TX_Angel
-
Posts
2,320 -
Joined
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Posts posted by TX_Angel
-
-
So... I just canceled my sub. Will gladly resub if the issue is fixed. Not canceling out of protest - simply don't want to waste money on something that I literally cannot play - from a technical perspective. I considered reverting to Win 7, but I think it's silly to do that for just 1 game. I can wait.
There isn't anything for Bioware to fix, the problem is somewhere on your end.
It is possible you'll end up having to do a clean install of Windows 10. But something isn't working there.
Have you completely removed NVidia drivers and reinstalled using their clean install option?
-
at least a season, possibly years. As long as I'm getting to play and improving my skills by getting to test myself against better players sometimes and other games having a decent shot at winning, then I'm fine. That's what happens in most rec leagues in my town every season and they all do fine.
Fair enough... but that isn't what happens in SWTOR... all too often, you DON'T have a decent shot at winning.
Now some of that is due to bad matchmaking (premade guilds against PUGs for example), but some of it is due to gear, class combinations, etc.
Skill only makes up for so much.
-
Exactly this. I am the same way. Way back with the game City of Heroes (pre issue 13 pvp nerfs) was my first venture into PvP. I got beat bad constantly when I first started. I changed things up and sucked less, but still got my hindquarters handed to me repeatedly. I started talking to the people that were the best at killing me and got tips on how to build my character (totally different set up in that game for pvp vs pve) and how to improve. After a bit of effort I was the one people were coming to for tips because they couldn't figure out how some giant guy in a pink bunny outfit and wifebeater shirt killed them so fast.
Oh sure, to be fair, learning is part of it... but not all matches are a learn 2 play issue... PvP in SWTOR is part learning to play, and part being the right class, the right spec, and in the right gear. It also depends on who you're matched with, you can be the best player in the world, but if you have 6 newbies in PvE gear, it isn't likely to matter if the other team is 6 experts in PvP gear.
Skill only makes up for so much.
-
Yes, if they were that desperate, they should have just sat on the sidelines and watched the clock or gone home. Who cares if the final score was 107-1 or 350-1? A loss is a loss, and people need to get over it.
Then I feel sorry for you...
Existed, sure, but wasn't codified. I'd have no problem with local media slamming that winning basketball team for their "unsportsmanlike" behaviour. But there should not be official rules and regulations saying you can't do it.Don't be shocked if the coach is fired over it.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2009/01/26/girls-basketball-coach-fired-after-100-0-win.html
That happened in 2009 here in Texas. Coach was fired over it.
-
You don't like getting your face rearranged, leave the warzone. If enough people do that, it closes out anyway. No need for special functionality as described.
So you're saying that the losing highschool basketball team should have walked off the court?
Are you suggesting that some percentage of PvP players just quit playing? Do you think that would be healthy for the game?
As an aside, I think rules against running up the score (in video games or IRL) are asinine, and a symptom of the general PC BS that our society has fallen to -.-That isn't a recent thing, regardless of what you might thing. Basic human decency has existing long before your lifetime.
-
I guess its the way we grew up and other factors on life is why we have different opinions. When I get beat down I simply want to get up and try again, always have, in sports, and in video games. When I get beat by someone better, I want to do better, not simply just call it quits and move on.
I understand, and there is nothing wrong with wanting to get better. But sometimes you're just outmatched.
If the other side is better, you are going to lose.
I'm not the best at PvP. I do ok, I win my share of matches. But sometimes I end up in a PUG that has zero chance. No healers, no tanks, wrong classes. The other side is made up of fully geared people who are experts.
It becomes pointless. I find that I simply stop trying when it becomes obvious that there is no chance. Some people just camp somewhere, usually 1 or 2 people keep fighting to the end and yell at everyone else, "why are you idiots guarding, keep fighting", to which someone replies, "the match is lost, we're just waiting for it to end".
It isn't fun, and if it happens too often, people stop playing. That isn't good for anyone.
-
Not sure why you're complaining about wasting time in a game mode that is nothing but a time waster, really.
But it isn't a bad idea.
I suppose you could say the girls in the high school game in the article I linked were just "wasting their time".
Here is another story on it:
http://www.wkyc.com/sports/high-school/gilmour-girls-basketball-defeats-neo-prep-108-1/46795423
If you read the comments below that, you'll see several people say the head coach at Gilmore is known for running up the score, they were ahead 71 points at halftime. Likely someone said something to him to "cool it", thus the "only" 107 point win.
-
Out of all the PVP oriented games I played... I have never seen anything like this and probably wouldn't want to. If they are skilled enough to completely lock the players in a spawn trap and making it impossible for the other team to break it, they should be rewarded. Yeah... its downright dirty, unsportsmanlike, and cruel, but they did have the skill to rule the match... and should be rewarded so.
The only place in the world where shutouts are acceptable is in professional sports where players are being paid.
Coaches can and DO get fired for this when it happens at the school level. It is considered unsportsmanlike behavior and is not acceptable for amateur play.
---
Let me put this another way. If you belonged to a tennis or bowling club and you went to Thursday Tennis or Bowling nights, and it was as often as not a complete shutout with one side stomping the crap out of the other, how long do you think the losing players would keep coming back?
There comes a point where a healthy PvP enviroment in the game requires that teams either be balanced properly, or shutouts get shutdown or avoided or there needs to be some level of mercy for those involved. Otherwise you'll end up with people with personal problems stomping newbies and taking great joy in it and lots of lower skilled players simply not coming back to play anymore.
How many people here keep saying, "we need cross server queues"? I see a post almost every week. Well, if there was a more sportsmanlike attitude and design to the game, we might not need that. Instead you have stomp fests that aren't fun and most people don't want to be part of it.
-
http://www.cleveland.com/sports/index.ssf/2016/02/ohio_high_school_basketball_co.html
"In wake of 108-1 girls basketball score, should Ohio pass a 'mercy rule' for high school basketball?"
"Unlike football, where the Ohio High School Athletic Association has a regulation in place to run the clock after a large point differential is reached, basketball does not, adding to the rise of lopsided victories."
---
There are times when PvP is a blast, when it is a close match and everyone is playing hard. Those are fun, win or lose...
What ISN'T fun is when the score is 600 to 0 when playing the snow/mid/grass turrets, or when it is 100% to 0% on shielded turrets. It isn't fun for the losers and it shouldn't be fun for the winners. Anyone who takes joy and glee from complete shutouts has personal issues IMHO...
I would like to see a mercy button in PvP. If one side is just shutting out the other, let people click it. If more than 50% of the members of the team click it, then the match ends early.
-
Should I do some research to figure out if this is compatible with my laptop or are they standard? And is 240 enough to hold Windows 10 + SWTOR comfortably?
My main concern would be that if I got this I would have to buy an HDD as well to put all of my other games on since I have only 1 internal slot.
Post your laptop to be sure, but these are standard 2.5" SATA laptop drives, it should work in just about any laptop made in the past... well, anything that runs SWTOR...
But if you post a link to the laptop page on Amazon or NewEgg, I'm happy to double check for you.
And 240GB is enough for Windows 10 + SWTOR + a small handful of other games, but with games taking 30+ GB these days, it does go quick. The 480GB model might be worth considering if you're worried about space.
Crucial 480GB BX200 - $130
It is exactly double the price of the 240GB drive, so if you can swing it, it will give you some peace of mind on the space issue.
-
Further down in that same article is: "When we ratchet the CPUs back up to their regular, stock clockspeeds, we see a gap worth discussing. Overall at stock, the i7-6700K is an average 37% faster than Sandy Bridge in CPU benchmarks, 19% faster than the i7-4770K, and 5% faster than the Devil’s Canyon based i7-4790K."
5% faster for a chip that is 200 Mhz slower is telling.
The 19% faster than the i7-4770k is mostly due to the clock speed difference at stock, not the IPC difference.
I would agree that Skylake is about 5% faster than Haswell at the same speed, but you won't notice 5% in normal use, only benchmarks will show the difference.
You are correct that the end user probably wont be able to tell the differenceThen we are in agreement.
I would further make the statement that the normal end user will not see any difference between an i5 and i7 desktop chip from the same generation, or even one apart.
i5 Haswell or Skylake, i7 Haswell or Skylake, they'll all perform about the same, give or take a few percentage points.
It is worth noting that I didn't say the i7 wasn't faster, I said that it didn't provide worthwhile benefit to gamers.
With all other hardware being equal in testing machines, an increase of 4 threads, 500 MHz base, 300 MHz boosted and 2MB L3 cache is a rather large difference between chips. I would hazard a guess that difference also plays a factor into why Intel charges more for the i7s.That gap doesn't exist in the real world, or it shouldn't at least. Which was my point about the i5-6600k only existing to be overclocked. If you're running it at stock, you're doing it wrong and should have gotten a i5-6500 instead.
The only real difference for most PC users (including gamers) between the i5 and i7 is the clockspeed, and overclocking fixes that. Note the stock speeds of the i5-6600 and i7-6700 (non-K versions) and compare them, you'll find them MUCH closer together than the K versions.
You picked out two poor examples to try and make a point, but your overall mistake is that you're buying into the marketing nonsense.
16GB of DDR3 doesn't cost $90, you simply found an example where it does, but you can buy that for $60. You can't buy 16GB of DDR at any speed for $60.
Age aside, there are exactly 2 players in the CPU field, AMD and Intel. Who cares what AMD does? 24% of the CPU market.So? We're talking about the differences between the i5 and the i7, which has nothing to do with AMD.
The Haswell uses a LGA 1150 socket. The Skylake uses a LGA 1151 socket. The Kaby Lake and Cannonlake chips are projected to be LGA 1151 sockets. All you have to do is change the processor and motherboard on a Skylake system, leaving everything else alone until the Cannonlake debutes in 2017. Stick with the Haswell, its a full upgrade.You won't do that, almost no one will. That is the false logic of "future proofing".
There won't be enough of a difference between Skylake and Cannonlake to make the change worth making. I've seen that promise many times over the decades, I have yet to actually find it worthwhile to upgrade the CPU in a computer. If the jump is enough to bother with, you need a new motherboard.
Every time.
The memory form factor doesnt change very often. DDR lost out to DDR2 around 03-04. DDR3 took over around 2007. DDR3 is fully able to step down so DDR3-2400 can run in a DDR3-800 slot just fine. Spending the money on something that isn't going to change very often, and has a lifetime warrentee, isn't a "new and shiny upgrade path".DDR2 didn't start out at 800 MHz, DDR3 didn't start out at 1,600 MHz. While the basic format has been around awhile, there have been many changes.
DDR3 also has 1.35v, 1.5v, and 1.65v flavors, and many timings. It hasn't remotely been static since 2007. Back then, 1,066 MHz was the normal speed, with some machines using 1,333 MHz DDR3. My current machine (built in 2014) uses DDR3-2400, which wasn't even an option back then.
Unless you upgrade often, very little can be carried over for very long.
Its researched planning that might be a bit cheaper than replacing perfectly good memory every time the motherboard and processor are upgraded.The same promises were made back in the 90s with "Pentium Overdrive". That wasn't worth doing then, CPU upgrades aren't worth doing now.
Directx 12 support is already out in the wild. Refering back to that Steam Hardware Survey. 28.18% DX12GPU & Windows 10, 39.64% DX12GPU & Pre-WIN10.So? DX10 support existed for years before games went to DX10. Seriously, if you think the above means anything, then you don't understand the subject at all.
The games have to be written to support it. Just having DX12 doesn't help, the game companies have to write the games to support it.
SWTOR doesn't run any faster on Windows 10 than it does on Windows 7 or 8 for exactly this reason, it is still using DX9 and will ALWAYS use DX9, unless Bioware rewrites the engine for DX12. But if they do that, then the engine can ONLY run on Windows 10.
That is not likely to happen within the reasonable lifetime of SWTOR.
----
TL;DR - In my opinion, you buy into hype and marketing way too much and don't deal with the reality of the business enough. New and shiny and big numbers and promises in the future seem to appeal to you, but all that really matters is right now, today.
-
I also pay for the 150 mb/s internet speed through comcast
The connection speed doesn't matter, latency and number of hops to the SWTOR server is what counts.
You could be on 15 megabit and your performance would be exactly the same.
BOTH AMD DESKTOP AND LAPTOP runs without any frame lag or server. My ping never goes over 13 and no matter where or what i do i have no lag. Even at peak times.If your ping time in the game is 13ms, then you must live right next to the servers, because there is no distance travel in there.
In any case, most of what people refer to as "lag" isn't really lag, but rather frame rate drops. The term is misused, but it has been misused so much that it has become accepted.
-
It's an Asus Z170 Pro Gaming, and according to this Anandtech article the M.2 slot is x4.
Yes, with that board, you should be good to go.
A review I found notes M.2 speed to be lackluster, but cites driver issues as a probable cause. Also the SSD they used for testing is an old model and apparently only x2.You're buying a very early technology that doesn't have a lot of choices or competition right now. Give it a year, I expect the prices will be cut in half and the performance to double.
They seem to do fairly well in random reads, it's just the writes that are a problem. I would imagine loading sequences in SW:TOR and other games to be biased towards sequential reads.Yes, but how much faster in random reads is the 950 Pro vs. 850 EVO? Not much.
But again, disclaimer... I haven't tested it, I'm giving advice based on reviews and my experience of messing around with a ton of hardware.
Let me put this another way. Going from a HDD to a SSD is a blazing change, largely due to random read/write speed, not sequential speed. You go from a 45 second boot time to a 5 second boot time. That is all random.
Modern HDD transfer at about 200 MB/s, modern SSD at about 500 MB/s. The 950 Pro is about the same percentage jump in sequential transfer speeds over SATA SSDs. What is the jump in random read speeds over SATA SSDs? What is the jump in random read speeds over SATA HDDS?
That is where I draw my answer from.
That is a big part of it. Given the other specs of my computer - i7-6700k, 16 GB 2666 MHz DDR4 RAM, GTX 980 and dual 2560x1440 displays - I figured an M.2 NVMe SSD would be appropriate. The current drive is a Crucial MX200, which is an excellent one as far as SATA drives go, but it's still limited by the SATA link speed. SW:TOR isn't the only game I play, and I also use the computer for other things which sometimes involve heavy data processing and could benefit from a faster drive.One thing I'm cautious about with the 950 Pro is that it uses TLC NAND. I still remember the performance degradation debacle with the 840 EVO, so I'm going to do some research before I trust that particular technology again.
The 950 Pro uses MLC, not TLC:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9702/samsung-950-pro-ssd-review-256gb-512gb
I had the slowdown issues on the 840 EVO (and the 840, which they never fixed). I can say the 850 EVO doesn't appear to have the problem. Samsung screwed up, sorta fixed the 840 EVO, and moved on. Such are the joys of the tech business.
That is one reason why the Crucial line of drives is often my go to brand, I now have more of them in the office than Samsung. But I still have a 840 EVO in my main personal desktop, and it runs just fine these days.
---
If you decide to do it, please report back with your opinions. Sometimes a subjective opinion is worth as much as objective tests are. I have found that benchmarks will say X is faster than Y, but then when just using a computer, the difference isn't really noticeable.
I have learned to check for the "does this bloody matter in real life" test, which too many tech reviews leave out.
-
So can I expect to see a significant improvement on the new desktop compared to the Lenovo laptop? Will this game likely be lag free on the new computer?
Will it be faster? Yes.
Will it be massively faster? Meh... maybe...
Just being a desktop will help, the clocks are faster, the GPU is faster, etc. But your existing laptop isn't "old" and it has a dedicated GPU which isn't terrible.
That Alienware is expensive for what it is, upgrade it to what it should be and it is really expensive.
$850 for a system with a basic $100 ish video card and hard drive? No SSD at that price? You're paying a massive Dell Alienware tax for a shiny case that doesn't get you anything.
Lenovo IdeaCentre 700-25ISH ($930)
This system includes a SSD boot drive (and the 1TB HDD for data), and a FAR superior GPU in the GTX 960. It also has a far superior CPU, the i7-6700 at 3.4GHz (turbo to 4.0GHz) vs. the i5-6400 at 2.7 GHz (Turbo to 3.3GHz).
---
Note: You can build yourself a better desktop than any of these of course, but not everyone is inclined to build their own, so if you want to buy, the above Lenovo system is a good place to compare and start shopping.
Side note: If you don't care about SSD and want cheap, try this:
ASUS M32CD - $450
That system is almost exactly the same as the Alienware:
i5-6400
8GB DDR4
1TB HDD
AC Wi-Fi
Buy this card and add it, will take you 15 min:
EVGA GTX 950 - $150
That card comes with an adapter to convert the 2 MOLEX power cables inside the ASUS machine to one PCI-E power cable, it is the most card I'd run in that machine, but it'll be enough for modest gaming at 1080p.
So for $600 total, you get the same basic computer as the Alienware, for $250 less.
If you think you want to go higher on the GPU, then don't get that ASUS machine, it lacks the space and cooling and power supply for more GPU than that, but it is the "less expensive option".
If you want to spend more:
CYBERPOWERPC Gamer Xtreme GXi9100A - $866
Gets you more or less the same thing as above, but comes ready to go. The plus side is that it will include a better case and probably better power supply.
-
When you compare the 2 stock chips that are architecturally identical, the fps difference is around ~10-15FPS. Google a stress comparison of the i5-6500 and the i7-6700 in Far Cry 4 and Grand Theft Auto 5. You'll not only see a FPS difference up to the neighborhood of around 26%. You'll see a wide fluctuation in the i5 frame rate that doesn't exist i7 (read that as i5 stressing out) because of the Hyper Threading and the extra L3 cache allow the extra push the i5 just doesn't have the chips for.
I would question any such results. There isn't enough of a difference between the chips to provide the fps spread you're describing. Either someone is testing it wrong or is setting it up to show what they want it to show.
I have most of the chips that we're talking about (only the i7-6700k is missing from my test bench because it is still in short supply and I'm not recommending it for anyone right now)
People on a budget should be making choices that fit in their budget. The current "best" Intel has is the i7 Skylake. If you can afford it, do it. If you can't you can't, don't.If you can afford it, you might still not want to do it. The number of people who should actually spend the extra $100 for an i7 is in the very small single digits, yet the number of people who DO buy it is far larger, because "oh it is faster and thus it is better, right?"
A lot of people make uninformed buying decisions, or poorly informed at least, which is why cards like the GT710 exist:
So many people see a computer and say, "oh, that has NVidia GeForce in it, that's good right? I need one of those, that computer should do the trick", without understanding that a name means nothing.
For most people, the i7 fits into that category, only in reverse. "Oh, well the i7 is faster than the i5, right? And I want a fast computer, so I better get that". Sure, except does it make the difference you think it makes? Not likely. Sure, it doesn't hurt you, but you just spent $100 more than you had to, because you didn't understand what you were buying.
DDR4 is replacing DDR3.So? It will over time, but what difference does that make to the person building or buying a computer today?
If you build a Skylake computer today, with few exceptions, you should do it with DDR3. The odds of actually upgrading the RAM in the system's lifetime are low, $60 will get you 16GB of DDR3 which should last you the life of the machine for most use cases, and it costs less than DDR4.
DDR4 being "new" doesn't mean much if the difference doesn't show up to the end user.
AMD has already done it in their embedded market and will with Zen.Who cares what AMD does?
If I had to guess, you're young and haven't watched the market for decades, you think "new and shiny" must be best, and you think that having lots of upgrade paths for chips and motherboards is a nice thing.
In my very long experience going back to the 8088, I have never found that to be the case and I see nothing that will change it going forward. CPU/RAM/Motherboard almost always gets installed as a set and replaced as a set. Oh sure, you can find exceptions, but not many. I sure wouldn't base any buying decisions on that line of thinking.
Skylake is Intel's move. The Skylake will future proof your system far more than last year's i5. One thing you can be certain of, The best video card on the market is already out of date.The best video card on the market isn't out of date, the best video card on the market is... *drum roll please* The best video card on the market!
As for Skylake, it is no more future proof than a Haswell Refresh would be. For most users planning to keep a computer up to 5 years, either choice is fine right now, they aren't going to see or notice any difference. It also won't matter if they put in DDR3 or DDR4.
Being "newer" does not equal being "better".
DirectX 12 is also on the horizon. Its already shown to favor multi-core processors. ( there is a demo on steam) Play with it yourself... The i7 plays stronger than the stock i5. It plays nicer than the overclocked i5.By the time DirectX 12 matters, you're likely to have replaced whatever computer you buy today.
Having DX12 doesn't matter if you're playing a DX9 or DX11 game, it only matters if you're playing a DX12 game, and those won't become a thing for a long time.
Again, compare apples to apples. The chips we are talking about share the same pinout, so they dont require a different motherboard or different memory.You are making the mistake of confusing what is possible with what is reasonable and customary.
The only people who should be using Z170 motherboards are those using K CPUs. If you are NOT using a K CPU then you shouldn't be on anything beyond H170. There is a decent price difference between the H and Z boards, at least from the same company and quality.
A decent number of people running non-K CPUs won't even be on H170, they'll be on H110, which is fine for a lot of users as well.
As for different RAM, I have yet to see a Z170 board that uses DDR3, but I see lots of H110 and H170 boards that use DDR3 (and plenty that use 4 of course).
So a non-K CPU on a H170 board with DDR3 is a whole lot less money than a K CPU on a Z170 board with DDR4. At least enough money to pay for a jump in GPU power.
-
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/23
*Overall, Skylake is not an earth shattering leap in performance. In our IPC testing, with CPUs at 3 GHz, we saw a 5.7% increase in performance over a Haswell processor at the same clockspeed and ~ 25% gains over Sandy Bridge. That 5.7% value masks the fact that between Haswell and Skylake, we have Broadwell, marking a 5.7% increase for a two generation gap.*
With i7-6700k having a 200 MHz slower turbo speed compared to i7-4790k, in the end, the two chips at stock speeds will perform plus or minus about the same.
There are benchmarks, then there is what the average person can perceive, which is what so much of the tech review world glosses over so often.
Unless you work with it on a regular basis, I fully expect to be able to put an Ivy Bridge i5 or i7 on a desk, next to a Skylake i5 or i7, and you won't be able to tell the difference without looking. There just isn't that much of a difference outside of edge cases. You have to go back to Sandy Bridge to see it (and even then a lot of people won't, depends on what you're running)
-
I'm currently considering getting this one: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Series-512GB-PCIe-NVMe/dp/B01639694M. It's a bit expensive for its size, but performance is measured in gigabytes per second. It's three to four times as fast as a traditional SATA SSD. Requires a fairly recent mainboard with an M.2 connector though (which I have).
Make sure that your motherboard provides a real x4 32 gb/s slot, and not a 6 gb/s slot, which some of the first ones did.
Beyond that, yes, it is a faster drive in all respects over the SATA drives. The question is, does that really matter? Will you notice the difference?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9702/samsung-950-pro-ssd-review-256gb-512gb/7
Look at the random read and write speeds. The sequential bandwidth indeed crushes "normal" SSDs, but it is the random read/write speed that matters more for desktop computers.
---
If you have no serious budget limits, if you have the cash and just want the best, then by all means, go ahead, enjoy. But I suspect if you put it side by side with a 850 EVO, it won't be THAT much faster.
Disclaimer: I haven't personally tested the 950 Pro, so I am going from my experience in testing various hardware and my trust in the results of Anandtech's technical review.
-
Your solution is to even the field by overclocking the i5. Since not everyone over clocks,saying just "Run a i5-6600K at 4.0GHz with a turbo to 4.4, like the i7-4790K, and it'll be really close" is really... uh... bad.
If you're not going to overclock, why in the world would you buy a K series chip? Buy a i5-6500 (or i5-6600 if you really want), save on the motherboard while you're at it too. The i5-6600K exists only to be overclocked, otherwise it serves no point.
As for it being "risky", nonsense. Buy a nice ASUS H170 D3 motherboard, ASUS provides automatic overclocking right in the bios, or via software from within Windows. The user doesn't actually have to do anything. It won't get 100% out of the chip, but it'll do well enough for most users.
-
We've hijacked the thread with this...
If you want to compare chips, then atleast compare the ones with the same architecture...
The current top of the i5 food chain is the i5-6600k. The equivalent i7 is the i7-6700k, not the i7-4790K from 2014.
There is no real difference in performance between a Haswell Refresh chip and a Skylake chip.
Skylake is about motherboard chipset features and a die shrink to 14nm, not speed. In many respects, a i7-4790k is faster than a i7-6700k because it turbos to 4.4GHz while the Skylake turbos only to 4.2GHz.
You're trying to make a point about i7 vs i5 based on 1 or 2 fps in a few tests picked out to make that point. I rather think your own examples point out the oppisite, there is no detectable difference between a i5 and a i7 for gaming. 87 fps on a i5 vs 88 fps on a i7 is not something a human can detect, even if it was consistent. Further, the i7 is a hundred dollars more expensive, money that would be far better put into a GPU.
There is simply no rational reason for anyone on a reasonable budget to put a i7 into a gaming machine. Oh sure, if you have the money and want the best, by all means.
If you're in the GTX 960 or GTX 970 budget range, an i7 is way out of place for gaming. For a $100 price increase from the i5 to the i7, I'd expect at least a 10% performance jump, and it just isn't there.
---
Frankly, for most people, I wouldn't suggest either chip. Unless you plan to overclock (which is the only reason to buy the K chips in the first place), the best bang for the buck is the i5-6500 Skylake chip running at 3.2GHz with a turbo to 3.6GHz. It installs nicely on a H170 board which also costs less and can be had with DDR3, which ALSO costs less.
Within a fixed budget:
i5-6500
H170 Motherboard
16GB DDR3
GTX 970
Total - $655
vs.
i7-6700k
Z170 Motherboard
16GB DDR4
GTX 950
Total - $760
So for $105 more, you get a reasonably more powerful CPU, but a FAR inferior GPU. If the only game you'll ever play is SWTOR, I might understand that trade, but for general gaming, the first system is far superior in being a "balanced" system.
In fact, for the same money of the second system, you can almost get to a GTX 980 card in the i5 system, which for most games will make a larger difference than the CPU will.
Of course, if you have $1,500 to spend, this becomes somewhat moot as you have more room to put stuff in there, but I think it is a waste of money for the average gamer.
-
The modern stuff... Star Wars Battlefront, Fallout 4, the i7 stomps a mud hole in the i5.
Again, I don't see what you do...
The i7-5930k doesn't really belong there, it has 6 true cores.
The i7-4790k wins, but it has a 500 MHz clock speed benefit over the i5 CPUs.
Run a i5-6600K at 4.0GHz with a turbo to 4.4, like the i7-4790K, and it'll be really close. Oh sure, the i7 might be 1 or 2 fps faster, but it is also a lot more money.
For most people, that money is better put into the GPU.
-
Witcher 3
The i7-3770k is 2 years older than the i5-4690k and had a 1fps minimum advantage at the same speed. While still performing 11 watts cooler and using four more "cores". That's just one where it managed to do better. there are plenty where that i5 barely edged out that i7.
That is WELL within the margin of error... Looking at the entire chart, none of the CPUs make any real difference. The margin between all those CPUs is nearly zero...
What that chart tells me is that the game is either engine bound or GPU bound... Run it 10 more times and those numbers could easily switch. Run it on 10 different versions of those CPUs and it'll move 1 fps either way.
-
"Choices Matter"
Get over it and roll an alt.
I'm a paying customer and this is just a game.
Get over it...
-
You realise that sex and nudity it's not only about naked 'girls' right? It's also about naked 'boys'. If you even consider doing such thing, do it right. Give them butts, hot male butts.
I'm ok with that too...
My daughter is 7 years old, I don't want to "shield her" from sex, nudity, and boys... instead I want to empower her, make her know that SHE can choose, she has the power to say yes and no, that she should do what is right for her.
The idea is not to "scare her" and frighten her into "eww, sex bad! run away". I got that crap from my parents (wait until you're married to have sex, drilled over and over), screwed me up for years.
We're all naked when we're born and it isn't bad or evil. I don't care if my kids see a naked person, or even sex. I DO care if they see guns, shooting, killing, murder, etc.
-
On Rep fleet on different character:
I wanted to try EV HM when I noticed someone looking for fully 216 geared players. Turns out I would need NiM achievements to join.
216 is a reasonable ask for HM Ops, even KP/EV... Augments also would be required, but the gear doesn't have to be set bonus gear, blue comms would be fine.
I wouldn't care about your achievements however.
Bioware just got MASSIVELY called out on the new Cartel Packs... by Massively
in General Discussion
Posted
Hey! Stop posting reason and facts! This is the Interwebs!