F-4E Phantom II Development Update and Release Delay Announcement

[Tiger-II]

2 hours ago, bfr said:

It may well be that it was something like lower end kit (which they might not have tested it on much until thrown to a much wider testing pool) that it ended up as being unusable on. Its hinted at it was an OS v hardware thing. Wasn't there a thing with people still on Windows 10 and certain CPUs and scheduling that was a bit hooky in the past?

 

From what I understand, it was Windows 11 that choked on P-cores/E-cores of the latest Intel processors. It would schedule threads onto E-cores and then die if any of them MT with anything on a P-core due to the performance difference between the two. That ignores the fact the whole E/P core thing is just the dumbest idea Intel have had yet. Who the hell doesn't want max performance all the time? If you're that worried about power consumption, computing isn't for you. Gamers sure as hell don't want power efficiency as that is directly proportional to lower performance for a given piece of silicon. It's physics; not wishful thinking.

The thing with this browser integration is it is probably trying to use E-cores because what websites need performance? Chromium wants to be efficient. This is probably where the problem lies.

https://blog.chromium.org/2021/10/renderingng.html

Huh...LOL!

Quote

greater reliability, due to a 6x reduction in GPU driver crashes on problematic hardware

Uhh...yeah. Maybe read the docs next time? I found this after 10 seconds on Google. I wouldn't put this software near anything I was writing. Ever.

This link: https://developer.chrome.com/blog/renderingng/

gives 404. That tells you everything you need to know about the rubbish state of this software! Junk.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/comments/keuev4/frequent_crashes_of_chromiumbased_applications/

More LOL!

Edited April 18, 2024 by Tiger-II

[Q3ark]

8 hours ago, freehand said:

I understand some liking this post because of giggles but who would thank you for such a post.  

I’m just getting bored of people trying to stir up drama where none exists, the whole idea that there’s some ulterior motive to the release delay or that “they” are lying to us is ridiculous. 

[bfr]

6 hours ago, Tiger-II said:

From what I understand, it was Windows 11 that choked on P-cores/E-cores of the latest Intel processors. It would schedule threads onto E-cores and then die if any of them MT with anything on a P-core due to the performance difference between the two. That ignores the fact the whole E/P core thing is just the dumbest idea Intel have had yet. Who the hell doesn't want max performance all the time? If you're that worried about power consumption, computing isn't for you. Gamers sure as hell don't want power efficiency as that is directly proportional to lower performance for a given piece of silicon. It's physics; not wishful thinking.

The thing with this browser integration is it is probably trying to use E-cores because what websites need performance? Chromium wants to be efficient. This is probably where the problem lies.

https://blog.chromium.org/2021/10/renderingng.html

Huh...LOL!

Uhh...yeah. Maybe read the docs next time? I found this after 10 seconds on Google. I wouldn't put this software near anything I was writing. Ever.

This link: https://developer.chrome.com/blog/renderingng/

gives 404. That tells you everything you need to know about the rubbish state of this software! Junk.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/comments/keuev4/frequent_crashes_of_chromiumbased_applications/

More LOL!

 

Fwiw i absolutely agree Chromium can be a a bit of a resource hog but the last post was on a windows 10 subreddit about a low spec machine and kind of illustrates the point I was suggesting. 

[felixx75]

19 hours ago, draconus said:

I meant they just push the devs to work, not to release it. If everybody was so happy and cool with devs delaying things they'd start to be lazy in no time.

Also nonsense...

[average_pilot]

12 hours ago, Tiger-II said:

Who the hell doesn't want max performance all the time?

Between the ever increasing laptop users and then quite a lot of greenwashing everywhere, configuring a PC for max performance has become a nightmare. Computers are made to NOT want to work to their full capability.

[Archangel44]

2 hours ago, average_pilot said:

Between the ever increasing laptop users and then quite a lot of greenwashing everywhere, configuring a PC for max performance has become a nightmare. Computers are made to NOT want to work to their full capability.

If this is true, then that absolutely sucks for gamers.

I would hope AMD doesn’t do that crap.

I’m running an old Bulldozer, 8 core 4.7 MHz and so far so good.

I did have to go into the Windows 10 advance settings to enable all 8 cores because by default, Winders only enabled 1 core and performance was not good, but now with 8 cores running, I get less stutter in game with my 1080 SC, although loading screens and ending screens still take a bit of waiting.

[NoodI]

23 hours ago, Tiger-II said:

From what I understand, it was Windows 11 that choked on P-cores/E-cores of the latest Intel processors. It would schedule threads onto E-cores and then die if any of them MT with anything on a P-core due to the performance difference between the two. That ignores the fact the whole E/P core thing is just the dumbest idea Intel have had yet. Who the hell doesn't want max performance all the time? If you're that worried about power consumption, computing isn't for you. Gamers sure as hell don't want power efficiency as that is directly proportional to lower performance for a given piece of silicon. It's physics; not wishful thinking.

The thing with this browser integration is it is probably trying to use E-cores because what websites need performance? Chromium wants to be efficient. This is probably where the problem lies.

https://blog.chromium.org/2021/10/renderingng.html

Huh...LOL!

Uhh...yeah. Maybe read the docs next time? I found this after 10 seconds on Google. I wouldn't put this software near anything I was writing. Ever.

This link: https://developer.chrome.com/blog/renderingng/

gives 404. That tells you everything you need to know about the rubbish state of this software! Junk.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/comments/keuev4/frequent_crashes_of_chromiumbased_applications/

More LOL!

 

last link was the op's pc problem, and stop throwing a tantrum, you arent heatblur or a dev, stop making this a huge deal chromium isnt gonna fry ur cpu or kill you. and whats wrong with a 404, you can enter the wrong url anywhere and get a 404 doesnt mean anything associated with it is evil and dog<profanity> and again youre literally using chrome, or even any browser to use this forum...

Edited April 18, 2024 by NoodI

[average_pilot]

13 hours ago, NoodI said:

and again youre literally using chrome, or even any browser to use this forum...

That's unfair,this is a web site, it can't be accessed by any other means. What many people find shocking is that web technologies are used for a graphical interface instead, but the reason is that it provides lots of tools that developers don't need to develop themselves because the www already evolved to be very interactive and multimedia. That saves lots of resources to anyone building any sort of rich graphical interface.

[Hiob]

On 4/18/2024 at 2:07 AM, Tiger-II said:

That ignores the fact the whole E/P core thing is just the dumbest idea Intel have had yet. Who the hell doesn't want max performance all the time? If you're that worried about power consumption, computing isn't for you. Gamers sure as hell don't want power efficiency as that is directly proportional to lower performance for a given piece of silicon. It's physics; not wishful thinking.

What the actual Duck did I just read?

That must be the most ignorant statement of the day....

Has it crossed your mind at any moment, that there are other usecases for computers than gaming?

And gamers absolutely want efficiency, because efficiency only means max output per input. Or max fps per watt.

Intel messed up, sure, but that doesn't make E-cores a bad idea per se.

Edited April 19, 2024 by Hiob
typos

[freehand]

Ninja edit by Q3ark 

[Q3ark]

28 minutes ago, freehand said:

Ninja edit by Q3ark 

I posted then thought twice, don’t want to cause a row or make stuff personal

[mondo]

3 hours ago, Hiob said:

What the actual Duck did I just read?

That must be the most ignorant statement of the day....

Has it crossed your mind at any moment, that there are other usecaes for computers than gaming?

And gamers absolutely want efficiency, because efficiancy only means max output per input. Or max fps per watt.

Intel messed up, sure, but that doesn't make E-cores a bad idea per se.

I was going to quote and reply to that message but you beat me to it. The only issue I've encountered with E cores themselves was with DCS MT and that got fixed.

[Tiger-II]

8 hours ago, Hiob said:

Has it crossed your mind at any moment, that there are other usecases for computers than gaming?

You might want to read my comment again. I wasn't referring ONLY to gaming, but to the point people are complaining that an electronic, power-hungry device is *shock* consuming lots of power.

I don't want to pay for fuel for a tractor unit that only does 8 miles to the gallon, so I don't own one. If I wanted the tractor unit, I wouldn't then be complaining it only did 8 MPG. Same with computers. They use a lot of electricity, so if you want a computer, don't complain your electric bill doubled.

People seem to be wanting a 1-liter 3-cylinder petrol powered car that does 0-60 in 1.3 seconds and has a top speed of 210 MPH. LOL. It isn't going to happen, and the same is true with computers.

You want more compute power? Need more electricity to run it.

Edited April 19, 2024 by Tiger-II

[WarbossPetross]

31 минуту назад, Tiger-II сказал:

People seem to be wanting a 1-liter 3-cylinder petrol powered car that does 0-60 in 1.3 seconds and has a top speed of 210 MPH. LOL. It isn't going to happen, and the same is true with computers.

Depends on the boost though

[Horns]

We’ve got pretty OT, maybe that’s natural because we seem to have covered the range of positions re the original topic. If anyone else wants to say something in response to the topic I suggest you do so quick because I don’t know how long this will stay open…

[IanHx2]

14 hours ago, Hiob said:

Has it crossed your mind at any moment, that there are other usecases for computers than gaming?

Let's see, there's....ummm.... errr.....   writing about games......   and ......  give me a minute.....umm....errr.... coding more games.....?   

[Q3ark]

3 minutes ago, IanHx2 said:

Let's see, there's....ummm.... errr.....   writing about games......   and ......  give me a minute.....umm....errr.... coding more games.....?   

In winter I run a taxing 3D application at maximum graphics to heat my room, does this count? 

[ContinuedMayhem2020]

JFC! The Geeks are at it again over <profanity> 90% or more of us don't care about.

The F-4E is going to be awesome once released. HB has my money, and they can keep it.  Pre-order $59.99 big deal. If that breaks your bank, you should focus on other things. I'm still loving the F-14...give it a try if you haven't already.

[Archangel44]

I’m really looking forward to the F4 coming out.

One reason is that I really like the F14 but I’m not doing so well at it.

Back in the days a little before the F14 came into service, our Navy guys were flying the Phantom, as they were  still commissioned, they took from what the learned from the F4 and transitioned to the Tom Cat, same with the Tom Cat guys who transitioned to the Hornet when the Navy decided to retire the F14.

I’m hoping that once I can get a handle on the F4, I’ll be at a point that the F14 will be easier for me.

I found this true as I spent some quality time in the F5 and I believed it made it easier when I started learning the F16. Different animals I know, but there’s just something about the old saying of learning to crawl before you learn to walk then run and finally leap.

Edited April 20, 2024 by Archangel44
Speeling air-or

[ThorBrasil]

[ThorBrasil]

[giullep]

in the comment of the CH-47 preorder video on Youtube, Ed said that the release of the F-4 is before the release of his Ch-47 in june, and then...may...is Pharelease!|

Edited April 20, 2024 by giullep

[felixx75]

3 hours ago, giullep said:

in the comment of the CH-47 preorder video on Youtube, Ed said that the release of the F-4 is before the release of his Ch-47 in june, and then...may...is Pharelease!|

 

 

[Richrach]

14 hours ago, Archangel44 said:

I’m really looking forward to the F4 coming out.

One reason is that I really like the F14 but I’m not doing so well at it.

Back in the days a little before the F14 came into service, our Navy guys were flying the Phantom, as they were  still commissioned, they took from what the learned from the F4 and transitioned to the Tom Cat, same with the Tom Cat guys who transitioned to the Hornet when the Navy decided to retire the F14.

I’m hoping that once I can get a handle on the F4, I’ll be at a point that the F14 will be easier for me.

I found this true as I spent some quality time in the F5 and I believed it made it easier when I started learning the F16. Different animals I know, but there’s just something about the old saying of learning to crawl before you learn to walk then run and finally leap.

 

I have not flown either model in DCS, but I did fly the baby Hornet in real life and got time in the F-14A simulator.  They were radically different in handling and performance, not even close.  The Tomcat was a traditional fighter, flying on the edge of stability for the sake of maneuverability.  It was like flying on the head of a pin trying to maintain directional control.  The Hornet with its fly-by-wire systems was very much like the F-16 in most respects, with the exception of the side stick.

I will say the F-16 was the hardest modern jet to fly I have experience with because its side stick had so little movement.  You had no real sense of proportionality to your inputs.  Traditional sticks with their large movement arcs are much easier to fly in real life, even the FBW birds.

Most guys I flew with hated flying the F-16 in the goo (IFR) because of the lack of real feedback from the controls.  This problem transfers over to simulators as well, with the minimal stick movement most have.  The extensions made for some sticks are a real boon for realism, as is VR.

One person's experience.  Your mileage may vary - Richrach

[t_hedlund]

On 4/19/2024 at 9:24 PM, ThorBrasil said:

Thor, please keep these excellent screenshots coming!