Rekall Incorporated to HardwareEnglish • edit-27 days agoIntel admits Core Ultra 9 285K will be slower than i9-14900K in gamingvideocardz.comexternal-linkmessage-square5fedilinkarrow-up132arrow-down12
arrow-up130arrow-down1external-linkIntel admits Core Ultra 9 285K will be slower than i9-14900K in gamingvideocardz.comRekall Incorporated to HardwareEnglish • edit-27 days agomessage-square5fedilink
minus-square@NegativeInflink23•7 days agoBy 3 frames per second at over 260 fps for a savings of 80 watts. Spend your watts on a better graphics card babe.
minus-squareAlphane MoonMlinkEnglish4•7 days agoTo be honest, I don’t think that’s too bad of a trade-off, but I can see how this would be controversial in the context of desktop computing.
minus-squareViklinkEnglish2•edit-27 days agoit’s bizarre how IHVs will absolutely crank power for such marnigal gains in average fps :( I’m happy ARL is taking this approach.
By 3 frames per second at over 260 fps for a savings of 80 watts.
Spend your watts on a better graphics card babe.
To be honest, I don’t think that’s too bad of a trade-off, but I can see how this would be controversial in the context of desktop computing.
it’s bizarre how IHVs will absolutely crank power for such marnigal gains in average fps :(
I’m happy ARL is taking this approach.