If you want a good example of why brand loyalty isn’t a good idea, compare the Asus G14 to their lower end models like the a15. There is also their higher end intel gaming laptops compared to their 200 nit, bios throttled TUF 505GT.
Some products are good, some products are not; has nothing to do with the brand but the quality of the product itself.
I wouldn’t call it “brand loyalty”… But I have had pretty steady success with Gigabyte’s windforce series GPU’s. My 650ti, 1050ti, and current 1660ti have all been Windforce and never let me down. When the next gen RDNA cards come out… I will likely wait for Windforce card. the raw performance loss from the lower clock is made for in the reliability of performance through thermals.
I need to see a pretty solid argument to the contrary for me to change.
Just wait for reviews. Which will be very important this generation since the high end RTX 3000 cards are going to be power hogs at launch. The mid range cards will probably be fine.
“power hogs” doesn’t do it justice. Seasonic indicated, via their pic of the new 12pin connector, that minimum recommended PSU for it is 850w.
I would say that although outliers exist, Sapphire and EVGA are your “go to” for AMD and Nvidia graphics cards.
That is to say, I don’t think either has made a terrible design and I think both of them either fix them or will cover you if they are.
The cards themselves will probably be around 350 Watts~, they just recommend 850 Watts so it doesn’t bite them in the behind with RMA’s.
They do it because of people who buy crappy “850w” PSU’s that are really more like 450w PSU’s
My Vega 64 says it needs a 750w PSU, but even with a +50% power limit OC and a 5ghz 8700k, my from the wall (as measured by a Kill-a-watt meter) under full synthetic CPU/GPU load was like 640w, including all my displays and peripherals.
Thanks for your help. I’m wondering how “little” I could spend to get a similar performance. I know you saw my other thread, but I’ve been feeling a little iffy on buying a $1300 computer just for WoW. I have two weeks to return this so I want to make sure it was the right decision.
In regards to the monitor, I’m still undecided on the ultrawide. It’s 1440p and 60 hz (I think you can get it to 75 hz somehow). It looks great, but sometimes I think it’s almost too big. Like when I’m playing wow I can’t clearly see the quest objectives to the right unless I move my head/eyes. I can’t see my players/enemies health in the upper left unless I move it. It’s definitely immersive, but I’m still not sure if it would be better to get a small, cheaper, monitor that ultimately has better specs
So, since you can’t just get the display separated out, the 27" imac similarly configured to your $1300 PC is 3x as much, can’t be upgraded, has an unknown power limit/thermal solution and likely slower at gaming, but better at whatever it is you use mac for, and has a better display.
the imac is a glorified laptop without the mobility. Nothing wrong with it but understand its pros and cons.
2.9GHz? Ouch.
It won’t run at 2.9ghz unless it’s throttling.
If cooled adequately it should hang around 4.3-4.6ghz most of the time.
Not really … that’s a decent chip - as Sal said:
Ah, k. I’m just weary of the low base clock chips.
It’s mostly because it’s trying to stick to the ridiculous 65w tdp at such settings. Base clock is only ever there in case of throttling - for example my wife’s i7-8700 has a base clock of 3.2ghz but it’s always at 4.3ghz
When I saw i7 @2.9ghz… I thought he had bought a Lenovo Legion laptop hahaha