (avg qd1/2/4). Evo blowing it away in these (500MB/s to 145? WOW). Better or not depends on what you're doing IMHO. Toms saw some of this too, but unfortunately it's easier to compare when you include Sata drives like anandtech did in all of the tests.
That said, your gpu comment might be correct today, but for how long (game design never changes?)? Most of the time these days I upgrade my gpu in the course of my cpu's life (at least once), but usually I'm tapping out the board for the most part from day one on cpu side. I usually am replacing the cpu/board together now. Will a 10nm LARGE die gpu (2nd gen 10nm probably) put the load back onto cpu soon for many users? Will I finally want dual gpus at 10nm if heat and watts are ok on some cards? Will more devs start using more cores with dx12/vulkan games at some point soon with AMD/Intel making 6-8 cores possibly normal (amd could price aggressively and cause Intel to dump too)? If devs see the future is more cores and start coding for them anyone not having them might end up punished on the cpu side for a while right (heck phones have 8 cores now)? Any combo of these could put the pressure back on many user's cpu at the right resolution probably depending on the game (no most of us aren't running 4k or even 1440p). We may be usually gpu limited today, but acting as though this will never change is like saying 640kb will be all we ever need...LOL. Look how that turned out. IF devs see gpus are not improving much but they have all these cpus to work with, some may decide to actually DO something with MORE CORES correct? You might be able to turn off some game features to get back to playable, but we're not actually looking or playing that same game at this point (at least not how the devs imagined it). Personally I skip a game until I can turn on EVERY feature the dev intended at the res I play at whether that takes a new cpu or gpu. PERIOD. Bulldozer bet big time on far more slower cores, but got screwed by devs not using them (opting for fewer very fast cores instead). That could change. Never say never right?
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-why-directx-12-is-a-gamechanger
"A Core i3 and i7 run the game in a very similar manner if you have an Nvidia card, but if you're using an AMD GPU, performance collapses whenever the system is drawing a more complex scene. Advanced Warfare isn't a one-off scenario either. Tune your system to favour frame-rate over visual effects and you'll run into a CPU bottleneck on AMD hardware much faster than you will with the Nvidia equivalent."
Sometimes it just depends on how you play too
DX12 definitely changes things correct? We are now going to see some pretty different games with it no doubt (vulkan too). Bottlenecks and devs do change over time. Full utilization of the cpu can be pretty important.
"the PC experience is built around scalability, but as we've noted recently, particularly in the underperformance of the top-tier Titan X, GTX 980 Ti and R9 Fury X in certain scenarios, something is holding back PC gaming from making the most of its hardware advantage. We're fascinated to see if DX12 can make the difference."
"The figures on this page strongly suggest that AMD's many-core CPU strategy could finally start to pay off."
Can't wait to see how this all plays out. BTW eurogamer isn't the only site recognizing "scenarios" where cpu seems to matter. Surely you'd agree dual cores have issues today right? There are games I certainly wouldn't want to play without a quad today.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3039552/hardware/tested-how-many-cpu-cores-you-really-need-for-directx-12-gaming.html
How many cores do you need soon? Signs that times may be changing soon? Pcworld's been around for 3+ decades (crap I'm getting old). I'm not a huge fan these days, but they're not total idiots here and Gordon has been around for much of my mag reading years (does anyone still do that? appeared somewhere around tom pabst's time). We'll know more in time as we get a bunch of games BUILT for dx12 rather than patched in crap.
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/DX12-GPU-and-CPU-Performance-Tested-Ashes-Singularity-Benchmark
We could get "WARS" in RTS games instead of "battles".
Hopefully you get the point now. Still somebodyspecial despite not wanting to be?...ROFL. That was a complete waste of my time. You attacked a point I wasn't even making...LOL. I guess I could have just said "Strawman" and quit early. But why not drive the point (points?) home for anyone who didn't get it when the website attacks eh?
Z170 is basically the same as Z270 perf wise. Yeah, that's what I said pretty much & don't need win10 either. Bonus. You completely avoided that whole bonus issue, while picking a one liner and tweaking it for your argument. Much like many sites acting like we're all on win10 (and 4k...LOL). Gee, just for kicks try to test things we're actually using (cuda vs. AMD cough, cough, maybe win7...) and quit acting like elitists
I'm starting to wonder if MSFT writes checks to sites these days to try to convince us win10 is good. Most all of them talk like you. Pretty much like the media/dems/hollywood acting like trump doesn't exist and missing the whole point of his election...ROFL. Umm, he's the president now no? Nah, Win10 is the bees knees we all use, and HRC can still win...LMAO.
Prediction: Dems lose 5-10 more seats in 2018 (more if DNC elects muslim leader who hates Americans as chair in this environment) giving republicans a trifecta. I can hear some stupid racist comment already. Nope, just watch that guy's vids (he's said a lot of anti-american stuff) and tell me dems won't drive their party off a cliff if they make him the head of the DNC with 10 states where dem seats are up for grabs (of 25) being won by trump.
Prediction: Z270, Wintel (AMD too?), won't change many Win7 users minds about win10. You've given it away for 18 months (still through accessibility loophole), review sites act like win7 doesn't exist, you've foisted it on users through sneaky updates, etc and you STILL can't get traction. Neither of my predictions seem that bold given the data we have.
Note to tom's since you CLAIM you listen to users and include stuff because we expect it: start benchmarking and testing win7 configs in your reviews at least occasionally because 50% of us still use it (2x Win10!). Start testing Cuda vs AMD in your gpu/app testing because that is a big reason NV people buy their cards.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram