too soon? .... too late?
Last edited by west-phoenix-az (2011-11-15 08:21:38)
Last edited by west-phoenix-az (2011-11-15 08:21:38)
Yea, there is a difference there, but Ultra destroys my GTX460 at 1920x1080. It was still playable, but with enough lag to make it annoying. The difference in the textures was also negligible...FEOS wrote:
Radeon: High - 61.44CapnNismo wrote:
I honestly can't see the difference too much between the two settings...FEOS wrote:
What I noticed was the difference in performance hit you take between the two when you go from HIGH to ULTRA settings. It seems to be more marked in the Radeon than in the GeForce.
Ultra - 39.99
-------
21.45
GeForce: High - 68.96
Ultra - 55.50
------
13.46
Granted, it's only 8 fps, but it still seems significant to me...
Cost/performance. thats whats all about brahFEOS wrote:
Radeon: High - 61.44CapnNismo wrote:
I honestly can't see the difference too much between the two settings...FEOS wrote:
What I noticed was the difference in performance hit you take between the two when you go from HIGH to ULTRA settings. It seems to be more marked in the Radeon than in the GeForce.
Ultra - 39.99
-------
21.45
GeForce: High - 68.96
Ultra - 55.50
------
13.46
Granted, it's only 8 fps, but it still seems significant to me...
Cost data wasn't in any of the charts provided...and not all of us have a running inventory in our heads. So cost was pretty much irrelevant to the discussion, as it was never mentioned. Until now, that is.Beduin wrote:
Cost/performance. thats whats all about brahFEOS wrote:
Radeon: High - 61.44CapnNismo wrote:
I honestly can't see the difference too much between the two settings...
Ultra - 39.99
-------
21.45
GeForce: High - 68.96
Ultra - 55.50
------
13.46
Granted, it's only 8 fps, but it still seems significant to me...
Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
Not sure why people are comparing the HD6950 and the GTX580. The GTX580 is twice the price of the 6950. The 6970 (which is still ~$150 cheaper than the 580) performs better at all 3 resolutions at high quality. (Although admittedly the 6970 falls back behind the 580 on ultra settings).
That was what I was happy about since I own a HD6970, and play at high settings.
u dont wanna talk cost, u wanna talk 8 fps. u mad, bro?FEOS wrote:
Cost data wasn't in any of the charts provided...and not all of us have a running inventory in our heads. So cost was pretty much irrelevant to the discussion, as it was never mentioned. Until now, that is.Beduin wrote:
Cost/performance. thats whats all about brahFEOS wrote:
Radeon: High - 61.44
Ultra - 39.99
-------
21.45
GeForce: High - 68.96
Ultra - 55.50
------
13.46
Granted, it's only 8 fps, but it still seems significant to me...
Not mad at all (and cost is important to me both at home and at work, thank you very much, Trollbert ). Just pointing out that some of us don't have the costs of these things ingrained in our heads--I haven't done a build in several years (had to get off that crack pipe). So, since the only data presented was performance-related, that's all I had to go with in comparing the cards.Beduin wrote:
u dont wanna talk cost, u wanna talk 8 fps. u mad, bro?FEOS wrote:
Cost data wasn't in any of the charts provided...and not all of us have a running inventory in our heads. So cost was pretty much irrelevant to the discussion, as it was never mentioned. Until now, that is.Beduin wrote:
Cost/performance. thats whats all about brah
Thank you past Finray, I knew posting the solution would come in handy one day.Finray wrote:
Fixed it by reinstalling video drivarz.Finray wrote:
Weird bug I've noticed with Opera:
Constantly feels like low fps, scrolling is jerky, letters aren't coming up as soon as I press the keys, etc
but when I grab the bar at the top, pull down to un-fullscreen, then push it to the top to full screen again, it fixes it for like .. 3 seconds. Then it's back to low fps.
Anyone experienced this or got any ideas?
you should be good to play bf3 then.Camm wrote:
beautiful.
my new pc has taken bfbc2 from 1280x720 @ low: <30fps
to
1680x1050 @ everything high: min 51, max 166, avg 99.5
We've had a 32gb 1st gen for a while now and haven't come close to filling it up, despite gobs of apps and movies for both the wife and kids.Jenspm wrote:
Ordering an iPad..
Question is, though, is the 64GB version worth the extra £80 over the 32GB? Anyone have any experience with them, and how much space you tend to fill up? Like, how much space do apps and such take?