Registered User
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Folterknecht

  1. 3 hours ago, Haswell said:

    Wouldn't you get bombed to shit in a tank then? I wonder how will they handle the inherent imbalance between fast flying things and slow ground stuff.

    Destroying a moying tank in a sim, especially if player controlled is hard. Forget WT and it's mouse aim. Furthermore you will also have friendly air cover and realistic damage models for planes, no WT planes with fire extinguishers in the engine and fuel tanks.


    But we ll have to wait and see ... .

  2. 1 hour ago, Haswell said:

    Looks great, but I thought IL-2 is a flight sim at heart?


    It is, but as Magz explaines in (t)his vid, the game engine makes tanks possible and they are extending a developer mod to a 100km x 100km map (Kursk area).


    I doubt it will have much in common with WT let alone WoT. There is no vehicle research or crew leveling in IL2, you just buy a module (Moskau, Stalingrad, Kuban, Bodenplatte ...) that includes vehicles (planes atm) and map(s) - that 's it. There is "no" balance only the drive to get as close to historical accurate as possible. -> get gud, it's a sim after all.


    But tanks could be a big success for them even as a sim, because the barriers of entry are much lower compared to planes. And if they keep their current buisness model, it might appeal to many people.

  3. I wouldnt touch neither of them, at least until you made sure that you can upgrade the RAM in the 4GB model with the FullHD screen. Often in low cost models (or Apple) the RAM is soldered without the option for expansion. Trust me when I say two low clocked cores with only 4GB RAM in todays day and age becomes a pain in the arse even with websurfing the moment you have more than 5 tabs open. Without addblockers you better have a good old fashioned men's magazine at hand to bridge the site loading times.


    And I havn't encountered a 1366x768 screen I didn't want to smash the moment I saw it, if only because the web is designed for FullHD. And that is before the issue of picture quality these screens have.

  4. 17 hours ago, Bavor said:

    AMD is offering a 16 core Threadripper to a few of Intel's 40th Anniversary winners,37320.html

    If I won an i7-8086K I'd take the Threadripper swap deal, then resell the Threadripper to buy other hardware.

    I feel the Threadripper is the wrong chip for that PR stunt - a 2700X + a X470 board would make more sense. Threadripper and Skylake X because of their architecture make "poor" gaming CPUs compared to 6 core Coffeelake. Or they should have gone for a "Replacement Kit" - 2600X + 16GB DDR4 + X470 board which is roughly the same price as a new 8086K.

  5. 13 hours ago, Fulcrous said:

    Probably "poor" in the sense of voltages required.


    "Poor" is the tech press coverage of new CPUs in the last 1-2 years, especially when it comes to the OC section of their reviews and tests.

    While the manufacturing process of new silicon gets smaller, the voltage these clowns run to get big numbers and draw attention to their reviews is slowly creeping up. While I know what to make of 1.4+V under air/H2O, the avg user doesn't. Not understanding that short term "bench stable" in this case leads to electromigration in the long run.

  6. 3 hours ago, Jaegaer said:


    In a IS-3 vs IS-3 fight a WN 300 player will lose 19 out of 20 times against an WN 2300 player.


    That's ok. The problem starts to rear it's ugly head in E-sports ... .


    Furthermore RNG is the most frustrating for those players who are potential E-sports material even outside of it. Among other things it's probably one of the main reasons of the exodus of top players since 2013/14.

  7. 2 hours ago, woe2you said:

    Help me out here - I can't think of a single real-world workload that would justify the difference between single disk NVME and RAID.


    I'm also seeing this as an outsider, but professional video editing (scrap disk) might be a usecase. Everytime you can speed up your workflow you save time/money ... . But as I said, that 's me talking out of my rear vent.


    1 hour ago, TheMarine0341 said:

    Upgrading the Ryzen 5 1st gen to the next is worth it IMO.

    not for 180-200$, though if he can pay AMD maybe 30-40$ and get a 2600 back instead of a 1600 that's a different story.

  8. 3 hours ago, Sipher351 said:

    Well my lottery results are finally in. 5.0 GHz at 1.40 Volts and 85C max temp. Not stellar but not the worst.

    Looks defenitly average.


    If you manage 4.8 or 4.9 GHz on all cores without AVX offset with only 1.3V or below, I 'd step down there. 1.4V in long run isn't that good for your CPU.

    It's always best to run the CPU at it's sweetspot over the long run. Example for a fictional Haswell/Devils Canyon CPU:

    speed --------- voltage

    4.5 GHz - 1.2V

    4.6 GHz - 1.25V

    4.7 GHz - 1.3V

    4.8 GHz - 1.4V


    That's usually also the spot where you can still max our the RAM and IMC. Overclocking the RAM when you near or at the limit of the CPU frequency wise is often very tricky.


  9. 4 hours ago, TheMarine0341 said:

    I am debating on weather or not to upgrade to the new Z470 boards

    X470 you mean?


    That aside there is very little reason to do so generally - compared to X370. B350 is basically not suited for Ryzen 8 cores in my book - VRM implementation leaves much to be desired on these budget boards.

    • seems X470 can handle slightly higher memory clocks, though probably more so on higher end boards with a corresponding price tag. Doubt you will buy a new set of 2x 8GB 3600 with low timings also.
    • you might see better VRM thermals on some boards, but that depends on the design and the price tag ...
    • NVME Raid (0 - 1) with two x4 PCIe 3.0 drives possible now, if board manufacturer implemented that (defenition of a niche market right there)