MattGPT

In the video it shows that the reference laptops run at 65 watts, with Intel saying the TDP on those chips is 80 w it will be interesting to see how a full power version scales and sits against Strix Halo on 80 w as well. I wonder if the reference laptops were set at 65 w because it is the sweet point for performance or just because it fits into a chassis and cooling for the reference design.

@Spodlude I agree, especially as most 9800X3D chips already overclock pretty well, though admittedly they will run hotter than a 9850X3D. When I overclocked mine I barely noticed any difference even with 400Mhz extra on the boost, not noticeable during gameplay and it was running much hotter, in the 80s high 50s when playing CP2077 so I just set it all back to stock. I am certainly not paying any more for a 1-2% performance gain.

This looks really impressive, I will be interested what ends up happing with their top end mobile chips, full fat Celestial might be a very good choice for good battery life but still reasonable performance for graphics work and occasional gaming.
This does make me question why there are no RDNA 4 mobile chips though, can AMD really afford to wait until mid 2027 sitting on RDNA 3.5 and on the CPU side is it feasible for them to add 3D cache to the CPU on an SOC?

@NandoCalrissian OLEDs are nowhere near as bright as an LCD backlight, using BFI means halving the brightness. Pulsar gets round this by having a much brighter backlight.

I found it really interesting that Intel are going to be deploying their own shader delivery via their driver/control program. I also liked that to do this they are employing shader butlers.

@NetshadeX I somewhat agree, although they have already found hardware solutions, VRR and 120/144/240hz displays. To and extent I feel that latency has been solved where it can be, e.g. it is basically unnoticeable at 120hz or higher, but at less than 60hz one can feel fluctuations in latency because they are bigger due to the gap between reference frames. Again, some people will be bothered, others will not, I think that is why some of this is subjective and there are people who never seem to notice (incorrect frame pacing, fluctuating frame rates, some people do not even notice screen tearing).

@Photoss See that is different to me and I guess why there is no universal solution. I get get used to and deal with a rock solid thirty, although it is not ideal, where as a game that bounces around in the fifties without VRR I find an awful experience. I guess that is why some of this is so subjective, even on the same hardware some people really hate uneven frame pacing, fluctuating framerates, but others are not bothered by it at all.

@Photoss
It could be possible, but not ideal. Frame gen is good at higher frame rates, in my experience it is brilliant at increasing visual fluidity by pushing anything already 60hz higher, up to the 240hz max my monitor can take, however using it to bring a sub-sixty game up to sixty feels really bad.Whilst it only technically adds a very small amount of input lag, below a level that is actually perceivable it makes the lag feel worse due to there being multiple frames inserted between, it is somewhat hard to understand until one actually experiences it. The advantage of this will also align well with VRR because it allows the monitor to display the additional frames as and when they are ready. With frame gen not all frame times are equal, at 240hz that is not really an issue but at 60hz without VRR it might be. As DLSS 4.5 is live now I am hoping we might get some preliminary analysis data in the Direct that arrives over the weekend.

It could if that was a priority, though I suspect at least in the short term AI will be used just to lower production costs. There are some amazingly well optimised games that do not fill 8GB of VRAM whilst having much better better textures than many games that get close to filling 16GB of VRAM, I sometimes wonder how low resolution textures end up being so large compared to others. However RT and especially path tracing does increase both RAM and VRAM requirements due to the BVH (the CPU builds it in RAM, then transfers it to VRAM to be traced against), on the plus side that whole process is also getting more efficient.

I think that this "crunch" may well lead to devs getting better at optimising their games, with hardware power slowing down, generations getting longer as well as a baseline set up PS5 and then possibly Steam Machine devs will look to do more with the same hardware, much how console graphics look better at the end of a generation than the start even though the hardware does not change.

All the game that ran badly on 8GB GPUs could be made to run well on them if the devs put in the required resources, I remember the improvements that happened with TLOU which was awful on 8GB GPUs at launch and is now pretty good, looks much better whilst also performing better, or with Monster Hunter just decompressing the textures on the hard drive solves the performance issues on 8GB (and also lower end) GPUs.

@SodaPop8456 Only if Microsoft don't manage to kill it first!

The Steam Machine interests me from a technological standpoint but as I have a 9800X3D paired with a 5090 and a PS5 Pro it is not something I will buy, however the Frame is on my seriously interested list. I did think about a PSVR2 but wanted to see the level of support and it became obvious fairly quickly that Sony has all but abandoned it so I held out, hoping that a new generation of PC VR would hit the sweets spot and I I think this ticks all the boxes at the moment apart from the one unknown, price.