Yeah, I remember going into a big box computer store in Austin when Pentium was first released and was amazed how fast it was. We're all old.
Noob question time: since that amazing Asus G-sync monitor doesn't seem to be available yet and is out of my current budget, would I see any benefit going with something like, say, the Monoprice 144Hz monitor vs. a standard 60Hz? I know a decent amount about TVs and frequencies and all that shit, but honestly, I'm lost when it comes to desktop stuff as I've always just bought those desktop-in-a-box deals and upgraded as needed. And have never used one for anything more intense gaming-wise than Escape Velocity and the first two Myth games.
Don't know how their "personal" codes work, but PM me if you want mine.
I refuse to accept that the Pentium line is 20 years old. that simply cannot be.
:sad:
Homie did you not install your 3.5 floppy copy of Windows 95 on your shiny new Pentium 75 Mhz? 8 MB of Ram, bro! 1GB HDD, bro! 2MB 16 bit SVGA card, bro!
Don't know how their "personal" codes work, but PM me if you want mine.
I refuse to accept that the Pentium line is 20 years old. that simply cannot be.
:sad:
Homie did you not install your 3.5 floppy copy of Windows 95 on your shiny new Pentium 75 Mhz? 8 MB of Ram, bro! 1GB HDD, bro! 2MB 16 bit SVGA card, bro!
I've had enough with my godawfully slow HDD and decided it's time to get an SSD to toss the OS and a select few games on. Looking for around 250 jiggabutts, which should be enough for the basics. Any particular brand/model to recommend?
Local store has a Samsung SSD 850 EVO SSD 250GB for a decent price.
I've had enough with my godawfully slow HDD and decided it's time to get an SSD to toss the OS and a select few games on. Looking for around 250 jiggabutts, which should be enough for the basics. Any particular brand/model to recommend?
Local store has a Samsung SSD 850 EVO SSD 250GB for a decent price.
That's a good one. I have a Crucial MX100 256GB SSD and it has been great as well. I have no complaints.
Also, guys thanks for your ram matching explanation. With that info it means I don't have to start watching for the exact ram on sale if I want to upgrade. Very helpful
Hey guys, first time posting here. I've currently got my big ol' computer sitting next to my TV and I've been toying with the idea of getting a smaller motherboard/case so its less of an eye-sore.
I've currently got a 2500k i5
2x4gb ram
750ti which i just bought when my old card died last month
1 ssd
1 hdd
I would like to use as much of my current hardware as possible.
I've never looked into mATX or any of the smaller form mother boards until now and I was hoping you guys could point me in the right direction. I'm also looking for a case that is vertical and thin, or lays flat and short.
So I'm reading Anandtech's writeup of a new draw-call heavy benchmark for DX12, and it occurs to me to ask:
Just what does this actually mean, in terms of visual improvements for PC games? The ability to have more polygons on the screen at once? Just less pop-in in things like AssCreed Unity?
I've had enough with my godawfully slow HDD and decided it's time to get an SSD to toss the OS and a select few games on. Looking for around 250 jiggabutts, which should be enough for the basics. Any particular brand/model to recommend?
Local store has a Samsung SSD 850 EVO SSD 250GB for a decent price.
The 850 Evo is a good product. You'll be happy with it.
Also does anyone have any recommendations on monitors that are below $150. I have HDMI, DisplayPort and DVI on the video card. Kinda want a thing with a headphone jack but that isn't even a bit required. Gaming and school/internet are the use cases.
So...investigating more and holy shit there are so many options and what do they all mean and I don't even know what I want in a monitor any more
Help!
Edit: Also I guess now below $200 is the requirement pricewise
So I'm reading Anandtech's writeup of a new draw-call heavy benchmark for DX12, and it occurs to me to ask:
Just what does this actually mean, in terms of visual improvements for PC games? The ability to have more polygons on the screen at once? Just less pop-in in things like AssCreed Unity?
Some current games have hit what seems to be draw call limits in DX11. Dying light stop pushing your video and cpu when the draw calls go way up, so you hit a performance ceiling but your card and cpu isn't working very hard.
Hey guys, first time posting here. I've currently got my big ol' computer sitting next to my TV and I've been toying with the idea of getting a smaller motherboard/case so its less of an eye-sore.
I've currently got a 2500k i5
2x4gb ram
750ti which i just bought when my old card died last month
1 ssd
1 hdd
I would like to use as much of my current hardware as possible.
I've never looked into mATX or any of the smaller form mother boards until now and I was hoping you guys could point me in the right direction. I'm also looking for a case that is vertical and thin, or lays flat and short.
I'm using this case from Silverstone Tek and so far it's pretty great:
XBL: Jhnny Cash PSN: Jhnny_Cash Steam ID: http://steamcommunity.com/id/hypephb 3DS: 0619-4582-9630 Nintendo Network ID: DBrickashaw
You might know me as D'Brickashaw on Steam.
So I'm reading Anandtech's writeup of a new draw-call heavy benchmark for DX12, and it occurs to me to ask:
Just what does this actually mean, in terms of visual improvements for PC games? The ability to have more polygons on the screen at once? Just less pop-in in things like AssCreed Unity?
Basically, it just means more. Every time a game engine wants to draw something in a scene, it does so using a "draw call", which is just a message to the gpu drivers to draw something. Every separate thing needs it's own call (with some exceptions. There's a technique called batching where multiple related objects are drawn in a single batch, but there are a lot of requirements that have to be met in order for objects to be batched). The problem is that draw calls take cpu time. Not a lot of time, but the draw call handling portion of both directx and opengl is single threaded.
Normally the draw calls for the next frame are made while the gpu renders the current frame. Frames have to be rendered in less than 16 milliseconds to hit 60 fps. As scene complexity rises, the time spent making draw calls can exceed 16 ms, the gpu gets starved of work, and the frame rate tanks to 30 or lower.
Also does anyone have any recommendations on monitors that are below $150. I have HDMI, DisplayPort and DVI on the video card. Kinda want a thing with a headphone jack but that isn't even a bit required. Gaming and school/internet are the use cases.
So...investigating more and holy shit there are so many options and what do they all mean and I don't even know what I want in a monitor any more
Help!
Edit: Also I guess now below $200 is the requirement pricewise
The best advice I can give you is to use http://www.howstuffworks.com and Wikipedia to explain the different features and give you ideas of what to look for. Also, if you have questions about specifics, you can ask us.
Also does anyone have any recommendations on monitors that are below $150. I have HDMI, DisplayPort and DVI on the video card. Kinda want a thing with a headphone jack but that isn't even a bit required. Gaming and school/internet are the use cases.
So...investigating more and holy shit there are so many options and what do they all mean and I don't even know what I want in a monitor any more
Help!
Edit: Also I guess now below $200 is the requirement pricewise
Well, how fancy a monitor do you want?
I think you can get a perfectly good monitor for ~$150. Biggest things to think about are:
Size: I would go with at least 23"
Panel: TN or IPS. IPS is a little more expensive but has better color reproduction and viewing angles
Inputs: DVI at least, you might also want HDMI. DisplayPort is on more expensive monitors mostly.
So I've been doing more looking into what the specs are that I need to replicate so my wife has a comparable computer to her current work computer when she graduates. I'm not sure what it means, but when she looks into the processor specs through RedHat, it shows (0-7) 8 different I7-4770 3.4gighz processors.
Is this how Linux reports multiple cores, or is this some sort of weird mini-server disguised as a workstation?
If, if Reagan played disco He'd shoot it to shit You can't disco in Jackboots
So I've been doing more looking into what the specs are that I need to replicate so my wife has a comparable computer to her current work computer when she graduates. I'm not sure what it means, but when she looks into the processor specs through RedHat, it shows (0-7) 8 different I7-4770 3.4gighz processors.
Is this how Linux reports multiple cores, or is this some sort of weird mini-server disguised as a workstation?
Someone here can probably say better than me but Core i7 has 4 cores, 8 threads. If I recall, the 8 has something to do with Hyperthreading which is the main difference between the i5 and the i7 and hyperthreading can make it look like it has 8 cores but that processor definitely only has 4 cores.
So I've been doing more looking into what the specs are that I need to replicate so my wife has a comparable computer to her current work computer when she graduates. I'm not sure what it means, but when she looks into the processor specs through RedHat, it shows (0-7) 8 different I7-4770 3.4gighz processors.
Is this how Linux reports multiple cores, or is this some sort of weird mini-server disguised as a workstation?
Someone here can probably say better than me but Core i7 has 4 cores, 8 threads. If I recall, the 8 has something to do with Hyperthreading which is the main difference between the i5 and the i7 and hyperthreading can make it look like it has 8 cores but that processor definitely only has 4 cores.
That's kind of what I figured was it was just being read funny by Linux. I've looked around before I put something in the forums. I didn't think it was possible for a computer in a case the size of a large desktop case to have that many processors.
If, if Reagan played disco He'd shoot it to shit You can't disco in Jackboots
Yeah. Individual cores are exposed as separate processors because for all intents and purposes they are individual processors. Hyperthreading all happens inside the processor, and is exposed to the system as an extra core for each extra thread.
Technically, the operating system knows which two virtual threads belong to each core, but it abstracts all that info away from the rest of the system for simplicity's sake.
Now the way CPU usage is reported differs between the two. If one of eight threads is at full blast, Windows calls it 12.5%, *nix calls it 100%. If all eight are going, Windows calls it 100% and *nix calls it 800%.
Now the way CPU usage is reported differs between the two. If one of eight threads is at full blast, Windows calls it 12.5%, *nix calls it 100%. If all eight are going, Windows calls it 100% and *nix calls it 800%.
yea the fist time I ever looked at process monitor on a dual core processor on OS X and saw the processor running at 138% I just about lost it. 49 seconds of google later I was fine but my heart definitely skipped a beat.
Hey guys, first time posting here. I've currently got my big ol' computer sitting next to my TV and I've been toying with the idea of getting a smaller motherboard/case so its less of an eye-sore.
I've currently got a 2500k i5
2x4gb ram
750ti which i just bought when my old card died last month
1 ssd
1 hdd
I would like to use as much of my current hardware as possible.
I've never looked into mATX or any of the smaller form mother boards until now and I was hoping you guys could point me in the right direction. I'm also looking for a case that is vertical and thin, or lays flat and short.
There are HTPC cases that come with a 90 degree riser to lay the GPU over so they can be nice and flat like a console or BluRay player, but they are generally costlier and usually require special PSUs.
0
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
So I've been doing more looking into what the specs are that I need to replicate so my wife has a comparable computer to her current work computer when she graduates. I'm not sure what it means, but when she looks into the processor specs through RedHat, it shows (0-7) 8 different I7-4770 3.4gighz processors.
Is this how Linux reports multiple cores, or is this some sort of weird mini-server disguised as a workstation?
Someone here can probably say better than me but Core i7 has 4 cores, 8 threads. If I recall, the 8 has something to do with Hyperthreading which is the main difference between the i5 and the i7 and hyperthreading can make it look like it has 8 cores but that processor definitely only has 4 cores.
That's kind of what I figured was it was just being read funny by Linux. I've looked around before I put something in the forums. I didn't think it was possible for a computer in a case the size of a large desktop case to have that many processors.
So I'm reading Anandtech's writeup of a new draw-call heavy benchmark for DX12, and it occurs to me to ask:
Just what does this actually mean, in terms of visual improvements for PC games? The ability to have more polygons on the screen at once? Just less pop-in in things like AssCreed Unity?
Basically, it just means more. Every time a game engine wants to draw something in a scene, it does so using a "draw call", which is just a message to the gpu drivers to draw something. Every separate thing needs it's own call (with some exceptions. There's a technique called batching where multiple related objects are drawn in a single batch, but there are a lot of requirements that have to be met in order for objects to be batched). The problem is that draw calls take cpu time. Not a lot of time, but the draw call handling portion of both directx and opengl is single threaded.
Normally the draw calls for the next frame are made while the gpu renders the current frame. Frames have to be rendered in less than 16 milliseconds to hit 60 fps. As scene complexity rises, the time spent making draw calls can exceed 16 ms, the gpu gets starved of work, and the frame rate tanks to 30 or lower.
Cool, thanks for the rundown!
But maybe I'm just being dumb here, because I still don't get what this actually means, on the user's end. Like will it just let developers have more stuff on the screen at once? Will it only affect how quickly that stuff is put on the screen?
0
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
It means that DX12 allows GPUs to be able to render graphics faster, without being restrained by the CPU to the same extent that they were up until now.
0
Options
BouwsTWanna come to a super soft birthday party?Registered Userregular
So I'm reading Anandtech's writeup of a new draw-call heavy benchmark for DX12, and it occurs to me to ask:
Just what does this actually mean, in terms of visual improvements for PC games? The ability to have more polygons on the screen at once? Just less pop-in in things like AssCreed Unity?
Basically, it just means more. Every time a game engine wants to draw something in a scene, it does so using a "draw call", which is just a message to the gpu drivers to draw something. Every separate thing needs it's own call (with some exceptions. There's a technique called batching where multiple related objects are drawn in a single batch, but there are a lot of requirements that have to be met in order for objects to be batched). The problem is that draw calls take cpu time. Not a lot of time, but the draw call handling portion of both directx and opengl is single threaded.
Normally the draw calls for the next frame are made while the gpu renders the current frame. Frames have to be rendered in less than 16 milliseconds to hit 60 fps. As scene complexity rises, the time spent making draw calls can exceed 16 ms, the gpu gets starved of work, and the frame rate tanks to 30 or lower.
Cool, thanks for the rundown!
But maybe I'm just being dumb here, because I still don't get what this actually means, on the user's end. Like will it just let developers have more stuff on the screen at once? Will it only affect how quickly that stuff is put on the screen?
They are two sides of the same coin. It's like asking, "with this Titan GPU allow me to play prettier games, or will my existing games just run faster?" The answer is yes in both cases.
Being able to accomplish faster draw calls will allow developers to do more with the same hardware, as well as push the leading edge hardware further than ever before. More geometry on screen means finer detail in games, more lush vegetation, better particle effects in smoke, more complicated lighting interactions.
If we were able to use DX12 on current generation hardware/software, it would remove draw calls as a bottle neck. However, when we start seeing what developers can do with this new overhead, we will see another HUGE leap regarding what can be displayed at one time on screen.
Between you and me, Peggy, I smoked this Juul and it did UNTHINKABLE things to my mind and body...
Hey guys, first time posting here. I've currently got my big ol' computer sitting next to my TV and I've been toying with the idea of getting a smaller motherboard/case so its less of an eye-sore.
I've currently got a 2500k i5
2x4gb ram
750ti which i just bought when my old card died last month
1 ssd
1 hdd
I would like to use as much of my current hardware as possible.
I've never looked into mATX or any of the smaller form mother boards until now and I was hoping you guys could point me in the right direction. I'm also looking for a case that is vertical and thin, or lays flat and short.
There are HTPC cases that come with a 90 degree riser to lay the GPU over so they can be nice and flat like a console or BluRay player, but they are generally costlier and usually require special PSUs.
Looks good except that I need a mobo with an LGA1155 socket. Is my understanding correct that m-ITX is smaller than m-ATX? I would like to go for the smallest one possible but I can't seem to find and m-ITX board that have 1155 sockets on them.
Posts
FEELING OLD
We're both old
That processor still confounds me how powerful it is for how cheap it is, good lord
Noob question time: since that amazing Asus G-sync monitor doesn't seem to be available yet and is out of my current budget, would I see any benefit going with something like, say, the Monoprice 144Hz monitor vs. a standard 60Hz? I know a decent amount about TVs and frequencies and all that shit, but honestly, I'm lost when it comes to desktop stuff as I've always just bought those desktop-in-a-box deals and upgraded as needed. And have never used one for anything more intense gaming-wise than Escape Velocity and the first two Myth games.
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
WHERE'S YOUR MEMORY LEAK NOW, CHROME?! I have more tabs open than a deadbeat alcoholic.
Homie did you not install your 3.5 floppy copy of Windows 95 on your shiny new Pentium 75 Mhz? 8 MB of Ram, bro! 1GB HDD, bro! 2MB 16 bit SVGA card, bro!
1GB HDD huh? No one would need more than 500MB!
Local store has a Samsung SSD 850 EVO SSD 250GB for a decent price.
That's a good one. I have a Crucial MX100 256GB SSD and it has been great as well. I have no complaints.
Also, guys thanks for your ram matching explanation. With that info it means I don't have to start watching for the exact ram on sale if I want to upgrade. Very helpful
SteamID: edgruberman GOG Galaxy: EdGruberman
Sheeeeit. My first HDD was 30MB for my Atari ST. GOML, son!
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
I've currently got a 2500k i5
2x4gb ram
750ti which i just bought when my old card died last month
1 ssd
1 hdd
I would like to use as much of my current hardware as possible.
I've never looked into mATX or any of the smaller form mother boards until now and I was hoping you guys could point me in the right direction. I'm also looking for a case that is vertical and thin, or lays flat and short.
Just what does this actually mean, in terms of visual improvements for PC games? The ability to have more polygons on the screen at once? Just less pop-in in things like AssCreed Unity?
The 850 Evo is a good product. You'll be happy with it.
So...investigating more and holy shit there are so many options and what do they all mean and I don't even know what I want in a monitor any more
Help!
Edit: Also I guess now below $200 is the requirement pricewise
Some current games have hit what seems to be draw call limits in DX11. Dying light stop pushing your video and cpu when the draw calls go way up, so you hit a performance ceiling but your card and cpu isn't working very hard.
I'm using this case from Silverstone Tek and so far it's pretty great:
http://silverstonetek.com/product.php?pid=503&area=en
You might know me as D'Brickashaw on Steam.
Basically, it just means more. Every time a game engine wants to draw something in a scene, it does so using a "draw call", which is just a message to the gpu drivers to draw something. Every separate thing needs it's own call (with some exceptions. There's a technique called batching where multiple related objects are drawn in a single batch, but there are a lot of requirements that have to be met in order for objects to be batched). The problem is that draw calls take cpu time. Not a lot of time, but the draw call handling portion of both directx and opengl is single threaded.
Normally the draw calls for the next frame are made while the gpu renders the current frame. Frames have to be rendered in less than 16 milliseconds to hit 60 fps. As scene complexity rises, the time spent making draw calls can exceed 16 ms, the gpu gets starved of work, and the frame rate tanks to 30 or lower.
The best advice I can give you is to use http://www.howstuffworks.com and Wikipedia to explain the different features and give you ideas of what to look for. Also, if you have questions about specifics, you can ask us.
WHOOSH
The SSD went over your head?
Through echo's body, atom by atom. Whoosh.
Well, how fancy a monitor do you want?
I think you can get a perfectly good monitor for ~$150. Biggest things to think about are:
Size: I would go with at least 23"
Panel: TN or IPS. IPS is a little more expensive but has better color reproduction and viewing angles
Inputs: DVI at least, you might also want HDMI. DisplayPort is on more expensive monitors mostly.
This is $160: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009720
Is this how Linux reports multiple cores, or is this some sort of weird mini-server disguised as a workstation?
Someone here can probably say better than me but Core i7 has 4 cores, 8 threads. If I recall, the 8 has something to do with Hyperthreading which is the main difference between the i5 and the i7 and hyperthreading can make it look like it has 8 cores but that processor definitely only has 4 cores.
SteamID: edgruberman GOG Galaxy: EdGruberman
That's kind of what I figured was it was just being read funny by Linux. I've looked around before I put something in the forums. I didn't think it was possible for a computer in a case the size of a large desktop case to have that many processors.
Technically, the operating system knows which two virtual threads belong to each core, but it abstracts all that info away from the rest of the system for simplicity's sake.
yea the fist time I ever looked at process monitor on a dual core processor on OS X and saw the processor running at 138% I just about lost it. 49 seconds of google later I was fine but my heart definitely skipped a beat.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/yVvDJx
There are HTPC cases that come with a 90 degree riser to lay the GPU over so they can be nice and flat like a console or BluRay player, but they are generally costlier and usually require special PSUs.
Well then you would be wrong! 24 physical CPU cores on an ATX motherboard...
But yeah it is unlikely that she would be working on a multi-CPU workstation in college unless she is doing some really rad shit at school.
Cool, thanks for the rundown!
But maybe I'm just being dumb here, because I still don't get what this actually means, on the user's end. Like will it just let developers have more stuff on the screen at once? Will it only affect how quickly that stuff is put on the screen?
They are two sides of the same coin. It's like asking, "with this Titan GPU allow me to play prettier games, or will my existing games just run faster?" The answer is yes in both cases.
Being able to accomplish faster draw calls will allow developers to do more with the same hardware, as well as push the leading edge hardware further than ever before. More geometry on screen means finer detail in games, more lush vegetation, better particle effects in smoke, more complicated lighting interactions.
If we were able to use DX12 on current generation hardware/software, it would remove draw calls as a bottle neck. However, when we start seeing what developers can do with this new overhead, we will see another HUGE leap regarding what can be displayed at one time on screen.
Looks good except that I need a mobo with an LGA1155 socket. Is my understanding correct that m-ITX is smaller than m-ATX? I would like to go for the smallest one possible but I can't seem to find and m-ITX board that have 1155 sockets on them.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007627 600093976 600009028
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.