It's in a mid tower atx case, think either cooler will fit?

Actually the heatspreaders on my RAM might be a problem, from reading. I can't remember what the case model or ram model is at the moment, but I'll look into it when I get home.

[Edited on February 28, 2013 at 4:38 PM. Reason : .]

2/28/2013 4:32:07 PM

I have an NH-D14 with a full case and it just barely fits.

2/28/2013 4:49:09 PM

I have the phanteks and I measured 47mm of ram clearance. I have it in an m-atx case (SUGO 09) with 1/4" clearance to the door. It looks like 155mm hight from the ram slots to the top of the fins. Let me know if you need any other measurements.

2/28/2013 7:26:27 PM

If you are serious about spending around 90 for a NH-D14/phanteks PH-TC14PE for a cpu cooler but want LC, I would seriously think about getting a real liquid cooling kit. XSPC makes some awesome "affordable" kits that aren't that far away from this price range that gives you a whole level of cooling abilities, plus it would give you a base in the event you wanted to expand LC to other parts.

The XSPC Raystorm 750 RS240 should be around $130 the last I looked, but you get a double 120mm fan radiator, which is more than enough to cool an OC 2500k and any high end GPU with room to spare.

If you got some nice friends who live near a microcenter, you could build your own kit from clearance parts for less than that too. One of my clan mates was able to build a similar setup as the RS240 for about $70 on his wife's PC. But that's hugely YMMV.

3/1/2013 12:53:43 AM

I am way out of the computer hardware loop since I built my current rig which is an Athlon 64 X2. I would like to build a new system for web surfing, photo editing, and some games (such as SimCity). Any suggestions as to what processor/motherboard and video card I should be looking at? I am not looking to break the bank but I am willing to put $500-700 in a new system. I would like to get my bang for my buck.

3/4/2013 8:58:43 PM

^I was in a similar boat in not knowing what is current/best. I used http://reddit.com/r/buildapcforme. Basically you post your budget and what you're looking to get out of the computer and people recommend components to maximize your budget. For that price range you should be able to get a pretty decent build, but do consider if you have anything you can re-purpose such as hard drive or os. You'll be able to get a better pc and be able to upgrade those later on.

3/4/2013 9:37:37 PM

Another approach is to use the PC Perspective Leaderboard:

http://www.pcper.com/hwlb

They constantly update the systems with the latest hardware based on price, and they are all geared towards PC gaming. The low-end system is around $500.

3/5/2013 7:57:41 AM

Thanks guys....will check out both.

3/5/2013 7:33:34 PM

No way in shit that noctua is fitting in my current case. RAM and mobo are fine but my case is several cm too narrow. And phantek's is even taller.

Don't feel like spending a lot on water cooling so if anyone has a recommendation for the best air cooling for a mid tower case, I'm all ears.

Looks like Noctua makes a top down fan cooler that's only 112 mm tall: NH-C12P. Gonna check that out.

[Edited on March 5, 2013 at 8:47 PM. Reason : .]

3/5/2013 8:35:11 PM

why do you need any more than stock? im running 8x4166 on a stock cooler with no voltage changes at near silent.

3/5/2013 11:28:57 PM

For Air cooling I highly recommend the Corsair Carbide Series 400R: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1676/1/

Capable of 10x 120mm fan air cooling, and the case is also built for liquid cooling if you wanted to do that too.

3/6/2013 8:56:47 AM

^^Yeah for Sandy you really don't even need a cooler. I'd do some overclocking without bumping your voltages and see what the temps are like. No reason to spend the money if the stock works fine.

3/6/2013 9:35:19 AM

OH SNAP...

Dell 27" IPS LED 1440p monitor is on sale for $550 on newegg... Must resist...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824260111

3/27/2013 3:53:05 PM

damn, that is tempting if I didn't just buy a new guitar.

TFT Central says it has this LG Panel in it: 27"WS LG.Display AH-IPS (LM270QW1-SLB2)

and I believe this review is VERY similar to the same display:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2713h.htm


BTW what was the promo to get it down to that price, even though they are out of stock now?




[Edited on March 28, 2013 at 9:22 AM. Reason : _]

3/28/2013 9:18:57 AM

The U2713 H and the HM's don't use the same displays. The differences are subtle, but they are noticeable for color critical applications like photography or print.

The U2713 H's are the pro version ($750) that offers a fast 6ms G2G response time, 10 bit color (8 bit panel + FRC), hardware color calibration (almost unheard of in this price category, tends to be restricted for the more pricier pro monitors for video work) and the ability to daisy chain monitors using the DisplayPort; it also offers a 120% sRGB and 99% AdobeRGB color gamut.

The U2713 HM's are the "pro for web" for $50 less ($700) that offers still a lot when you look at the specs. You still net a 8ms G2G response time, a full 8 bit color (no FRC sadly), and a full featured OSD menu ability (most 27"+ monitors in this price range tends to omit this to save cost since it requires extra logic chips). The other good thing is that they made the panel to still hit 100% sRGB color gamut so if all of your pro color work is mostly on a display medium (like say video or web development), its a perfect display while saving you a few bones for not needed features.


I think the great things about the two displays, as with most IPS large displays coming out in the last 2-3 years, has been lowering the average input lag to keep up with the cheaper TN gaming panels so the 20-25ms lag on the 27" dell's is a good stride for them and hopefully they can even half that for a gaming mode like they have on their 24" models. With the HM's been on sale twice for $550, its only a matter of time till they get even more cheaper.

I really do wish that Dell, HP, LG and Samsung start to make even high res monitors that use the even wider 21:10 or 21:9 format for consumer monitors. Dell's 21:9 29" monitor is really enticing since its like two 22" monitors stuck side by side, great for work flow management since you don't have the break in screen with the monitor bezel.

[Edited on March 28, 2013 at 11:22 AM. Reason : ]

3/28/2013 11:16:36 AM

Yea I knew they were slightly different, but there is no review of the other so I posted the one they did review. TFT Central offers (IMO) the best display reviews of any site around and has some of the biggest databases of panel info found in each model.

Was there a promo to get it down to $550 or did the price just change after they sold out?

3/28/2013 11:27:06 AM

TFT has both monitors for review...

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2713hm.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2713h.htm

And it was a shell shocker deal that lasted only a few hours, but it went out quick. If I had gotten an actual call back about my job interview yesterday, I would have picked it up right then and there, but no job security means not spending any money. Can't say I have a lot of friends with my level of financial discipline. Actually, I have no friends with financial discipline... now that I think about it.

I need new friends.

3/28/2013 11:51:39 AM

Eh still 60hz monitors. I love dat 120hz fps.

3/28/2013 12:13:39 PM

When I did a search on the model to see the panel it didn't have a link, normally that is the case, so I assumed it didn't have a review on the other (didn't bother to do a search).

Shit son, I OC'd my monitor from 60hz to 92hz.

3/28/2013 12:21:31 PM

high resolution > 120hz

I want as many pixels I can get on my displays and since video editing is mostly still set at the 24fps rate anyhow, it makes little difference for me if I'm capped at 60hz for games either. I'll still kick your ass in most fps'.

But if I had it my way, I would take both hig rez and 120hz...

3/28/2013 1:06:32 PM

Asus GTX 660 2GB (non-TI) card is on sale on newegg for $170. Its comparable to AMD's 7850, but beats it in almost every game by 5-10% on average.

http://slickdeals.net/f/5943738-ASUS-GeForce-GTX-660-2GB-192-bit-GDDR5-PCI-Express-Video-Card-169-after-20-Rebate-Free-Shipping

4/2/2013 2:45:41 PM

^Thats a good deal, I have the 7850 and love it.

4/2/2013 5:49:19 PM

Can't wait for my new work laptop to get here

Dell Precision M4700

Ivy Bridge i7-3520M (2.9ghz, 4mb cache)
16gb ddr3-1600mhz ram
AMD FirePro M4000 1gb video
15.6" 1080p display
256gb SSD
8xdvdrw
bluetooth 4LE, 802.11g/n
9 cell (97wh) battery with express charger

I am stoked. This thing will actually support driving two 2560 displays

4/2/2013 6:36:53 PM

^What's it weigh?

Quote :

"Shit son, I OC'd my monitor from 60hz to 92hz."

Huh? Probably not at the native resolution. Mine does 1080 at 120hz natively.

Quote :

"high resolution > 120hz"

Depends. Have you ever played consistently on a 120hz monitor? You really notice a difference once you get above 90-100. It's just butter smooth. It's a 27" at 1080p and truthfully if I had a much larger resolution monitor I'd take a bigger performance hit not to mention I wouldn't be able to play at a higher FPS. I don't invest THAT much into GPUs.

Plus some games are actually pretty fun in 3D. I've still got my two Dell 24" U2410s for any editing I do (far and few between as I have a job now).

[Edited on April 2, 2013 at 7:33 PM. Reason : s]

4/2/2013 7:32:31 PM

Can't sell me on the idea that I need 120hz. I've seen it, played with it and still not impressed with them since its not on IPS panels yet. Till someone can show me a pro level 1200p+ monitor that supports close to 100% adobeRGB color gamut with 120hz. I will never take 120 over image quality, but I wouldn't mind both (which won't happen soon until new display standards are ratified; 1600p+ displays are fixed to 60hz right now. I believe DisplayPorts will be getting 120hz ability soon, but its left up to the pro level 4k displays).

Besides, even with my old dell monitors with "atrocious" input lag, cheapo mech keyboard and $10 gaming mouse; I still hit above a 3 KDR on all FPS games that I play. Monitor has no relevance to my actual performance ability.

4/2/2013 11:25:47 PM

Recommend me a new router please. Small home networking with 3 PC's connected via ethernet, so I don't need anything with more than 4 output ports. Biggest thing is the wifi range. I want something that has a good built in wifi antenna as it'll be on one end of the house and I want to be able to get a solid reception/signal in the garage on the other end of the house about 100ft away. I'd also like one that I can adjust settings on (ie: encryption, passwords, broadcasting, limit who can connect, etc...)

I don't know where to start. My gut is to go with something Linksys.

4/4/2013 1:14:50 AM

Quote :

"Monitor has no relevance to my actual performance ability."

Of course it does. Input lag has a huge impact on your performance. You could be better if you had a more responsive monitor. Saying your monitor has no relevance to your actual performance ability is like saying the motor in your car has no relevance to how well the car performs. The better equipment you have the better you're going to perform.

Plus most competitive gamers could give a shit about image quality. It's all about limiting input lag, having a really high DPI mouse and a fast monitor. Most SC2 players play on low quality. You're way in the minority if you care about graphics quality and not input quality if you're doing online multiplayer competitive gaming.

I don't really play online but I still care about input lag as it's annoying in game. Back when I used to play on my Dell 2408's it was horrible. The U2410s are a little better but after I moved to a 120hz TN everything is way better. I could give a shit about accurate color reproduction. As long as all the colors are vibrant and exaggerated I'm having more fun in the game. If you're playing a game on a color calibrated nice monitor intended for editing or video you're doing something wrong.

[Edited on April 4, 2013 at 1:50 PM. Reason : s]

4/4/2013 1:43:01 PM

when are the prices of 3570's coming down? i've been waiting for almost a year now. not paying $199 or whatever the slickdeals "deal" price is.

4/4/2013 3:04:53 PM

Quote :

"saying your monitor has no relevance to your actual performance ability is like saying the motor in your car has no relevance to how well the car performs. The better equipment you have the better you're going to perform."

Oh... the garage folks will chew you up and spit you out with how that is a terrible statement.

First, you have to keep in retrospect of my comment. The input lag saving of 20-30ms isn't such a huge limitation for most people, same thing goes with the difference of 120hz and 60hz. Will some notice it, yes, but for most people, its not going to matter two shits if they can't take advantage of it with terrible spacial coordination, situational awareness or proper evaluation, judgement and planning abilities. The idea that having better equipment will make you better is routinely contradicted, even in motor sports. Having the capability doesn't necessarily mean you have the ability and even in a number of situations, having the capability will actually lead to a higher difficulty in achieving said abilities (higher learning curve).

2nd, you can't compare a Monitor too a Motor... If anything, a Motor is going to be directly related to the horsepower of a computer; aka CPU or GPU. The Monitor performance would more likely be closer to represent something like a short shifter or a non-slip clutch. Can you drive the car without them? Yes, having either of those items could reduce reaction times and theoretically increase performance capability, but its up to the brute behind the wheel to properly shift without fucking it up. If you don't know how to shift well, that potential time saved for response is completely wasted.


Everyone knows I ride motorcycles and have raced them (non-competitively) on a few instances around a circuit, but because I have a great machine that is capable of hitting 170+ mph and track times beating $250k+ ferrari's and lambo's doesn't mean that I have the ability to. Even in some instances, my 110hp to the rear wheel r6's takes a certain level of skill to even be able to achieve 70% of the bikes capability, where as I can get faster track times on a less technical bike that produces half the power, like the sv 650, and actually more fun.

Quote :

"You're way in the minority if you care about graphics quality and not input quality if you're doing online multiplayer competitive gaming."

Where did I say anything about playing games competitively? We are talking about normal people playing casually for fun... You don't need 120hz, low lag monitors, mechanical keyboards and $100 laser mice's to enjoy a game and be good at it. And I know I'm in the minority since my whole background is in photography and videography in the professional sense; Image quality will always me the top priority for me.

This is my who rhetoric for the entire argument with you: You don't NEED 120hz or low input lag to play a game well.

Quote :

"Recommend me a new router please. Small home networking with 3 PC's connected via ethernet, so I don't need anything with more than 4 output ports. Biggest thing is the wifi range. I want something that has a good built in wifi antenna as it'll be on one end of the house and I want to be able to get a solid reception/signal in the garage on the other end of the house about 100ft away. I'd also like one that I can adjust settings on (ie: encryption, passwords, broadcasting, limit who can connect, etc...) I don't know where to start. My gut is to go with something Linksys."

Honestly, I say get a separate wifi access point if you want better wifi range than some crummy tacked on shit that most consumer wifi routers tend to have. For the same price as a number of mid to high level routers that are paired with some what decent wifi capabilities, you can spend on an entry level commercial product that doubles or triples the range and doesn't require you to completely change out your existing network infrastructure.

I personally use the Ubiquiti Unifi AP long range unit for the last 18 months and love it. It's a bit older compared to the newer stuff out now, but it has a 600ft radius range and works very well; Signal is on the other side of the house and still reaches my garage 120+ ft away through at least 6 walls. It's super easy to setup and has a lot of great admin features. I got mine used for about $70 shipped and they normally go for about $150 new at the time.

http://www.ubnt.com/unifi#aplr

I'd probably look at their newer AP's that offer higher speeds, but if I had to do it again, I'd probably get an AP with the ability to attach my own powered antenna for even longer throws, but that would be costly.

[Edited on April 4, 2013 at 3:28 PM. Reason : ]

4/4/2013 3:25:31 PM

I think you took my motor analogy a little too seriously. In general the more performant a motor is the better performance capabilities a car will have. That's a fact. Sure you can get into minute details but in general a 6 cylinder is typically going to have more horse power than a 2 cylinder and hence make the car go faster. That was my only point in the analogy and I think you missed it.

Regardless my primary point was the better computer hardware you have the less limitations you're going to have on enhancing your skills (both in being competitive and just having fun). There's no argument there. The better keyboard, mouse, and monitor you have, the better you're going to play the game. Otherwise there wouldn't be such a huge market for gaming hardware. To your point I agree there's diminishing returns but IMO it's more fun and easier to be comfortable with a game if you've got nicer hardware.

If you don't want to invest in a nice mouse, keyboard, or monitor for gaming then more power to you. My only point was there's a noticeable difference between a cheap mouse and a nice mouse, a cheap keyboard and a nice keyboard (albeit smaller) and there's obviously a huge difference in a monitor with poor input lag and one with nice input lag.

I've owned the Dell 2407, 2408, 2410, as well as my Acer TN 120hz panel and as far as how I FEEL when I play the game the later is the most "fun" as far as the least input lag and less ghosting. If all you're used to is your 2408's then that's fine but I'm saying I have more fun on a monitor with less input lag not to mention 3D is pretty freaking sweet in games like Portal.

Again I agree you don't NEED nice hardware to be good at a game but if that same player were given better hardware they would indeed be able to play the game better. That's obvious. If you had better hardware you would play the game better. That's all I'm saying. You can argue all you want about how much better you're be but you would indeed be better.

-Also not to mention the dell 2408WFP a01 series had horrible input lag. Dell confirmed it was a hardware bug and would swap any out within your warranty period. I still have one but it's out of warranty and it's HORRIBLE. I hope you're not playing on one of those.

[Edited on April 4, 2013 at 3:46 PM. Reason : s]

4/4/2013 3:37:28 PM

Quote :

"I think you took my motor analogy a little too seriously. In general the more performant a motor is the better performance capabilities a car will have. That's a fact. Sure you can get into minute details but in general a 6 cylinder is typically going to have more horse power than a 2 cylinder and hence make the car go faster. That was my only point in the analogy and I think you missed it. "

More horsepower does not necessarily mean better performance or capabilities of a car. If anything, you need to be talking about performance on the power to weight ratio. Sure a v6 with 300hp is going to be fast, but a V6 is going to be much heavier than a simple, smaller I4. With a smaller, lighter car, your need for more HP drops... Do I want a heavy car with more HP or a light car with half that? Why do you think I ride motorcycles with 100+ hp in a vehicle that weighs just shy of 325 lbs? That's Ferrari Enzo power to weight ratio and acceleration territory.

Monitor performance is always going to take a backseat when other areas of the pipeline are going to be a priority for latency (CPU, GPU, network). That extra 20-30ms lag with a monitor input lag is more in line with auxiliary performance upgrades like short shifters and non-slip clutches in the motorsports world analogy. If we are talking about performance in the scales of milliseconds... that's pretty fucking minute of a detail...

Besides, putting more power out of a motor can cause a load of troubles in other areas if not addressed, such as handling. Sure, a v6 with 300hp could be fast in a straight line, but what about going around a bend? Will the extra HP make it over-steer? Will the faster speed in the straight be too much when the car needs to break before a turn, causing associated problems with brake fading? Would the suspension be good enough? Would it cause more stress on the chassis with higher lateral G's that it might produce if otherwise the motor wasn't producing the extra HP? What about stress on other components that might lead to premature failures?

Quote :

"Regardless my primary point was the better computer hardware you have the less limitations you're going to have on enhancing your skills (both in being competitive and just having fun). There's no argument there."

I agree, that having such a capability can lead to better ability, but even having the capability will not necessarily mean you will ever achieve or enhance your skills. My biggest rhetoric has always been to be the simple fact that no matter whatever external latency issues with software or hardware, from the computer to input devices, the biggest hurdle will always be your mental abilities. The simple fact that most people always seem to forgo.

Everyone has the capability to become the best race car driver in the world, but very few have the mental discipline or ability to reach to that level. The same can be applied in anything and everything we do. Knowing what needs to be done and actually being able to do it are two separate things.

Quote :

"The better keyboard, mouse, and monitor you have, the better you're going to play the game. Otherwise there wouldn't be such a huge market for gaming hardware."

And then you go off and say this crap that contradicts with your first statement.

No, I don't agree with this at all. Your statement gives to the same logical fallacy that I've been debating with you: because you have better equipment, you WILL be better at playing the game. You cannot guarantee this, its a huge misconception in the gaming industry - in fact, its a huge misconception with any industry that sells in a competitive environment. It's this misconception of association that we recognize a link between performance equipment with actual skill or measurable performance.

Its the DESIRE to perform better and many people associate that in order to WANT to be better, they reclassify the "gaming" products to a NEED. It's Marketing 101, brand recognition or awareness. Ergo, tons of crappy gamers buy the best gaming rig's and crap that money can buy and may never achieve anywhere close to being good at a game.

Shit, I know atleast 2 dozen friends who have $10K+ gaming rigs with all the best monitors and input devices ever created, and they still couldn't kill me in most situations; even when I had the crappiest monitor, a cheap $2 dell keyboard with a $10 mouse and a budget computer back in the day.

And of all of that capability will not save you from a zerg rush if you don't know how to play the game properly in the first place...

[Edited on April 4, 2013 at 5:03 PM. Reason : ]

4/4/2013 5:00:48 PM

You're still completely missing the analogy because you like talking about motors. But that's alright I don't want to discuss motors.

Regardless of your argument or opinion a gamer with a nicer mouse, keyboard, and monitor will have an advantage over one with a shitty mouse, keyboard, and monitor. Sure you've got plenty of other factors but at a base level a better interface translates to better playing of the game.

You're trying to argue to what degree and that's fine but the only point I'm trying to make is I have a more enjoyable experience playing with a nicer mouse and monitor. There's less input lag (it's quite noticeable going from even my u2410 to the Acer) and the mouse has a lot more DPI options.

Now as to whether that gives me a competitive edge I could care less because I don't really play multi-player FPSs.

This got a little out of hand as my only argument was nicer hardware results in a more pleasing user experience. I think you're just jealous of my sweet 120hz monitor.

Quote :

"Shit, I know atleast 2 dozen friends who have $10K+ gaming rigs with all the best monitors and input devices ever created, and they still couldn't kill me in most situations; even when I had the crappiest monitor, a cheap $2 dell keyboard with a $10 mouse and a budget computer back in the day."

This indicates you're really not understanding the point. Lets say we cloned Jeff and put him on a $10k+ gaming rig and also put him on a cheap gaming rig. Assuming said clone was familiar with both systems then $10k+ Jeff would have a competitive advantage. That's ALL I'm saying. You can beat your friends with nicer rigs because you're THAT much of a better player.

Make sense?

[Edited on April 4, 2013 at 6:12 PM. Reason : s]

4/4/2013 6:06:45 PM

Quote :

"You're still completely missing the analogy because you like talking about motors. But that's alright I don't want to discuss motors."

You're the one who brought it up and I countered the argument in the analogy was a bit flawed because performance of a monitor is not comparable as the performance of a motor since the Motor is what drives a car; One relates to time variable, the other is power output. A monitor does not drive a PC. It's an auxiliary piece of equipment, a "dumb" output display that needs a "motor" to display anything. If you had no PC (aka Motor) all you have is a nice monitor with a black screen.

Quote :

"Regardless of your argument or opinion a gamer with a nicer mouse, keyboard, and monitor will have an advantage over one with a shitty mouse, keyboard, and monitor."

This is NOT what I've been debating with you about. I've been debating that nicer equipment does not translate into automatically becoming a better gamer (i.e. being better at gaming in terms of performance).

Quote :

"You're trying to argue to what degree and that's fine but the only point I'm trying to make is I have a more enjoyable experience playing with a nicer mouse and monitor. There's less input lag (it's quite noticeable going from even my u2410 to the Acer) and the mouse has a lot more DPI options. "

Ah HA! Now we are getting somewhere.

I'm not talking about a "more enjoyable experience", that's qualitative analysis is a bit more subjective and I do agree with you that playing video games with good gear will relate into a more enjoyable experience, but what I'm debating is in terms of performance increase related to a person's skill set associated with "gaming" gear.

Will "gaming" gear allow someone's capability to be increased? It can.
Will "gaming" gear allow someone's ability to be increased over time? It can.

What I'm saying is that its a possibility and what you are saying is that its a definitive yes. Probability and definitely are two separate things and I can't endorse the misconception that "gaming" gear will "definitely" increase someone's skill level when there's a number of contrary data. This is just playing with words at this point.

Quote :

"This indicates you're really not understanding the point. Lets say we cloned Jeff and put him on a $10k+ gaming rig and also put him on a cheap gaming rig. Assuming said clone was familiar with both systems then $10k+ Jeff would have a competitive advantage. That's ALL I'm saying. You can beat your friends with nicer rigs because you're THAT much of a better player. "

Having a competitive advantage does NOT correlate into actually being able to utilize the advantage is what I'm getting at.

Reason why I made the analogy of a short shifter or a non-slip clutch since those devices installed in a car can save precious milliseconds when switching gear, leading into a shorter time frame for acceleration, faster response time and can improve performance when racing. But if you cant move the gear shifter into the correct gear fast enough, you loose the advantage. If you can't properly use the clutch when shifting, you loose the advantage. If you can't rev match, you loose the advantage.

4/4/2013 7:49:43 PM

Again with taking the motor analogy a little far. I could have said having a nicer windshield (e.g. one with less glare) translates to being able to handle the car better. It doesn't matter. You're getting too caught up in the semantics that you're losing site of what I originally said. I don't see the merit in debating whether an analogy worked or not. You obviously understood my intent.

Quote :

"This is NOT what I've been debating with you about. I've been debating that nicer equipment does not translate into automatically becoming a better gamer (i.e. being better at gaming in terms of performance). "

Agreed I guess I just enjoy it more.

Back to the point my original statement addressed your statement:

Quote :

""Monitor has no relevance to my actual performance ability.""

That is false. Plain and simple. We can argue semantics all you want but what type of monitor you use has some relevance to your actual performance ability. My only problem with your statement was you said it simply has no relevance. This directly condradicts what you just said:

Quote :

"Will "gaming" gear allow someone's capability to be increased? It can. Will "gaming" gear allow someone's ability to be increased over time? It can."

Those two statements were the ONLY point I was trying to make. That "gaming" gear whether it's a mouse or monitor CAN allow someone to perform better. I never said all gaming gear ALWAYS makes EVERYONE better. You were reading a little too deep into that.

So answer my scenario. If we took two Jeff's and one used a shitty monitor (with lots of input lag) and one used a monitor with little input lag then over time the Jeff with the better monitor would perform better. Would you agree or not? Yes or no?

In this scenario I would argue it would "definitely" make the Jeff on the nicer monitor perform better in the game. Just like if you took two clones but one had better eye sight then that one would obviously be the better sharp shooter.

If you do not agree then explain to me what would happen and justify it:

1. Two Jeff's maintain same ability
2. Jeff with shitty monitor is better
3. Jeff with nicer monitor is better.

Quote :

"Reason why I made the analogy of a short shifter or a non-slip clutch since those devices installed in a car can save precious milliseconds when switching gear, leading into a shorter time frame for acceleration, faster response time and can improve performance when racing. But if you cant move the gear shifter into the correct gear fast enough, you loose the advantage. If you can't properly use the clutch when shifting, you loose the advantage. If you can't rev match, you loose the advantage."

Ok good analogy. So considering my two Jeff scenario if you answered 'no' then you're saying you wouldn't be able to realize the competitive advantage of having a nicer monitor?

4/4/2013 8:26:53 PM

Off topic a bit but my harddrive crashed last night on my main rig. Going to get a small ssd and windows 7 oem home. Does tiger direct in raleigh still carry windows7? I want to get my mess backup and running

4/5/2013 7:53:58 AM

JBaz just can't afford a 120Hz monitor and is arguing that it's not needed in a Perpetual New Computer Build thread, where people routinely spend thousands of dollars on things that are not needed. Sigh.

I own a 120Hz monitor with 2x MSI GTX 670 OC Power Editions in SLI, and my friend has the exact same setup, minus the 120Hz monitor.

We played FarCry 3 for a bit on his machine, and then went to my place later.

This is what his face looked like when he saw the game on my 120Hz, versus his 60Hz monitor:



[Edited on April 5, 2013 at 9:16 AM. Reason : -]

4/5/2013 9:13:37 AM

^Haha that's exactly how I feel when I have to make the decision to either max out the settings on a game for 40-50 fps or turn them down a bit for 90-100+ fps. Jealous of the 2 670's....Going to hold onto the 580 for a bit until next year probably for Maxwell.

4/5/2013 10:47:19 AM

nothing special 660 w/ 27" monitor, and that face is the face my friend always makes when he comes from playing 32-player BF3 on his PS3 to playing 64-player BF3 on PC....

4/5/2013 11:26:58 AM

Quote :

"Monitor has no relevance to my actual performance ability."

Quote :

"That is false. Plain and simple. We can argue semantics all you want but what type of monitor you use has some relevance to your actual performance ability. My only problem with your statement was you said it simply has no relevance. This directly contradicts what you just said: Will "gaming" gear allow someone's capability to be increased? It can. Will "gaming" gear allow someone's ability to be increased over time? It can."

I believe my statement from my own experiences and opinion about my abilities is sound for myself, maybe not for others. "It can" means you have two possibilities, yes and no.

If I owned a 120hz capable monitor, would I enjoy gaming better? I could. Will I have a competitive advantage? I could. But I've played BF3 on the same 120hz monitor as yours and on a "lagtastic" Dell monitor and my playing styles and performance stayed the same. I did not feel like I had gained an upper hand when playing on the 120hz monitor. But this is my opinion about the product. Since I hold image quality and color gamut to be my priority features on a monitor, I am not willing to sacrifice those for the 120hz capability since an IPS 120hz does not exist, yet.

This mean that I am NOT someone who would be taking advantage of the capability that the 120hz monitor has to offer when playing games.

Quote :

"JBaz just can't afford a 120Hz monitor and is arguing that it's not needed in a Perpetual New Computer Build thread, where people routinely spend thousands of dollars on things that are not needed. Sigh."

I can afford a 120hz monitor, and looking to dump a pretty chunk of change this summer on my new build but I will not be satisfied with a 120hz monitor since its not a feature that I'm willing to get over higher resolution, better image quality and larger color gamut ranges. Until a product has all three with 120hz would I enjoy the higher refresh rate.

I'm debating that not everyone needs to get the top of the line gear to become good at gaming. You can spend 3000 on a fast machine or 1200 for a decent gaming rig or even 500 on a budget box and still retain the same skill level throughout and maybe not even improve on the better systems.

I'm simply saying that one should shop smart and not buy into all the marketing bullshit that one needs something because of the possibility, lure or promise that it will make you a better gamer (in terms of performance). You should get a product as a want and not a need in terms of priority, but I've seen a lot of idiot gamers who classify a computer "gaming" product as a need because of the lure that they will be a better gamer and will, hand-over-fist, dominate others, then they get their nice new toys or computer and still find out that they sucked at the game anyhow.

Sure computer gaming is a hobby, even a lifestyle for many; people will spend more for the things that they enjoy and desire to be good at, but its the shifting of want to need in something that is pretty frivolous and the reason why people become disillusioned in their own dreams that they forget why they were doing it in the first place. To enjoy the fucking game.

I blame COD... lol Everyone wants to be stats padders and number whores. Grind and grind and grind just to gain a fake medal or ribbon in game, but forget one plays the game to have fun. Could you grind and still have fun? I think there are games out there that are, but its definitely a shift in the industry that I've observed in both FPS and RGP's.

4/5/2013 2:46:08 PM

I'd say it's almost the opposite. Most of the casual gamers I know who have a life and don't have time to game competitively (or want to) but still game on occasion enjoy having nice hardware because it makes the game more enjoyable and because we have the means to have said hardware.

Quote :

"Since I hold image quality and color gamut to be my priority features on a monitor, I am not willing to sacrifice those for the 120hz capability since an IPS 120hz does not exist, yet. "

This is why I have two U2410s for everything else (not great for gaming) and my 27" 120hz Acer for gaming. There's just no competition the Acer is more fun to play a game on. 60hz is boring now.

I still say you would have more fun and would be a better player if you had a better gaming monitor and a nicer mouse.

Quote :

"This mean that I am NOT someone who would be taking advantage of the capability that the 120hz monitor has to offer when playing games."

Well. I mean you would. Whether consciously or not.

I mean seriously? What would your brain be thinking? OMG THE COLOR GAMUT IN THIS GAME IS OFF I CAN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE LACK OF INPUT LAG AND FAST RESPONSE TIME!!!

4/5/2013 8:35:05 PM

[Edited on April 5, 2013 at 8:36 PM. Reason : woops]

4/5/2013 8:35:54 PM

I used to be a professional gamer, playing 8+ hours a day. keyboard, mouse, monitor, none of it mattered, it was all what you were comfortable with. Ergo made a difference, but that was it. Today, years later, the only esports I partake in aren't nearly as twitch as they were back then but latency is the only thing that matters. As long as I have 30+fps I'm good. I play on a 27" 2560x1440 60hz IPS, but still average 70-100fps on actual competitive games. BF3 doesn't have any ladders to speak of and I've lost interest in pubbing. I could play with triple sli 7990's if I cared to, but most games are made for consoles first so then run on max on my 6970 at 40+fps at 2560x1440, which is good enough for me given how often I get to play.

4/6/2013 1:15:29 AM

Quote :

"I'd say it's almost the opposite. Most of the casual gamers I know who have a life and don't have time to game competitively (or want to) but still game on occasion enjoy having nice hardware because it makes the game more enjoyable and because we have the means to have said hardware. "

But we were originally not talking about "enjoyment", we were debating on becoming a better gamer, increasing of skill and ability. The false prospect that having x or y hardware guaranteeing a person to enhance their abilities. We can't make absolute assumption about the whole population, but I can make an assessment from my own person experience and observations between theses products.

Quote :

"Well. I mean you would. Whether consciously or not. "

How can you know? Could is not would. I "could" take advantage of it, but it doesn't impact my gaming abilities. I play the same on a slow monitor vs. a low lag monitor. Tactics, Strategy and experience out-ways any capability that one posses whether one has competitive advantage on the software or hardware side. If you don't know how to play the game well, best gear won't save you from a quick, painful death and there in rage quit and threaten to never play the game again...

If you don't know how to use the tool, you pretty much are a tool. This can be applied with anything.

You have to look at this from both spectrum of the gaming pool. Shitty players will always be shitty players on the best gear, unless they change their gameplay style. All that 20-30ms savings will just allow them to see their death that much sooner. Because there are these kinds of gamers out there in the population, you there in can't state the claim that the whole population will improve their gaming ability when using a 120hz, low input lag monitor.

In this, enjoyment of using a 120hz, low input lag monitor is not what is being measured.

Quote :

"I mean seriously? What would your brain be thinking? OMG THE COLOR GAMUT IN THIS GAME IS OFF I CAN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE LACK OF INPUT LAG AND FAST RESPONSE TIME!!!"

I use the monitor for print and video use. If I invest a grand into a monitor I want it able to do the main thing that I want it to do on a professional level. Low input lag or 120hz refresh rate of a monitor isn't that dire needed when I'm photoshopping or cutting video.

Quote :

"I used to be a professional gamer, playing 8+ hours a day. keyboard, mouse, monitor, none of it mattered, it was all what you were comfortable with. Ergo made a difference, but that was it. Today, years later, the only esports I partake in aren't nearly as twitch as they were back then but latency is the only thing that matters. As long as I have 30+fps I'm good. I play on a 27" 2560x1440 60hz IPS, but still average 70-100fps on actual competitive games. BF3 doesn't have any ladders to speak of and I've lost interest in pubbing. I could play with triple sli 7990's if I cared to, but most games are made for consoles first so then run on max on my 6970 at 40+fps at 2560x1440, which is good enough for me given how often I get to play."

LOL, please dude, we all know you were NOT a pro gamer. Playing competitively doesn't make you a pro gamer. FYI, you can't have SLI 7990's... That would be xfire...

[Edited on April 6, 2013 at 9:33 AM. Reason : ]

4/6/2013 9:30:23 AM

getting paid to do something makes you professional. I was on the house team for compusa after our performance in wcg circa like 2002-2003. they paid/sponsored us. our team was cal-p(rofessional) and cal-invite (best of the best) the I wasn't there for most the cal-i time

this: http://www.gamespot.com/unions/CSUNION/forums/24623064/the-story-of-bigwie-great-counterstrike-player-now-writes-articles-at-gotfrag
and wow were when I stopped.

[Edited on April 7, 2013 at 12:45 AM. Reason : yep]

4/7/2013 12:19:04 AM

you got fired from professional gaming for cheating?

4/7/2013 3:13:40 PM

Quote :

"getting paid to do something makes you professional"

It does not.

I've gotten paid to solve math problems for people, does that make me a professional mathematician?
I've gotten paid to do home improvement projects, does that make me a professional handyman?
I've gotten paid to fix people's motorcycles and cars, does that make a professional mechanic?

It just means you were lucky enough to get a little bit of money from a hobby. Was it your only source of income? Did you pursue it as an actual career? Did you quit your day job or actually took it upon yourself to be educated in a related gaming field to be in that industry? You can't loosely base the definition of the word "professional" as one to just getting paid to do something.

Even I enjoyed being part of gaming clans during cal-p and cal-i early days with CS and tribes. Shit, I've won a number of competitions in other leagues in other games and received prizes and winnings, but never did I ever saw myself or my teammates as professionals because at the time, it was still considered a hobby and whatever earnings we made never proved to be anything important enough to say "hey, I'll quit my job or stop going to college and do this full time". Shit, my IRL gaming clan, whenever we win hardware (since you can't split it 6 ways), we just give it to the most needed person in the clan even if they didn't participate in it.

4/7/2013 3:26:46 PM

I never cheated but the corruption at the top of the leagues as money poured into the game was a catalyst -- this was about the time gear was getting branded after people like fatal1ty and "MLG" came about and started airing on espn2 in the summer.

Patch 1.6 was pretty terrible (shields) and wow beta started at the same time. It was the perfect storm for a mass migration from CS to WoW. You can all personally define a pro-gamer however you want, but CS was my only source of income, though most of it came in the form of sponsorship, like gear, internet service, etc. At one point I was trying my best to live completely on CS money like 3d. We didn't have the notoriety and marketing appeal of a ksharp so that dream was short lived. Certainly played in the same matches, lans, and brackets with them, sk gaming, TAU, etc and beat them often enough to be considered in the same league. Saying we were "competitive" is a bit of an understatement.

4/7/2013 8:41:59 PM

So... I'm guessing any linksys will do. Thanks fellas...

4/8/2013 10:23:15 AM

Hiro, if you want to boost your wifi, buy a DD-WRT or Tomato firmware compatible router. It will allow you to boost your signal. I'd say Linksys or Buffalo for routers.

http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported_Devices

not sure how many out of the box routers can give you good reception at 100', you might want to have a removable antenna so you can replace it with higher gain.

[Edited on April 8, 2013 at 10:59 AM. Reason : .]

4/8/2013 10:52:53 AM

^

I wouldn't go tomato, but that's just based on preference.

4/8/2013 10:58:24 AM