Lt.Speirs

Sigh: asus still hasn't learned... That hideous stand should've never passed the initial concept meeting.
 
It's a good thing I decided to invest in a quality vesa mount.

Night - it's easier on the eyes.

Night - it's easier on the eyes.

Just get the cheapest TN 1080p 144hz monitor you can find (since "typically" they have the fastest responding panels). It still doesn't beat CRT's though.
 
Most pros plat at 1024 with black bars anyway. Besides - 24" is the sweet spot for most users.
 
 
I'm curious though: are you on ESEA? Are you an old timer from the CAL days?

That really wouldn't be fair to the console kiddies.

Grammar Nazi party. I'm currently an NCO in the Luftcomma. My job is to patrol for dangling participles and run-on sentences. 

it is kinda dumb that he said that, but ryzen is a better buy, even if it is worse in performance, which it isnt by far. the upgrade path and the better multitasking make up for it.

How is it a hyperbole when it's true? A 1600 is better everywhere than a 7600k, a 1700 is better everywhere than a 7700k. If you want Optane, buy Intel. If you like Intel, buy Intel. It's your money.
 
But facts are facts Bro. 

ok but no. just no. ive been on your side, and id rather have a 1700 over a 7700, but no. the 7700k does not lose to the 1700 in all games.

x299 is pathetic. its dead and it isnt even out. only the most ELITE intel fanboys will consider buying it

am4 does have much, much longer upgrade path, and an your four thread quote was bs. there are tons of games that use more than 4 threads, and that is why even a 7700 is not optimal. the minimums on the 7700 are lower than the 1700 in games that use more than four threads. all of the benchmarks that show ryzen having lower mins in those games are using shit ram, which i guess is a downfall of ryzen, but not enough to discredit it. 

also, i have a 6402p (6400 clocked 100 mhz higher) and it is not enough for tons of games. im constantly pegged at over 90% in games like andromeda and gta, so saying that a 4 core is enough is bs. if a game uses all of a 4 core 4 thread, the performance will obviously be better on a 4/8 cpu, but not as good if you just had 6 or 8 actual cores. you obviously read my signature, so why did you say that?

Yea, my current chair was purchased as a "stop gap"... it's honestly a piece of junk after two years (I'm 6'3", 200lb ...so big, but not a giant). I may just sit on it a bit longer and buy the Aeron or Mirra. I have a friend who doled out the big money on an Embody, sat in it when I was visiting recently. It's a simply awesome chair.

Respectfully disagree here.
 
I'm sorry but you're not going to get a quality chair for < $500 dollars. I've had terrible experiences buying chairs from office depot and staples over the years. Plenty of their so called 'rated for 8+ hrs' chairs are mass produced and are made in house. Generic chairs that are made with PU bonded leather won't last you very long (2-3 years tops from my experience).

My aeron was only $1100 fully loaded. If someone is willing to drop $600 dollars on a shitty dxracer or a generic mass produced chair - then it should be a no-brainer to spend a little extra on a superior product. That's all.
 
 
@Silent Node Since you're in Vancouver: I suggest you check out grshop (a reputable dealer and where I purchased my chair) and wait for their annual herman miller sale.
 
OR
 
You buy used. Many times businesses/start ups fail and go bankrupt so you can snag second hand herman miller chairs for half the cost.

Another AMD fanboy on damage control 
 

Two words: superior IPC.

The HD 650 is more mid to upper bass focused. They also have too much distortion down low. I was listening to the Tron: Legacy soundtrack with them the other day and their bass performance on some tracks is almost comical.
 
I would check out the ZMF Atticus. At $999 US these come in just slightly over your budget, which would not be including an amp and DAC. By all accounts, these have better bass quality and more sub-bass than the TH-X00.
 
The caveat is that you'll want to make sure that these are the right headphone to get because they are built to order. So, no returns and a hefty price tag. All else being equal I believe they probably have less bass than something like a Vmoda or Beats. If your brother is not an audiophile, it may be better to try tracking down true bass monsters like the Sony XB500.

TH-X00 are quite nice, and bassy. I have a pair at my house right now that I'm about to buy

if he is really a basshead then get him a pair of Fostex TH x00 or if you are lucky enough to be able to find some Fostex T50/40/20 mk2 Argon modded then those would also be great for a basshead.

Ah sorry, wasn't sure if you'd have seen it.
I'm no expert in high end headphones, so afraid I can't help you any more than that
Best of luck.

Yeah until you see he was only at 2933MHz on the RAM. RAM doesn't mean much for Intel, it's everything to Ryzen. This is the improvement on bios I keep bringing up, I was stuck at 2933MHz too, until the lates bios. Now I'm at 3333MHz easy. That jump in RAM speed was where my fps jump up in every game. 
 
But you're not objective here, you proved it when you were looking to be "vindicated". You're looking to win an argument, not talk about hardware. 

ignore these kinds of people
 
with a ASUS mobo, 3000 to 3600 mhz seems to bring it close to a 7700k 
 
buy yourself a cookie, you earned it. 

I swear my steam account is older than some of these people on here.

Almost everything is single-threaded. CAD is single-threaded, but can spread the workload over multiple cores. Gaming is mostly single-threaded, but (dependent on the engine) can use multiple cores.
 
Using multiple cores does not equal multi-threaded. 

Older games: i5 has a performance benefit, because of better single-threaded performance. But older games already run at way above 100fps with max settings (on decent graphics cards), so the performance gain over an Ryzen R5 is moot. There are certain games, that are badly optimized and still run at sub 100fps even with bleeding edge hardware (WoW anyone?), so for those titles it might be advantageous to get the i5. But should we really base our future hardware purchases on games that are literally over a decade old?

Current games: i5 is roughly equal to R5 (or has a slight advantage, depending on the game).

Future games: Pure speculation at this point. But if we look at the advancement of multit-hreading performance in games in the last years, it is safe to assume, that future games will benefit from more cores and thus giving the R5 an advantage.

Well if you want to debate details then there's monitors capable of hitting 240hz as well.. There's a certain give/take - and a point where diminishing returns takes effect.