191–200 of 219 posts
Its bad. Its never been this bad before. Just go on pcpartspicker and realize that there are GTX 1080 Tis selling on third party websites for over $1500, and that's the only place you can get them beyond getting lucky. Nvidia isn't going to ramp up production significantly because crypto could crash any day, simultaneously destroying their new sales and flooding the used market with old mining hardware. Combine it wi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Though there is some benefit to cryptocurrencies that rely on ASICs for mining: it means that someone with a significant amount of CPUs/GPUs under their control (such as botnet operators, or government groups like the NSA) can't waltz in and trivially 51% attack the blockchain with their existing general-purpose hardware, and then go back to using it for other things. An attacker would have to commit to buying/buildi…
Unrelated - did you used to frequent a Halo tricking forum called HIH?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Though there is some benefit to cryptocurrencies that rely on ASICs for mining: it means that someone with a significant amount of CPUs/GPUs under their control (such as botnet operators, or government groups like the NSA) can't waltz in and trivially 51% attack the blockchain with their existing general-purpose hardware, and then go back to using it for other things. An attacker would have to commit to buying/buildi…
ASICs are supposed to be orders of magnitude more efficient at their job than GPUs. So NSA can make a 0.01x the investment and "waltz in and trivially 51% attack the blockchain", all while not touching their existing equipment.
If Bitcoin mining relied on GPU or CPU computation, then the NSA could just redirect some of their existing GPU/CPU hardware to do a 51% attack, and then go back to using it for something else when they were done. It would be cheaper and easier for them to do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The effects on prices are quite bad, but the pendulum always comes back in the other direction two. Every GPU shortage leads to the second hand market getting flooded a few years later with used mining GPUs. So in effect we get short term problems, but if you time your purchases correctly you can get deals too.
Would you want to buy a piece of hardware that had been run at 100% of it's capacity for years, without any warranty?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unrelated - did you used to frequent a Halo tricking forum called HIH?
Yeah, that's me. I stuck around its game-modding subforums a lot back then.
Funny how 10 (plus?) years later we’d run into each other on a different site.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have the 1060 6GB. It can max out any game on my 1080p 60hz 24" monitor. However, that's table stakes these days. 1440p monitors are gaining ground as people realize the DPI difference between their PC monitor and their smartphone. Moreover, most people can also notice the difference between 60hz and 100hz monitors.
Why is a noticeable difference considered meaningful? It won't make the gameplay any better. (Asking as a Luddite who doesn't see the point of Retina displays.)
Going from 60 => 100 fps on the other hand makes fast-paced games feel much more fluid and responsive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most PC gamers aren't using high-end machines and don't upgrade very often. The Steam Hardware Survey shows that the majority (74%) of PC gamers have a 1080p monitor and a plurality (37%) have a video card with 2GB of VRAM and 8GB of system RAM (47%). The GTX 1060 only recently overtook the GTX 750 Ti as the single most popular video card. Pricing of high-end hardware is largely irrelevant to the success of PC gaming…
keep in mind that the numbers have been skewed in the last few months because of an influx of pubg players from china, who probably don't have as much money to spend than western gamers. see: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/directx/ windows 7 having a huge uptick from aug-oct, and high end graphics cards' market shares dropping in the same time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have the 1060 6GB. It can max out any game on my 1080p 60hz 24" monitor. However, that's table stakes these days. 1440p monitors are gaining ground as people realize the DPI difference between their PC monitor and their smartphone. Moreover, most people can also notice the difference between 60hz and 100hz monitors.
Why is a noticeable difference considered meaningful? It won't make the gameplay any better. (Asking as a Luddite who doesn't see the point of Retina displays.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have the 1060 6GB. It can max out any game on my 1080p 60hz 24" monitor. However, that's table stakes these days. 1440p monitors are gaining ground as people realize the DPI difference between their PC monitor and their smartphone. Moreover, most people can also notice the difference between 60hz and 100hz monitors.
So now we're talking about bleeding-edge technology in the 1440p / 100hz realm. I don't feel really bad that gamers can't readily get access to the technologies that drive the 0.0001% of gamers to these settings, no more than I feel bad for cryptocurrency miners who spend $1200 on a 1080ti and configure it like an idiot and get half the earning potential they should.
It's high-end, but not exactly what I'd call bleeding-edge / 0.0001% of gamers.
I'm legitimately worried about the long term future of my hobby (PC gaming) at this point. Prices like this have a cascade effect because when less people can afford to build a PC and/or upgrade there's less incentive for developers and publishers to spend time on the platform. Consoles are shielded by the ability of Sony and Microsoft to take losses which will be absorbed by online fees and higher game prices but no…
Most PC gamers aren't using high-end machines and don't upgrade very often. The Steam Hardware Survey shows that the majority (74%) of PC gamers have a 1080p monitor and a plurality (37%) have a video card with 2GB of VRAM and 8GB of system RAM (47%). The GTX 1060 only recently overtook the GTX 750 Ti as the single most popular video card. Pricing of high-end hardware is largely irrelevant to the success of PC gaming…
I'd also wonder if the small percentage of people on top-end gear drive the market forward (e.g. purchasing significantly more games even if the users are smaller in number).