RTX 3xxx performance speculation

Gideon said:
AMD is not 15.26% share of the video card market as per Steam.
Click to expand...

AMD's video card share is higher than 15.26%. I see the source of your confusion.

That's not what Steam says. Remember Steam and JPR track different things.

Steam tracks GPUs.

JPR tracks AIBs (Add in Boards).

These are not the same. Steam doesn't differentiate if the GPU is in a Card or not, JPR tracks only Cards.

As I have been saying all along, the numbers are consistent between them, when you take into account the different things they track.

Maybe you have noticed that gaming laptop GPUs thus far are pretty much owned by NVidia, these are included in the Steam survey, not in the JPR survey.

Get it now?
 
Snowdog said:
AMD's video card share is higher than 15.26%. I see the source of your confusion.

That's not what Steam says. Remember Steam and JPR track different things.

Steam tracks GPUs.

JPR tracks AIBs (Add in Boards).

These are not the same. Steam doesn't differentiate if the GPU is in a Card or not, JPR tracks only Cards.

As I have been saying all along, the numbers are consistent between them, when you take into account the different things they track.

Maybe you have noticed that gaming laptop GPUs thus far are pretty much owned by NVidia, these are included in the Steam survey, not in the JPR survey.

Get it now?
Click to expand...

JPR tracks both, you should try reading them. https://www.jonpeddie.com/press-rel...hipments-in-q319-reports-jon-peddie-research/ , https://www.jonpeddie.com/store/add-in-board-report/
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
Snowdog said:
But I am not claiming either is more accurate. Given the differences in what they report, they essentially show the same thing, and reinforce each other (as I said before).

You OTOH, called the Steam HW survey "garbage", so the onus is on you to prove your charge.



No. Next.



Again, completely irrelevant unless there is a reasonable expectation that ratio of GPU types would be significantly different on different services, and there is no such expectation.



Not sure where you get this "far more accurate" from, but these are sampling type analysis as well, based on outlets willing to talk to them, and some likely don't. Back when Apple reported unit volumes, these types of analysis routinely had significant errors.

Just like Steam Survey, JPR is the right ballpark, but I don't see any basis for calling them "far more accurate".

In the overall numbers, after factoring differences in what they report, they show about the same ballpark, so I don't really care which one you want to use for overall market share. That's actually the least interesting thing to me.

Steam Survey is MUCH more useful because it reports on the individual GPUs. So we can see the relative market share of 1660 Ti vs 2060 for instance. Or we can total up all the RTX GPUs and see what kind of RTX market share there is with gamers. JPR doesn't give us any of that capability, it's just a simple market share number.
Click to expand...
I believe JPR does give more granular data, you just have to pay for it.
noko said:
Where did you get I had a feeling that AMD data is incorrect??? Your feelings? lol. No, not my point, data scatter is too great to take the Steam survey as being accurate for Nvidia or AMD. Plus their are many different markets outside of Steam which are not represented with the Steam results. Yet folks over and over again use Steam results as some kind of reliable data and use it rather stupidly for or against Nvidia or AMD. Good grief, waste of time.

Well if Steam results are useful then RTX is an utter waste of die space/money/time: Very few on Steam percentage wise are wasting their time it seems with RTX, tell me the games below and which one's have RTX and for those that do, do folks actually use it? These are ranked top to bottom the games being played most:
Click to expand...
727k players of CS:GO on a platform that at last check has 125 million active users and over 30k games. So 0.58% of the user base playing 0.003% of the available games.
 
Gideon said:
JPR tracks both, you should try reading them. https://www.jonpeddie.com/press-rel...hipments-in-q319-reports-jon-peddie-research/ , https://www.jonpeddie.com/store/add-in-board-report/
Click to expand...

The JPR link you have provided until now was the AIB report, and you specifically compared that result to Steams HW survey, and used it as the basis for your theory that there was something wrong with Steams results.

You have been claiming Steams results should match the JPR AIB report, despite them tracking different things.

Do you not remember doing that?
 
Gideon said:
Between those two you get a decent look at installed base, which both report a much higher share then 15%. Firefox is a good one as well since it will include APU data as well.
https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/30dayshare.html , https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/hardware
Click to expand...
Oh how reality hits and the bugs run away. Looking at several different reports shows significant divergence " But but my favorite worship brand Nvidia looks most favorable with Steam surveys so it must be right!" mentality seems to prevail regardless of facts, not even willing to look at the data one thinks will save them for obvious flaws. Even given real data, links showing flaws and corrections, the non disclosure of methods Valve does not share for peer review to make sure it represents anything, etc. -> "IT IS RIGHT!" "You must be a AMD fanboy for disbelieving!" "Your feelings must be hurting is your reasoning". :ROFLMAO:

Steam has 1 billion accounts and 90 Million Users 2019: https://variety.com/2019/gaming/news/steam-one-billion-accounts-1203201159/

  • A good assumption would be only hardware being used actively on Steam can be counted for their hardware statistics.
    • Please note the hardware statistics is not known if a given piece of hardware is being used multiple times by different active users, nor is a study known to be done and a viable correction factor implemented other than net cafe's which is unclear if Steam was effective or not, which dominated by Nvidia hardware just from the market share standpoint would skew results highly in favor of Nvidia in that case.
  • Taking one data example, Dec 2019 and Jan 2020 for All Video cards used: 1060
    • https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
    • Dec 2020 16.38% of all video cards used were Nvidia GF GTX 1060s
      • .1638 x 90 million active users = 14,742,000 GTX 1060s are represented by that data
    • Jan 2020, one month later, all of a sudden, 30 days later, 13.51% of all video cards used were Nvidia GF GTX 1060s
      • .1351 x 90 million active users = 12,159,000 GTX 1060s are represented by that data
    • So in one month there were 2.583 million less 1060s! What? Did they all fail or 1060 users formed a strike?
Now the real number of Active users is unknown but from Dec to Jan it should be relatively consistent and the divergence of data is the big red flag here. Changing the numbers of Active Users and if that represents hardware will not change that fact. There are actually worst examples if one wants to look at what the data is showing. So does those Steam survey hardware numbers represent actual hardware numbers in general -> I highly doubt it.
 
PhaseNoise said:
I am fascinated by the arguing against Steam survey results. They are what they are: a statistical sampling of steam users. No more, no less.
It is of course not unreasonable to assume it's a decent perspective of gamer machines in general, unless you can provide data that there are huge outcroppings of one vendor who meticulously avoid Steam.

That's what MangoSeed has been asking: if you feel this does not represent installed share, please explain why it would favor one vendor over another in reality. Anecdotes of "it didn't ask me" are not really useful. Well, unless the assertion is that Valve itself is biased for some reason. If so, please just assert that and we can move on.

Also, it has nothing to do with perceived / marketed merits of the hardware. It's a "what is actually in use" metric.
Click to expand...
It is not even remotely that simple and frankly naive.

Why it favored Nvidia, one example:
Most of the Internet Cafe's in China use Nvidia hardware, 2014/15 54% of all Nvidia revenue came from China. Internet Cafe's from a high day of 350,000 have declined over the years to around 140,000 today. Each machine can have a number of users in a day and hundreds in a month which the Steam Survey would sample the different users on the same machine over and over again. You take 140,000 x 300users/month (10 users per 24 hour period per machine) = 42,000,000 use cases for only 140,000 actual computers. Data indicate each computer is used over 50% of the time for gaming where Steam would have a window to look at what hardware is being used. This very much skews falsely any data taken and took Valve how long to even address? If they did. This was going on for over a decade dealing with Steam results. The data itself shows gross variations if one just looks and starts thinking a little.

Due to the closed nature of the survey, no real peer review of methods used, consistency, verification that the data is not manipulated internally or externally makes it a very unreliable source of determination for AMD or Nvidia.

Edit 2/20/20, my calculation failed to count that each internet cafe would have more than one computer, they can have literally 10-50 machines each. Just using 10 computers per Internet Cafe x 140,000 would give 1.4million computers times the Users average per month. The number calculated previously would actually be smaller than actual as in a factor of 10x. While statics indicate 58% of the time each person is on a computer is spent gaming, that does not tell if that is on steam or not. In a nutshell and not to prolong endless debate -> This would have a huge effect of what hardware per Steam member uses since many members could actually be on the same computer being counted multiple times. Enough said.
 
Last edited:
Aireoth said:
what does any of this circle jerk have to do with future performance speculations???
Click to expand...
Because the same flawed reasoning supporting it, using it to show some kind of advantage etc. keeps coming up here at HardOCP. I rather much talk about Ampere, where games are heading and why Ampere could lead the way in that. Since even bigger players are involved dealing with gaming that also has to be seen what will happen. I think Nvidia has hardware and now working software to shock the gaming industry in methods never thought possible even a few years ago. Except it will be a very steep uphill battle unless Nvidia can actually work together with Microsoft, Sony, AMD, Intel and developers.
 
Market leaders get to push standards or proprietary features. Market followers usually don't, or can't. That's why market dominance matters and why we should care; market segmentation is not a boon for customers, generally.
 
noko said:
So does those Steam survey hardware numbers represent actual hardware numbers in general -> I highly doubt it.
Click to expand...

You doubt it because you don’t like it. It’s that simple. Your doubt has no basis in statistical theory.

Steam graphs are self explanatory. From August 2018 to January 2020 the ”trend” is clear and consistent. Nvidia enjoys ~75% of the installed base of Steam gamers.

After all this back and forth you still haven’t provided any data to refute that conclusion.
 
You have to remember the rules of Keeping A Thread Alive. You just go through each item until the discussion calms, then move to the next.

1) Discuss the actual topic
2) Tangential discussion of companies involved
3) Historical reference of something mentioned earlier
4) Steam Survey
5) Did Solo shoot first?
6) Was the lady in "Paranormal Activities" hot or not.
7) Trump/Bernie
8) Hitler

<image of prove me wrong guy>
 
MangoSeed said:
It’s how we entertain ourselves while waiting for actual news.

Can’t be much longer now. GDC and GTC are around the corner.
Click to expand...

I get it, but it’s just the same discussion with the same people (some of them fanatics) going round the same tree resolving nothing. Your basically all Canadians now:p
 
Speculation at this point without further info seems mute:

https://www.trustedreviews.com/news/nvidia-ampere-release-date-price-specs-3972062
Basically we know nothing of actual Ampere, price or when it will be released. AMD may launch first meaning since time of Turing, AMD would put out 3 generations - Vega 20, RNDA, RNDA2 of cards before Ampere hits. Then again we do not know for certain even what AMD will release, when or price.

I do believe Nvidia has a technical advantage which if used is huge, mostly dealing with AI. Once more games use the newest or best DSLL, Nvidia can provide driver profiles (hopefully) for games as times goes on - this has a huge impact for performance and that is just the beginning of using AI. Reconstructing a partial or lowering resolution image to a much higher resolution putting in things not even in the lower resolution image using AI and some temporal sampling (several frames) as in what DLSS does, what else can AI be used for?

I see Nvidia moving on to using AI to figure out the lighting of a scene -> that would be even more significant than working DSLL. If AI can figure out how the lights would light up the objects, maybe by doing actual ray traced samples as needed but at a significantly reduce rate which would minimally impact performance when used -> the rendering may look more like a render farm ray traced rendering vice a rasterized image with gimmicks. Nvidia is doing a ton of very cool stuff software wise using their hardware and are possibly posed to shake things up more than ever before. Of course I can only speculate here.
 
One thing to keep in mind about the 75% better performance I is that we don't know the metric.

INT32?
FP32?
FP16?
FP64?
Something else?
A mix?
A if a mix, how is it load spread?

Lots of unknowns still
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
Algrim said:
Market leaders get to push standards or proprietary features. Market followers usually don't, or can't. That's why market dominance matters and why we should care; market segmentation is not a boon for customers, generally.
Click to expand...
Yes and we are now once again in a time of some actual competition. Last year we had a very nice little back and forth of AMD and Nvidia adding features to their drivers. I do not doubt AMD will deliver an answer to the improved DLSS and even further, present some other new features, as well. The question is when.
 
chameleoneel said:
Yes and we are now once again in a time of some actual competition. Last year we had a very nice little back and forth of AMD and Nvidia adding features to their drivers. I do not doubt AMD will deliver an answer to the improved DLSS and even further, present some other new features, as well. The question is when.
Click to expand...

When it's too late and too little, as usual.
 
Well things don't have to be that bleak for AMD, AMD definitely surprised Intel and kept repeating that surprise. If AMD will do that to Nvidia is to be seen. Companies, at least the good ones, don't have to keep repeating the same mistakes. Not saying AMD is in a rosy position now. I do think AMD need to address AI inside of their GPU's, however done, and start doing some of the very inventive things Nvidia has been doing with AI. Also make sure the cards customers get actually work well (no excessive black screen crap, crashes etc. less bugs than Nvidia in other words). Hopefully we have a much better info next month both from AMD and Nvidia. Some of us will end up with both, hopefully they will both be worth it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Auer
like this
noko said:
Well things don't have to be that bleak for AMD, AMD definitely surprised Intel and kept repeating that surprise. If AMD will do that to Nvidia is to be seen. Companies, at least the good ones, don't have to keep repeating the same mistakes. Not saying AMD is in a rosy position now. I do think AMD need to address AI inside of their GPU's, however done, and start doing some of the very inventive things Nvidia has been doing with AI. Also make sure the cards customers get actually work well (no excessive black screen crap, crashes etc. less bugs than Nvidia in other words). Hopefully we have a much better info next month both from AMD and Nvidia. Some of us will end up with both, hopefully they will both be worth it.
Click to expand...

One problem for AMD is the ecosystem NVIDIA buildt for their hardware.
Hardware without an ecosystem is not going to cut it in AI.
 
noko said:
AMD definitely surprised Intel and kept repeating that surprise.
Click to expand...

More that Intel surprised all of us -- and themselves! -- with the magnitude of their fab issues. AMD managed to build a Skylake-competitive core, and has been lucky that TSMC has been on the ball.

Nvidia uses TSMC too, and has out-innovated AMD... since AMD bought ATi.

The comparison is convenient, and yes, I'd like to see AMD more competitive with Nvidia, but unfortunately one cannot compare Nvidia and Intel with respect to AMD.

noko said:
I do think AMD need to address AI inside of their GPU's, however done
Click to expand...
Honestly, the only traction AMD has gotten from the graphics / compute industry has been by open-sourcing stuff, and that's been pretty limited, despite AMD building stronger compute products across their range.

Nvidia has done the legwork to get their tech into datacenters and into released games. However difficult it was for Nvidia to do that, it will be more difficult for AMD to replicate as they'll need to garner attention for something else. Remember that Gameworks solves problems for developers and already runs on AMD hardware, as an example -- now you want developers to do things again another way because...? What's their incentive?

Why buy AMD for a datacenter? You have to customize your stack for their GPUs, but the stack is already customized to take advantage of Nvidia... Again, what's the incentive?
 
Factum said:
One problem for AMD is the ecosystem NVIDIA buildt for their hardware.
Hardware without an ecosystem is not going to cut it in AI.
Click to expand...
IdiotInCharge said:
More that Intel surprised all of us -- and themselves! -- with the magnitude of their fab issues. AMD managed to build a Skylake-competitive core, and has been lucky that TSMC has been on the ball.

Nvidia uses TSMC too, and has out-innovated AMD... since AMD bought ATi.

The comparison is convenient, and yes, I'd like to see AMD more competitive with Nvidia, but unfortunately one cannot compare Nvidia and Intel with respect to AMD.


Honestly, the only traction AMD has gotten from the graphics / compute industry has been by open-sourcing stuff, and that's been pretty limited, despite AMD building stronger compute products across their range.

Nvidia has done the legwork to get their tech into datacenters and into released games. However difficult it was for Nvidia to do that, it will be more difficult for AMD to replicate as they'll need to garner attention for something else. Remember that Gameworks solves problems for developers and already runs on AMD hardware, as an example -- now you want developers to do things again another way because...? What's their incentive?

Why buy AMD for a datacenter? You have to customize your stack for their GPUs, but the stack is already customized to take advantage of Nvidia... Again, what's the incentive?
Click to expand...
All good points. For the game side AMD has Microsoft and Sony helping which are huge players and probably have their own ideas and methods they want to try. Ideally AMD/Nvidia/Sony/Microsoft/Intel work together as much as possible. Particularly AMD and Nvidia since AMD maybe providing the platform for Nvidia hardware. Next month could be very interesting but I will not hold my breath for it. Both Nvidia and AMD or one or the other.
 
MangoSeed said:
It’s how we entertain ourselves while waiting for actual news.

Can’t be much longer now. GDC and GTC are around the corner.
Click to expand...

Companies have started pulling out of GDC due to corona virus. I wonder if Nvidia will still keep GTC.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
More that Intel surprised all of us -- and themselves! -- with the magnitude of their fab issues. AMD managed to build a Skylake-competitive core, and has been lucky that TSMC has been on the ball.

Nvidia uses TSMC too, and has out-innovated AMD... since AMD bought ATi.

The comparison is convenient, and yes, I'd like to see AMD more competitive with Nvidia, but unfortunately one cannot compare Nvidia and Intel with respect to AMD.


Honestly, the only traction AMD has gotten from the graphics / compute industry has been by open-sourcing stuff, and that's been pretty limited, despite AMD building stronger compute products across their range.

Nvidia has done the legwork to get their tech into datacenters and into released games. However difficult it was for Nvidia to do that, it will be more difficult for AMD to replicate as they'll need to garner attention for something else. Remember that Gameworks solves problems for developers and already runs on AMD hardware, as an example -- now you want developers to do things again another way because...? What's their incentive?

Why buy AMD for a datacenter? You have to customize your stack for their GPUs, but the stack is already customized to take advantage of Nvidia... Again, what's the incentive?
Click to expand...

On top of that is risk. There’s a lot of risks in changing to a different product. This is for both true for consumers and more so for corporations. You’re basically putting your job on the line / company at huge potential risk to switch vendors. The positives have to be huge (which they are not).
 
noko said:
All good points. For the game side AMD has Microsoft and Sony helping which are huge players and probably have their own ideas and methods they want to try. Ideally AMD/Nvidia/Sony/Microsoft/Intel work together as much as possible. Particularly AMD and Nvidia since AMD maybe providing the platform for Nvidia hardware. Next month could be very interesting but I will not hold my breath for it. Both Nvidia and AMD or one or the other.
Click to expand...

The argument about consoles is kinda false.
At no point has the AMD hardware in the consoles given any advantage on the PC side.
NVIDIA has the top to themselves...due to hardware and software giving better performance and more features.
Eg. NVIDIA supported DXR (Microsoft API).
AMD now plays catch up (and thus the consoles).

NVIDIA has executed well...and their ecosystems are spreading.
In my book NVIDIA has kept the eye on the ball.
 
All I know is I got a bucket full of money ready to throw at Nvidia once they release the new cards hahah. I'm also upgrading my monitor at the same time, so I'm very anxious to say the least lol
 
Factum said:
The argument about consoles is kinda false.
At no point has the AMD hardware in the consoles given any advantage on the PC side.
NVIDIA has the top to themselves...due to hardware and software giving better performance and more features.
Eg. NVIDIA supported DXR (Microsoft API).
AMD now plays catch up (and thus the consoles).

NVIDIA has executed well...and their ecosystems are spreading.
In my book NVIDIA has kept the eye on the ball.
Click to expand...
Yes, Nvidia supplied hardware, access to engineers software/hardware, supported with money many PC developers which allowed Nvidia to advance new cool stuff. AMD did not have to do that as much and they are still well supported on the PC side and I do believe that is because of their Console relationships. Nvidia also did the same for data centers, HPC platforms, Professional applications and won their position. I pretty much agree with you, AMD will have a tall order and if they are serious will need not only hardware advantages but software and a sound eco-system. AMD CPU business does give them some advantages with promoting their GPU business due to discounts, easier platform certification and configuration talking to one group vice several. Still I believe many if not most will want EYPC with Nvidia Tesla's for example, AMD should give Nvidia the win there if that is the case and better their own game. AMD best chance may just be a massive influx into the mobile market which in the past they actually owned for awhile.

Microsoft changed their tactics which does change things on the PC side. Basically all current XBox and XBox Series X games will be on the PC as well. No exclusives, so to me that does give an advantage to AMD hardware if anything unique is shared between the next gen Xbox and PC hardware plus optimizations should carry over as well. Hardware Optimizations on the Xbox AMD GPU should carry right over to the PC side for AMD hardware if the same features are supported. Nvidia strong backing of developers and support should also even this out for those titles with maybe some very fine exclusive rich features as well for some.

As a after thought, Nvidia may lay to waste AMD if AMD does not get serious with AI tech and methods in gaming and other stuff. However done, AMD needs to get serious with AI which will most likely shape actual designs of hardware as in CPUs/GPUs, a total remake of how games are rendered, automatic geometry creations from pictures that are clean models (vice current methods), driver testing and driver software. AI could create on the fly for example a picture of you, face, body etc. and instantly put you into the game geometry is an example. All facial animations could duplicate yours if enough data was given. I don't think people understand how much AI can totally disrupt everything we do now on the PC. From actual hardware designs, testing, optimizations for given tasks to software development,testing and creation. Finding the best UI for applications, training and the list goes on and on.
 
Last edited:
noko said:
and I do believe that is because of their Console relationships.
Click to expand...
If anything, the trend has shown that their 'console relationships' have produced negative returns on the PC side. I'd just argue that they've seen no returns instead, as AMD has seen Nvidia's hardware and software advantage increase.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
If anything, the trend has shown that their 'console relationships' have produced negative returns on the PC side. I'd just argue that they've seen no returns instead, as AMD has seen Nvidia's hardware and software advantage increase.
Click to expand...
I would not say that, but that does not mean better than Nvidia results either on the PC side because of it. Either way next generation will come rolling in and will let the results speak for themselves. Like I said before, I will probably buy at least one of each of AMD/Nvidia cards if they are worth it. Then again a better gaming/work monitor will need to go with them. AMD and Nvidia better support DP 2 and HDMI 2.1, I think DP 2 would be more important since one should be able to get an adapter from DP 2 to HDMI 2.1. If both skip that detail, I may wait yet another generation.
 
Marees said:
Yes

https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/02/29/nvidia-still-moving-forward-with-gtc-2020/
Click to expand...

This is surprising to me, especially since GDC got canceled completely. I'm not convinced it's a necessary measure, but it sure seems like a good way to look like your being responsible to the public.

I think it'll be interesting in 2-3 weeks if we see any anything pop up as a result of PAX. If it does, I think pulling the plug on any trade show like that will be the right move.
 
Viper87227 said:
This is surprising to me, especially since GDC got canceled completely. I'm not convinced it's a necessary measure, but it sure seems like a good way to look like your being responsible to the public.

I think it'll be interesting in 2-3 weeks if we see any anything pop up as a result of PAX. If it does, I think pulling the plug on any trade show like that will be the right move.
Click to expand...

They should just have most of these shows move to virtual.
 
Yes indeed! Make it VR as well :D. Companies that can change on the fly and yet still meet commitments/goals separate themselves from the rest =>winner.
 
The big cards always herald in the new generation of gpu's so we should be seeing the trickle down leaks in the next few weeks starting to come out as well. Really hoping Nvidia decides to push the limits on the gaming side of its gpu business this generation and get a little generous with the amount of cores across the board. It's like we can see the potential, just out of our reach with what they're able to do at the high end. If they released an unleashed no compromise titan, I know that a lot of people would take a hard look at saving up for it now that the performance is going to be so much of an upgrade potentially.
 
I also want Nvidia to leave it all out on the field. I was a bit meh on the 2080 as I didn’t have the use cases for it. Now I’ve got almost double the pixels and should have a valve index soon, I need more powaaaarrrrrrr!

Won’t be able to get it till September for budget reasons (buying house) but I’m going top end, and it’s be nice if I could double my high oc 1080Ti performance. I get 70ish FPS now at 3840x1600 in the two games I play most so that would be the sweet spot.

If those 7000 cores are the new GP as expected, I might even be tempted on a titan if that gets up there. I’m sure I can invent enough ML bullshit to make it a business expense for the taxman.
 
oldmanbal said:
The big cards always herald in the new generation of gpu's so we should be seeing the trickle down leaks in the next few weeks starting to come out as well.
Click to expand...


I foresee a ~40-50% performance gain when utilizing RT and DLSS over the 20x0 non-Super cards as they'll be better tailored for those now more mature technologies. But without these features enabled the gain in overall performance will only be another ~30-35% for each card tier.

I also predict the performance of the fastest "Big Navi" card to barely nip at the heels of a 2080 Super when DXR features aren't used, while still a solid 10-20% behind once RT is enabled. And that's with me more than a little optimistic on the part of AMD here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top