seburoh

Aye, hence the trend we're seeing in phones towards 90hz over 60. Even for nongaming uses, smooth is nice. For gaming it really just depends on personal taste as with anything. With OP doing a laptop, if the goal is spending $1500 on a laptop and the user wants to play AAA titles as they release, probably not going to get much gaming-side use of the high refresh rate unless the user wants to sacrifice in graphics settings. For people more into esports stuff, playing a mix of new/old, or even just being in a higher pricing bracket where the hardware could theoretically keep up with doing AAA at high fps longer, the higher refresh rate can have a lot more longevity. I don't think there's much of a wrong answer, so much as just personal preference and values.

You're right, but oversimplifying and in doing so conflating a bunch of different things. Connectivity to internet definitely matters, which is why ping and server latency are a definite thing when talking about game performance. But I can't think of a game off the top of my head which ties framerates to server connectivity. You can run pretty much any game at whatever FPS your computer can handle, and it will take/give data with whatever server you're connected to at a pace which is completely isolated from that. League is one of the games which works in this way. This is something that normally is pretty apparent visually. FPS drops will make a game feel choppy, as FPS is a straight measurement of how many frames of animation are shown to the user, and our eyes/perception can only trick us that a flipbook of still images is actually a moving picture when the flipbook of images is showing us enough pages a second. With more and more pages a second past that point being more helpful for faster "moving" objects to be tracked, or for peripheral/subconscious thought. Hence why movies can get away with 24 fps still in 2020 and nobody really complains, they don't move quite as fast or unpredictably as video games have a penchant to, so they don't generally need the extra frames to function to the user. Conversely, server connectivity can still feel smooth, but out of time/sync. You could walk real fluid-like up to a door, but when you try to open it suddenly you're back where you were 10 seconds ago. The act of moving up to the door is still allowed to be smooth motion, high FPS, but once the server is told "hey the player is over here", it has to deal with the information of where you thought you were, vs where it thought you were, and the differences therein. This can be caused by user internet being shit, or from the server not being able to keep up, but either way the results will feel similar, just on different scopes. User internet issues being ones that cause that one player to fall out of sync/jitter around, ex: everybody sees them walk into a wall for a couple seconds for no reason, only to snap into existence somewhere else entirely a second later. Whereas server-based issues mean instead of one wall-kisser, everybody is a wall-kisser. Which can happen at any FPS these differing players can run the game at. Where the players snap back to, how they snap/jitter, etc, is all based on the specific netcode of the game and how it chooses to interpret that core difference of "player thought they were here, server thought they were over there, what do?". I'm sure there's some game out there which had the ridiculously bad idea of tying server connectivity to player FPS, but thankfully I've never run into such a nightmare. It's standard and accepted in the game industry for these things to not tie themselves to each other that way. If a user's server connectivity isn't good enough for their machine to be told there's an enemy jumping around the corner in front of them at exactly the moment it happens, then simply that enemy model does not move to do so on the user's local machine (as it has not been told to do so), until that information is properly given. You can find out more on this topic by researching "tick rate", and the rabbit hole that is how often online games actually pass information back/forth with it's local players. The tl;dr for that research being: it is generally nowhere even close to the FPS at which most people play competitive online games. A kind of half-example for fps tied to server connectivity would be EVE Online, which creates a timewarp thing to slow down the ingame clock within a space if the battle computations get too large. You could relate this to dunking FPS by relating it to games which tie FPS to the game's engine (Valkyria Chronicles, lots of bad racing games, etc), but since EVE wasn't made in such a way, the framerate is still allowed to be high. You're viewing the map in slow-motion, but that slow-motion is technically still running at whatever FPS your computer can handle it at. The reason why EVE Online does this, is to reduce strain on the servers running the game specifically, so it can keep up with the action (through slowing it down to a pace at which it can), instead of having everybody make out with walls as per the above analogy. --- A great experience to pick up if you want to see the workflow of an online game, is Guild Wars 2's mode called World vs World. GW2 is running on a modified engine that's now about 15 years old, and the WvW mode centers itself around armies of players in a PvP environment. Instead of the 5v5 of LoL, WvW is more like a 40v40v40 for scale, it's rather large. Too large, in fact, for the poor game to handle without coughing up blood on almost every level. The statistics mod which players use in the game separates out performance into three quick numbers, always seeable, so players can adjust their play accordingly. These three numbers are: FPS: How good your computer is rendering what's going on. Ping: How good your internet connection is doing with communicating to where the game servers are. Response: How quickly and reliably the servers are communicating back. If you run the game on hardware not strong enough for the graphical settings chosen, only FPS will drop. If you live in the woods and your internet is garbage, only Ping will drop. And if you get into a fight big enough to where the servers are having a hard time keeping up with computing what information to give back to the players, only Response will drop. Since performance problems happen constantly and consistently within the game, it's something that ends up being really easy to test and watch. It can show you how the workflow of an online game works, by showing you what happens when it doesn't work at all. Illustrating the differences between local FPS, and the disconnected but definitely important statistics of server connection and reliability.

That kind of performance, to me, sounds like the game is for some reason using the integrated Vega 10 graphics of your CPU, rather than the GPU. You said you checked, but ~60fps@1440 is pretty spot on for the Vega 10 seemingly from googling it. That laptop should have the capability of hot-swapping when it's using the integrated Vega 10 and the dedicated 1660ti based on power settings & usage needs. I know there's been issues in the past with games (blazblue comes to mind), which had problems with auto-detecting the correct GPU of a computer, causing it to default to integrated even while the rest of the system was using a dedicated card. So it could be some real wack stuff in your drivers/settings of something. Return/exchanging and calling it a lemon might be an easier method of ending up in a computer without the weirdness than finding the real cause. Depends on how much you want a puzzle I guess.

For Samsung 7100 connectivity: There is screen mirroring like it says on box, but there is straight up no UI for it. I owned one, and using the Connect option from a Windows 10 device it just...works on it's own (tested from an old surface updated to win10). Attempted doing the same from Android (S7 Edge) and the phone would see and connect to the TV, but nothing would happen. Since there's no UI for the function, idk.

Oh i'm a dumbass you just saved me any further thought, i had searched for 1080ti's, and that's a straight 1080. Thanks ebay search parameters gg.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/MSI-NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1080-Duke-8GB-GDDR5X-PCI-Express-3-0-x16-Video-Card/253961166733?epid=245282127&hash=item3b2143df8d:g:xBcAAOSwenJbzldU#shpCntId#shId Observation: -His sell history is all common mining junk, piles of RX580s, etc. -There is one sale seemingly from within the past year, so the mark of "3mo mining use" might be accurate, depending. -75% rating is not really indicative of overall, hasn't done much in the past year other than seemingly get a more enticing offer on a pile of rx580's, cancelling a sale on somebody else. -what even, a 1080ti for 425. / The sell history and such all seems to point to a legit person selling used mining parts legitly, but I've never used ebay for...anything before, and am not sure if I'm missing something, or if that's worth it. If it's true of 3mo of mining use, card should be in fine condition, fan bearings not destroyed or anything, enough to last until the card has played many games. Thoughts? I'm hesitant because it looks too good to be true.