Kid's game? Tiny Tina/Borderlands is a huge franchise in gaming. I think its clear these two games were chosen because the cell-shaded style they use is less GPU demanding, but its still impressive. But note things like Cyberpunk 2077 is there too. These are all popular games. I don't think its this dishonest ploy you're making out to be.
My 2070 barely handles those games at that fps.
Yes those are older games because this APU is not going to play modern AAA at 4k, but it can handle some pretty hefty games fairly well and might be tempting to budget gamers especially when mid-tier cards start at $500-600 nowadays.
There are 2,000 people playing Tiny Tina on Steam.
There are a million people playing CS2. Fortnite sees about 2.6 million and peaks at eleven million.
The Finals has 70,000+ people playing.
Tiny Tina has about 1/5th of the player count it would need to be in the top 100. So yes, AMD marketing was pretty fucking desperate when they listed that game.
> There are 2,000 people playing Tiny Tina on Steam.
The game is cross-platform and available on PS4/PS5, Xbox X/S, Xbox One, Steam and Epic Store. And on top of that it is a paid game.
I'm not even aware what this game is, but I'm aware of Borderlands franchise and they're quality games.
Why would you compare player numbers to top f2p games is beyond me.
63 fps on Cyberpunk 2077 which when it came out was "unplayable but on the most powerful PCs" is incredibly impressive without a GPU.
This is pretty close to my 2070 GPU does, which cost me $400+ a couple years ago and uses 215W. My CPU also uses 100W, so about 300W compared to 65W for very roughly similar performance (in some games) is still pretty incredible.
Now GPUs are almost twice that for that xx70's and xx80's cards. I don't know what market this is aimed at, but this is very impressive for an APU. There's a pretty strong budget PC gamer community that could benefit from this. There are a lot of people who can't afford gaming PCs anymore and this could be a big seller to the budget community. Also at 65TDP power supply and fans and ventilation costs will be low, so they can be sold in cheap and modest cases and ps's.
I'm not sure if these chips translate into laptops, but a laptop that games well is always desirable in the gaming market.
Not even remotely close. It's equivalent to an RX570 or 580, which is roughly 1050 territory. Your 2070 is equivalent roughly to a 1080, plus raytracing.
> Cyberpunk when it came out [..] unplayable but on the most powerful PCs is incredibly impressive without a GPU.
The game has seen numerous patches in the last three years since it was released that have significantly increased its performance.
I would however wait for third party reviews on these SoCs. They promise performance that's simply unheard of, for an APU. Best to be skeptic than else.
It's a side effect of the laptop efforts... Getting a price and margin that makes sense. Using the same tech in desktop form makes sense for a lot of people. A $600 or so desktop that can game albeit at lower settings is pretty impressive these days.
“[C]ollision and damage repairs on an EV can often run about twice that associated with a comparable combustion engine vehicle,” Hertz CEO Stephen Scherr said in a recent analyst call.
---
This is concerning. These cars are essentially delicate ipads with wheels and repairs for them are costly and specialized. Driving, in general, is dangerous and accident prone. Waking up to twice your repair cost or insurance premiums must not be great for Hertz.
Also the article doesn't mention the EV value cut-off unrelated to MSRP. When the battery reaches 50-60% of its top capacity, then range anxiety is back. No one wants a 150-100 mile Tesla, or worse in the winter with the heating on.
Range issues aren't a big deal with regular owners as with regular use they only lose 10-15% range in the first few years, but Hertz drives theses hard everyday, unlike someone with a suburban commute who gets groceries on the weekend. Who knows what their internal data is suggesting. Id be very, very hesitant to buy a Hertz used Tesla. I'd want to see how bad the battery is first, especially what its real world range is in the winter. I wouldnt be surprised because how hard these cars are run, they'll have more battery degradation per year/per mile than a well kept car babied by someone who loves their Tesla.
I just took a look on their website and the long range sedan I'd be interested in at that trim level 2024 model is going to be about $50k. Hertz has a 2022, a less than 2 year old car, with 80k miles for asking $31k. A 40% depreciation in 2 years is very rough.
Their resale value is particularly punishing. Hertz doesn't keep cars for all that long, so a tough depreciation isn't something they can ignore.
On the flipside, its not as obvious what coal burning exhaust has done to other parts of the biome. I imagine its extremely damaging. Not to mention, what it does to human lungs.
Evolution didn't create all this life with the assumption there would be electric beaches. I suspect the loss of this warmth will be a small price to pay to reduce emissions and that other parts of the biome will flourish in-line with how evolution developed life in that regions for billions of years.
I feel like we're at some weird technological historical point where we have IoT everywhere but we aren't passwordless yet. So we're polluting our world with IoT devices like this but they ship with "admin/password" as the default and expect someone with some technical knowledge to secure it, with the blessings of management who takes security seriously. In many organizations they have either one of these, or none of these. In people's homes, they have none of these.
No one would care about IoT wrenches if they forced some app-based auth with mfa. We only care because we can trivially exploit them.
Companies like Bosch shipping these things insecure by default is the real problem. Near everything embedded does snmp 'public' with write options and very few devices force strong passwords or passwordless or force mfa. The embedded space is a mess and where computers were pre-2000.
This it the classic "we invented cars before seatbelts and don't want to spend money on safety anyways," scenario.
Regulation here is badly needed. The market won't fix this itself. Bosch isn't really hurt by this stuff. They can just blame operators, the same way Boeing blames pilots or airlines when their Max's crash or fall apart in the sky. This is a classic perverse incentive of capitalism at play here and now that politics has moved towards idealizing a low-regulatory environment, we're only going to see more awful scenarios like this.
Also this should be a massive warning to companies, non-profits, and governments who think "Sure, Elon is mismanaging this and platforming the worst people and making it a cult of personality, but its not that bad. We get to reach a lot of people, so its still good for us."
Now they have to worry about whether Elon is in the mood to give your account proper security or if your password hash leaked "by accident" by a "junior dev." Or just the everyday incompetence of all personality-cult organizations. Elon went from being sued by the SEC to hosting its humiliation.
Elon is chuckling it up right now. The problem with personality-led companies is that if you get on the bad side of that personality, then anything goes.
Its sad to think web 2.0 so long ago was a move towards more human centric websites, UI's, AJAXy sites, etc and now web3 is just a marketing term for fraudsters, exit scammers, shady VC's, and criminals. The late-stage capitalism of the internet is obvious to see.
Web3 never had anything to do with the web. It was always a vain attempt to cash in on the aura associated with web 2.0 by sounding like a legitimate heir to the heritage of the WWW. It is however, as you said, just a convenient marketing term for crypto bros and blockchain scamware.
Web 3.0 as Tim Berners-Lee envisions it might have some legs, but web3 was a always an empty marketing vessel.
So in the article about 200 miles driving (in California) is 1 in a million chance of dying. So lets use that number nationwide to be lazy.
Now we can move a decimal point over. So the death chances of a Chicago to LA drive is 100,000 in one. But you drive back, so then its that twice. Once in 50,000 people dying on a Chicago to LA and back roadtrip is extremely frightening. How many people from the midwest make this drive a year? Or from the east coast? How many don't make it back?
The USA, on average, has 100+ fatalities via auto transportation a day.
The above ignores serious injury, permanent disability, etc. Its just death. The chances of having to deal with a broken spine, losing a limb, blindness, 3rd degree burns all over your body, etc aren't even calculated, but those are real and far more common than death. Death being harder to achieve with modern medical treatments.
Cars are extremely dangerous. We downplay what it means to drive.
I wondered about that reading some of the comments about the 737 Max. We routinely travel in exponentially more risky ways all the time, yet we expend time thinking about the safety benefit of avoiding a specific type of aircraft.
Not downplaying airline safety as a whole there, but thinking about it for yourself on a personal level is maybe not moving the needle.
Agreed. It must’ve been terrible for the people on that plane, but I don’t think it’s worth my time to worry about what plane I’m flying on, or what the maintenance record of the airline is. For developed countries, they’re super good enough.
Billboards can be taken down. Fashion comes and goes. Kitchens can be redone. Hair grows back.
Things on the moon are permanent until launching is 1000x cheaper. Even then, who would pay to clean up and what property rights are in play?
Lets stop polluting the moon with garbage to get rich people involved in projects (ashes of relatives, etc). Invest on its merits, not on some morbid ego boosting entitlement.
NASA and the international community needs to step in here. The moon should not be the trophy case of the super-rich.
Also these budget moon missions are starting to get concerning. What standards bodies are in control here, if any? The Israeli's lost one in 2019. It crashed on the moon and spilled a bunch of tardigardes and dna samples on its surface.
People are going to leave traces on the Moon, this way or another. I see very little difference between landers, rovers, human ashes, and garbage piles astronauts are going to leave near a surface habitat. This isn't something that should be either stopped or encouraged, unless it's something like nuclear waste. Potential biological contamination is another question, and it's been given plenty of thought already.
There are no land property rights on the Moon or any other celestial body, according to the current treaty. It's going to stay that way until the world powers will have something to gain from it. The exploitation of potential water resources already caused some talk on that matter.
My 2070 barely handles those games at that fps.
Yes those are older games because this APU is not going to play modern AAA at 4k, but it can handle some pretty hefty games fairly well and might be tempting to budget gamers especially when mid-tier cards start at $500-600 nowadays.