BenTheSciGuy

Yup, I know that my motherboard supports SLI, that's why I had 2x760's as a choice. What higher-end motherboards don't support SLI or Crossfire these days?

Thanks for all the feedback guys, looks like 970 all the way. I do have a sexy system. :3 650D, Sabertooth Z97, H100i, AX860i(mega overkill), 4770k, black Vengeance Pro, Sammy 840 pro, and a WD Green. So basically it's an all black system.

So, with the release of the new 900 series cards, and the want for more power, I am thinking of an upgrade. But the dilemma is that I can probably sell my ASUS 760 for ~150 USD and buy a 970 for ~350ish USD (Non-reference of course), while another 760 will cost me 200 USD, leading to both options having the same price in the end. Also, 2x 760's and one 970 will have similar raw performance (Passmark scores, considering a close to 100% scaling in 2x SLI), with the 760's with a small possible advantage. So, what would be the best choice in your opinion? For example the new 900 series support DX12, but I do not know how much of an impact that will lead to in the long run.

By Dell I mean the U2713H, which is not 21:9 and is 1440p, and I actually don't mind the LG stand, as I have a high desk I don't need tilt or vertical adjustment. Anyone know how say the Asus PA279Q(or another comparable asus monitor) compares with the Dell U2713H and the BenQ BL2700PT(just so size isn't a variable)?

Happy my thread helped out someone else as well, I will probably get one of them, but I'm leaning to the LG. Or the a Dell. I'm gonna want to see them in person if possible.

Amazon always has "sales" on everything, which ones are you referring to exactly?

So thanks to a dying monitor, I am in the market for a new one. I currently have a 25 inch monitor, and need some more space as I am one to juggle a bunch or tabs and windows. I also casually play games which are not FPS's, with the exception of Borderlands 2 and TF2, so response time is not a huge deal. I have considered the Dell U2713H and U2711, but I am not very picky in regards to picture quality, so one of them probably won't be my choice(I am going to see if my local store has at least one of them on the floor so I can see how good the picture is for me). Needs: Space(27+ inches, maybe even a 21:9 monitor), scales well to lower resolutions if it is higher than 1080p(I run a GTX 760), but it isn't that important as I will upgrade to an 800 series card that is 300-400 dollars when they come out, just ok scaling. Budget: 0-700 USD with an ability to go 1000 if the monitor is perfect.

Hey guys, So I am currently the owner of an HP 2509m, which was stupidly and blindly bought in 2009, when I was just getting into tech(I was 10). The 2509m likes to have the inverter or back lights go bad (apparently a part supplier to HP messed up with quality control for this monitor). It was probably bought for $300-350, is 1080p, TN, and all that. I like the monitor, but a few days ago the backlight started flickering upon startup of the panel. So, would it be a better idea to repair the monitor, or replace it? I do quite a bit of gaming, a lot of just surfing on the internet, ect. I can most likely repair it myself, as I know how to solder, have a multimeter, and any other tools I mat need, so I can probably replace the inverter board or the backlights themselves, but after quite a bit of digging on the web, I could not locate any replacement parts. If it's the caps, I can replace those. But is this economically feasible when the monitor is 5 years old almost? The replacement parts, if they are perfect replacements, are known to die, so does it even make sense? Or are the parts that are still compatible but are known to last? So what do you think, repair or replace?

So I finally decided to overclock my 4770K. So I set a multiplier of 46, and a voltage of 1.2v. When i boot into windows, and start IBT, about a minute in, my CPU temperatures quickly rocket to 100 and the CPU obviously shuts down. I am using an H100i, which I know is properly seated as un-overclocked with IBT running for a few hours it rarely breaks 70. What's up here?

Thanks xeks.

Thanks for the responses, but it seems you did not read the question completely, I ask if there is a way without going into bios every time to turn off speed step.

Oh great people of the LinusTechTips forum, I come to seek your help. I have a little problem. I have a game that is a bit CPU intensive (but no multi-core support ), and I want to know is there any way to keep my 4770k from under-clocking to save power, without having to go into BIOS every time I want to turn it off? Maybe a way to configure it so when it detects the game is running it does not under-clock? What is happening, is that the game starts off not needing much CPU power, and then when a certain event happens it piles on a large amount of work on the un-expecting under-clocked CPU, which takes a time to realize that it needs to return to normal clock-speeds, leading to a very large FPS spike in the game, rendering(get it?) it unplayable.