DLSS 3 is just another form of gatekeeping by nvidia because they get away with everything they're doing. The amount of anti consumer stuff they do just keeps increasing, but people keep buying their products over the competition. This is most visible in the low-mid range where nvidia 30 series cards are still msrp+ and AMD is selling higher performance at lower costs.

I don't know when I'll need a video card again, but whenever that is I sure hope AMD/Intel are still making products because I have zero interest in supporting nvidia anymore.

She definitely didn't do herself, or anyone else, any favors by obfuscating the truth with regards to the compensation. Perhaps she was afraid people would see the $15k and not care, or was insulted by the cameo offer, but either way it was a mistake. At the end of the day they appear to have lowballed her and the "extra" compensation really doesn't get out of that territory. She has every right to be upset by it, but she's managed to make it look more like sour grapes over a working relationship gone wrong than anything else.

HoSpanky wrote on Oct 24, 2022, 13:33:
So, in the end, she was offered significantly more than the $4000 she claimed, and is FAR more than the usual voice actor compensation, and that wasn't enough, eh?

If you'd actually been following the story at all even the $15k figure isn't significantly more than anything given the union rates (unsure if she's part of the union, but her replacement very much is). The prior games were made before the current union deals covering vg voice actors so the amount of pay there isn't comparable either.

theglaze wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 02:34:

thestryker wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 02:18:

theglaze wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 02:07:

thestryker wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 01:46:

theglaze wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 01:12:

thestryker wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 00:20:

Simon Says wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 00:03:

thestryker wrote on Oct 20, 2022, 19:40:

Simon Says wrote on Oct 20, 2022, 15:37:
Another fun fact, 13900K throttles EVEN IN GAMES.

Welp...

With a 120mm AIO... which if you're using you deserve what you get.

I wonder since when it's ok to have thermal throttling IN GAMES with a cooler that can beat even some 240mm AIOs and match others?

They were purposely testing worst case scenario with insufficient cooling what part of that don't you understand?

If the AMD CPU is pulling around 140W and Intel CPU around 180W and only the latter is throttling then the cooler is the problem.

He said in the video a MSI 360 AIO was used, and 13900K hit Tjmax in just a few seconds with Cinebench.

What does that have to do with them purposely using an insufficient cooler to show Intel throttling while using more power than AMD?

That 'insufficient' cooler was 'sufficient' for the direct competitor, 7950X. It's all kind of silly anyways, because most gaming requires considerably less power, therefore less thermal throttling.

That was literally the point behind them switching to the 120mm AIO: to show temp != wattage.

These quotes have left me dizzy...what are we discussing again? In most reviewer scenarios that I've seen, the 13900K consumes more power and will likely outperform the 7950X with current W11 builds. But the 13900K is more likely to thermal throttle with measurable impact on performance.

The first poster mentioned thermal throttling while gaming, but that was not part of the regular testing it was a specific test HUB did with a 120mm AIO to show that while AMD may be running hotter (95c thermal target) Intel is still putting out more heat (higher wattage).

You're completely correct about the comparison between the two overall. I was pointing out that using a specific test designed to show thermal throttling is not indicative of the actual experience (their 360mm AIO certainly was not throttling during any gaming).

theglaze wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 02:07:

thestryker wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 01:46:

theglaze wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 01:12:

thestryker wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 00:20:

Simon Says wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 00:03:

thestryker wrote on Oct 20, 2022, 19:40:

Simon Says wrote on Oct 20, 2022, 15:37:
Another fun fact, 13900K throttles EVEN IN GAMES.

Welp...

With a 120mm AIO... which if you're using you deserve what you get.

I wonder since when it's ok to have thermal throttling IN GAMES with a cooler that can beat even some 240mm AIOs and match others?

They were purposely testing worst case scenario with insufficient cooling what part of that don't you understand?

If the AMD CPU is pulling around 140W and Intel CPU around 180W and only the latter is throttling then the cooler is the problem.

He said in the video a MSI 360 AIO was used, and 13900K hit Tjmax in just a few seconds with Cinebench.

What does that have to do with them purposely using an insufficient cooler to show Intel throttling while using more power than AMD?

That 'insufficient' cooler was 'sufficient' for the direct competitor, 7950X. It's all kind of silly anyways, because most gaming requires considerably less power, therefore less thermal throttling.

That was literally the point behind them switching to the 120mm AIO: to show temp != wattage.

theglaze wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 01:12:

thestryker wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 00:20:

Simon Says wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 00:03:

thestryker wrote on Oct 20, 2022, 19:40:

Simon Says wrote on Oct 20, 2022, 15:37:
Another fun fact, 13900K throttles EVEN IN GAMES.

Welp...

With a 120mm AIO... which if you're using you deserve what you get.

I wonder since when it's ok to have thermal throttling IN GAMES with a cooler that can beat even some 240mm AIOs and match others?

They were purposely testing worst case scenario with insufficient cooling what part of that don't you understand?

If the AMD CPU is pulling around 140W and Intel CPU around 180W and only the latter is throttling then the cooler is the problem.

He said in the video a MSI 360 AIO was used, and 13900K hit Tjmax in just a few seconds with Cinebench.

What does that have to do with them purposely using an insufficient cooler to show Intel throttling while using more power than AMD?

Simon Says wrote on Oct 21, 2022, 00:03:

thestryker wrote on Oct 20, 2022, 19:40:

Simon Says wrote on Oct 20, 2022, 15:37:
Another fun fact, 13900K throttles EVEN IN GAMES.

Welp...

With a 120mm AIO... which if you're using you deserve what you get.

I wonder since when it's ok to have thermal throttling IN GAMES with a cooler that can beat even some 240mm AIOs and match others?

They were purposely testing worst case scenario with insufficient cooling what part of that don't you understand?

If the AMD CPU is pulling around 140W and Intel CPU around 180W and only the latter is throttling then the cooler is the problem.

Simon Says wrote on Oct 20, 2022, 15:37:
Another fun fact, 13900K throttles EVEN IN GAMES.

Welp...

With a 120mm AIO... which if you're using you deserve what you get.

AMD chose a bad design for their IHS (yay for the CPUs running hotter and less efficient than they could have) and their power draw went up quite a bit over 5xxx. Intel has been pulling too much power in general for the last 3-4 generations though at least gaming/lightly threaded isn't too bad with 12th/13th. Both companies have made it very easy for me to sit on what I've got and wait for next time.

If all you do is gaming the 5800x3d still seems like the best buy due to high performance and low power consumption. Whereas the best general usage CPU seems to be the 13600K since it's good in ST/MT and its power consumption is less bad than the flagships.

I'm not sure that a cloud gaming service can survive on its own unless there are actually exclusives coming out often enough to keep people attached to the platform. An argument could be made for cost vs buying a pc/console to play games (iirc Stadia was $10/mo so 50 months of streaming for the cost of a console), but I still think they'd have to deliver cross saving with existing games and have exclusives to keep people playing. Even then you're still limited in what audience can use your services. The most successful services currently seem to be Microsoft's Xbox Cloud Gaming and Nvidia's GeForce Now, but neither one of these are standalone.

Schkorpio wrote on Oct 18, 2022, 20:00:
Cloud gaming suuuuuuuuuuucks! Unless they can use quantum entanglement, there's always going to to much input lag. That's just physics.

This isn't even remotely accurate outside of esports/competitive titles that people also tend play at high refresh rates. As long as you have a decent internet connection and the server locations aren't too far away from your ISP's gateway it's perfectly fine for many games. I played Orcs Must Die 3 on Stadia and there wasn't much difference between that and when I played it locally after it released on Steam.

The Flying Penguin wrote on Oct 15, 2022, 09:04:
Zotac 3060 for $358: https://www.amazon.com/ZOTAC-GeForce-Graphics-IceStorm-ZT-A30600H-10M/dp/B08W8DGK3X

My friend has this card and very happy with it.

Which is still more than the $330 MSRP they launched with.

You can get an RX 6650 XT for under $300 and its raster performance is about in the middle between the RTX 3060 and 3060ti. While its ray tracing (which is of limited benefit on this tier of card) performance will be worse it's still significantly cheaper for a faster card in the vast majority of games.

This nvidia mindshare is undoubtedly part why they felt they could release two RTX 4080s for $1200/900 with severely cut down chips in the first place.

Not that I think huge mergers and acquisitions are a good thing in general, but the UK CMA sure has a hardon for CoD being on playstation. To the point where they're ignoring the trove of IP actibliz has and the arguments MS is making. At this point is sounds more like a shakedown than anything else.

The whole last generation taught nvidia they can do whatever they want and people will buy it. AMD has much better price/perf (aside from RT) yet nvidia's market share grew. I really hope that people decide to skip the 40 series, or ideally hop onboard with AMD (or potentially Intel at the lower end/next year with their second series of cards). The GPU market needs a hard reset.

RedEye9 wrote on Oct 7, 2022, 14:06:

El Pit wrote on Oct 7, 2022, 13:03:
Proposal: instead of investing in your own data mining tool, just put everything on GOG, Epic, and Steam. How about that?

How are they supposed to data mine if they do it your way.

To be fair they can still mine all your data through any game that connects to the internet. All of the publisher specific storefronts have always been about two things: getting people into their ecosystem and not sharing profits with other storefronts.

On topic: Had to install this to use the EA Play that came with Game Pass and aside from looking like everything else it works. I haven't gone through all of the options since I didn't use it a whole lot, but so long as it hasn't lost anything from Origin it ought to be fine.

It's a move that has worked very well for China so why wouldn't they go down this route? It's not like most gamers have shown they care in the slightest about abusing people so long as there's a game they want to play.

1badmf wrote on Sep 20, 2022, 14:59:

Overon wrote on Sep 20, 2022, 14:41:

ZandarKoad wrote on Sep 20, 2022, 14:01:
I'm only in the market for 3090's for the foreseeable future. Especially EVGA 3090's.

I don't give a damn about games. I need VRAM for my language models. 2x3090 is just barely enough to fit a lightweight version of GPT-NeoX for fine tuning.

40xx series does nothing in the VRAM department, so there is no reason to look at that generation.

The fact that Nvidia intends to sell 12 GB VRAM 4000 series cards means they have their heads up their ass. The fact that they are selling 3000 series cards with 8 and 12 GB of VRAM means they had their heads up their ass already. Also don't forget expect triple slot cards and power requirements through the roof.

yeah the 4080 12GB is 100% bullshit. 12GB is not enough today for a top end gamer card, and only 192 bit memory bus too. that'll start hitting memory limits sooner rather than later which is completely unacceptable for an $800 card. for that price it needs to last the entire product cycle. it SHOULD be a 4070.

You mean $900 card:

GeForce RTX 4080, 16GB and 12GB GDDR6 versions. $899 for 12GB, $1199 for 16GB

Oh and they're keeping the 3060/70/80 as "lower end" without adjusting pricing so Nvidia can get fucked at this point. I wish AMD was looking to reset pricing, but the last two generations have just shown them pricing with Nvidia. That leaves us with maybe Intel, but if they stick to it and have a competitive product there's no way they'll reset pricing.

The absolute comedy of anyone at Sony crying about exclusivity shouldn't be lost on anyone. They've done more damage with exclusivity than anyone else in gaming given how content and characters get stripped out of multiplatform titles.

jdreyer wrote on Sep 14, 2022, 11:18:

thestryker wrote on Sep 14, 2022, 01:17:
Riot's anticheat they use for Valorant paved the way for this type of system. I have my doubts regarding EA's competence with regards to getting it right, but if they do it's clearly superior to third party anticheat systems.

I'd prefer that they just use a VM, Sandbox or UWP for the MP portion of their games as this would be infinitely less invasive for users. This would undoubtedly cost more money to develop and maintain so they're going the cheap/easy route.

Wouldn't that affect performance?

UWP has zero impact on performance, but is easily the most problematic/controversial because it locks you into Windows 10/11 and requires a lot of understanding how it works. I may be wrong, but I don't believe any of the MS store exclusive PC games were so much as pirated successfully until they left the store (UWP was mandatory originally for the MS store).

Any form of sandboxing would certainly add in overhead, but I think that's certainly a much better tradeoff than kernal level access. It's one of those things: would you prefer a game to have higher system requirements or an anti cheat which requires you to trust a gaming company to do due diligence with coding and has to be enabled on boot so any time you didn't want it running you'd have to reboot and do the same for when you wanted it running.

While I'm not opposed to what they're doing in theory I'm also thrilled they're rolling it out in a game I'd never play. I'm all too happy for someone else to deal with their teething issues first because it's pretty much guaranteed to come to every other competitive multi-player game they sell.

Riot's anticheat they use for Valorant paved the way for this type of system. I have my doubts regarding EA's competence with regards to getting it right, but if they do it's clearly superior to third party anticheat systems.

I'd prefer that they just use a VM, Sandbox or UWP for the MP portion of their games as this would be infinitely less invasive for users. This would undoubtedly cost more money to develop and maintain so they're going the cheap/easy route.

WitcherOntheProwl wrote on Sep 8, 2022, 15:08:
Well CD was doing good until Shadow of the Tomb Raider. SotTR is one of the worst in terms of 90% of the game. I was hoping CD would get replaced by another dev that actually knew what a good story is.

They didn't make Shadow of the Tomb Raider Eidos Montreal did. Also Rhianna Pratchett wrote Tomb Raider and Rise of the Tomb Raider but they chose to not involve her after the first two games. There was also some high level corporate meddling when it came to the comic adaptations where they forced changes upon the creators which leads me to believe SqEnix had people butting in all across the franchise.

Steele Johnson wrote on Sep 6, 2022, 15:46:

thestryker wrote on Sep 6, 2022, 15:24:

Steele Johnson wrote on Sep 6, 2022, 13:27:
"These included the difficulties in adapting to a new generation of hardware, the challenges in QA testing more complex games, and the fact that so many big games are now made with multiple studios."

Testing more complex games? Sure, graphics tech has gotten more advanced, but I don't feel like gameplay has. In fact, I've yet to play a story-based first person shooter that has better AI than Half-Life 2, and that was released almost 20 years ago. I think what he's really getting at is the grinding nature of the job and how it affects the turnover rate these days. Keep your employees happy and you'll release a quality product (with minimal delays)

I think the biggest issue is actually the size of the games not so much complexity. I can't imagine how godawful it is trying to test an Assassin's Creed type game.

...

yeah, I can see that a bloated game like AC could be complicated to test, but honestly, the real fix for that is to make it smaller/shorter. I've yet to hear anyone say that they liked the length of that last 2 AC games. A repetitive grind in different locations doesn't make a better game. haha!

...

Oh I agree with you completely! It's just that is the direction many "AAA" games seem to be going in so it's inherently making the QA job a bigger nightmare than it already was (working conditions etc).