Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums

as i said in my eariler post i was going redo my test with my Ram overclocked.

I only did 4.5ghz atm.

My Stock Ram settings are 1333mhz @ 9-9-9-24.

i overclocked it to run at 1600mhz @ 8-9-9-24.

here are my results.

test 1 - 97fps


Test 2 - 75fps


Test 3 - 117fps


over my last 4.5ghz entry i saw a.

+3 fps on Test 1
+1 fps on test 2
+4 fps on Test 3.

overall my averages were higher than my ram at stock. but i also went up from 1333 to 1600. and then overclocked the timings a bit.

so faster ram does make a slight difference. (i saw same results when i did pcsx2 but i only saw nearly a 1fps increase in that so i expected a Slight improvement as well).

im impressed how little effort can improve a tiny bit.

squeeze them performances out.


for the novelty of sakes of trying to see how a low powered processor would work... i underclocked my 3570k to 2.0ghz with my ram at stock.

test 1 - 42



test 2 - 35


test 3 -55



these results were basically equvilant to that amd phenom II 850 @ 3.1ghz

if i went to 2.1-2.3ghz it would match a 955 @ 3.4ghz. boy processing has come a long way im surprised i was still able to maintain over 100% speeds

Sigh. I know I said I wouldn't do this but he at least tried to produce some relevant data. So I suppose that counts for something.

jbone1337 if you want people to take the contents of your posts seriously you should begin structuring them into proper replies with sentences and quotes. Your lack of proper punctuation, spelling, and grammar as well as your continued ad hominem attacks against me reflect poorly on you. I would also recommend that you try to avoid using capitalization as a means of emphasis and constant acronyms (lmao, lol, w/e, etc.). And please stop calling me retarded. If you think I am dumb then it is clearly because I have said things that you disagree with. Therefore you should be able to provide evidence against those claims and in the process show that I am wrong and/or dumb. Simple calling me dumb instead of arguing your points is childish.

jbone1337 Wrote:you are basing your "facts" off of "benchmarks" and are saying becuase im not using a similar method for mine, its invalid,

Actually that's not why I said your claim was invalid. I listed a number of specific holes in your logic. My main piece of data is the specs of the two cards.

jbone1337 Wrote:and that benchmarks are the 100% end all be all of factual information....

I never said this. Benchmarks can be disputed with other benchmarks.

jbone1337 Wrote:benchmarks are a "GUIDELINE" not FACTUAL INFORMATION.....

Any form of reproducible data is by definition a fact.

jbone1337 Wrote:you are stuck on "since the 3650 is 2x better then the 5470m is MUST SCORE ATLEAST 2x HIGHER FPS"

Actually I never said that. What I said was:

NaturalViolence Wrote:A chip that is twice as fast will perform twice as well if there are no outside bottlenecks. This is just common sense. And doubling the framerate of any game makes a very noticeable difference.

It was intended as an example for use in arguing my point that specs are important.

jbone1337 Wrote:Im basing mine off generalization and REAL testing... not "benchmarks" which 9.9/10 times are false

You do realize that what you just did is a benchmark right? A benchmark is a comparison test that you perform to evaluate performance relative to a reference point. Which is exactly what you did in this post. What is your definition of "real testing?"

You have also now made a sweeping statement that almost all benchmarks are false. Adding yet another claim that you have yet to back up with any data. Please start listing specific examples along with your general claims.

jbone1337 Wrote:(ive gotten as much as 2x performance of my 5470m using the EXACT i mean EXACT same settings as some benchmarks). SO its like they were running like hardcore 3d model rendering in the background or something during tests i swear....

What version of the GPU were they using? The standard version of the 5470m has half of the memory bandwidth of your card. Also if this is true would you mind linking the benchmarks that you're referring to as well as a screencap of your own results?

jbone1337 Wrote:and if you SERIOUSLY think big name benchmark people arnt payed off for results, you SERIOUSLY KNOW NOTHING about how the world works lol (real world, not w/e fake fantasy world you live in...)

Would you mind listing any specific examples of this or corroborating evidence? That's quite a general statement to make.

jbone1337 Wrote:Heres some real world testing + some of your "renown behchmarks" you love so much.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2616/5
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gami...107-7.html

That link that you listed is full of benchmarks. But earlier you implied that benchmarks are not real world testing. So I ask again, what is your definition of "real testing"?

jbone1337 Wrote:In benchmark above, its "almost" 2x better at the highest delta.

Actually it's not. Crysis at 1280 x 1024 is the highest performance delta out of the benchmarks that you listed. And in that benchmark the 4670 is hitting 55 fps and the 3650 is hitting 20 fps. That's a 2.75x difference not "almost 2x better".

jbone1337 Wrote:so if 6 "tiers" = ~2x performance.
Then by that logic, the 3 tier seperation between 5470m/3650 obviously cant be 2x the difference in performance....

Where did you get the 2x figure from?

jbone1337 Wrote:game, runes of magic
test area, HoS instance
settings medium @ 1366x768 resolution (laptop), 1440x900 (desktop)

amd turion II x2 @ 2.4ghz, 4GB of ddr3 1066, amd 5470m (512MB GDDR3)
intel core 2 dou @ 2.93ghz, 4GB of ddr2 800, amd 4670 (1GB GDDR3) overclocked to 725-750mhz (dont remember exacts)
my laptop vs my brothers desktop, same settings, same area other then resolution (1366x768 vs 1440x900)

laptop = 20-40FPS
desktop = 30-60FPS

There are a lot of things you need to do to make this benchmark a reliable source:
1. Drop the core 2 duo cpu clock rate down to 2 GHz to eliminate variation due to cpu performance.
2. Use the same resolution on both systems to eliminate variation due to resolution.
3. Do not OC the GPU.
4. Use a reliable application to measure average framerate such as fraps. And list the method of framerate measurement that you used. Right now I have no idea how you measured the framerate.
5. If possible provide a screencap of both task manager and the game running so that we can confirm that you used the same spot and angle in both tests and had no background tasks sucking up significant cpu or gpu resources (your word alone is not enough for this).
6. It would really be advisable to not use an mmorpg for your comparison since their are many more variables to account for such as player count in an area that can affect performance. This holds true for multiplayer games in general.

And even if your results turned out to be accurate is says nothing of how a 5470m will do against a 3650

jbone1337 Wrote:explain that one to me one to me. the 4670 should EASILY get 10x+ performance by your explanation. and the fact its also a better cpu. Its at a higher resolution but it also has a 128bit bus with 1GB video buffer vs 64bit 512mb.
(also his desktop has literally NOTHING i mean NOTHING running the background. hes installed like 3 things to his desktop lmao)
It wasnt an "ideal" test, as i wasnt going for testing, i was just playing the game on both, and noticed the difference in fps wasnt as much as i thought it would be.

So ya, better cpu, FAR better gpu, less background tasks running, yet doesnt even score 2x the performance. Ya at 1366x768 it would probably hit 2x, but still basing off "your benchmarks" it should score 10x+ performance....

I don't know where you're getting this 10x figure from. I never stated any specific performance difference between the tiers or even between the 5470m and 3650. The 2x figure actually came from a example that you came up with:

jbone1337 Wrote:ok a visual example
5470m = 1 penny
3650 = 2 pennies
now 2pennies is 2x as much, but its still 2 pennies, which isnt going to be enough for anything....

I then argued why using this logic is flawed using a different example of a scenario involving the same delta value.

As for the tomshardware chart that was intended to point out that it is a faster gpu. Which you have already admitted is true. Nowhere does it state exactly how much faster, nor do I. I then backed up my claim by pointing to the specs and saying this:

NaturalViolence Wrote:I really doubt this. Common sense dictates that if all of the important specs are much higher and the SP architecture is the same the performance will be much higher unless there is an outside bottleneck. It's a much faster chip so why would it perform almost the same? It should perform 45% better under a worst case scenario (difference in shader throughput) and 90% better under a best case scenario (difference in memory bandwidth) if I'm not mistaken.

Let me make the claims that each of us has made perfectly clear, hopefully one last time:

So far you have made the following claims:
1. The 5470m achieves about the same performance as a 3650 graphics card. Originally you claimed the the difference between the two would be only 1-2 fps.
2. A much faster GPU will not significantly impact performance
3. GPU performance delta increases as GPU load decreases (older games, lower settings)
4. All or most professional benchmark sources are corrupt, bias, and unreliable.
5. Benchmarks are an unreliable source of information

I have opposed these claims therefore my claims and my reasoning for them stand as follows:
1. The 5470m is significantly faster than a 3650 graphics card assuming both use the reference specifications. The reference specifications are substantially better for the 3650 and the SP architecture is the same. I don't like to post exact numbers without direct benchmarking data backing me up but if I had to make a complete guess I would say that the 3650 is probably around 50% faster than the 5470m.
2. A much faster GPU will significantly impact performance in modern 3D games. This is backed up by pretty much every GPU benchmark ever done.
3. GPU performance delta generally increases as GPU load increases. The only exception to this is in the case of a video memory, system memory, framelimiter, or cpu bottleneck.
4. Most if not all of the trusted hardware review organizations do not publish biased benchmarks. Doing so would be extremely obvious since these benchmarks are all reproducible and they would be putting their entire organization at risk. If other sources posted benchmarking data using their same methods that was not consistent with their own it would ruin their reputation. Yet this hasn't happened.
5. Benchmarks are generally a reliable source of data. Especially when backed up by other benchmarks. To say otherwise is to literally invalidate all potential sources of performance data since it is impossible to determine the performance of any hardware component without a benchmark.

I don't know how I can make my arguments any clearer than listing them this way. All you have to do is quote and respond to them one by one.

I hope this will be over soon. Although considering the list of claims keeps expanding into ever more ridiculous excuses to invalidate all forms of data I doubt it.

@Venomx1

Nice job.

(04-02-2013, 08:13 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]@Venomx1

Nice job.

thanks. with my second benchmark i was trying to hit my old 955 performance level.. surprisingly i almost had it with the first go around.

Also i felt like having 1 Benchmark with a Underclocked Processor. to properly show the comparison in power between Intels and AMD based cpus at this point in time. Since it seems nobody on the benchmark has actually underclocked .
Hopefully this shows the difference as it would be right smack dab with all the amds.

my latest project is trying to get 5.1ghz stable on air. (i can boot into it right now but i dont have enough voltage to make programs like dolphin stable).

probably gonna reach the 1.5v range...

(04-02-2013, 08:22 AM)Venomx1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-02-2013, 08:13 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]@Venomx1

Nice job.

thanks. with my second benchmark i was trying to hit my old 955 performance level.. surprisingly i almost had it with the first go around.

Also i felt like having 1 Benchmark with a Underclocked Processor. to properly show the comparison in power between Intels and AMD based cpus at this point in time. Since it seems nobody on the benchmark has actually underclocked .
Hopefully this shows the difference as it would be right smack dab with all the amds.

my latest project is trying to get 5.1ghz stable on air. (i can boot into it right now but i dont have enough voltage to make programs like dolphin stable).

probably gonna reach the 1.5v range...

Wow 5.1? Do it, we gotta beat that 2500k lol. Did you delid your cpu btw? I haven't tried moving past 4.5 yet but I think I can still squeeze a little more out of my cpu before I hit its limit. Vcore is just a little below 1.2 iirc, with temps hitting 70 with prime.

Quote:but I think I can still squeeze a little more out of my cpu before I hit its limit

Ivy Bridge IHS glue is quite strong . Use knife (a sharp and thin one ) to cut Ivy Bridge CPU . Reapply aftermarket thermal compound such as Arctic MX-4
http://www.overclock.net/t/1313179/official-delidded-ivy-bridge-club

Hey guys,
I have an issue with Wind Waker. I don't know if any of you had this problem before.
When I open a chest or get anything important in the game there is that music and the blue text box that comes out telling what was got.
But I can't make this blue box go out. The emulator simply stops getting any input. The item I get continues spinning, the frames per second, the music, everything continues. The emulator does not stop, but stops receiving any input. Everything else runs smoothly.
I tried with keyboard, mouse, Wii remote. I tried to disable sound, limit FPS. I don't know how to solve this issue.

Has anybody ever seen something like this?

Please tell me if you know how I could proceed.

Thanks

(04-03-2013, 05:55 AM)Gilder Wrote: [ -> ]Hey guys,
I have an issue with Wind Waker. I don't know if any of you had this problem before.
When I open a chest or get anything important in the game there is that music and the blue text box that comes out telling what was got.
But I can't make this blue box go out. The emulator simply stops getting any input. The item I get continues spinning, the frames per second, the music, everything continues. The emulator does not stop, but stops receiving any input. Everything else runs smoothly.
I tried with keyboard, mouse, Wii remote. I tried to disable sound, limit FPS. I don't know how to solve this issue.

Has anybody ever seen something like this?

Please tell me if you know how I could proceed.

Thanks

Absolutely wrong thread for this. There is also no need to spam the same question in multiple threads. Wait for someone to answer your first one, which is in the correct thread.

sigh.................


First off anyone who uses spelling or grammar as an argument not only fails at arguing but fails at life.... and id actually love for you to point out where you see a "problem" with my spelling or grammar... and really? acronyms? acronyms?!?!? WHAT?! o yes because acronyms just dont exist on the internet.... ya.....

secondly

Quote: So far you have made the following claims:
1. The 5470m achieves about the same performance as a 3650 graphics card. Originally you claimed the the difference between the two would be only 1-2 fps.
2. A much faster GPU will not significantly impact performance
3. GPU performance delta increases as GPU load decreases (older games, lower settings)
4. All or most professional benchmark sources are corrupt, bias, and unreliable.
5. Benchmarks are an unreliable source of information

1) ya i said the 5470m wont perform that much differently from a 3650 IN DOLPHIN ON THIS SPECIFIC BENCHMARK... You didnt read it... nor did you read the context in which my statement was said.... it was in a reply to "the 5470m is below the minimum requirements for dolphin", which i disputed that it was not because its probably not that much lower then the performance of a 3650...

you want quotes?

(03-28-2013, 07:39 PM)jbone1337 Wrote: [ -> ]Also the 5470m is above the min requirements
(not really much in benchmarks for the 3650, but really a pci-e 3650 dekstop card is probably about the same performance as the 5470m)

so id have to say the 5470m should be more then enough for playing at native 1x resolution with no harm on emulation speed. If it is bottlenecking the cpu performance, it cant really be by that much.

and the word i used was "PROBABLY about the same performance."
i never said it WAS 100% FACT LAW INDISPUTABLE that the 5470m was EQUAL TO THE PERFORMANCE of it...
i said PROBABLY ABOUT, ABOUT CLOSE TO.

and the CONTEXT IN WHICH IT WAS SAID WAS POINTED AT THIS SPECIFIC DOLPHIN BENCHMARK AND WAS ALSO APPLYING TO DOLPHIN EMULATION IN GENERAL.


THIS IS WHAT YOURE ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS BEEN ABOUT. WAS SAYING THIS EXACT SPECIFIC STATEMENT IS 100% COMPLETELY FALSE...
HOLY SHIT


2) i never claimed that one... YOU ARE ASSUMING THAT.... and with your comprehension skills, is like wtf?!?!?
I said a better card will NOT ALWAYS perform a noticeable amount faster...
3)

(03-29-2013, 11:48 AM)jbone1337 Wrote: [ -> ]But in actual gaming performance at a 720P resolution (1280x720/1366x768), they will score about the same (3650 would get maybe 1-2 fps more lol), which that level of difference is negligible.
If you were playing at like 640x480 or something, there would be a larger difference in performance between the 2. But really thats not a real world benchmark when benchmarking a gpu, since no one is ever going to be really playing at that resolution....

i never said THAT THE PERFORMANCE DELTA WILL ALWAYS 100% ALWAYS BE ALWAYS..... be higher at lower resolutions then higher resolutions..
AGAIN THIS IS YOUR STUPID IGNORANCE BRAIN NOT BEING ABLE TO COMPREHEND THINGS....

look at that last link i gave you, PERFECT example. all but crysis the delta WAS HIGHER AT LOWER RESOLUTIONS.
This is because the games in those benchmarks were less demanding games. When a game is less demanding, the delta will be high at lower resolution, since both cards will be able to play it.

its like saying which will win in a 1 mile race on a 45mph speed limit
street with no lights (and they are both already driving at 45mph)
a Ferrari or some crappy electric car.
well if the speed limit is 45, and they are both at a constant 45mph, they will tie.
you cant seem to understand that concept at all...

dolphin would fall under the "not as graphically demanding" category. (again the pint of this was for DOLPHIN NOT OTHER GAMES, IDK WHY YOU EVEN BOUGHT IN BENCHMARK FROM OTHER GAMES TO BEGIN WITH WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DOLPHIN.....)
I did because other examples as you NEVER seem to be satisfied. you just for SOME REASON have this need to argue with me over nothing. youre arguing over a point that means nothing. (and you WONDER WHY I CALL YOU STUPID.... LIKE REALLY. AND THE FACT YOUR QUESTION WHY IM CALLING YOU STUPID IS EVEN MORE OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!)

O AND NO, you couldnt just go and PM me about this or something. NO NO NO. YOU INSISTED ON GOING COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC of this thread to argue with me ABOUT WHAT?!?!?!? REAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLYY?!?!??! AND YOU ARE REAAAAAAAAAAAALLLY WONDERING WHY IM CALLING YOU RETARDED!?!?!?!?!??! WHAT!???????????!!!


4/5) ummm ya... who in their right mind is going to take benchmarks w/o a grain of salt? you seriously take them as 100% undeniable law, like laws of physics, like they CAN NOT BE BROKEN.
Like that can be mathematically PROVEN TO BE 100% TRUTH... (and yet all benchmark are never the same? hmmm?)

benchmarks have so many factors, they are only best used as guidelines.
Then also factor in alot of benchmarks are bias/paid off, they almost become ridiculous.

and if you really think that people arnt payed off for reviews/benchmarks in the world, wow, you are the most naive 5yr old in the world... the world revolves around corruption. like everything in this world is not true or what it seems... (well i guess i shall explain so your tiny brain understands. ofcourse not EVERYTHING if false, but you need to view the world like that, because the world is pretty much run on greed and corruption, and not acknowledging that fact is the most basic form of stupidity).
You know the better business bureau is like one of the most fake things in existence? and alot of people use that for some reason.

most "reviewers" get things sent to them for free for benchmarks. with how large toms hardware store is, i can PERSONALLY GUARANTEE its a pretty fake site. You say for me to prove they are fake? but you stand up for it SO much, prove to me its real.
I want you to show me a FULL LENGTH VIDEO OF THE ENTIRE TESTING PROCESS. 100% UNEDITED, like 6hour+ long video of all the benchmarks done. LIKE SHOW THE EXACT PROCESSES RUNNING in the background, THE EXACT HARDWARE SETTINGS, THE EXACT GAME SETTINGS, THE EXACT SAME PARTS DOING THE EXACT SAME THINGS.
when i mean EVERYTHING i mean EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE THING.
and do that for EVERY BENCHMARK.
THEN I WILL BELIEVE its real. why cant they do that? they are benchmarking already, how much trouble would it really be to just us your phone to record what you are doing while you are doing it and upload the unedited video to youtube.
wont cost a penny to do, creates maybe an extra 10seconds of work you have to do, and it ensures 100% authenticity of the benchmarks. why dont they? hmmm?


If you average all benchmarks there are on all pieces of hardware from lots and lots of different sources. Both professional and personal benchmarks.
AFTER YOU DO THAT, THEN YOU HAVE A GENERALIZATION which can still have probably a 10-20% margin of error.

You are taking 1 source (a compilation of ONE source) and saying it undeniably law, and the fact there is no clear measurements between the list of tiers. You are using ONE source with NO clear indication of the difference between them, to try and say that IN DOLPHIN, ON THIS SPECIFIC WW BENCHMARK, THAT THE 5470M WILL NOT PERFORM CLOSE TO THE SAME PERFORMANCE. (AGAIN YOU REAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALY ARE QUESTIONING WHY IM CALLING YOU RETARDED!?!?!?!? WHAT?!?!?)


this WHOLE ARGUMENT IS BASED ON THIS SPECIFIC WW BENCHMARK, AND NOTHING ELSE. IT DOESNT MATTER WHAT EXAMPLES OR W/E I MAY HAVE TRIED TO USE TO EXPLAIN TO YOU THAT THIS SPECIFIC WW BENCHMARK (or possibly other gc games or wii games) WILL BE CLOSE TO THE SAME PERFORMANCE.
EVERY EXAMPLE I USED WAS TRYING TO MAY MAKE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT IN DOLPHIN THESE 2 CARDS WILL NOT PERFORM THAT DIFFERENTLY.... BUT APPARENTLY YOU CANT UNDERSTAND ANYTHING, NOR DO YOU UNDERSTAND DOLPHIN IS NOT THE SAME AS NORMAL GAME BENCHMARKS.

AGAIN I HAVE TO BRING UP YOU ARE REALLY QUESTIONING WHY I THINK YOU ARE STUPID?
PLEASE TRY, PLEASE TRY, TO COMPREHEND THIS. I KNOW IT MAY BE HARD FOR YOU, BUT OMG.....



and JUST TO SATISFY YOU
i will probably go over to my brothers tonight, and do this dolphin ww test at 1x IR and 4x IR on his computer, then go do it on my old laptop, and show you literally everything about it.

(04-03-2013, 10:04 AM)jbone1337 Wrote: [ -> ]most "reviewers" get things sent to them for free for benchmarks. with how large toms hardware store is, i can PERSONALLY GUARANTEE its a pretty fake site. You say for me to prove they are fake? but you stand up for it SO much, prove to me its real.
I want you to show me a FULL LENGTH VIDEO OF THE ENTIRE TESTING PROCESS. 100% UNEDITED, like 6hour+ long video of all the benchmarks done. LIKE SHOW THE EXACT PROCESSES RUNNING in the background, THE EXACT HARDWARE SETTINGS, THE EXACT GAME SETTINGS, THE EXACT SAME PARTS DOING THE EXACT SAME THINGS.
when i mean EVERYTHING i mean EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE THING.
and do that for EVERY BENCHMARK.
THEN I WILL BELIEVE its real. why cant they do that? they are benchmarking already, how much trouble would it really be to just us your phone to record what you are doing while you are doing it and upload the unedited video to youtube.
wont cost a penny to do, creates maybe an extra 10seconds of work you have to do, and it ensures 100% authenticity of the benchmarks. why dont they? hmmm?

How can you personally guarantee it's fake. You are less known than the reviewers so if they can't be trusted then your personal guarantee is absolutely worthless. So what if reviewers are sent things for free. All the various review sites would have to be in it together for readers not to know without a doubt that a review was biased. As NV explained on that point. Us users would see a review that was quite a bit off the mark and that reviewers reputation would be ruined. All that extra crap is utterly useless would take more than 10 seconds and no one would watch it anyway.

Last thing. Stop with all the personal attacks. It does nothing for your side of the argument. I guess you aren't old enough to have learned that calling names in an argument is the best way to not win the argument. Even if you are right you will never convince anyone if you call them stupid while arguing with them. Anyway you've been warned about this once already so I'm hoping a mod will come and take care of the ridiculousness that is going on in this thread.

I think I can safely stop responding at this point without anything of value being lost. At this point no matter how many more times I ask politely he's just going to keep screaming at me and calling me names in a childish manner. And no matter how many times I ask for some data he's going to keep ranting in all caps about how all reputable benchmarks are biased even though they are all peer reviewed by each other and users.

However I would like to point out just one thing to anyone else who might actually consider reading this "debate" instead of doing a point-by-point response before I take my leave. This was part of my original post that started this whole thing:

NaturalViolence Wrote:If this were another game I might suspect a gpu bottleneck. However given the slow cpu and the fact the WW is extremely light on the GPU (which is one of the reasons that it was chosen) I can safely say that the gpu is not a bottleneck in this instance.

I said from the very beginning that this would not impact dolphin. I never tried to argue against this. When he said that the performance levels of the two cards would be the same (not performance in dolphin, just performance). I pointed out the specs and that prompted him to reply with this:

jbone1337 Wrote:But in actual gaming performance at a 720P resolution (1280x720/1366x768), they will score about the same (3650 would get maybe 1-2 fps more lol), which that level of difference is negligible.
If you were playing at like 640x480 or something, there would be a larger difference in performance between the 2. But really thats not a real world benchmark when benchmarking a gpu, since no one is ever going to be really playing at that resolution....

He was the one that originally brought up gaming performance being nearly identical. He even specifically said gaming performance. In every post since up until the last one he has not tried to take this back but instead kept coming up with examples and analogies to try and hammer his support of this claim further. All he had to do was respond with "yes games will run significantly faster on the 3650 but this won't effect WW" and that would have been the end of it. But he chose to continue arguing against me as if he disagreed. And he said that lower settings would generally increase the performance delta yet now he argues that dolphin will have a low delta because it's not very demanding. Only one of those statements can be correct.

Everything else in his latest post is barely readable gibberish that's not even worth responding to. And I'm not going to keep absorbing insults and putting the time and effort in to try and keep things on track for no good reason. So I'm done. I'm amazed that I have to do this. I have never had to do it before in all my years of debating people in rl and on the internet. But this has gone on long enough.

This thread can now resume its topic without further interruption since apparently his argument was against something I never even disputed.