Search the Community

Budget (including currency): $900 - $1200 Country: US Games, programs or workloads that it will be used for: Blender, Zbrush, 3d work, run most steam games pretty well + occasional AAA Other details (existing parts lists, whether any peripherals are needed, what you're upgrading from, when you're going to buy, what resolution and refresh rate you want to play at, etc): AMD Ryzen 5 3600 CPU Processor MSI B450-A PRO ATX Motherboard G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 16 GB DDR4 3200 RAM Seagate Ironwolf NAS 3 TB Hard Drive Sabrent Rocket Pro NVME 512 GB Drives ASUS Geforce GTX 1650 Videocard Fractal Design Focus Mid-Tower Case Corsair CXM 650W ATX Power Supply WARNING: I’m not a techie, but I want to start learning 3d modeling and have a functional desktop for light gaming that I won’t have to upgrade for awhile. I’m planning on buying a 1080p monitor from Bestbuy and a making a 2nd monitor from my dead laptop. I’m upgrading from laptop to desktop, and I tried to build a cheap pc to save money. Halfway through realized it might not be the right build for what I need, and that I’d rather spend extra for better overall performance anyway. I saw this build on the recommended build for 3d work and have all the parts in the basket, but I saw a comment saying his $900 Ryzen build would be cheaper and would run better. I’d like to follow a build guide from Linus, and would prefer not to stray too far from the recommended parts list if possible. Again, I know nothing of computers and don’t want to spend too much money and time wondering which parts will work together. It would be very helpful to know which build would be the best for 3d work, and if there is a better build guide to follow. Thanks!

I have seen many videos talking about the difference between the M1 air vs M1 pro. but if I’m going to be upgrading from the 2015 MacBook Pro how does that compare to the M1 air? How much progress has been made in the 5 years?

Man, I just can't get over how woefully underdeveloped CP 2077 is. The lack of attention to detail is appalling when compared to games like GTA 5. Next time one of those CDPR fan bots wants to claim they are on Rockstar's level, show them these videos. They don't even hold a candle to Rockstar Games.

To my new build I was going to get a Zotac 1660 ti.-https://www.nanotek.lk/product/1466 But then i found this ASUS 2060 card for the exact same price.-https://www.nanotek.lk/product/1696 But that 2060 only has ONE FAN whlie the 1660ti has 2. Should i be worried about overheating? I also use Unity 3D a lot. Which is the card best suited form me?

I'm asking based on this video: I currently have the i7 9800x paired with a 1070 and as far as I can tell the 1070 is the bottleneck so I want to upgrade. Looking at this video I would like the 3080 for 1080p gaming since I aim to get 144fps at max settings on as many games as possible. But compared to the video above, how many more frames would the 10850k pull? Would my cpu bottleneck the 3080?

That's my cpu. To what cpu can it be compared in terms of pure gaming performance? I'm asking once again because my cpu is pretty rare and I can find incredibly little info on it online. Cyberpunk 2077 shows that the recommended cpu for 1440p ultra graphics setting is an i7 4790. Is my cpu better or at least equal to the 4790? And what about the i7 6700? It shows as recommended for 4k ultra settings and RT enabled. Is my cpu comparible? If you forget about prices and look purely at performance, how high would you rate the i7 9800x?

Hey guys, so im looking for a mousepad to go with my setup but came across the steelseries qck, corsair mm300 small, and the corsair mm100 (just know that I'm not looking for an extended mousepad ) Anyway the steelseries's logo on the mousepad sticks to your mouse according to the reviews, and I dont rlly know about the corsair mousepad. PLS give me some advice since I don't have much time to get these

Let's say for the sake of it that your system easily support both options. Would you rather game at 1440p 240 FPS or 4k at 120 FPS? And why?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/EVGA-GeForce-RTX-3080-XC3/dp/B0979GYMHP/ref=sr_1_17?crid=HERAGVHL96CY&keywords=graphics+cards+rtx+3080+ti&qid=1660405447&sprefix=%2Caps%2C73&sr=8-17 There does not appear to have anything wrong with it

What's the difference? I'd like to believe that G-Sync would be better due to having an actual physical module in the monitors But every time I look up this kind of question, the blogs come down to "It depends" or something similar... What's the clear answer to this question?

By surround-sound system I mean for example, 2.1 or 5.1 speaker systems. Are soundbars far behind them in terms of sound quality or are they similar?

Hey everyone, Basically, the title. I'm looking at both options to get for someone as a gift and I have both options at around 50$. I would like to know if you could help me choose one option, or if you had experiences with either, good or bad, that could help me with the decision. I believe the person I'm getting them for is more interested in battery life, good connection and practicality than things like amazing sound (which of course the best is better) or options like noise cancelling or input customizability. Thanks in advance for your help!

I'm used ro 16:9 aspect ratio, so 21:9 sounds really weird for me Do most games support that aspect ratio? What about most videos / movies / etc?

Comparison between ASRock B550 Taichi ATX AM4 and ASUS ROG Strix B550-F Wi-Fi II ATX AM4? Here’s the build: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/9zpnNc

I haven't done anything that would require benchmarking in ages. Last change made to my old log file was 2014 after I changed some case fans and wanted to check if they did something to temps. This July I changed graphics card which is something I would say anyone should run their own sequence after. So after any bigger change (CPU/GPU mainly) anyone should run same benchmarks they have run before change. I will come back to this in a moment. In my situation need was really big. I went from 2011 midrange card to 2013 top end card. Something that in paper is bit better than 280X, card that I was eyeing for upgrade year ago. Yes, talking about used cards. Upgrade was from GTX 560Ti factory OC'd to reference GTX 780. Benchmarks would look awesome. In numbers if not actually, but thats more about nature of tests themselves. So why this post? Well, so I can refer to it when someone asks advice about benchmarking. Since my last run was 3 years ago and I haven't really played any new games, all my game benchmarks are pretty bad choices. Like NFS Shift and Battlefield Bad Company 2. There might be Battlefield 3, but thats it. This new batch won't have any real gameplay. Because of two reasons. 1. I still lack good games for realistic benchmarking, Battlefield 4 is probably on the heavier side. So nah on games. And 2. I don't want to buy games just because I could get good benchmark out of them. Even games with benchmark tools would be just for it since I don't play 3rd person single player adventure/action games (Metro 2033, Tomb Raider, Witcher 3). This will be list of benchmarks which are free and provide good base for anyone looking to create their own sequence. 1. What is my "sequence"? I use term "sequence" to describe procedure where I run multiple tests, check temps and mark down scores. Marking down scores and temps is good practice in general. Not just for bragging, but to check how much you spending money actually improves the systems performance. So my sequence involves having few monitoring software open, taking numbers in notepad and running several benchmarks one by one. Yes, it will take some time, some 1.5h for me. But you need to do it once and then you can just refer notes later if someone asks something. I've used temp readings many times to advice on high temps under stress tests and idles on my older hardware. To actual point. I have 10 software, 12 tests, 1 main monitoring software with 2 others running, notepad with template for scores and temps and FRAPS for one odd out fps reading. I cover tests later. I happen to have 2 monitors, but all this can be done on one monitor. 2nd is good for having all monitoring software there. Like in this manor: So MSI Afterburner is present because of habit of looking at graphs. I actually don't use it for GPU temp monitoring anymore, but habit of looking at fan and temp graphs remains. Main screen is where I look at GPU temp when test is running. Mainly since its new piece and I want to see how my fan settings are holding. Main software here is RealTemp with GPU temp monitoring open. I reset Maximum readings after every test to get reliable readings for all tests individually. Under them all is my normal main monitoring software, OpenHardwareMonitor. Notepad is on main monitor since I don't need it until after test finishes. Things I do and would recommend. I have habit of doing this after cold boot. I would recommend booting before running sequence. Its easiest way, since there's least amount of extra software running on background. For this sequence I added way of closing all extra stuff I have open. Skype, several driver software's, basically anything except multimonitor manager, fan controls and virus scanner. Some might close virus scanner too, but I don't mind it. Then another boot after all testing is done. To get everything working as normal. I would recommend setting any fan profiles like you are going to use them before running test on new components. Makes more realistic comparison. As for temps, I have idle's. Which I will take after first test has run. Reason being that idle's coming directly from boot will be lower than what you are going to see any other time. For testing temps I use max temp. Its most relevant. Since RealTemp shows temps for all cores, I use average with easy count. Take highest and lowest and split difference with upward rounding. Like 66C and 58C would be 62C (8/2=4, 58+4=62C) or 67C and 60C would be 64C (7/2=3.5, round up 4). 2. Tests and score keeping Let's start with synthetic benchmarks. I will give some background on why I use software listed here, where to get it and what settings to use (if needed). 3DMark https://www.futuremark.com/downloads/3dmark.zip If you have had gaming PC for some time, you know this software already. Futuremark's (Yay! for Finnish company) 3DMark has been industry standard for almost 20 years. Its combined benchmark, meaning that it tests both GPU and CPU within single run. First 3DMark I've used is 3DMark03. I've had 05, 06. Vantage and 11. 3DMark06 was used for long time because of its DX9 support. Until Vantage with DX10.1 it was only thing to test new hardware reliably. Thats important. Because of the way benchmarks work, if you change something the score will also differ. So comparing two results between different versions of software can cause issues. I first noticed this fact with FurMark. But back to 3DMark. Free version has 3-4 tests. Most common is FireStrike which is for current gen gaming PCs. You can run it with lower end hardware if you are like me and want before upgrade scores to compare. I also used tad lighter SkyDiver. Mainly because I couldn't get 06 running anymore. So let both tests run, mark score to notepad, mark max temps for GPU and CPU, remember to let temps go back to "idle" in between and reset max readings before running the test. Thats it. Free version doesn't have any settings to toggle. Only thing I would like to toggle is Demo. CINEBENCH R15 Yes, they actually have product name in caps. Maxon makes professional 3D modeling and animation software as their main source of income. But Cinebench has become one reason for their homepage to get constant traffic. It has 2 tests, individually for CPU and GPU. GPU uses OpenCL, CPU renders image using all available threads. Cinebench gives some comparison for similar systems, but I wouldn't look that graph too much. I also don't think it as very taxing software. Run tests for both CPU and GPU, with temp normalization in between. This is among those software with this batch that has single part focus on testing. I don't have just for CPU, but I might look into that part more. Intel Extreme Tuning Utility has CPU testing, but I don't know if it works with AMD. Anyway, having whole benchmark just for single component has some advantages. Like if you'd like to test air cooling myth about radiating GPU heat. So running GPU only test would raise only GPUs temp notably and do something to CPUs temp also. I don't look at utilization when I run these tests, but it could be one thing to check also if you want to gather more data. Catzilla http://www.catzilla.com/download ALLBenchmark's test is different from the two above because it has very noticeable sound effects and music. Otherwise its just another combined benchmark. I've used it since I heard about it from OC3D's TinyTomLogan. TTL is someone who's opinion on OC and CPU performance means a lot to me. I've picked other go-to software from him with OCCT, a stress test software for CPU. But back to Catzilla. Basic version only has 540p benchmark, but you get 720p one by creating account to their site. Easy thing with Google, Twitter or Facebook linking. Rest of the stuff is like before. RealBench https://rog.asus.com/rog-pro/realbench-v2-leaderboard/ ASUS' RealBench is combined test which uses real life tasks for benchmarking. Image manipulation, rendering, video encoding and multitasking. Besides giving total score, you get score per test. I mark all of them down. I got to see how much GPU did bottleneck CPU on CPU heavy tasks. Result? Not that much. But some. UserBenchmark This is new to my lineup. I haven't looked much into what it actually measures. But looks to be lighter side combined test. I would say it replaces Novabench I had on earlier lineup. Results are given in three categories, for Gaming, Desktop and Workstation in percentage. I marked those percentages as results. Heaven and Valley These two from Unigine are pure GPU tests. Heaven is what is commonly used for GPU OC testing, temp testing and benchmarking by reviewers. Valley is bit heavier, so I'd say running them both is good practice. Like with 3DMark, there are more tests you can use. I used highest presets for both, Extreme for Heaven and ExtremeHD for Valley. FFXIV: Stormblood Like said earlier, I don't have real gameplay benchmarks in this set. So this game from 2013 is lower end gaming benchmark for me. It has preset for Mazximum settings, but I pumped those bit more. You can check my settings from PDF attached. I use score as scoring, but you could have also given FPS. (FFXIV_Stormbloo_benchmark_LoGiCalDrm_config.pdf) Star Swarm http://store.steampowered.com/app/267130/Star_Swarm_Stress_Test/ This game engine benchmark is free on Steam. Released 2014 by Oxide Games, guys behind Ashes of Singularity, its has capability of simulating space battle game. There are few options to simulate different style of games. I used Attract with Extreme settings. Score will be given as average FPS. You can select some other combination, important part being that same settings are used before and after any upgrade made to keep score consistent. demo2 https://files.scene.org/view/parties/2015/assembly15/demo/demo2_by_ekspert.zip This one is something I cooked up. Its newer than both other gaming style benchmarks, its done with Unreal Engine 4 and I have no clue if it has any relation to real world or not. Its Demo made by group called Ekspert for Assembly LAN Demo Compo 2015, in which it placed 2nd. There are few remarks I want to make about demo's and demoscene before going actual benchmarking part. Demoscene is all about digital art. Animation, coding, graphics, music, indie game development. At least in Europe, many software and game dev companies have their roots deep into demoscene. If you are doing the things I mentioned above and want to show off your skills by competing, maybe look if there are parties/compo's held in your area. The two known Finnish companies with demoscene background are Futuremark (surprise, surprise) and Rovio. One for making first PC demo at the time when Amiga and Commodore 64 were main platforms, other for making mobile game back when those were played on Nokia N-Cage's. Now back to benchmarking part. Demo2 doesn't have built-in scoring system. So I've used FRAPS to calculate average FPS. Running 1080p version gives warning about using Fraps for recording purposes, but loads just fine after that. I start benchmark counter as soon as demo starts and check scores afterwards. Nothing more to it. Others? As I said along the lines, I would like to have more modern game benchmarks, as well as CPU only benchmark. So I will be looking around for those and adding them here. If someone reading this has ideas about free or cheap games with included benchmarks, please let me know. 3. Scores and comparison At this point you should have raw data text file. Something like this one I'm using: benchmsrk.txt Which includes system specs for each test cycle. This would be the file you are updating during tests. Feel free to use it as template or comparison. But what now? Well, you can just compare by eye results, use it to quickly refer temps and so on. But what if you want know how much better system performance is after upgrade. Thats where Excel (or Sheets, Calc and so on) comes in. Copying results to Excel (&co) can be annoying, but do it once to get template correct and maybe adjust .txt file to help in future. Here's my .xlsx for reference. Also free to be used as template or comparison: benchmark_LoGiCalDrm.xlsx In file I've got some extended system info and notes about tests. Which are pretty much same as in here. But main thing is +- column (Excel hint: add < ' > in front of symbol to exclude any automatic formula). It calculates how many percentage better new score is compared to last. Works best when score changes less than 100% or new score is over twice the value of old. Formula used is pretty simple: =(<new>/<old>)-1 Shown in percentage. You can add color coding and such if needed. If new value are over twice bigger, remove <-1> to get accurate score. There's some oddness in that file in CPU temps. I had issue with Speedfan missing fan profiles for 2 front intakes. Which I fixed after I had changed to new GPU. So those are something to ignore. 4. Conclusion I hope this helps those who are new to benchmarking. Note that this is just how I do things and you should be taking it as guide or advice. Make it your own. I will be doing some fixes along the lines, but as I will not be getting major upgrade in few years, its quite possible I'll be making another batch of tests when next upgrade is on me.

After I used Windows 10 as my primary OS for many months, I realised that I wouldn't miss anything about it if I went back to Windows 7. And since I found that everything was more difficult, more frustrating, more ugly, and more time-consuming on Windows 10, I went back to Windows 7 as my primary OS. Windows 10 made the detail of just having an OS a chore and liability all on its own, whereas Windows 7 is just passively there, like an OS should be, and just works for whatever I decide to do, without any of the barriers, talk-back, and convolution of Windows 10. This post's sections include: 1) General Windows 7, Windows 10 user experience comparison 2) Gaming and application-wise 3) The modern Microsoft factor 4) My conclusion General Windows 7, Windows 10 user experience comparison: These are many of the reasons why I found Windows 7 to be a much more sophisticated, smartly-designed, and user-friendly OS than Windows 10: Windows 7 has a more useful and efficient start-menu design, that takes up less screen space, and requires less mouse travel distance to get to what you want. Pinning applications to a space-efficient list directly above the start button is a lot more space-smart, and functionally-useful than the live-tiles design in Windows 10. Windows 7 has an intelligent Windows Update set of choices, whereas in Windows 10, unless you edit Group Policies, you have basically no choice. The choice to defer updates is not useful, since deferring them still causes the same ambiguous and random update process to automatically occur, just a couple of months later. There isn't even a choice for how long to defer them. Also, with the Anniversary Update, Microsoft has reduced the availability of Group Policy options in Windows 10, a move which certainly wasn't done to be of any service to Windows 10 Pro license owners. Customizing file-associations in Windows 7 is straight-forward, while in Windows 10 it can be a repeating arm-wrestle with the OS, as sometimes Win 10 resets the file associations you've changed, and sometimes the ability to change file-associations "bugs," and it doesn't let it be changed, or doesn't list the application you want and doesn't provide any means to add the application you want to use to the list (such as to use Chrome to open URLs from offline, non-browser text). Windows 10's UI isn't very aesthetic to many people, and Windows 7's UI feels a lot more comfortable to me. Windows 10's UI can be changed to some extent, using programs like Startisback, Classic Shell, or Start 10, and Aero Glass. Windows 10's data-collection is invasive, and it isn't straight-forward to turn it off. Microsoft has made effort to spread the settings for various aspects of data-collection in many different places, to make it challenging for a person to find them all and disable them all. And extra efforts may be required to put a more thorough stop to MS' collection of your data, such as those described in the link in my signature. Don't presume that just because you turned off telemetry and data-collection during the Win 10 installation process that you got it all. You'll find more data-collection settings in individual MS apps that need turning off in them after the OS has completed installation. Windows 10 has so far tended to often require users to redo their OS customization work with new big updates, which can have the magical ability to reset things back to the way MS wants them to be. For that reason, and because of data-collection, and because of file-association challenges, Windows 10 is not a user-friendly OS. It's a for-Microsoft OS, that a user might have to struggle with quite a bit to get the way they want, and to keep it the way they want. It's rather abusive, in this. In Windows 10, there are in-OS ads, which is something Windows 7 doesn't have. Does anyone want to see advertisement in their personal space? I don't. In Windows 10, Windows Defender is a nuisance, unless it is permanently disables in Group Policy Editor, and all system warning notifications are disabled (otherwise Windows 10 will constantly bother the user to re-enable Windows Defender). Windows 10 has (lots of) bugs, and while new versions and patches fix some, they also often create new ones, sometimes major ones. Windows 7 has been generally bug-free (or, few enough that I haven't encountered any since its release). Microsoft uses Windows 10 to pester users about whatever random thing they want to happen: General: Microsoft is disgustingly sneaky: Windows 10 isn't an operating system, it's an advertising platform How to Get Rid of “Suggested Apps” (like Candy Crush) in Windows 10 How to Disable Ads on Your Windows 10 Lock Screen Windows 10 Creators Update: Turn Off Suggested Apps in Share Dialog August 2016: Microsoft's war against Chrome battery life now includes Windows 10 notifications January 2017: Windows 10: Microsoft is spamming Chrome users with pop-up adverts Microsoft's latest Windows 10 ad annoys Chrome users with taskbar pop-ups February 2017: Windows 10 pushes notifcaitons to remind you to watch the Superbowl and to purchase snacks October 2017: Is nothing sacred? Advertisement for OneDrive in my face when I opened Windows Explorer (I already pay for Office 365) Microsoft is putting OneDrive ads in Windows 10’s File Explorer https://boards.4chan.org/g/thread/59233293 November 2018: Microsoft wants to put ads in Windows email — and it’s already testing them out I feel that the best thing I've found about Windows 10 is that after setting everything up the way that I'd like it, it functions pretty much like Windows 7, with the only differences being worse on Windows 10 than in Windows 7. But, since it takes more work to set up than Windows 7, and since it takes work to keep Windows 10 set up the way I want it to be (since Microsoft's Win 10 updates seems to cause people's Windows 10 configurations to reset arbitrarily), I can't see why I would go with the OS that takes ongoing work to be good, rather than the OS that is simply good from the start. Areas in which I've discovered Windows 7 to be more configurable than Windows 10 include: Windows Updates, system restarting, the Group Policy editor, removing default apps, configuring what the default apps for file-types are, disabling background data-collection, account permissions, reliability, and visual customization. Gaming and Application-wise: There are no tangible performance differences between Windows 7 and Windows 10 in non DirectX 12 games and applications. While I haven't looked at benchmarks on the subject in a long time, last I saw, some games will perform better in one Windows OS compared to another, but, on average, across a large selection of games, Windows 7, 8, and 10 all perform within ~1 FPS of each other, with the two overall fastest Windows OSes being Windows 8, then Windows 7, with Windows 10 coming in last for performance in non DX12 games. On my dual-boot system, Windows 7 is the OS that's lighter on system resources, using only 13% RAM at idle, compared with 15% RAM-usage at idle in Win 10 (Anniversary Update version). Compatibility-wise, Windows 7 has better support for a larger amount of games and applications, having been the main gaming OS for a very long time, and continuing to be the OS with the largest market share. Because of this, Windows 7 also has a lot more community guides, fixes, and other materials to get games and applications to run on it, then does any other OS. Windows 7 is a more stable and reliable OS in general than Windows 10, and Windows 7 doesn't interfere with online gaming by automatically updating and sharing data, such as can occur in Windows 10, for whatever MS app and service wants to do that. There are more options available to Windows 7 owners, to ensure that there won't be any automatic updates while they're playing their games, and Windows 7 doesn't cloud-share OS updates to other Windows owners, which Windows 10 does, unless a person disables it. Windows 7 doesn't have directX 12, but it does have Vulkan, which accomplishes the same low-level hardware communication that improves application performance, and Windows 7 in Vulkan is just as good as Windows 10 in DX12. I think that Vulkan is more likely to become the industry standard than DX12, as it is available for all Windows, Linux, and more, OSes, whereas DX12 is only available in Windows 10. As Valve has expressed, there doesn't seem to be much point in making a game DX12, when making it Vulkan will make it accessible cross-platform. Also, there doesn't currently seem to be any benefit for Nvidia cards in DX12, with Nvidia GPUs typically losing performance when running DX12 modes, compared to their performances while in DX11 mode. Because of this, and because of Vulkan's availability on previous Windows OSes, I think that Windows 10's DX12 has nothing to offer Nvidia GPU owners. Windows 10 has a lot of problems right now, and Microsoft, with their new QA strategy (having laid off most of their testing engineers), has, so far, been unable to stay on top of them. I would avoid Windows 10 just for that reason. But there are other issues with Windows 10 that make it not the most sound OS for gaming, whatever a person is looking to do with it. The modern Microsoft factor: In the last 3 years, Microsoft has fired around 20,000 employees (many of whom were testing engineers), has changed management, has rearranged internal development and testing structures, has completely shifted business strategies away from software-first to monetization-first, and as a result, is no longer capable of quality product design, or of producing competent software releases. As ridiculous as things seemed to be under Ballmer, Microsoft is a not the same company today, for the worse, and Windows is not the same product anymore, also for the worse. The new Microsoft didn't design and develop the Windows IP, and has simply inherited the Windows IP, and is now just looking for how they can exploit and prostitute every cranny of it. It's just like when a pharmaceutical company buys the rights for a drug that they didn't research or develop, and then jacks the price up by 5000%. Or, it's like when a big publisher buys a developer of a popular game, and turns their game into a dumbed-down, overly-generic version of its previous form. Currently, Windows 10 is probably the most buggy OS Microsoft has released since Windows ME, and each new major Win 10 update brings as many new bugs as it fixes. I think that Windows 10 simply is not a professional OS. It's like an indie-dev's prototype that never solidifies into anything great, but just morphs from one bloated and troubled presentation to another. Also, Win 10 is littered with "bugs" that are intentional, to keep people using MS services - things like issues with changing default apps away from MS ones. If a program starts doing that on a person's PC, it's called malware. And it's not different when Microsoft does it, through Windows. I think that it is fair to classify Windows 10 as malware, especially since it installed itself on so many PC systems without permission. And malware to be cleaned from a system. I think that Windows 10 is not a professional OS, and many businesses agree, and see Windows 10 as a debacle to be avoided, with nothing to be gained over previous versions of Windows, but rather the liabilities of it being a perpetual beta OS, filled with a bunch of consumer crapware and half-baked phone/mobile apps that have no business on a PC. The redesign of Microsoft QA has led to the current situation where accepting Windows updates can actually be more of a liability than not updating Windows: January 2016: Windows 10 default programs keep changing June 2016: Microsoft June Patch Breaks Group Policy Settings for Some Orgs August 2016: 16 Windows 10 Anniversary Update Issues & How to Fix Them August 2016: Microsoft admits to distributing Windows printing bugs in KB 3177725 and KB 3176493 August 2016: Partition disappears in Windows 10 Anniversary Update August 2016: Microsoft Warns Windows 10 Update Has A Serious Problem August 2016: Kindle crashes and broken PowerShell: Something isn’t right with Windows 10 testing August 2016: Microsoft Has Broken Millions Of Webcams With Windows 10 Anniversary Update Oct 2016: Flood of reports from people unable to install latest Windows update, resulting in an endless loop of repeated attempts Microsoft's immense degradation of its programming and design quality has continued into 2018, with major updates causing a variety of serious issues for Windows owners, and patches meant to address serious security flaws actually making the flaws worse, and in some cases bricking a system's BIOS. January 2018: Windows 10 will not start/boot after windows update March 2018: Total Meltdown? October 2018: Microsoft's latest Windows 10 update is reportedly wiping user data October 2018: New Windows 10 1809 bug: Zip data-loss flaw is months old but Microsoft missed it October 2018: HP users report BSOD after Tuesday patch November 2018: Hold off installing re-released Windows Oct Update - networked-mapped drives not working, display driver problems November 2018: Microsoft Blocks Windows 10 Version 1809 on Some PCs Due to Bad Intel Drivers November 2018: Microsoft confirms File Association bug in Windows 10 will be patched on Tuesday November 2018: Re-released Windows 10 October 2018 Update breaks Apple iCloud November 2018: Et tu, Office? After pulling Windows 10 update, Microsoft does the same for Office November 2018: Latest Windows 10 update breaks Windows Media Player, Win32 apps in general December 2018: Microsoft pulls Windows 10’s optional November update following BSOD reports March 2019: Latest Windows 10 Update Kills Performance in Some Games April 2020 edit: Haven't been keeping tabs on the updates for a bit, but be assured that in 2020 the situation is still the same: Windows 10 KB4549951 update fails to install, deletes files, disables microphones, camera & USB ports, shuts down defender & causes other issues, including BSODs, Bluetooth and WiFi issues, random system crashes Here's an article looking at what some of the changes have been to Microsoft's style of testing. August 2014: Why did Microsoft lay off 'Programmatic testers'? With Microsoft having halved the number of their OS testing engineers, there were bound to be differences between traditional Windows QA and modern Windows QA results: July 2014: Satya Nadella Is Cutting 5,500 Microsoft Employees, Too, With Windows Hit The Hardest July 2014: Microsoft cuts 18,000 jobs July 2015: Microsoft cuts another 7,800 jobs, takes $7.6 billion "impairment charge" July 2016: Microsoft to cut about 2,850 more jobs January 2017: About 700 Microsoft employees will be laid off next week, sources say July 2017: Microsoft plans thousands of job cuts in a sales staff overhaul to fuel cloud growth January 2018: Microsoft makes a new round of layoffs across multiple business units March 2017: Microsoft claims 10 million ‘fans’ help it test Windows 10, but it’s sure got a funny definition of that word Today's Windows is not the Windows we are familiar with, and today's Microsoft is not the Microsoft we are familiar with. I think that both of those things, in their modern forms, are shit. And, in both my opinion, and experience with using Windows 10 since its release, using Windows 10 is sort of like walking through a minefield, in that you never know when something is going to screw something up, or even everything up, but you know that there are issues lying in wait to go off, all over the place. And every so often, sometimes frequently, something happens to create frustration, and requires work, sometimes a lot of work, to get sorted out. My conclusion: Windows 10 is a hyper-invasive, user-fighting, buggy, perpetual beta/demo version of Windows, that is ad-supported, and which is a constant chore and headache to keep set up, and to get it to do what a user wants it to. On the other hand, Windows 7, at least up until June / July 2015, behaves like it is the full version of Windows, which just works, obeys the user, and doesn't collect a user's data for resale to make MS money, and doesn't try to trick the user at every turn, or even at all. In my view, Windows 10 is a snake-oil OS, and many people are merely caught up in a sentiment they have of Windows 10 being new and the future, and they just want to ride that fluffy feeling while shutting down their minds completely. Meanwhile, the I find reality to be that Windows 10 has less useful functionality than Windows 7, is a lot less stable and reliable than Windows 7, is less user-friendly than Windows 7, offers a PC admin less control than Windows 7, is more invasive than Windows 7, has in-OS ads which Windows 7 doesn't, has an excess of bloatware pre-installed while Windows 7 doesn't, and constantly resets customised file-associations to force people into using MS applications, which Windows 7 doesn't do. Confessions of a former Microsoft programmer:

The case needs to house an I7-4790 and a GTX 1070 and it should be good but not too expensive. NZXT H510 Corsair 110Q Corsair 275R They is only a few euros difference between them so the price is not a factor. I consider them all aesthetically decent so that is not a crucial factor either. Which of these would be the best choice for that especially considering noise and temps?

I'll be going for either the XPS 13 plus or the Asus. Waiting to see the LTT video to help make a decision but what do you all think? I won't use it for gaming much if at all but if value for money the Asus is the better machine and has a dedicated gpu then so be it. Let me know what you think.

Hey guys, I'm looking for a new multi-purpose display - gaming, general productivity, media consumption, digital drawing etc. - although, this will be my auxillary display, as in, it won't be directly in front of me, but rather to my left at quite an angle. Just making things clear, doubt it's that important. I managed to narrow down my potential options to Samsung Odyssey G5A and LG UltraGear 27GN88A-B. Which one would be better? I'm curious about LG's NanoIPS display, but I read that there are potential problems with backlight. I remember that Linus made a video about it's older brother, I guess? The UltraFine Ergo and I was immediately interested in that ergo stand. In terms of pricing I can get the LG for ~440$ and Samsung for ~380$ plus 40$ for a third party ergo stand. That's why LG looks like a fine choice, since it seems to have everything I need, including ergo stand. Opinions from display experts would be greatly appreciated I'm open to other options, my budget is around 440$ with ergo stand of my preferred choice. As for requirements, I need 27", at least 144Hz IPS panel with both G-sync and FreeSync support, solid colors, but no need for HDR.

60 Hz is very likely still the most common refresh rate to play at. I just gave it a shot for an hour, everything looked blurry whenever I moved my camera, couldn't focus a thing Could it be that most people just got used to that blurriness? Once you go 120+ Hz is so hard to go back...

I found some motherboards in my criteria (i7-12700K support, 4 DRAM slots, M.2 support and are around 150 USD.) Im welcome to suggestions on boards not this list but my main goal is for guidance on these specific boards. MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4( the wifi version is at 170$) NZXT N5 Z690 MSI PRO B660-A DDR4 removed because no overclocking support ASUS PRIME Z690-P D4 Thanks all.

Hi. So I've been using these sites to compare Cpus and Gpus: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/ https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/ They're just so convenient and nicely organized for me. Other sites I've tried, not so much. Sometimes, if I'm watching a youtube video, they'll say this cpu is better than this one. I check it on the above sites and yeah, the faster cpu has a bigger single thread score. Which benchmark sites have reliable trustworthy data? What makes them reliable? Thanks

Which builds better custom systems for the price? If anyone has experiance with both I am very interested in hearing your experiance.