kenjigreat

Thanks. Is there any reason stuff like this isn't popular. I think gaming Laptops for portability is a really bad idea considering ultrabooks like the Razer Stealth need to be hooked up to an external GPU that and if you are gaming on one the battery life sucks. Fullsize GPU laptops are unwieldy. For me, the dream to get a desktop experience anywhere with a plug but no one seems to care. Thanks I don't live in America , we don't have walmart here . I went around asking some IT shops and they didn't have a clue what I wanted.

I've decided to either get a Node 202 or a Silverstone Rvz02. It seems portable enough for portable gaming if the place you are heading has a plug. So I'm really curious if there is a Small screen that is minimum 1080p that can be carried around that has a HDMI or display port input.

For someone that wouldn't you are willing to spend a lot more than the people here.

I think I agree with you. It's super neat. But switching from using a 4K native display all the time to a device with a much lower pixel count. My sensitivity to aliasing and pixels makes it pretty hard to peripatetic it.

The major players are $799 and $599. What is your sweet spot?

This crashing thing might all come down to luck and when you updated your drivers. For example there was a recent batch of Nvidia Drivers that caused lots of issues. DX12 is 'the future'. Its definitely a step up from DX11. We'll see how Vulcan does when both are adopted by most AAA games.

I'm done with SLI or Multi GPU setups. It's half the reason I want to switch from a full tower to a ITX mini case. SLI support rarely happens on Day 1. Sometimes it never happens or takes forever. You almost never get perfect scaling. Don't get me wrong when it works I love it but it's way too much hassle and praying that people cared enough to support it . Unless suddenly every developer takes SLI seriously I won't be investing in a SLI Setup again.

Even people who own Nvidia cards not just me know they love to turn the Tessellation up. https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/834905/real-reason-why-witcher-3-hairworks-reduces-fps/

While AMD has been great on the Open-source front. Nvidia has been less than completely honest. If you want AMD to run worse. Make sure to add tons of Tessellation into the game. It's why the Witcher 3 with Hairworks runs like crap on AMD until you turn down the Tessellation.

That and driving tessellation way up just to screw with AMD. I own a 2 Nvidia cards at the moment and I'm happy with the performance but the company is so -_-.

Excluding some notorious Gameworks titles. There are some games that need AMD Fixes but run perfectly fine on Nvidia Hardware. Although, honestly the more I read about Nvidia's business practices the more I want to get an AMD card. I'm pretty sure DX12 Crossfire/SLI Mixing will get shutdown by Nvidia.

I highly doubt it will be 10x as powerful as Maxwell. Although playing the Witcher 3 at 4K 300FPS Ultra would make me cry tears of joy. My plan now is to get a 980Ti until the Enthusiast versions of the New Cards come out. Plenty of people own Maxwell in the form of GTX 970s. You're right though I think maybe year end of 2017 is when we'll see the mass movement to DX12 at work.

It seems that's what Nvidia is great at. Even though I'm getting a Nvidia GPU again for my newest rig. Once the Titan/AMD Enthusiast versions of the next batch of cards come out in 2017. I'll probably go to AMD.

So Maxwell is a waste of time once most games are DX12?

I don't really do much besides scour the internet. People have been posting their benchmarks on Neogaf for Tomb Raider and the GTX 980Tis don't seem to have any real gains. Above is a Benchmark for GTX 980. Minor Improvement. Same benchmark but for the AMD R9 390X lots of improvement. Tomb Raider is the exception. Negative gains. I've heard people claiming that AMD HBM cards have gains from DX12 but Nvidia doesn't. But Ashes of Singularity tells a different story Some Developers are partnering with AMD for DX12. Here's my Questions. People are saying that Drivers or NEW games that are built with DX12 in mind would allow for Cards to benefit. Other people claim that Nvidia Drivers aren't enough to allow gains on Maxwell and Only Pascal will bring gains. When will we see 'HUGE' gains from DX12 Can someone with some experience/insight/expertise comment?

What do you mean by '212'? I was actually considering the Define Nano S but the plan for this box is to be good for travelling when the time comes and it's a little too big for luggage.

I'll probably prioritize some on the SSD and the rest on the HDD I would go for the Node 202 but one of the priorities for the case is easy to build in and upgrade to the GPU which is what I heard the Core 500 does well.

The only parts I'm reusing is my SSD and HDD.

Yea I know it doesn't do much and I love my 4790k. I'm curious if ITX is worse than ATX besides less memory and expansion. I tried SLI for a year and honestly It feels like a project every time I boot a game cause I have to check if there are driver profiles and if there isn't I have to look for ways to make it work.

My current PC setup is an 2 Way-SLI-GTX 980 paired with an i7-4790k. It's a pretty huge tower. I just really don't want to deal with the hassle of SLI gaming. Here's my plan for my new PC. http://pcpartpicker.com/p/VKtBsY i7-6700K+Asus Z170i-PRO Gaming M-ITX Samsung SH-224 24x DvD+-RW Fractal Design Core 500 Mini ITX Case Corsair RM650X 650W Modular Gold EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 06G-P4-4995-KR 6GB SC Kingston HyperX 16GB Samsung 840 EVO 1TB WD HD

Thanks in advance. Ideally a balance between price and more importantly reliability/stability.

It's a long road ahead then, 4K hasn't even caught on yet.

Isn't the distance for a the human eye to be able to spot Pixels dependent on the PPI? I'm sure 8K screens have amazing PPI though. How much hardware power do you need to encode 8K efficiently? I'm curious.

The problem as I said is not really technical but how you market it. There is very little benefit of going to 8K/16K for the average consumer unless your TV is way bigger than 55inches or 70inches or You really love to put your face next to the TV. The reason 4K hasn't taken off is lack of content. Sure it looks gorgeous but for the average guy what is he going to watch on it? There needs to be a content production and distribution system to convince people it's worth it to upgrade (I know Netflix and a few other places offer 4K content but Many Youtube channels don't and the 4K Bluray is coming but it's still not here in force).

At the rate we are progressing we might get there when I'm 80, silicon processing will end pretty soon. SSDs haven't gotten bigger than 8TB. Most people still use 1080p. America is filled with terrible ISPs.