Jump to content

joenewbie

Members
  • Posts

    714
  • Joined

Reputation

10 Good

1 Follower

Personal Information

  • Location
    Las Vegas
  • Interests
    As far as interest, I charge the standard vig.
  1. I upgraded to Win10 Pro and have not looked back, 8 was a disaster, 8.1 was acceptable, 10 is great. Just a couple of finicky things, like auto-update, but those things can be circumvented. Search the net there are plenty of optimizing 10, videos and articles to choose from. Runs really smooth.
  2. I have a GTX 970, yes it's fast up till 3.5 but most games aren't hitting that cap very easily at the moment, only if I try to run GTA V or something like that with maxed out everything do I hit a cap. I plan on upgrading my GPU when Nvidia drops it's new cards in 2016. Also, just upgraded from an old SSD a Crucial M4 with 256gb, to a 500gb 850 EVO.
  3. If you completely log out of the game and come back does it fix itself? I'm trying to pin down what fixed it for me, because after a while it just worked, but I did keep running missions and upping the skill in that time as well. So I don't know if it was logging out and returning a few times that fixed it, or having 20 or more points above the stated requirement for the mission that triggered it to actually work.
  4. SWTOR runs perfectly fine on my side, occasionally there might be network issues that cause lag and such, or something on the server side, but I run SWTOR just fine and dandy. The problem with SWTOR is they're limited in what they can do because it's a 32-bit program which limits them to using only 4gb's of memory or is it 2? In any case most gaming PC's run 8gb, I have 32gb's and I think I can actually create a ramdrive and run it from that with zero load times, but I have an SSD so my load times aren't an issue in the first place. The price of SSD has come down so much I recommend it to anyone, but especially if you're having issues, 80 bucks will get you a 240-256gb SSD. I hope there is a transition plan in place for SWTOR though which will open up their capabilities but not in a whole new game, but rather where we can keep our toons/account and maybe buy a new game platform on which we could play them and continue our story. Maybe a graphics upgrade to go along with that, trick would be to keep old textures and such available for people on lower end systems as well. That's the problem with MMO's they're a long term thing rather than a yearly new release. Yes expansions, but I'm talking about the backbone on which it's based. SWTOR is running into the same territory as a lot of MMO's, hardware outruns MMO's software. Would be nice to see DX12 and backwards compatibility upgrades for a lot of games, but that's not happening.
  5. While that's true, it doesn't apply if they split themselves into two divisions first. One CPU one GPU, they could theoretically then sell off the GPU division and focus the company on the APU market and actually turn a profit by selling those Xbone/PS4 chips for the next gen. They could specialize in making the best chips for consoles in the world, they already have the market, they'd just need to up their prices to MS/Sony to a point where they're turning actual profit. At which point Intel, which can afford to do so, could undercut them at a loss of their own books just to hurt AMD. AMD would just have to hope the console makers stick with the chip that brought them to the dance, so to speak. No solution is simple unfortunately, so it will either be status quo or total upheaval.
  6. Best move for AMD? Either split into two divisions GPU and CPU, because how many CEO's they've had in the last 8 years isn't helping because each new CEO shifted the company's focus, or someone to come along and buy out either CPU or GPU rather than the whole pie. It would let AMD focus on one or the other and would let a new company without the history of AMD's corporate musical chairs issues focus on whichever division they'd work on. AMD in an attempt to grab the APU market, ie, the chips you find in every console gaming system out there, actually sold those chips at a loss just to dominate the market in the hopes it would up their brand image across the board. By doing this, they're making chips focus on integrated graphics rather than just a good straight up chip. It's why they lag behind Intel, because although Intel has integrated graphics, it's not what their brand is known for, unlike AMD. So AMD is stuck in this place as being known as the economical company for lower budget systems, they're cutting out the high end market entirely because people with the money to buy Intel and Nvidia products, do so. It's like the old expression, "Jack of all trades, master of none." They need to focus, either GPU or CPU, or at least split the company that way you can have a dedicated CEO for each company. If they don't do something radical like that, yes, Intel might be bailing AMD out at some point.
  7. I went from Ivy to Devil's, so for you to go from Sandy to Skylake, that's MASSIVE, you got some long long life out of that chip. Kudos.
  8. That depends on your start point, for Sandy Bridge, yes, but I'm Devil's Canyon, not so worth the upgrade. Like I say, your needs determine if it's worth it. Sandy Bridge, absolutely worth the jump to Skylake, even Ivy Bridge, but nothing newer than that in my opinion because the performance upgrade vs dollars starts narrowing big time after Ivy.
  9. I do video rendering, which is the only reason I upgraded from an i5 in the first place. DDR4 would make that better, but DDR3 is so cheap I was able to go to 32gb pretty cheaply. And yes, I have an i7-4970k, it's on air so I don't overclock it hard, but if I choose to I'll go to an AIO wc solution and crank it to 4.7, currently it's 4.5 but that's with Noctua.
  10. Yeah, I'm not sold on Skylake either, and didn't want to jump to DDR4 quite yet. Like I said about upgrading, don't do so unless you have to, my chip/mobo should last me at least another couple years before I even consider upgrading it. GPU's on the other hand have a shorter shelf life. For CPU I'm waiting for the 10nm chip that will come sometime in 2017, it's a bigger change than what Skylake offers.
  11. There is no absolute right or wrong answer to any of this, like I said before AMD makes great products too. I'm not a fanboy, but for my application and what I would do, is Intel/Nvidia and I have my own reasons for doing so, as I've laid out in my post. Heat/power consumption is an issue, especially for people who live in a hot climate in August. Tom's Hardware has great lists and they've recently updated them for November, of the best CPU's/GPU's. Best for anyone to take a look at their opinions and reasoning and decide for yourself. If dollars were my major concern rather than heat/power, I'd go AMD, but it's secondary as I can get a used Intel CPU at a reasonable price, especially right after a new one comes out. I know overclockers who when a new chip comes out will buy 10 CPU's in one shot, test them all, keep the best overclocker because it is a silicon lottery, then sell some of the other 9 used. GPU's that's less true, but, people still tend to sell their last gen when the next gen comes out for those and used parts are a reasonable option for penny pinching.
  12. Everything comes down to budget. It's why I like building a PC myself though, because after the initial investment, you save money over time with modular upgrades. If it were me I'd keep the 770, nothing wrong with it, but you might be getting issues with the CPU, yes AMD always has more cores than Intel, but the cores are better on Intel. That's where I'd focus attention. Unfortunately that also means a mobo upgrade as well. I'm on an i7-4790k with a Asus Z97-A board. Dollars to donuts it's a great investment, but it depends on what you're playing too. SWTOR doesn't need that kind of horsepower, an i5 is fine, and buying new I would also recommend Skylake and DDR4 memory, but that does up the price tag. If not a i5-4690k will save you on memory and costs about 100 less than the i7 counterpart. It's 4 great cores but no hyper-threading, that's the trade off. A quality Z97 board will let you upgrade to i7 later as well. But I would get into the i5 first, then consider the GPU later because in 2016 GeForce will be coming out with their new ones, then go back and reevaluate CPU but only if you think you need more ooomph. Even if you don't want to buy the new GPU when it comes out in 2016, it might be worth waiting for it to drop because people will be selling their last gen GPU's used and you can pick up a great bargain like that. I know I'll be selling my 970 used at that time when I upgrade. Rule of thumb I have for any upgrades, A. don't do it unless you must, B. sell the used gear, C. always upgrade UPWARDS, in other words not laterally. I went from a GTX 660 to a GTX 970, the 70 being the next higher tier of card. In 2016 when the new one drops I'll be into a "980 class" GPU, whatever number they assign to it that's what I'm upgrading to unless there is some motive at that time not to, perhaps I'll just do a monitor upgrade instead, go from a 24" to a 27", something like that. Why I like GeForce/team green for GPU's? It costs a bit more up front, but is very efficient in it's power and heat, and I live in Vegas, so heat is always an issue. But AMD makes great products too, I wish they'd step up their game when it comes to CPU's as well to force Intel to develop faster/cheaper. Just wanted to share my thoughts as I've thought on this topic a lot over the last few years and let my OCD run wild on it. EDIT: Also I notice people talking big about how many cores AMD has, here's the thing, games don't require that many cores to run, multi-core/hyperthreading is needed for A. Multi-tasking and B. more importantly, video rendering, it's in those programs where the threads get occupied. PC games, especially SWTOR on a 32-bit structure, gets more benefit from faster cores rather than more of them.
  13. First try, 1 in 5 chance, 20%, second try, also 1 in 5 chance, 20%... point being it doesn't go up based on how many previous attempts you've made.
  14. There's an expression in Roulette which applies here, "the ball has no memory" You have 38 numbers 0 and 00 and 1-36, just because you spun and got 20 on the last roll doesn't mean you won't also roll 20 again, because, the ball has no memory. So too if 31 hasn't been hit in the last 500 spins, it's an outlier perhaps, but not a big deal, because of course, the ball has no memory... 31 hasn't hit in 500 spins, that doesn't mean it's "Due" to hit.
  15. But you have to admit 15+ tries is a bit on the high side of the RNG, and I did fall on the bad side of that more often than I could count. In fact I can remember only a few occasions where I got it in 3 or less, not true anymore though since the change. I've been on the very good side of the RNG-Gods to be sure.
×
×
  • Create New...