EPTI've looked around the user profile area and can't find a button or link anywhere. I also searched "close account" and didn't come up with anything.
Simple Questions Simple Answers - Page 334
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
|
NDDseer
Australia204 Posts
I've looked around the user profile area and can't find a button or link anywhere. I also searched "close account" and didn't come up with anything. | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
On May 26 2013 01:01 ronpaul012 wrote: I could use some help on deciding if an upgrade is needed, and if so what to upgrade to. I built my 1st pc 2 years ago this summer, and noticed its starting to not run as great with new games. I'm looking to buy Farcry 3, Bioshock, and Crysis 3 pretty soon, and want to fully experience those games. Currently I'm using this 6850. I also have an i7 2600k as my processor, and 16gb of ram. If there are other important specs needed I can provide them, but thats the general information. Do you think that an upgrade from the 6850 to a newer card would improve performance a lot, or would the upgrade by minuscule? I'm not looking to get an amazing card, but more along the lines of $150-$200 card. Before I really proceed on buying one, I just wanted to get some opinions from those who know more than me to see if it would help. There's this list: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html The authors say you should try to move up at least three rows to feel a difference and not be disappointed. If that's true, a current $150-$200 card could be worth it. The "GTX 650 Ti Boost" (the Ti is important, and the Boost is important) is exactly three rows up from you HD 6850 and available for the price you want. HD 7850 on the AMD side also has similar price. Your CPU is still excellent. On May 26 2013 01:22 NDDseer wrote: How do I close my TL account? I've looked around the user profile area and can't find a button or link anywhere. I also searched "close account" and didn't come up with anything. There's a thread where you can ask for a name change. I'd try to ask in that thread, demand the account to be closed. | ||
|
ronpaul012
United States769 Posts
On May 26 2013 01:22 Ropid wrote: There's this list: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html The authors say you should try to move up at least three rows to feel a difference and not be disappointed. If that's true, a current $150-$200 card could be worth it. The "GTX 650 Ti Boost" (the Ti is important, and the Boost is important) is exactly three rows up from you HD 6850 and available for the price you want. HD 7850 on the AMD side also has similar price. Your CPU is still excellent. Thanks, this is exactly what I was looking for. When I originally built it I figured that my CPU would be great for a long while, but that my graphics card would probably be my 1st upgrade. Thanks for the link and suggestion. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
Here's a lazy, very rough chart of relative performance: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Inno3D/iChill_GTX_650_Ti_Boost/26.html But yeah, if you want to run stuff like Crysis 3, it'd help to upgrade. Personally, I'd strongly recommend getting the HD 7870 if you haven't already bought the games. AMD's current promo means you get Crysis 3, Bioshock Infinite, Tomb Raider (uh, the reboot new one), and Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon (but not actual Far Cry 3) bundled in for free with a HD 7870. With the HD 7850, which is in the $150-200 range, you miss out on Crysis 3, so you may as well step on up to the HD 7870. edit: somehow I missed the last page while posting the above. However, if you haven't yet bought the games, I would seriously consider going with AMD because they're bundling in the games you want for free, at least through the larger e-tailers. | ||
|
Craton
United States17269 Posts
| ||
|
ronpaul012
United States769 Posts
On May 26 2013 02:46 Myrmidon wrote: You can't get huge upgrades over HD 6850 without spending over $200. Or maybe I just have different expectations when it comes to graphics upgrades than other people. Here's a lazy, very rough chart of relative performance: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Inno3D/iChill_GTX_650_Ti_Boost/26.html But yeah, if you want to run stuff like Crysis 3, it'd help to upgrade. Personally, I'd strongly recommend getting the HD 7870 if you haven't already bought the games. AMD's current promo means you get Crysis 3, Bioshock Infinite, Tomb Raider (uh, the reboot new one), and Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon (but not actual Far Cry 3) bundled in for free with a HD 7870. With the HD 7850, which is in the $150-200 range, you miss out on Crysis 3, so you may as well step on up to the HD 7870. edit: somehow I missed the last page while posting the above. However, if you haven't yet bought the games, I would seriously consider going with AMD because they're bundling in the games you want for free, at least through the larger e-tailers. That's partially what I'm debating right now. My 6850 isn't bad by any means, but I've noticed its starting to struggle a bit with a lot of the latest games. Right now I'm deciding if I want to spend the money and get a new card, probably the 7870 like you were talking about, or just buy a card for like $25-30 on ebay and have the games. Kind of a tough choice. | ||
|
Arctyrus
Denmark77 Posts
On May 25 2013 22:43 Myrmidon wrote: + Show Spoiler + I'm not so sure about Haswell being so great for mobile, at least in the sense we're talking here. A big part of it is greatly improved iGPU performance, which isn't relevant if you're playing a game off the dGPU from AMD or Nvidia. Another big thing is the ultra-low-power states and idle power consumption, which is more a benefit for low-power, stripped-down tablet systems and smaller ultraportables. A performance user may not care as much about idle power, and even if platform and CPU power consumption can be reduced on a larger machine, the display and other peripheral parts still take power. I just think that for this kind of application, the jump to Haswell won't particularly be a bigger deal than it is for desktop users. That said, improvements with Haswell wouldn't exactly be unwelcome. btw if you can't wait, you can find the Y500 elsewhere. e.g. $1000 for a similar config but with SLI (uh, yeah...) GT 650M. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834312439 On May 25 2013 14:58 Womwomwom wrote: + Show Spoiler + The problem with AMD mobile GPUs has been Enduro. Enduro will always be worse than Optimus because of how it works (IGP + dGPU drivers active, proxy driver allocating tasks) and how unreliable display drivers can be. Updating drivers can be a problem too because of this but AMD's been trying to separate their drivers from the manufacturer. I have no idea if Samsung's GPU implementation is good or bad but I expect it to be decent enough that AMD's hotfixes and reference drivers work. So performance-wise, there shouldn't be any problem with the AMD option provided Samsung lets you use AMD hot-fixes and reference drivers. Still, waiting for the Haswell revision might not be a bad idea since all signs point to it being specifically designed for mobile usage. Thanks for the replies. It's correct that the iGPU wont be of much help, since I figured I'd need a dedicated graphics card if I where to play SC2 in high/ultra. But I read somewhere (http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/24/intels-haswell-processors-to-offer-50-more-battery-life) that Haswell should improve battery life by 50%. While that is most likely exaggerated a substantial increase in batterylife will be worth the wait. I surely hope that with Computex there will be released a lot of highend laptops with Haswell immediately  | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
edit: Actually seems bigger than i thought. People are throwing around +50% load, +2000% idle battery life which sounds a bit silly to me, i wouldn't be suprised with 20-30% higher battery life and a couple times longer life sat on desktop though. | ||
|
xasuma
Chile62 Posts
http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Wireless-Gaming-Headset-Surround/dp/B003VANOFY/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1369511853&sr=1-1 Anybody would argue for a diferent one that you guys know for about the same price ? (or less? :o) Thank you | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
| ||
|
Craton
United States17269 Posts
| ||
|
Rollin
Australia1552 Posts
| ||
|
xasuma
Chile62 Posts
thanks a lot | ||
|
BjoernK
194 Posts
Then I used my old HDD to boot from and started sc2 from it. After entering my login-info my old username was there again and my achievements were back. After booting from the ssd again the new username was active again. An hour later or so I received an email from Blizzard "Due to an unusual change in your access pattern, the Battle.net account xxxx@googlemail.com has been locked... please change your password" Did anyone hear of this problem? | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
I am really surprised by the amount of people getting caught out by this | ||
|
alQahira
United States511 Posts
The HD would be an SSD, so that would help cushion the blow a bit if the system needed to rely more heavily on the paging file. | ||
|
Flaiker
Germany235 Posts
| ||
|
Lonyo
United Kingdom3884 Posts
On May 27 2013 00:25 alQahira wrote: Is 4gb of RAM enough on a new windows 8 laptop for non-gaming uses? Like say, streaming or listening to some music, having 20 tabs open in chrome, 3 word docs and an excel sheet? I'm a little concerned since on my windows 7 desktop, having my various background programs running, about 20 chrome tabs (including one twitch stream), and word eats up just over 4gb, but supposedly windows 8 is a bit less of a RAM hog? The HD would be an SSD, so that would help cushion the blow a bit if the system needed to rely more heavily on the paging file. Windows 7 and 8 use spare RAM to cache data that may not be used. If you have >4GB RAM, Windows will use >4GB RAM. If you only have 4GB RAM, Windows will use less RAM. You WANT your RAM to be used by the system even when not required, as long as the OS is capable of freeing up the RAM when required. Windows 7 and Windows 8 will both run fine for standard use with 4GB RAM. | ||
|
Arctyrus
Denmark77 Posts
On May 26 2013 06:27 Cyro wrote: It will improve battery life a ton if you idle a lot, but i don't think the gains if you are heavily loading the system would be massive edit: Actually seems bigger than i thought. People are throwing around +50% load, +2000% idle battery life which sounds a bit silly to me, i wouldn't be suprised with 20-30% higher battery life and a couple times longer life sat on desktop though. To be precise what I want to do is game from time to time with the power connected. Most of the day is spent studying, browsing etc. If there's a great increase in the time I can stay surfing, I'll definately make sure to buy a Haswell. So I'd like to ask why it'll only improve battery time while idling, and if you think a Haswell will chunk out a few hours more while surfing, cheers! I'm inclined to buy the previous linked Samsung if Haswell doesnt arrive over the summer, or if the increase is marginal < 20%. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
Some of the ultra-frugal stuff seems to only be happening for the special low-power dual-core variant of Haswell (Haswell U) that even has the southbridge chipset functionality integrated. The mid-to-high-performance parts (what you'd have) will have the separate southbridge and not all the possible optimizations. If you're browsing, the display is turned on, Wi-Fi needs to be turned on, RAM still need refreshing, hard drive or SSD may still need to be going, etc. It's not like Haswell itself can reduce the power consumed by these components. It's still on a 22 nm process (though apparently a tweaked one), so it shouldn't have much of a physical advantage over Ivy Bridge in power consumption, just in terms of design and features implemented. I think this could be outdated info, but here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6355/intels-haswell-architecture/2 | ||
| ||
