PC Hardware Talk Megathread

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Obviously you're the one looking at it so what you notice is what really matters at the end of the day. I just don't know why you wouldn't check your FPS and see if it is even making a difference objectively speaking. If nothing else you could try to get it as close as possible to 144 by trial and error with settings.

I think I'm prob misunderstanding you which is likely my fault as I've been out of gaming for a while

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

I think I'm prob misunderstanding you which is likely my fault as I've been out of gaming for a while

Ok, looking back at my posts I might have been assuming you had some information that I didn't provide.

There are a number of things you "want" out of a video game when it comes to graphics, but in the most basic sense, with all settings on "ultra", you want two things: a high frame rate (measured in frames per second or "FPS") and a high resolution (1080p, 1440p, 4k). Unfortunately, those things are in tension: the higher you set the resolution, the lower your frame rate, because it takes a more powerful video card with more memory to show all those frames when the resolution is pumped up (as well as the hardware to support the video card).

When you're looking at a monitor, again, you're looking at two primary factors: first resolution, and second, refresh rate, which correlates to frame rate. The refresh rate of the monitor (60hz, 120hz, 144hz etc) is the highest frame rate that the monitor is able to display. Crucially, this does not mean that the monitor is always displaying content at the refresh rate it is set to. You still need to have the hardware - primarily the video card - capable to run a game at a high enough frame rate to take advantage of the monitor's refresh rate.

In other word, if you have otherwise-identical 60hz and 144hz monitors side by side, and the hardware you're using is only able to display the game you're playing at 50fps, what you see on the screen will be exactly the same on both monitors. However, if the hardware you're using is able to display the game at 130fps, the 60hz monitor will only display it at 60FPS, while the 144hz monitor will display it at 130fps.

In your case, you have a monitor that can be set to a refresh rate of 144hz or 165hz. But can your hardware play your games at 120fps, 140fps or 160fps? Because if it's 120fps or 140fps, it does not matter if your monitor is overclocked or not - you will see exactly the same thing on the screen. If your hardware can play the games at 160fps, you might see a difference.

There is software that allows you to see your current FPS displayed live on the screen. Steam has an option that shows live FPS, but most people use MSI Afterburner, because it works really well and has a lot more optionality for what you can actually display (I typically show some combination of CPU temp, GPU temp, FPS, Avg FPS and 1% low). When I see what the FPS is, I can then adjust the game's graphics settings to get the frame rate as close to my monitor's refresh rate as possible if that's what my priority is, or in other cases, at least ensure that it never drops below what I consider a playable number for the game (usually 60fps).

That's what I meant by "trial and error" with your game settings to get the most out of your screen. You paid for 144hz, might as well try to get the benefit of it, is my view.

[White Out 403]

I had no idea the link between refresh rate and FPS. Thanks! That makes so much more sense now when I'm in the on the monitor menu in game with G sync on and see the refresh rate go back and forth like crazy in game

still the fact this guy is getting weird in OC leads me to believe that there is a issue with the monitor itself. I'm leaning to getting the 4 year warranty and then cashing in on it later in the monitors life if it gets worse

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Well, your refresh rate should definitely not be going back and forth like crazy in game. Once you set it to something, it shouldn't be changing on its own, unless there is something software-based that is telling it that it can't be at 165hz in that particular situation.

It's the same as when you set your resolution; it shouldn't just randomly change unless, for example, you start up a game and the game doesn't support the resolution you were using.

Again, refresh rate is just a cap for FPS. So maybe you want to set it lower - you can also cap FPS by software. A lot of people do that, because consistent FPS is generally better than having a high max FPS but having it jump all over the place depending on what's on screen. If you're bouncing between 100 and 130 FPS while you play, your game will feel less smooth than if it was just running at a consistent 90FPS at all times.

[White Out 403]

That's what g sync does. It matches your refresh to your fps

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

No, Gsync is intended to eliminate screen tearing. It doesn't serve the same function as a frame rate cap at all.

Let's say you're playing Witcher 3 on a 100hz monitor at 1080p. Your graphics card is humming along, giving you an average FPS of 101, higher than the refresh rate. So what you're looking at on the screen is generally 100fps, and if it drops to 95 once in a while, it's not significant enough to seriously alter your gameplay experience. .

In game, you decide to travel to the Skellige isles. It starts raining in game. The number of npcs on the screen goes up, there's more water texture on screen, more lighting effects needed to be displayed. Your graphics card is no longer giving you 101 fps with occasional drops to 95, now it's giving you 75 to 90 fps on screen, depending on where Geralt is standing at any given moment. Those rates are perfectly playable, and Gsync will have no effect on them, but the jumping around will be noticeable to most people, and really annoying to some. The 75fps moments will feel sluggish.

If instead you capped your FPS at 80, you'd have a smoother gameplay experience. Now, maybe you're the sort of person who isn't really bothered by frame rate variance and you don't want to do that. But I think most people will.

[White Out 403]

G sync is variable refresh rate as described by Nvidia

I didn't say it was a fps cap

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Yes, but my point is, it's an anti-screen tearing measure. It's just Vsync, but it does the adjustment on the monitor side of the issue, whereas Vsync makes an adjustment on the video card side. They're both just used to address screen tearing, not FPS variances. It has no impact on that issue. So Gsync isn't relevant to what we were talking about.

EDIT: I think maybe you're saying that the refresh rate of your monitor is changing because of Gsync being enabled, but that shouldn't be happening. Gsync just operates in the background. You shouldn't see any changes to your monitor's refresh rate settings (or anything else) because it's turned on.

[nickerjones]

Im venturing into my first PC build. Im actually an apple fanboy. During this quarantine my group started streaming video Games to create a virtual locker room situation. It's ben pretty fun but even using a brand new MacBook Pro I'm having issues with things like StreamLabs OBS to stream console games.

People mentioned I should build a streaming PC. So why not? All the parts are being shipped but my main question is, how much trouble am I in actually putting together this PC? I have zero experience in doing it.

[White Out 403]

The only input I'll add is rgb all the things lol

[photon]

G-Sync is absolutely about changing the refresh rate of a monitor; without G-Sync or Freesync an LCD monitor's refresh rate is fixed; it does not fluctuate with the frame rate of the input.

That's what causes the tearing; the PC is throwing new images at the monitor faster than it can update them and the screen often displays images from two different frames on different sections of the screen (vsync being off)

vsync being on means the video card will give frames to the monitor at the exact fixed refresh rate of the monitor. Which is smooth but limited to the refresh rate of the monitor (and of course assumes the PC can even run the game at that speed), but can have some lag and introduces stuttering as the GPU holds onto a frame until the monitor is ready to show it.

G-Sync and Freesync allow the monitor to vary its refresh rate to match what the GPU is putting out so it eliminates both tearing and lag and stuttering (as long as the GPU is putting out whatever the monitor is capable of, I don't think monitors can go below 30Hz or of course above their max of 144Hz or whatever)

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by photon

G-Sync and Freesync allow the monitor to vary its refresh rate to match what the GPU is putting out so it eliminates both tearing and lag and stuttering (as long as the GPU is putting out whatever the monitor is capable of, I don't think monitors can go below 30Hz or of course above their max of 144Hz or whatever)

Yes - this is my entire point. The question I am suggesting he find out the answer to is, is his GPU capable of hitting the max refresh rate of the monitor in the games he is playing. If it's not capable of doing that, there's no point to overclocking the monitor anyway. And furthermore, he might want to change some graphical settings so that they are set to a place where the GPU actually IS capable of hitting (or at least approaching) that max refresh rate, consistently and without drops that will feel sluggish. If it turns out that he's running his games at 60-80fps on a 144hz monitor that just seems like a waste of the hardware's potential.

[photon]

Usually it's a tradeoff between quality and fps, and I'd rather run 80fps at full quality than 120fps at low quality.. the noticeable difference in smoothness is going to fall off the higher the fps. Not being able to run at 144Hz and only being able to run at 80 or 120 isn't wasting the potential IMO because the potential is itself a waste in most cases IMO.

Especially if getting that potential requires spending $1500 on a new video card.

[photon]

There are some neat tests one can run to find out where the differences really start to fall off at testufo.com

For example this one is a good test for DOTA/LoL, RTS or Civ players in screen panning.

https://www.testufo.com/framerates-v...re=2&showfps=1

You can play around with how different refresh rates compare.. make sure Windows itself is running at 144 or whatever your monitor is capable of and you can throw in different refresh rates to see the comparisons to get an idea where your own eyes stop being able to see a difference.

[cSpooge]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

Im venturing into my first PC build. Im actually an apple fanboy. During this quarantine my group started streaming video Games to create a virtual locker room situation. It's ben pretty fun but even using a brand new MacBook Pro I'm having issues with things like StreamLabs OBS to stream console games.

People mentioned I should build a streaming PC. So why not? All the parts are being shipped but my main question is, how much trouble am I in actually putting together this PC? I have zero experience in doing it.

If you can read and follow instructions it's not hard. Tab A goes in Slot A. Just don't force something in a slot it won't fit and you'll be fine.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by photon

Usually it's a tradeoff between quality and fps, and I'd rather run 80fps at full quality than 120fps at low quality.. the noticeable difference in smoothness is going to fall off the higher the fps. Not being able to run at 144Hz and only being able to run at 80 or 120 isn't wasting the potential IMO because the potential is itself a waste in most cases IMO. Especially if getting that potential requires spending $1500 on a new video card.

I 100% agree. But it's personal preference as well as the type of game you play. No way to know what you like best until you've tried a few things.

[nickerjones]

Originally Posted by cSpooge

If you can read and follow instructions it's not hard. Tab A goes in Slot A. Just don't force something in a slot it won't fit and you'll be fine.

Thanks! That makes me feel a lot better.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

There are a few things, like putting the standoffs in properly to ensure that the mobo won't touch the case (even if it flexes) so that it doesn't fry all your components, but it's mostly a lego project at this point. Doesn't require any significant skills. Remember to ground yourself and you're good.

[Cliche]

https://www.amd.com/en/chipsets/b550

To decipher the chart: B550 supports only Ryzen 3000 and newer processors.

Zen 3 or Ryzen 4000 desktop processors (Zen 2 is Ryzen 3000 processors mostly) are only supported on x570 and B550 chip set boards.


Also for Core i7-7700 equivalent performance, Ryzen 3300x is pretty much equal(https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews...0-cpu-review/3), and is 300$CDN cheaper.

[woob]

So, is the general consensus that this is not a great time to be building a gaming PC? I imagine stock is low and thus prices might be higher on some items? I want to start building a Sim Racing PC over the next 4-5 months, however on the wheels/pedals/etc. side, it looks like stock is getting hammered and pricing is going up.