3 ms·
>Besides, NVMe SSDs are expensive Yes. If you're bargain hunting for gaming hardware you should just buy a console. Or, if you're seriously suggesting to put a
by BuckRogers 11y ago
>Besides, NVMe SSDs are expensive
Yes. If you're bargain hunting for gaming hardware you should just buy a console. Or, if you're seriously suggesting to put an Intel 750 into some old system like SandyBridge.. no comment. I would never recommend someone bother doing that.
Step up to an NVME setup, Skylake and do it right. Skylake i5 setups can be had for cheap. You're just arguing to argue on that point. Whether or not you have anything useful to add. The SB argument is common knowledge, an age old argument at that with no new information or insight.
>Name me an M.2 NVMe SSD that is more cost effective than a Mushkin Reactor (1TB, MLC, maxes out the SATA6gbps bus, $200), or has faster I/O speeds than a 750.
I'm not into cost-effective bargain hunting. Anyone who would gimp a nice Intel 750 SSD on a non-NVME system is a fool and you've suggested it.
>The cheapest of GPUs are significantly better than IGP.
No they aren't. The point about DX12_1 IGPs is that it's there, it's modern and it has already sucked the life out of the low end space and moving into the midrange with Iris Pro. Your stance is the 2010-era view on computers. Same era as Sandybridge TBH.
>I also care about adaptive sync / GSync technology, which isn't supported by Intel Iris.
This demonstrates how much you know, and why people shouldn't listen to what you're saying. Which can be heard on any PC gaming forum a thousand times over. This is HN though and it won't fly.
Intel has already committed to FreeSync. It's incoming with KabyLake rumor is that it may be enabled for Skylake.
>Intel's IGP doesn't even come close to a $100 GPU, let alone the midrange GPUs.
Wrong on its face. You just haven't cared to investigate recently.
>NOT on the desktop. Crystalwell is laptop-only, and 45W to boot.
Nope. The Crystalwell chips are going into NUCs from here on out. There's a 128MB L4 NUC coming in 2 1/2 weeks and a 256MB NUC coming in 12 months.
The fact you're talking about gaming and recommending an ES-2670 for that is just silly. That might be a good machine for compiling code. If that's your goal, it's still a bad idea when distcc can utterly embarrass that old power hungry chip.
For gaming, Broadwell already demonstrated what Crystalwell adds for gaming performance with a standalone GPU. And it's a game-changer, it's faster than the i7-6700K. Yes, it is. And it definitely mops up where it counts (99th percentile frame times) on SandyBridge too.
In 2 1/2 weeks you'll see Skylake with Crystalwell and Thunderbolt 3 absolutely delete any SandyBridge gaming rig you may have (even with an Intel 750, if you made the ridiculous decision to actually put one in SB). There might be more cost-effective ways to build a gaming rig, but if you're into saving money on hardware and gaming, buy a PS4.
I understand it's the prevailing thought among PC gaming kiddies, but holding your grip tighter on some old SandyBridge system won't change that in reality it's fallen pretty far behind in both overall platform performance and power efficiency.
- dragontamer 11y agoI can't find Iris Pro 580 on benchmark sites, because no gamer gives a care about that for gaming. The Iris Pro 5200 GT3e achieves Passmark 1,174. http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=Intel+Iris+Pro+5200 http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=Intel... If Iris Pro 580 GT4e is twice as good (Intel only claims 50% better), that's still not very good. Thats utterly awful actually. A $100 GPU is the R7 360, just off the top of my head. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125847 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125... Exactly $99 on Newegg right now. It achieves Passmark 3,150. No one gives a care about the $600 Crystalwell chip that performs worse than a $100 dGPU. Its utterly awful. You'd be insane to actually recommend this product to anybody. You claim that you care about performance. Do you even look at the benchmark numbers bro? You're claims are so far away from reality I really just don't know how I'm supposed to respond to you. Yes, a $600 Chip. I'm assuming this, unless you can figure out a cheaper Skylake Iris Pro: http://ark.intel.com/products/93336/Intel-Core-i7-6970HQ-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz http://ark.intel.com/products/93336/Intel-Core-i7-6970HQ-Pro... ---------- EDIT: I see that you're an anti-AMD guy. Okay, whatever. That's why there's another company out there. http://www.amazon.com/ZOTAC-GeForce-DisplayPort-Graphics-ZT-70605-10M/dp/B00KHUE0MC http://www.amazon.com/ZOTAC-GeForce-DisplayPort-Graphics-ZT-... NVidea GTX 750 Ti, $105 right now on Amazon. Passmark 3,686. Still utterly crushing your $600 iGPU with cheap-as-hell GPUs, no matter the brand. http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+750+Ti http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+75... Dude, I'm running a (what was at the time) high-end R9 290x, although this is more of a mid-range card now due to its age (Fury / 980 Ti). It has Passmark of 7,153, and you're seriously suggesting I "upgrade" to a Crystalwell Iris Pro that only achieves ~2000 Passmark? ------------ PS: Skylake performing 20% faster than Sandy Bridge after five years of updates is awful. ----------- > I'm not into cost-effective bargain hunting. Then why the hell are you bringing up M.2? Intel 750 is the best of the best and plugs directly into PCIe. Sandy Bridge handles it just fine. ----------- > In 2 1/2 weeks you'll see Skylake with Crystalwell and Thunderbolt 3 absolutely delete any SandyBridge gaming rig you may have Crystallwell has to beat a $100 dGPU first. And the benchmarks say otherwise. My bet? Crystalwell fails to beat a R7 360 / NVidia 750 Ti (NVidia's LAST generation BUDGET card) and I get to laugh at its worse-than console performance numbers despite the $600+ launch price for the chip. But hey man, show me those benchmark numbers if you disagree with my assessment.