Jump to content

DaftBehemoth

Member
  • Posts

    1,050
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by DaftBehemoth

  1. Add me to the list of people that REALLY should have checked the forum before my purchase of Synergy. What an absolutely abysmal program... ZERO configurable options. Zero options at all. There isn't even a simple start/stop button. You have to manually stop the service to get it to stop running on your system. That alone makes the software worthless to me, but the crappy attitude of Nick Bolton, CEO of Symless, on the Synergy forum is the nail in the coffin. He refuses to answer simple, uninflammatory questions on the matter and instead immediately gets snippy and defensive. He'd rather point to the refund option rather than answer a simple question or address a user's concern. VERY disappointed. 

     

    I don't mean to raise pitchforks, but this REALLY took me by surprise. The LTT team should really consider looking into this. As it stands, I'm going to try my luck at refunding. @nicklmg @LinusTech @CPotter @Slick

  2. The i5 will be plenty. I think you picked some pretty good options as long as you don't mind refurbs. There are a couple really good options at $715, if you don't mind increasing the budget though. :P

     

    Edit Link: https://www.amazon.com/Notebook-Computer-Quad-Core-i7-6700HQ-GeForce/dp/B01MR05UO2/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1503259691&sr=1-1&keywords=asus+950m+laptop

     

    Actually the other one's price went up, so just one at $715. Proper quad core i7 and a dedicated GPU. 

  3. Considering your clocks go higher the cooler you can keep your card, I think it's worth it. So long as you don't mind paying a $100 premium for good cooling. If I leave mine at stock clocks, they boost to 1920mhz. OC'd they can hit 2050 pretty easily. Though with mine being custom liquid cooled, your mileage may vary. 

  4. Wasn't able to achieve any overclock on one of those monitors... but honestly an increase of 10 to 20hz from 144 won't actually be noticeable. You start getting some serious diminishing returns after about 100hz. 

     

    I assure you that 144hz is completely worth it though. :)

  5. 13 hours ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

    Yeah me too. I'd so much rather get this on PC than PS4. Then again if the other FF PC ports are any indication, this one will probably be locked to 30 fps too on PC.

    The ports of the more modern Final Fantasy games have all at least allowed 60fps... I think it'd be pretty safe to assume they would at least offer that. But who's to say? I want Durante to work on the port like he did for Trails of Cold Steel. :P

  6. My vote is the ultrawide. They're fantastic for games that support them, and pretty great for desktop use as well. If you're thinking of going Surround with the three 24"s, I would still vote for the ultrawide there as well. Swapping between Surround and normal triple screen is a big pain in the neck, unfortunately (especially if you use high refresh displays).

     

    Also, I do like my Predator x34 a lot, but the 200hz, 35", HDR versions are supposed to come out in Q4.

  7. First step, know what load you're going to be putting on the CPU. If you're gaming, 4 cores is enough (maybe 8 if you want to go a little overkill). If you're doing any production stuff like rendering, get as many cores as you can.

     

    Step two, completely ignore clock speed. The only case where clock speed matters is if you're comparing identical platforms. Such as a Sandybridge CPU to another Sandybridge CPU. As others have said, it's instructions per clock (IPC) that matter, not the actual clock itself. 

     

    Step three, look at benchmarks. Do not speculate performance based on core count and clock speed. Look at actual performance.

  8. Just now, Hikaru12 said:

    Yea I've heard that because the PPI is so low. How's the scaling for games from 3440x1440p to 2560x1080? Is there any noticeable difference? Black bars and the like?

    No black bars (assuming it supports 21:9 in the first place). It'll just stretch the image. And yeah, you don't really want to go below 90 PPI. 1080p ultrawide at 34" is like 81 (1440p is 109). 

  9. 5 minutes ago, Hikaru12 said:

    That's a tough call. At that price point the X34 is only $30 more on Amazon right now but I'd have to at least jump to a 1080 which is another $200 to even begin to touch the 1440P resolution. I've seen one without Gsync for that monitor for $500-$600 but didn't know if there were better options (the one I'm referring to has brightness issues).

     

     

    You could skip G-Sync and go this route (once it's back in stock): https://www.amazon.com/Designo-MX34VQ-Frameless-Monitor-Adaptive-Sync/dp/B01N4UQIGT/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1501803593&sr=1-1-fkmr0&keywords=34"+ultrawide+1080p+100hz

     

    Still has the resolution that's too high, but you could run games at a lower res for now and at least have the desktop that looks sharp. Believe me, 34" ultrawide at 1080p is blurry as hell.

  10. The Predator X34 won't look right if you lower the resolution to 1080p ultrawide (source: I own one). I wouldn't blow that much money on the monitor and then NOT use half the resolution.

     

    LTT just put out a floatplane video on this: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824025121&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=11552995&PID=1796839&SID=262247179

     

    It's closer to your budget, but still pretty high. Unsure if you're going to hit your 100hz target at $800...

×