OpenGL vs. Vulkan With AMDGPU-PRO 16.40, Compared To NVIDIA On Linux

[aht0]

For example what kind shit intel laptop you can buy with 460 euros, when having good one with amd graphics, 8GB ddr4 RAM and 256GB ssd.
https://www.notebooksbilliger.de/not...049ng+notebook

Good luck with that laptop. First, it's HP. It means it's got whitelisted BIOS which is like stone around your neck from the moment you want to upgrade something like wireless card in it. I especially love the marketing text. Letzteres unterstützt den schnellen 802.11 b/g/n-Standard.
I did not bother searching for it but you probably would have to buy insanely priced "HP"-branded wireless for an official upgrade. If you happen to live in a area with many 2,4Ghz APs you are literally fu*ked. With an "AC"-capable AP at home you are also seriously bottlenecked.

Second. You buy something "cheap" with a "premium" component like SSD, you can be pretty sure it's going to be as cheap as possible for manufacturer to get away with it. It's pretty common pattern with OEM desktop PCs. You'd be better off buying your own SSD and adding it yourself. Or let someone authorized by HP add it.

"As cheap as possible for manufacturer to get away with" also applies to build quality. Thinner, thinnest, lightest - combine with cheap plastic and you have weak casing prone to cracks. Even worse, might have weak screen hinges or their mounts since you have not much plastic for hinges to be attached to. So, it's going to last your warranty period tops and then you get to buy new one. Congratz. That tendency seems to keep going worse as years go past.

Now, explain me why do you need AMD "graphics" in laptop? You can't play with it, I quarantee it. All it does is mostly generating extra heat. This by the way, could cause male fertility problems (your balls are hanging outside the body for a very good reason). To make it short. I would not buy that HP for myself.

Laugh as much as you like about "second handing". Getting dead laptop with a sturdy casing and building it up how you like it, gets you usually better performing machine in the end. And quite a lot cheaper. And is far more interesting tinkering. Things like laptop CPU's and RAM are dirt cheap on aftermarket, since so many motherboards die. Often all you need to do, is to buy dead hulk for like 10 euros from someone and order new motherboard from manufacturer for 100-150 euros top. And then browse eBay for mobile processors. My wife's Dell Inspiron 15R started out with an i3, 4Gb ram and 500Gb HDD. It has now i7, 8Gb ram and intel's 240Gb SSD in it. She wanted to buy new laptop but I talked her out of it and pimped her old one up. Cost me probably 1/5 of what her new one would have cost. And is probably still better performing. And you must love screen hinges of an old Inspiron. Would need crowbar to yank them lose from casing.

Batteries are only good argument for getting new laptop. You'd have to trust replacement battery NOT to be ticking bomb..

Intel fanboys are building their computers from second hand parts. Product cost is a significant factor, there no sense to buy intel desktop or laptop for most of pc users. So intel has fired 12 000 workers and is going downhill. Only software engineers and other professionals need fastest available cores.

Second hand parts mean less wasting. Our society wastes already too much. Do you even know how much water gets polluted in order to produce your precious machines?

I have had only 1 desktop cpu from Intel in 15 years. This happened 5 years after AMD produced it's most powerful CPU and started twiddling thumbs. Yeah, accuse me of being Intel fanboy. Dissatisfied former AMD user would be more accurate.

Only software engineers and other professionals need fastest available cores.

Ignorance is a bliss.

[aht0]

Here we are discussing average consumers choices and not yours.

Wrong. You asked me..

For example what kind shit intel laptop you can buy with 460 euros, when having good one with amd graphics, 8GB ddr4 RAM and 256GB ssd.

https://www.notebooksbilliger.de/notebooks/hp+15+ba049ng+notebook

..and I gave you my opinion in return. Both about your shown "good laptop" example and about topic in general.

With AMD A10-9600P you play many games and stop writing bs:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Bristol....168477.0.html

technically you "can play" but on not the level even average player would be satisfied with. I'll tell you this. I am unable to play BF4 well on anything under 100-120 frames per second. There is very good reason why gaming monitors are either 120Hz or 144Hz.

"well" being defined as I can beat other players "at least twice as much as they beat me". It does presume smooth game play, constant fps and no lag.

now check this link out. http://www.notebookcheck.net/Bristol....168477.0.html

Battlefield 4 is listed as 35,8 fps on "low" settings, 18,2fps on "high" and effin' 7 fps on "ultra" video settings. 7 fps is like picture slide show. 35,8 while technically playable, it's not neither smooth or enjoyable. It's still lagfest. You see enemy, want to react, move mouse but he is going to kill you because your flippin' computer decided it can't render scenes or load models of the world around you that fast and as a result your game character is dead. Servers decide the result, game clients feed data to it. When one client is too slow because hardware can't quite support it's needed computations fast enough - you lose.

I can't actually see single tested game reach even 60fps on "low" settings. It's pretty pathetic compared to dedicated cards.

Special gaming laptops exist but such are hideously expensive. For a reason, again. Look at Dell Alienware for ready examples. And they usually sport dedicated graphics cards.

[aht0]

(1)There are hundreds of older games that you play with AMD A10-9600P, but not with same fps intel shit at the same price level. I did not ask you(2) nothing.

1. Sorta funny. First you are pointing me a link with a bunch of game tests against particular APU, trying to convince me that it's possible to game with it. Then start talking about older games when I point out some of the particulars in the test. BF4 was btw one of the oldest in the test and running bit better than most. I took it as an example because im quite familiar with it myself. There are 2 newer battlefields out which demand even more from hardware than "4". In my eyes, it's already "old" enough and losing player base whom are migrating to newer iterations of the game.

Yeah sure. Actually I think you could use that particular APU for gaming. But with a few qualifiers. Not on enjoyable level with any 3D games newer than roughly 6-7 years. And that presuming you'd be using Windows, not Linux.

2. Making the relevant quoted part of your text bold this time.

For example what kind shit intel laptop you can buy with 460 euros, when having good one with amd graphics, 8GB ddr4 RAM and 256GB ssd.

https://www.notebooksbilliger.de/notebooks/hp+15+ba049ng+notebook

[aht0]

In the list there are many game over 40 fps and they are all playable.

I now your English is not native language, but you means also in general. You is used for passive. You have to admit that rebuilding a laptop is not a every mans job.

If, then only single player mode's. Some games have them next to multiplayer. Some are pure "single player". And on "low" graphics settings which tends to be ugly.

Granted. Did not think that way indeed.

Also there is other uses for gpu than gaming, like cad and picture rendering, using gpu cores for science and virtual money making. Intel igpu are total crap under 500 euro laptop category. It is not good if Intel is a monopoly even for intel religion believers. Luckily for all amd finance is going up now thanks to Lisa Su and her team.

CAD.. for pretty small models if and when. Because of not enough RAM in regular laptop and because the nature of the APU itself. CAD works best with a workstation graphics. Gaming graphics is optimized for games which are mostly predefined bitmaps-textures and low count polygon-geometry. Getting good visual suffices and priorities are fast loading and high fps.

Workstation graphics cards has to be able to manipulate billions of triangles and geometry must be measurable in many decimal places at once. For example, same drawing might include details measurable in micron range and also in hundreds of meters. Get it wrong and you've got collapsing bridge or sinking yacht. Thus workstation video cards tend to have really good double precision floating point capabilities while gaming cards have not. Reason why AMD has FirePro for this segment of market.

Can't comment on rendering. Never had much to do with it.

[aht0]

Also there is other uses for gpu than gaming, like cad and picture rendering, using gpu cores for science and virtual money making. Intel igpu are total crap under 500 euro laptop category. It is not good if Intel is a monopoly even for intel religion believers. Luckily for all amd finance is going up now thanks to Lisa Su and her team.

Seems I forgot to answer to all I wanted to..

virtual money making (bitcoin) is mostly unprofitable by GPUs now. ASICs killed it off. It boosted AMD R9 290 sales for a bit though then half a year later there were tons of aftermarket Radeons one could buy cheap. If you wanted to risk buying card which had been working at full power 24/7 for months at a time. Mostly the system looked to have small Sempron processor and then as many discrete cards one could cram or connect to the motherboard using all the PCIe connectors and even USB/PCIe extenders.

Intel iGPU might be total crap from performance view point but it has some advantages. Lack of heat. It does show 2D fine and does small time 3D sufficient for showing you desktop. As a result, thermal stress on motherboard solders is much smaller and laptop has extended longevity. It's important with all that lead-free crap used for soldering these days. My step father is lorry driver and uses laptop for additional navigational aid (USB/GPS module, Garmin/TomTom does not suffice always) and for watching movies while on resting. Picked laptop for him specifically because it's casing looked decent and it contained crappy little Pentium and cool-running Intel iGPU. Cost ~250 euros and still works now 4 years later.

[aht0]

Amd new apus are low powered and heat is easy to control with hw design. Powerful hw generates more heat, of course.

Even with new manufacturing process difference between 14nm and 10nm is roughly 28%, amplified by less efficient design.

Intel believers long sermons proves than intel is a religion.

At the moment you appear as "believer", I am just stating facts or pulling apart your claims. Then you respond by new claims trying to still prove your point.

Sure hp knows how to build a laptop better than you.

I do not doubt it. I also know to avoid the brand because of HP software is locking ME out of changing some of it's hardware. I've had couple of HP's laptops in past.

[aht0]

just to end this stupid arguing. I've got 4 laptops/netbooks in household and 3 PC-grade computers. Of the former only 1 is Intel (my wife's) and of the latter 2 are Intel's - old E2140 routing internet and firewalling, Xeon W3690 built into failed HP wx9400 workstation (it's original AMD dual socket Opteron board died on me). Third is small AMD Athlon 5350/Asus AM1M-A which I use for experimentation. So, I've got stuff from both camps. You might as well stop complaining about fanboy-ism or religion.