video card for new computer

[H]

On December 15, 2017 5:20:17 PM EST, Xen <list at xenhideout.nl> wrote:
>Liam Proven schreef op 15-12-2017 20:32:
>
>>> But, they merged CPU and GPU which I think is a very bad idea
>because 
>>> it is
>>> only useful for video acceleration and not for gaming, because any
>APU 
>>> is
>>> not good enough
>> 
>> Speak for yourself.
>
>I am speaking for myself, and for many other gamers. You can quit it, 
>you know.
>
>> For the very occasional level of gaming I do,
>> onboard GPUs are more than enough.
>
>So what. Portal 2 has system requirements 46x less than current entry 
>level games.
>
>You can play that game on onboard graphics from 2009, the HD Radeon
>3200 
>I mentioned.
>
>>> and it takes out the fun of buying a graphics card,
>> 
>> Fun? O_o
>
>Yeah, you know, gaming, fun, people think it's fun.
>
>>> and you
>>> now cannot upgrade your CPU without your GPU and vice versa.
>> 
>> That's not true.
>> 
>> You can add a graphics card, or even multiple ones, and the on-board
>> GPU just gets disabled.
>
>That's not what I said. I said that you cannot change the CPU without 
>changing the GPU, not the other way around.
>
>> So such machines are every bit as upgradable as those with no GPU.
>
>The difference was not with a system with no GPU, the comparison was 
>with a system with onboard GPU.
>
>If you compare it with a system with no GPU, of course it won't matter 
>much.
>
>>> I thought motherboard GPU was a much better solution.
>> 
>> Then you can't upgrade it at all, ever.
>
>You didn't need to because you had discrete GPUs for that.
>
>Now you can upgrade your APU, yes, but the CPU itself is so much more 
>powerful than the APU that comes with it, that upgrading your APU for 
>playing games makes no sense; you don't need the CPU horsepower, only 
>the GPU horsepower.
>
>So why would you upgrade the APU to get better graphics performance?
>
>And if you need better graphics performance, why would you upgrade the 
>APU?
>
>So in order to upgrade, you *still* need to buy a graphics card (and
>not 
>a faster CPU).
>
>However, if you did not buy an APU, you had to buy a graphics card from
>
>the get go, which is annoying, because they are expensive and you
>cannot 
>test your system first on the onboard graphics that way.
>
>
>So for about the same price AMD now has an offering of the Ryzen 3 1200
>
>and the A12 9800E.
>
>The Ryzen is 40% faster but has no graphics.
>
>So you would choose graphics over 29% lower performance, I mean that
>you 
>get your graphics chip but you pay with ~29% lower performance.
>
>Previously this was merely the choice between ATX and mATX
>motherboards.
>
>So if you think you are going to be buying a discrete GPU at some point
>
>anyway, it makes no sense to now buy a CPU that's 29% slower.
>
>So you now have to make this choice ahead of time instead of after the 
>fact, which is a huge detriment, at least to me.
>
>So for someone like me, I have no choice but to get the Ryzen and then 
>to immediately get the GPU I think I need (If I didn't have any).
>
>But that's tricky business.
>
>More than that, I now don't have a fallback.
>
>I can't fall back to internal graphics anymore.
>
>
>Before I would get onboard GPU, CPU, and then later graphics card.
>
>The mere fallback to internal graphics is not worth 29% slower CPU.
>
>> You can _replace_ it with a
>> separate card, but not take it out and put a better one.
>
>This is void; that's what discrete cards are for.
>
>With an APU, you also cannot say "Well, my CPU is fast enough, but I 
>need a faster GPU, so I guess I will.... replace the GPU part of the
>APU 
>now."
>
>You are simply stuck in the same upgrade cycle for both. Getting a 
>faster CPU makes no sense unless it is a lot faster,
>and you are also paying for the graphics card at the same time, making 
>you unwilling to spend that money again.
>
>The APU is also quite slow and even paired with good graphics card 
>performs sometimes abysmally.
>
>https://www.techspot.com/review/1486-amd-a12-9800/page2.html
>
>It's simply a slow CPU and a slow graphics card.
>
>Yes you can play games from 2008, of course.
>
>You can also play Diablo III and World of Warcraft and Rift or Guild 
>Wars 2 will also do fine.
>
>Yet you will never have the appetite to upgrade your CPU to a Ryzen 
>because you lose your graphics, and you don't have much appetite to buy
>
>a GPU because the CPU is more likely to bottleneck you at that point,
>so 
>you need to upgrade both.
>
>Upgrading both means you can throw away your APU.
>
>Moreover you have already paid for your GPU... so in the end you might 
>decide to get a graphics card and then succumb to also replacing the
>APU 
>with a Ryzen, and then keeping the APU in reserve for whatever...
>
>So for upgrade paths, this is terrible.
>
>
>> Honestly, after the Intel management code debacle, I am considering
>an
>> AMD for next time.
>
>Well I can understand that.
>
>It's just that previously you could get a cheap motherboard with 
>reasonable onboard graphics
>and all upgrade paths available to you; faster CPU, easy, faster GPU, 
>easy.
>
>Now you have to choose: APU or CPU + discrete?
>
>The choice for me is always going to be Ryzen.
>
>But I hate not having onboard graphics.
>
>
>>> So, for me that day meant that I grew less fond of ATI graphics 
>>> cards....
>>> (AMD now).
>> 
>> Don't care about that.
>
>Well then there is little reason to comment :p.
>
>This was about video cards you know :p.
>
>-- 
>ubuntu-users mailing list
>ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
>Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

Xen, could I ask you to put a little bit more effort into your writing? You don't need to make each sentence into a paragraph - it makes it very painful to read your posts. They would also benefit from being read through before being sent.

Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20171216/5e3f9007/attachment.html>