• Breaking News

    Monday, November 9, 2020

    Home Unlabelled Hardware support: [Linus Tech Tips] How Could They Mess Up This Bad... Again - $1500 PC Secret Shopper 2 Part 1

    Hardware support: [Linus Tech Tips] How Could They Mess Up This Bad... Again - $1500 PC Secret Shopper 2 Part 1

    November 09, 2020

    Hardware support: [Linus Tech Tips] How Could They Mess Up This Bad... Again - $1500 PC Secret Shopper 2 Part 1

    [Linus Tech Tips] How Could They Mess Up This Bad... Again - $1500 PC Secret Shopper 2 Part 1

    Posted: 08 Nov 2020 12:09 PM PST

    PS5 vs Xbox Series X review scores piss me off

    Posted: 08 Nov 2020 12:27 PM PST

    This will mark me as a fanboy to many people, but I'm not. I don't want a Series X and actually planned to get a PS5 this generation. I skipped the PS3 and PS4, so that's why I'm so disappointed by the new hardware and confused about the glowing reviews.

    1. The standard PS5 is the same price as the Series X but less powerful. It will perform worse in multi-platform games. This is down to both the CPU being slower, the GPU being less powerful, and both being variable. It's not a "let's wait and see" situation because we know how the technology in both system works. If you're reviewing a console at release, this should factor into your score.

    2. The PS5 uses more power. If it was more powerful that would at least have an explanation, but it's weaker and therefore less efficient. That should be a knock against it because power efficiency really does matter these days. We all care about the environment!

    3. PS5 has good backwards compatibility for PS4 but does not have ANY backwards compatibility for PS1, PS2, or PS3. These are objectively features that are missing compared to Series X compatibility with 6th and 7th gen.

    4. The Series X has more storage space, and both the internal and add-in storage is user-replacable. We have also seen that a lot of backwards compatible games load faster on Series X. I think reviewers really dropped the ball by not waiting for more next gen multi-plats in order to run apple-to-apples loading comparisons. PS5 still deserves credit for the on-paper speed advantage and the non-proprietary add-in storage.

    5. The PS5 has inferior resolution output to Series X. It doesn't support VRR, ALLM, or 1440p. It also doesn't support 8K, though that doesn't really matter. These should still factor into a hardware review.

    6. The actual box is very large, the stand feels cheap, and the design could most charitably be described as "divisive". While nowhere near the most important part of a console, comparing it to the objectively smaller and less attention-grabbing Series X should be considered in a review.

    7. Yes, the controller is cool and inventive. This should factor into reviews, but I don't think it accounts for the review score differences we're seeing.

    I know some people will say the usual stuff: "reviews are subjective, scores don't matter, how can you say anything when you haven't played either console yet?" etc. My view it that any hardware review for a console at release should be about the hardware. Well we all know about the hardware at this point, and one is objectively, measurably superior for the same price. If your review says that one box launched with more/better games, that's not really a hardware review and should instead be an article about which console has the better launch lineup. The idea you can award a "90" to one console for having exclusives at launch is idiotic because in three months, that number will be utterly meaningless. These launch scores should all be for just the hardware, or should explicitly be rating the console's launch and say that in the title.

    I'm annoyed that reviewers aren't knocking Sony in the area that they deserved to be knocked this generation. They made a bigger, weaker box with worse backwards compatibility. Whether or not they release with more exclusives, or if people expect it to have more/better exclusives over time, the console hardware at release is inferior to the competition. I think a lot of reviewers are probably being swayed by their affection for PlayStation and Microsoft's disastrous 8th gen.

    Xbox deserved praise for releasing better hardware this generation, but they deserve criticism for their woeful launch lineup. PS5 deserves praise for its launch lineup, but the hardware deserves criticism. Lumping all this together into "hardware" reviews that will never be updated is misleading. I want Xbox to do well this generation so that Sony doesn't rest on their laurels and continues to push. Awarding them higher scores for worse hardware is not helping.

    submitted by /u/aimlessdrivel
    [link] [comments]

    AMD Ryzen 5 Linux Performance Review

    Posted: 08 Nov 2020 11:59 AM PST

    Power Lost: A Better Way to Compare PSU Efficiency (2012)

    Posted: 08 Nov 2020 04:06 PM PST

    [Hardware Unboxed] 6-core Gaming Beast, AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Review vs. 3700X/10600K

    Posted: 08 Nov 2020 02:01 AM PST

    Upcoming NVME drives (fast sequential performance, 2TB+)

    Posted: 09 Nov 2020 02:55 AM PST

    A14X Bionic allegedly benchmarked days before Apple Silicon Mac event

    Posted: 08 Nov 2020 02:15 AM PST

    Difference between a CPU core and thread

    Posted: 09 Nov 2020 02:34 AM PST

    First of, I apologize if this is the wrong subreddit for this kind of question.

    I'm starting to get into PC hardware and building. But I seriously have a problem with understanding the difference between CPU cores and threads.

    I know that cores are physical, and threads are virtual, and that usually there is 1 thread per core. But with hyper-threading, core can have multiple threads.

    So would there be a difference between a 4 core with 4 threads (1 per core), and a 2 core with 4 threads (2 per core) cpu?

    submitted by /u/Dragoon5602
    [link] [comments]
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment