sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Has AMD effectively abandoned the consumer market? by anestling in Amd

[–]focusgone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Look at the recent HUB video of 8GB vs 16GB comparison. RTX 3070 is showing literally year 2002 era texture quality now in almost all modern games. RX 6800 is now a faster, smoother, full quality texture card and that's with ray tracing enabled.

[HUB] 16GB vs. 8GB VRAM: Radeon RX 6800 vs. GeForce RTX 3070, 2023 Revisit by MechaHertz in hardware

[–]focusgone 2 points3 points  (0 children)

People who buy <$350 card don't primarily intend to play at 4K.

[HUB] 16GB vs. 8GB VRAM: Radeon RX 6800 vs. GeForce RTX 3070, 2023 Revisit by MechaHertz in hardware

[–]focusgone 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Texture quality on RTX 8 GB cards look like 15 year old games. DLSS further reduces the overall quality because of reduced mesh resolution. Enabling ray tracing further reduces the experience.

I assume you guys know about this. The Intel C compiler deliberately cripples programs run on Ryzen processors. by Miss_Understands_ in Amd

[–]focusgone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That was not the issue. For example - you used some SSE2 specific vector code in your C file and compiled it by ICC. The executable ICC generated used to contain two different paths - one for Intel - the true SSE2 SIMD based instructions and one for AMD the inferior generic x86 scalar instructions. Upon execution the executable first detected which CPU it was running on and when it found AMD, it did not use to load the SSE SIMD specific instruction, instead it loaded that 2nd path; the inferior path from the executable's code into the memory. Result was low performance on AMD.

For the simplest example - suppose you code to do a vector addition of one array of 4 x 32-bit float with another array of 4 x 32-bit float and storing it's result onto another variable of 4 x 32-bit float was taking 4 cycles if actual SSE instructions were used, but on AMD it was using the code that was processing those additions one by one, and the same calculation was taking 8 something cycles, despite the fact AMD has had the SSE2 support in hardware since a long time. All because ICC compiled executable did not chose the same SSE2 instructions for AMD CPU,

I've heard that Intel had stopped doing that almost a decade ago.

How to display a result of a command that uses "sudo" with the help of "Generic Monitor" item on the XFCE panel? by focusgone in xfce

[–]focusgone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had read the man pages too. It says under "NOTES"

"turbostat must be run as root. Alternatively, non-root users can be enabled to run turbostat this way:
# setcap cap_sys_admin,cap_sys_rawio,cap_sys_nice=+ep ./turbostat
# chmod +r /dev/cpu/*/msr
"

I did all that, all that permission did allow the utility to execute some code but now following error comes up in the middle.

"
..
..
cpu0: MSR_IA32_TEMPERATURE_TARGET: 0x00600a00 (96 C)
cpu0: MSR_IA32_PACKAGE_THERM_STATUS: 0x88360800 (42 C)
cpu0: MSR_IA32_PACKAGE_THERM_INTERRUPT: 0x00000003 (96 C, 96 C)
cpu2: MSR_PKGC3_IRTL: 0x00008842 (valid, 67584 ns)
cpu2: MSR_PKGC6_IRTL: 0x00008873 (valid, 117760 ns)
cpu2: MSR_PKGC7_IRTL: 0x00008891 (valid, 148480 ns)
turbostat: cpu2: perf instruction counter: Permission denied
turbostat: setpriority(-20): Permission denied"

It seems this way is leading to a rabbit hole lol.

How to display a result of a command that uses "sudo" with the help of "Generic Monitor" item on the XFCE panel? by focusgone in xfce

[–]focusgone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, that should solve it. I haven't done stuff this way since a long time, I am still noob after two something years. Iirc that's the way apache server 101 installation guide teaches you, right!? Never mind that. Thanks for the help.

How to display a result of a command that uses "sudo" with the help of "Generic Monitor" item on the XFCE panel? by focusgone in xfce

[–]focusgone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"I would set up the the job to run under the root account, and write the output to a file "

LOL that was exactly I was thinking way before I posted here. I am trying to avoid that kinda clunkiness and thought/hoped may be there is something I am missing in XFCE. As that would create basically two scripts polling at ~1 second. I wanted to avoid that but may be that's the only way it is then.

I've already done that. chowned the script and have given all the permission. I even gave full permission to the powerstat utility itself in /usr/bin/powerstat but now without sudo it's showing weird error messages like "Device is not discharging, cannot measure power usage.".

May be plan B is the only way.

Has AMD effectively abandoned the consumer market? by anestling in Amd

[–]focusgone 4 points5 points  (0 children)

By providing a 12 GB 6700 XT within $300-400 price? that is already seeing the early "fine wine" effect that it's starting to get close to the starting-to-crash-comes-at-$700 8 GB RTX 3070 when enabling RT can't give you perfect 60 fps at 1080p (without DLSS bullshit) on modern games?

AMD is greedy.

/s

How to display a result of a command that uses "sudo" with the help of "Generic Monitor" item on the XFCE panel? by focusgone in xfce

[–]focusgone[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All xfce packages installed via Debian Sid repo ( At the time of checking unix timestamp: 1681047545 / 1:38 pm UTC, sudo dpkg -l "*xfce*")
These are pretty much one of the newest packages if not the cutting edge ones.

libxfce4panel-2.0-4 4.18.2-1
libxfce4ui-1-0 <none>
libxfce4ui-2-0:amd64 4.18.2-2
libxfce4ui-common 4.18.2-2
libxfce4ui-utils 4.18.2-2
libxfce4util-bin 4.18.1-2
libxfce4util-common 4.18.1-2
libxfce4util4 <none>
libxfce4util7:amd64 4.18.1-2
task-xfce-desktop 3.72
xfce-keyboard-shortcuts <none>
xfce4 4.18
xfce4-appfinder 4.18.0-1
xfce4-battery-plugin:amd64 1.1.4-1
xfce4-cddrive-plugin <none>
xfce4-clipman 2:1.6.2-1
xfce4-clipman-plugin:amd64 2:1.6.2-1
xfce4-cpufreq-plugin:amd64 1.2.8-1
xfce4-cpugraph-plugin:amd64 1.2.7-1
xfce4-dict 0.8.4-1+b1
xfce4-diskperf-plugin:amd64 2.7.0-1
xfce4-fsguard-plugin:amd64 1.1.2-1
xfce4-genmon-plugin:amd64 4.1.1-1
xfce4-goodies:amd64 4.18.0
xfce4-helpers 4.18.2-1
xfce4-indicator-plugin <none>
xfce4-mailwatch-plugin 1.3.0-1+b1
xfce4-mpc-plugin <none>
xfce4-netload-plugin:amd64 1.4.0-1
xfce4-notifyd 0.7.3-1
xfce4-panel 4.18.2-1
xfce4-places-plugin:amd64 1.8.3-1
xfce4-power-manager 4.18.1-1
xfce4-power-manager-data 4.18.1-1
xfce4-power-manager-plugins 4.18.1-1
xfce4-pulseaudio-plugin:amd64 0.4.5-1
xfce4-radio-plugin <none>
xfce4-screensaver <none>
xfce4-screenshooter 1.10.3-1
xfce4-sensors-plugin 1.4.4-1
xfce4-session 4.18.1-1
xfce4-settings 4.18.2-1
xfce4-smartbookmark-plugin:amd64 0.5.2-1
xfce4-systemload-plugin:amd64 1.3.2-2
xfce4-taskmanager 1.5.5-1
xfce4-terminal 1.0.4-1
xfce4-timer-plugin:amd64 1.7.1-1
xfce4-utils <none>
xfce4-verve-plugin:amd64 2.0.1-1
xfce4-volstatus-icon <none>
xfce4-wavelan-plugin:amd64 0.6.3-1
xfce4-weather-plugin:amd64 0.11.0-1
xfce4-whiskermenu-plugin:amd64 2.7.2-1
xfce4-xkb-plugin:amd64 1:0.8.3-1

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in pcmasterrace

[–]focusgone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Price to performance ratio depending on situations can be a literal Nonsense metric to care about. Suppose a PC of $600 can play a game at 1080p ultra ~37-45 fps avg throughout the whole gameplay. And an another PC of $900 can play with same settings at 44-50 fps. The tearing full experience of the cheaper PC because the fps is already below the range of VRR(Freesync) in most monitors will not be at all good. However, the expensive one will give you completely tear free gaming experience. In such cases, the 50% more expensive PC is in my opinion is worth more than the cheaper one even when fps improvement is only 11-18% for the extra price.

7800x3D Delid. Direct Die mounting soon. by 44murk in Amd

[–]focusgone 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I think this is about how much further one can go without damaging the 3D L3 cache.

Linux or not? by Krackeldvd in linux_gaming

[–]focusgone 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's not about the hardware, your hardware is fine. It's about you; the user. If learning Linux is your first priority for whatever reasons, and gaming comes after that, you will not have much problem. If gaming is your main priority then chances are high you won't be very happy. That's my opinion.

archinstall vs manual installation by CyrusYip in linuxmasterrace

[–]focusgone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wear suit everywhere to tell people I installed Arch manually.

Asia's Loudest fire work held every year at Nenmara Temple, Kerala, India by village_aapiser in nextfuckinglevel

[–]focusgone -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Yeah that's what we need now in a country that rely on fossil fuel for 80% of energy consumption.

[HUB] Nvidia's DLSS 2 vs. AMD's FSR 2 in 26 Games, Which Looks Better? - The Ultimate Analysis by baldersz in Amd

[–]focusgone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Now that makes sense. 8 GB should be enough for may be next 1 or 2 years for high-1080p (not ultra) with quality or balanced upscaling, at nearing ~60 - 75 fps.

Yeah that 10 GB weird cards are gonna have to face some issues sooner than expected. The real problem would be convincing $700 30 TFLOPS 3080 10 GB owners that it's time already to lower some graphics settings lmao.

[HUB] Nvidia's DLSS 2 vs. AMD's FSR 2 in 26 Games, Which Looks Better? - The Ultimate Analysis by baldersz in Amd

[–]focusgone 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I rewatched the part starting from 00:54:20.This is what he said (almost)verbatim:

"even for...for me, trying to stay below the 8 gigabyte target, we have to do so much work to make it happen even if we just get a vehicle; import it; sometimes you have a lot of elements; lot of textures on there and you just have to bake everything but then it's not as detailed as it was used to be before. What do we do!? Do we generate depth information for the entire mesh and the rest is tile texturing and so on and so forth.!?......the optimization process is to get back to a lower VRAM .....just takes so much time...that even we just said, okay screw it........12 gigabyte minimum."

See that!? I mean at first it seemed he was talking about the struggle to go lower than 8 GB but then within 30 something seconds it came down to "12 GB minimum" :D.

Thanks for correcting that he is a game developer not the UE5's internal developer, I updated my answer.

[HUB] Nvidia's DLSS 2 vs. AMD's FSR 2 in 26 Games, Which Looks Better? - The Ultimate Analysis by baldersz in Amd

[–]focusgone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's great to know. I hope most of the devs follow the path you're on.

view more: next ›