thefinalepic

The recent video on the Dasung E Ink monitor starts with a misleading intro that heavily implies permanent eye damage might result from using traditional monitors:
This does two things:
It sets the tone of the video as either "This display, due to the nature of E Ink, may be the aforementioned 'solution'. Let's find out if it is." which could also be interpreted as "Dasung claims that this display, due to the nature of E Ink, is the aforementioned 'solution'. Let's test that claim." It suggests that there may be a link between light-emitting displays and permanent eye damage. Despite this, for the bulk of the remainder of the video, the claim above is never really put to the test until this chapter at the very end (aptly labeled "Contesting their claims"):
However, the well-informed or critically thinking among you may have already caught the problem with this section: It doesn't actually answer the questions they asked at the begining. Are traditional monitors permanently damaging your vision and is E Ink the "better solution"? All they've done here is establish that E Ink doesn't help with nearsightedness and digital eye strain.
 
The problem is that most people aren't going to catch this distinction. To most people watching this, the intro told them that something about light-emitting displays could permanently damage their eyes, and then asked if E Ink was the solution to this. Then, the chapter quoted above answered that question with a definitive "No, it's not just light-emitting displays. E Ink is not the 'solution'.", while talking a whole lot about "digital eye strain" all of a sudden. This directly correlates (in most people's minds) "digital eye strain" with "permanent eye damage", which is extremely misleading, as there is zero evidence that supports any correlation between the two.
 
Now to see if this post becomes popular enough that this is seen as an issue worth addressing. I'll end this with a quote of my own words, since even after all the recent controversy, a popularity contest (either here, on other socials, or in YouTube comments) is still the only way for your "community" to get issues in front of staff post-publishing.
 
tl;dr open a public issue tracker.
 
---
 
Edit because people love to read what they want to read instead of what I wrote:
How have you entirely missed the point? I never claimed that LTT claimed that light from monitors permanently hurt your eyes. I said that the statement sets an expectation for an answer in the video. And by not actually directly addressing those "what if"s in the conclusion, and instead answering a slightly different question, it's very easy for the layman to conflate the two.
 
After watching the intro, it's not hard to imagine that many people will be thinking "Oh I wonder if light from monitors is actually a problem that could lead to permanent vision damage and if E Ink is the answer. Let me keep watching to find out!" And upon hearing "E Ink still causes eye strain" at the end, reaching the conclusion "Oh they said E Ink still causes eye strain because of <stuff about focusing>, so the light wasn't the culprit and both technologies could lead to permanent damage to my vision because they both cause digital eye strain."
 
Is that a logically sound conclusion? No. Is that the conclusion this video baits people towards? Yes.

I have to say that the way Linus handled, and continues to handle, this has been terrible. The constant jabs at GN have been quite pathetic, frankly. All they did is call you out with facts, that’s their job and that’s what they said they’d do. I doubt the original video was even particularly personal. It’s a shame because Linus’s takes on random topics on WAN are generally pretty fun to listen to, but he definitely has gone down in my estimations.
 
I’d like to say that LMG as a whole though I want to give the benefit of the doubt. Hopefully Terren has laid down the law and it does seem like the others at the head of the table understand what upset the community and how to fix it. Time will tell, but the responses to the issues brought up by GN’s video seem to be the right ones.
 
What still hasn’t been addressed is the Madison allegations. I don’t know how that’s going to play out but I think that’s going to be my biggest influence on whether I still support LMG.

Oh yeah linus is legitimately that kind of person.
 
I guess after all, never meet the people who you look up to. They turn out to be a bit of an ass usually

To me it's personal
Lost all respect I had for the man after that

Considering the Radeon 7 is just defective FirePro cards that were repurposed...
 
Why bother with a card that still lags behind a GTX 1080 Ti while consuming the double of electricity for this pricing? But that's just me personally.
 
Availability is terrible outside the common markets like USA.

Get the new one if it is for free (and new, never used) and gives you the same performance for what you do in your computer, you dont need to use the RT thing...

Doubt it. The whole VRAM thing doesn't mean much and you should know that people literally just buy what's new.
 
As long as they compete with each other I think the 2080 is the better investment at the same cost. 
 
And to think Nvidia doesn't limit previous cards performance on purpose is laughable at best..

You guys make great points and I guess it's choosen. Thanks to everybody that replied and gave constructive advice

I bought a used 1080 ti Aorus Extreme (mint condition). Guess what I did? Sold it and bought a 2080 FTW3 (for a good price). 
 
I'm way happier with it! Even at the $150 premium I paid for it. I honestly feel like it was a solid choice as I plan to sell it later on. 
 
I think the 2080 runs better and I see less dips in FPS. Could just be me, though.
 
And who knows, maybe Nvidia will pull some magic and ray tracing and DLSS might a actually become a thing.
 
If you're not losing performance, I don't think there is ever a reason to not get the newer card for basically nothing but an even trade. 
 
The problem with the 2080 is that we don't where it's price will be in a year or two.. I personally think the value will hold up, for the most part, at least. The only way the value would decrease drastically is if Nvidia did one of two things, 1, released a way better card for the same price or cheaper (lol) or 2, lowered msrp a couple hundred (don't count on it) due to RTX and DLSS being a joke.
 
Even if Ray Tracing and DLSS is a joke, the raw performance of the RTX cards is undeniable and won't somehow just become undervalued. Will pricing go down? Most likely, but will it go lower than your current 1080 ti? I doubt it.

The 2080 is worth more so if you ever plan on upgrading from a 1080 ti/2080 performance, I would get the 2080. Almost the same performance, not the same price. 

The issues were fixed i believe, but anyway if Ray Tracing matters to you that much and you consider it worth it then sure go for it, otherwise there's no point.

Well that's tempting, Depends if you won't be downgrading too much the card itself, like I think I'd still rather have a GTX 1080 Ti Hall of Fame over a RTX 2080 EVGA Black.
 
But all in all it's worth considering even if the cards still perform about the same across the board.

He summed it up quite nicely. Can't put it better words. I dislike apple with a deep hatred as a computer enthusiast.

Not for everyone.
For example, I had a terrible experience with the AMD platform a while back, so bad that I lost a lot of time and money trying to troubleshoot it because I wanted to make it work, be it fiddling in the BIOS for hours to find the magic combination(never found it, not even with help from manufacturers) or by buying different motherboards, RAM and even the same CPU but with a newer stepping that apparently fixed some memory issues... but I still had the same "HyperTransport Sync Floor Error" issue.
Yet the moment I caved in and switched to Intel, everything worked flawlessly from the get go reusing the same hardware except for the motherboard and CPU... And it has ever since, still chugging along without a single issue 8 years later.

In a situation like that, wouldn't you think twice before ever buying AMD CPUs again?
 
Granted, I doubt the OP is in the same boat as I so he may certainly be one, but come on, don't just assume everyone is a fanboy just because they don't want a specific platform.
 
 
 
As for OP, your CPU is still perfectly fine for your current purpose, maybe wait another generation or two until Intel really fixed up specter and meltdown instead of using a microcodes update if you really want to upgrade. Heck, if MY CPU is still fine for gaming, yours is more than fine.

3.33ghz oc atm, handles 4.2+ when I feel like it, confirmation that for gaming you don't really need to worry too much about CPU. As a rule of thumb I run most of my games at 60fps on max settings, with the best benchmark being wolfenstein 2 at max 1080p.
 
Maybe for 1440p and higher a better processer is required, but I would not know.

in couple years you will have diffrent priorities  family, car, house, kids

Yeah thats what i was worried about, what you described. Me doing other task will take a tiny bit out of of the CPU and thus take away from the processing power of the games, just having the 8 cores to have breathing room, and was wondering was it "worth" the 1.4k cost upgrade but you're all right that its not. You are also right that i7 4790k is perfectly capable, can't believe this little guy been chugging a long for so long.
 
I used to be an AMD fan boy sadly lol.
 
Tehehe current set up  I definitely over did it but i did get each part one at at a time.
 
https://pcpartpicker.com/b/QKhypg
Thank you.  I have massive respect for you.
 
I didn't even knew what that was until I looked it up. Wow. Yeah I guess I am... guess i'm just itching to upgrade even though everything is great.

if  you have money to spare, just save on account, invest in gold, wait for better times

It's called, having funds and means to buy what you prefer.

you are overreacting, I have i7 970 now and I multitask while playing, everything is fine

NP
Consider upgrading your cooling and airflow, and just go for a big testicle overclock

The game itself can't fully utilize hyperthreading/SMT yes however having it means that whatever other resources background/side applications may require from the CPU you will have smaller hits on your 1% and 0.1% lows.
 
So in shorts hyper-threading or SMT usually won't gain you more fps however it will 'protect' your minimums providing a smoother gameplay.
 
Majority of the newer titles is fully optimized for 4 cores, that means though the best CPU for gaming to buy nowadays should be a 6 cores one, so your game can take those 4 cores just to itself and the OS, background stuff and so on have the spare 2 cores to play around maximizing your gaming performance potential.
 
All that said an i7 4790K is perfectly capable yet, you do have what to gain going to the i7 8700K but at this point waiting for 9th gen is the least you should do.

I 3d model on a daily basis while running photoshop and listening to spotify, and having multiple browser windows open. Correct me if I'm wrong but CPUs have made substantial advances in the last few years, but nothing compared to the jump in GPUs. Give it a lil bit before upgrading bud.

the GTX 1080ti will demand an upgrade long before your CPU will for 1440p gaming.
New games are about to release that are a fair bit more demanding, and upcoming games next year and the year after will feature new graphics technologies that the current GPU's will not be able to deal with very well.
I'm using a GTX 1080 and a 4770K right now for 1440p gaming and i have no plans on upgrading the CPU anytime soon since it performs flawlessly in all games but the GPU is another story, it's still fine for now but i know it won't last long.
 
Don't expect pascal to age well at all from this point on.
 
That's not multi tasking lol

I'm using a i7920 oc'd at 4.2 and I sometimes upscale games to 1440p.
Ancient cpu, still chugging along. Generally for gaming, the CPU is the least concern in most cases. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but as games don't even utilize hyperthreading to it's full intentional, it's more about having at least 4 cores and them running at a decent clock.