• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
BTR Will Shut Down Friday ... as we Upgrade
#1



BTR is being upgraded to VPS from Cloud/shared hosting. It's about 8X more expensive per month but will give our readers a much better experience with improved loading times and less compressed images.

UPDATED

The order will go in by noon on Friday (July 31), and BTR should be back up on Sunday (August 2) .... See you on the other side
Dirol
  Reply
#2
BTR has been working both yesterday and today...did this go through?
  Reply
#3
(07-25-2020, 06:04 PM)SickBeast Wrote: BTR has been working both yesterday and today...did this go through?

No. I got the order in too late. It will start next Friday.

I got myself a new monitor ...
https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16824022815

I want to see if these old eyes and slowing reflexes can tell the difference between 60Hz > 120Hz (yes) > 240Hz (?)
Crazy_pilot
  Reply
#4
I definitely notice 120hz. I've never tried 240hz. Congrats! Looks like a cool/fun purchase for you. You've probably got the hardware to push 240fps. Running FPS that high might require a really high CPU speed though. Good and fast RAM, also. That will probably make for some interesting reviews. Maybe you can show how CPU and GPU power affect FPS that high.
  Reply
#5
(07-25-2020, 08:08 PM)SickBeast Wrote: I definitely notice 120hz. I've never tried 240hz. Congrats! Looks like a cool/fun purchase for you. You've probably got the hardware to push 240fps. Running FPS that high might require a really high CPU speed though. Good and fast RAM, also. That will probably make for some interesting reviews. Maybe you can show how CPU and GPU power affect FPS that high.

Without any doubt 120Hz looks sharper than 60Hz when moving the mouse, nevermind for fast twitch gaming.

Basically, I have very nice 32" BenQ HDR10 display 3840x2160 (after my generic Monoprice 4K/28" display started having issues again), but it is only 60Hz - which is OK since very few cards can push 120Hz at 4K - yet.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B078HW...00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

My favorite display for all-round gaming is a 34" Acer 3440x1440 display but it only overclocks to 100Hz - perfect for G-sync and most games. I have an old ASUS 3DVision 120Hz 28" display that is very fluid compared with 60Hz, but it's 1080P. So now I want to see if 240Hz is something I can even notice, and I like 1440P - 27" seems right for 2560x1440 because 34 is too wide (I can see the pixels) for 3440x1440.

Thank-you. That is the whole point - to see if a much faster CPU (5.3GHz vs 4.8GHz) will be able to drive games at 1440P/240Hz so that there is a noticeable difference. It should generate a few reviews
- I will start by reviewing it; it's just a bit expensive but it has pretty unique specs as a 1440P HDR600 240Hz panel with fast GTG that is both G-sync and FreeSync Premium 2 compatible. So I can test any GPU.

I use 32GB T-Force DDR4-3600MHz at stock timings - for now. Since my platform is brand new, I won't OC it further until I have the OC locked down. And I don't want to introduce any instability by combining two new OCs simultaneously. Afterward, I'll clock the RAM Back to 3866MHz for regular benchmarking. It should be fast enough; Intel's default highest RAM is 2933MHz and there is enough bandwidth for 5.3GHz on a single core without any choking off of performance.
  Reply
#6
I think you'll almost definitely see an FPS boost from a 500mhz CPU clockspeed gain. You'll see gains if you can tweak/overclock your RAM more also. Just to let you know, when I compared my system to your RAM scores from your review, my memory at 3100mhz at CAS14 can actually match and even exceed your faster system RAM. You'd do well to tighten your timings up a bit if you can, particularly the CAS latency setting.

Is there a way to get more than one core running at 5.3ghz? It's cool that Intel has enabled such a high speed by default. I very much doubt you could get all the cores running that fast, and even if you could it would probably have too much heat output to be stable or realistic for daily use.

These are the overclocking statistics for the 8700k:

Top 58% 5.1 GHz 1.412 V
Top 30% 5.2 GHz 1.425 V
Top 6% 5.3 GHz 1.437 V

I would suggest that the stats should be pretty similar even for the newer Intel chips. It's not as though they have done anything drastic to their design or manufacturing. Perhaps there is a better chance of hitting 5.3ghz now but I'd still venture to say that that would be a very rare all core stable overclock for the vast majority of chips.

The monitor purchase seems interesting. Please keep us updated.
  Reply
#7



Overclocking the RAM will be for a follow-up review. DDR4 latency is generally less important than speed.

Yes, there is an "all core" OC to 5.3GHz possible but only the best chips can achieve it at reasonable temps. I would be satisfied with 5.1GHz all core but be much happier with 5.2GHz.

I'll have the review up by mid week. I should get the new display on Friday since it is shipping from Newegg's Indiana warehouse.
  Reply
#8
Change of plans. We will only be down for a few hours today as we upgrade our hosting. I'll delete this post after the migration.
  Reply
#9
The Upgrade is done. There are some things that Mario will be cleaning up over the weekend including the forum.
  Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)