Cài đặt Steam
Đăng nhập
|
Ngôn ngữ
简体中文 (Hán giản thể)
繁體中文 (Hán phồn thể)
日本語 (Nhật)
한국어 (Hàn Quốc)
ไทย (Thái)
Български (Bungari)
Čeština (CH Séc)
Dansk (Đan Mạch)
Deutsch (Đức)
English (Anh)
Español - España (Tây Ban Nha - TBN)
Español - Latinoamérica (Tây Ban Nha cho Mỹ Latin)
Ελληνικά (Hy Lạp)
Français (Pháp)
Italiano (Ý)
Bahasa Indonesia (tiếng Indonesia)
Magyar (Hungary)
Nederlands (Hà Lan)
Norsk (Na Uy)
Polski (Ba Lan)
Português (Tiếng Bồ Đào Nha - BĐN)
Português - Brasil (Bồ Đào Nha - Brazil)
Română (Rumani)
Русский (Nga)
Suomi (Phần Lan)
Svenska (Thụy Điển)
Türkçe (Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ)
Українська (Ukraine)
Báo cáo lỗi dịch thuật
You're fine, bump up to 16GB RAM, SSD, Win10 64bit
But I am just using a 32" 1080p HDTV (2 ms response that can emulate 120 Hz through interpolation), so as long as I can do over 60 Hz in any game I play (in Linux), I am happy.
you know what Intel Turbo Boost is and how it works? Also how Hyperthreading works? Apperently not because you post is full of logical BS.
Hyperthreading is easily said somethin that 2 threads use one lane/pipe to push data through. 1 thread not constantly sending data so that the pipe has phases when it is used and some when it is not used. So Hyperthreading makes it possible to push a second thread though that pipe while the first one not sending anything.
So Turbo Boost work by switching TDP-Shares. Its like an information how much heat the core is allowed to produce and therefor how fast it can run. With Turbo Boost those TDP-Shares of some cores get transfered to another core so that this specific core can boost higher as it has more TDP-Shares. But to transfer the TDP-Share the core has to be in deep sleep mode (100% idle). While in deep sleep mode by definition the cant cant hyperthread as you cant do anything to stay idle. In the end you lose 6 threads a 3 cores just to boost a single core to a bit higher clock. That can use still HT but you lost 6 threads in the boost process. So I like to easily say that boost disables HT (not 100% correct like I said).
So talking about many threads (HT) and higher boost is something that doesnt fit together.
PS: In demanding games you wont get far with a 3GB 1060 which is often even worse then the 1050 Ti and GeForce has alot of Problems with Linux that you lose alot of performance compared to Windows 10.
That's dipping below performance of GTX 970/980, which is too low.
Overall, you just aren't going to get great performance under Linux as far as Gaming goes. Regardless of your choice of NVIDIA or AMD GPUs; but at least NVIDIA is decent under Linux.
In all fairness though it's Dirt Rally he's referring to, I did the free week-end with an FX8350/280x no problem at 1080p, not an overly demanding game anyway that I could see so sure a GTX1060 3GB would be more than enough but not the best choice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daiF6lYguN4
I ran across this today ^ and just found it interesting no I wouldn't go out and pop a gtx1080ti on an i7 8xx but essentially you could.
In his world of Dirt Rally what he has is pretty much all he needs for 1080p.
I never understood the down-lookers on AMD FX anyways; I've used them and never had issues. But again, I never bought "junk". A majority of every post on here over the years with an AMD FX user; 95% of them had "junk" for their parts, so that is why the issues. Like FX CPU on 760 or 780 Chipset Motherboard
even then not. I ran test with an i5-7600K and 1080 Ti to see if it bottlenecks, It didnt tho it came close to it.
No, actually its more likely to bottleneck at 1080p then it would at 4K.
But 1070 and above aren't going to do well at 1080p anyways; those are more suited for higher res.