Not really, if you don't want Lightboost/Strobing, just 144Hz then it's hard to beat at that price.
Account Details | |
---|---|
SteamID64 | 76561198042353207 |
SteamID3 | [U:1:82087479] |
SteamID32 | STEAM_0:1:41043739 |
Country | Germany |
Signed Up | December 16, 2012 |
Last Posted | April 26, 2024 at 5:56 AM |
Posts | 3425 (0.8 per day) |
Game Settings | |
---|---|
In-game Sensitivity | |
Windows Sensitivity | |
Raw Input | |
DPI |
|
Resolution |
|
Refresh Rate |
Hardware Peripherals | |
---|---|
Mouse | |
Keyboard | |
Mousepad | |
Headphones | |
Monitor |
#8
Intel said they'll support it soon as well. Nvidia does technically support it, they are just blocking it in the drivers because they want you to buy G-Sync monitors since they get some nice profit from that.
About the monitor: Some gamma problems (glorious TN panel), otherwise good.
I don't know of any.
This one is about FreeSync and doesn't support Lightboost iirc whereas BenQ is very much about Lightboost/Strobing.
The cheapest BenQ monitor with FreeSync is the XL2730Z for 500$ and that's a 27" 1440p monitor.
Only the XL2411Z got a similar price and then it's about whether you want Lightboost/Strobing or FreeSync before the colours factor into it. If you want neither then there's cheaper options.
#1710
SEK are fine, I always try to use the shops that it'll actually be bought from to get the most accurate prices.
Ok, quick explanation why overclocking exists. You know that there's CPUs which are identical except for clockrates. That's because not every chip can handle the highest clockrates. However that also means if the fastet CPU Intel sells runs at 4.0 GHz then maybe only 20% actually max out at 4.0 GHz. Another 20% each could do 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 respectively. So people try and run their CPUs at that speed, see if it crashes and if not, hey free performance.
The other thing is at a certain frequency and voltage a CPU will consume a certain amount of power. Most of the time if you want higher frequencies you need higher voltages as well and power consumption goes through the roof. Since Intel wants to sell the CPU with 95W that's useless to them. But if you don't care about that, you can just get a better cooler, use 20% higher voltages to run it at 20% higher clockrates. Sure it might use 160W, but if you don't care it's almost free performance again.
Now some reasons why you shouldn't do it:
- It's a lot of effort. Basically you try a setting, run a stress test for 30-60 minutes, see if it crashes and then repeat with another setting. It can take days to get a good overclock.
- Intel didn't like it one bit so now they are locking all CPUs except the K versions which are identical to the non-K version of the same number, just overclockable, without a cooler and more expensive. They'll also only let you overclock with the most expensive chipset, so motherboards are more expensive too. Couple that with the fact that the CPUs don't overclock nearly as high as they used to and you're paying 100$ more for maybe 10-15% more performance.
- The most important reason is that you want to play on Ultra. That means you'll be limited by the GPU 99% of the time, not the CPU. So all that extra performance would just be money and effort for nothing. TF2 is a bit weird in that regard, but for new games it's GPU all the way.
Well that was a bit longer than expected, but trust me, it's the short version.
So that's why you shouldn't get an i7-6700K. The other thing is that the only difference between an i7 and an i5 is that the i7 can run 2 threads on each core basically at the same time. Now that's nice if you have a lot of threads that need to do work (streaming, rendering, that sort of stuff), but most games only use 3 or 4. So an i5 with it's 4 cores will get you exactly the same performance, at 2/3 of the price.
Now some more questions:
- When are you going to build it?
- Could you link me a shop or price comparision site?
For the monitor:
- Lightboost yes/no?
- G-Sync/FreeSync yes/no?
- IPS yes/no?
- Size? 24" or 27"?
I'm assuming you're fine with 1080p since barcaphillip mentioned that, but just to make sure:
- Resolution? 1080p or 1440p?
If you don't know what Lightboost, G-Sync, FreeSync or IPS are I can give you a short explanation or you can just google them.
#32
That's you personal preference.
Two problems with that:
1. Failure rates for RAM are <2% average, even the worst offenders don't break 5%. So 5$ for better warranty and statistically you're guaranteed to make a loss, unless you're buying RAM for >100$.
2. Because the failure rates are so low everyone and their mother offers a lifetime warranty on RAM. Kingston and Corsair do, as you probably know, but so do Crucial, G.Skill, Mushkin and even fucking Team Group.
Also don't try to figure out which DRAM is used on what model. Even Kingston switches the memory whenever they feel like it on consumer models. So same model number, different memory. Unless you get the shop to tell you the serial number you're out of luck.
Enterprise is different, for compatibility reasons (fucking RDIMMS).
#33
See above. Lifetime means lifetime. And HyperX means you're paying for fancy heatspreaders. Even if you want Kingston, if you can find "ValueRAM" with the same specs, it will be cheaper, since they're the same without heatspreaders.
I'm mostly mad about the "b15m msi motherboard" because someone will look for that, not find it and just get the most expensive MSI mobo they can find. Don't laugh, I've seen it happen.
Well the whole "brands don't matter" still applies though. I mean you've got to get some RAM.
As you already know a non-overclocked i5 won't really help, +5% best case for the 6600 over the 6320, so it's 6600K or nothing. The problem is that 6600K + Z170 mobo (otherwise no overclocking) + RAM will already use up all of your budget and then you still need a cooler because the 6600K doesn't come with one. Maybe you can squeeze a low end cooler in the budget but then you end up not being able to overclock much. Even factoring in the mobo and RAM from the top of my head I'd say it'll be 50% higher cost for 10% higher performance.
I really don't understand. I tried to answer your question about brands comprehensively but you consider that passive agressive and have to "end it" by claiming it doesn't matter anymore.
#25
So you read that but insist on getting at least an i5 so you can complain about the price?
Then we're back to "I have no words.".
So you know the 6500 isn't worth it, the 6600 for similar reasons.
6600K depends on how high you overclock it. Any i3 will definitely have the better price to performance ratio.
HashtagBasedGive me information on how, and why the brands are "terrible"
HashtagBasedAs of now, I am interested in that RAM anymore. So I'm not sure why it matters.
?
You asked a question, I answered it. Now you claim it doesn't matter anymore.
Should I just stop answering questions?
#26
Exactly.
If you actually read what I wrote it might help you understand.
SetsulYou're recommending RAM by brand which is already terrible
Recommending RAM by brand just makes no sense.
2400 MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM from brand X will perform exactly the same as 2400 MHz CL15 DDR4 RAM from brand Y.
There is no reason not to get whichever is cheapest.
In fact both might have been manufactured by DRAM manufacturer Z.
Example: While for example Kingston does put the DRAM on the PCB themselves, the actual DRAM is still manufactured by SK Hynix, Micron or various other companies that you've never heard of. Some brands like Transcend just rebrand and do no actual work besided sticking a label with their name on the DIMM and packaging it for retail.
You complained about Intel CPUs being twice as expensive and after you've been shown a CPU that's cheaper and faster than an FX-8350 you immediately pick a CPU that is literally twice as expensive.
Price can't simultaneously matter and not matter to you.
I have not posted in this thread before so I'm not sure what claims you remember that I could contradict.
I am also not sure how "I have no words" could contradict anything.
HashtagBasedWhat I'm looking at is less than half the price of an intel processor.
HashtagBasedWhat would be the performance difference if I got an i5 6600k instead of i3 6100?
I have no words.
HashtagBasedSuppose I get an i3-6100. Would it improve my frames more than the AMD and the processor I already have?
That is what everyone has been trying to tell you.
HashtagBasedShould I get the same motherboard as I was planning to?
No. AMD uses different sockets than Intel so the CPU wouldn't fit.
Budget?
Overclocking yes/no?
#11
The FX-8350 has always been terrible for games now it's 4 years old and terrible for everything.
How would Zen make the 8350 any faster?
#12
You're recommending RAM by brand which is already terrible but then you're recommending mobos by brand instead of model which is retarded and the only hint you're providing is the chipset which you somehow manage to fuck up with either a typo or just misinformation.
EDIT:
#1701
Talked to him on steam, waiting for more details on case and PSU.
#1705
What kind of RMA is that?
#1706
I had to take a 3 day vacation to get over it.
Oh wait, I'm still not over it.
Either way if you don't have backups by now you're going to have a bad time.
#1707
I'd recommend not getting a 6700K and 1060.
Overclocking yes/no?
How many fps on Ultra 1080p in which games? Any GPU will run them, but 5 fps is probably not enough.
#1708
Seems like he got properly ripped off.
Discrete GPU + APU? Makes no sense.
700W PSU also makes no sense, so it's either a shitty 350W PSU sold as 700W PSU or just complete bullshit to rip people off.
No idea about the case so I'll assume it's one of those terrible prebuilt cases that require a blood sacrifice just to swap an HDD.
In summary:
To get an i5-6500 he'll have to replace:
CPU (obviously)
RAM
mobo
To replace the GPU he'll have to replace the GPU obviously.
The PSU is probably a fire hazard.
That leaves the case and HDD which I assume are both utter garbage, going by the rest of the prebuilt.
Why not just sell/return the whole thing? There's really nothing worth saving.
I mean he'll spent more than the whole thing is worth and replace more parts than he'll keep. That's not really an upgrade anymore.
#19
Not sure how high you can go before the CPU becomes the limiting factor but a new GPU would definitely mean some improvement.
However your current GPU is just extremely slow by today's standards. That's actually a good thing, because a 50-100$ used GPU would already be a huge upgrade. If you still want more fps after that you can still get a new CPU (+ mobo).
#20
2 cores + GPU driver. It's complicated. Assume about 1.7 cores of actual work, so ~40% on a quad core. He's not too far from that but he should be able to get 30-40% more fps.
If the GPU hits >90% then that means drops, so I'd adress that first.
#33
Well that's an option.
One last guess: In the power options, try setting t "Hard hisk -> turn off hard disk after" to 0 minutes.
#34
TPU = TechPowerUp, the website that listed 8.10 beta 2 as latest version.
Fucking TPU.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/the-throttlestop-guide.531329/
https://www.sendspace.com/file/c5qet1
Here we go.