Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards


About moderategamer

  • Title
    Gaming moderately since 1991
  • Birthday Mar 06, 1991

Contact Methods

  • Steam

Profile Information

  • Location
    UK, Scotland
  • Gender
  • Interests
    Tech, Gaming, Home Cinema, DIY Tech, Washing dishes, Cooking, Cleaning, Music
  • Biography
    24 year old Uni drop out. Studied games/web design for 3yrs.


  • CPU
  • Motherboard
    Asus H81M-E
  • RAM
    Corsair Vengeance 8GB
  • GPU
    Asus Nvidia GeForce GTX 970 strix (4GB, GDDR5)
  • Case
    Zalman Z9 Plus
  • Storage
    3/4 Floppy disk,120gb SSD & 1tb WD & 2tb WD
  • PSU
    EVGA 500W
  • Display(s)
    acer S220HQL, optima hd141x projector
  • Cooling
  • Keyboard
    It has keys promise
  • Mouse
    Razer Deathadder
  • Sound
    Yamaha rxv367, FR/LR warfdale Diamond 9.1 R/LR warfdale Diamond III Sub Vibe 12" custom enclosure
  • Operating System
  • PCPartPicker URL

Recent Profile Visitors

2,055 profile views
  1. Hi I'm looking for some clarification on whether this mobo supports NVME drives. I've not really been following hardware for quite some time and must admit I don't know much about M.2. PC parts reports no compatibility issues but I thought I better check before making the purchase. PCPartPicker Part List Type Item Price CPU Intel Core i5-9600K 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor £191.97 @ Aria PC CPU Cooler Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler £2
  2. Not a fan of the colour scheme but I like the project idea pretty cool
  3. True I did make a point of stating that ARM chips have to play by the same rules just for the record I'm merely stating that ARM has less of a footprint limitation meaning it can physically have more cores without the need of trickery. It is useful for separate cores to communicate however but to what degree is debatable. I'm not saying AMD's solution is bad I know nothing about it and after all they are the chip designers so they obviously know more than me and they wouldn't do it if there was no benefit to it. However I do feel like it is kind of a hack to boast higher core counts when in ac
  4. I'm having trouble here you seem to be proving my point while telling me I don't understand yes I'm aware L1 cache is blisteringly fast that is my point. L2 cache is in comparison very slow obviously not compared to system memory but as far as memory giving instructions to the CPU L1 speeds are pretty much required for useful operation ie two separate chiplets as he called them couldn't hope to communicate at similar speeds as the distance between cache and the cpu is directly responsible for speeds. So yes although the chiplet method provides better speeds than two separate cpu's it's ultimat
  5. Could you guys do a full video comparing desktop chicklet keyboards including the Dell KB216 and the Lenovo 4X30M39496?
  6. My mistake I didn't mean bandwidth but you know what I meant. I don't follow AMD but I find it hard to believe they can achieve the kind of speeds comparable with L1 cache speeds which are required to provide any sort of useful communication. So unless they share L1 cache which for all I know they could then I stand by my comment.
  7. Only problem with that is memory bandwidth if you have two separate chips sure you can handle separate loads individually faster but the two chips can't communicate with each other at useful speeds to help each other may as well just have two separate processors at that point.
  8. It would help if you bothered to watch the video before asking me questions that are covered in said video, not a dig would just be nice XD There is absolutely a limit to how many cores we can have on x86 due to the high transistor count and trouble reducing die sizes. there comes a point where things are just too far apart. That's not to say ARM chips don't have to follow the same rules it's just ARM chips use far less transistors and are already on small dies they can just physically afford more cores plus the instruction set is better suited for parallelised tasks.
  9. That is the current top of the line ARM processor holding it's own against a low to mid range CPU but in the video it explains that the next generation ARM chip will be 3.5x faster than the current snapdragon so it's not unimaginable that ARM chips could become quite fast enough to rival current gen Intel chips in certain work loads not to mention the fact that ARM has the potential to have greater # of cores.
  10. Yeah the power saving is really the big calling card not to mention better parallelisation. Mobiles already run on the ARM Architecture so no need for anything to change their.
  11. I'm not saying it would be easy but if ARM can provide a better path to compute times and the hardware can catch up which it's looking like they will the industry will be forced to do that. I mean Adobe have already created photoshop for ARM something they don't stand to make any real money from but are pretty much preparing themselves for the future. And it's not like they have to literally re write the entire operating system they have to re write the compilation of their OS sure it's not as easy as that but essentially it's very possible.
  12. I think the main advantages are just the fact that it's better developed in terms of software and hardware. Although ARM has the potential to be faster the fact is that we have come so far under the x86 architecture that it will be a challenge to make the switch