Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
Or are you that kind of a player that says "no xp waste!"?
Coming from someone who's just done this..
Not really much point in building a PC now, you'll have to wait over a year for Ashes, so unless you need to immediately upgrade for current games, don't bother building one until it's a few weeks from release, when all the current released stuff is cheaper..
Atleast if you build it then, it'll be cheaper and if you aren't conceded about prices, then jist buy top of the line stuff thats released later on closer to the release.
Living the dream babeeeh!
if it's alright, I will be messaging you three with some questions later on.
Thanks a ton again!
Best,
Bal
in terms of overall value performance per dollar the AMD R7 1700 is incredible, 8core 16thread for the same price as the 4core 8thread non K 7700. that can still overclock on the cheaper B350 chip set.
With bios and driver updates the Ryzen line has been significantly closing the performance leads initially held by Intel Skylake.
the 7700k as mentioned is pretty much a 1 trick high refresh rate pony in terms of performance its far from a bad CPU but its starting to tap out and stutter in multi threaded applications. and in comparison to the competition is overpriced.
Intel has even suggested when the issue was found regarding that the 7700k was thermal spiking that users should not overclock it.....
Intel might have the best* gaming CPU with high IPC but they still use bird poop for thermal interface material between the die and the ihs while voiding warranty by de-lidding.
Intel supports and funds Feminist Frequency...just sayin.
It's shifty practices as such that make me want to sell my 6700k and switch to AMD.
That and my first PC build was an AMD Athlon 64 x2 4200+ on socket 939, so i am a bit fuzzy to AMD but I am not a fanboy.
The average user that is watching YouTube, checking email, and playing video games have no need for an overpowered machine that "stutters" when doing massive benchmarks. Quad core have their uses. Just as 8 cores has its uses. Intel has had 6c/12t and 8c/16t cpu's for years. The vast majority of people do not need 8 cores. They may would use it 2% of the time, while the rest of the 98% it will sit utterly useless. People have been saying well in the future....for years on end. They'll continue to say that because it's what lets them sleep at night. It will be YEARS upon years before anything of the sort is needed. Even then, quad cores will be needed as well.
If you want something to do video rendering or software development and whatnot that the average everyday user don't utilize then the ryzen would probably be good.
Both do their jobs well. I would hardly call intel a one trick pony on that note though
I have an Intel system now and my last 3 builds were Intel. But i am done with their shenanigans and will switch to AMD until intel stops being a dick.
But if money is an object and the consumer is value concerned then AMD ryzen is hard not to recommend.
Intel killed thier own i3 with the g4560 at the low end.
Ryzen made the i5 obsolete at price to performance overall. not probably Hands down best value. the R5 1600 is the cpu of the year.
Multi tasking is becoming the norm...social media, streaming, gaming. working.
Multi threaded applications are becoming the norm.
High refresh gaming seems to be the only reason why gamers* suggest the 7700k /the 1 trick. can the i7 do other stuff yes of course, there are reports of stuttering in games while multi tasking.
for the 10-20% peak frame output you gain with the i7 you can lose 30-40% overall productivity compared with the 1700. whether that disparity is worth the price is up to the consumer.
That'll cost us a pretty penny or two, however!
And @SaeyoPrayers, I commiserate, lol. When @Possum and I met, I gamed on lappies. Now, I'm getting spoiled to the benefits of being on a box again!
I'll begin with the i3, they removed it from sale because no one was buying it, with the introduction of the i9 they needed to keep things simple. Maybe in 2 years time they will pull the i5 who knows whats going to happen in 2 years.
Multi tasking was a feature on processors from the 80386 up. Multi tasking means execute more than one program or task simultaneously. As you can see multi tasking was around 40 years ago.
Multi threaded applications are becoming the norm, yes, but for certain applications. Below is a snippet I found which explains it.
Writing multi-threaded code is often harder as you may have to invest time in creating thread management logic.
Some examples
High refresh gaming this refers to refresh rate of your monitor. This means either buying a 120Hz or 144Hz computer monitor. These displays can handle up to 120 frames per second and the result is a lot more smoother gameplay. This is where having a suitable video card to suit the monitor comes in handy. Suggesting having a 7700k is a mute point.
no one was buying the i3 because intel offered a 2core 4thread pentium in the g4560 at 1/2 the price of the i3.
Current and future games are moving towards mandatory 4 thread minimums and full utilization of multi-thread CPUs moving forward.
I stated previously that the GPU should be paired with the appropriate monitor.
the i7 is being promoted by a vocal gamer* minority as usual , specifically towards higher peak frame rates though .1% minimums are more or less them same. So in conjunction with a 120hz+ monitor and suitable graphics card the i7 is reasonable, for that user base.
Other game genres love more cores and threads on the CPU. MMOs and online multiplayer games especially.
I am value-centric and care more for consistent minimum framerates in my gaming experience.
An educated consumer cannot ignore how much of a market shake up AMD delivered with Ryzen and soon to be Threadripper. Which can be seen by AMDs current growth in adoption and market share.
There is new competition to the segment and there are real value options again.
Why would one bother with an 120Hz when a 144Hz is becoming the standard.
Which MMO's is setup to use Multi cores and Multi Threads can you name some. The most I have seen is 2 or 3 cores being used and some use the CPU only and do not bother with the GPU.
Also framerates is not be all and end all. You can say I get 100FPS but what do you get in a crowded room with 20 other players in it. Do you get like 10 FPS.
I agree again...
120hz (+) <-plus
I want 4k at constant 60hz for my personal preference.
in GW2 during or any heavy WvW more than 50players conflict every core and thread though not optimised made a significant performance increase making the difference between a slide show and something remotely playable.
Multi threaded games are an eventuality.
More people are streaming or watching content/multi tasking while gaming.
I remember when 2 core cpus were considered stupid not so long ago.
Now 4 core was the recommended minimum until AMD dropped Ryzen and killed the i5.
PNY's GeForce GTX 1080 Ti OC XLR8 Gaming card is exactly why you should wait until Ashes is released.
The card is currently marked down to $634 on Dell's website. That makes it cheaper than Nvidia's reference Founders Edition variant (which was $1,299 when I purchased it), and is about $100 less than PNY's MSRP ($735).
PNY's card features a factory overclock—it comes out of the box running with a 1,531MHz base clock and 1,645MHz boost clock, up from Nvidia's reference 1,480MHz and 1,582MHz base and boost clockspeeds, respectively.
Don't say that I didn't warn you, you will get better for cheaper if you wait.
going to wait a little bit.
Best,
Bal
But if you're getting a laptop, it won't be anywhere near as upgradable as a PC. When you do buy one, make sure you are able to upgrade the RAM.
When buying the laptop, check for the usual stuff.
I like HP's, Asus and Dell. Don't bother with Alienware, it's always over priced for the brandname.
CPU's
I like intels, never had issues with them. Any i7's should be fine and decent price range. 3-3.5GHz is about what you should be looking at, will run most games fine. (If you want stupidly good processor, they have i9's out now)
But if you're an AMD man, go AMD 3-3.5GHz.
GPU's
I'm a Nvidia man, got a GTX 1080 Ti, but mines for custom built PC.
Most laptops will come with built in graphics cards that aren't interchangeable. So make sure they have something decent, (AMD, Nvidia 10-series)
Make sure you buy the appropriate fitting RAM cards too if you want to max them out.. 16GB should be more than fine for today's stuff and easily affordable. Won't really need to max to 32GB..
id wait till release is closer to worry about it
I've got a GTX 1080 Ti aswell, but need (want) some water cooling and don't know what to get. What do you have for your system? N does the water cooling system prevent any damage from OC'ing a GTX 1080 Ti?
If something comes along that even on low settings causes my computer to cough-- I may actually look into it. Till then, I'm not to worried.
A decent 2 block custom loop with 240 rad and d5 pump + bits won't see much change from $500 or so.
IMO an AIO cooler is overpriced and less reliable than a respectable air cooler with temperature ranges comparable to performance and price effective. I would only consider an AIO if case air flow was terrible or unaccommodating or if you swap components often.
Understand that if you factor in the cost of added cooling/hardware overclock potential, 9 times out of 10 you would be better off investing in better/more hardware rather than added cooling.
Even with the added headroom for max overclock silicon typically has a hard wall before thermal ceiling is achieved.
So it comes down to 3 main factors if considering a liquid cooled system. Cooling overhead, noise reduction and looks. the first 2 can be done admirably with conventional air cooling.
Aesthetics are a subjective matter.
thoguh I feel the market and industry is pushing for looks above all else.
I am a tinkerer so i enjoy the hobby of custom cooling, but it really isn't worth it all things considered...unless,
Now i will explain the number 1 forgotten reason why liquid cooling should actually be an option worth considering.
It is the ability to radiate/dissipate heat away from the source in another location.
I have a 560 radiator under my pc room (in the basement/crawlspace) with input and out tubes going through my floor. The majority of thermal dissipation happens externally. Keeping my PC and personally environment cooler, because i am not cycling heat and hot boxing. And due to the oversized radiator my loop actually exchanges heat bringing in cooler liquid than room ambient at idle.
if you want to liquid cool your 1080ti to give more cooling overhead to increasing voltage and push clocks, you can but you will still generate more heat and consume more power with no guarantee that you particular 1080ti even has any more to give. That's the gamble enthusiasts take on the silicon lottery. all while voiding warranty cover.
Yeah true, thanks for the info.
The reason I was considering overclocking my 1080 Ti was cos I heard they have a factory overclocked 1080 Ti with custom cooling out for sale now. Seemed like something worth doing myself and adding in a cooling system than buying the new card.
I am only using it for gaming, so its not struggling or anything.. So I guess I'll just keep it as is, thanks.