just brew it! wrote:@cynan - I don't think you've been reading enough of his threads.
Maybe you've had to read too many.
Personal computing discussed
just brew it! wrote:@cynan - I don't think you've been reading enough of his threads.
derFunkenstein wrote:just brew it! wrote:@cynan - I don't think you've been reading enough of his threads.
Maybe you've had to read too many.
just brew it! wrote:derFunkenstein wrote:just brew it! wrote:@cynan - I don't think you've been reading enough of his threads.
Maybe you've had to read too many.
Touché!
just brew it! wrote:Vhalidictes wrote:The Egg wrote:Upcoming whm1974 topics:
When will augmented reality headsets become mainstream, and exactly how much will it cost?
2048, $200 US.
In inflation-adjusted 2017 dollars, or 2048 dollars?
Vhalidictes wrote:EDIT: Would a new post "propose whm1974's next thread title" help by concentrating all this into one place, or hurt, overall?
Topinio wrote:Nope. Much and long as I try to resist, I will inevitably join in, once and probably twice per thread.
It doesn't matter how or it all gets, really; he's good value, you just gotta roll with it. Cheers!
LostCat wrote:While kill off might be a little bit of an overreaction so is most of this discussion peeps. He had a legit point.
LostCat wrote:High end PC gaming costs have gotten out of control IMO. As long as this system stays working I'm done buying anything for many years unless I can sell off this 1070 later for a decent amount.
just brew it! wrote:"High end" has always required a non-trivial cash outlay. What's different today is that more of the cost of a high-end gaming rig is in the GPU, as opposed to other system components. I don't think overall system cost has changed much in roughly 2 decades.
just brew it! wrote:And even if SSD prices haven't risen in absolute terms, you're typically paying the same price for flash with crappier endurance as the race to the bottom continues.
whm1974 wrote:Now I'm and now wondering with the outrageous prices of GPUs now if that will end up killing off or doing some major damage to PC gaming? I mean I would I would be pissed off if I couldn't play new games at 2560x1600 considering how much I paid for my display or if I would have to pay an arm and leg to be able to do so.
I mean really I checked Newegg's prices on GPUs and even older ones like the 970 are really high. I wish this mining thing will crash and crash hard.
just brew it! wrote:"High end" has always required a non-trivial cash outlay. What's different today is that more of the cost of a high-end gaming rig is in the GPU, as opposed to other system components. I don't think overall system cost has changed much in roughly 2 decades.
LostCat wrote:The chances of an SSD crapping out in normal usage scenarios still seem monumentally slim even with the worse endurance. I'll worry about it when I have a reason to.
My only dead SSD so far is the one that had physical damage to the connector.
just brew it! wrote:And even if SSD prices haven't risen in absolute terms, you're typically paying the same price for flash with crappier endurance as the race to the bottom continues.
Aranarth wrote:To answer the op question - nope.
If I understand it correctly - As difficulty ramps it becomes uneconomical to use video card to mine and people will move to asics once they have been designed and manufactured.
I expect prices for 1050, 1060, rx 470 / 480 and rx 570/580 to return to MSRP around thanksgiving.
There will be lots of used video cards on ebay around that time for good prices as well but they will be abused and might not be as good of a deal as one would hope.
just brew it! wrote:From what I understand, some of the newer cryptocurrencies (e.g. Ethereum) are being explicitly designed to make ASIC mining impractical (memory requirements, IIRC).
Aranarth wrote:just brew it! wrote:From what I understand, some of the newer cryptocurrencies (e.g. Ethereum) are being explicitly designed to make ASIC mining impractical (memory requirements, IIRC).
Yup until someone comes up with a way to make it practical.
I bet people are already working on it and probably already have some test hardware done on FPGA's.
Aranarth wrote:Yup until someone comes up with a way to make it practical.
JBI wrote:I also have to wonder: Once you've added the complexity of the added DRAM interfaces and the cost of the DRAM itself, would ASICs still have much of an advantage over GPUs? Presumably performance will be throttled by RAM bandwidth as well, so having a more efficient hardware-based implementation of the algorithms likely won't help as much.
ptsant wrote:just brew it! wrote:"High end" has always required a non-trivial cash outlay. What's different today is that more of the cost of a high-end gaming rig is in the GPU, as opposed to other system components. I don't think overall system cost has changed much in roughly 2 decades.
I would also add the peripherals. I used to buy $10 keyboard and $5 mice. The re-introduction of mechanical keyboards (I already had one in the 1990s) has pushed prices a bit. Most importantly, the introduction of "gaming" peripherals has also increased prices significantly. Or maybe I'm less cheap than what I used to be...
just brew it! wrote:And even if SSD prices haven't risen in absolute terms, you're typically paying the same price for flash with crappier endurance as the race to the bottom continues.
whm1974 wrote:ptsant wrote:just brew it! wrote:"High end" has always required a non-trivial cash outlay. What's different today is that more of the cost of a high-end gaming rig is in the GPU, as opposed to other system components. I don't think overall system cost has changed much in roughly 2 decades.
I would also add the peripherals. I used to buy $10 keyboard and $5 mice. The re-introduction of mechanical keyboards (I already had one in the 1990s) has pushed prices a bit. Most importantly, the introduction of "gaming" peripherals has also increased prices significantly. Or maybe I'm less cheap than what I used to be...
I'm in the same camp myself. I brought a ~$100 keyboard not too long ago as well. Hell ten years ago I would have laughed at those who spent that much or more on a keyboard. And I really did get bitten by the high end hardware bug.
LostCat wrote:High end PC gaming costs have gotten out of control IMO. As long as this system stays working I'm done buying anything for many years unless I can sell off this 1070 later for a decent amount.
just brew it! wrote:whm1974 wrote:ptsant wrote:I would also add the peripherals. I used to buy $10 keyboard and $5 mice. The re-introduction of mechanical keyboards (I already had one in the 1990s) has pushed prices a bit. Most importantly, the introduction of "gaming" peripherals has also increased prices significantly. Or maybe I'm less cheap than what I used to be...
I'm in the same camp myself. I brought a ~$100 keyboard not too long ago as well. Hell ten years ago I would have laughed at those who spent that much or more on a keyboard. And I really did get bitten by the high end hardware bug.
You can still buy the $10 keyboards and $5 mice if you want. Nobody is forcing you to buy mechanical. A good mechanical keyboard will also last a very long time, so the higher cost can be amortized across multiple builds. My RK-9000 was purchased 2 or 3 builds back, and the key action still feels as good as when it was new.
Waco wrote:LostCat wrote:High end PC gaming costs have gotten out of control IMO. As long as this system stays working I'm done buying anything for many years unless I can sell off this 1070 later for a decent amount.
IMO, they're the cheapest they've been in...ever...really. Look at what $500 could purchase a decade ago, or two decades ago. You can get a far more useful gaming system today for that money than you ever could in the past, and that's not even accounting for inflation.
Dammit, 20 FPS at 320x240 used to be damn good if you were running full 16 bit color, and it didn't take a cheap machine to do that. People are spoiled.
Vhalidictes wrote:JBI, the good news is that a lot of older MLC drives are still available on the market for essentially the same price as the new crappy RAM-less TLC drives. For as long as that's still the case it's possible to get more for your money.
Topinio wrote:Vhalidictes wrote:JBI, the good news is that a lot of older MLC drives are still available on the market for essentially the same price as the new crappy RAM-less TLC drives. For as long as that's still the case it's possible to get more for your money.
Inherent unsustainability is unhappy-making, though, and it's getting worse than TLC; I think it won't be too long before the new and crappy QLC drives using crappy 3D charge trap NAND are what's available.
Vhalidictes wrote:Topinio wrote:Vhalidictes wrote:JBI, the good news is that a lot of older MLC drives are still available on the market for essentially the same price as the new crappy RAM-less TLC drives. For as long as that's still the case it's possible to get more for your money.
Inherent unsustainability is unhappy-making, though, and it's getting worse than TLC; I think it won't be too long before the new and crappy QLC drives using crappy 3D charge trap NAND are what's available.
But then you're better off with spinning rust. A new-ish not-too-fragmented HDD can push 150MB/sec sequential; At some point there's no advantage to Flash any more.
Vhalidictes wrote:EDIT: Now that I'm thinking about it, a 4-drive RAID 0+1 array of new small 7200RPM HDDs (1-2TB each, say) might actually outperform a **** TLC drive in random-access performance.
just brew it! wrote:Vhalidictes wrote:EDIT: Now that I'm thinking about it, a 4-drive RAID 0+1 array of new small 7200RPM HDDs (1-2TB each, say) might actually outperform a **** TLC drive in random-access performance.
Random? Not a chance. Seek latency completely dominates random performance for HDDs. Sequential performance maybe.