Building a gaming PC

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

Higher number of cores shouldn't matter when GPU is already saturated. But for CPU bound games, that don't saturate the GPU yet, using proper multithreading can surely improve things. And they have Vulkan to handle GPU side properly when doing it.

There aren't many games yet that do it, and common engines like Unreal aren't even done with parallelization rewrite.
See: https://trello.com/c/lzLwtb5P/124-vulkan-for-pc-and-linux

But once they will be, more cores will surely be a major benefit.

 

[eskiMoe]

That Ryzen rumor is so juicy, and apparently it's coming from the same source that leaked the Geforce RTX launch.

Intel is gonna get so rekt. The only thing they had over AMD was the higher single threaded performance which (if this rumor turns out to be correct) is gonna be at least as close to Intel's flagship CPUs that the difference is going to be negligible.

And all this at a much lower price point.

 

[volsung]

Just a quick short note: clock frequency is a bad indicator of performance (perceived as "speed"). Processors A and B could be 3.8 and 4.5 GHz respectively and we would simply not have enough information to know which one is faster. Architectural parameters, like instruction set, instructions per cycle and branch prediction have more impact than raw frequency. In other words, based on frequency alone you can't say AMD is slower than Intel. You could predict their performance if you have enough information or test it empirically like most websites do.

And yes I also agree games should have much better shared memory parallel processing but I think 4 cores is still pretty standard, and game programmers are known for hard coding stuff.

 

[Hoplite_22]

Can get Corsair DDR 4 3200 16gb for less than that on overclockers. like £20 less. does depend on main board compatibility admittedly but you don't seem to have one on there so i have no idea if that is usable. just that ram seems expensive.

 

[volsung]

So I thought this might be interesting. I'm still testing the Omen X 35 monitor and it's actually quite good, it has great response times, no ghosting and when adjusted, very good colors. Two things however: the monitor is capable of displaying a wide range of dark tones that even my old Dell U2415 could not, so what was a black blob before is now a gradient, but in low quality content it displays as compression artifacts. If I "crush" the blacks a bit with gamma and brightness, it looks like my old IPS and most artifacts are gone. The other thing is some games have gradient banding, for instance in fog, smoke and so on. Examples include using a flash light in dark games like Soma or The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, and the (IMO) ugly vignetting effect in The Witcher 3. What I did not know is that some games actually implement dithering to reduce banding, creating much smoother gradients, while others (I suppose including the aforementioned games) do not and have more or less noticeable banding (more so in a high contrast panel). Dithering can also be implemented in-driver, and AMD does so which makes banding essentially disappear in games with Radeon/Vega. Nvidia for some obscure reason does NOT support driver level dithering in Windows so the banding is noticeable on my GTX 970.... but, and here comes the fun part, Nvidia DOES support dithering in Linux! Games with banding in Windows do not have banding in Linux, they look fantastic!

There you have it. These monitors (and even Nvidia for that matter) are better supported in Linux for some strange reason.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

@volsung: Interesting. Do you know how to control in-driver dithering using Mesa?

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

Intel reaffirms adaptive sync support: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/12/intel-promises-big-boost-to-integrated-gpu-breaks-teraflop-barrier/

This will be the end of Gsync probably, at least for users of integrated GPU + discrete one. Since even Nvidia will work with FreeSync monitor, through running sync over integrated GPU. So with both AMD and Intel supporting the standard, Gsync will be cornered.

 

[M4xw0lf]

Intel also announced that soon their CPUs will use the same heterogeneous Chiplet approach which AMD has already taken. They currently have really lost the initiative in the x86 CPU market.

 

[volsung]

@Gilrond-i-Virdan
Not sure I understand. Do you mean Nouveau + Mesa? If so I haven't tested it, but I would assume it should be on by default since there's not much of a configuration interface.

I am not sure if the dithering alone is responsible for the video differences outside of 3D games, but overall this VA monitor looks better in Linux than in Windows.

I tested a few more games, like The Witcher 3 and Doom (2016) and to be honest they look pretty damn good. With VA you lose a tiny bit of that color oomph from IPS but the contrast in dark scenes is impressive (true black + bright colors). I'm still considering getting a 60Hz 34" LG IPS instead, but everyday I appreciate/get used to the differences a little more.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

I mean AMD + Mesa (i.e. radeonsi / radv drivers). Usually forced features that override application behavior are controlled with environment variables.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

With all this talk about new monitors, I started browsing around for something like 2.5K (i.e. 2560 x 1440) with 144 Hz max refresh rate (with full range Adaptive Sync), IPS panel and low response time. That's not a very common combination, but something did come up. Namely Acer Nitro monitors:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/acer-nitro-xv272u-vg271u-and-xf272u-with-144hz-and-dci-p3-gamut/

Does anyone have experience with these? Are they good?

The reason I don't want to go to 4K is simply because I want to have higher refresh rate and higher resolution than classic 1920x1200 / 60 Hz. 4K is already a stretch, and pushing refresh rate higher with 4K is way beyond what common GPUs can handle. So 2.5 K is more like it.

I'm not in a rush to buy it though, since it will likely require a better GPU, so I might as well wait until Navi comes out.

 

[SigilFey]

Acers are really popular in the Middle East and Europe. They seem pretty solid. Good quality. I used them all the time while there. No complaints. Nothing to rave about either.

I wouldn't go for 2K or 4K yet (unless I was into art or something). For games, it's still going to be a while before there are any titles made that truly take advantage of it. Both Nvidia and AMD offer resolution scaling to simulate super-resolutions, and that works just fine for games that utilize 4K resolutions now.

Also, as the resolutions increase, it simply creates much heavier performance load for quickly diminishing returns. I think most gamers are going to wind up being much happier with 1080p and higher refresh rates. For modern games, using standard 1080p with normal AA is going to give beautiful image quality and smooth gameplay. 4K will give slightly better image quality and slower performance. During gameplay, most players are probably going to see no difference but feel like 4K is sluggish and less responsive. (Great for games like TW3 or Dragon Age, but problematic for fast-paced shooters and the like.)

Again, what's the return for the price? I'd choose lower resolution, higher refresh, and G-Sync over a 2K / 4K option right now.

Don't get me wrong though -- I looove 4K and can't wait for it to become standard! It's just not done stewing yet.

 

[Hoplite_22]

With all this talk about new monitors, I started browsing around for something like 2.5K (i.e. 2560 x 1440) with 144 Hz max refresh rate (with full range Adaptive Sync), IPS panel and low response time. That's not a very common combination, but something did come up. Namely Acer Nitro monitors:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/blog/acer-nitro-xv272u-vg271u-and-xf272u-with-144hz-and-dci-p3-gamut/

Does anyone have experience with these? Are they good?

The reason I don't want to go to 4K is simply because I want to have higher refresh rate and higher resolution than classic 1920x1200 / 60 Hz. 4K is already a stretch, and pushing refresh rate higher with 4K is way beyond what common GPUs can handle. So 2.5 K is more like it.

I'm not in a rush to buy it though, since it will likely require a better GPU, so I might as well wait until Navi comes out.

Acer have a really big build quality problems. so while the electronics may work great you find the stand is totally stuck or the casing is coming away or the power button is failing. this was from buying them in bulk for a business to upgrade people monitors.

 

[SigilFey]

Acer have a really big build quality problems. so while the electronics may work great you find the stand is totally stuck or the casing is coming away or the power button is failing. this was from buying them in bulk for a business to upgrade people monitors.

Do you remember what model that was? We used almost all Acer monitors at the schools I worked at in the UAE, and there were no such problems like that. I never bought one myself because they were simply "good". Screen was clear, but not great. Colors were robust, but not great. Viewing angles were wide enough, but not great. And so on.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

I never bought one myself because they were simply "good".

Are there any higher quality monitors, that are 2.5K, 144 Hz, full range FreeSync, IPS with low response time?

 

[Hoplite_22]

Do you remember what model that was? We used almost all Acer monitors at the schools I worked at in the UAE, and there were no such problems like that. I never bought one myself because they were simply "good". Screen was clear, but not great. Colors were robust, but not great. Viewing angles were wide enough, but not great. And so on.

i do not, they where 4:3 monitors in about 2008.

Are there any higher quality monitors, that are 2.5K, 144 Hz, full range FreeSync, IPS with low response time?

could try looking at LG, view sonic, Iiyama. there are only actually a few compnies that produce the actual screens so if acer has it so will a few others if they use the same supplier.

 

[negan16]

I would like to buy a gaming PC already built. where can I find one?

 

[Hoplite_22]

I would like to buy a gaming PC already built. where can I find one?

depends where you are. but there are a lot out there from Dell and HP to Origin, maingear or Ibuypower.

 

[SigilFey]

I would like to buy a gaming PC already built. where can I find one?

What sort of system do you want? Laptop? Desktop?

How much do you want to spend?

My first recommendation is to build your own (or have it built). Buying your own parts can save literally thousands of dollars, but it can take time.

Most expensive option for real power is custom build through a company. Falcon Northwest and iBuyPower are two I can vouch for, but they can get prohibitively expensive very quickly.

If you'd rather just pick something up pre-built and good-to-go, check the ASUS Republic of Gamers line. They're my favorite brand. This path is great value for the dollar. Performance will be very good, but not top-notch. These you can get in retail shops.

 

[Garrison72]

I bought my pre-built from NCIX. Now I just find out they went under. Bummer. Corsair offers pre-builts as well.