I’m Hunter Perrin. I’m a software engineer.
I wrote an email service: https://port87.com
I write free software: https://github.com/sciactive
The libraries would probably be easy. We’ve already got x86 and amd64 libraries on the same machine, but the kernel I imagine would be awful. Would two kernels have to run on the same machine? What about memory access? What about the scheduler? Would it really be more efficient than emulation? For every x86 instruction, there is either an equivalent instruction or an equivalent set of instructions for ARM.
I feel like if ChatGPT were the only LLM on the market, they’d have a real path to profitability, but it’s not even the best LLM on the market. And the open source models are nearly as good, meaning the vast majority of people who need an LLM can run it on their own hardware.
It’s kind of like trying to make a profitable business out of offering a special sauce that isn’t as good as your competitors sauce, and is barely better than the free sauce from Taco Bell. Oh and it costs you millions of dollars to produce a single bottle.
Other than ray tracing, those are all gimmicky. You should buy the card that can run the games you want to play at the resolution you want to play them at. During the RTX 3000 vs RX 6000 generation, AMD had substantially better price to performance for everything except ray tracing. Now, that’s changed, and AMD is a much less appealing deal.
Yes, indiscriminate bombing is a war crime.
PC is superior in many ways, and console is superior in some others. It depends on what you value. The only reason my wife plays on PC is because I helped her get everything set up, but she didn’t need any help at all to play on the PlayStation. If you just want to play games and don’t care about tweaking things or getting the best graphics, consoles are better because they’re simple. I like to tweak and tinker and get the best graphics I can and play with mods, so I’ve always been partial to PC.
Up to a certain extent, yeah. The faster an image appears on the screen, the sooner your can perceive it and start to react. But it’s a diminishing return. The difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS is perceptibly much bigger than the difference between 60 and 90. Beyond about 180-240, it becomes faster than any human alive can perceive. Even 144 is fast enough for nearly everyone to reach their theoretical peak performance.
Am I the only one that didn’t really see this as such a bad thing? Like, it was not released software. Asking someone to refrain from making a negative review of your unreleased software seems reasonable to me. Like, maybe it should have been worded differently, like don’t make a negative review based on unfinished or buggy gameplay, but the underlying idea doesn’t seem that bad. They’re not obligated to let anyone test their pre-release software.
They’re all pretty good. Even the Intel cards are pretty good now. I guess, what’s most important to you? If you want maximum compatibility with games, go for Nvidia. If you want better price to performance, go with AMD or Intel. Although, if I were you, I’d wait until AMD and Intel’s next gen. Both are coming (relatively) soon (probably before the end of the year), and will probably be a lot better than what’s out now.
One caveat, if you use or plan to use Linux, Nvidia can present some difficulties, so avoid them.
Actually two caveats, if you plan to use hardware encoding, like you’ll be streaming on Twitch while you play games, avoid AMD. Their hardware encoding is pretty trash. Both Nvidia and Intel are much better.
My current lineup (I know I have a lot of machines, but my wife and I both play games, and I do AI workloads as well):
The nature and scope of the request.