technology The Glorious PC master race thread

[-BleachedOne- 233]

Oh goody, a PC gaming thread. =w=

 

I'm just breaking out on the scene after several years with consoles. Still gonna keep my PS3 until I'm able to play Hyperdimension Neptunia and Disgaea on my PC, but other than that, I think I can safely say that I'm trying to get into this. My friends have been recommending me laptops for the longest time, telling me desktops are dying out and aren't worth it anymore. As a builder, I'm definitely in opposition with them, but the price CAN climb rather quickly. Hence why I'm giving into buying a gaming laptop.

 

I've recently decided to focus on getting my hands on an Asus G750JZ-DS71. Anybody here know if it's worth the $2k for this monster? I've been doing my own research, and it seems like it'll run everything I want on it for the time being. I'm not looking for something hellishly overpriced, but this seriously seems like a good deal compared to Alienware's silly bells and whistles. I've also heard good things about Asus's support. The weight isn't an issue; I don't mind carrying a 10lb laptop around if I have the right kind of padding.

 

Just thought I'd pop in here and get an opinion.

[Azure Envy 1,092]

Oh goody, a PC gaming thread. =w=

 

I'm just breaking out on the scene after several years with consoles. Still gonna keep my PS3 until I'm able to play Hyperdimension Neptunia and Disgaea on my PC, but other than that, I think I can safely say that I'm trying to get into this. My friends have been recommending me laptops for the longest time, telling me desktops are dying out and aren't worth it anymore. As a builder, I'm definitely in opposition with them, but the price CAN climb rather quickly. Hence why I'm giving into buying a gaming laptop.

 

I've recently decided to focus on getting my hands on an Asus G750JZ-DS71. Anybody here know if it's worth the $2k for this monster? I've been doing my own research, and it seems like it'll run everything I want on it for the time being. I'm not looking for something hellishly overpriced, but this seriously seems like a good deal compared to Alienware's silly bells and whistles. I've also heard good things about Asus's support. The weight isn't an issue; I don't mind carrying a 10lb laptop around if I have the right kind of padding.

 

Just thought I'd pop in here and get an opinion.

 

If you don't need the portability, build a desktop. You can get far more power for that $2k. Desktops are certainly not dying out.

[long gone 8,929]

and hold back until we have some more budget friendly cards with more than 2GB. Not everyone can spend $500 on a GPU.

GTX 970 has 4GB VRAM standard, but that's a $330 GPU. Not as expensive as a GTX 980 or R9 290X, but still not within a budget-friendly price point.

[Azure Envy 1,092]

GTX 970 has 4GB VRAM standard, but that's a $330 GPU. Not as expensive as a GTX 980 or R9 290X, but still not within a budget-friendly price point.

 

Shadow of Mordor (great game, by the way) recommends 6 GB VRAM for the HD texture pack.

 

What they're trying to say is, "Buy a Titan."

[long gone 8,929]

Shadow of Mordor (great game, by the way) recommends 6 GB VRAM for the HD texture pack.

 

What they're trying to say is, "Buy a Titan."

I somehow doubt that it will use up 6GB VRAM, but yeah, VRAM requirements are getting ridiculous now.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

GTX 970 has 4GB VRAM standard, but that's a $330 GPU. Not as expensive as a GTX 980 or R9 290X, but still not within a budget-friendly price point.

 

That's pretty far out of the budget range of a lot of people though, I think they should wait until we have AT LEAST reached the point of $200 cards with larger amounts. 

 

I'll just get the 2GB one and figure it out somehow. 

[Nuke87654 1,849]

They say they'll be a console command to unlock it, but it was designed for 30FPS and they don't recommend removing it. I might "acquire" because it does look interesting. I can personally live with 48-60FPS on a PC game as long it it's optimized well enough it doesn't feel laggy.

 

A lot of people are saying it sounds like a BS excuse for lazy optimization.

 

I know, but if I have to use a debug command just to force the game to play at higher fps, then it's just damn lazy on the developer to have me force my computer to play the game with such a method. It is an excuse in my eyes as old gen consoles will recieve a port as well so I believe it is a case of Bethesda being lazy and are trying to stave off the pc gamers anger at them after the Watch Dog fiasco with Ubisoft. Edited October 9, 2014 by Nuke87654

[-BleachedOne- 233]

If you don't need the portability, build a desktop. You can get far more power for that $2k. Desktops are certainly not dying out.

 

Amen to that.

 

The portability is HELPFUL, considering I'm a full-time college student and I generally move around a lot. I don't even have a desktop anymore, really. Just this 2012 HP Pavilion g6-2129nr that SOMEHOW is able to run stuff like Garry's Mod, Fallout 3, and Oblivion on decent settings. Has an annoying issue where if you move it around, the graphics chop out, the audio goes to shit, and everything just lags for a short time before it goes back to normal. I USED to have a desktop, and I'm...kind of afraid to put the specs up. XD

 

I built it back in 2005, it's in an old silver and red Aspire X-SUPERALIEN case, sporting an AMD Athlon 64 3800+ Venice processor, and originally had a GeForce 6800GS in it that I somehow blew up with Skyrim. A friend gave me his old 570GTX a few years ago, and I've been dying to test it out, but...the processor is shit to the point where it stutters like crazy, and to be honest I don't even try to boot it up anymore. *shrug*

[Nuke87654 1,849]

I somehow doubt that it will use up 6GB VRAM, but yeah, VRAM requirements are getting ridiculous now.

6gb vram, what the hell is with this crap.

[long gone 8,929]

That's pretty far out of the budget range of a lot of people though, I think they should wait until we have AT LEAST reached the point of $200 cards with larger amounts. 

 

I'll just get the 2GB one and figure it out somehow. 

GTX 960 is rumored to have 3GB VRAM, but no specifics on price have been released yet. Until then, the R9 280X is the only current sub-$300 GPU with more than 2GB VRAM.

[Azure Envy 1,092]

I somehow doubt that it will use up 6GB VRAM, but yeah, VRAM requirements are getting ridiculous now.

 

I'm sure you're right, but it comes a hell of a lot closer than Ghosts did to using up 6 GB of RAM.

 

Amen to that.

 

The portability is HELPFUL, considering I'm a full-time college student and I generally move around a lot. I don't even have a desktop anymore, really. Just this 2012 HP Pavilion g6-2129nr that SOMEHOW is able to run stuff like Garry's Mod, Fallout 3, and Oblivion on decent settings. Has an annoying issue where if you move it around, the graphics chop out, the audio goes to shit, and everything just lags for a short time before it goes back to normal. I USED to have a desktop, and I'm...kind of afraid to put the specs up. XD

 

I built it back in 2005, it's in an old silver and red Aspire X-SUPERALIEN case, sporting an AMD Athlon 64 3800+ Venice processor, and originally had a GeForce 6800GS in it that I somehow blew up with Skyrim. A friend gave me his old 570GTX a few years ago, and I've been dying to test it out, but...the processor is shit to the point where it stutters like crazy, and to be honest I don't even try to boot it up anymore. *shrug*

 

Take the $2k you're willing to spend, put $1.5k towards a nice build and take the $500 and buy yourself a small 13 or 14" laptop to take around campus. You're far more likely to throw that in your bag than a 17.3" behemoth and if someone jacks it, well, it'll suck but at least it wasn't your only (expensive) computer.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

GTX 960 is rumored to have 3GB VRAM, but no specifics on price have been released yet. Until then, the R9 280X is the only current sub-$300 GPU with more than 2GB VRAM.

I can always upgrade in a couple years

 

6gb vram, what the hell is with this crap.

As I said, I think they're pushing 4k quality textures a little to soon. 

I'm sure you're right, but it comes a hell of a lot closer than Ghosts did to using up 6 GB of RAM.

 

 

Take the $2k you're willing to spend, put $1.5k towards a nice build and take the $500 and buy yourself a small 13 or 14" laptop to take around campus. You're far more likely to throw that in your bag than a 17.3" behemoth and if someone jacks it, well, it'll suck but at least it wasn't your only (expensive) computer.

 

Or buy a second-hand laptop and spend even less(might be able to get a decent for schoolwork for $200 or so if buying used)

[long gone 8,929]

 

 

I can always upgrade in a couple years

 As long as Intel's CPU performance remains where it is, I don't really see much of a reason to upgrade beyond the GPU every 3 - 5 years, maybe longer depending on how soon devs learn how to properly optimize their games again.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

 As long as Intel's CPU performance remains where it is, I don't really see much of a reason to upgrade beyond the GPU every 3 - 5 years, maybe longer depending on how soon devs learn how to properly optimize their games again.

 

The CPU I have my eye is that 3.5-4.0GHz eight-core from AMD, so I should be good for a while there as long as I'm careful picking a mobo and PSU. 

[Azure Envy 1,092]

I can always upgrade in a couple years

 

As I said, I think they're pushing 4k quality textures a little to soon. 

 

Or buy a second-hand laptop and spend even less(might be able to get a decent for schoolwork for $200 or so if buying used)

 

Pushing 4K maybe, but more likely they came from having to work with the constraints of the 360 and PS3 and being forced to think creatively on how to best utilize their limited resources to a new set of consoles with this 8 GB bucket of high-speed memory that they can just dump things into. Oversimplification I'm sure but two years ago I would've told you that a 3 or 4GB VRAM card was a waste of money. Fast forward to today, we're on the cusp of affordable new 4 GB cards and they're telling us we need 6 GB.

 

I think we'll be fine once we get our hands on 8 GB cards. Then we'll be back to demanding 8K UHD texture packs.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

Pushing 4K maybe, but more likely they came from having to work with the constraints of the 360 and PS3 and being forced to think creatively on how to best utilize their limited resources to a new set of consoles with this 8 GB bucket of high-speed memory that they can just dump things into. Oversimplification I'm sure but two years ago I would've told you that a 3 or 4GB VRAM card was a waste of money. Fast forward to today, we're on the cusp of affordable new 4 GB cards and they're telling us we need 6 GB.

 

I think we'll be fine once we get our hands on 8 GB cards. Then we'll be back to demanding 8K UHD texture packs.

 

I just hope they start utilizing it better for those of use on a budget XD.

[Nuke87654 1,849]

Well, looks like in 2016 will be the year Nvidia starts getting out some unified memory graphics card. I'll have to keep tabs on it.

[long gone 8,929]

The CPU I have my eye is that 3.5-4.0GHz eight-core from AMD, so I should be good for a while there as long as I'm careful picking a mobo and PSU. 

Yeah, you should be good.

 

I think we'll be fine once we get our hands on 8 GB cards. 

Good thing 8GB GTX 970s and 980s are rumored to be on their way. PCBs have the room for the extra 4 gigs of RAM.

[Jonny Music 3,396]

For the 8th gen, I'l be sticking with my gaming PC laptop and Nintendo Wii U.

 

For some reason, I can't upload my own photos of my current setup. However, I do have a video talking about that. Here it is, 

(FYI, this video was made and uploaded before I made an account for MLP Forums).

 

I hope you like it.

[long gone 8,929]

Bethesda has confirmed that you can unlock the frame rate and alter the aspect ratio with console commands, but why do we need to use the console to do that in 2014???????????

It's better than editing INI files, but still. Ridiculous. They also recommend you leave the frame rate locked and the aspect ratio the same for the "best experience", but no. We want it to run at a smooth 60+FPS for the actual best experience.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

Bethesda has confirmed that you can unlock the frame rate and alter the aspect ratio with console commands, but why do we need to use the console to do that in 2014???????????

 

It's better than editing INI files, but still. Ridiculous. They also recommend you leave the frame rate locked and the aspect ratio the same for the "best experience", but no. We want it to run at a smooth 60+FPS for the actual best experience.

 

Couldn't run find at 30 if it's optimized for it, though?

[long gone 8,929]

Couldn't run find at 30 if it's optimized for it, though?

Depends on how well-optimized it is.

[Azure Envy 1,092]

Bethesda has confirmed that you can unlock the frame rate and alter the aspect ratio with console commands, but why do we need to use the console to do that in 2014???????????

 

It's better than editing INI files, but still. Ridiculous. They also recommend you leave the frame rate locked and the aspect ratio the same for the "best experience", but no. We want it to run at a smooth 60+FPS for the actual best experience.

 

Hopefully it doesn't break the game in horrible ways.

 

Perhaps that's what they mean by best experience, the game still works?

[long gone 8,929]

Hopefully it doesn't break the game in horrible ways.

 

Perhaps that's what they mean by best experience, the game still works?

Perhaps, but Capcom said that unlocking the frame rate in DR3 might break stuff - it doesn't.

[Azure Envy 1,092]

Perhaps, but Capcom said that unlocking the frame rate in DR3 might break stuff - it doesn't.

 

Hopefully that'd be the case -- Simply covering their asses and not wanting to support the PC beyond what they need to.

 

Not great, but how it is.