lefudgelover666

2 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

Yes.

 

High end LGA 771 chips are maybe around i5-2300 levels of performance in single thread.  They are not going to blow the doors off of anything in single threaded workloads.  In things like Cinebench they perform more like an i7 2700k/3770k.

 

Some newer games that like lots of threads run somewhere between the two.  Older or ST limited games perform more like the i5-2300.

both untrue, 771 chips perform like core 2 quads, the jump to Sandy bridge from a Harpertown xeon is night and day, sandy was a massive jump

the 771 setup is budget af, but even after a heavy oc would bottleneck anything over a 1050ti, recommending somemthing that old is terrible when the budget allows for newer much superior hardware

these are extremely obvious fakes

get the best office chair you can for your budget, those will be comfort first, looks second, while any gaming chair will be looks first

13 hours ago, Jurrunio said:

That's what I found out when I bought my monitor. I had used a BenQ screen at first, also 1080p 60Hz, that thing shows significant screen tearing even if my frame rates just go slightly below, like 50-55, the refresh rate. With my current LG monitor, screen tearing only gets noticeable when frame rates dip to the low 40s. It in theory shouldnt be possible, but in practice it is.

yeah no, not really possible, all non adaptive sync monitors tear in the exact same way because they refresh at  the exact same rate, a 60 hz monitor will refresh 60 times per second at the exact same interval, thats what adaptive sync changes, it slows the monitor refresh rate to match the gpu fps, without adaptive sync this does not happen and is impossible regardless of whether its a $1000 or a $50 monitor

43 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

Gsync monitor? Not really imo. There are good monitors with little screen tearing even without adaptive refresh rate.

what? that makes no sense, all monitors without adaptive sync will tear exactly the same

yes, the coulds are an upgrade in every possible way from the A50's aside from not being wireless

the price of a pixelbook gets you in Dell XPS ballpark, which is miles better

its pretty well known that razer is aesthetic over quality

i have a 75" as well but i only use it for movies, the latency just not something i can cope with in a game and aside from being big its pretty much inferior to my monitors in every other way so i stick to watching movies on my ultrawide

from my experience no, unless its older titles, you have to remember that its less than perfect scaling, 

buy a pack of zip ties and just run them through the motherboard in an x pattern over the cooler block, i am using that methon on a hyper 212 i dont have mounting hardware for and it works fine

im pretty sure by no budget they mean corsair h100i instead of h60 lmao

2 hours ago, Darkseth said:

So yea. 1080 is around 10-15% faster. How much more % does it cost?

its 1-5% faster, not 10-15%, and on average 10-15% more expensive

20 hours ago, DeadlyTitan said:

I did mentioned that we are not talking about Vram and you yet quoted on me that. 

 

its kind of impossible to not talk vram since available vram makes a massive difference in the size of the framebuffer

if these were cars thats like saying "aw yeah theyre both V8's but displacement doesnt matter even though one is 610 cubic inch and the other is 305"

or if it were food " aw dude no its okay if you only got a half full cup and the guy in front of you got a full one, theyre the same size cup so its all good

rgb is neat, but after 2 years of stuffing my system with rgb its become a little nauseating, i prefer the black and gold accent of my Team Group Xtreem 4000 over the Vengeance rgb they replaced any day, but thats personal preference

37 minutes ago, DeadlyTitan said:

Just look at it this way a GTX 1070 ti is like the 3 GB Variant of GTX 1060 But for GTX 1080. Not talking about actual ram but am talking about performance difference. The GTX 1070 Ti is like a cheaper but a bit less capable GTX 1080.

not really, the 1060 3gb has 50% less  VRAM and 10% less cuda cores and SM's, as Gamers Nexus showed, that can lead to up to a 30% diffirence in Vulkan titles or 5-10% in others

the 1070ti only has 5%less SM's and cuda cores, and for the most part performanc is 0-5% apart and that gap is not only overcome but beaten by simply overclocking

theres a reason steve says the 3GB 1060 is the real 1050ti and not worth of being called 1060

1070ti is the better option as long its a cheaper non mini card

$20-40, but its something that would take a long time to sell for very little return, pull the ram stick and psu, scrap the rest

of course the 24 wont look as sharp, the 21.5" will look exactly as sharp as a 43" 4k display, while the 24" will have the same pixel density as a 48" 4k tv, personaly i would never go below 24". its just too small after that for me to enjoy any content

the gpu is either disabled in bios or dead

thats 1080-1080Ti price for something that will perform worse than both

heatguns used to melt the display adhesive are far far far hotter, its completely safe, just softens the vinyl a little

struggling in what way? could just be crappy upload speed

22 minutes ago, mok said:

As mentioned above - it does not have an iGPU

and as a consequence you will notice that most (if not all)  X299 motherboards do not have any video outputs on the rear i/o panel

i think they all dont because even kaby lake x chips dont have an igpu

special edition is probably higher binned too, all of the sapphire limited/special ed cards ive had in the past have been much better overclockers than the standard