Speccy thread?

Speccy thread?

K

What's with the potato CPU's?

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

>says the kid with an i5

Also, nice shitty graphics card, dude, ahahahaah!

>says the one who bought a e3 1230 v2 instead of an i7 to save $50.

No need for an i7 extra threads won't benefit you when it comes to gaming. 960 is fine for me. perfect for 1080p.

>says the guy that doesn't know I paid 247 bucks for it, new

Still laughing at your 960 ahahahah! dude!

Because you just upgraded? Maybe I should just laugh at you for not buying a 1080.

hivemind

I was trolling, Jeez.

...

Guys is this the new Windows 10 thread?

...

>those thicc windows borders

hello Sup Forums

Can you tell me a good distro (to use it like a partition) considering this piece of shit?

i'm saving shekels to build a good pc

sure

...

...

...

R u me????

Temps a little high

that's at load

and yes, i am u

No cpu oc and reference gpu I'm guessing??

No.

>No cpu oc
see
It's at 4.4GHz daily, can hit 4.7GHz stable

GPU is just some Asus card that was on sale, it was ~4 months before the 10xx series release and I dont do any gaming really, the GTX 960 has HEVC main10 hardware decoding unlike the other 9xx series GPUs.

So your highest temp under something like intelburntest is 60C at 4.4ghz? What's vcore?

...

Also, those load temps () are just light load, just some counter strike for an hour to see what my temps got to.

A stress test can bring my temps up to around 70c. I don't let it go over 75c.

>all this Windows 10
Sup Forums is infested with pajeets

Nice I'm at 4.5ghz 1.28v on mine. I don't generally see temps break 50C gaming. Intel burn test puts me up around 75C. What cooler you run? I'm using kraken x60 with push/pull.

>kraken x60
Corsair H115i GTX, just 2x140mm in push at the moment.

Debated going for push/pull but my temps are fine as it is so i'm not too worried about it.

:)

Nah senpai I upgraded because i'd rather deal with botnet than windows 8

Can you screenshot in game with afterburner monitoring all cpu threads?

>4.7 stable
What's the vcore on that? Mine boots to desktop at 4.6 and 1.3V but crashes in benchmarks or render loads. Have it backed down to 4.4 and 1.25V now.

...

For benchmarking I had it up at 1.34v for 4.7GHz

Managed a 10 minute encode and Cinebench R11.5 run.


It's summer though so I only did a few tests at that clockspeed.

For the most part I keep it at 4.4GHz daily.

Other user with 5820k here, I was stable at 4.5 1.25v with slow ram. Moved up to 4.5 1.28v wirh 32gb 3200 ram. I can get to desktop at 4.7 or 4.8 1.30, 1.31, 1.32v but all crash when I start burn test. Scared to go much higher for minimal gains.

Why?

he's implying no game would use more than half your cores

They won't, who cares?

Is this what you are looking for?
I don't really game, I do server shit mostly.
So please don't tell me "i7 is better for games" like I dont already know.

It's a I need a new screen but 4k is too demanding and 1440p will last me year and a half at best before I'll start eyeing a 4k screen thread.

>i7 is better for games
That's just a stupid meme like 'you can't play games with a Quadro bro!'

GTA V and Fallout 4 would like a word.

With what?

...

I'm not, I just want to see it

You dont think I know this?
Comon.

4K is good but at 60hz it's not there yet. I moved back down to a asus pg348q. Lost a few pixels but g-sync 100hz is bae.

>ultrawide
Thanks, but no.

...

Fallout 4 is a terrible example, it's like any other elder scrolls, in that it would rather have a single core @ 10ghz rather than 6 cores @ 5ghz. Gta 5 and bf4 on the other hand love more cores. My 5820k uses most of the 12 threads in either game, obviously not maxing them out but 10-30% usage.

Eyes cant see past 16:9?

Why not downgrade back to 7?

I don't want to deal with all the scaling and UI issues.
Every time I had a non-standard aspect ration it sooner or later became a pain in the ass.
If it's fine for you then great, enjoy it, but I don't want ultrawide.

Dx12

Because 10 is a better OS than 8 or 7.

Actually the only game on my steam account that has an issue is fallout. Flawless widescreen fixes just about any 21:9 issue you might have. Almost all AAA titles support it out of the box.

>all those low-res lowlifes

>60hz

Is that a console user?

>he's a tech illiterate and thinks higher res on such a small screen matters.

At a normal viewing distance of about 2-3 feet anything over 120PPI is going to require image scaling, which means all that extra screen real-estate is wasted, sure it looks sharper, but you're not really gaining much space because of the scaling you have to do in order to read anything.

36-46" 4k is the minimum to give you the same pixel density as a good quality 1440p 25-29" panel.


Congrats on falling for the meme though, there is a reason those 4k monitors are so cheap.

One of these retarded sub 35" 4k monitors

He was too poor to buy Ultrasharp

...

>lelg
kys

75" here Enjoy your tiny ass monitor

You realize input lag on 4k TVs is literally at like 150ms at the moment right?

That's why almost no one uses 4k TVs for gaming.

It's unnoticeable and far lower than 150ms, like 55ms (it's OLED) when I measured it.

>sure it looks sharper, but

But nothing. 1440p is the new 720p. You done goofed.

Okay, so I know I need more storage, and new RAM. Anymore suggestions?

27" isn't too small for 4k.

Laptop is a Acer Aspire 5349.

>Is Sandy Bridge still good in 2016? Legit question.

Buy more RAM and more storage?

It is. Anything under 35" is pretty bad

That's marketing nonsense trying to shill you into buying a larger version, because the price increases exponentially with the size, not the resolution. Higher pixel density is a good thing, you twit.

As far as I'm aware LG doesn't make a 75" OLED panel

They have a curved 77" or a 65", and both of those are $7k+

and anything over 20-30ms is shit for fast paced games, so 55ms is terrible.

Turn on the image interpolation and you will easily go over 150ms

you're retarded and don't understand how resolution works then, literally there is ZERO point in getting a 4k monitor under 35" in size.

>literally there is ZERO point in getting a 4k monitor under 35" in size.

Except for the fact that 4k at 27" looks very noticeably sharper and better than 1440p at 27". You're the retard in this. You were told repeatedly not to fall for the 1440p meme.

Yes but 60hz makes my eyes bleed

So I forgot two inches.
And yes it was pricey.

>aver 20-30ms is shit for fast paced gam
I'm not a Gotard playing a shit game made for cheating.

It's really not

It really is though?

>Higher pixel density is a good thing

Yes but only up to a certain point, the reason it's more important on a cellphone or tablet is you hold them a LOT closer to your face, when you sit in front of a computer you SHOULD be about 2-3 feet back, at that distance anything over about 130PPI is going to be known as "retina", as in your eyes can't see the individual pixels.

So 4k at under 35" is just pretty dumb, 35" 4k is 125PPI which is already more dense than 1080p at anything over 18".

the 77" model is over $15,000 i highly doubt you got that one.

What makes you say that, kid?

my GPU runs cooler than my CPU

also I just checked power on time for my drives, the one I keep my games on is at 2213.9 days

>Yes but only up to a certain point,
How are you supposed to know where that point lies? How many sub-30" 4k screens have you used?
>So 4k at under 35" is just pretty dumb,
Not in my experience, it's more than big enough for that resolution to unfold.
>which is already more dense than 1080p
1080p is not a benchmark. It's low-res compared to what's possible now and in the coming years. We'll be moving towards 8k in the foreseeable future.

I fucked up

WDDM 2.0/2.1
DX12
general SSD improvements
etc
etc

So nothing important?

>sub-30" 4k screens have you used?
10-15?
I work at a computer store.

Ultrawide is a meme and sub 35" 4k is a meme.

1440p IPS or 1440p 144Hz is fine for now, but "upgrading" past 1440p without getting a REAL 4k at over 35" is just retarded.

There is no reason to hobble yourself with 4k on such a tiny screen, you're forcing yourself to do GUI scaling and all you're getting is a slightly sharper image out of it... wew fucking lad, what an upgrade.

I'd rather have a 40" 4k panel which gives me 4x20" 1080p windows on a single 40" panel with no bezel.

>performance and all around general usage improvements are worthless

uhhh user, you might be a bit retarded, that or all that CP you're keeping on W7 has rotted your brain.

It just works more faster to me on every machine I've installed it to :)

Enterprise version, I do not use Home or Pro.

>I'd rather have a 40" 4k panel which gives me 4x20" 1080p windows on a single 40" panel with no bezel.
holy fucking shit this

anyone who buys a 4k panel at under 35", just tell them to open up 4 1080p windows at once and see how usable it is, the WHOLE fucking point of higher resolution is to be able to fit more information on a single screen, with 4k panels under 30" in size opening up that many windows is unusable because you can't read shit. On a 40" however it's like having 4 1080p monitors in 1.

I fully support my 3440x1440 100hz ips curved g-sync meme