Sharkyx1

Probably not but there is probably some way to get a loan for legal settlement with a long term

The judgement of poor value for lower end parts is that as prices decrease more of the final retail price is dedicated to the fixed price of for example a gpu. Let's say a 4080 is 1200$ retail Maybe 5$ of its price is packaging Add 10$ for logistics, warehouse, qc, lost items, Unrealistic,but let's say the hdmi license is 1$, pcie, and other regulating bodies have licensing, pretend there's 5$ in licensing The fans pretend they are 5$ The pcb manufacturing base price is say 20$ There's more tiers to this. But effectively in this post im going to suggest that there's fixed costs of 45$ for "any gpu" obviously a 1030 and a 4080 have vastly different pcbs and components, but for the sake of this post there are these fixed costs. 45$ in fixed costs leave 1155$ to potentially go towards, the gpu core, vram, heat sink, elements that make a gpu good at rendering video games performantly. Now if we look at a rx 6400 that card is in the range of 150$. Now it shares the vast majority of the fixed costs with a 4080, the pcie slot, the licenses for pcie and hdmi, having a pcb, heatsink and fans, packaging and infrastructure. With 45$ in fixed cost 1/3rd of the retail price is dedicated to fixed costs in this example for a 6400 vs about 4% in our example 4080 A card that is only 100$ more than 6400 will have double the amount of money going towards non fixed costs in this example. So with that in mind. A 6400 xt in real life is 150$ A 6650 xt in real life is 250$ In games a 6650 is 300% of the performance for only 66% more money. It's a better value.

Hey man, I think the best thing with your threads for this topic is just to stick to the original post. They are both in "troubleshooting" now so it's redundant to have both. Not a big problem I know you said you are new to the forum. Not sure if you can delete this thread and keep everything in the other thread. Just my opinion but it keeps someone from giving you the same answer twice.

Hello, this isn't the right subforum on ltt forum to post this but I have no problem with helping, this thread will get moved by the mods at some point. What I would do Try putting the same game on the ssd and not the HDD and see if performance issues are relieved Also what games. Many modern games demand to be on fast ssd. Also specifically which ssd and hdd are you running, could help people determine your issue. EDIT1: could you confirm windows is actually installed on the ssd and not the HDD by accident?

The ps4 and ps4 pro support sata ssds The ps5 supports nvme ssds Watch a video on how to upgrade the ps4 drive. You need a Phillips screw driver and a usb drive to setup the new drive.

To further this, I didn't read that but it's better idea to get a pro if the difference is only say 120 for a base model vs 170$ for a pro. Pro has bigger gpu and higher cpu clocks I think. Most games perform better on it Still definitely pick up a sata ssd. 870 evo or something like that, it adds to the price but the difference in load times is huge I just installed an ssd and tried rdr2 and loading went from 3 minutes to 36 seconds. Most games it's not that dramatic but it's a big increase.

There's a good handful of games that do 120fps at above 1080p but most ps5 games don't have a fixed resolution. Anywhere from for example 1120p to 2160p. Some games are 900p-1440p etc The call of duty games, destiny, Tony hawk off the top of my head A gaming laptop with a good gpu will do better, but it's incorrect to say ps5 doesn't do it.

If you put an ssd in it. Yeah it's still a solid games machine. Just check out digital foundry videos to see how games run before you buy them.

Disgusting

Love it! I love automation. I've been a supporter of the game since I think mid 2011. Incredible to see what they've achieved.

I don't disagree with what you and the other guy are saying now. It was more just the way you said "everything you describe hints at a CPU bottleneck, im afraid." When I made my comment I was responding mainly to that, because i was confused why you might make a point of that when he says he's cpu bound in the original post. I've read the further responses since I made my first reply. I'm just attempting to clarify my meaning here

I think you and the others are misunderstanding OP My take on what he's saying is : "I'm playing an older game and I'm cpu bound. I'm seeing very low GPU usage. Given those two things, why is my frame rate increasing at lower resolutions, when I'm already cpu bound at the higher resolution " And I think the thing is, many games are capable of choosing to not render things that may be too small to see due to resolution. This would make the cpu load lower at lower resolution. Other things I'm sure have an affect as well

I recently just bought and did a build in one Generally ok. Build quality kinda bad, bigger than I expected. Paid 200$ for it

Seems like a good change to make.

One can compare it to original 360 or PS3 and Arkham Switch is still a poor release

As a Canadian I appreciate what Reboot was from a technical point, but unfortunately, it also looked like garbage to my eyes so it's preservation does little to move my needle. I am glad to see some important art may get preserved for future generations though. Call me when the original cut of Event Horizon turns up though

I have never experienced this kind of thing on any of my systems. Never seen a notification from anti virus either, but I'll take your word for it.

What do you mean exactly by this?

Gears of War Ultimate Edition is an early Xbox One game and doesn't support the Xbox Series X feature set. It's 30fps in single player and 60fps in multi player. At 1080p Modern Warfare 3 hasn't recieved extensive testing but MW2 ran at 2730x1540p with dynamic res down to 1365x1540 in its 120fps mode at 90-110fps in most cases Forza Horizon 5 runs at 2160x3840 with 4xMSAA at 100% locked 30fps at quality mode. Performance mode is 1600-2160p with 4xMSAA at 60fps. These are the results that Digital Foundry found in their benchmarks. 10:00-11:30

I don't think touch is 100% better than keyboard typing. There's use cases where it's more convinient, but there's a reason professional typing is mostly on keyboards still. I have no interest in voice control or eye tracking, I view both as a nuisance. Especially voice control. I don't want to hear what others are doing with their phones EDIT : my reference to direct input earlier is specifically about how when I type e there's no inference of what I'm trying to type, I can type e e e e e e e e, but it would probably be much harder to use a voice to text to get the same result.

I don't see how this is better than my iPhone. I like direct input. I don't like voice input

TOPS is Tera Operations, not IOPS, its an ai performance operation measurement

Hey man I'm glad that the other games are working well for you To figure out if the gpu is the problem with your Buffalo Slots animating slowly you would have to install something like GPU-Z and then leave it running in the background, do something that triggers the animation lag and then check to see if the VRAM or GPU usage was maxed out From what I've seen of other online casino type titles I would not Expect Buffalo Slots to heavily utilize the gpu cores on a PC, but it is to be remembered the 710 is a very low power gpu so it reasonably could just not have the gpu power. Your speculation about VRAM not being enough could be correct too. There might just be too many new animations added at once and it overwhelms the VRAM. 2gb used to be a lot but now it's pretty common for pcs to have 4/8 on anything sold in the last few years.

You have to use hdmi 2,3 and you have to have VRR enabled to use 240hz according to the manual for hdmi

Just a question, how do you know the pc is overheating? Are you monitoring temps?