• 0

    posted a message on Any good minecraft computers out there?
    You really really should just build a desktop save quite a bit of money.

    But here are two prebuilts from newegg
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883220163
    Good brand good specs. The APU is a bit outdated but the Desktop replacment for it is really not around.at least in budget.


    Howver this is over budget and from a brand that everyone here dislikes.
    But it has a Trinity APU with a much better CPU and GPU then the llano APU above.
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883157361
    It is a bad brand but it is a hella good deal
    Posted in: Hardware & Software Support
  • 0

    posted a message on Speedtest.net Results and General Internet connection and ISP Discussion



    This was in a car I never stoped I generaly get better speed when not moving but its pretty good.
    Posted in: Computer Science and Technology
  • 0

    posted a message on How Good of a System Do I Need?
    Quote from ImThat1Guy

    Really? The benchmarks I've seen show the 560ti on par with the 6970, a much more expensive card.




    The 590 beats and sometimes equal to the 6990 in games yet the 6990 wins in compute.
    None of these benchmarks are in the software the op has so they are kinda meaningless.

    Final cut pro supports Opencl
    Logic pro does not use the GPU.

    I can speak from personal experience at least in Vegas that the 6970 is faster then the 560ti in terms of render times.
    Over the life of the 6xxx the drivers made a pretty large difference.
    This being vegas and not final cut but I would assume there would be similar performance.


    Granted this is a marketing benchmark from Sony and could all be ******** but it shows the 6870 being 570.


    It also matters what the software is optimized for and with the mac pros using AMD graphics I have a feeling the software might be properly optimized for AMD.

    The 6950 is pretty cheap its only a bit more then the 6870 recommend earlier.
    Posted in: Hardware & Software Support
  • 0

    posted a message on How Good of a System Do I Need?
    Quote from ImThat1Guy

    At that price there's nothing better, except for maybe the 480.


    Well the AMD 6xxx series is good for compute just not as good as the 7xxx so he should be fine with the 6 series.
    Posted in: Hardware & Software Support
  • 0

    posted a message on How Good of a System Do I Need?
    Quote from ImThat1Guy


    The 480 is compatible, but it runs really hot and I would not really recommend it (though for $220, it's a fairly good deal). I'd recommend a 560ti. I think the 560ti 448 core is compatible, but I cannot confirm it, and it's probably out of your price range as well.


    The 560ti is not very good at compute its in the same boat as the 6xx series with the compute units cut out of the design to make more room for gaming performance.
    Posted in: Hardware & Software Support
  • 0

    posted a message on What About Wifi...?
    Or you could buy super cheap Ethernet cable and run a cord if that is an option for you.
    For the price of that wireless card you could get 100ft of Cat5
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812107238
    Posted in: Computer Science and Technology
  • 0

    posted a message on How Good of a System Do I Need?
    I really know nothing of Hackintoshes support but if you are getting the GPU for the compute performance look for a 7 series AMD card rather then a 6 series assuming Hackintoshes will support it.
    Posted in: Hardware & Software Support
  • 0

    posted a message on 660Ti finally benchmarked
    Quote from teckmaster

    A benchmark and overclocking by wccftech:

    http://wccftech.com/...hz-benchmarked/

    Also by videocardz.com, unboxing and a bf3 test:

    http://videocardz.co...d-bf3-benchmark


    Lets see first one is artificial ******** so lets take a look at Bf3.

    Toms ran Bf3 at slightly higher AF settings then videocardz but the numbers are still ok to compare.

    58.8 660ti
    59.3 7950
    72 670

    Defiantly quite a bit slower then the 670 and that's a good thing Nvidia needs to push into the lower end cards.

    Should be priced around 300-320 they could be right under the 7950 while getting roughly the same bf3 performance and that's about all we can tell from benchmarks so far.
    Posted in: Hardware & Software Support
  • 0

    posted a message on Skyrim
    Quote from 23232323

    Explain why. I can't see anything bad about Xbox getting it early. Now, if PS3 and PC didn't get it at all, then that would be different, but they do.


    Because I want my freaking Video games 2-3 weeks late is unacceptable when I want them now.
    Plus its funny Microsoft needs to gimp the other systems to stay competitive(mostly against PC)
    Posted in: General Gaming
  • 0

    posted a message on Skyrim
    Quote from Homem Pigman

    Oh, it's so bad they have a business! How evil!

    Companies need money to produce games, champ. There's nothing bad about Microsoft paying for early release, if that's what you're implying.


    I do think its bad deal with it.
    Posted in: General Gaming
  • 0

    posted a message on Mediafire not shut down, misinformed error, ignore.
    Uhh it works fine for me.
    Posted in: Computer Science and Technology
  • 0

    posted a message on L4D faster on Linux then Windows.
    Quote from BC_Programming

    In other words: We just lied to your face when we said it ran at 270 fps.

    What this boils down to is not that it runs faster on Linux, but that it runs faster with OpenGL. Which isn't exactly surprising since OpenGL has been faster for as long as I can remember.

    That said, those looking to give Linux free points have never been one for fair tests, anyway.


    "We are using a 32-bit version of Linux temporarily and will run on 64-bit Linux later.
    Running Left 4 Dead 2 on Windows 7 with Direct3D drivers, we get 270.6 FPS as a baseline. The data is generated from an internal test case."

    "This experience lead to the question: why does an OpenGL version of our game run faster than Direct3D on Windows 7? It appears that it’s not related to multitasking overhead. We have been doing some fairly close analysis and it comes down to a few additional microseconds overhead per batch in Direct3D which does not affect OpenGL on Windows. Now that we know the hardware is capable of more performance, we will go back and figure out how to mitigate this effect under Direct3D."

    I think a better title would be OpenGL faster then Directx.
    I mostly used this news as an excuse to talk about this as we have not had a thread on this.

    Valve sorta explains the difference.
    Posted in: Computer Science and Technology
  • 0

    posted a message on L4D faster on Linux then Windows.
    "Using a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 graphics card with an Intel Core i7 3930K processor, Windows 7 SP1 was running Left 4 Dead 2 with the Direct3D renderer at 270 FPS while under Linux with OpenGL they are now at 315 FPS! Using the OpenGL renderer on Windows isn't also quite as good with its average frame-rate at around 303 FPS"
    http://www.phoronix....item&px=MTE1MjI
    http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/faster-zombies/

    Even with Nvidias poor OpenGL drivers it does pretty good.
    Hopefully Valve can get all companies to put more time into their drivers on Linux.
    Posted in: Computer Science and Technology
  • 0

    posted a message on Arma 2 Reccomended specs.
    Quote from LampLightJc

    Whats your specs?


    My profile page has them.

    Desktop
    AMD athlon2 x3 3.6ghz
    AMD 6970 overclocked.
    Ram 8gigs 1333mhz
    1.5TB of hardrive space
    1440x900
    Posted in: Computer Science and Technology
  • 0

    posted a message on Arma 2 Reccomended specs.
    Quote from TheFieldZy

    What fm87 said. Hopefully they can iron out a lot of the bugs in Arma 3, making great mods like DayZ work. Though I don't think some people get how poor this games engine is. This is what the developer Rocket (creator of DayZ) said once:

    The sad thing is that it looks like a game from 2003 and gets fps like a game from 2014.


    The game does not look that bad in terms of lighting quality but the textures could use some work but the view distances are pretty massive.
    Also IIRC rocket said the AI uses or can use raytracing to see and I know dayZ uses it.

    The game is maxed out on my computer except for the post processing I have it disabled because it blurs stuff in the distances something you don't want in this game.
    Posted in: Computer Science and Technology
  • To post a comment, please .