Subject: Video-card noises (except I'm not sure it's the video card)
Stuff shouldn't rattle....a *something* has a secondary rattle similar to a two-stroke engine very far away, that stops when the computer is idling.
Yes, my computer idles with a quiet wind-tunnel effect, but this rattle is new and only during benchmarks or games.
I see that my temps are normal, relatively.
What's all this about AMD "SAM"?
They tried real hard to not be technical, so they gutted any useful information about it.
So *I* will make shit up (totally) and hope I am close, until I find some jaded reviewer who says different.
The pipeline between the CPU and graphics cards, is so-many bits wide (128,256, 192, some giant number that doesn't usually get taxed, Think, 10-lane freeways at 2AM)
 |
| "Bifurcation?" duh.... |
 |
| "Enabled", whatever, IDK (makes you wonder why they ask, are there side effects? Could you die?) |
 |
"192 bit wide memory" not 256.
'K, I give up finding someone who speaks plainly.
Maybe , (link), but it's (in my head) a little like writing "Bigger houses are better because they have more rooms"
|
Now, about that rattle... it'd have to be much louder before I started caring.
Security-guards in the break room pick up some extra income by letting someone film them on their break.
YOU are supposed to notice the shadows moving with the action.
Isn't this from ten years ago? Except they do it faster now.
 |
Not just shadows, "Ray traced shadows" which (everyone knows) are 107.6% better than regular shadows.
|
There are biggie huge expensive programs that already did this using another name, I remember watching videos about it long ago.
Is this a different, less restrictive version?
3dmark 2001 (a very old version I am unsure of the name) Used a merry-go-round,
balls of light and what looks to me like a flying turd,
 |
| Flying Turd, all shadowy and ray-tracy ("dot3 bmp map") |
so it isn't *new*, just *different*
 |
| 2001 "Neo" |
I must be thinking of the "Feature tests" which I am still looking for to show a picture of a shadow....Ya know what? Nevermind.
I kind of wonder if some game maker despairs trying a new feature, because users will rip him a new asshole for slowing down the game, and critics will pan it as having too much frippery,
and customers seem to prefer cartoony games without shadows anyway.
Why try, why spend zillions, when the next version of whatever is just around the corner??
 |
| Bah |
The poor woman having this problem met with the Smarter-than-god (it's in their SIG)
Microsoft sycophants, and finally decided that a clean install of windows was necessary.
(Which is pointless because at *some* point she'll have to install her apps and updates)
People approach this the wrong way, in my opinion (not the woman, but the microsoft reps helping her!)
They assume right off that it's the woman's fault, that she inadvertently corrupted her installation, without really knowing what the error message wants.
(And what does it want, O most wise??)
Well, pshaw, I don't claim to exactly *know*, except, has Microsoft screwed with your video-card driver lately???? (Huh?)
And if you reinstall the full gigantic-class nuclear powered driver from the video card's website, does the problem disappear?
Yes!!
Un..until Microsoft chooses to replace the driver again.
"Timespy" running poorly might have something to do with Their driver vs the one directly from AMD, although I am sandwiching in a separate issue that I discuss further, a few paragraphs from now.
What's WRONG with hiring unpaid volunteers to dispense advice??
FREQUENTLY they get it wrong (*I* might have it wrong, but I don't think so)
I'm still reading, for the next 34 seconds, and I am surmising that several applications use their own copy of "Python" files that they brought in a suitcase.
One of them notably is the AMD driver.
 |
'K, in answer to "LibEGL is missing!!"
on an obscure tech-page, it isn't missing, but the registry might have the wrong data.
God forbid they combine all those visual-C packs and libraries, and have centralized library files, cuz then the universe would blink out of existence |
One guy suggested installing "Python" but then he claimed that it was too difficult, and proceeded to list his own method, before I stopped reading.
A guy with an indian accent is playing in a little Youtube box.
What he's saying isn't true for my PC, so I sort of lost interest.
If you do a biggie-picture overview, you might conclude that it is not a file but a *registry* problem, uh,
But no one else has said that, so I have no registry fix.
Plus, every couple versions of Windows insider-updates, 3DMark-timespy gets pissed off and starts running like a geriatric.
Without bogging this down too much, it should be emphasized that slowing down "Timespy" is one of those inevitable things going on for years (one or two years, at least.)
It's incomprehensible that they would not know the exact reason for this, they must be testing something, right? (for a year??)
Fine, go back to previous, right?
I mean, the youtube (after the commercials, after the LOUD intro) says to do that, And India is pretty smart (They seem to be the only ones making instructional videos, what happened, Japan?)
 |
| Curses! Foiled again |
But I have an older ISO!! Mount it,
set up,
Joy!!
3DMark Runs fine again!!
OTOH I'm prolly skirting disaster, but that's in my fearful mind (for now).
I've *Paused* updates, for a blissful week.
Notes for the arcane stuff in the driver options:
Adrenaline 22.10.3: No! on enhanced sync, graphics profile:gaming.
No! "Boost" (actually disable everything but "Image sharpening" and that is in 'global settings'
Some guy says: vddg ccd,iod=0.955v, VDDP=0.950
When running ordinary timespy, reduce resolution to 2560*1440, it's a quirk of Timespy which tests at an even lower resolution, but counts the transition-menu times.
To get consistent results (next month, next year, etc)
And, *what* is a decent score??
(Hmm?)
Well, see, uhm, I do not overclock so I'm prolly the slowest on the planet *anyway*, but
My latest 2560*1440 score is: 13123 overall, 13087 graphics, 13,335 cpu.
The CPU can be higher, I've seen it go over 13400, but I care little and only really want the graphics score and I'm satisfied with anything over 13,000
 |
| 3840*2160 |
 |
| 2560*1440 |
 |
"Radeon Super Resolution"...
(I might be missing an undiscovered setting or two, but it seems slow) |
Tweeeeking the settings and voltages and keeping notes on the results, seems wise, except, stuff breaks a lot, and a person becomes conditioned to be grateful if it works at *all*, at a *decent speed.*
Tweeek, me hearties....I'm going home.
 |
3840*2160 is 1.5 times 2560*1440
so, yeah, release the Kraken, see what happens |
No comments:
Post a Comment