Video Cards

The woodshed is where you found the paddle to beat the shit out of your kid. It is a widely known idiom.
My Thinkpad X1 Extreme has a discrete GPU and still weighs less tha 2kg. I know your LG Gram is probably around half that, but computers in that class are a different beast for other reasons as well.
 
Last edited:
The rumors are that Zen 5 APUs coming next year will be competitive out of the box with low and mid-tier RTX 4000 mobile graphics. We all get tired of hearing things are changing real soon now, but this is probably good for a lot of PC users.
 
No, I never heard that story. It sounds like something from a Victorian era. We had no sheds in SoCal. :LOL:
There probably was physical child abuse, but we were naive about that.

It's fine if AMD is skipping a generation of APUs.

I'm really hoping that there is a drop-in replacement for the 7950x in 2024. That would drastically maximize value of my system and keep it relevant until the end of Windows 10.
 
Last edited:
I think it's a safe bet there will be another generation in a year. At the same time, there is really nothing so terrible about Windows 11. I think we'll see a Windows 12 relatively soon. Adoption rates on 11 have been pretty low and Microsoft knows it.

It's sounding like AMD is going to adopt efficiency cores in their next generation CPUs. I'm mildly skeptical that AMD will stick with the same socket with another big architectural change.
 
I know that 11 will be mandatory eventually, but I just "upgraded" all systems to 10 in 2021-2022. It's just a huge hassle to deal with the data suck of Windows and have a half dozen acounts with emails. I'm still not clear if it is possible to login to the local machine without a password. I will go nuts o_O if it is necessary to login to computers 30 times a day since several are rebooted often. The constant login of the Amazon is bad enough. :(
 
I also haven't upgraded to Windows 11 because I've been too lazy to bother redeploying my system with TPM 2.0 enabled. I don't do much besides gaming on it so I haven't really cared for anything in Win11.
 
If you upgrade or install fresh from original Windows 11 Pro media, you are not forced to create a Microsoft account. We've talked about this.
You should be able to back up all your account settings if you're worried about that, and if your data is properly segregated to a drive besides your OS drive, it should just be a matter of pointing the account folders back.

Also, just in case anyone was wondering, Windows Easy Transfer from Windows 7 and 8 still works with Windows 11., or you can use something like this.
 
I'm not sure what is meant by an account in Windows. I don't recall ever having that or is it something that secretly exists automatically? C: has all the programs and the settings in those programs but no data. I restore the entirety of C: from MacriumReflex spanned files a few times per week.
 
Microsoft Accounts? They're analogous to Google Accounts that anyone with Gmail or an Android device would have or Apple accounts for anyone with an iThing. Microsoft started pushing for them in Windows 8 and is making them more and more mandatory as of the most recent Windows 10 and 11 release versions.
 
I have that Google gMail thing for the Androidic phones. That's exactly what I don't want in Windows.
 
Equally fun fact (that I just learned): If you later associate a Microsoft account with your Windows 11 Local account and choose "User this account everywhere in Windows" instead of "Microsoft Apps Only", even though your account is still displayed as a local account, there does NOT seem to be a way to disassociate that initial account from your user profile. The local password still works, but even a sweep through Credential Manager and sweeping the registry doesn't seem to prevent the association.

This isn't a massive deal breaker most of the time, but I've run across it on my lab PCs a couple times now, such that they now have a security policy in place that prevents users from signing in on a Microsoft account at all; I had people signing in to their onedrive, associating the whole PC with their account and thereby hosing the machines in question.

OK and the actual reason I posted: My datacenter guy only wants $250 for 2080Tis or 12GB 3060s. 100% that they were mining cards but at least I know the conditions in which they were used. I have to say I'm tempted to buy a couple at least.
 
Last edited:
2080Tis were good cards, that is what I ran before this, but the 3060 is probably pretty close performance wise and much better on power. That is what I'd pick.

I suspect that my system right now is in that "local account" tied to MS account situation. Not a big deal because it works the way I want it and I don't share my PC, but that is a pretty big issue for MS IMO.
 
I see a MSI Gaming GeForce RTX 3060 for $338-30 coupon on the Amazon and from the Amazon. I'm not convinced that $250 is so great for a heavily used product.
 
LunarMist said:
I see a MSI Gaming GeForce RTX 3060 for $338-30 coupon on the Amazon and from the Amazon. I'm not convinced that $250 is so great for a heavily used product.
Click to expand...

MSI entry level GPUs wouldn't make my personal cut because MSI seems to prioritize fan loudness as if it's a feature. I had really good luck with the ten GTX1080TIs I bought last time through the same guy. I still see the people who have those cards fairly regularly. No one has mentioned having a GPU-related issue with any of them. I suspect that mining GPUs are probably fine when they've been run in a controlled environment like a datacenter that's shoving 60°F air ait every intake. The bigger issue I'm aware with mining cards is that there are nondescript cards that have been flashed with weirdly upgraded firmware. These cards are a mix of name brands (Asus, Gigabyte, PNY, EVGA) that I suspect were all bought at the local Best Buy.
 
That was just an example. I have no idea what you do with all those computers and old parts.
 
Firmware is certainly a concern, but the nightmare I saw was running wooden racks of GPUs in open-ended tents as a "solution" to the cooling issue. Those seemed to be corroding a bit.
 
LunarMist said:
That was just an example. I have no idea what you do with all those computers and old parts.
Click to expand...

I build PCs, mostly as a hobby at this point. Having parts funneling through my life is also an excuse to get and stay current on upgrades as well. Gaming PCs are about the most interesting thing most people want, so there is a degree to which I pay attention to that stuff.

ddrueding said:
Firmware is certainly a concern, but the nightmare I saw was running wooden racks of GPUs in open-ended tents as a "solution" to the cooling issue. Those seemed to be corroding a bit.
Click to expand...


Nah. My datacenter is in a weird building, but it has all the regulated power and warm and cool aisles and cages with racks. The place was a rail service depot that was purchased and used by AT&T until the 80s. It's been a datacenter in function for decades now. I've seen photos of Slavic setups that look like they medical relief for a natural disaster, or some crypto-bro's spare bedroom. Those setups were real.

With regard to the value proposition of used GPUs specifically, I'll point to this video from one of dd's favorite creators, which suggests even better outcomes than I would've personally guessed.
 
nVidia has apparently continued its bold new direction of shipping GPUs that aren't worth buying. Hope you wanted good ray tracing at 1080p in your $400 or $500 card because that's the only really compelling feature it brings to the table.
 
So for $400 what would you buy for a new Windows computer, AMD, Intel, or nVIDia?
 
For myself I'd get an nVidia card because I really dislike having to worry about stability, drivers, and compatibility. That would mean a 3060ti in that price range I think. But for a build for someone else I'd probably feel obligated to go AMD, as nVidia is not a value proposition at the moment. I look forward to when I can recommend an Intel card, but they need another generation of cards at least before I'd sell one to someone as part of a build.
 
If Intel is so much better, then wouldn't nVIDia lose sales and reduce the price?
I have not used the AMD GPU since XP, so I don't know about the cost or performance.
What AMD GPU is similar to the 4070Ti for the AI Denoise? Is it cheaper or do they keep similar prices?
 
AMD released the RX7600 today, which has an MSRP of $270. It keeps pace with the corridor of Arc 770 - 3060Ti but it only has 8GB RAM and doesn't have either Intel's driver support for content creation or nVidia's AI, but given that it's priced reasonably, it's at least worth consideration.
 
But isn't there a correlation between AMD and the nVIDia cards for the levels of 4070, 4070TB, 4080, 4090, etc?
Is there a calculation to compare them or is only empirical testing possible?
Why is 8GB an "only" situation? It seems like plenty, but I only played two games so far.
 
LunarMist said:
Why is 8GB an "only" situation? It seems like plenty, but I only played two games so far.
Click to expand...
A lot of new games released in the last 6 mths seem to use 10GB+ of VRAM, especially if you enable ultra settings and RT effects and run resolutions 1440p+. If you dial down the settings (especially lower quality textures), you can get VRAM usage under 8GB.

I think it was Hardware Unboxed did a review between the 12GB RTX 3060 and 8GB RTX 3060Ti, and in the games that used more VRAM, the regular 3060 gave better frame rates than the 3060Ti, all because the 3060 has more VRAM...
 
LunarMist said:
If Intel is so much better, then wouldn't nVIDia lose sales and reduce the price?
Click to expand...
Ideally yes, but Intel had a a poor launch due to less-than-perfect drivers (especially in games that used DX9), so a lot of the initial fan-fare was lost.
AFAIK, Intel has fixed a lot of the issues in the drivers and the A750 and A770 are good offerings for modern games.

But nVidia IMHO also has become a little arrogant lately and just assumes that the buyers will just buy nVidia, so they can market/price what ever they want and people will still buy.
The only area where nVidia has a lead is in CUDA (an nVidia only technology, but used widely in productivity/creative applications) and RT performance. If neither of these are a requirement for you, then both AMD or Intel offer better value for money.
 
I am clueless about the RAM. I suppose it is caused by manufacturing the 3D effect. They don't need many MB just to display the flat image the humans see on the screen.
 
Usually the XY00 AMD and X0Y0 nVidia card are approximately on par, up to about the x080 level on the nVidia side. AMD's high end usually doesn't reach the ridiculous high of whatever the x090 can do, but AMD's top end is also far cheaper. AMD sometimes adds some extra SKUs to fill in between the mainline products, like the RX6650.

Cheaping out on VRAM is really weak sauce because it limits the lifespan and utility of the card. 8GB cards have been relatively mainstream probably for three full generations of cards at this point. They can't be the norm going forward.

Architecturally, everything that isn't an x86 PC will typically have a single pool of fast RAM that's shared between CPU and GPU and those two things will be on the same SoC. PCs can share RAM with a GPU as well but everything I've ever read about them doing that makes it sounds like it's profoundly inefficient. I understand that this is why PS5 game ports are uniquely demanding for Windows PCs.
 
My understanding is the AI utilizes the Tense Cores. Some of the MAC folks are irritable because their very expensive Studios are suboptimal on the same tasks, lacking the better cores.
 
Mercutio said:
Usually the XY00 AMD and X0Y0 nVidia card are approximately on par, up to about the x080 level on the nVidia side. AMD's high end usually doesn't reach the ridiculous high of whatever the x090 can do, but AMD's top end is also far cheaper. AMD sometimes adds some extra SKUs to fill in between the mainline products, like the RX6650.

Cheaping out on VRAM is really weak sauce because it limits the lifespan and utility of the card. 8GB cards have been relatively mainstream probably for three full generations of cards at this point. They can't be the norm going forward.

Architecturally, everything that isn't an x86 PC will typically have a single pool of fast RAM that's shared between CPU and GPU and those two things will be on the same SoC. PCs can share RAM with a GPU as well but everything I've ever read about them doing that makes it sounds like it's profoundly inefficient. I understand that this is why PS5 game ports are uniquely demanding for Windows PCs.
Click to expand...
Is the VRAM really so expensive, or are the extra cores the cost driver? The architecture is massively parallel on multiple levels, but probably the higher GPUs are low in yields. Will the software need more RAM in few years or is the display resolution the obsoleting factor.
 
The people who make this hardware work to shave fractions of a penny off the costs per unit, and it's not like GDDR6 or 7 is exactly cheap. For nVidia especially, gating the additional texture memory to high end products is a way to ensure that there's a limited lifespan for the cheaper parts and drives additional demand for the more expensive models. It's not like the direction for increased memory demand is going down.

There's always an application for additional video memory. There's some truth to the utility of AI superscaling textures does help, but people still want to push up to 4k AND turn on all the eye candy and a big part of doing that is having the RAM to store it all.

The matter of whether extra VRAM helps for content creation is still kind of up in the air for me. All the cards I have sitting around here are 4 or 8GB.
 
I think we all use different processing applications. Numbers for Adobe software may not have a meaningful correlation to DXO or Capture One. It's also true that improvements are coming very quickly.

I do feel like Intel has gotten written off in GPU discussion. I've seen A770s sell for under $300. They were painted poorly based on need for a relatively new motherboard feature and some deficiency in legacy DirectX gaming, but they're very strong for content creation and I think they're the least expensive option for a 16GB card. They're a legit option, especially for the people who aren't concerned whether they get 300 or 400fps in Counterstrike.
 
I love my A770, but I bought it expecting problems and it delivered a few times. I'm also not really able to leverage the compute power since the programs I would like to use only accelerate with CUDA. I bet it's a folding monster, but I'm not really interested in incurring the wrath of my wallet when the electric bill comes in, so that's purely theoretical for now. I have had more and less problems because of Linux -- for example, there still doesn't seem to be a proper X11 driver for the damn thing, they just expect you to use modesetting or fbdev I guess, so I had to install and figure out Wayland. Meanwhile, I get around all the issues it had with DX9 and such by simply converting it all to Vulkan in the first place. I still feel like I got a fair deal at $349 back in January or whenever it was.
 
It looks like nVidia 4000-series GPUs are getting big markdowns. 20% off puts their price almost at the point of sanity. Apparently sales of graphics cards are the lowest they've been in actual decades and pretty much no one is happy with that state of affairs.
 
Oh Gigabyte...


My take on it is, Gigabyte is using a slightly more brittle PCB material (than other manufacturers) is that more prone to cracking when installing/removing, coupled with traces close to stress points on the retention mechanism leading to failures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top