darcmage

Yup.

Unfortunately I don't think AMD (& Nvidia) care about GPU gaming market share when they'll be selling all the MI accelerators they can make using the same wafers at much higher profit margins.

As consumers, we're going to have to get used to getting mediocre offerings at inflated prices until the AI hype dies down or they find a way to use some of the other manufacturing nodes to make competitive GPUs.

I like what the Arc division has been doing lately, especially with Linux support. I am looking forward to what battlemage can bring to the table.

We'll have to wait ~ 2 years since the next round of AMD cards are rumoured to be midrange cards. The Steves are right that if A.I is still as profitable for both AMD and Nvidia by then, expect prices to go up for any flagship. It wouldn't make any business sense not to.

Absolutely this. It is becoming increasingly rare to find a game that doesn't work in linux (excluding stupid copy protection/anti-cheat implementations). We haven't reached the works-out-of-the-box stage but the combination of proton-ge/wine-ge with lutris or heroic provides a solid alternative to games not on steam.

https://github.com/JunkFood02/Seal - ytdlp gui for android

https://selfh.st/apps/?search=youtube

$666 without kb/mouse/monitor/os. https://pcpartpicker.com/list/vjVNbL

You're right in that over the long term, a PC gamer will probably end up spending less on their hobby. But for someone starting from scratch and trying to decide on a path, the console remains the cheaper and easier platform to jump into.

I don't see where I mentioned optimization but I am curious and maybe you can elaborate further on what I'm guessing are probably the differences between game patch optimizations vs driver level optimizations?

Not sure I agree the premise of the article. Sales are going to be down when there are fewer AAA releases to drive hardware sales. It's taking longer and longer to develop those games and the budget required no longer justifies console exclusivity.

I think 2025 will be the real measure of console strength when the big releases are scheduled to come out.

First point is more true today than it was in the past. It is impossible to build a gaming pc for $400-500 that is capable of playing most modern games at high settings (without RT) and play at 60 fps. The gpu capable of doing that is around $300 by itself.

I think the longevity of consoles also plays a large part in their appeal. Knowing you can use the system to play at consistent performance levels for 7-8 years is a comforting thought.

For the PC side, I'm not sure about your point about drivers. Nvidia/AMD/Intel regularly release day 1 drivers to improve compatibility with new games.

That's great and all but if your experience was typical, Mozilla wouldn't have created webcompat.com and it wouldn't be as busy as it appears to be. We can probably work around such issues but I wouldn't expect non-techies to do the same.

Firefox has been my preferred browser since 0.9. But whenever I help set up a relative's or friend's computer, I always install chrome as the default browser. With the lack of adherence to web standards and most sites only testing against chrome, it just makes chrome/chromium the obvious choice if you don't want to deal with the occasional breakage.

I think they're comparing chrome's user interface which, on a tablet, switches to a more desktop like interface with the tab bar instead of the tab counter. It is something I wish firefox would also implement but not a deal breaker.