LooneyJuice

If everyone else has the same mods, then yes AFAIK. Though I'd recommend duplicating the vanilla install, and only installing the RCM mod, conversion pack, and v1.3 pack. I've played multiplayer with my sibs with those and it worked fine. We can test and see how many mods we can use. I could even upload my GameData folder (wouldn't be illegal, since you have to have the BattlefrontII.exe file to make it run, and then you can replace your GameData folder with it, so we have the same mods. I gotta sort out the bugs in mine though (it glitches once each match, then it's fine. Though it'd suck if it was the server), and get it hooked up to the internet. 

Sweet. Also, I wonder if that glitch may be due to allocated memory with all the mods. Tried LAA (Large Address Aware)? (Backup your .exe)
 
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/large-address-aware.112556/
 
Could be totally random of course.

Updated main post with a mod list, and I'll try and keep it up to date with any other cool ones I find. 

Yup, recategorized. the FX mods are under essential though, since they make it look soooooooooooooooooooo much better. 

I thought it was strange a silence optimised card had dual 8 pins, but I can easily push this thing harder, stick it on chilled ethyl glycol at -20°C (about the cooler I can go without more extreme methods. Volt mods and all, It'd probably do 1700MHz before dying from too much voltage for the temp, or becoming unstable from rising temps. 

I math better when I'm drunk.

It's ok. Thanks for the insight though 
 

What? You don't have an unqualified qualified opinion on the subject? How dare you? This is a tech forum!
 
Wait... neither do I in this case, sorry OP 

Well as far as I can see, however superficially, it was kind of explained in the video. Massive heat cycles can sometimes cause issues with solder or other structural components more susceptible to melting or fatigue fractures. Excessive heat can also cause interconnects and semiconductors in general to start becoming conductive when you don't want them to, which increases current leakage, resistance, reduces efficiency and can degrade traces and interconnects on a board or chip (I believe as a byproduct of electron momentum/electromigration, the latter happening at a slow rate anyway as a function of current going through your electronics). Basically, the more you heat up a semiconductor, the more energy its electrons have, the more they start moving around, the more it starts zapping things it's not supposed to. 
 
I'm relatively sure that in my impaired state of being, that's the gist of it.
 
Also, sauce HERE
 
Thermoelectric effects on semiconductors. I'm not expecting anyone to be able to read this, I barely can, my aptitude in mathematics is as low as Satan's wine cellar. I just like posting sources when pertinent/possible. 
 
Generally speaking, you wouldn't gain anything from running in the lower temperature ranges you suggested, other than maybe more efficient operation. It doesn't really matter in the timeframes we're talking about (since lots of components can last for decades under reasonable circumstances).
 
EDIT: Sorry, glossed over something I shouldn't have since you mentioned wondering how silicon wears out in general. Temperatures aside, what kills electronics mostly is a phenomenon called electromigration. What that does is physically move material around an interconnect as a result of electron momentum/current. Basically, the more current that goes through an interconnect, the more material gets moved around until a point where fractures are formed and the interconnect and therefore the component fails.
 
More easy-to-reach sauce HERE

Perhaps you simply don't understand how efficiency works. I can demonstrate with AVX if you'd like. When your CPU is being more efficiently used (meaning, nothing is being wasted, every aspect is utilized), it will run hotter as a result.
 
If you think 5.2ghz is going to be "easy" on 6c/12t, you are seriously fooling yourself. Going from Skylake to Kaby Lake, we got 200-300mhz higher on average for overclocking, when core count remained exactly the same. I don't expect this to be the case when you add 2 more cores to it. 

This is the key part. Not all else is the same. If you are getting more performance at the cost of heat increasing (as more and more of your CPU is being used), heat becomes a byproduct of that efficiency. Again, using AVX as an example. Load up Linpack, and slowly alter either your AVX offset (if you have a board that allows it) or adjust your tRDWR/tWRRD timings. As the amount of FLOPS you get increase, so does your CPU's temperatures. Lowering the AVX offset, or weakening the timings associated with AVX (timings that alter bandwidth), your FLOPS are lower, and temperatures are lower as a result.
 
I am not trying to deceive anyone when I say this, but it should be common knowledge by now. If you are using MORE of your CPU, it should go without saying that it will run hotter than what it would if you were using less. Efficiency is dependent entirely on the context. Hopefully I've made that clear this time around. 
 
For those of you that do not have Linpack, or are too afraid to run it, you can test this without using FLOPS as a measurement. Simply compare the various "100% load" stress tests. While most of them still load your CPU to 100% usage, their difference in heat can be monumental. 

Not necessarily, other than completely saturating every chip and measuring its relative performance against heat output. You're way more savvy at that stuff. Additionally, I only really have this oldie Sandy machine, so it's not like I can provide much useful methodology input currently.
 
It would be cool to have some kind of chronology though. And I'm guessing it would have to be done strictly on a stock specification basis, as every chip ran out of the box.

Totally agreed on this, [unless we can get all of the tested components to the same frequency].

So it seems to be down to the two games you mentioned. FO4 has chronic issues still I believe regarding certain areas where framerate will drop regardless. It's not a hardware thing, it's just the game. If anyone has more recent information, by all means. Witcher 3 on the other hand has an insane amount of variance. One minute you walk into a forest and your GPU usage spikes to 80% and you think you're good, and that's the worst of it. And then it throws in a storm, maybe some rays, tree sway and particles and suddenly you're chugging. 
 
Additionally, I think for some reason NV dumped the old Witcher 3 SLI profile they had and they're now brute-forcing it with just one of their Alternate Frame Rendering presets. Those are usually presets used on non-explicitly supported games just so you can use the second GPU, but it results in pretty poor scaling. We're talking maybe 30% more performance at best sometimes. So in Witcher 3's case, you could be seeing a 1x1080ti + 30%, which even for 1440p will get a workout. There's a few spots in Blood and Wine as well that will work hardware to the bone. If your other games (at least those with proper SLI support work fine) I wouldn't worry. Sadly, these are the drawbacks of SLI. It's not a Plug n' Play technology. There's lots of fiddling and lots of misses when it comes to specific titles.

Ok thank you very much for the help and info  

Well, ideally, for efficiency and such, yeah. But that's a broad enough spectrum to put it in the safe temperatures most people around here talk about anyway. Don't let your chip hit Tj max 24/7, keep it in a reasonable range, and it'll probably fail sooner from either a minor fabrication fault or damaged  interconnect than by heat. It's toward the temperatures stated in the video that stuff starts getting toasty, inefficient and just straight-up bad. It's why really poorly designed, hot VRMs chew through more power. But again, that's in the triple-digit range. What I'm trying to say is, the reasonable temperature bracket everyone around here aims for is the best rule of thumb rather than trying to keep it as cool as possible, maybe even at the expense of performance.

best upgrade i have ever done ? SSD 
 
worst upgrade i have ever done? club 3D geforce 5600 - that thing SUCKED SO HARD

My Mother is a teacher and has been sense the early 90's she was cleaning out the basement and I saw a box that said Intel, and I thought it was odd because she couldn't print something on a printer if her life depended on it.
I opened the box, and holey shit was there cool shit in here.

A prototype Pentium Processor (Some bent pins but easly repairable)
and I think the coolest part a silicon wafer of an un-known processor. And I did some research none of the chips have red dots, meaning they were never rejected chips from intel. I wonder what processors these are. Im pretty sure its from the P5 micro aritecture. Anyways anyone know the value on something like this kit? Not going to sell it just curious
 

 
 
Updated Pictures
 
Updated pictures will also update to main post. I assume this kit was used by kids at somepoint, so some stuff is probably missing
 


 

But that wafer though.... You should frame it on the wall of your room!

Thats the plan

Well, ideally, for efficiency and such, yeah. But that's a broad enough spectrum to put it in the safe temperatures most people around here talk about anyway. Don't let your chip hit Tj max 24/7, keep it in a reasonable range, and it'll probably fail sooner from either a minor fabrication fault or damaged  interconnect than by heat. It's toward the temperatures stated in the video that stuff starts getting toasty, inefficient and just straight-up bad. It's why really poorly designed, hot VRMs chew through more power. But again, that's in the triple-digit range. What I'm trying to say is, the reasonable temperature bracket everyone around here aims for is the best rule of thumb rather than trying to keep it as cool as possible, maybe even at the expense of performance.

Well as far as I can see, however superficially, it was kind of explained in the video. Massive heat cycles can sometimes cause issues with solder or other structural components more susceptible to melting or fatigue fractures. Excessive heat can also cause interconnects and semiconductors in general to start becoming conductive when you don't want them to, which increases current leakage, resistance, reduces efficiency and can degrade traces and interconnects on a board or chip (I believe as a byproduct of electron momentum/electromigration, the latter happening at a slow rate anyway as a function of current going through your electronics). Basically, the more you heat up a semiconductor, the more energy its electrons have, the more they start moving around, the more it starts zapping things it's not supposed to. 
 
I'm relatively sure that in my impaired state of being, that's the gist of it.
 
Also, sauce HERE
 
Thermoelectric effects on semiconductors. I'm not expecting anyone to be able to read this, I barely can, my aptitude in mathematics is as low as Satan's wine cellar. I just like posting sources when pertinent/possible. 
 
Generally speaking, you wouldn't gain anything from running in the lower temperature ranges you suggested, other than maybe more efficient operation. It doesn't really matter in the timeframes we're talking about (since lots of components can last for decades under reasonable circumstances).
 
EDIT: Sorry, glossed over something I shouldn't have since you mentioned wondering how silicon wears out in general. Temperatures aside, what kills electronics mostly is a phenomenon called electromigration. What that does is physically move material around an interconnect as a result of electron momentum/current. Basically, the more current that goes through an interconnect, the more material gets moved around until a point where fractures are formed and the interconnect and therefore the component fails.
 
More easy-to-reach sauce HERE

You've never dropped your phone.
 
Except for that time that you dropped your phone.
 
So, after dropping your phone after not holding your own securely, you still can't understand how phones get dropped?

G910?
 
Edit: Of your choices, I'd go K70.

You can literally snatch almost any 1080ti and it won't make a bit of difference other than an out of the box OC. Buy whatever suits your budget and has adequate cooling. Don't stick to a single manufacturer just for the sake of sticking to one, look at all offerings and purchase based on local pricing.
 
This generation of Nvidia GPUs as stated by many, many, many outlets is essentially hard-capped. If you want to overclock, everything will overclock at about the same level (just above 2000mhz, 2030-2050, very few will do more), and to add to that, it's not going to be a night and day difference. Get the best cooling you can for the money as that'll affect the baseline performance on the card more than any individual manufacturer implementation of the 1080ti.