Back in 2002 offering broadband to all in Sweden was estimated to cost 50 billion SEK. That could easily had been done. 5 billion usd is less and we're talking 400 times the population if it's only half the earth population...
There exist 120, 144, 165, 200 and 240 Hz monitors.
Ryzen 7 2700X doesn't necessarily run the game at 100+ FPS average. Even less so low. Meaning it won't keep up with the monitor.
That may also be true for the 8700K but I never make the claim that the limits of the 8700K in gaming is irrelevant. I'd say they are.
But on average as far as I know the 8700K run games better than the Ryzen 7 2700X.
The 40 fps 4K Ultra benchmarks I consider pretty irrelevant for judging the CPU performance. Even if Ryzen would happen to be 0.5 FPS faster by chance or memory controller or whatever. The low GPU demand benchmarks is the relevant ones because that let the CPU be the limiting factor and you can actually see which one can execute the game code faster. And that in most tests will be the 8700K.
If you look at game benchmarks with the Ryzen 5 2600X and the Ryzen 7 2700X they will most likely be very similar with a slight lead for the Ryzen 7 2700X which clock a little bit higher. The extra 2 cores isn't of much use right now.
The game code optimized and compiled for the Intel platform, the higher clock of the Intel chip, the lower memory latency and the more powerful FPU of it however do matter.
I know a bunch of people speculate completely out of their asses that that would be the reason Anandtech results are different to most others but that's likely the case because any serious tester would use the latest Windows update, BIOS and drivers.
You just claim that out of nothing. You shouldn't do that. You don't know that's the case. Just a bunch of idiots claim that like if it was the truth.
Anandtech is investigating why their results are different. Their 8700K results for GTA V seem to be higher than their earlier ones so it don't seem to be an issue with this specific run and maybe ASUS Crosshair VII Hero with G.Skill SniperX 2933 MHz with the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X simply run amazingly well. Or their results using 8700K is poor both now and before because they use only Crucial Ballistix 2666 MHz RAM and a Silverstone AR10-115XS cooler for the i7 8700K. Or some firmware or driver on the ASRock Z370 Gaming i7 board make it run bad. I haven't compared the Anandtech results with similar machines with the same games and settings from some other reviewer so I can't tell if the Anandtech results are different from theirs.
If the memory kit AnandTech used for the 8700K is the Crucial Ballistix Sport then it don't seem to be on the QVL of the motherboard, they also used 4x8 GB there vs 2x8 GB on the Ryzen platform and four memory modules is more demanding for the memory controller so that combined with the motherboard in question may mean they have poor memory performance on the Intel system. They also use a 3U rackmount / small form factor CPU cooler which is just 79 mm high, 88 mm wide which use a 70 mm fan. Then again the Ryzen used the stock cooler so I guess it's completely fair to use a more simplistic cooler for the purpose and they spec what they use but it may not be perfect for the board.
The AMD board mean-while used G.Skill SniperX 2933 MHz and 2x8 GB of them instead.
Anyway the AnandTech result is an outliner. It's not the normal result. The normal result even with these stupidly run gaming benchmarks which may not be tuned for lowest GPU vs CPU load is that the Intel chip win. Sweclockers test use "medium" settings which may lower the demand on the CPU but most likely "definitely" lower the demand on the GPU resulting in more frames and a higher chance the CPU is the limiting factor. And there as you can see above in those games the 8700K is 17-25% faster which is more in line with what you could expect.
The IPC for non-AVX/FPU work-loads seem similar for the two chips but the typical 1 core turbo of the 8700K is 4.7 GHz where's the one thread turbo of the Ryzen 7 2700X seem to end up being 4.35 GHz, the all core turbo of the 8700K is 4.3 GHz whereas the all threads turbo of the Ryzen 7 2700X in some older review was 3.9 GHz but maybe it's closer to 4 GHz on X470? Regardless it's lower. Meaning lower performance / core. Also Intel have 256 bit FPUs vs the 128 bit ones on the Ryzen plus Intel still have a bit lower memory latency for whatever difference that make. The latencies to difference caches and for sharing data between cores varies so that become hard to compare. In this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... which is great because it show GPU load too you can see that GPU utilization isn't at 100% meaning the CPU is the one holding the performance of these games back but you can also see that the CPU utilization is very low meaning lots of threads / cores are unutilized and performance like are held back by t
Plenty of benefits for Intel chips precisely for gaming. That's were they are leading.
Rather than putting it like you do the truth is that you don't need the fastest cpu unless you have a beast of a graphics card or run at settings to maximize frames per second. Because you'll be gpu limited anyway.
But if you aren't then Intel have a lead in games.
Will be great in Sweden with record house hold debt, housing prices, negative interest rate, weak krona, lots of new immigrants, a budget which haven't saved up any money these years because we've used the money for that other thing, no reforms or political changes whatsoever really because Swedish politics has only been about which one thing.
From your lack of tact, I take it that you're from one of those elitist shit-holes that look down on everything from the US in spite of the fact that they have all their own issues.
I definitely doesn't look down on EVERYTHING from the US. Far from it. And I don't know if the other citizens of this country do either. It may be quite common to dislike parts of American politics especially but it has been the worlds most important country so that's not weird. For all I care it's completely fine to think whatever thing in America, in your own country, with people of whatever identity and so on is wrong.
We definitely have our own issues and what I like with the US tend to be the things which is opposite of how things are here.
But yeah. It's definitely an "elitist" country, likely the most "elitist" bragging idiot country there is. It's Sweden. The most progressive of retards. The people who do the most to follow everything and encourage everyone to go even further regardless of what crazy shit it is. And we know we do it right and that everyone else is wrong. At-least that's the political and social-democratic view of it.
As far as manner and style I don't care whatsoever.
What many other Swedes doesn't like about America is that your society doesn't seem willing to support those who are weakest / are doing the worst. What me and them dislike about it is the negligence and ignorance of what happen to the environment. What I like with the US is a bit stronger laws for freedom of speech and defending oneself but I know you aren't very great at the former either with the SJWs and the freedom of speech zones which isn't something we have (here you've got the right to demonstrate but like in a city you have a responsibility to apply for a "permission" to do so mostly so the police can be there and help you do it if necessary / possibly shut it down if things goes bad but you can kinda still do it even without a permission and maybe nothing will happen because of that either.
As far as the military goes everything is upside down here. Before the left hated imperialist America and loved the soviet but now the popular thing is to want us to be a member of NATO because of "yay globalism!" I guess even though USA kinda is the creator of the problems in the middle-east and all the refugees, then again the leftards like the later so.. it's not a problem for them I guess.. Also it would make it easier to blame us for it. Also they hate Russia because Putin doesn't care all that much about the globalists and their enforced rule. Mean-while people like me who previously thought that we should have an actual defense one way or the other whatever spending more and doing it ourselves (and I'm totally fine with exporting as much military equipment as we can to non-dictatorships to help us cover the costs) or join NATO but of course we needed a defense. But as I see US foreign and security politics as the creator of what I see as A SHIT PROBLEM for Europe (easy solution would be to create much stronger borders and control, in the case of Sweden mass deportations too) and don't want to hear lame excuses about how we've created the mess so it's our responsibility I don't want a NATO membership (though they are kinda not really the same thing.. as in participating in destabilizing Muslim countries and helping defend other NATO countries) plus I of course like Putin in that he is a strong leader who rule Russia as a soverign country doing their own thing for their interests (same as the US really.) The leftards hate that and consider us traitors because we "love Putin" and "hate Sweden" and while that may be correct on the political level that's not the same thing as me loving Russia and it's not Sweden I hate it's the politicians and leftards.
Anyway my knowledge of Estonia isn't great either. Sure they have a lower income but at-least they don't get as many immigrants and they have very low debt. If you compare Swedish and Estonian numbers then sure average income in Sweden is higher but all the numbers are much higher for Sweden and whatever that make Sweden the better country...
Window managers got much less exciting when they tried to look like Windows 95.
KDE 3 seemed somewhat exciting and I haven't used either for long so I shouldn't really comment but.. I guess I wouldn't have much reason to be excited.
Slashdot Mirror
Back in 2002 offering broadband to all in Sweden was estimated to cost 50 billion SEK. ...
That could easily had been done.
5 billion usd is less and we're talking 400 times the population if it's only half the earth population
5 billion is "nothing."
Facebook censors themselves and follow the law so you hope for way too much.
I don't want to used a walled and fenced spying network.
Sure it may be what we are forced to use in the future regardless but I don't want it.
Or smarter than a thousand snowflakes.
It definitely matter to me.
There exist 120, 144, 165, 200 and 240 Hz monitors.
Ryzen 7 2700X doesn't necessarily run the game at 100+ FPS average.
Even less so low. Meaning it won't keep up with the monitor.
That may also be true for the 8700K but I never make the claim that the limits of the 8700K in gaming is irrelevant. I'd say they are.
But on average as far as I know the 8700K run games better than the Ryzen 7 2700X.
The 40 fps 4K Ultra benchmarks I consider pretty irrelevant for judging the CPU performance. Even if Ryzen would happen to be 0.5 FPS faster by chance or memory controller or whatever. The low GPU demand benchmarks is the relevant ones because that let the CPU be the limiting factor and you can actually see which one can execute the game code faster. And that in most tests will be the 8700K.
If you look at game benchmarks with the Ryzen 5 2600X and the Ryzen 7 2700X they will most likely be very similar with a slight lead for the Ryzen 7 2700X which clock a little bit higher. The extra 2 cores isn't of much use right now.
The game code optimized and compiled for the Intel platform, the higher clock of the Intel chip, the lower memory latency and the more powerful FPU of it however do matter.
No, they unlikely aren't.
I know a bunch of people speculate completely out of their asses that that would be the reason Anandtech results are different to most others but that's likely the case because any serious tester would use the latest Windows update, BIOS and drivers.
You just claim that out of nothing. You shouldn't do that. You don't know that's the case. Just a bunch of idiots claim that like if it was the truth.
https://www.sweclockers.com/te...
720p medium GTX 1080Ti:
BF1: 8700K 25% better avg. 19% better 1% low.
Witcher 3: 8700K 21% better avg. 14% better 1% low.
Fallout 4: 8700K 18% better avg. 17% better 1% low.
Total War: Warhammer II: 8700K 17% better avg. 19% better 1% low.
Farcry 5: 8700K: 17% better avg. 18% better 1% low.
Anandtech is investigating why their results are different. Their 8700K results for GTA V seem to be higher than their earlier ones so it don't seem to be an issue with this specific run and maybe ASUS Crosshair VII Hero with G.Skill SniperX 2933 MHz with the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X simply run amazingly well. Or their results using 8700K is poor both now and before because they use only Crucial Ballistix 2666 MHz RAM and a Silverstone AR10-115XS cooler for the i7 8700K. Or some firmware or driver on the ASRock Z370 Gaming i7 board make it run bad.
I haven't compared the Anandtech results with similar machines with the same games and settings from some other reviewer so I can't tell if the Anandtech results are different from theirs.
If the memory kit AnandTech used for the 8700K is the Crucial Ballistix Sport then it don't seem to be on the QVL of the motherboard, they also used 4x8 GB there vs 2x8 GB on the Ryzen platform and four memory modules is more demanding for the memory controller so that combined with the motherboard in question may mean they have poor memory performance on the Intel system. They also use a 3U rackmount / small form factor CPU cooler which is just 79 mm high, 88 mm wide which use a 70 mm fan. Then again the Ryzen used the stock cooler so I guess it's completely fair to use a more simplistic cooler for the purpose and they spec what they use but it may not be perfect for the board.
The AMD board mean-while used G.Skill SniperX 2933 MHz and 2x8 GB of them instead.
Anyway the AnandTech result is an outliner. It's not the normal result. The normal result even with these stupidly run gaming benchmarks which may not be tuned for lowest GPU vs CPU load is that the Intel chip win. Sweclockers test use "medium" settings which may lower the demand on the CPU but most likely "definitely" lower the demand on the GPU resulting in more frames and a higher chance the CPU is the limiting factor. And there as you can see above in those games the 8700K is 17-25% faster which is more in line with what you could expect.
The IPC for non-AVX/FPU work-loads seem similar for the two chips but the typical 1 core turbo of the 8700K is 4.7 GHz where's the one thread turbo of the Ryzen 7 2700X seem to end up being 4.35 GHz, the all core turbo of the 8700K is 4.3 GHz whereas the all threads turbo of the Ryzen 7 2700X in some older review was 3.9 GHz but maybe it's closer to 4 GHz on X470? Regardless it's lower. Meaning lower performance / core. Also Intel have 256 bit FPUs vs the 128 bit ones on the Ryzen plus Intel still have a bit lower memory latency for whatever difference that make. The latencies to difference caches and for sharing data between cores varies so that become hard to compare.
In this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
which is great because it show GPU load too you can see that GPU utilization isn't at 100% meaning the CPU is the one holding the performance of these games back but you can also see that the CPU utilization is very low meaning lots of threads / cores are unutilized and performance like are held back by t
Plenty of benefits for Intel chips precisely for gaming.
That's were they are leading.
Rather than putting it like you do the truth is that you don't need the fastest cpu unless you have a beast of a graphics card or run at settings to maximize frames per second. Because you'll be gpu limited anyway.
But if you aren't then Intel have a lead in games.
I call bullshit.
Not enough poor and uneducated.
At 2.4% unemployment they simply are out of workers in the country.
Their economies are much better than ours.
They will do better.
Robots will beat westerners and westerners beat third world people so you've got no point here whatsoever.
They will do better and they won't have all the other people in their societies.
That's why they go with robots.
They are smarter than the west.
Japan will also go with robots. Much better all around.
Will be great in Sweden with record house hold debt, housing prices, negative interest rate, weak krona, lots of new immigrants, a budget which haven't saved up any money these years because we've used the money for that other thing, no reforms or political changes whatsoever really because Swedish politics has only been about which one thing.
It's an enzyme. Not a bacteria. In this case.
Originally it's a bacteria but what are you gonna do about it and kinda why? Losing plastic would still be worth it.
We need this on dating sites.
Hide my age and (lack of) achivements.
The second one there seem to fit ...
Yeah. Because not neing able to talk back on political posts is exactly what I've got a need for.
Facebook is non-free and as such pretty useless as an Internet service.
By now I think the moderators are worse.
And considering that's us maybe we just have the mods we deserve?
What? Link.
From your lack of tact, I take it that you're from one of those elitist shit-holes that look down on everything from the US in spite of the fact that they have all their own issues.
I definitely doesn't look down on EVERYTHING from the US. Far from it. And I don't know if the other citizens of this country do either. It may be quite common to dislike parts of American politics especially but it has been the worlds most important country so that's not weird. For all I care it's completely fine to think whatever thing in America, in your own country, with people of whatever identity and so on is wrong.
We definitely have our own issues and what I like with the US tend to be the things which is opposite of how things are here.
But yeah. It's definitely an "elitist" country, likely the most "elitist" bragging idiot country there is. It's Sweden. The most progressive of retards. The people who do the most to follow everything and encourage everyone to go even further regardless of what crazy shit it is. And we know we do it right and that everyone else is wrong. At-least that's the political and social-democratic view of it.
As far as manner and style I don't care whatsoever.
What many other Swedes doesn't like about America is that your society doesn't seem willing to support those who are weakest / are doing the worst.
What me and them dislike about it is the negligence and ignorance of what happen to the environment.
What I like with the US is a bit stronger laws for freedom of speech and defending oneself but I know you aren't very great at the former either with the SJWs and the freedom of speech zones which isn't something we have (here you've got the right to demonstrate but like in a city you have a responsibility to apply for a "permission" to do so mostly so the police can be there and help you do it if necessary / possibly shut it down if things goes bad but you can kinda still do it even without a permission and maybe nothing will happen because of that either.
As far as the military goes everything is upside down here. Before the left hated imperialist America and loved the soviet but now the popular thing is to want us to be a member of NATO because of "yay globalism!" I guess even though USA kinda is the creator of the problems in the middle-east and all the refugees, then again the leftards like the later so .. it's not a problem for them I guess.. Also it would make it easier to blame us for it. Also they hate Russia because Putin doesn't care all that much about the globalists and their enforced rule.
Mean-while people like me who previously thought that we should have an actual defense one way or the other whatever spending more and doing it ourselves (and I'm totally fine with exporting as much military equipment as we can to non-dictatorships to help us cover the costs) or join NATO but of course we needed a defense. But as I see US foreign and security politics as the creator of what I see as A SHIT PROBLEM for Europe (easy solution would be to create much stronger borders and control, in the case of Sweden mass deportations too) and don't want to hear lame excuses about how we've created the mess so it's our responsibility I don't want a NATO membership (though they are kinda not really the same thing.. as in participating in destabilizing Muslim countries and helping defend other NATO countries) plus I of course like Putin in that he is a strong leader who rule Russia as a soverign country doing their own thing for their interests (same as the US really.) The leftards hate that and consider us traitors because we "love Putin" and "hate Sweden" and while that may be correct on the political level that's not the same thing as me loving Russia and it's not Sweden I hate it's the politicians and leftards.
Anyway my knowledge of Estonia isn't great either. Sure they have a lower income but at-least they don't get as many immigrants and they have very low debt. If you compare Swedish and Estonian numbers then sure average income in Sweden is higher but all the numbers are much higher for Sweden and whatever that make Sweden the better country ...
From your lack of knowledge I take it that current location is the US.
While the world is full of shit-hole countries Estonia isn't one of them.
Same as with freedom of speech, information transparency, raising support for a political opinion and as such democracy itself.
With restrictions everywhere we aren't living in a democracy.
The paper bills are used to buy the cocaine and to make it easier to get it into your nose.
Now credit cards those are for ordering digital currency and to line up the coke.
Because decrease the value of the dollar to half and the government would care so much if it got twice the amount of dollars instead.
Backed how? They will buy it? No.
Yeah.. gnome.. 3 .. .28. Exciting.
Window managers got much less exciting when they tried to look like Windows 95.
KDE 3 seemed somewhat exciting and I haven't used either for long so I shouldn't really comment but .. I guess I wouldn't have much reason to be excited.