Hardware Discussion Thread

tuxy · 23-02-2013 12:11am

NTMK wrote: »

no we will still get buggy ports (360 had pc like architecture and lazy devs ****ed up porting)

No the 360 used a powerpc processor.
So it was a RISC processor not a CISC that's used in PCs

NTMK · 23-02-2013 12:15am

tuxy wrote: »

No the 360 used a powerpc processor.

**** my bad thought the thing was x86 we might actually see some good ports now:D

AlmightyCushion · 23-02-2013 12:17am

NTMK wrote: »

no we will still get buggy ports (360 had pc like architecture and lazy devs ****ed up porting) but we might get some japanese developed games on pc due to everything being similar now and we'll also see more time being spent on content development as opposed to optimising for cell (imo this was the reason bf3 pc wasnt as fleshed out as it could have been but the spent the last 5 or so months optimising on ps3 that it became the lead platform)

The 360 wasn't using an X86 processor, it was based on IBM's PowerPC architecture.

SpannerMonkey · 23-02-2013 11:24am

MRTULES wrote: »

Titans on hardwareversand for 949 but not in stock for a few days

Got that mail too.
Anyone else thing its expensive considering its not as powerful as a GTX 690 and costs more ?

glynf · 23-02-2013 1:40pm

IMO it's far too expensive for a single GPU card, a 690/ 680 SLI /7970 CF are way better value. Nvidia are taking the piss with their pricing, if it was going for the 600-650 mark they would sell well, two of these in SLI would trounce anything else out there.

glynf · 23-02-2013 1:40pm

Double post, so I'll leave this here-George buying a box of Titans.

NTMK · 23-02-2013 1:53pm

glynf wrote: »

IMO it's far too expensive for a single GPU card, a 690/ 680 SLI /7970 CF are way better value. Nvidia are taking the piss with their pricing, if it was going for the 600-650 mark they would sell well, two of these in SLI would trounce anything else out there.

it is atm but if it drops below the 690 price which it should gives someone like me who is building an itx build a card which has a lower power draw and lower thermal output than a 690 and i cant do cf/sli

frozenfrozen · 24-02-2013 8:56pm

Edit: was posting about ram dying, then realised that I have a ridiculous 900000000000000 year warranty as with most ram these days. woohoo, now i get to wait for it to be shipped all around the place.

Gbear · 25-02-2013 2:40pm

Got my Corsair 500r last week.

It's good - my gpu is about 25 degrees cooler.

Build quality doesn't seem the greatest. The HDD trays in particular are the ****tiest quality ones I've ever come across.

Still. It's certainly functional.

indough · 27-02-2013 3:23pm

the swiftech h220 is now available, costs £120 ( ~€140 )

http://www.overclock.co.uk/product/Swiftech-H220-Compact-Drive-II-CPU-Water-Cooler_45550.html

or £107 if you can wait until march 8th

http://www.specialtech.co.uk/spshop/customer/Swiftech-H220-Compact-Drive-II-PWM-Water-Cooling-Kit-pid-17411.html

marco_polo · 28-02-2013 1:30pm

The always interesting Techspot CPU/GPU review is in for Crysis 3, most surprising result is the performance of the i3-3220 relative to even the older quad cores like the 980BE and the i7-920. Comparing the numbers in the CPU and GPU sections it would even slightly bottleneck a HD7850 at the same settings (@1200 and medium settings: 36fps vs 40fps). I suppose it had to be expected at some point in time, given it happened to the much slower Core 2 and Phenom dual cores a few years ago.

http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page4.html

tuxy · 28-02-2013 4:42pm

It looks like a budget build for crysis 3 should probably have the AMD FX-6200 for the CPU right?

Gbear · 28-02-2013 4:45pm

marco_polo wrote: »

The always interesting Techspot CPU/GPU review is in for Crysis 3, most surprising result is the performance of the i3-3220 relative to even the older quad cores like the 980BE and the i7-920. Comparing the numbers in the CPU and GPU sections it would even slightly bottleneck a HD7850 at the same settings (@1200 and medium settings: 36fps vs 40fps). I suppose it had to be expected at some point in time, given it happened to the much slower Core 2 and Phenom dual cores a few years ago.

http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page4.html

I'm somewhat skeptical of those.

I have C3 running smooth as silk on my machine.
I don't know what fps I'm getting but I'm not noticing any problems with it, particularly since I disabled AA and VSync.
I've a mildly OC'd 7950 and the game's running at 1440p.

Monotype · 28-02-2013 4:53pm

tuxy wrote: »

It looks like a budget build for crysis 3 should probably have the AMD FX-6200 for the CPU right?

FX-6200 is last generation; you'd want the 6300.

I have to say that I still like the 8320 for its value best. It's a good competitor against the 3570K (in the right scenarios), being €50 cheaper and with AMD making its way into consoles + Crysis 3 results + having a better upgrade path with AM3+ than 1155. Looks like the 8 cores could actually come to use.

tuxy · 28-02-2013 4:53pm

Gbear wrote: »

I'm somewhat skeptical of those.

I have C3 running smooth as silk on my machine.
I don't know what fps I'm getting but I'm not noticing any problems with it, particularly since I disabled AA and VSync.
I've a mildly OC'd 7950 and the game's running at 1440p.

It is strange to see a gtx 580 ahead of a 7950 but it is the second benchmark I have seen that puts nvidia way ahead in this game.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/crysis_3_graphics_performance_review_benchmark,6.html

60 fps is pretty much the standard for a game running really smooth. I know it's still perfectly playable at lower fps but you definitely notice when it dips below 60.
Could you run fraps to see what fps you get, would be interesting to see how an overclocked 7950 does that that res.

Gbear · 28-02-2013 4:55pm

tuxy wrote: »

It is strange to see a gtx 580 ahead of a 7950 but it is the second benchmark I have seen that puts nvidia way ahead in this game.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/crysis_3_graphics_performance_review_benchmark,6.html

60 fps is pretty much the standard for a game running really smooth. I know it's still perfectly playable at lower fps but you definitely notice when it dips below 60.
Could you run fraps to see what fps you get, would be interesting to see how an overclocked 7950 does that that res.

This it?
http://www.fraps.com/download.php

tuxy · 28-02-2013 4:56pm

Gbear wrote: »

This it?
http://www.fraps.com/download.php

Yes just run that before starting the game and you will get an fps counter on the corner of your screen.

BloodBath · 28-02-2013 5:15pm

It is strange to see a gtx 580 ahead of a 7950 but it is the second benchmark I have seen that puts nvidia way ahead in this game.

The 580 isn't ahead at any resolution :S

tuxy · 28-02-2013 5:19pm

BloodBath wrote: »

The 580 isn't ahead at any resolution :S

http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page4.html

ahead at 1680x1050 equal at 1920x1200 :S

The link I posted was the other bench where I saw Nvidia ahead but the 580 does not do as good.

BloodBath · 28-02-2013 5:32pm

Ah ok. That's at the high preset though. At very high the 7950 is ahead in all with just about playable frame rates. Need to be overclocking for this. Still going to be getting 40 fps tops it seems. Time to go crossfire soon maybe :S

tuxy · 28-02-2013 5:40pm

Yeah but it's just weird to see last gen nvidia card up there with current gen amd. You never know how accurate these benchmarks are though.

Also the gtx 660(non ti) a card which many considered weak is way ahead of the 7870 and just beats the 7950 non boost at 1920x1200 high settings. Memory bandwidth does bottleneck it at high res though so no surprise there.

BloodBath · 28-02-2013 5:51pm

Meh I wouldn't pay much attention to stock clocked 7950's anyway. You can get the clocks 30-40% higher. The game still favors Nvidia though. Drivers might change that story.

Amd are being pretty damn slow with this 13.2 final release.

Gbear · 28-02-2013 6:51pm

I was getting about 27-30 frames consistently. Not much fluctuation.

That's only with 950 clock 1350 memory. Might see if I can squeeze a bit more out of it.

Edit: Incidentally, if anyone wants to help with OCing my PC nip on into my thread in the OC forum.:)

marco_polo · 01-03-2013 11:27am

I'm now officially a Sapphire Trixx convert, out of all of them (GPU Tweak/afterburner/iTurbo) the only piece of software that lets me near the core voltage of my HD 7850 for some reason

.

Bump up to 1.225v (which seems to be the max allowable) of gets me to a stable 1200 core/1350 memory

marco_polo · 01-03-2013 1:52pm

Could well be an interesting product for low powered, budget gaming HTPC or laptop, as I doubt we will see AMD able to squeeze that powerful a GPU mixed with more powerful desktop grade CPU cores onto the same die until well into 2014 or even 2015.

http://www.techspot.com/news/51791-amd-will-sell-a-stripped-down-version-of-sonys-playstation-4-apu.html

AMD's accelerated processing unit (APU) strategy got a major boost last week when Sony announced that it will be using an AMD Jaguar based APU in its upcoming Playstation 4 games console. Now AMD has said that a cut down version of the same APU will be available to consumers, albeit without Sony's technology.

While Sony revealed some information about the AMD APU that will power the Playstation 4, the details that were made public were all about AMD's technologies rather than Sony's. AMD told The INQUIRER that the APU used is a custom A-series part that has a mix of AMD and Sony technology.

However John Taylor, head of marketing for AMD's Global Business Units, said that a version of the same chip without Sony's technology will be available for consumers later this year.

Serephucus · 01-03-2013 2:15pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVNuN0UcYUQ

H220 review. It's a lot more telling than TTL's.

Eboggles · 01-03-2013 2:25pm

Serephucus wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVNuN0UcYUQ

H220 review. It's a lot more telling than TTL's.

After watching TTL's review, I decided against ordering the H220. €150 is a tonne of money to pay for that kit, especially when you can get a fully (I don't count the H220 as custom) custom watercooling setup for not much more.

As a result, I'm thinking of migrating to a white (read: not grey

) 600t and watercooling the sh!te out of it.

Would anyone be interested in a 2500k/Asrock P67 Pro3?

Serephucus · 01-03-2013 2:38pm

Eboggles wrote: »

After watching TTL's review, I decided against ordering the H220. €150 is a tonne of money to pay for that kit, especially when you can get a fully (I don't count the H220 as custom) custom watercooling setup for not much more.

As a result, I'm thinking of migrating to a white (read: not grey ) 600t and watercooling the sh!te out of it.

Damn it... :P

It's actually not bad value at all. It's £107 for the H220 on Specialtech. The next non-AIO solution up is an RS240 kit for £143. It would most-likely perform the same. Both have 30mm copper rads, both have decent tubing, and good CPU blocks. The deciding factor is going to be the pump. I can't find comparable specs, so I'll leave that one alone.

If you're looking then at a fully custom loop, with parts that would actually be worth buying over an AIO solution, you're look at an EX240 or NexXxoS 240 rad, Rasa/Raystorm block, and D5 pump. Throw in fittings and tubing, and you're looking at the guts of £200 easily.

This is all assuming the same fans of course. TTL makes the massive mistake of using the stock fans at 12V for these kits. Sure, it's fairer in a sense, but it doesn't really give you an idea of how well a given kit will perform all things being equal.

NTMK · 01-03-2013 3:34pm

Eboggles wrote: »

As a result, I'm thinking of migrating to a white (read: not grey ) 600t and watercooling the sh!te out of it.

want a dark grey one :P

the white one is probably the nicest white case ive seen esp with blue lighting

marko93 · 01-03-2013 8:15pm

Quick question, what would be a good USB WiFi dongle? Sadly, ethernet cable is less than ideal

Hardware Discussion Thread

Comments