Drak3

More F150. In all the ways that take away from what makes the F150 a good truck if you want luxury.

Increased initial cost, running cost, and maintenance cost for a vehicle that is more awkward to drive.

Don't talk to me or my Eevee again. Trucks aren't the greatest winter vehicles. They're comparatively front heavy if you don't keep stuff in the bed, ideally over the axel. I don't drive my Dakota much when it snows for that reason.

Car, or truck?

Internet bill and/or internet speed and shopping. Otherwise, fuck big cities.

In most of the US, you keep at least 60% after taxes, or ~$30 million.

Oh cool, more crap to avoid on my favorite backup phone.

A handful of poorly developed games, maybe. But competent developers use high resolution textures and high poly count models and render the actual images at the target resolution.

1440p is called quadHD for a reason, it's 720p times 4. Just like how "4K" is just 1080p times 4. And 720p is still a common resolution for non interactive content creators to target, so upscaling to 1440p is rather easy if the scaling algorithm just treats those 4 pixels as one (something that would be equally true of the majority of 1080p content made before the past 2-4 years). As for games, most engines have long since been built to scale across different resolutions and aspect ratios with minimal to no loss in quality. 1440p is exactly as easy to support as 720p, 1080p, 4K, and even odd balls like 900p, 1366x768, or 2736 x 1824. And for the majority of people, 4K on a small screen isn't really beneficial. It's actually detrimental for gaming as higher resolutions are harder to drive without sacrificing visual quality.

That is HEAVILY dependant on usecase. For someone like me (and most people here), the 3900X is irrelevant. Unless you're working with large data sets (like video rendering or large scale number crunching) or multiple instances of smaller data sets (like high traffic file/web/game servers or VM hosting), those extra cores just sit around, doing nothing.

It's a combination of that and they're not interested in having any dialogue. They don't want to hear opposing opinions, usually out of fear (or realization) that they can't support their own.

Yup.

Because you can never be too safe, or something.

Apple has the best (or even above average) build quality. At one point, it was true. That point was at least 10 years ago. Now, everything they make, build quality wise, is average at best.

I mistyped, but it's not worth my time fixing. Completely average now. They were the best in fitment (and exclusively fitment, not overall build quality) 10 years ago. Now, HP, Dell, Microsoft, and Lenovo all have devices with the same level of fitment. MSI doesn't waste their resources going after the thin and light market anymore, so they can't have a thin and light with that type of fitment, and I don't pay attention to Gigabyte, ASUS, or ACER laptops. Highly subjective, and something Apple has been doing a worse job with, as we see going from Sierra to Catalina.

But not over many other laptops. And gaining power over the 15" is not a huge accomplishment, as the 15" design took an underspec cooler for a quadcore and tried to get it to work with a octocore of the same uarch, similar node, and similar clock. That requires 3rd party hardware, and is something Apple fights against. Which is still rather pathetic outside of the thin and light market.

Maybe try rereading my posts. Because I explicitly said that the MacBook lineup is not a good GAMING machine. That's it. It was, 10 years ago. Not anymore. Microsoft's lineup uses touchscreens and high end active pens. That's where the premium on the Surface lineup comes from. Toms' Hardware praises the current models for thermals. As far as I can find, low boost clocks (not thermal throttling) are due to the stock fan curve balancing thermals with noise. But, unlike Apple, MSI doesn't try to prevent manual control of the fans, they include a utility to actually do it (as well as limit the CPU performance). The issue isn't there with the other included fan profiles. Again, incorrect. As already pointed out earlier in the thread, the 16" does better than the older 15", but it still redlines on thermals with the base model.

With Apple moving away from 32bit and OpenGL, they're at fault for the already slim selection getting cut significantly. The comparable XPS15 also demands a premium for the form factor. A comparable Dell Inspiron Gaming laptop costs $1600. And no, the """build quality""" of a MacBook doesn't justify the premium. External fitment is pretty average, and internal design (largely the CPU+GPU combination with the thermal solution) is subpar. No, thin and lights with internals too hot for their chassis and cooling solutions thermal throttle. The MacBook being a consistant offender. Whereas the Dell Inspiron won't thermal throttle. Nor would most gaming laptops. Baseless and incorrect assumption. I use a '17 MBP 15, partially for work and partially for a portable machine that mixes well with iDevices. No, it's not. There are no considerations for gaming made with the MacBook Pro. I say this from experience of gaming on my MBP. It's a challenge I quite enjoy, but there is no practicality in trying it.

No, I'm not. MacBooks are not great gaming machines, between weaker internals, worse thermals, and the game selection issues that Apple seems happy to compound. We have the fanboys already conceding that the new machines are still redlining at boost clocks on the CPU. And now, we're moving from the 35W 560X to a 85W 5500M and you're going to tell me that the 5500M is going to get to stretch its legs for a gaming session? You can't disable it in OSX, only turn it down somewhat. Because you're paying a premium for OSX, and then paying for Windows on top of that, to have a system that will thermal throttle, restricts eGPU capability, require adapters for any wired peripherals like mice, and either run the GPU at a resolution that it's underpowered for or at a wierd downscale.

Yes, it is how that works. SSDs will spread data across the NAND chips and the controller keeps tabs on the basic layout of data distribution. The only difference between a RAID array and a multichip SSD being that the SSD is a self contained unit. Not really. HDDs write onto one platter at a time, and then move on to the next. They don't stripe data across multiple pieces of a storage medium like RAID or SSDs.

Many people say the same thing about cars. And they're absolutely wrong as well.

From what I watched, it's a meh story with meh gameplay. Like the rest of the Kojima games I've played.

Translated: GabeN can't count to 3 confirmed.

After a bunch of searching around, I can confidently say this: I'd rather be learning quantum physics. The best answer I could find is that a mainboard in UEFI mode with secure boot or fast boot enabled will require a GPU that uses UEFI GOP vBIOS. Otherwise, it seems to be a clusterfuck of 'I think's.

Polteageist