typographie

They are equivalent. 1 Hz or 1/s can be read as "once per second" or "one <thing> per second." Thus 1 transfer per second (T/s) is 1 Hz, and 1 MT/s is equal to 1 MHz.

Recently Activision unveiled the Ricochet, the new trojan spyware client anti-cheat for Call of Duty games.
You might have even noticed that it installs kernel-mode driver like Vanguard (anti-cheat software by Riot).
 
Both Activision and Riot are trying to make you think like it's not a big deal and this is a really bad tendency.
Their motivation is all about "sophisticated cheats" that can't be detected otherwise and they try to ensure you that they only do so for "monitoring applications".
 
But why is that bad?
 
There's an easy representation of "protection levels" in OS:
 

 
Basically all games are Ring 3 applications. And applications do not need special privileges to make users happy.
 
Drivers, on the other hand, can't work in unprivileged environment because they need to access any memory directly, without additional abstraction layers.
They need to react when devices come and go before any application would even notice that.
They might need to create virtual devices that will look like real ones (e.g. VPN interfaces).
And so on.
 
Microsoft doesn't really use Ring 1-2 so basically it's all or nothing. Kernel-mode apps even require special kind of signature in Windows that is different from usual application signatures.
Only things that are lower is hypervisor (if you are running windows in VM) and CPU firmware (AMD PSP and Intel ME).
 
That, however, also have additional consequences because of new possibilities that kernel mode gives:
read memory of every application in your system access information about other running applications and services restrict users from running applications restrict users from uninstalling applications  
Only thing that stops developer from doing shady stuff is their promises of not doing so. And if they promise, sometimes they don't keep their promises. ESEA, for example, used anti-cheat to create mining botnet.
Game developers aren't security specialists and even if Activision do hire good developers, it's not their goal to make good security for you. Anti-cheat isn't a product that they sell to increase your security. It's there only to increase their profits by securing their side.
 
Even if you do trust game developers that they 100% aren't doing bad things, you should be aware that any developer can miss bugs in their software. Bugs in kernel drivers would mean possibility of attacks on your PC that will have unlimited access to everything.
That includes RCE (remote code execution) vulnerabilities. So if someone will find such kind of attack for Call of Duty/Ricochet, not only they can do funny things with game itself, but also with your whole system.
Even local vulnerabilities are very serious. There is even a PoC for software that uses kernel-mode driver for Genshin Impact to access other applications.
 
There are couple of points regarding overall data usage by companies that force you to accept their intrusive software:
Activision is a big company and big companies tend to mislead people about usage of their data. Since user data also brings money, it's only a matter of time until they dip their noses deeper into their player's private matters. Of course by covering efforts by "bringing better experience for out precious players and further increasing of protection". Riot is a subsidiary of Tencent which is based in China. China isn't the only country that would like to get everything possible about you but it's quite successful in controlling local companies. So, the question is: would you give an access to your banking paswords for companies like Activision or Tencent?
Or maybe you are willing to share monitoring data with their affiliated 3rd parties which may or may not include advertisement giants or government agencies?
 
At the end of the day, games are just games. They should be fun to play. Why people need to sacrifice privacy and allow game developers to tamper with their system?
It's always possible to choose another game that won't be able to take an advantage of you.
 
Game developers aren't your friends and it shouldn't be a norm for them to put their sticky fingers deep inside your PC.
 
P.S. I am really sorry for all mistakes that I made since English isn't my native language.
If you have some suggestion on how to fix them, you could write me a private message.
Thanks.

rtx 3070 uses around 250w of power and r5 3600 under 100 so together if 100% stressed (not realistic) they will use around 350w.
 
add fans, storage, ram and motherboard to mix and your system will consume liuttle over 400w at full load. it will be lower when gaming.
 
@Mark Kainedid run rtx 3070 and r5 3600 with not the best 500w psu just fine. 
 
 
so you want atlerast a good 500w psu.
 

ther already is no performance loss running 2d monitors off your dedicated gpu. there wasn't 20 years ago and there still isn't. monitors that display 2d imagery like youtube or your desktop don;t require significant amounts of power.

GT 1030 DDR4 vs. GDDR5: A Disgrace of a Graphics Card - YouTube
good video discussing this, the ddr5 is much faster overall

The DDR4 version isn't just slower it's muuuuuch muuuuuch slower,i had a DDR4 GT 1030 and it was horrible.
Save your money and get a better GPU.
 
 
Also is there a 4GB GT 1030?I don't remember being one.
 
 

You shouldn’t have to undervolt it, they are pretty easy to cool. I’ve benched mine at 4900 with just a heatsink.

The best thing to do would be to refer to a video teardown for your card. I think this is the same model as yours:
This guy pulled out the fan headers from the wires and it was fine, but I would suggest trying to get a fingernail under the plastic if you can instead (or just leave them plugged in). Those wires can be snapped or yanked out with alarming ease.
 
I wouldn't expect miracles from this if you're also dealing with some fan issues, but it's an old enough card that a re-paste isn't the worst idea.

If you're using OBS, set the stream encoder to NVENC ("NVidia ENCoder" I guess) in the Output settings. x264 is the more CPU intensive alternative.
 
For what it's worth, any time I've tried x264 with my Ryzen 5 5600X, it's been totally fine. I don't really expect you'd have any problems either way, but just know NVENC is there as an option.
 
Only in the sense that merely USING a video card shortens its lifespan. You're not doing anything it wasn't designed to do.

Dust will do that.
I'm sorry what?

They're just giving you a literal, honest, and frankly accurate answer to the question you asked. If you want a more overclock-friendly answer, the first poster told you. 1.3 Volts, if you want to run it like that 24/7, is generally agreed to be safe. If 4.5 GHz at 1.3 V is stable, that's probably where I'd personally quit.
 
Of course that's still potentially reducing the lifespan, but it's still likely to last for years if kept at safe temperatures.

Well. The new price for 2x16gb is 2,5 times the 2x8gb. That's one problem in my book. (and no one selling cheaper used one right now too)
Not to mention if im going to use a ram with lighting on it ..... using 2 gonna look... idk... ugly? lol
But yea , the price is more of the problem. Double the price of a new 2x8gb is fine (since the capacity is doubled anyway), 2,5times ? ..... that's... weird.

I'll occasionally cap my framerate to 144 FPS (my refresh rate) when I find a game where I exceed it. I'm not sure why, but going over 144 tends to introduce some stutter sometimes. It's a worse experience, and I'm just converting fossil fuels into heat at that point, so I may as well cap it.
 
I don't think you need to worry about your graphics card's lifespan by running it at 100%, though. As long as its temperature and voltage are safe, letting it run at max capacity shouldn't make any real difference to its lifespan. As long as you're benefiting from it, let it run.

I believe the smaller number CL will be faster...... I think, someone let me know if i am wrong.

Depends on the game, and the settings. There's always going to be some type of bottleneck, so if you're playing a sight seeing game, then your GPU will likely bottleneck the CPU.
 
I doubt the CPU will bottleneck the GPU unless you're playing CSGO/Valorant with low settings, but at that point you're going to be getting 400fps, so who cares.

If you want to play competitive buy a real monitor. I’m not trying to sound like a jerk but if you only have a 60 Hz one now the input lag is probably bad on it to

It will be in the motherboard's manual.

That has been a happening for many people,here is a good solution:
 

Yes, but not in the way most people think.
 
The modern Assassin's Creed games are basically old fashion CPU games that use a single thread to feed the GPU. The strength of that thread determines your frame rate. 
 
They also don't use the most affiant cores on an Intel CPU for this task making the CPU boosts pointless. So the only way to get more performance in the game is with an all core overclock. 
 
Here is what it looks like with an i7 8086k/2080 ti with the i7 at 5ghz all cores. CPU5 is doing the heavy stuff. 

 
The i9 10900k is stock so it loses to the i7. All other games the i9 wins. CPU11 is feeding the GPU on this one but the boosts are on CPU1 and 2 so the i7 with 5ghz all cores wins. 

I'm not German so bear in mind I'm collecting this information from English sources outside the country.
 
My understanding is that at least since the 1990's, the German "ban" on the swastika was because the USK (the German software ratings board) policy was to refuse a rating to any video game that featured the swastika, in any context. And since a USK rating is required to sell a game in Germany, this amounted to a de facto ban. I don't think there was a total government ban on all depictions of the swastika in artistic contexts, as is commonly believed.
 
Recently the USK reversed this policy and is now rating games that display the swastika on a case-by-case basis instead of a blanket refusal. As far as I know, Wolfenstein II The New Colossus and Wolfenstein: Youngblood are now available uncensored in Germany.

It should work fine.
 
Remember that they may need to be installed in alternating pairs to make sure dual channel mode works. So on a board with four slots, it should be 4/8/4/8 or 8/4/8/4. Your RAM slots may be colored to hint at that.

Sure. Just depends on what you want them to do, though:
 
If you want the two GPUs to work in tandem to improve performance in a game, that's called SLI (Nvidia) or Crossfire (AMD), and there are some restrictions and caveats depending on which technology you're using and what game you're playing. In the case of SLI (and partially in the case of Crossfire) the cards need to be practically identical.
 
It's possible to install one Nvidia GPU as your main, and then a second to dedicate to PhysX processing. That doesn't require SLI, but the number of games that it helps out in is even smaller.
 
I think you its possible to install two video cards, possibly even mix Nvidia and AMD cards, and use them in tandem in productivity software like 3DSMax without needing SLI or Crossfire. Maybe.

It's an odd contradiction that it's a "possibly destructive" modification, and yet in many cases these manufacturers are designing overclocking features into their cards and advertising their expanded overclocking capabilities and yet still offering warranty coverage.
 
I think you may be correct that many warranties include language that would seem to void the warranty if overclocked. But in practice I think very few RMAs get rejected on that basis unless the user installed a custom BIOS to push the voltage ridiculously high or something. I doubt most of them are even looking for signs of overclocking done within the bounds of the stock BIOS.

I used to have an apartment in what was supposed to be a non-smoking building. I assume that the previous owner used to go into the bathroom and smoke with the window open, and as a result the walls were coated with sticky yellow shit that dripped from the walls and ceiling every time I took a shower. Despite scrubbing the walls numerous times, I only ever made it slightly better.
 
So yeah, that inside of a computer, or anything else? Well, just one more reason I'll never smoke.

There are ICs (chips) which create one or two USB 3.1 ports and use one or more pci-e lanes.
 
For example, AsMedia ASM1142 creates two USB 3.1 gen 2 (10gbps) ports, but connects to the rest of the system through either a single pci-e v3.0 x1 lane (~970 MB/s in both directions) or two PCI-E v2.0 lanes (maximum 2 x 500 MB/s in both directions).
So while a single port is designed to handle up to 10gbps (~ 1250 MB/s) in real world very few devices actually get close to that speed, so being limited to maximum 970-1000 MB/s to the system is not a big deal.
Also, rarely both ports are used anywhere close to maximum speed so again, it's not a big deal that there is a "choke point" at the exit from the chip.
 
Some usb 3.1 10 gbps ports are created by the chipset.  Most modern chipsets talk to the processor through a connection that's very similar to or is actually just a bunch of pci-express lanes.  Ryzen chipsets actually use a pci-e v3.0 x4 link, while intel processors use DMI or something like that, which behaves pretty much like pci express.
 
The chipsets take this big data link and split it into multiple internal smaller "highways" to which various devices can connect. Think of the chipset as a network switch that has 16-48 1gbps ethernet jacks and a single 10gbps ethernet jack which goes somewhere else (the processor).  Those 16-48 ethernet ports have cables which go to various parts of the chipset : the usb 2.0 controller, the usb 3.0 controller, the usb 3.1 controller, m.2 connectors (if any) , pci-e slots (usually x4 and x1 slots on the motherboards ), the sata controller, pci-e links to the onboard sound, the onboard network card, additional usb controllers...
 
The idea is that you don't use all the usb ports, all the sata connectors, all the pci-e slots on the motherboard at the maximum throughput all the time, so it's acceptable to just take the "data traffic" from all these and mix it together into the pci-e 3.0 x4 link or DMI and send it to the cpu, and rarely all the devices connected to the chipset will actually reach the limitations of that connection (4 GB/s in both direction)
In some cases, data doesn't even have to go to the processor, for example you have an external hard drive connected to usb 3.0 which comes from chipset, and you copy data on a sata drive connected to the sata controller in the chipset, so the flow of data may not have to reach the processor, it may simply pass through between controllers in the chipset.