3 days 12 hours
3 days 22 hours
Grand Theft Auto V
9 days 4 hours
Football Manager 2017
41 days 23 hours
Football Manager 2016
41 days 13 hours
Football Manager 2015
32 days 16 hours
Football Manager™ 2010
12 days 14 hours
GPU teardown - under the shrouds of the Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti and AMD RX Vega 64
AMD Vega reviews, news, performance, and availability
Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti review: the numbers are in and the Titan X is toast. Hail to the 4K king
Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti - availability, specs, pricing and performance
AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 review: even if you could buy one, you probably shouldn’t… yet
AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 review: a high-end GPU waiting on a future it’s trying to create
Best CPU for gaming
AMD "going heavy with Vulkan" is a gamble that could help level the GPU race with Nvidia
Best gaming monitor
Nvidia's Volta-based Titan V is a six-month-old graphics card at launch
Best AMD gaming motherboard
AMD’s Adrenalin overlay makes Shadowplay look like you're capturing on a wax tablet
Best graphics card
The 5 future tech deals that will change the world
Best gaming motherboard
Nvidia Volta release date, price, specs, and performance
Nvidia's Volta GPU hits the desktop with the next-gen Titan V
Best gaming keyboard
Virtual kittehs are slowing the Ethereum cryptocurrency network to a crawl
Best gaming headset
At launch you could buy an 8400 for around £180, with ASRock Z370 boards retailing for as little as £109. That's a pretty compelling gaming package.
As I said in the review above, for multi-threaded workloads the 12-threads of Ryzen help, but this appraisal is based on gaming performance, and across the board the Intel is either better or at least the same.
In the US the 1600 is $169 and the motherboards can be as low as $40
The 8400 is $189 and motherboards at best are $100 and not very consistently.
Actually, No sir, no it did not. I don't use Ryzen Master, as it's garbage (IMO). Here's what I use: https://www.grainger.com/product/20E890?cm_mmc=PPC:+Google+PLA&s_kwcid=AL!2966!3!166587239686!!!g!82166490957!&ef_id=WdTObwAAAGhYtSAP:20171115192233:s&kwid=productads-adid^166587239686-device^c-plaid^82166490957-sku^20E890-adType^PLA
Got anything else you'd like to add? Some might say 'silicon lottery' but you'd have to lose that lottery pretty badly to get such badly results. Really badly, actually.
No it did not... what?
I was explaining where the figures we provide came from, and that we are not 'lying bastards.'
The Wattage figures we show (and the ones we show in all of our testing) are for peak platform power. The total AM4 testing platform, supplied by AMD for the purposes of the 1800X review, ran to a maximum of 204W drawn from the wall. They're captured in the same way for all our platform power testing and are used to show the difference between different systems.
And the thermal figures we show came from the original Ryzen Master Utility (again supplied by AMD).
There's no bias, no blatant lies, and no corporate shilling. Why would there be? What would be the point?
The other explanation could be that we use platform power draw to measure that side of things. And the thermal information came from AMD's Ryzen Master utility.
Thanks for reading.
It's true that PC sales are still tanking, but gaming and gaming hardware is a serious growth sector. Last year gaming hardware sales topped $30bn for the first time:
And that's likely to be even higher this year. So, while Nvidia are making a whole lot of cash from AI and datacentre stuff right now, the increase in the graphics card revenue has been a huge boost to their bottom line.
Intel have been talking a lot about gaming, and from people we've spoken to that's going to continue with their touted discrete GPU tech. This is more likely a move to bolster their future AI earnings, but equally a decent discrete GPU for gamers would give their bottom line a bump too.
I'm stunned Intel are dipping their toes back in the GPU water after the catastrophe of Larrabee. Short memories maybe, or Raja has convinced them it's actually possible this time.
Back in the day, Intel kept telling us in the tech press that Larrabee was going to be great, right up to the moment it was killed. We'd all been really hoping for a third GPU way...
The temperatures were creeping up and up and, without the cooling kicking in as it did, the GPUs would have collapsed under the load. The manual step the fans were on essentially meant they remained at a specific speed no matter the temp.
I'm sure there will be a balance you can strike with the amount of fan profiling on offer (as I mention in the piece) but it is going to take a bit of effort on your behalf.
That's annoying, they should configure it with a default fan profile that keeps it within spec at the minimum possible RPM.
It's impressively quiet. I believe the Max Q spec is for gaming load to be 40dB or less.
If I didn't already buy a HiDevolution EVOC 16L-G-1080 I would have jumped on this.
I think you just did :)
Sadly Asus' all-core enhancement feature is limited to the K-series chips only. I was hoping it would enable us to run the 8400 at its single core 4GHz clockspeed all the time, but unfortunately not :(
The Computer Base 4K benchmarks weren't run at Ultra settings, they were running at High.
But as I mentioned in the piece we cannot currently verify the results as our Vega samples are still being shipped back to us.
If you are going to post something like this why not back it up?