Speculations about when Alder Lake will be launched are circulating.
Speculations about when Alder Lake will be launched are circulating.
Some folks are discussing 360 and 480hz screens... I just cap it at 100hz in most games because of heat and power issues, hehe.
It's surprising how much power these 1080p low/medium settings consume most of the time.
When engaging in games similar to MMOs, I keep the frame rate around 100-120hz to avoid overloading my GPU, which can reach about 340w. I’m comfortable with AAA or FPS titles for short sessions, but MMO experiences usually last several hours. Recently, I’ve set a 100fps cap while playing MMOs, added an 80% power ceiling, adjusted the voltage on my 900mv curve, and slightly lowered my clock speed.
I'm really excited about staying on 1080p. I also have several GPU profiles set up—one capped at 250 watts with a 1950 MHz curve, and another with a 384 watt limit but higher overclocking potential. When I play MMOs or RPGs, I don’t mind the FPS much, so I switch to the lower profile there too.
I can't recall back far enough, how much heads up do we typically get between a product officially existing, and it going on sale? That would seem to be the reasonable window for DDR5 to start being listed. I don't do insane fps gaming. I know it is a thing for some, but how much of it really makes a difference, and how much is "because they can"? For such a player, how bad is it for example if they went from 250fps average to 300fps? For me, it would make exactly zero difference apart from the GPU fan being more annoying. My old 6 core is the 8086k. From memory, 4.7 GHz all core, 5.0 single core boost. I think the best OC I got from it is 5.2 GHz all core. Is Zen 3 or Rocket Lake going to do meaningfully more fps? For those with deep wallets and want the best they can get, sure, go for it. For most it doesn't matter. You're not alone. On my 144 Hz G-sync display I often run it at 72 Hz. My gaming laptop is annoying. It only offers 165 Hz so I can't use vsync to limit. And not all games offer frame rate limiting. I think there's a setting in nvidia's options somewhere too, but I never got around to tinkering with it. I think my sweet spot for fps is around 80fps. It is still visibly smoother than 60fps, without ramping up the power usage much. That will depend on how many hundred fps you're pushing at the time Opposite for me. Not everyone wants insane fps. My laptop is 1080p and it looks so soft compared to my old desktop at 1440p, and my current main gaming system with a 4k TV. Being realistic, if you reach some kind of minimum for the game type, more doesn't really add much value. I like puzzle, simulation, strategy... well, you get the idea. High fps is totally irrelevant here. 60 fps minimum and I'm happy. The nearest I get to action is Genshin Impact which has a 60 fps cap anyway, and MMOs which are more network limited.
well, there is just a glimpse of extra smoothness playing at 360fps/hz its hard to explain, its not that there would be any kind of groundbreaking improvement like there was from 60hz to 144hz or anything like that. If you've played at 360fps on 360hz Monitors you start to miss it when you dont have it anymore, everything just feels and looks so much smoother and more "connected" compared to 144hz or below. I really enjoy it. I probably would also enjoy 4k gaming no doubt about that and it would also be a more obvious improvement visually, people should just decide which road to go based on theyre favorite genre's. If you play immersive single player games high refreshrate doesnt do anything for you but a higher resolution can. If you mostly play competitive shooters you probably already are at 144hz/240hz or above anyways. There is even the option of the middleground with 1440p 240hz now, so why not. Rocket lake is kinda worse than cometlake in terms of gaming performance, not in every game but in some it suffers alot, like -20% performance against comet lake, so if you go for high refreshrate gaming comet lake is still the thing to go for, because it offers you better overall performance in more titles. Zen3 is good enough but lacks good %lows and doesnt have the high ram speeds without losing on the FCLK clocks soo.. for 1080p gamers its only used by some that are mainly playing specific titles that benefit especially from zen3. Like f.e. games that really skyrocket in fps when having alot of L3 cache (valorant/csgo) .. or alot of cores. The reason why comet lake is so much better than f.e. Coffee lake is just its larger L3 cache with the 10900k aswell. Its not that the more cores or any "ipc improvement" would benefit you greatly or anything, but in some games L3 just pumps out FPS like mad. Also f.e. Rainbow Six Siege.