Jump to content

xGGAx

Member
  • Posts

    587
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by xGGAx

  1. Have you done any testing with a different set of ram/ psu? We need to rule out that possibility.

    If your ram and PSU work fine in some other rig, then your motherboard could be faulty.
    I had a similar issue when I was in Tech support. We got an HP workstation that kept rebooting and stuff. First time it was a dead stick of ram. We removed it and it worked fine for a month. Then it started acting up again. All memtest, prime95 , etc. came out just fine.

    We tested the psu and ram separately, they worked fine, but sometimes the pc would reboot itself or display a bluscreen. Long story short, the motherboard was killing the ram, one stick at a time. 
    Im not saying that your motherboard is DOA, but it might be damaged somehow(again, assuming your ram and psu work fine).

  2. 5 minutes ago, emosun said:

    the haswell power requirement has to do with the machine going to sleep. Nothing to do with powering it and booting it.

    and yeah 6 years isn't very old for a 1200 watt psu it can last 20+ years easy

    Oh so you think C-states only work when the pc is in sleep mode? Have you tried using non-haswell ready psu with a newer system? This is what happens:

    By the way, thats my current build. I was using a 700w toughpower( from 2008 I think). I was really naive just like you, and I thought any psu would work. Older PSUs cannot handle the low power draw, so when it drops below 0.5A , the psu thinks the pc is shutting down and it powers off.(newer systems can handle 0.05).

    From corsair website:

     

    Quote

    When an Intel Core (i3, i5, i7) processor is idle, it goes into a sleep state that requires less power than when the CPU is active. Since the motherboard voltage regulation modules that provide power to the CPU gets their power from the power supply's +12V rail, these sleep states can dramatically reduce the load on the power supply's +12V rail.

    According to Intel's presentation at IDF, the new Haswell processors enter a sleep state called C7 that can drop processor power usage as low as 0.05A. Even if the sleeping CPU is the only load on the +12V rail, most power supplies can handle a load this low. The potential problem comes up when there is still a substantial load on the power supply's non-primary rails (the +3.3V and +5V). If the load on these non-primary rails are above a certain threshold (which varies by PSU), the +12V can go out of spec (voltages greater than +12.6V). If the +12V is out of spec when the motherboard comes out of the sleep state, the PSU's protection may prevent the PSU from running and will cause the power supply to "latch off". This will require the user to cycle the power on their power supply using the power switch on the back of the unit.



    Besides, why would anyone recycle such old parts for a new killer build? The psu is one of the most important things in a system. Doesnt matter if you are on AMD or Intel.

  3. 1 hour ago, Draconid said:

    This forum post may help you, https://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatch/topic/20745504371 It basically tells us how the matchmaking system works.

    That post has some useful info:

    Quote

    "Skill" is not measured absolutely, it is inferred by predictions and game results. The quality of opponents you meet and beat ultimately paints a picture of "stronger than A

    ^so no actual measurement, only predictions, hmm...

    Quote

    A lot of systems also tend to temporarily and gradually expand the search range after X seconds if a match has not yet been found. I expect Overwatch is no different.

    in other words, there are no players in my skill level/ping so it expands its search

     

    Quote

    Statistically, it appears to be a fair match, but it's proving not to be as the results consistently favor one side. However, the Overwatch system has a failsafe in place in this case where the match will be disbanded (both sides will requeue and "Finding a more balanced match" will appear) once a threshold of consecutive losses is met.

    Note that this does not apply on a per-game basis, but rather across a series of matches with the same participants.

    ^I have never seen this.

     

    Quote

    It's very easy to assume that you are a group of individuals playing against a 6-stack. You know that you queued alone, and you see that the other team coordinates exceptionally well. One thing to consider is that there is a high probability that you have a stack on your team, too. That "solo vs 6" is very probably a "1+5 vs 1+5" or "1+1+1+3 vs 1+1+1+3".

    Currently it's difficult to prove this, however Tigole mentioned that in the current internal build, Competitive Play will show which players are grouped together.

    lol what?, If I get matched against a group of players called:
     [TROLL] Number1

    [TROLL] Number2

    [TROLL] Number3

    [TROLL] Number4

    [TROLL] Number5

    [TROLL] Number6

    It is pretty obvious they are together....

     

    I am by no means a great player ( only 1 month playing) but I can manage myself.

    Some matches are really good, I had one last night with a 1-2 min overtime(we were attackers with a payload) and we won. 

    Other matches are really bad, with a-hole teammates(usually mei player puts ice wall at the exit of the spawn point) so natually we lose without even getting to the objective.

     

    I really want to enjoy this game, I love the character design and system performance, but this matchmaking thing disappoints me every time.

  4. I just started playing Overwatch a month ago or so. I only played vs AI until I reached level 10, but now I mostly play in quick play. I noticed that I get matched against high level teams (by high I mean 100s, 70-something players, etc).

    Of course we get trashed in a minute or two even if we have counter heroes. So, is matchmaking broken? Out of 10 matches, I win 3 , maybe 4 at most.

  5. 1 minute ago, LoGiCalDrm said:

    Now you've twisted my post completely. I meant that just having badly written question doesn't give right to give wrong answer or troll/sarcasm the hell out of it. Nor does short answers give anyone right to attack those just because they are right, but didn't give full answer.

    maybe I did not explain myself, I never meant  that at all. No one should be bullied over poor grammar or a badly written question. 
    What I meant was, a stupid/ simple question  should not be allowed in the first place. If someone ask "what is Ethernet?" and I post a reply with the google definition it should be fine. I DO NOT condone trolling.

  6. @LoGiCalDrm is right, you need a valid question to get a valid answer. I have seen many new users that post spammy questions all over the place. Sometimes it seems like they just want to raise their post count. Questions such as "what is Ethernet?" "how to restart windows?" should not be allowed in the forum( but they are, I have proof). 
    A simple google search can answer most of those questions. 

×