OAcesync

Sorry if I just sound dumb so would this be better for gameplays than AVC

What happened

Just curious to know what experiences people have had on the deep web since I literally just became aware of it yesterday and I'm curious what people find on there when they tried it

How is that different from just AVC

First time using Sony Vegas and I'm trying to figure the best render settings that obviously wouldn't put too much stress since my PC isn't very up to the task while having good quality 60fps videos in 720p I was wondering whether my current settings were good and how could I improve them without dropping too much quality

Considering all the other options it's a bad buy http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-power-supply-220gs0650v1

I would stick with just the i7 on your current mobo imo not point in upgrading to Haswell i5 apart from that it's fine although people may suggest 390 over a 970

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant CPU: AMD Athlon X4 860K 3.7GHz Quad-Core Processor ($68.99 @ NCIX US) Motherboard: ASRock FM2A78 PRO3+ ATX FM2+ Motherboard ($59.99 @ SuperBiiz) Memory: Crucial Ballistix Sport 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($39.99 @ Amazon) Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($44.89 @ OutletPC) Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 380X 4GB NITRO Video Card ($233.98 @ Newegg) Case: NZXT S340 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case ($63.99 @ SuperBiiz) Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA GS 650W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($79.99 @ Amazon) Total: $591.82 Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-21 14:12 EST-0500

650W is enough for 2 970s so yes

I would swap the AIO for an air cooler unless you have a preference but that's about it

Simply DX11 optimization and Nvidia's dodgy practices, hairworks for example is complete bs hindering AMD GPU performance for minimal gains but hairworks can be fixed for AMD with CCC tinkering(can't remember article link). AMD GPUs generally have more firepower and better compute performance but Nvidia are partnered with more games so they can easily hinder counterpart performance and have better DX11 drivers. But shitty ports is a very big exaggeration as when you take off hairworks even on Nvidia based games AMD can still beat Nvidia or match same fps range. It's just Fallout 4 which seems at the moment to be heavily Nvidia based. I would still recommend 390 since it's a great card and this to subject to change with DX12. AMD also have equivalents of game optimizers with the Raptr app

Okay before this gets locked I'm just gonna wrap up saying quick that FX 9000s are absolutely pointless to Intel counterparts which can be done cheaper. (Ignore HDDs I'm lazy clearing builds) PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1231 V3 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($242.99 @ SuperBiiz) Motherboard: MSI B85-G43 GAMING ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($70.98 @ Newegg) Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($44.89 @ OutletPC) Total: $358.86 Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-20 20:50 EST-0500 i7 equivalent without iGPU, for fact delivers better performance because of IPC and Quad core hyperthreading PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant CPU: AMD FX-9370 4.4GHz 8-Core Processor ($284.86 @ Amazon) Motherboard: Asus Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($171.98 @ Newegg) Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($44.89 @ OutletPC) Total: $501.73 Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-20 20:50 EST-0500 A lot more expensive, can't be overclocked anymore, very high TDP, beefy mobo required, good cooling needed. All these requirements/drawbacks while delivering lower performance, this is why AMD FX generally is not recommended but if you can't afford the Intel Xeon then go for a 8370E

That CPU is a complete waste of moeny

Water cooling would be optimal

Since when did something being stronger mean that the latter has to have problems?

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant CPU: Intel Core i3-4170 3.7GHz Dual-Core Processor ($139.71 @ Vuugo) Motherboard: MSI H81M-P33 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($56.71 @ Vuugo) Memory: Kingston HyperX Fury Black 8GB (1 x 8GB) DDR3-1866 Memory ($56.00 @ Vuugo) Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($55.98 @ DirectCanada) Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 380 2GB Dual-X Video Card ($257.50 @ Vuugo) Case: Fractal Design Core 1000 USB 3.0 MicroATX Mid Tower Case ($52.25 @ Vuugo) Power Supply: SeaSonic S12II 520W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($84.98 @ Newegg Canada) Total: $703.13 Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-20 20:22 EST-0500

Intel build could fit in that brb

CPUboss is trash *Compared to Intel

As the title says is Samsung reliable for HDDs as a I plan to buy this HDD to replace the storage in my PS4

R9 380 is faster than a 960, has a bigger memory bus to utilize Vram better and it's not hot at all with a good cooler, power consumption is also still low enough for budget PSUs

a 970/980 would be a better option but by then Pascal will be out so the performance of 960 will drop more making it pointless to SLI an inferior card so you could pickup a next gen card. (Also btw I would recommend a 380 instead of 960 unless you have some sort of preference)

SLI.Xfire is a good option if you already own a higher end card and want to squeeze more performance for a resolution/refresh rate upgrade without wasting a card to a buy a more expensive when sometimes two cards can perform on par than one highest tier card and save you money. But if you don't already own a higher end card (290 and above) then it's absolutely pointless and not worth it since a single card is more consistent and much less hassle to work with

Are we talking about graphically demanding or just unoptimized?

That's even worse

It's for console gaming so that's why I think it should be fine