Precourser

If I could honestly flash the phone with Cyanogen Mod, I would buy it in a flash, because the hardware it amazing. The only Android phones that come close to the build quality are the HTC One, and now the Note 4. I don't know how the home button would work, but the build quality is still really good. Just my opinion however, and I would hate to start a flame war, but I love Android and the iPhone's build quality.

I just got my Enthoo Pro, and the attention to detail is something I've never seen before. All the thumb screws have rubber washers to prevent scratching the paint, the PSU cover had it's screws changed for thumb-screws, and each Phanteks logo on the tool-les ODD bays have plastic covers over them to protect them during transit. The Enthoo Pro feels like it should be $150+, especially with its mostly aluminum construction.

I don't think most average gamers need Nvidia G-Sync as much as they do AMD Mantle. Linus recently uploaded a video that said that all gamers will want and need G-Sync, even if they don't know it, because they won't have to deal with either screen tearing or V-Sync. I play with V-Sync on all my games because I don't feel a difference between using it and not, and I can't play well with screen tearing. Most of my friends that play video games a lot feel the same way. One of my friends came from console, and still can't tell the difference between 30 frames and 60 frames. I however can, but have a GTX 650, so unless I want to play on a game that looks like literal crap, I won't be able to feel the awesomeness of 60 frames (I have an IPS 60 Hz monitor that is smooth enough for me). I am going to upgrade to a Gigabyte R9 270x soon, which will be able to give me rediculous frames once AMD Mantle for Battlefield 4 comes out. More gamers will be able to see the difference between 45 frames than 60 frames than the difference of a few fractions of milliseconds that V-Sync includes. I am not saying that G-Sync eventually be an everything if Nvidia plays it right, but at the moment, AMD's new technology is looking much more appealing to me than G-Sync. This is a very long and disjointed wall of text, so anyone below can consilidate my toughts for me because I am very tired right now (yes, I am giving you the permission to copy my thoughts, so go to town, please, because I want Linus to see this and give us his own imput).

I don't think most average gamers need Nvidia G-Sync as much as they do AMD Mantle. Linus recently uploaded a video that said that all gamers will want and need G-Sync, even if they don't know it, because they won't have to deal with either screen tearing or V-Sync. I play with V-Sync on all my games because I don't feel a difference between using it and not, and I can't play well with screen tearing. Most of my friends that play video games a lot feel the same way. One of my friends came from console, and still can't tell the difference between 30 frames and 60 frames. I however can, but have a GTX 650, so unless I want to play on a game that looks like literal crap, I won't be able to feel the awesomeness of 60 frames (I have an IPS 60 Hz monitor that is smooth enough for me). I am going to upgrade to a Gigabyte R9 270x soon, which will be able to give me rediculous frames once AMD Mantle for Battlefield 4 comes out. More gamers will be able to see the difference between 45 frames than 60 frames than the difference of a few fractions of milliseconds that V-Sync includes. I am not saying that G-Sync eventually be an everything if Nvidia plays it right, but at the moment, AMD's new technology is looking much more appealing to me than G-Sync. This is a very long and disjointed wall of text, so anyone below can consilidate my toughts for me because I am very tired right now (yes, I am giving you the permission to copy my thoughts, so go to town, please, because I want Linus to see this and give us his own imput).

I don't think most average gamers need Nvidia G-Sync as much as they do AMD Mantle. Linus recently uploaded a video that said that all gamers will want and need G-Sync, even if they don't know it, because they won't have to deal with either screen tearing or V-Sync. I play with V-Sync on all my games because I don't feel a difference between using it and not, and I can't play well with screen tearing. Most of my friends that play video games a lot feel the same way. One of my friends came from console, and still can't tell the difference between 30 frames and 60 frames. I however can, but have a GTX 650, so unless I want to play on a game that looks like literal crap, I won't be able to feel the awesomeness of 60 frames (I have an IPS 60 Hz monitor that is smooth enough for me). I am going to upgrade to a Gigabyte R9 270x soon, which will be able to give me rediculous frames once AMD Mantle for Battlefield 4 comes out. More gamers will be able to see the difference between 45 frames than 60 frames than the difference of a few fractions of milliseconds that V-Sync includes. I am not saying that G-Sync eventually be an everything if Nvidia plays it right, but at the moment, AMD's new technology is looking much more appealing to me than G-Sync. This is a very long and disjointed wall of text, so anyone below can consilidate my toughts for me because I am very tired right now (yes, I am giving you the permission to copy my thoughts, so go to town, please, because I want Linus to see this and give us his own imput).

I dont have any pics, but my first computers for gaming where old workstations from my dad's company. He worked in engineering, and the IT department was aware he was into computers, so on multiple occations I got a new computer that my dad dropped an old NVidia card in and called it my "gaming" computer for around 75 bucks.