Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: Desktop PC upgrades

  1. #31
    Sysop Ptah's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    4,889
    Quote Originally Posted by QuickTwist View Post
    I'm actually really interested why you eliminated Ryzen, if you don't mind my asking.
    Zero interest. I prefer Intel, long story short.

  2. #32
    singularity precursor Limes's Avatar
    Type
    INTJ
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,019
    INTPx Award Winner
    I'm running two water cooled 8-core AMDs at 4GHz, one with 16Gig of RAM and one with 32.

    I've been running water cooling for many years now, was into peltier cooling in the nineties, but it could make ice crystals if you aren't careful.

    I'm not big into gaming, so I just have a GTX1050 in one and a GTX 1070 in the other, mostly for cracking hashes. Usually chewing through WPA-PSK 8 character alphanumeric.

    I like running 2x 27" screens. Hard to go back to one, or smaller once you have.

    I have been running a "fast" SSD for boot and main use programs and a secondary hard drive for bulk storage, while the other PC has a 2TB RAID0, though I am migrating to a NAS mirror for bulk storage, it's just a crappy Lenovo and it's a bit slow.

    I think the only upgrade I can think of is a faster NAS, maybe an SSD based one.
    Oh, might well go with a faster SSD than the SATA bus, I'm seeing stuff in excess of a gig per second now. A terabyte of that would be nice.
    I don't think I have a CPU bottleneck. Waiting for 1080 prices to come down, but hash cracking at home is just for fun, so I can leave it running overnight.
    maybe quad screens, but that's kinda obnoxious.

  3. #33
    tsuj a notelpmis QuickTwist's Avatar
    Type
    INXP
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    983
    Quote Originally Posted by Limes View Post
    I'm running two water cooled 8-core AMDs at 4GHz, one with 16Gig of RAM and one with 32.

    I've been running water cooling for many years now, was into peltier cooling in the nineties, but it could make ice crystals if you aren't careful.

    I'm not big into gaming, so I just have a GTX1050 in one and a GTX 1070 in the other, mostly for cracking hashes. Usually chewing through WPA-PSK 8 character alphanumeric.

    I like running 2x 27" screens. Hard to go back to one, or smaller once you have.

    I have been running a "fast" SSD for boot and main use programs and a secondary hard drive for bulk storage, while the other PC has a 2TB RAID0, though I am migrating to a NAS mirror for bulk storage, it's just a crappy Lenovo and it's a bit slow.

    I think the only upgrade I can think of is a faster NAS, maybe an SSD based one.
    Oh, might well go with a faster SSD than the SATA bus, I'm seeing stuff in excess of a gig per second now. A terabyte of that would be nice.
    I don't think I have a CPU bottleneck. Waiting for 1080 prices to come down, but hash cracking at home is just for fun, so I can leave it running overnight.
    maybe quad screens, but that's kinda obnoxious.
    My CPU is under water, but I just don't have the cash flow for putting the GPU's under water. I actually do have a pretty good res/pump though. I also have a couple 512 GB Samsung Pro's in Raid 0. I have my backup as a couple 2TB Barracudas in Raid 1. My Games Drive is an external HDD that's like 500 GB called a My Passport.
    But your individuality and your present need will be swept away by change,
    and what you now ardently desire will one day become the object of abhorrence.
    ~ Schiller - 'Psychological Types'

  4. #34
    tsuj a notelpmis QuickTwist's Avatar
    Type
    INXP
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    983
    Actually, I was in the top 50 in the world for Firestrike Ultra for 4K for 2 GPU's and yeah, was still on air. I haven't upgraded from the 980's though and I don't really think I need to at this point.
    But your individuality and your present need will be swept away by change,
    and what you now ardently desire will one day become the object of abhorrence.
    ~ Schiller - 'Psychological Types'

  5. #35
    tsuj a notelpmis QuickTwist's Avatar
    Type
    INXP
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    983
    Quote Originally Posted by Ptah View Post
    Zero interest. I prefer Intel, long story short.
    Why?
    But your individuality and your present need will be swept away by change,
    and what you now ardently desire will one day become the object of abhorrence.
    ~ Schiller - 'Psychological Types'

  6. #36
    tsuj a notelpmis QuickTwist's Avatar
    Type
    INXP
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    983
    Quote Originally Posted by Ishaad T. Cock View Post
    I'd definitely un-recommend reading the Witcher series.

    The first book, The Last Wish - a collection of short stories - is an enjoyable enough read. The next, another short story collection, is a good deal less so. Then things turn to total shit with a five book "epic", where the pacing turns into an ungodly boring slog. The first part doesn't even have any climax; it just ends, apparently expecting you to take it on faith that the next book will be better. Maybe I would've enjoyed the books more if I was another type. I could imagine an ISTJ not noticing that the story-telling is glacial, un-enticing, and unrewarding, and that none of the characters talk like human beings. (Can you guess what type the author is?)

    The first game is a real mess. It feels a lot like other eurojank such as Gothic. Even with like half a dozen various cheating mods to make things playable (like resting anywhere, increasing gathering yields), the game's still a boring slog, where you spend 90% of your time just walking. So much goddamn walking to and from the same places and people, again and again. If for some reason someone still wants to play this, here's my old notes I wrote after I finished the game:
    Mods make this game much more playable. Full Combat Rebalance makes the fighting more interesting, but use the "Easy" module (which is still harder than the original Hard mode). I did Easy/Easy, which was a little too hard at times - particularly the beginning - and a little too easy at others. I imagine Easy/Medium would be too frustrating in a lot of places, particularly at a point near the beginning, where you'd need a Specter Oil to do any damage, and probably didn't make any (I don't think you can even get the recipe for it until later). FCR kind of makes Group Style near useless unless you put a bunch of points into it (and you probably shouldn't). (Personally, I cheated and added some Talent Points so I could branch out and try other stuff a bit). FCR lets you choose to lower the number of monsters to something more plausible and less annoying; but it does make some gathering sidequests hard or unfinishable (in particular, you won't find Fleders); it's probably worth it though. There's a mod ("Plentiful Items"?) that packages a bunch of useful mods like an item that lets you rest anywhere (essential!), gives you infinite inventory space (essential!), all the book knowledge on monsters and herbs (just do it; trust me), and teleport between the swamp and the city (saves a lot of bother). If I recall correctly, though, some mods interfere, such that you have to load the game with one installed, get the item it gives you and save, and then swap the files. There's also a mod to increase the amount of herbs you gather at once. Another makes the dice minigame much easier (the AI cheats like a complete motherfucker; it's bullshit) [note: the one that comes with FCR doesn't seem to work]. There's also Rise of the White Wolf (the textures for Triss are kind of ugly though). Some blood mod. The texture mod made my computer fan go full blast constantly; for that alone I don't think it was really worth it. Another makes the Swallow potion last much longer (do it). I didn't use the scabbard mod; probably because it conflicted with something. SweetFX looks nice though. There's a mod that increases running speed, with the caveat that it also increases the speed of everything else; for that reason I didn't use it, though I wonder a little if maybe it'd be worth it. A lot of stuff in this game is kind of broken; personally, I'd recommend not worrying about it too much. You don't have to do everything, man; it's probably better just to roll with it. You could probably save a lot of time looking up some things online though; don't hesitate if you can't figure out what to do next. You'll want to use both overhead and Over-The-Shoulder (OTS) camera angles at times. Overhead is good for moving long distances (just one click), gives you more information in combat, and people say it's best for combat for some reason, though I found it to be less convenient myself. I found OTS much easier to maneuver in. For combat, you basically always want the swallow potion active (also stacks with food). You typically want Specter Oil around, or you won't be able to do any damage to them (even if it looks like you can). You mostly want to level your stats first, then styles, then maybe some magic (I used Aard). The talent that lets you gather more is important if you reduced the monster count with mods; get those gathering talents very soon.
    Anyways, I wouldn't recommend it, even if I did find myself having a vague sort of fondness for the game regardless of its glaring flaws. I'd say the one thing it did well was atmosphere. The countryside was endearing, and the towns lively.

    Haven't played the other games yet. I hear they're much better, but also flawed.

    Like many things in life, I found myself wanting to like The Witcher much more than I actually enjoyed it.
    I tried getting into The Witcher 3 times to no avail. TW3, however, is probably in my top 5 favorite games of all time.
    But your individuality and your present need will be swept away by change,
    and what you now ardently desire will one day become the object of abhorrence.
    ~ Schiller - 'Psychological Types'

  7. #37
    Cooler than Jesus
    Type
    intp
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,988
    I'm glad I didn't go with anything more than a gtx 1060. Ultra high graphics seem like a gimmick more than anything. I don't need, nor want, to see the pores on the face of animated characters. Right now I can play everything at max, but I don't think I'd care about lowering it a notch.

    Draw distance is another thing though. I've always been a sucker for high draw distances. I remember thinking how beautiful Gothic II was when it was maxed out.

  8. #38
    Senior Member Senseye's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,064
    I agree with your sentiment, good looking graphics are a nice bonus, but they don't make or break a game. A good game will still be good with the graphics at medium settings, and a lousy game will still be lousy with beautiful graphics all running at max.

  9. #39
    Meae Musae Servus Hephaestus's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,388
    INTPx Award Winner
    Agreed. I'd add that the difference between medium and ultra often isn't that much. Bringing a system to it's knees is often the difference between good shadows and blobby shadows, or lighting things you only notice for the first few minutes because your judging the graphics at that moment. Meanwhile, the skybox is obviously a skybox, the textures, while detailed are still clearly just wrapped on a simpler geometric form--and with foliage, it's often just placed in a transparent pane.

    Then there's the odd question of what makes for good graphics. Talk to chumps and they'll bitch and moan about cell-shading and other stylistic or worse--painterly approaches to graphics, insisting that "better graphics" means "more photorealistic".

    Not this little black duck, no sirree. I like painterly. I thought the watercolour effect in Valkyria Chronicles was beautiful. I like good animation with squash and deform. I like fluidity in motion--and good contrasting colours (Halo is an excellent example of how to screw this up--I'm not color blind but their palettes, especially on the alien ships, is muddy shit). Bright/dark, as long as the colours make sense for the intended mood, I'm in. Some of the best platformers on the NES used tilesets that were mostly black, and they worked magnificently. While I agree that photorealism can be stunning, I'm much more enthralled by well done artsy styles and honestly prefer my games to look as much like interactive cartoons or comics come to life. I find photorealism in gaming can be offputting, partly because it makes the weaknesses so much more apparent because once someone tries to make something look like reality, you notice more the things that aren't even close to reality, like glass walls and curiously un-massy physics where everything object behaves like an empty cereal box, whether it's an empty cereal box or cinderblock.

    And yet--even knowing this, I still succumb to biases about a game based on how it looks, even though I know I've found better gameplay from slightly goofy graphics than I've found from stunning graphics.

    I've sunk about a hundred hours into an ASCII rogue-like based on Doom because the gameplay was fantastic. Meanwhile I played through Vanquish once, and was done with it.
    Most of time, when people ask why something terrible happened, they don't realize they are looking for someone to blame.

    --Meditations on Uncertainty Vol ξ(x)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •