Jump to content
Floatplane payments are migrating! Read more... ×
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Chris V

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards

About Chris V

  • Title

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Vienna, Austria


  • CPU
    Core i5 6600k
  • Motherboard
    Asus Z170-K
  • RAM
    Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 2133Mhz
  • GPU
    MSI NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Gaming X 8G
  • Case
    Corsair Carbide Series 400C

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. yeah I mean right now when I have animated wallpapers, vpn, steam, synapse, chrome, TS3 + overlay and league of legends (with some customization apps) open, I do notice the stock 6600k getting to its limits, as the game has more drastic ups and downs in fps, compared to nothing being open in the background. + at 1440p with more intense games, my 1070 will be the bottleneck anyway, but LOL would run at 200 frames with any of those cpus, since my 6600k also is able to deliver that (should I ever go for a 140-165 hz monitor). Its the only game I play competitively. + even the non k 8700 is more expensive than the 2700x Im really so tempted right now haha. Im doing a new table, complete new setup very soon and a mini ryzen with my 1070 would be the dream haha. Maybe in sth like a crystal 280x case... ahh the dreams
  2. agreed alright, thank you (i did mean 2600 not 1600, sry for that) maybe ill just get an AIO that is compatible with lga 1151 and am4 and just push the 6600k to its limit until 3000 series is out.. hmmm
  3. damn im really tempted now haha. So glad you came to an amazing result! I thought about turning my 6600k build into a hackintosh kinda thing and go for a mini itx ryzen build. Since you probably did more research on performance of Ryzen 2000 series: How do 2600/2600x/2700/2700x compare gaming and oc wise? Id be kinda torn between going all out 2700x or just 1600 and chill until ryzen 3000 series haha.
  4. amazing youre bringing me in real temptation now too haha
  5. go for it haha ! enjoy your new chip
  6. i think 4.5-4.7 should be easily possible, but i was just too lazy because I didnt really need it to OC. So the numbers you had in mind in the first place are average I would say. Im really with you on the AMD hype train haha. if those turn out to be true Ill get one as well. Even if the true performance will be lower than what these leaks suggest. And I also agree with the MB. Personally Id also just want my stuff to be as hassle free as possible.
  7. Yeah thats fair enough. Apart from work related software, there are also games that benefit from more cores or hyperthreading. Also your whole system is just more responsive and youre able to do more, which is amazing, even if your gaming experience remains the same for some titles. I didnt want to imply anything or make a bold statement like "you will never benefit from more cores, when it comes to games". Obviously thats not true
  8. i hate to be annoying, but if the 2600 isnt gonna insanely bump up your effectiveness in work, you might as well wait. because when talking about the "need" of upgrading at this level, youre basically going from "mediocre" to "mediocre" (gaming wise for sure; so if ur software doesnt hugely benefit, or the tasks that would actually benefit are only 5% of your work, then is it rly worth it? just to switch platform to something that might be what you want in the future?). Thats why I meant to express the importance of you checking the benefits of each chip in gaming and work. Just saying, im not sure a 2600 can beat an oc'd 6600k in Witcher 3 or AC Origins etc. just FPS wise - and thats a chip that people are selling for 150€ including MB. (ofc the ryzen would be way better for streaming and multitasking) what I mean is you should do whatever is tailored best for your use case and not get something that is in theory amazing, even if for you that means youre not really benefitting from the actual upsides the chosen option has to offer. edit: im not saying AMD is worse / dont go AMD. Im saying dont spend that cash - at least not now if youll use the upside of Ryzen for 3% of your time. In that case u'd be spending cash (platform change) in order to be able to spend cash again so you can get what you actually wanted in the first place (a better chip for gaming from AMD). Even if you do get a MB, Ram etc that performs amazingly, getting all those parts later when 3000 series is here, will probably get you features and performance. If none of the latter - then still your defects liability will start later, so in some way your risk will be lower for longer. From this conversation judging, I see fit for an oc'd 7700k / 8700k / 9600k, cuz youll stick money towards gaming, which is that rigs main purpose I guess, and you already got the 212 evo - so thats a bonus too. If you go 2600 you will see nothing gaming wise (effectively) and paying 150-250 (depending on region) for upsides youre not using, only to end up (hopefully) replacing it with the actual Ryzen Chip you wanted. Moreover with Ryzen, youre (more) forced to spend big time on Ram in order to not cripple your new amazing chip.
  9. Chris V

    Did i make the right purchase?

    I get that but what I linked to you is about the same price bruh ^^ seeing your link to a 70 buck garbage mic, I didnt expect money to be a problem for you in this price range. but nvm it was just an idea
  10. alright, I mean I really get the problem you have, because its the same for me. Personally im rocking a 1070. (I speculate) Your GPU is about 25%(?how much actually?) faster, so I am not dealing with the same kind of "bottleneck" (If I oc my 6600k itll do just fine with a 1070). Honestly though, I think when it comes to gaming it now all depends on the titles you play. If its Diablo, WoW, PoE, Hearts of Iron 4, ANNO etc then I guess Intel all the way. Youll notice intels advantage here in 1440p as well as 1080. If its other games more like storytelling etc then your 2070 will rock that at 1440p with either AMD or Intel. its a tough one. I am really tempted to stating opinions or whatever but what you need to do is find out how the: - 2600 - 2600x - 2700 - 2700x - 9600k - 7700k (runs cooler, so your evo will get you decent OC; -> very strong gaming, also HT -> office work; and no need to get a new board; so you can spend 350 instead of anything from 450 to 600 and wait for what AMD has to offer in late 2019 - 2020; maybe you can find a used one?) ...perform game wise and VM wise. Then youll see what price to performance in each category is. Thats what Id do if it should be a REAL decision based on facts . Usually when I get into a situation like this I either just leave it be (like I did with deciding to stick with the 6600k) or I just buy "the best" because Id rather not spend that time making up my mind haha. Its not smart though. Spend 2-3 hours on an excel sheet comparing each chip game and work wise. #excelSheets=life
  11. oh the pricing is really different. the chip can be found about 60 € cheaper here. since you already have proper cooling Id be tempted to say go for the 9600k then. Do you perform any other tasks apart from gaming on this machine? what resolution are you playing at?
  12. Chris V

    Did i make the right purchase?

    Id get a way better mic if ur alrdy putting in some cash. Get a "real" mic and an audio interface for like 30-60 bucks more and youll have crazy audio quality + can get into recording (YT or Music) anytime with solid quality already at your disposal. edit: like maybe an mxl condenser and a presonus audio interface? the presonus will run ya like a 100 but you also get a DAW in addition. thats up to you though, what Id definitely do is choose a proper condenser mic.
  13. although we all love to get max fps if possible, if ur say... at 1440p, below a 2080 gpu wise and wanna make a good purchase, just go with the 2700x. at least in austrian amazon its 320€ which is just as much as the 8700 non k. if u really want "the" gaming chip then go with the 8700k and oc it. whichll run you about 420€ ish I guess. so u just gotta decide: - save 100 bucks, be able to swap chip til 2020 - spend extra 100 bucks, best gaming performance. keep in mind, if ur not running a crazy gpu, u might not notice a difference at all with either, except for the hotter 8700k thatll also rob ya 100 bucks more. both options leave you with enough cash for a good board I guess.
  14. Chris V

    RTX 2080 or Radeon VII, which would you buy?

    hey there, seems difficult atm, since I havent seen (real) radeon VII benchmarks yet. I have a 1070 too, running 1440p I dont see any need to upgrade yet though - well maybe ur running 4K or need to do work with it. Personally I would do this: - a pascal deal is more likely than an RTX or Radeon VII deal I guess, so Id be looking for a new 1080Ti - if I had experience with really testing a GPUs health, Id consider a used 1080Ti (maybe one that has been bought recently; gives ya defects liability and saves you time, not having to wait for a retailer deal) - maybe Id wait and speculate on a 2080 deal later in the year, but I guess there will be better deals (%) and more frequent deals on the generation before, hence 1080 ti. - I havent used GSync or FreeSync so I cant say anything about that (concerning how well it works), though from what Ive seen, getting a good monitor with either of them is about the same price at least for me here. (with 1440p quality monitors that Id buy in theory) Having the 1070 myself I really think waiting for something amazing or at least RTX 2nd gen is the way to go. I thought of going 8700k or 9700k and of course theyre way better than my 6600k. Im all for spending part of ones money even if its just for pleasure or a hobby like gaming. But the truth is, if I had a 2080 or an 8700k in my rig now it wouldnt make that big a difference for me, so Id find more pleasure in redesigning my office space, visiting some place, getting real nice kitchen equipment or whatever else. Cuz the truth is if you dont really need the raw power right now, you can wait. If thats not the case and you really need to work on it, Id wait for R VII reviews and propably get that, since supposedly its "better" than Nvidia for a professional use case.
  15. Chris V

    Stuttering issue

    Hey guys, so when I hook up my PC to my TV I get like a slight stutter every 3rd or 4th second when watching videos. I know issues like these are common, so I researched on the internet. I tried everything that sounded plausible to me, but nothing resolved the issue. That includes playing around with all my TVs settings, and switching around resolution settings (and more) within the Nvidia Settings. It is a smart TV so it doesnt matter too much, but I was thinking about going Hue Sync (since Im already a hue customer ^^) and that'd only work with a computer. Maybe you guys can help me figure this out, or point me to the right direction in order to learn more and resolve it myself. I just cant sit back and forget about this since Im just frustrated having spent this much money and not being able to simply watch a video on my TV off of my PC. (like with the whole Hue Sync idea aside) Now my GPU is a MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X 8G, my TV a LG 49SJ800V, which has a True Motion 200 ("real" 100Hz) panel, according to LG Service. Obviously, when hooked up to my 27 inch Asus Monitor (75Hz 1440p) nothing stutters and also with an older 1680x1050 display I never had any issues or had to play around with settings. This issue does not happen while gaming/general usage, but only when consuming video. It persists apparently independently from: - which monitor is set as the main one - having only my tv or the 27inch hooked up (or both) - resolution (4k 60hz, 59 hz, 50 hz /// 1080p upscaled with a 120hz or 100hz) - which port I use (TV, GTX only has 1 hdmi) - hdr mode - nvidia quality settings - nvidia settings for chrome - vsync - energy settings - my desire to stream worldcup soccer without throwing a tantrum haha [(btw: my TV has no "PC mode" but it lets me turn off any setting like noise suppression / making it more fluid / vivid, which I tried; these effects indeed make movie watching very nice (set on a low lvl) but the stuttering issue still exists)] In advance: Im very sorry if I missed out on something very obvious. I hope you guys can help me out, since wanting to watch stuff on my TV does not correspond correctly anymore with the amount of frustration Ive already had. maybe this is a common Chrome issue? (which I just cant imagine) maybe its like an anti aliasing or texture thing that the GPU does? have I overseen some obvious setting I should try and turn off/on? Thanks alot for your time and greetings, Chris!