Nvidia Shield, Geforce Now VS Geforce Now, is a Core i5 enough? – The Full Nerd Ep. 15

Gordon Mah Ung, Brad Chacos, Alaina Yee, and Adam Patrick Murray go over the Nvidia Shield and how it stacks up, the confusing Geforce Now VS Geforce Now, ask if a Core i5 is good enough for games anymore, and take questions from the audience.

Listen to the podcast on SoundCloud:

Listen and subscribe on iTunes:

Check out the show live every other Tuesday at

Click here to subscribe to IDG.tv:

Check out our website for our full video collection:

Like IDG.tv on Facebook:

Follow IDG.tv on Twitter:

Follow us on Instagram:

17 thoughts on “Nvidia Shield, Geforce Now VS Geforce Now, is a Core i5 enough? – The Full Nerd Ep. 15

  • January 25, 2017 at 1:29 am

    The thing about gaming at 4k resolution is that the gpu becomes the bottleneck, whereas at 1080p, the bottleneck is on the cpu.. hence if ure going to game at 4k = i5, but if ure going to game at lower resolutions = i7

  • January 25, 2017 at 2:33 am

    I really think you guys forget that bulldozer was a 319mm2 die, you know that is ridiculously big and expensive to produce and you want to know how big Intel $1000 990X was 239 mm2

    So while yes AMD couldn't charge $1000 for bulldozer because absolutely no one would buy it AMD was still making money on bulldozer at the start and the 990X was a 6 core part we are only talking about 2 more cores on a 14nm process vs 32nm 5 years latter and Global Foundries 32nm was SHIT at the time so yields were low. Furthermore Samsungs/Global Foundries yields are looking to be pretty good right now. So $350 is by no means insane as you think it is as a Zen 8 core CPU is probably going to be cheaper to produce than Bulldozer was back in 2011. So really AMD if they had a need could charge $240 same as bulldozer and still make a small profit, point being is at $350 at a minimum AMD is making like $110 profit per CPU which is a pretty nice profit, and at $500 they are making over double.

    It's just Intel has been gouging the ever living fuck out of everyone, and for AMD stepping up from making a loss on there CPU's currently as there selling 319mm2 dies for $150 upto making a 45% profit at a bear minimum is not a bad place for them to be and if they can sell a shit ton of CPU's at a 45% profit that looks fantastic to a company that has been making losses for years. Although 108.3% profit does look better, and tbh I don't see AMD turning down the opportunity to make that money.

    Because they would still sell a shit ton of 6 and 4 core CPU's at around the $350 for the 6 core and $200 – $250 for the 4 core versions. And they can reduce prices when Skylake X comes out to put Intel even further on there backfoot. So what I think is going to happen is yes AMD is going to launch the lowest end 8 core at $500~ then a bit after Skylake launches they reduce the price to $350 which will force Intel to do 2 price drops in a short period of time of the i3's to i7 4 core CPU's. And maybe 2 price drops to the Enthusiast CPU's.

    And Intel will probably be hesitant to drop prices so AMD can take sales away from them in those 2 periods, while also dirtying Intel's name with those who pay attention, and gaining mind share and consumer confidence with basically everyone. It's too good of a plan not to go for, and AMD definitely has smarter people working on this than me and a lot more people who's job it is to think of these things which means they will spend more time thinking about it.

    So they will probably have came to a similar conclusion,

  • January 25, 2017 at 3:10 am

    Oh also the very fact that they have contracted both Global Foundries and Samsung to produce Zen CPU's gives the distinct impression that they expect to sell a metric shit ton.

    Which at $700-$800 they are not going to sell many Zen CPU's if we assume after that a 6 core would probably be around $500 and a 4 core for around $350. Well at least Global Foundries would be able to keep up with how many you would expect them to be able to sell at those kind of prices.

    The only reason you would reasonably expect them to sell that many is if they are going to be selling them for what is currently an unbelievable price or they are out performing Intel significantly, which we know it's not the latter so price it is.

    Because for them to have to have Samsung and Global Foundies you are talking millions of units, only companies like Apple who produce things that sell like iPhones have to contract 2 manufacturer to keep up with demand.

    That should give you some indication of how well AMD thinks this is going to sell, you could ague this is more due to the server CPU's because AMD is certainly going to kick the leg out under that industy as Intel is currently charging $4000 for a 22 core CPU.

    Where as AMD is likely to come in at around $2000 – $2500 for a 32 core but consumer spending on processors is still higher than Enterprise so if they want to meet the demand they obviously think they are going to have they need to hit the consumer space hard too.

  • January 25, 2017 at 9:16 am

    Video editing is wut is going to drive i7 cores. My i5 is slow for video editing!

  • January 25, 2017 at 10:13 am

    The CPU is the only PC part that is "future proof" . You can use a good CPU up to 7 years and still be relevant. But a GPU is 1-3 years unless its AMD which 1 extra year. So i'd say if your the type of person who doesn't upgrade every 2 gen , get a massive CPU and a good enough GPU for the current year. and when u feel the need for more performance just trow another GPU and it will work.

  • January 25, 2017 at 12:59 pm

    So what, you pay $125 to play through a $50 game like witcher 3? You've spent $175 total to play this one game. It would only take roughly 10-20 games depending on hours spent before it would have been more cost effective to buy your own PC. I play through at least 10 games in a year. Nvidia is barking mad with this one. The value proposition gets even worse if you go up to the 1080 level. I also won't believe that latency won't be a huge problem for the vast majority of people until I see it, especially in countries like Australia.

  • January 25, 2017 at 1:38 pm

    Nvidia shield I like it but you can't get outside the US

  • January 25, 2017 at 7:43 pm

    Am I the only one who doesn't want an always-on mic anywhere near me?
    I dislike my Alexa (it was a gift) – I'm sure not buying stuff with that tech and no reasons behind it.

  • January 26, 2017 at 1:37 am

    +PCWorldVideos I can also see GeForce Now as a way to test drive a GPU too. Do I want/need a GTX 1080 for instance? Other than that and the reasons mentioned in your cast it is a very niche service.

  • January 28, 2017 at 7:04 pm

    GeForce NOW on a SHIELD I imported to Australia, rates GeForce NOW as unplayable… yet the latency is incredibly low compared to even my Xbox 360 at 180 ping, less than 25Mbit/s even… as a 120Hz (now 144/165Hz) gamer since 2011, I'm shocked as hell at the results.

    Also, the PC streaming of GeForce NOW is aimed at expanding the gaming market for those who want a good experience without paying the whole price for a new PC or high-end graphics card whilst they may only pay a few hours a week. It was explained so incredibly clearly with perhaps a graph if I recall even… then if they choose to say, buy a Nvidia card later as a result of that… Nvidia again, profits more? It's a win-win for them.

  • January 30, 2017 at 3:40 am

    I'd love to see an in depth article on i5 vs i7. I'm not afraid to spend money on gaming, 144hz 34" monitor, GTX 1080, but still rocking an overclocked i5-4690k. I haven't seen compelling evidence in more than isolated games that a newer cpu or 8 threads will help me that much.

  • February 1, 2017 at 3:47 pm

    4 core gaming is dead for 2 reasons:

    – bad console ports (8t optimization baldy ported to 2-4t)
    – Win10 ressource hog (whenever it decides to do it even if your life depends on it)

    You can fight it, curse, cry, boycott..the fact remains: you want a good experience in the next 2-4 years (thats why you are buying now, right?) you better have some spare ressources in your machine.

  • February 2, 2017 at 12:41 pm

    Sorry, but as a finance person, i think Streaming is the future, its unfortunate that Nvidia botched the opportunity to make it a universal service across all devices at the same $7 price. It could have been an instant industry changer.

Comments are closed.