By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Vasto on 07 January 2015

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/mRb2cS1u2R4?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>



Around the Network
torok on 07 January 2015

500GB is a bad, bad choice. A lot of games now are with 20 to 50GB. I have 4TB and 2.5 are just games. Forget the SSD and get 2TB.

Edit: Now I saw it is a 500GB SSD. Forget it, get HDDs. It won't matter for games, you OS would just boot 10 seconds faster. And you would regret a lot after downloading 2 or 3 next gen games.



Bet with jetforcejiminy: PS4 will pass the Wii lifetime numbers.

Jizz_Beard_thePirate on 07 January 2015
vivster said:
Jizz_Beard_thePirate said:
Well, that PC would certainly run it like cray cray but imo, it would be better if you were to wait a little longer before buying a new PC. The 8gb version of the 970/980 series should be released this year, DDR4 should also be released this year and granted the difference isn't zomfg compared to DDR3 but for future upgradability purposes, I highly recommend waiting for DDR4. And USB 3.1 should also be released this year and it has twice the throughput as USB 3.0!

So it would be really great if you could wait just a little longer for even more of a kickass PC

Sorry, but that's just nonsensical. Not only is DDR4 currently a bad idea since it's actually slower than DDR3 in some scenarios it will literally not make a difference at all. I also don't know what you would achieve with 8GB of VRAM on a single gpu. By the time 4GB aren't enough anymore it's time for a new GPU anyway.

The money saved by not getting DDR4 and overpriced GPUs could be put to better use in an upgrade from 970 to 980 which will actually make a big difference.

Well, I did say the difference isn't zomfg and the main reason I am telling him to wait for DDR4 is for future upgradability when DDR3 will more or less get discontinued or when DDR4 will outdo DDR3. And if that other dude is right, an AMD 380X might come out this year. The point I was trying to get across was that if he waits a little longer, it would be better in the long run for him if he could. And more VRAM is generally better for higher resolution gaming



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850

torok on 07 January 2015
Jizz_Beard_thePirate said:

Well, I did say the difference isn't zomfg and the main reason I am telling him to wait for DDR4 is for future upgradability when DDR3 will more or less get discontinued or when DDR4 will outdo DDR3. And if that other dude is right, an AMD 380X might come out this year. The point I was trying to get across was that if he waited a little longer, it would be better in the long run for him if could. And more VRAM is generally better for higher resolution gaming


But it also depends if your GPU will be able to push the games at that resolution. A 970 won't push a lot of 4K 8th gen titles. It would be better to get one 970 now and then a SLI later for 4K. Then he would have the memory and the power to push the pixels.



Bet with jetforcejiminy: PS4 will pass the Wii lifetime numbers.

Jizz_Beard_thePirate on 07 January 2015
torok said:
Jizz_Beard_thePirate said:
 

Well, I did say the difference isn't zomfg and the main reason I am telling him to wait for DDR4 is for future upgradability when DDR3 will more or less get discontinued or when DDR4 will outdo DDR3. And if that other dude is right, an AMD 380X might come out this year. The point I was trying to get across was that if he waited a little longer, it would be better in the long run for him if could. And more VRAM is generally better for higher resolution gaming


But it also depends if your GPU will be able to push the games at that resolution. A 970 won't push a lot of 4K 8th gen titles. It would be better to get one 970 now and then a SLI later for 4K. Then he would have the memory and the power to push the pixels.

Thats true but idk if he wants to deal with the SLI launch problems that various games have. But either ways, I think he should just wait for either the 380X or Nvidia's equivalent at least. And granted, I may have jumped the gun with the 970 8gb version and should have used a different example instead rather than the one that came to mind right away



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850

Around the Network
vivster on 07 January 2015
Eddie_Raja said:
vivster said:
Jizz_Beard_thePirate said:
Well, that PC would certainly run it like cray cray but imo, it would be better if you were to wait a little longer before buying a new PC. The 8gb version of the 970/980 series should be released this year, DDR4 should also be released this year and granted the difference isn't zomfg compared to DDR3 but for future upgradability purposes, I highly recommend waiting for DDR4. And USB 3.1 should also be released this year and it has twice the throughput as USB 3.0!

So it would be really great if you could wait just a little longer for even more of a kickass PC

Sorry, but that's just nonsensical. Not only is DDR4 currently a bad idea since it's actually slower than DDR3 in some scenarios it will literally not make a difference at all. I also don't know what you would achieve with 8GB of VRAM on a single gpu. By the time 4GB aren't enough anymore it's time for a new GPU anyway.

The money saved by not getting DDR4 and overpriced GPUs could be put to better use in an upgrade from 970 to 980 which will actually make a big difference.

In 4K the 8GB version of the 290X beat the 4GB version by ~30% in some games.  It breezed right past the 980 in those benchmarks as well.  So already some games utilize 8GB.

No single GPU is currently strong enough to do 4k properly, especially not for current games. High RAM cards are exclusively for SLI/CF setups.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster on 07 January 2015
Jizz_Beard_thePirate said:
vivster said:
Jizz_Beard_thePirate said:
Well, that PC would certainly run it like cray cray but imo, it would be better if you were to wait a little longer before buying a new PC. The 8gb version of the 970/980 series should be released this year, DDR4 should also be released this year and granted the difference isn't zomfg compared to DDR3 but for future upgradability purposes, I highly recommend waiting for DDR4. And USB 3.1 should also be released this year and it has twice the throughput as USB 3.0!

So it would be really great if you could wait just a little longer for even more of a kickass PC

Sorry, but that's just nonsensical. Not only is DDR4 currently a bad idea since it's actually slower than DDR3 in some scenarios it will literally not make a difference at all. I also don't know what you would achieve with 8GB of VRAM on a single gpu. By the time 4GB aren't enough anymore it's time for a new GPU anyway.

The money saved by not getting DDR4 and overpriced GPUs could be put to better use in an upgrade from 970 to 980 which will actually make a big difference.

Well, I did say the difference isn't zomfg and the main reason I am telling him to wait for DDR4 is for future upgradability when DDR3 will more or less get discontinued or when DDR4 will outdo DDR3. And if that other dude is right, an AMD 380X might come out this year. The point I was trying to get across was that if he waited a little longer, it would be better in the long run for him if he could. And more VRAM is generally better for higher resolution gaming

It's doubtful if the 390 will come out before The Witcher releases. Waiting is a very bad habit when it comes to hardware. The best hardware is the one that is available when you need it. If it's available by then I'd opt for that too.

DDR3 will not be discontinued for at least another 5 years. The reason is that DDR4 is absolutely useless for now and the next years as it will not make any difference in gaming whatsoever. The only difference it makes is in your wallet. Buying DDR4 for your gaming PC is like buying enterprise SSDs for your home computer.

Current GPUs are not strong enough for higher resolution gaming anyway. Before the VRAM bottlenecks the GPU will be at its limit. 8GB GPUs are meant for SLI/CF.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

episteme on 07 January 2015

You don't need a SSD for games, the 128 GB MX100 for the OS and programs like Photoshop is fine. Everything else on HDDs (or SSHDs if you want shorter loading times).

What resolution are you aiming for? It's alright for 1080p, but not for higher resolutions.

And yes, DDR4 doesn't make much sense now.



vivster on 07 January 2015
episteme said:

You don't need a SSD for games, the 128 GB MX100 for the OS and programs like Photoshop is fine. Everything else on HDDs.

What resolution are you aiming for? It's alright for 1080p, but not for higher resolutions.

And yes, DDR4 doesn't make much sense now.

So you don't value your time? Having fun spending hours on loading times?

Games are getting bigger while HDDs are not getting any faster.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

episteme on 07 January 2015
vivster said:
episteme said:

You don't need a SSD for games, the 128 GB MX100 for the OS and programs like Photoshop is fine. Everything else on HDDs.

What resolution are you aiming for? It's alright for 1080p, but not for higher resolutions.

And yes, DDR4 doesn't make much sense now.

So you don't value your time? Having fun spending hours on loading times?

Games are getting bigger while HDDs are not getting any faster.

lol, you're right. I'm using a 2 TB SSHD for games myself. It's the difference between SSD and SSHD that isn't worth it in my opinion. A 2TB SSHD is around half the price of a 512 GB SSD.