or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › PC Enthusiast-Fi (PC Gaming/Hardware/Software/Overclocking)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PC Enthusiast-Fi (PC Gaming/Hardware/Software/Overclocking) - Page 255  

post #3811 of 9059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yazen View Post
 

I was wondering why you mixed a pornography website with an "E" rated game lol.  Is the new SS Bros provocative?

 

 

I think we may need a new thread for pornography sites lol.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

------

I finally got Shadowplay to work. Cheap Asian at his (almost) finest. MotherofGod FINALLY!

post #3812 of 9059
A Hyper 212 can fit into a Prodigy, right?
post #3813 of 9059
Quote:
Originally Posted by ibob4tacoz View Post

A Hyper 212 can fit into a Prodigy, right?

Check the height of the cooler on CM's website and cooler clearance on Bitfenix's website.

 

I'm not going to say yes or no since I don't remember the cooler clearance of the Bitfenix Prodigy.

post #3814 of 9059

Given a NH-D14 can fit(if you remove the drive case, it's too wide), the H212 fits fine. Max cooler height is 170mm iirc.

post #3815 of 9059
Thread Starter 

It's crazy just how much more AAA games of today can possibly be improved upon(efficency) or even in how some are still 'hard' to run.

 

GTX Titan's, GTX 780's, and even my setups can't max out Metro Last Light at full maximum settings(AA, everything) and get 60fps stable at 1920x1080.

 

It's a crazy thing to think about. 

 

Which leads me to wonder if maximum settings is really even worth it? Many of the bells and whistles in the end are seen to me to just be luxury bells and whistles that really don't offer that that much more to a games graphics.

 

SSAA is highly inefficent (because doubling or quadrupling your resolution, and then down sampling to native is good for performance) and maximum tesselation settings just don't really seem to be doing all that much these days.

 

Looking at FPS charts and all that, modern day high end GPU's can easilly pull into the 200's with the same 'hard to run' AAA games without the bells and whistles.

 

But of course, I guess that it doesn't really matter in the end. I mean, this is just a luxury that high end GPU's can do in any case. It's just a bit disapointing how inefficent those'luxury' improvements are even to this day.

 

FXAA blurs schiit too much, and the other MSAA stuff is mild at best in terms of how it looks and how effective it is. And SSAA is the devil incarnate for GPU performance (but it does look nice with some uber multipliers)

 


Looking at FPS performance charts. I should be able to get better performance on my setup than a single GTX 780 in almost every case (unless you go above 2560 res). (where the R9 270 is a downclocked 7870, and the 270x is a overclocked 7870)

 

Obviously the review isn't always' correct' in the sense of things but the conclusion is pretty much the same from everything I've seen about it. 

 

I wrote this because it is still pissing me off how I can't pull 60fps with maximum mutha trucking settings on Metro Last Light. -____-

post #3816 of 9059
Originally Posted by bowei006 View Post
 

I wrote this because it is still pissing me off how I can't pull 60fps with maximum mutha trucking settings on Metro Last Light. -____-

 

That's how it should be IMO, we need to keep pushing the boundaries and let games get faaaaaar ahead of the hardware, or else we'll be stuck with crappy looking console ports for years. The maximum settings are there for people who can use them, they aren't there so you can brag to your friends that you can get 60fps on ultra with just a pair of 7870's. :p If that would be the case, then it'd be a crappy looking game, no? 

 

Sure, you can argue about efficiency here and there, but in the grand scheme of things, this is a good thing for PC gaming. Besides, you should know all about diminishing returns, you really aren't missing out on much if you can't run things on max.

 

Having the power of a titan or a single 780 doesn't mean you have a top tier system any more, so you shouldn't expect to be able to run a newish game on it's max settings. It seems that we need a pair of high end cards to really catch up with the games these days, and that's just on 1080p/1600, it's going to be a bloodbath once affordable 4k monitors come out.

post #3817 of 9059
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadlylover View Post
 

 

That's how it should be IMO, we need to keep pushing the boundaries and let games get faaaaaar ahead of the hardware, or else we'll be stuck with crappy looking console ports for years. The maximum settings are there for people who can use them, they aren't there so you can brag to your friends that you can get 60fps on ultra with just a pair of 7870's. :p If that would be the case, then it'd be a crappy looking game, no? 

 

Sure, you can argue about efficiency here and there, but in the grand scheme of things, this is a good thing for PC gaming. Besides, you should know all about diminishing returns, you really aren't missing out on much if you can't run things on max.

 

Having the power of a titan or a single 780 doesn't mean you have a top tier system any more, so you shouldn't expect to be able to run a newish game on it's max settings. It seems that we need a pair of high end cards to really catch up with the games these days, and that's just on 1080p/1600, it's going to be a bloodbath once affordable 4k monitors come out.

Yes, this is good in the sense that games still can't be run with no problems. But it is also showing a precedent for anti aliasing, advanced shading, reliance on a set API method (Direct X) and other things for being inefficent and second class.

 

Look how well the X360 and PS3 uses its crap tastic resources? Or rather, how well game companies make it so that modern games run relatively well on older hardware.

 

From a synthetic benchmark POV(which in itself isn't really anything concrete even as a comparison purpose), current hardware like the GTX 780 is over 20X 'faster' than PS3 hardware yet, games don't necessarily look 20X better(whatever 20X better means) running on it.

 

Edit:

Hopefully by the time I can afford a 4K monitor, that Vram mirroring is rectified. My measley 2GB isn't enough for that glorious 4K haha. 


Edited by bowei006 - 12/29/13 at 11:58am
post #3818 of 9059
Originally Posted by bowei006 View Post
 

Yes, this is good in the sense that games still can't be run with no problems. But it is also showing a precedent for anti aliasing, advanced shading, reliance on a set API method (Direct X) and other things for being inefficent and second class.

 

Look how well the X360 and PS3 uses its crap tastic resources? Or rather, how well game companies make it so that modern games run relatively well on older hardware.

 

From a synthetic benchmark POV(which in itself isn't really anything concrete even as a comparison purpose), current hardware like the GTX 780 is over 20X 'faster' than PS3 hardware yet, games don't necessarily look 20X better(whatever 20X better means) running on it.

 

You can't compare consoles to PC's, because there a thousands of combinations of hardware for PC, a developer simply can't optimise a game for every PC configuration, it's just not practical. We're getting into dangerous territory when correlating subjective performance with actual performance, but I'm sure you're already aware of all the trickery involved that a developer has to use to make modern games on consoles look decent.

 

If you look at the diminishing returns from tessellation or polygon counts and stuff, then yeah, you're absolutely right, games won't look 20X better subjectively, but that has nothing to do with efficiency and optimisation, that's just a simple fact of life when it comes to graphical performance.

post #3819 of 9059
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadlylover View Post
 

 

You can't compare consoles to PC's, because there a thousands of combinations of hardware for PC, a developer simply can't optimise a game for every PC configuration, it's just not practical. We're getting into dangerous territory when correlating subjective performance with actual performance, but I'm sure you're already aware of all the trickery involved that a developer has to use to make modern games on consoles look decent.

 

If you look at the diminishing returns from tessellation or polygon counts and stuff, then yeah, you're absolutely right, games won't look 20X better subjectively, but that has nothing to do with efficiency and optimisation, that's just a simple fact of life when it comes to graphical performance.

Yeah, the inability to optomize is a problem. But hey, maybe a universal platform with same cards and chip architecutre that allows new updates to optomize software more and more. Akin to how Apple is able to still push out updates to its various phones.

 

One day. I want me some of dat sweet VR Poontang

post #3820 of 9059

Sampling does not benefit a game much unless developers unless the game resources were targeted for 4k, 8k, etc.

It mostly depends on the algorithms used, but you will likely see more deterioration than benefits. 

 

We are not bottlenecked by PC hardware at this point.  Its going to take more money than developers are willing to budget.  I think this console generation developers are going to be focusing on computing over art.

 

EDIT:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8aBlIn44Kg

 

Not an overnight change obviously, but I'll have my degree in Computer Science by then ;)


Edited by Yazen - 12/29/13 at 12:19pm
post #3821 of 9059
Thread Starter 

Why not both? All those polygons and schiit won't matter if it looks like

post #3822 of 9059
Quote:
Originally Posted by bowei006 View Post

Why not both? All those polygons and schiit won't matter if it looks like

Dat DPI doe...
post #3823 of 9059
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadlylover View Post
 

Having the power of a titan or a single 780 doesn't mean you have a top tier system any more, so you shouldn't expect to be able to run a newish game on it's max settings. It seems that we need a pair of high end cards to really catch up with the games these days, and that's just on 1080p/1600, it's going to be a bloodbath once affordable 4k monitors come out.

You aren't freaking kidding. By the looks of things I'll need a new PAIR of cards if I get the Dell 28" 4k monitor that's supposed to come out around $1.5k to actually play at that res. Two GTX670's evened heavily OCed isn't gonna cut it.

post #3824 of 9059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tangster View Post
 

You aren't freaking kidding. By the looks of things I'll need a new PAIR of cards if I get the Dell 28" 4k monitor that's supposed to come out around $1.5k to actually play at that res. Two GTX670's evened heavily OCed isn't gonna cut it.

I'd still really love to know what the benefit of 4k is.  I know for TV it's totally pointless, but ever since I got a big ass desk and moved my monitor to the back of it I'm now sitting far back enough to no see the pixel structure at all.  Then again it's only 23 inches but going bigger than that is just counter productive imo.

 

4k is one of the very few "just because it's more doesn't mean it's better" parts of technology especially when you take a HUGE performance hit along with it.

 

EDIT: Got the D5 for my cnc water cooling project that I'm hopefully starting soon and I'm starting to realize how over kill it is even though the cpu design is pretty restrictive.  if any one with a reference 7970 block could dimension the face of it and the heights of everything you'd get a free virtual pat on the back.


Edited by linglingjr - 12/29/13 at 5:54pm
post #3825 of 9059
Quote:
Originally Posted by linglingjr View Post
 

I'd still really love to know what the benefit of 4k is.  I know for TV it's totally pointless, but ever since I got a big ass desk and moved my monitor to the back of it I'm now sitting far back enough to no see the pixel structure at all.  Then again it's only 23 inches but going bigger than that is just counter productive imo.

 

4k is one of the very few "just because it's more doesn't mean it's better" parts of technology especially when you take a HUGE performance hit along with it.

 

EDIT: Got the D5 for my cnc water cooling project that I'm hopefully starting soon and I'm starting to realize how over kill it is even though the cpu design is pretty restrictive.  if any one with a reference 7970 block could dimension the face of it and the heights of everything you'd get a free virtual pat on the back.

Moar screen space for spreadsheets.

 

 

Srsly. I use all the space on my current 1600p screen so more space really would be nice. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › PC Enthusiast-Fi (PC Gaming/Hardware/Software/Overclocking)