What does your PCs look like?

[Migas]

s10469047 was probably given the wrong information as I've heard other people saying that 30 FPS thing on the server and also I thought this was true.

I think there was no need to reach this point. People learn about these things as they get more informed about technological things. It is not pleasant and it is not friendly to call someone "retard", to post big red unfriendly message, and to place "lmao" images as a response, specially when some of these come from Senior Members.

A simple explanation like how Jzargo did (thanks for it) without any of these unnecessary additional messages to make another person feel terrible would've been enough for s10469047 to understand he was wrong about it.

[enderaptor]

yea i guess i might have pushed it a bit far, i meant no harm/insult , it was just a joke .

sorry migas and s10469047 (specially you s10, you know i meant no harm) and i guess if this will get me punished i'll gladly accept that, sorry again.


P.S: i think i sould edit the cooment out but i prefer to keep it as a reminder when next time i act before thinking.

[ZwemmendeBoom]

My sincere apologies to anyone who felt offended. This wasn't at all my intention.

The picture in my post is a quote from the movie "Tropic Thunder" and is commonly used as an internetmeme.

[Jzargo]

apologies for the big red exclamations as well, I meant to make a joke and not offend anyone

[Fedgar_Lurch]

To be fair to S7 x10^8 30 became the benchmark because it was readily attainable with older hardware, and gave good performance.
Now, Jzargo hit on some points, but there are some issues with his explanation. We have to look at the hardware to really get a good picture.

You have 3 main things you have take into account (there are other things, but I dont want to get into that much detail)

Framerate = FPS
Refresh rate = Hz
Pixel density = P/in^2

So lets say you have a computer with a standard 60hz monitor with a 1080p resolution (Pixel density), a graphics card that is capable of running whatever game you choose at 300fps.
In this circumstance, anything over 60 Fps is absolutely pointless. The FPS are going to be truncated by the maximum refresh rate. IE the monitor is not capable of updating the picture more than 60 times per second.
Now lets change the hardware...
Same graphics, new fancy monitor, 120Hz refreshrate, same 1080p resolution.
In this case, you could crank up to 120FPS and there would be a measurable difference (measurable being the key word here). That being said... there might be an appreciable difference between 60FPS and 90FPS but it would be marginal. Between 90 and 120FPS there would be even less. This is because the pixel density is just not enough to really showcase the difference.
Changing the hardware one more time...
Same graphics, Brand new, 4k with a 240Hz refresh rate (Yes they make them, no they have no point in 95% of situations)
In this case, running things you would see a marked difference in running a fast paced game (or movie) at 120FPS over 60FPS, you would even see a difference between 120FPS and 180FPS but much higher and its going be less and less noticeable the closer you get to the maximum theoretical ability for our eyes to detect movement in an electronic format.

Jzargo touched on, but was mistaken in this. The 300~Hz limit is true, but that is because of the format we are using. If you are curious to see a similar phenominon in action, you can look at your computer/tv through your camera, you will notice a shudder/flicker/rolling aspect to the video. Things that are not displayed electronically, can be seen at much higher rates. But not the 7000000FPS he was talking about FPS for measuring anything but videorate is pointless. There is a good paper on this that you can read if you are interested

http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v5/n10/full/nn924.html

There is no quick way to determine what the "Best framerate" is, its entirely subjective to the application, the hardware, your own personal sensitivity, ect. Yes the higher your framerate the better your experience will be, same goes with resolution. You must always take into account the law of diminishing returns, after a certain threshold... things become less and less productive.

[Jzargo]

neat explanation!

I put FPS in brackets most of the time; I know it's impossible to measure human eyesight like this and I began the explanation saying exactly that. I used it as an approximation as we have no other measurement, understandable by the regular person. I messed up Hz and FPS, though.

P.S. Interesting read!

[RNTenant]

   Hello. This is SuperSonic14045 speaking again.

   You might have noticed I changed the motherboard in the parts list for my future spec (once the MSI H81M-P33, now the ASRock H81M-HDS R2.0) because my original choice lacked a USB 3.0 header. If I have the front port to use, why let it go to waste?
   Either way, unfortunately I also had go change the processor to the i3 4170. Apparently, even though the regular ASRock H81M-HDS supports the i3 4160, the ASRock H81M-HDS R2.0 surprisingly does not, all according to ASRock's own website. The one I will be buying only gains support to the i3 4170 with a BIOS update though (the required version is 1.10)
   My question is the following: can the motherboard have by any chance the updated BIOS already installed when I buy it?

[Jzargo]

by any chance it will work good as is. the BIOS update is only necessary for features rarely used by normal consumers, such as Trusted Computing, ECC memory and so on.
it won't be already updated when you buy it, no way it will be. i think they don't even produce LGA 1150 motherboards anymore at all, as intel is no longer shipping Haswell CPUs.

P.S. Also, that CPU fan will be useless unless you're buying it for the looks, because i3 CPUs can't be overclocked and the stock cooler is perfectly fine for absolutely everything at it's rated clock rate.
I don't know if I mentioned that earlier, but unless you're going to upgrade to something like an R9 380 or a GTX 960, you could as well go with a Pentium G3258 instead of an i3 (overclockable) and get a R9 370 instead. up to you, though

[RNTenant]

   Thank you for the answer J'zargo. That being the case, I truly hope the motherboard still goes to POST with BIOS 1.00.
   About upgrading, yes, you have mentioned what you said, though in less detail. Also, as this will be my first build and as I was awarded the money to get it (do not ask), I may stick with it for quite a while (maybe at least 30 months). Also, since overclocking isn't of my current interest, even though the Pentium G3258 is cheaper I won't be going for it.

[Jzargo]

Of course the i3 4170 is better than the G3258, the thing is, with the money you save you can invest in a better GPU. Unless there is extreme "bottlenecking", such as giving the Pentium a GTX 970 or R9 390, a better GPU will always lead to more framerates than a better CPU. Overclocking is very simple and can lead to significant performance gains.

 That being said, there have been recent problems with starting a couple of AAA games on dual-core, non-Hyperthreading CPUs, those are caused by poor choices taken by the developer and not the physical limits of the CPU, and normally patches exist, but I suppose an i3 would be a safe choice as applications detect it as a quad-core thanks to Hyperthreading.

[Jzargo]

Here is my now-ugly rig, I had to mess up the cable management when taking out the dead video card and later a defunct HDD too. Can't be bothered to fix it or clean it again as I'm getting a new PC in 3 months, but it has served me well!
 I'll probably stick in an R7 250 and place it as a family PC for my younger siblings to use as they like playing games with me


P.S. Idk how I forgot to mention this, but the PSU also died, albeit reasonably as it's over 10 years old, but it had neat black cables as opposed to this one's ugly rainbows.

[RNTenant]

   Oh yes, the inside of a desktop in all of its glory...

   Two questions:
       1st: - On the bottom right by the hard drive, is that an unplugged SATA cable?
       2nd: - 400W PSU or...?

[Jzargo]

Yep, the vertically mounted HDD is unplugged because it's a fairly old 250 GB 5400 RPM one. I used it for storing data I won't ever need but, you know, I might need it someday. Windows has been reporting errors and it's been doing weird stuff so I just unplugged it, not sure whether to put it away in a shelf or try to see if it isn't a software problem.
 The PSU is 350W, plenty for the stuff that would run off this PC.

[Jzargo]

By the way sonic, is that SSD going to be your only means of storage? At 40$ (assuming that currency is dollars), it's pretty much a steal but I strongly advise you to not use 120 GB as a sole means of storage. That was what I did with my 240 GB SSD and I ran out of space in a couple of months (I didn't have any intensive or AAA games on it either), and I had to buy a HDD (got a 2 TB one but it's overkill as 70% of it is free). Speedy drives are awesome, but a 1 TB HDD is better than a 120 blazing-fast SSD. Consider 30 of it out due to OS, and that's 90 GBs you've gotta store games, pictures, songs, movies on.
 I understand that your budget is limited, but it kinda sucks to have a PC that can play all the games you want but not having space to store them. HDDs are dirt cheap nowadays, I got my 2 TB for 60$ (with a hefty discount of course, but a generous price nevertheless).
 Also make sure there is good WiFi connection where your PC would be, and using cables really isn't that hard, you just need a little imagination and primitive cable management abilities (such as sticking a cable to a wall). My PC is 2 rooms away from the router but getting an Ethernet cable there was pretty easy.

[bricer123]

I have a Mac.  Fight me, nerds.