If even half of Intel’s claims are true, this could be a big shake up in the midrange market that has been entirely abandoned by both Nvidia and AMD.

  • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    Yeah, 40 is just not for me. I rather go 1080p and hopefully get 75+ FPS. It’s really hard to go back from that to something as choppy as 40, even 60 feels kinda bad now.

    And yes, I use local LLMs too and 8 GB vram is kinda painful and limiting, though the biggest hurdle is still rocm & python which are an absolute mess. I’d love to get even more than 16 GB but that’s usually for the high end segments and gets real pricey real quick.

    Linux and me playing a lot of indie titles is also why I’d still avoid Intel, even if they had something in the upper midrange, but I still would’ve loved to see some competition in that area because then AMD would have to also deliver with their prices and that’d be good for me.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      Yeah, 40 isn’t great, but I play a lot of Switch games, and 40 is generally a good framerate for those. But I definitely notice it when switching between new AAA and indie/older games.

      Intel could’ve earned my business by making up for mediocre performance with a ton of VRAM so I could tinker w/ LLMs between games. But no, I guess I’ll stick w/ my current card until I can’t even get 40 FPS reliably.