Jump to content

D13H4RD

Member
  • Posts

    5,946
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from GeoffLucas in *UPDATED 9/5/2018* Tom's Hardware's Editor in Chief's Controversial RTX Article   
    Watching the Gamer's Nexus video and reading the article over and over, I really can't stop laughing and cringing at how ridiculous the article is. Pretty much the entirety of it is ridiculous but I'll leave my favorites;
    So, a GPU that we barely know anything of aside from one or two gameplay videos and marketing charts is worth buying. How do we know this exactly?
     
    A GTX 1080 Ti already does gaming at 3840x2160 pretty respectably. Plus, $526 is a really good deal for a GPU that performs admirably well in modern titles at high settings at resolutions beyond 1920x1080. Ray-tracing gone mainstream is about 2-3 years away when pretty much everyone has done it and by that time, NVIDIA's next architecture would've already been out and will undoubtedly perform better than Turing at DLSS and real-time ray tracing.
     
    No, just stop. This really feels like something a salesperson would say but you and I know that as great as Battlefield V looks, there's still some graphical oddities like fires burning at lower framerates, the relatively low resolution of the flames itself alongside the reflection in the cars. Plus, when you're playing a first person shooter, you're not going to be staring at reflections or looking to see how great the soldiers' eyes look. You're going to be pointing at an enemy player and firing at them hoping you get the kill.
     
    Plus, it's common for many FPS players to turn down graphics settings not just for more FPS but also a tactical advantage. Remember Battlefield 3's grass? Turning them down to their lowest actually makes them so flat, you can see prone players trying to hide, of which it seems like they're hidden on the grass's maximum settings.
     
    Uh, how long exactly until we get a large library of games which support full-on real-time ray tracing? Probably until the next architecture?
     
    Um, my life is already ray-traced, thank you very much. Like having ray-tracing in my games is nice but it's not something I would have on my list of life accomplishments.
     
    Yeah........no. I got my 25" 1080p 144Hz monitor for $250 about 8 months ago. Not too long ago, even a TN version of a 1080p 144Hz panel would be much more expensive. But it doesn't make it any less enjoyable.
     
    If anything, that RoG Swift monitor that costs an arm-and-a-leg will probably be mainstream with a lower price after some time, and by that time, more people will be able to enjoy it. I get it, being an early adopter is great but I'm more interested in seeing how the tech matures enough to the point of going mainstream.
     
    Or I could just be playing TF2 on my GTX 1060, which still performs really well anyhow so..... *shrugs*
     
    Yeah, I'm pretty sure by that point, Mr. Forrest would probably sit very far away from this guy if they happened to meet each other in a coffee store.
     
    It doesn't matter if it's an opinion or what. He is free to express his views and such and hell, if he thinks that NVIDIA's new RTX GPUs are worth buying, then he's well within his rights to go out and throw all the dosh on them. But as the editor-in-chief of a major publication that has built up a reputation with computer enthusiasts (a lot of it thanks to their generally awesome forums), he should know that the reputation of the publication also rests in what he writes.
     
    You don't just diss off a colleague just because he thinks the RTX GPUs aren't worth it just yet. And you also don't just tell people to spend a load of money on something that we barely know about and one where detailed benchmarks have not been released yet. The sheer irony is that he's basically dissing the entire publication by essentially saying that whatever benchmarks that will come (even from them) are essentially useless as the cards will already perform great.
  2. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from ikjadoon in Microsoft is Forcing me to Buy MacBooks - Windows Modern Standby   
    Need to add to this.
     
    I just got my Slim 7i back from the repair depot, and ran the powercfg command in cmd. This machine supports S3 sleep in the firmware, but what caught my eye was that S0 sleep was always in "Network Connected" mode, regardless of whether it is plugged-in, or not. So the hypothesis, while valid, doesn't seem to apply to every Windows machine.
     

  3. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from LAwLz in Samsung is improving qualities of moon-picture with pre-stored detail, you can try it out yourself!   
    I purposely refrained from commenting earlier because I needed time to frame my thoughts and discussing with some of my other fellow photographers who are also into technology.
     
    Ultimately though, I just feel that this is yet again another case of Reddit taking something, and then overblowing it to insanely ridiculous proportions. Samsung (and many tech reviewers) themselves probably didn't help the situation by mismanaging expectations, but this just feels like a whole lot of hot air. 
     
    1) The "revelation" that this user has claimed to unearth with obvious effect is not at all a revelation. In fact, none of this is new. Smartphone cameras, over the past half-decade (or longer) have made extensive (and increasing) use of ML-based processing algorithms and whatnot to help improve the perceived quality of the final image, even for information that the sensor itself might be unable to capture convincingly. Superimposing details on objects like the moon is also not really all that new. Really, everyone's getting worked up on something a competent smartphone camera has been able to do for the past half-decade, or longer.
     
    2) Why are people so suddenly obsessed with shooting (bad quality) moon pictures on their phones? Especially when you can find literally hundreds upon thousands of moon pictures online that look exactly the same. I understand this fad will eventually die off, but the obsession over this is ridiculous.
     
    3) They know this feature can be disabled, no? So I don't understand the whole outrage. It's not like it is being forced to be applied all the damn time.
  4. Agree
    D13H4RD reacted to Zodiark1593 in Apple's new MacBook Pro with M2 Max packs up to 96GB of RAM (also: Mac mini M2)   
    From an objective standpoint, a Macbook is the “best” laptop, but the tradeoffs (beyond of course, the price) are quite steep. If you’re a gamer at all, losing x86 is a borderline non-starter, and Macbooks are quite a bad offender in proprietary, difficult-to-replace components and expandability. 
     
    The gaming bit is a big shame, because the GPU in M1 and M2 series are actually quite good, and could otherwise make mincemeat of the vast majority of what Steam offers. However, without Bootcamp, options are quite limited, and you lose out on a lot of flexibility with PC gaming. 
  5. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from WhitetailAni in Apple's new MacBook Pro with M2 Max packs up to 96GB of RAM (also: Mac mini M2)   
    I think it's more to do with the fact that unlike before, the performance of SSDs has come quite a ways, to the point where it being swapped to brings little noticeable performance blows.
     
    I've swapped quite a bit on the 32GB M1 Max when doing very heavy tasks (I've actually swapped up to 16GB on it at one point), but I don't really feel an absolutely massive hit in performance. The heavier tasks do definitely start slowing down quite a bit, but just switching between desktops, Spotlight searching, and general use all still feel relatively normal. Obviously, having more physical memory to begin with is still going to be a lot better, but depending on your use case, you might be able to get away with it, so as long as you don't swap too much.
     
    The software itself absolutely plays a role as well, but I think a lot of people don't really realize that with computers basically all coming with half-decent SSDs as standard, using it as a swap drive doesn't bring the entire system slowing to an absolute crawl unlike with spinning drives before.
  6. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from leadeater in Apple's new MacBook Pro with M2 Max packs up to 96GB of RAM (also: Mac mini M2)   
    That's the strategy I'm going with my MBP. I have the base storage config and currently work off a 2TB Samsung T7 Shield SSD.
     
    The cost to upgrade the internal drive is absolutely ridiculous, and the fact that it is soldered continues to be a pet peeve. I'm willing to put up with that for the battery life and on-battery performance at the moment because there hasn't yet been a direct alternative with the same benefits, but it is frankly beyond silly at this point to have the whole SSD be soldered, when M.2 drives can offer pretty much the same speed and whatnot.
     
    The machine has been great so far, but it doesn't mean it's perfect.
  7. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from Zodiark1593 in Apple's new MacBook Pro with M2 Max packs up to 96GB of RAM (also: Mac mini M2)   
    That's the strategy I'm going with my MBP. I have the base storage config and currently work off a 2TB Samsung T7 Shield SSD.
     
    The cost to upgrade the internal drive is absolutely ridiculous, and the fact that it is soldered continues to be a pet peeve. I'm willing to put up with that for the battery life and on-battery performance at the moment because there hasn't yet been a direct alternative with the same benefits, but it is frankly beyond silly at this point to have the whole SSD be soldered, when M.2 drives can offer pretty much the same speed and whatnot.
     
    The machine has been great so far, but it doesn't mean it's perfect.
  8. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from maartendc in Apple's new MacBook Pro with M2 Max packs up to 96GB of RAM (also: Mac mini M2)   
    Well yeah, but this is true of M1 as well. The M2 is essentially having the core M1 architecture but having its A14-based components upgraded to A15-based ones, alongside some other updates. It's a specbump.
     
    Like I said in my original post, this is a release that is 100% designed to target those who are still using Intel-based MacBook Pros. If you already own the 2021 M1-based 14"/16" model, there is little in this refresh that warrants an upgrade, unless for whatever reason, you really need WiFI 6E, HDMI 2.1 or the 96GB RAM config.
     
    96GB of RAM in a machine that can be directly accessed by both the CPU and GPU is cool, but it is also absolutely a hyper-niche usecase. I just use mine as a photo-editing workstation, and 32GB has been working fine.
  9. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from Lightwreather in Apple's new MacBook Pro with M2 Max packs up to 96GB of RAM (also: Mac mini M2)   
    You'd be surprised at how much you can get away with doing on a machine with a mere 8GB.
     
    When my computers were out of order during the worst of the pandemic, I had to fall back on a then-10-year-old Acer Aspire that has a Sandy Bridge Core i3 and a mere 6GB of RAM.
     
    Now, I wouldn't edit my photography portfolio on it at all, let alone run Lightroom at all, but for Chrome, Discord, and Zoom sessions all happening at once, it's surprisingly not terrible. I'd actually daresay that it was plenty usable. A lot of why is likely because it has an SSD in it, which it was likely swapping into, but the limited memory didn't really prove to be a huge bottleneck.
     
    I still think we should be seeing these premium-tier machines come with 16GB as the baseline, just because, but I was genuinely surprised how much I could get away with very limited memory when it comes to daily use, especially since all my machines up to that point were 16GB.
     
    All that being said, there are still plenty of benefits to 16GB on the Macs. The first being that you won't be upgrading it after purchase since it's part of the SoC, so you'll want more of it if you plan on keeping it for a while. The second is that the OS does actually cache a good amount into memory for performance benefits.
  10. Informative
    D13H4RD got a reaction from Lightwreather in Apple's new MacBook Pro with M2 Max packs up to 96GB of RAM (also: Mac mini M2)   
    I think it's more to do with the fact that unlike before, the performance of SSDs has come quite a ways, to the point where it being swapped to brings little noticeable performance blows.
     
    I've swapped quite a bit on the 32GB M1 Max when doing very heavy tasks (I've actually swapped up to 16GB on it at one point), but I don't really feel an absolutely massive hit in performance. The heavier tasks do definitely start slowing down quite a bit, but just switching between desktops, Spotlight searching, and general use all still feel relatively normal. Obviously, having more physical memory to begin with is still going to be a lot better, but depending on your use case, you might be able to get away with it, so as long as you don't swap too much.
     
    The software itself absolutely plays a role as well, but I think a lot of people don't really realize that with computers basically all coming with half-decent SSDs as standard, using it as a swap drive doesn't bring the entire system slowing to an absolute crawl unlike with spinning drives before.
  11. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from leadeater in Apple's new MacBook Pro with M2 Max packs up to 96GB of RAM (also: Mac mini M2)   
    I think it's more to do with the fact that unlike before, the performance of SSDs has come quite a ways, to the point where it being swapped to brings little noticeable performance blows.
     
    I've swapped quite a bit on the 32GB M1 Max when doing very heavy tasks (I've actually swapped up to 16GB on it at one point), but I don't really feel an absolutely massive hit in performance. The heavier tasks do definitely start slowing down quite a bit, but just switching between desktops, Spotlight searching, and general use all still feel relatively normal. Obviously, having more physical memory to begin with is still going to be a lot better, but depending on your use case, you might be able to get away with it, so as long as you don't swap too much.
     
    The software itself absolutely plays a role as well, but I think a lot of people don't really realize that with computers basically all coming with half-decent SSDs as standard, using it as a swap drive doesn't bring the entire system slowing to an absolute crawl unlike with spinning drives before.
  12. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from soldier_ph in Show off your latest purchases   
    This laptop stand that I got for my 16" MacBook Pro, which also surprisingly fits my 13" Yoga S7i.
     
    Also yes, I did get a MacBook together with a fabric case.



  13. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from OhioYJ in Show off your latest purchases   
    This laptop stand that I got for my 16" MacBook Pro, which also surprisingly fits my 13" Yoga S7i.
     
    Also yes, I did get a MacBook together with a fabric case.



  14. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from Tams in Apple to Allow Outside App Stores in Overhaul Spurred by EU Laws {DMA, DSA}   
    It will probably be a similar situation to the Google Play Store.
     
    Where the vast majority will get it off the first-party store, but with a small minority having the option to sideload or install an alternative.
     
    It's still a win for choice either way.
  15. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from Crunchy Dragon in What is it like only owning Apple's "productivity" products instead of an iPhone?   
    I would still spec for 16GB if you plan on using the machine long-term for medium-level productivity at least, especially when you're using apps that are known to be very heavy on memory.
     
    Since it can't be upgraded after purchase, I prefer to get the most of what I can afford at the point of purchase, even if it might be more than what might be needed today.
     
    All comes down to how you plan to use the machine, really.
  16. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from mr moose in New EU rules for making batteries easier to remove and replace   
    You know what? Good.
     
    Even though I haven't cared for battery swapping in years, I'm absolutely tired of devices that basically just break if you just open it up in order to access stuff that you probably want to replace anyway, like the battery.
  17. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from BiG StroOnZ in Show off your latest purchases   
    This laptop stand that I got for my 16" MacBook Pro, which also surprisingly fits my 13" Yoga S7i.
     
    Also yes, I did get a MacBook together with a fabric case.



  18. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from sub68 in Show off your latest purchases   
    This laptop stand that I got for my 16" MacBook Pro, which also surprisingly fits my 13" Yoga S7i.
     
    Also yes, I did get a MacBook together with a fabric case.



  19. Like
    D13H4RD got a reaction from SimplyChunk in Show off your latest purchases   
    This laptop stand that I got for my 16" MacBook Pro, which also surprisingly fits my 13" Yoga S7i.
     
    Also yes, I did get a MacBook together with a fabric case.



  20. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from LloydLynx in Microsoft is Forcing me to Buy MacBooks - Windows Modern Standby   
    The thing is though, some of us put our laptops to sleep not necessarily because we can't sit through 5-10 seconds of booting up. A lot of us put it to sleep because we want to keep our session in the exact state it was in so that we can quickly resume work when we go back to use the machine.
     
    It's because of this, and the mess with Modern Standby, that I pretty much have to set the system to hibernate when closing the lid, which seems to be the "ideal compromise" at this point. Didn't really have to think much about that with my MacBook Pro, but it's not infallible as well, which is why they did the thing Microsoft somehow undid, which is to allow the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
     
    My point still stands though. This is something Microsoft needs to fix, even if it's something simple as allowing the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
  21. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from just_dave in Microsoft is Forcing me to Buy MacBooks - Windows Modern Standby   
    The thing is though, some of us put our laptops to sleep not necessarily because we can't sit through 5-10 seconds of booting up. A lot of us put it to sleep because we want to keep our session in the exact state it was in so that we can quickly resume work when we go back to use the machine.
     
    It's because of this, and the mess with Modern Standby, that I pretty much have to set the system to hibernate when closing the lid, which seems to be the "ideal compromise" at this point. Didn't really have to think much about that with my MacBook Pro, but it's not infallible as well, which is why they did the thing Microsoft somehow undid, which is to allow the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
     
    My point still stands though. This is something Microsoft needs to fix, even if it's something simple as allowing the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
  22. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from ScratchCat in Microsoft is Forcing me to Buy MacBooks - Windows Modern Standby   
    The thing is though, some of us put our laptops to sleep not necessarily because we can't sit through 5-10 seconds of booting up. A lot of us put it to sleep because we want to keep our session in the exact state it was in so that we can quickly resume work when we go back to use the machine.
     
    It's because of this, and the mess with Modern Standby, that I pretty much have to set the system to hibernate when closing the lid, which seems to be the "ideal compromise" at this point. Didn't really have to think much about that with my MacBook Pro, but it's not infallible as well, which is why they did the thing Microsoft somehow undid, which is to allow the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
     
    My point still stands though. This is something Microsoft needs to fix, even if it's something simple as allowing the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
  23. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from Results45 in Microsoft is Forcing me to Buy MacBooks - Windows Modern Standby   
    The thing is though, some of us put our laptops to sleep not necessarily because we can't sit through 5-10 seconds of booting up. A lot of us put it to sleep because we want to keep our session in the exact state it was in so that we can quickly resume work when we go back to use the machine.
     
    It's because of this, and the mess with Modern Standby, that I pretty much have to set the system to hibernate when closing the lid, which seems to be the "ideal compromise" at this point. Didn't really have to think much about that with my MacBook Pro, but it's not infallible as well, which is why they did the thing Microsoft somehow undid, which is to allow the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
     
    My point still stands though. This is something Microsoft needs to fix, even if it's something simple as allowing the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
  24. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from BondiBlue in Microsoft is Forcing me to Buy MacBooks - Windows Modern Standby   
    The thing is though, some of us put our laptops to sleep not necessarily because we can't sit through 5-10 seconds of booting up. A lot of us put it to sleep because we want to keep our session in the exact state it was in so that we can quickly resume work when we go back to use the machine.
     
    It's because of this, and the mess with Modern Standby, that I pretty much have to set the system to hibernate when closing the lid, which seems to be the "ideal compromise" at this point. Didn't really have to think much about that with my MacBook Pro, but it's not infallible as well, which is why they did the thing Microsoft somehow undid, which is to allow the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
     
    My point still stands though. This is something Microsoft needs to fix, even if it's something simple as allowing the user to easily tweak the sleep behavior.
  25. Agree
    D13H4RD got a reaction from rikitikitavi in IOS to Android   
    OP, the big question you need to ask yourself is how much of the Note's features will you actually use? It's one thing to imagine on how it would improve your experience, but it's another to know that you would actually use it.
     
    I asked because the Note is probably still the most feature-packed slab smartphone out there, with the S21 Ultra basically being almost-identical sans an included slot for the S Pen. I own a Note8 since launch and it was my daily driver until recently, when I replaced it with an iPhone 13 Pro (but kept it as a secondary). At the time, I had thought that I would use the pen on the regular, but after over 4 years of using it as a daily, I've come to realize that I've only used it less than 50 times during that period, and the only feature that I've used on the regular is Samsung's Smart Select feature, which doesn't require an S Pen. The rest of the time, I was using it like any other Android phone.
     
    It's a great phone, but keep that in mind first and foremost. And think of whether what you're giving up on iOS would be worth making the switch. Android is great in its customization and flexibility, but whether you'll actually make use of it is something only you can decide.
×