Jump to content
Banner by ~ Ice Princess Silky

Azure Envy

User
  • Posts

    1,360
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Azure Envy

  1. On 9/14/2018 at 12:04 AM, Windseeker said:

    Okay, so, my local library retired their Dell Optiplex 780 mini towers and I got one for 20 bucks. It has everything short of a hard drive, has 3.5 gigabytes of memory, a solid Core 2 Duo CPU, and a power supply of 225 watts.

    I want to turn this thing into a budget gaming computer for my sister as part of her birthday present, but between car repairs and school payments, money is kinda tight. I know the PSU is going to require replacement, but can a PCIe 3.0 video card operate normally within a PCIe 2.0 slot (both x16 size)?

    I heard that it does, but I want to be aware of any bizarre side effects. 

    Yes, PCIe 3.0 is backwards compatible with 2.0.

  2. 7 hours ago, LegsKolles said:

    I also plan to get a higher refresh monitor at some point. While the 1080 is capable of getting to the 120Hz I'm aiming for, it still depends on what is going on in-game, so I will need more GPU performance to do that. At the very least, I could get a 1080Ti.

    That would be perfect if I could find a deal on a 1080Ti. Hitting those high refresh rates is tough even with what I got.

    Shame I can't pick up an tensor/RT board and drop it in alongside. $800/1200 is steep af but for half that I might go in on RT since I already have a GPU.

    Then again, I always wanted one of those PhysX boards way back when. Fun times.

  3. 2 minutes ago, Celli said:

    Pre-release benchmarks are apparently only 10% increase over the 10 series, And really the only thing noteworthy about Turing is Ray tracing, which won't be supported by more than 50 games, and even then you'd need two RTX 2080 Tis to hope for 1080p 60fps.

    Damn, that sucks :c

    I'm not surprised in the least. If RT really is the future -- it does looks awesome in action, so I hope it turns out to be more than just a curiosity. Given NVIDIA's push, it might be?

    That said, it's still a bit early for that. For $1200, dropping below 60fps at only 1080p is pretty weak. That's the early adopter tax along with the "our only competition is Pascal" tax.

    • Brohoof 1
  4. 5 hours ago, Celli said:

    I just wanna say for anyone with pascal, don't bother with the 20 series, it is not worth the upgrade.

    Without apples-to-apples benchmarks, we don't know for sure... but you're probably right.

    Missed out on that $300 GTX 1080 today... sold out before I could even get to the link. :(

    • Brohoof 1
  5. 13 hours ago, Celli said:

    You don't need a strap, when you're building it you can touch the inside of the case to let off static, and then put parts in. Also, everything is labelled and it's impossible to put things in the wrong spot. Just have patience and it's really not hard.

    Also, gaming laptops may be versatile it comes at the cost of longevity. In 4 or 5 years you'll need to spend a grand on another one to be able to play the newest games. With a desktop you just upgrade what you need. 

    4 to 5 years is a pretty good run imo. 20 years ago, you'd be upgrading your desktop every other year just to keep up. In 4-5 years I'd have gone through two graphics cards anyway so as far as a laptop that lasts that long is concerned, a grand every 5 ain't so bad for something you can carry around.

  6. I'd argue that Comcast is already doing a fine job of fucking us over to the fullest extent allowable by law especially so when there isn't any viable competition in the area.

    Cutting regulation to telecom would only strengthen that capability. They'll even save money not having to hire a social media team to explain why they're so committed to their idea of an "open internet" since it wouldn't even need to be. Nice!

     

    • Brohoof 3
  7. Just now, Mirage said:

    Nothing is free. The 'internet' requires trillions of dollars of infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of career professionals to maintain. The money has to come from somewhere, and if you force only certain people to pay, like businesses, you're still paying for the internet, but using a rather unfair tactic do to so. 

    Free as with no restriction, not necessarily for zero price.

    • Brohoof 4
  8. 32 minutes ago, Denim&Venom said:

    The internet is not supposed to be free. The internet is not supposed to be fair. there are going to be winners and losers.

    It's nice that we're able to have an open discussion about this on MLPF. That I don't have to pay for a social media package to even get here. That I can say what I want here without and oppressive government firewall blocking/monitoring every word I type.

    The internet is supposed to be free, open and accessible to everyone. It's an opinion that I share with the inventor of the WWW:
    https://www.fordfoundation.org/ideas/equals-change-blog/posts/the-web-belongs-to-all-of-us-qa-with-the-web-s-inventor-sir-tim-berners-lee/

    As he describes in the interview, the key barrier keeping people off-line is the cost. So we need to do something about that.. so maybe we need to think outside the box. Maybe this isn't the best or only answer, but there are people out there doing something about it. https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/4/15539934/spacex-satellite-internet-launch-2019

    Interesting article on arguments against it: https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/19/these-are-the-arguments-against-net-neutrality-and-why-theyre-wrong/

    • Brohoof 2
  9. On 12/2/2017 at 5:32 AM, Cloggedone said:

    Unpopular opinion, but I think that not much will change without NN.

    I know there's been a few instances where companies were caught blocking things, but the FCC has either fined or ordered them to stop, all without NN. One ISP in North Carolina was ordered to pay $15,000 by the FCC for blocking Vonage, and when Comcast blocked the BitTorrent protocol, the FCC ordered them to stop as well. Plus, many experts, such as Marc Andreessen (the creator of Netscape), Mark Cuban (multi-millionaire and owner of the Dallas Mavericks, with Internet start-ups in his history), and Peter Thiel (creator of PayPal and an investor in Facebook) have all stated that NN would extremely limit investment in broadband networks, since if they cannot charge Netflix or some other company for bandwidth as NN says, the ISP cannot get a return on all that fiber they've been installing in cities (as many ISPs have been doing).

    As for the "paid lanes"? That seems like a far stretch, and with many ISPs converting their existing bandwidth to fiber optic, they should be able to handle that traffic. Plus, you know how cell providers are starting to not charge for data on streaming services (such as T-Mobile not charging for data on Spotify, and AT&T not charging your data on DirecTV NOW)? Not allowed on NN. People love this policy, and a lot of people would hate to see it go.

    Of course they can handle the traffic. It was never about capacity. Data caps and bandwidth restrictions aren't about relieving congestion. The cost of delivering broadband services has been decreasing for a long time.

    AT&T not charging for DirecTV data? DirecTV is an AT&T subsidiary. They're more than happy to bundle TV with your Internet and not charge you extra, nothing above and beyond what they're already charging you for anyway. AT&T's acquisition of DirecTV marked the point at which they decided to quit offering discounts on plans in my area. Do I have another choice? Sure, Comcast. But in many other areas, even that's not an option. You get what you get.

    • Brohoof 2
  10. I'm not a pro, I don't work in the industry, but my 2c is that it has to do with cost. Even if it isn't double, even if it's only 15-20% more -- for your average Hollywood blockbuster that's still a significant cost increase.

    That and we're all so used to seeing 24 in theaters and higher framerates for things like sitcoms. At least, that's what I felt when watching Terminator 2 on a 240Hz TV. There were sections (heavy on CGI) that looked like a cheap home movie. Granted, T2 is pretty ancient but I imagine it's gonna take more effort to make convincing CG effects at 60 and not have it look like a sitcom.

    • Brohoof 1
  11. For me... it was... a lot. Too much TV? Nah... not enough. :grin:

    Short list: Alvin and the Chipmunks, Animaniacs, Batman: The Animated Series, Beetlejuice, Captain Planet, Chip n Dale Rescue Rangers, TMNT, Darkwing Duck, David the Gnome, Dexter's Lab, Doug, Goof Troop, Gummi Bears, Heathcliff, Inspector Gadget, Johnny Bravo, The Real Adventures of Jonny Quest, Muppet Babies, Rocko's Modern Life, Rugrats, Scooby Doo, Sonic the Hedgehog (SatAM/AoStH), Swat Kats, Talespin, Ren & Stimpy, Powerpuff Girls, Tiny Toon Adventures

    I'm sure there a few examples in there from the 80s, but I watched re-runs in the 90s so good enough for me!

  12. It's definitely quicker to load and feels snappier all around. That said, the limited API support killed off one of my must have add-ons so I'm still on 56. Considering a switch to ESR or one of the FF forks that retain support for add-ons.

×
×
  • Create New...