Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards

About Xelithium

  • Title
    Victory or Death
  • Birthday 1995-05-31

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. You are on a tech forum, get the fuck out. Fuck this place I'm out for good. Roflmao. This dude pretending he a chick.
  2. No you can't say that. This forum is all about AMD. Say something good about Nvidia or Intel and you are fucking digging your own grave.
  3. Oh dear, my opinion about Nvidia is just that, my opinion. I find them to be more premium and have higher quality products. But I have still said that I'm most likely getting the HD9970 cause it will be more powerful. But still, I'm a fanboy? If the performance difference is 5% or less I will always prefer Nvidia and Intel.
  4. Ehm, it's called downtime in multiplayer games. 2 monitors is amazing. Being able to keep yourself busy during loading times or downtime in games (preparing for a raid in WoW for example) is amazing.
  5. Can we see other benchmarks please? Clearly those favor Nvidia. I'm not a fanboy. I prefer Nvidia, people here know that.
  6. I was, untill 3 months ago. i7 950 @ 4.4Ghz. I was NOT a big fan of the powerconsumption, combine that with a GTX 480 @ 900MHz. Needless to say, that piece of nuclear powerplant requiring shit had to go after 3 years. It's funny how well it lasted though. I was still able to play pretty much all games at high/ultra @ 45-60 FPS. Mostly steady 60 FPS when I turned off AA and shadows.
  7. Nvidia is more premium. Just look at the GTX 780 and Titan cooler. Then compare it to HD7970 and this abomination:
  8. False. You need to OC memory. GTX 770 can do 8GHz easily.
  9. First of all, turn off HT. http://chipreviews.com/main-feature/main-news/frostbite-2s-limit-6-core-performance-in-battlefield-3/3/ Second of all, benchmark Crysis multiplayer. GPU usage and CPU usage there is great. BF3 just relies so heavily on the CPU (on 64 player) that it isn't even funny. Hopefully FB3 improves the GPU usage and actually makes use of the available power. Third of all, FB2 is capped @ 200 FPS. Doesn't BF3 use the HT threads if you have it enabled? Instead of the actual cores? I think it was the FB3 benchmark from alpha that allocated everything to the extra HT threads when HT was enabled. Edit: yea...
  10. Something is wrong. It doesn't eat that much VRAM.