Off-Topic Thread

Hank Scorpio

PC lost power there today, first time it ever happened. I was pretty unlucky seeing as I went out of the room for a minute and when I came back it was off. Tried to turn it on and it gained power for a few seconds and turned off again.

Left it for a minute and now it seems fine, it just loaded straight into windows. I don't think it blue-screened because I didn't get a "Windows recovered from blah" message. I`ll keep an eye on it for now.

My i5 760 is overclocked but its stable, or should be. My 460's are overclocked too but never had problems with them, and ram never gave me any problems. Running Win7 64bit on a msi gd80 p55 board with a 700w cooler master PSU.

Anyone have any suggestions if it does happen again? I have alot of important stuff on my hdd so backing that up at the moment just in case.

Monotype

ShadowHearth wrote: »

i just wonder will 7850/7870 be faster and better then 6 series? i bet alot of people were pissed of back then to see 6 series being so much weaker.

Yeah, from a numbering point of view, the 6000 series was weaker. For example, the 6850 wasn't as powerful as the 5850. By a good bit. But you get the improvements of a new generation. If you look up the crossfire results, two 6850s do surprisingly well, roughly matching two 5850s but with lower power consumption. Mostly, look at cost - a 6850 has averaged... maybe €150? A bit lower? The 5850 was priced €200-300 during its main lifespan. That's the price of a 6950.

I'd say it was just marketing tricks at work. Wow man, AMD have really cheap powerful GPUs! I can get like a 6950 for €200! It's all about fitting as many 9s in there. They always try and cram extra GPUs into the high end of a numbering scheme and throw additional meaningless letters that make the thing sound cool. It's the same in every industry.

Judging by the initial pricing that we've seen, it looks like the 7000 series will be a bit more expensive than the 6000. There'll definitely be a performance increase in comparing numbers - except all the ones below the 7700 which are just rebranded previous series with possibly a few updates.

nuxxx wrote: »

Anyone have any suggestions if it does happen again? I have alot of important stuff on my hdd so backing that up at the moment just in case.

Could have been a power blackout/brownout at the wall if it's a once off. Some of coolermaster's PSUs aren't great so that would be a suspect. You can only really wait to see if it happens again. Maybe get a surge protector power strip if the electricity is known not to be clean in your area.

ShadowHearth

Monotype wrote: »

Yeah, from a numbering point of view, the 6000 series was weaker. For example, the 6850 wasn't as powerful as the 5850. By a good bit. But you get the improvements of a new generation. If you look up the crossfire results, two 6850s do surprisingly well, roughly matching two 5850s but with lower power consumption. Mostly, look at cost - a 6850 has averaged... maybe €150? A bit lower? The 5850 was priced €200-300 during its main lifespan. That's the price of a 6950.

I'd say it was just marketing tricks at work. Wow man, AMD have really cheap powerful GPUs! I can get like a 6950 for €200! It's all about fitting as many 9s in there. They always try and cram extra GPUs into the high end of a numbering scheme and throw additional meaningless letters that make the thing sound cool. It's the same in every industry.

Judging by the initial pricing that we've seen, it looks like the 7000 series will be a bit more expensive than the 6000. There'll definitely be a performance increase in comparing numbers - except all the ones below the 7700 which are just rebranded previous series with possibly a few updates.






Could have been a power blackout/brownout at the wall if it's a once off. Some of coolermaster's PSUs aren't great so that would be a suspect. You can only really wait to see if it happens again. Maybe get a surge protector power strip if the electricity is known not to be clean in your area.

so prety much they just were ****ing around with naming cards? instead of proper naming that would reflect old gen, they just made alot of confusion. looks like they are going to gen 5 style naming instead of 6 series.

Monotype

Numbering schemes in computer hardware are a disgrace. (Software is bad enough too - e.g., Firefox). They mean little in comparing power (i.e., the gaps are not proportional or anything) and you're lucky if they can be consistent from generation to generation. Every company always seems to have their eye on their competitors, trying to use similar numbering schemes, often trying to number them a little higher to give the illusion to the ignorant that their product is better.
Look at Intel - i3, i5 and i7 - they are, at best, a general guide of power but it far from tells the full story. AMD are always at their number schemes in CPUs to match Intel and, as you can see, with their GPUs too. nVidia have re-released cards a few times and their probably skipped the 300 (retail) series to make it seem like a bigger gap.
Other components are just a mess and you have to be in the know to be able to determine which is better.

Tij da feen

Monotype wrote: »

Numbering schemes in computer hardware are a disgrace. (Software is bad enough too - e.g., Firefox). They mean little in comparing power (i.e., the gaps are not proportional or anything) and you're lucky if they can be consistent from generation to generation. Every company always seems to have their eye on their competitors, trying to use similar numbering schemes, often trying to number them a little higher to give the illusion to the ignorant that their product is better.
Look at Intel - i3, i5 and i7 - they are, at best, a general guide of power but it far from tells the full story. AMD are always at their number schemes in CPUs to match Intel and, as you can see, with their GPUs too. nVidia have re-released cards a few times and their probably skipped the 300 (retail) series to make it seem like a bigger gap.
Other components are just a mess and you have to be in the know to be able to determine which is better.

Firefox used to be much better but they went crazy after Chrome released. It's rumored that nVidia are going to give 6xx a miss and go to the 7xx so that it sounds like it's on par with the AMD 7xxx line.

Monotype

Tij da feen wrote: »

Firefox used to be much better but they went crazy after Chrome released. It's rumored that nVidia are going to give 6xx a miss and go to the 7xx so that it sounds like it's on par with the AMD 7xxx line.

Just keeping the eye on competitors in both cases. I could imagine that people would be stupid when buying graphics cards and not having a clue (although you'd think that if they can install a graphics card that they'd know better). The Firefox thing is crazy though. Who's going to fall for that? They're probably just desperate to try anything as they're seeing their numbers dwindling.

ShadowHearth

Monotype wrote: »

Just keeping the eye on competitors in both cases. I could imagine that people would be stupid when buying graphics cards and not having a clue (although you'd think that if they can install a graphics card that they'd know better). The Firefox thing is crazy though. Who's going to fall for that? They're probably just desperate to try anything as they're seeing their numbers dwindling.

what about firefox?

in all fairness average Joe will look at numbers and will go for higher, i bet some people got burned switching from 5 series ATI in to 6.

i just wonder what numbers scale will they use after ATI will be done with xxxx and nvidia with xxx. "2 bananas 3 oranges ultra" etc

Monotype

ShadowHearth wrote: »

what about firefox?

They had slow version numbers from 1-3 spanning across many years. Things like v3.5 were major releases even though they weren't labelled as a whole number. Then they blazed through 4-9 all in the space of last year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox#Version_tables

i just wonder what numbers scale will they use after ATI will be done with xxxx and nvidia with xxx. "2 bananas 3 oranges ultra" etc

It's not worth investing your thoughts in. It probably gets drawn out on a beermat or serviette the day before it's announced to the company.

Osmosae

Monotype wrote: »

They had slow version numbers from 1-3 spanning across many years. Things like v3.5 were major releases even though they weren't labelled as a whole number. Then they blazed through 4-9 all in the space of last year....

Head wrecking, all just to catch up with chrome. You'd wonder do these companies stop to think that while annoying its still manageable today, but in 10 years time we're going to be left with Chrome 82 and Firefox 81

Love the beermats comment

Headshot

Dammit lads im fair bored, its either iv played that game already or dont like those games

Need a good single player game ya know

ShadowHearth

Headshot wrote: »

Dammit lads im fair bored, its either iv played that game already or dont like those games

Need a good single player game ya know

bioshock 1.

i am playing dead space 1. waiting for misses to come back home, not very comfortable playing it alone...

*i know, i am pussy....

Headshot

ShadowHearth wrote: »

bioshock 1.

i am playing dead space 1. waiting for misses to come back home, not very comfortable playing it alone...

*i know, i am pussy....

Played

Iv played loads and loads of games, is there any pc only great single player games?

ShadowHearth

Headshot wrote: »

Played

Iv played loads and loads of games, is there any pc only great single player games?

what type? want to venture in to old school stuff?

Headshot

ShadowHearth wrote: »

what type? want to venture in to old school stuff?

I like shiny graphics lol so I want something that blow me away tbh so it'd be be newish

Im in FPS, RPG's, action games and third person shooters

ShadowHearth

Headshot wrote: »

I like shiny graphics lol so I want something that blow me away tbh so it'd be be newish

Im in FPS, RPG's, action games and third person shooters

witcher 1 or witcher 2, but if you are pc gamer, then you would have played those 2 already. if not, i will stab you with a rusty fork.

metro 2033 - you can get it very cheap these days. its flipping amazing. good game play, good story, super eye candy.

stalker call of pripyat + misery mod - pure sex right there.

Headshot

ShadowHearth wrote: »

witcher 1 or witcher 2, but if you are pc gamer, then you would have played those 2 already. if not, i will stab you with a rusty fork.

metro 2033 - you can get it very cheap these days. its flipping amazing. good game play, good story, super eye candy.

stalker call of pripyat + misery mod - pure sex right there.

lol played :pac:

ShadowHearth

well then you are prety much in same boat as i am

i spend more time on boards.ie then playing.

i dip in to SWtor now and then. some WAR 40k retribution, shogun 2.


oh wait! did you ever played Heroes series?! heroes 6 is very good! settlers 7 is great too. very under rated games.


Serious sam 1, 2, 3? Orcs must die is alot of fun.

deconduo

Amnesia is a great game if you haven't played it yet. Make sure to turn off all the lights and play it in the dark.

Binding of Isaac is an addictive dungeon crawl indie game, from the makers of Super Meat Boy

I assume you've played Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim?

Tea_Bag

is this the most people ever online on this subforum?

30 (13 members & 17 guests)

also, +1 on amnesia.

Osmosae

Do ye reckon the unwillingness of sony and microsoft to update their consoles will drive people back towards the pc gaming market ? Particularly when you can get a top end gaming machine for not too much these days. You can use xbox controllers and theres ports for playstations, so no being held back by mouse and keyboard for console gamers and avenues like steam are extremely attractive but not well known outside of pc circles .... was just thinking bout it today when i heard saw a couple people bitching about the graphics on BF3 on consoles

FlyingIrishMan

Osmosae wrote: »

was just thinking bout it today when i heard saw a couple people bitching about the graphics on BF3 on consoles

The consoles don't need to be updated yet. They're perfectly fine as they are.
Sure the games don't look as good as PC Games, but to say they look bad would be a lie.

And according to inside sources, the next gen Xbox rumoured to be released near the end of 2013 is only going to have a GPU based on the Radeon 6670..
Don't expect console graphics to match PC gaming, ever basically.

Also another rumour is that the next gen Xbox will not be able to play used games!
Once a game is bought new it will like link itself to that Xbox and won't be able to be played on any other one.

Sources:
http://ie.ign.com/articles/2012/01/24/xbox-720-will-be-six-times-as-powerful-as-current-gen
http://kotaku.com/5879202/sources-the-next-xbox-will-play-blu+ray-may-not-play-used-games-and-will-introduce-kinect-2?tag=xbox-720

Osmosae

well you couldnt expect a console to match a pc, but pc's have taken such a leap forward at the consumer level passed consoles, not just the enthusiast gamer level that i think we may see a shift this year in more people going towards pc based gaming, just an idle thought

EDIT:

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

Also another rumour is that the next gen Xbox will not be able to play used games!
Once a game is bought new it will like link itself to that Xbox and won't be able to be played on any other one.

That's a terrible decision

EDIT 2:
Ugh so many questions and no actual facts to go on. Very disappointing news on the forthcoming xbox though, the multi display out sounds interesting, wonder if they'll have something like eyefinity

Brian

Made on offer on a vintage Marantz CD-63 on eBay... hope I get it this time :c

PseudoFamous

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

the next gen Xbox rumoured to be released near the end of 2013 is only going to have a GPU based on the Radeon 6670.

and the 6670 is based on the 5670, which would mean that the Xbox will be running on technology that was midrange three years before its release.
I sincerely hope this rumour is just a rumour for the sake of gaming.

Monotype

Osmosae wrote: »

avenues like steam are extremely attractive but not well known outside of pc circles .... was just thinking bout it today when i heard saw a couple people bitching about the graphics on BF3 on consoles

I've come to the conclusion that it's not down to graphics, money or the quality of games for most people. They just couldn't be arsed to find better solutions and they'll just buy whatever they see in ads and what their friends have. As you said, things like steam (although I'm not a big fan of it, it does make things more straightforward) and other solutions are not well known. There's a consensus that PC gaming requires a degree in IT and you have to mess around with tweaking everything on a system. I've found that windows 7 has actually been very impressive with sorting out drivers, so in reality, nearly all work for the average person could be eliminated, aside from being careful what you buy initially.
People are often impressed with what a PC has to offer so you could have a big shift if people were educated about the advantages - the only thing is that who would do it? Not the PC manufacturers - the big players wouldn't want to show up that they often put substandard graphics cards in there. Not the game publishers - they make higher margins on console games. Not Microsoft - They said that they would, but they have their own console. Valve maybe? Not for another while, they're nowhere near as powerful as the other developer/publisher giants or consoles. AMD and nVidia do try a bit but they have interests in console hardware. IBM have strong interst too. Intel? ...well they certainly have the money. I could see them pushing it if their Larrabee dedicated card had been a success but they're more interested in advertising their computing power and their name itself.

PseudoFamous wrote: »

and the 6670 is based on the 5670, which would mean that the Xbox will be running on technology that was midrange three years before its release.
I sincerely hope this rumour is just a rumour for the sake of gaming.

The Wii U apparently has a 4000 series. But Nintendo usually chooses the slightly slightly weaker components in favour of not selling the consoles for below cost. Maybe Microsoft is taking a page out of their book with the amount of money they lost with selling below cost on top of red rings of death.

ShadowHearth

Osmosae wrote: »

Do ye reckon the unwillingness of sony and microsoft to update their consoles will drive people back towards the pc gaming market ? Particularly when you can get a top end gaming machine for not too much these days. You can use xbox controllers and theres ports for playstations, so no being held back by mouse and keyboard for console gamers and avenues like steam are extremely attractive but not well known outside of pc circles .... was just thinking bout it today when i heard saw a couple people bitching about the graphics on BF3 on consoles

I would love to see more people convert to pc or just in addition to console play pc games too.

Unfortunately explaining console player who has no clue about pc hardware abou how pc gaming became better and cheaper is imposible. It's like hitting your head in to wall made out of titanium.

New Xbox will use 6670 and will cost around 600$ dollars, so in eu it will be 600eu.
It rumoured to come out in 1.5 years. You can build a perfect gaming pc for 600eu. In 1.5 years you can build a monster pc which will piss on new Xbox ashes. Plus alot of console gamers forget that in "pc gaming" we have two words. It's gaming and pc. When you buy a high end pc you buy not just ability to play games, but you buy pc too - the biggest multimedia equipment in the world. It's not as expencive as you think when you see a big picture!


Try to explain that to average joe console gamer. Unfortunately it's imposible. There will be always pc gaming haters.

Headshot

Thanks for the suggestions in the games lads, ill give Serious Sam a go, never played those games before

On a different subject

I got a new mouse, should I unistall the old mouse or can they both stay on the computer
Newer mouse is the Logitech G9x and the older one is razor respawn 3500

cherryghost

Headshot wrote: »

Thanks for the suggestions in the games lads, ill give Serious Sam a go, never played those games before

On a different subject

I got a new mouse, should I unistall the old mouse or can they both stay on the computer
Newer mouse is the Logitech G9x and the older one is razor respawn 3500

You don't have to but sure why keep the software on it in the first place? Also, you selling that G9x? :P

ShadowHearth

Headshot wrote: »

Thanks for the suggestions in the games lads, ill give Serious Sam a go, never played those games before

On a different subject

I got a new mouse, should I unistall the old mouse or can they both stay on the computer
Newer mouse is the Logitech G9x and the older one is razor respawn 3500

there is a humble bundle of serious sam games. go get it while its still up. if you like 1 and 2 remakes, then 3 is even more fun

Headshot

Enderman wrote: »

You don't have to but sure why keep the software on it in the first place? Also, you selling that G9x? :P

Nope that's the new mouse I got

If I was selling id be selling the razor respawn but I think ill keep it, always handy to have a back up mouse

ShadowHearth wrote: »

there is a humble bundle of serious sam games. go get it while its still up. if you like 1 and 2 remakes, then 3 is even more fun

thanks