By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC - Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

I still need to grab a Windows 10 key. A friend of mine linked me to this site a few weeks back, not sure if it's legit though:

https://psngames.org/downloads/microsoft-windows-10-professional/?utm_source=www.allkeyshop.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=allkeyshop

I'd love to find a site that sells the Win 10 key or USB version for a decent price.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Around the Network
Captain_Yuri said:
I have been playing sc2 since WoL and I am still continuing to play it. Nova ops was a bit of an urk but I still bought it since it wasn't the worst thing in the world cause you did at least get more single player story.

But after that, I stopped supporting the game complete as far as micro-transactions are concerned cause it really is outrageous how much they have. I think the reason for the war chest and sc remaster to a certain extent is cause sc2 is pretty much dying. It really isn't as big as it once was and the userbase is continuing to go down and of course, the balance changes have been horrible. And as that continues to go down, they are implementing more nonsense in the hopes of making more money before it goes down completely.

Now as far as money is concerned, while it is true activision/blizzard could fund those tournaments, if we are being honest, the investors won't exactly like that. However, that doesn't excuse their business practices.

All in all, oh well. I have mainly moved to overwatch as my main online game so if sc2 one day dies, I wouldn't care much. I just hope that another RTS takes its place that is more consumer friendly.

Yeah the investors would dislike them doing that, but they want to show support for the very same scene they funded and created in the first place, they should carry on doing so, rather than both nickel and diming us while aslo asking us to foot the support bill as well as buying their games. SCII in it's entrety costs £235 if you want all the content it's selling. That alone is asking a lot from the consumer, for a single AAA game.

I bought Mineacraft for £14 back in 2010 and I'm still having fun with it. I nabbed SC II for £135 and had an on off relationship with it over the course of 7 years, half of the content I couldn't even make use of because I was always getting stomped in the MP games by godlike players, so I paid way more for the SP campaigns than I did for Minecraft on it's own.

I look at this and it's beginning to look the same for other AAA games I've bought in recent years, like SWBF and Titanfall for recent examples. I'm paying more for less while those indie games I'm also buying are offering more for less. These are also small time studios doing this, big time companies like Blizz are simply demanding more based on brand image and power alone, it's actually quite absurd at how bad this is getting in regards to AAA gaming. 

 

I know they won't pull the same move with SCI remaster, as the Koreans simply want the base game and nothing more.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Pemalite said:
Chazore said:
There are far more curved G-sync 1080p monitors than non curved =/.

https://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-hardware/monitors/monitors-nvidia-g-sync

Curved sucks. D:
It's the new "fad" and I don't like it to be honest. It's making monitor choices more difficult.

Chazore said:
Okay so I've come down to these choices for a new monitor.


1440p:

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/27-acer-xb271hu-g-sync-led-monitor-165hz-ips-panel-2560x1440-4ms-1000000001-hdmi-dp-usb-2x-speakers-

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/27-asus-pg279q-rog-swift-165hz-nvidia-g-sync-ips-monitor-2560x1440-4ms-10001-dp-hdmi-2x-usb-30-black


To me it looks like they are using the same panel. So go with whatever is cheaper?

I wouldn't even consider 1080P to be honest. Unless it's 24".

Yeah, having the curved ones in the way has actually made my monitor search all the more frustrating. Curved seems to have more downsides than pros above non curved monitors. 

 

I could go with the Acer predator one as it's the cheaper monitor, but under it's sepcs, it doesn't seem to list DP, but I'd assume it would support DP as all the G-sync ones seem to anyway.

I don't think I can even go with a 1080p 24' atm as I can't even find one that doesn't have more cons than pros.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Seems mining might bomb soon.
Might be worth keeping an eye on second hand outlets for something cheap.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Pemalite said:
Seems mining might bomb soon.
Might be worth keeping an eye on second hand outlets for something cheap.

Soon™



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Around the Network
Pemalite said:
Conina said:

Sorry, but you are wrong. The 93 ppi of your Viewsonic VX3209-2K are the same as the 93 ppi of a "peasant 1080P 24''-monitor":

http://www.displayspecifications.com/en/comparison/f7d9228cd

But I agree with you, that 90 - 100 ppi are still a good density for Windows + games.

I suggest you use this: https://www.sven.de/dpi/
You may find that a 1080P, 24" monitor does not have a PPI of 93.

It supports my claim.

A 24''-monitor (16:9, 1920x1080) with EXACTLY 24'' diagonal and a 32''-monitor (16:9, 2560x1440) with EXACTLY 32'' diagonal both have the same 91.79 PPI density.

But most manufacturers sell you a slightly smaller display (23.6'' or 31.5'') to max their profits and these have both ~93 PPI. So most 24''-models have the same density as your 32'' model, not less.



Pemalite said:
JEMC said:

Oh, in my case, monitor size is key, because I don't really like big monitors. My main TV is 32", and I don't really understand how people can use something that big as a monitor, let alone those with 40" or even more monsters.

You place the display farther back. The perceived pixels per-inch gets better then too.

Conina said:

 4K ain't a must, 1440p will do. So I'm very interested in the new monitors coming out this and next year.

Agreed. 4k is just to demanding on hardware. Even Titan XP users will find they will need to upgrade sooner rather than later.

I would never opt for anything less than 1440P these days.

My monitor sits barely two feet away from me, and I could only add another one if, and only if, I mount the monitor into the wall. So big monitors are completely out of the equation for me.

Besides, using a smaller panel with a high resolution would mean less use of AA, probably only 2x.

A problem with going 1440p is that most manufacturers are so focused/obsessed with 4K that they don't make 1440p panels with HDR 10 or FALD, and it's a damn shame.

Pemalite said:
Seems mining might bomb soon.
Might be worth keeping an eye on second hand outlets for something cheap.

I've read that a new version of Etherium (or whatever it's called) might rool out in November, which could cause at this craze to bomb, or at least slow down for a little while.

 

*Edited because I made a little mess*



Please excuse my bad English.

Former gaming PC: i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Current gaming PC: R5-7600, 32GB RAM 6000MT/s (CL30) and a RX 9060XT 16GB

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

Ok, here are one good rumor from Intel, and one bad piece of news from MSoft/Intel:

Intel preparing multiple 6-core Coffee Lake CPUs
Source: https://videocardz.com/70978/intel-preparing-multiple-6-core-coffee-lake-cpus
Original Source (in french): https://www.cpchardware.com/coffee-lake-approche/
In few months Intel will introduce new six-core processors based on Coffee Lake architecture. The high-end i7 8700K processor is reportedly running at 3.7 GHz base frequency with Hyperthreading enabled (12 threads). Compared to recently launched Core i9 7800X, the i7-8700K would have much lower TDP of 95W (vs 140W). This would without a doubt affect the sales of i9-7800X. Intel is also launching i7 8700 non-K which is said to be running at 3.2 GHz base frequency.

The most interesting part of the rumor are 6-core processors from i5 series. The major difference compared to i7 is a lack of Hyperthreading. The i5-8600K processor is said to be clocked at 3.6 GHz with the same TDP as i7-8700K (95W).
According to CPC Hardware the six-core series will not end at 8600K. The slowest 6-core desktop CPU is allegedly the Core i5-8400 with a core clock of 2.8 GHz and TDP at 65W. This is a direct response to AMD’s Ryzen 5.

>>Intel is launching 6-core parts in the mainstream class. At last! And it only took us to wait for AMD to kick them in the a** to see them.


The following won't affect you with your personal PCs, but it could have a minor impact in some business PCs. It also shows what MSoft could do in the future:

Microsoft cuts off Windows 10 support early for some PCs
http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-blocks-windows-10-creators-update-on-some-pcs/
Some PCs that received a free upgrade to Windows 10 less than two years ago are now officially blocked from receiving future updates.
If you are one of the unlucky owners of one of the first 2-in-1 PCs, announced in 2012 and sold throughout 2013 and 2014, your PC was eligible for the free Windows 10 upgrade in mid-2015, and it also received the Summer 2016 Anniversary Update (version 1607) without any compatibility issues.

But when Windows Update tries to install the March 2017 Creators Update, version 1703, the installation fails with a dire (and confusing) message
I was able to confirm that this hard block exists by attempting to install the Creators Update on an HP Envy X2, which uses a Clover Trail CPU, the Atom Z2760. HP shipped me the device in early 2015 and I've used it in lab tests as a benchmark for low-spec CPUs.

A search of Microsoft's website doesn't turn up any support documents that explain this serious compatibility issue. I did find confirmation from Acer, which published this support note: "Intel Clover Trail processors are not currently supported in Windows 10 Creators Update."

The following Intel Clover Trail processors are currently not supported on Windows 10 Creators Update:

* Atom Z2760

* Atom Z2520

* Atom Z2560

* Atom Z2580

Microsoft is working with us to help provide compatible drivers to address this incompatibility. If you install the Windows 10 creators update, icons and text may not appear at all, or may show up as solid color blocks or bars. If you have already installed Creators Update and are experiencing problems, you can use Windows 10 recovery options to restore your system to the previous build.



Please excuse my bad English.

Former gaming PC: i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Current gaming PC: R5-7600, 32GB RAM 6000MT/s (CL30) and a RX 9060XT 16GB

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

Conina said:
Pemalite said:

I suggest you use this: https://www.sven.de/dpi/
You may find that a 1080P, 24" monitor does not have a PPI of 93.

It supports my claim.

A 24''-monitor (16:9, 1920x1080) with EXACTLY 24'' diagonal and a 32''-monitor (16:9, 2560x1440) with EXACTLY 32'' diagonal both have the same 91.79 PPI density.

But most manufacturers sell you a slightly smaller display (23.6'' or 31.5'') to max their profits and these have both ~93 PPI. So most 24''-models have the same density as your 32'' model, not less.

You are right, I was slightly inaccurate with my first claim. I am only human, we all make mistakes. :P

But still. My panel which is 31.5" + 1440P and does have superior PPI to that of a 24" 1080P panel. - And it was advertised as 32" with 31.5" viewable area.

As for manufacturer claims. Some brands are more guilty than others, manufacturers with better reputations such as Asus seem to be pretty accurate with their claims as 23.6" panels are often advertised as 23.6" here.
I have seen 24" advertised panels actually have 24.5" viewable areas such as the Asus ROG Swift PG258Q.

JEMC said:

My monitor sits barely two feet away from me, and I could only add another one if, and only if, I mount the monitor into the wall. So big monitors are completely out of the equation for me.

Besides, using a smaller panel with a high resolution would mean less use of AA, probably only 2x.

A problem with going 1440p is that most manufacturers are so focused/obsessed with 4K that they don't make 1440p panels with HDR 10 or FALD, and it's a damn shame.


That's sad. :(
I lucky to have a fairly large and wide desk (Needed it to fit 3x monitors on it) so I can get away with having my tower, 32" screen, half a dozen external drives, A full Hi-Fi sound system... And still have a ton of room to spare.

I am hearing you on the HDR. I wish it was the standard industry wide, but I think we are a few years away from that yet. Hopefully 1440P gets a look in, it's the sweet-spot in terms of resolution for your buck right now in my opinion.

JEMC said:

I've read that a new version of Etherium (or whatever it's called) might rool out in November, which could cause at this craze to bomb, or at least slow down for a little while.

I am going to be watching ebay like a hawk. Haha


JEMC said:


Ok, here are one good rumor from Intel, and one bad piece of news from MSoft/Intel:

Intel preparing multiple 6-core Coffee Lake CPUs

Can we call that a rumor though? It was on Intels Roadmaps from over a year or two ago.

The new tidbit is that it's going to be more than one chip... And notebooks will also have 6-core chips as well, which is going to be brilliant.

Interested to see if AMD manages to bring Ryzen to notebooks eventually and how many cores it throws at it.





www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Pemalite said:
JEMC said:

I've read that a new version of Etherium (or whatever it's called) might rool out in November, which could cause at this craze to bomb, or at least slow down for a little while.

I am going to be watching ebay like a hawk. Haha

Start watching now!

Steep decline in cryptocurrency market has miners dumping their GPUs on Ebay
http://www.pcgamer.com/steep-decline-in-cryptocurrency-market-has-miners-dumping-their-gpus-on-ebay/
Ethereum, one of the most popular cryptocurrencies, is becoming more difficult to mine. At the same time, volatility is rearing its welcome head, and the value of Ethereum is now less than half of what it was around a month ago. As a result, profitability is way down, and some miners are putting their GPUs up for sale on second-hand sites such as Ebay, CoinDesk reports.

 

Pemalite said:
JEMC said:

Ok, here are one good rumor from Intel, and one bad piece of news from MSoft/Intel:

Intel preparing multiple 6-core Coffee Lake CPUs

Can we call that a rumor though? It was on Intels Roadmaps from over a year or two ago.

The new tidbit is that it's going to be more than one chip... And notebooks will also have 6-core chips as well, which is going to be brilliant.

Interested to see if AMD manages to bring Ryzen to notebooks eventually and how many cores it throws at it.

Yes, that was the rumor part I mentioned.

And I think AMD will focus first on APUs, and then notebooks/laptops. An APU based on a quad core Zen APU plus an 560 could be a very popular solution for gaming HTPCs.



Please excuse my bad English.

Former gaming PC: i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Current gaming PC: R5-7600, 32GB RAM 6000MT/s (CL30) and a RX 9060XT 16GB

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.