gonvres

They don't hurt, but in my experience they don't fix the problem. They usually come back too. Red stuck pixels are the worst.

Don't listen to the advice of people telling you to put pressure on your new screen. If its only a few weeks old and the pixel bothers you return it for another unit.

Completely a personal thing. You'll have no shortage of choice. If anything the 60hz IPS 4k screens are cheaper than the 'gaming' monitors.

Id take 1440P 144hz over 4k 60hz anyday.

Depends what you want. The thing with monitor technology is there is quite drastic price differences between them all. So your entry level: - 1080P. 27 inch. VA/IPS Panel - 60h/z. Now this will likely still be a very good screen and do everything you need. Also affordable. No real 'fancy' technology but you're paying big price increases for the improvements. -$200 - 1080P 27 inch. TN Panel - 144hz. You're likely paying over twice as much as the monitor above. You can see 144fps on the screen vs 60fps. This is definitely noticeable but is it worth over twice the cost? $400-450 - 1080P 27 inch Gsync TN 144hz. Adds the nVidia variable refresh rate stuff which does have an affect, but the price has also gone up quite a lot too $500-550. -1440P 27 inch G sync TN 144hz. Higher resolution with all the rest - $600-650. etc etc. Now the list keeps increasing. The question you have to ask yourself is if buying the third panel over the fist panel you're starting to pay huge differences in price. For instance you can probably buy 3 (or more) of the first monitor for what you're paying for the third and especially when comparing entry level 1080P IPS panels to the high end gaming TN panels for most of what you do the monitor quality is actually worse, as IPS screens nearly always look nicer than TN panels which have horrible viewing angles, especially on multiple screen setups. My advice is if you're getting into PC gaming just get a nice 1080P 60hz IPS panel with the size you're happy with. If at some later point you find spending all that extra money on something only marginally better is worth it for you then you can always just add another screen to your rig and keep the first.

Its IPS. It even says that on the page you linked.

Also that green, pink and wood phone is the most hideous phone I've ever seen. What were they thinking using that colour scheme to showcase anything

Its because its cheap. You're paying a few hundred dollars more for under an inch more screen size. Most people can't see the value in spending all that extra money.

Whats with the hate on small phone screens? I have to carry two phones per day for work (a personal 5s and a work 6) and there is nothing you can't do on the 4 inch phone that you can on the 4.7, only its lighter and easier to handle.

At your age its primarily about experience, a lot of guys would literally be volunteering to do the sort of work you're doing. That applies to almost every field of work too, very little experience = little pay. Like the others have said, you could have this job or work at a petrol station, a grocery store or a food place and get paid minimal wage. Spend a couple of years and make yourself invaluable before worrying about wage increases.

Hopefully nvidia become truly competitive in this product segment again. I got a 960 about a year ago purely because it did the job in the interim. Still a good card, but it was never really that competitive for the money.

Completely different screens. One is a TN 1080P 144hz screen. So it will have worse image quality but faster refresh rate. The other is an IPS 1440P 60hz screen. So it will have better image quality and resolution but a slower refresh rate. Depends if image quality, or speed is your priority.

http://www.lg.com/au/support/support-product/lg-27MP77HM-P Its on a very good sale at the moment, I've been casually hunting at adding another screen to my rig and at $60 off this is a nice looking monitor. However I can't really find any reviews on it which always makes a very difficult purchase. I know its a 1080P (At assumingly 60hz) IPS screen.

Agreed. Ideally i'd like something like the BenQ XL2411Z. But thats literally twice the price and I'm not really sure i'm in the demographic who would get value from the 144h/z (again, i've never used 144h/z displays).

I'm of the same opinion. The thing is I don't really have a lot (or any) experience with low latency models. I've always just been a buy consumer monitor type guy but figured since I was adding another screen I might consider something slightly more exotic. I do simrace on the screen on a fairly professional level and I assume that needs good response rates and low input lag. It all helps. I notice a lot of the cheaper panels are now VA, not TN and VA does have ghosting (apparently, I don't know).

Obviously some have 144h/z, gsync, freesync, etc. I'm more talking about this type of display. https://www.pccasegear.com/products/25659/benq-rl2455hm-24in-led-gaming-monitor - The 2455HM over say something like a $50 cheaper BenQ display that has identical refresh rate, size, resolution etc. The screen will be used for gaming on a 'somewhat' competitive level (Simracing), but I'm really unsure if I need the fast response time, but what can it hurt really.

Great video. Probably my favourite LTT video in a while. Almost identical to my first system too, except it was a XP1800. But very similar era. I completely forgotten about setting the hard drives to master and slave, man, that brings back memories of trying to work out what to do.

I especially agree with this. Which is why I always hate to see these so called 'balanced' rigs with the G3258 and something like a r380x. Realistically you're putting more money into the part that will be out dated sooner. A minimum of an i5 should be in any system imo just due to how long cpus are lasting.

Luke's build was impressive to look at, Linus' built a far better computer. I really like that old case, its clearly a G5 Mac Pro ripoff, but the Mac Pro has arguably the most attractive tower of all time.

That blue flame coming out the front of luke's case certainly looked dangerous when everyone started putting their hands near it to have a look at linus' system. I would have been giving that thing a great distance, especially since it was burning on gas which is extremely flammable.

I like the r5. I think the fans have better airflow, I think the internals are better designed and I prefer how it looks. Really up to you though, both great cases.

Discussing this clip. Lets say your yearly PC budget is $500 per year. What are the actual performance numbers when taking into account say a $1500 system every 3 years versus a $3000 system every 6 years. In terms of performance, etc. I have a feeling the 3 year $1500 PC cycle would give you top end performance for longer compared to the 6 year $3000 system cycle and would also kind of protect you against component life failures as you're not stretching the life of your parts. Not that a $1500 PC is anywhere near out of date after 3 years generally.

Basing a follow on thread from this topic on Aerocool powersupplies and a reply I made to it about people using them. Now i'm not recommending people use them or saying I would, but I do work on systems for families and that for fun and they're often custom built computers from stores with what I consider rubbish power supplies (often just bundled Thermaltake or Coolermaster ones that come with a cheap case) and they do get years of use with no perceivable problems. Now over the years I've gotten into the habit of never including cheap PSUs even in office builds, so my case+psu budget will often end up being something like $130-140 (Australian) as opposed to cases with case+psu that sell for half of that. The question is realistically for low power office systems, what is the likely outcome of this for them? As in, what type of failure rates are you seeing in that type of power supply. For me the two cardinal sins of cheap 'custom' pcs are bundled power supplies and also cases with large vents that have no sort of dust filters, so they inevitably clog the entire computer in dust over a few years. However neither of these things seem to affect them running that badly.

I've often wondered if the PSU hysteria for general office type computers is overstated. I've worked on friends and family members systems before and they often have shockingly bad bundled power supplies, yet seemingly last the time. I'm not saying that they should buy that trash, but sometimes on a cheaper computer saving $50 on a bundled PSU can make the difference. Not that I'd ever recommend anyone does it and I myself have developed what I call a "PSU paranoia" over the years on any system I put together, but I do notice a lot of people do use that junk.

I would assume its because most people want the higher resolution for their 'normal' at home viewing. The people who want 1080P first would far outweigh those who want 360P first.