Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards


About Phate.exe

  • Title


  • CPU
    Phenom II X6 1090T BE (4GHz #yolo)
  • Motherboard
    Asus Crosshair V Formula-Z
  • RAM
    16GB Corsair XMS DDR3-1333
  • GPU
    Powercolor RX 470 Red Devil 4gb
  • Case
    Overstuffed, hacked up Rosewill Abomination
  • Storage
    2x500gb Seagate Barracude, 1x3TB Seagate Barracude
  • PSU
    Rosewill Quark 550
  • Cooling
    2x120 chinarad, 1x140 chinarad, unknown copper CPU block, ebay acetal GPU block, Danger Den CPX-Pro, Custom Reservoir.
  • Operating System

Profile Information

  1. If you're gonna just be gaming at 1080p, especially if you aren't going high-refresh, you'll be good for a LONG time on a GTX 1070.
  2. Ryzen on 12nm might get a 50% core increase

    Probably uses about as much as my Phenom II 6 core at 4.1GHz. Which is a lot.
  3. BitCoin Hits $13,000

    Oh absolutely, it's such an absurdly large amount that you definitely want lawyers and accountants involved. Like we're well beyond amounts of money that are an abstraction. I'd just hope it doesn't drop before you get out, but it's so much that you totally could afford to just keep 1-2K BTC in there, if you want to continue gambling with millions of dollars, lol.
  4. BitCoin Hits $13,000

    Honestly? If I were you I'd start thinking about dumping some portion of them. Assuming you're not making things up. Not that this is especially hard to believe, I think we all know a handful of people that were given piles of BTC back in 2010-2011 when it was basically worthless, proceeded to forget about it, and then cashed out for stupid amounts of money when they heard that it hit $100/200/500/1000/etc. If you're really still sitting on 8K BTC, unloading a quarter of them (so 2000 BTC) will drop like 30 million dollars in your lap. Which by itself is hilarious, life-changing, never-work-again money. Cash out 4000BTC, suddenly have 60 million dollars, then you can watch the value and decide what you would like to do with the remainder from the deck of your goddamn yacht.
  5. I would certainly mess around with this on my 950. The snapdragon 808 is still snappy, it has enough ram (3 gigs), and I've been completely spoiled by both the screen and camera to the point that I'm not especially impressed by most new phones. If somebody puts together an Android ROM with a W10M or W8.1 style launcher, app list, and most importantly DARK THEME, I'd rock the hell out of it. My 1020 was an absolute tank, just like any of the polycarbonate Lumia's. My 950 has also taken a beating, although I like the look and feel of the polycarbonate unibody phones (920/1020/1520/etc). Cases were not necessary on either one. The 520 was a cheap sub-$75 phone (I saw them go as low as $30 on ATT GoPhone). It was low spec and cheap, but managed to still feel snappy in general use. The thing that actually got me to switch away from was the fact that in the Galaxy S4 era there really weren't many sub-$200 android phones that were actually worth using. I bought my old Lumia 521 (T-Mobile version of the 520) for $60, and liked the low-spec Windows Phone experience enough to buy a used Lumia 1020. Like I don't know if I can properly articulate just how trash budget android phones were in late 2013 early 2014.
  6. On first boot, 100% stock with a fresh Windows 10 install, my 1600X did either 1246 or 1249. So it sounds like your chip isn't actually running at 4.1GHz full time at all, because you were barely out-scoring what it would do at 3.7GHz. Now it's not a 100% even comparison between systems, but mid-1200's is the ballpark a stock 1600X should be running at on most systems. If there is something else that is dragging your system down a bit, that would obviously effect the scores, which is why it is so important to run all the benchmarks bone stock on your system, that way you can get a better idea of what kind of improvements you are actually making.
  7. Liquid cooling 600 watts of LED'S

    That would do the trick just fine. What is the operating temp range on these LED's? I would imagine normal operating temp is much higher than what you'd want for a CPU, so your cooling will be much more effective since you're working with a higher delta-T.
  8. Going from a 4GHz 1090T to a stock 3.7/4.1 R5 1600X is pretty much twice as fast overall.
  9. Anybody else thinking VEGA is just a waste of time?

    This. The cards really just have a bad case of being poorly-tuned out of the box. Just like the RX 480 did. I'm interested to see if any of the aftermarket cards are tuned better, and if not at least I'd be able to start with a quiet cooler. Vega is obscenely efficient if you keep the clockspeeds sane (and adjust voltage accordingly), but when you get to a certain point they become power hungry monsters. A Vega 64 running at R9 Fury X speeds (which happens to perform pretty similarly to a Fury) uses about as much power as an RX 470. Performance-wise, they're extremely competitive in a world where the 1080ti doesn't exist (so basically if it didn't get delayed). Because it didn't perform quite as well as they wanted it to, AMD pushed clockspeeds (and voltage) in order to get better looking benchmarks, just like they did with Polaris, and then we end up with everybody talking about ridiculous power draw. Saying "They're quite good if you're willing to spend a few minutes screwing around with the card" is absolutely not an excuse for how they perform out of the box, but just dismissing the architecture completely isn't quite fair either.
  10. FX-4350

    Ooooo are these the fun ones that would make some VRM fireworks if you leaned on them too hard? @Sk-Kadin upgrade the cooler (honestly if you can get your hands on a Wraith that would treat you pretty well), and buy a few packs of these: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835708011 Those little copper VRM heatsinks go on the mosfets your motherboard uses to control power delivery to your CPU. Stick them on the chips that I've highlighted below, and make sure there is airflow in that area: The power delivery that you have available frankly kinda sucks, so you're going to have to focus on keeping voltages as low as you possibly can. Unfortunately you don't have Load Line Calibration available to keep idle load a bit more sane.
  11. You're gonna run out of cores/threads before you actually bottleneck the GPU, and now that Intel is actually putting a useful amount of threads in the i5 you probably won't even do that. Still, that's really gonna depend on what games you're looking to play. Also keep in mind that 4K120 is pretty much maxxing out the 25.92Gbit/s bandwidth of Displayport 1.4. In general, the CPU is capable of running the game at a given framerate, which is generally much higher than what the GPU is capable of running the game at unless you either are running low graphics settings (this is why games are often tested at low resolution/settings when benchmarking CPU's), or pairing a powerful GPU with an older CPU (like when I had my RX 470 paired up with my 6 core Phenom II, and Forza was bottlenecking until I OC'd the CPU to 4GHz). Turning the resolution up doesn't drastically increase the load on your CPU. Basically, if an overclocked 8600K is capable of running the game at more than 120fps at 1080p, it'll probably do it at 4K as long as you've got the GPU horsepower to do it.
  12. XFX announces new Vega 64 and Vega 56 custom cards

    I dig it, absolutely love short boards with extended blow-through coolers. My only complaint is that the red fans don't work with my build at all, but you probably won't be able to see them. I can just get some white or purple vinyl cut to cover up the red Vega logo. Kinda hoping XFX offers some sort of hard swap fans for it though, so I can put white ones in.
  13. What are your unpopular preferences for tech ?

    Yup. For me RGB just means everything is color-tunable. Setting multiple colors is cancer. Purple backlit keyboard, tinted tempered glass with black/white components and purple lights in the case. I love mATX. You can get a nice compact build (my In Win 301 is only like 25L or something?) that doesn't take up much space on the desk at all, but you don't have to get into specialized SFF hardware that's usually either lower power or has loud fans on small heatsinks, and also tends to be expensive. I've got a Fury in a tiny case, and will have a Vega in there in the future. It's not necessarily a good idea, but it's very doable. I was the same way until my Zune got stolen out of my car. I hated running the battery down in my phone. Agreed. I'll take components that are color coordinated but generally more low-key (i.e. corsair LPX) over something that looks blinged out. I'm not a big fan of front mounted rads (or rads on any intake for that matter). I've always bought into the philosophy that the biggest advantage of water cooling is the ability to move your biggest heat loads wherever you want them, usually to the case exhaust.
  14. Lol I feel like tuning and optimizing your graphics settings became a lost art sometime in the last few years, and now everybody assumes they need to throw another $700 at the problem rather than spend five minutes turning a couple settings down (that wouldn't be noticed anyways). Also not sure why everyone thinks they NEED to run the game with the settings maxxed out. Like "can it run crysis" became a meme because when the game came out in 2007 there really was not hardware powerful enough to run the game at max settings at all (especially if you throw 4xAA into the mix). Games SHOULD be more demanding than what current hardware can actually handle. That's not even getting into the optimizations for underpowered consoles resulting in current games looking pretty great even at medium settings. To close my rant, I really like reviews that focus on "highest playable settings" rather than just looking at average/min framerates. Back on topic, the biggest concern is gaming on the mixed resolution/refresh rate setup.
  15. can vega 56 run 4k med. 60fps?

    I don't think you understand the graphs you posted. The first ones you posted appear to be at ultra settings. Very high/ultra, all features enabled pretty much translates to "all sliders to the right, they don't always call it ultra so we won't either". The Metro Last Light benchmarks I have no clue, you just posted a bar graph with any useful information or context cropped out. On Rise of the Tomb Raider, Very High is the highest quality preset, with a handful of additional settings (purehair, soft shadows, etc) that have an additional notch to go up. Read/watch literally any optimization guide. There are some settings that hit the gpu HARD despite offering very little improvement in quality outside of static screenshots. It's just silly to see a card struggle at the highest settings and extrapolate that you're gonna have to drop things to low in order to hit 60fps.