Thread:Vorknkx/@comment-3547390-20161116194210/@comment-3547390-20170106153303

I would definitely agree with that statement. EP4b feels relatively solid, even if some portions of it aren't my cup of tea. I have seen very little of LITTLE, but SUBWAY11 was a lengthy walking simulator. SIMPLE's levels were pretty meh, none are really frustrating but all are pretty barebones and uninteresting. WAST? Somebody really liked Cyberdemons apparently... and who ever thought adding 11INHELL was a good idea? That was one of the last levels I expected to be in a campaign, that level is just horrible.

I can only imagine. You mess up DOSBOX, delete the config. You mess up DOS, reinstall an OS. That alone makes it more of a risky environment, combined with a console UI it can get frustrating. I have tried Linux servers. I get more frustrated with them than actually get them to do anything. I can imagine DOS to be much the same. I may be nostalgic for old-school games, but definitely not for old technology or operating systems. I had enough headaches with Windows XP, for all the praise people have all I can remember was constant instabilities and crashing. On Windows 7 you barely see the BSOD.

That can be applied to anything in a desktop and is one of the things I love about them, their modability and ability to change whatever I need. There are exceptions of course, I am pretty much getting a "new computer" because my CPU is changing and is a different size than the one I have currently, which means I have to replace a lot of parts. Need a new Mobo since it has a different socket (I do benefit, Gigabyte is a bit funky of a company and is known for stability issues, would have more peace of mind on an ASUS board), need different RAM because it is incompatible with the new Mobo (which is why I haven't upgraded to 32GB of RAM, the nice thing is that the newer CPUs allow for 64GB so that is what I plan to get), need an aftermarket cooler because the CPU doesn't come with one (an inconvenience that is very recent, but as the stock cooler wasn't very efficient I guess I benefit in the long run since it motivates me to get this stuff), need TIM for the aftermarket cooler (this part intimidates me, I have never applied TIM before since I always just went with the stock cooler), and need a different case to fit the aftermarket cooler (it is a really big cooler, so I need something rather on the larger side). Plus since I am reinstalling everything due to a new Mobo and don't want to do this again so soon I want to upgrade to SSDs that work a lot better on the new Mobos. In my case, a lot of what I am getting is interconnected and needed for just getting a new CPU with some SSDs. The only internal parts I am retaining are the graphics card, the Titan X Pascal, and my power supply (Corsair AX1500i). Everything else are just the peripherals, which are staying the same at the moment, but I am looking into a potential upgrade for my dual monitors after I deal with the main computer. I am lazy and don't want to have to do another reinstall any time soon, so I want something that is powerful and will last me a few years or until I feel motivated to upgrade.

The stuff I am getting I am expecting to last until 2020 or so. AMD is totally incompatible with older software, so Intel is the way to go. Intel works on a 3-step process for pretty much every set of CPUs that come out, Process-Architecture-Optimization. Process is when Intel makes a smaller socket CPU than previous models, this happened last in the 5000 series (Broadwell). Architecture is where they modify the CPU to work better than it did in Process, often improving thermals and stability, this was the latest CPU that was around for a bit, the 6000 series (Skylake). Optimization is a bit weird, it was pretty much unofficial until this year even though it has happened in the past, but it is when the CPU is pretty similar but they manage to improve clock speed capabilities, many feel Optimization is pretty much just a resell unless you look at the specific details (This is the new CPU series, Kaby Lake, the 7000 series). I currently have a 4790k, which looks like part of the 4000 series (Haswell), but actually came out at the same time as Broadwell, they often release Optimization and Process pretty close together (they are doing this again with Coffeelake later this year). As I pretty much just implied, the 4790k is actually part of an unofficial Optimization called Haswell Refresh (also known as Devil's Canyon) which just used the same number as Haswell since Intel was keeping to a "tick-tock" methodology at the time. So my general rule of thumb, at least so far since I have been building high performance machines, is to wait for Optimization and upgrade to that if it is actually better. Thus why I didn't have a reason to upgrade to now and why I know this will last a bit. Coffeelake is around the corner, but like Broadwell it will be highly unstable and pretty weak, leading to lower performance than an Optimization chip since they are totally changing their architecture. So it makes sense for me to eyeball the 7700k and expect it to last past the 9000 series, which I expect will perform a bit lower than Kaby Lake. In a way, this is just the final and ultimate product of a given architecture, meaning it is the best time to make the jump.

SSDs have always been funky simply because whenever I could get one I didn't want to due to having to reinstall Windows. Or having to due to degradation rumors compared to traditional hard disks (it has been proven that they actually last longer). Plus until recently they didn't have the storage capacity to be worth it, people with SSDs pretty much use that for a Windows install but not for normal storage. I like having my programs installed on my Windows drive and my games on by storage, plus recording videos requires 2 drives to get good speeds, so it wasn't a good idea since I would be limited by the SSD space on the Windows drive. I am rather hyped up at the moment due to the release of a new style of motherboard to coincide with Kaby Lake. Most of the changes are small, it is an optimization as well, but they allow for dual top-speed SSD devices. Needless to say, this is the perfect time to upgrade after years of being on hard disks.

With this being January, this is pretty much the month of research and preparations. I am ensuring parts are living up to their hype, checking multiple benchmarks, and trying to make the best possible choices. Plus I need to test Windows 8.1 with my current system, I have been waiting to ensure the new CPUs actually worked with this OS before I actually put a lot of effort into testing, so this is a month to play with the new operating system and make sure it meets specifications. I think I will start working on it later today since it is finally the weekend.

It is one of the things people on laptops can't understand. They ask how fast your computer is... that is different based on what particular thing we are talking about and what the benchmark is. They will ask questions such as "how old is your computer". The best way to answer is by focusing on the CPU, but it definitely is a weird mindset that makes it awkward when talking to people ignorant of custom builds. It would also be nice if the internet had pretty answers, it feels like half the time people have the wrong ideas. People would think I want the best and so therefore must spend the most money, but that would mean a server CPU, which actually performs a lot worse with games due to a much lower clock speed (the benefit being a bunch of cores, which are pretty much useless to me if speed goes down).

Case info seems hard to come by, everyone benchmarks a CPU but nobody seems to care about the thermal levels of a case, and coolers/TIM are a lot less covered outside the popular brands. RAM is probably the easiest thing, you just go for max capacity of your Mobo, then go for the best speed you can afford or exists. So far the best way to determine a CPU is first make sure it is Intel, then check base/turbo clock speeds. That will give you a pretty general idea which can be verified with a bunch of benchmarks, the 7700k was the first to have a faster turbo clock than the 4790k and the first to have better single core performance, which is very important for old-school gaming (especially in regards to Thief, meaning it is top priority). I know overclocking is a thing, but that base/turbo seems to matter a lot, performing better at the same clock even when both are overclocked to the same number. SSDs are pretty easy at the moment, Samsung is pretty much the best for everything, then you just choose your capacity and how fast you want it to go based on what you can afford and what the Mobo supports. Mobo isn't too bad, ASUS' ROG line is pretty much the go-to here since they always get tops in benchmarks. The Formula seems to be the best, but honestly any model in the current line-up is pretty close, with the Extreme being better for overclocking but worse in real world tests in the past. Really, most of the parts are pretty easy besides of course checking to see if anything actually manages to top it, though I will say cases are a pain if focusing on the small details and Coolers/TIM are a bit of a pain to check. Maybe it is because all three are about real-world applications and bench-marked temperatures, which are a lot harder than the monopoly/duopoly most other parts have. If you want to save a lot of time comparing obscure brands with no similar benchmarks due to it coming from different places, monopolies/duopolies are pretty good. The one negative is that it also allows them to raise the price a lot more than the lower quality hardware. The irony is that when researching a computer, most of your time will be spent comparing peripherals. There are currently some peripherals which are top of their game, but there is a lot more to debate and question when talking about a monitor or mouse than there is your graphics card, CPU, or SSD.

Keyboards? You can bet there is a lot to debate if you get technical, especially in regards to the keys themselves. Do you want sensitive or resistant, loud or quiet, something that feels rougher or is more easy to push? Do you want keys easy to replace or a nonstandard which may potentially be better at response times? How loose do you want the keys? Keyboards are one of the more limited peripherals, but definitely have a lot more to look at and chose from than some parts in your computer. Perhaps it is the monopoly. Perhaps it is because you see it on a daily basis and so it matters more to the end user than a subtle benchmark.

People complain about CPUs and GPUs being pretty expensive, but the real price grabber at the moment are the SSDs. As Samsung is the only company with a 2 TB SSD with that type of speed and power, it costs quite a bit. It actually accounts for about 7/18 of the pricing of my planned build. In fact, take out the 2 monitors and the 2 SSDs in the plan. That would make my near $10000 system into a near $4000. More than half of the price is due to two things, which I happen to need double of, being quite high in cost. Most wouldn't bother with the stuff I am interested in due to "diminishing returns", which basically is when you are spending a lot more money for relatively small benefits. I guess you could say I am the reason they are able to pull this, but I am fine paying for something as long as it gives me greater benefits. I guess you could say I am an irrational builder, since most care about stuff like diminishing returns and not what the best possible system regardless of cost is. Even among computer builders, I am a rather odd case :P

EDIT: My Windows 8.1 Experience.

So I decided to do the craziest option and install Windows 8.1 on my desktop alongside Windows 7, I will delete the partition later and go back to just Windows 7. I needed an Intel CPU and my laptop is an Intel, so this is the best way to test compatibility on a Windows 8 system, by trying it out on a high performance computer and seeing how it works.

On install I had to set up a lot of settings, but at least it gets rid of a lot of junk from appearing in Windows 8.1. The first thing I did upon loading was install my browser of choice, Vivaldi, and get angry at the Windows Start Menu. I understood how to work it, but it felt so limited to have to block my entire screen to search something. Luckily I was prepared for this and installed Classic Shell. I was unsure how a third party program would work or emulate the experience, but I honestly couldn't tell you I am on Windows 8.1 if it wasn't for the new button logo. There may also be some more separators, but nothing to hinder the experience. It feels as good as a native version of Windows 7.

Many people complain about this OS, but many people are too lazy to change default settings. I tear apart everything and try to make it work optimally. So far I am still in a period of frustration due to the fun part, installing drivers. Thank goodness that I have a backup driver for my LAN port. Still, right now I am operating on one monitor, think I need to get Nvidia drivers. Will get that working and see if I got an operable system. This display is really getting on my nerves.

I have noticed some flaws already though. The charms bar disregards what I set the option to in the taskbar, meaning it still appears regardless of what I say. This is definitely frustrating, especially when I thought I could get rid of the charms bar. There is also a funky glitch I have seen in the Control Panel, apparently you can't actually save the viewing mode without it defaulting back to large view. This might be nice for some, but I really have become accustomed to Windows 7's category view and find it a bit annoying that I can't just save a setting here without it reverting. Still, that is a minor flaw, while the charms might be a bit more of a problem. I tried to solve the problem by going into PC Settings, but doing that caused my computer to freeze.

Nvidia Drivers up and running, Visual Studio working, my monitors set to 144hz G-sync. I decided to ignore any other specifics and get to the real important question on everyone's mind, does Thief: The Dark Project work in Windows 8? Oddly enough, it totally depended on what version you used, but the original vanilla version of the game actually works in Windows 8.1. The only problem is that it doesn't work well. I experienced constant flickering and my menu navigation was a lot slower. This could be seen as nice by some, since in Windows 7 it can accelerate to crazy amounts, but to me it made things feel clunky and slower. I was warned about DirectDraw issues in Windows 8.1. Now, upon testing, it seems that is indeed a massive glitch.

In fact, from testing Windows 8.1 I can only conclude that it was a heavily glitchy version of Windows. When I tested Windows 8 back in 2014 or so, when I set up a new computer and wanted to try out Windows 8, only to feel it felt like a bootleg of Windows 7 with bits of the Iphone thrown in there. I say a bootleg because it had the quality and stability of a bootleg, which is to say it was very shaky. Windows 8.1 and a stable system that fully supported the OS (my hardware was made when Windows 8 was out) didn't really fix that image. If anything, it just reminded me just how unstable the whole thing is. I was on Windows 8.1 for a short period of time whereby most of it was spent installing drivers. There were times I didn't know how to properly use the OS, but through Google-fu and logic I made my way through whatever I needed to do.

Yet in the time I was on Windows 8.1, I found a lot of glitches. A big reason I had to replace the Start Screen was because it had an odd delay that made it quite frustrating to pull up and use. The logo would pull up when I hovered over it, but no other icon would function in that way. I learned Classic Shell is an amazing program, though if I was to use it again I probably would only install the Start Menu, I didn't like the toolbar and other additions it threw up in my Windows Explorer. For all the complaints about Windows 7 update, I found Windows 8.1 update to be just as slow to find anything, meaning I did manual installs of drivers. Going the control panel revealed a visual layout bug, I find it a bit annoying that I was able to find a visual glitch that easily. The removal of Libraries was fine, I personally don't bother with them except at work, but I was pretty indifferent and felt the removal really changed things at all. The dual nature of Windows 8 means that the Start Menu had Apps, which due to Classic Shell I found I couldn't easily uninstall. There was some weird glitch going on with the charms bar where it totally disregarded my settings, which might make sense on a touch monitor but not a regular desktop. Trying to fix it using the official Windows Settings menu in Windows 8 resulted in me freezing the few times I tried to access it, which could only be solved by Alt-F4 and restarting my computer (It was a weird glitch, it would lock out my mouse except some rare dropdowns, but allow my keyboard to work everywhere).

Of course, the real killer here was my Thief tests. Loading my Windows 7, it worked perfectly fine, but on Windows 8.1 I was getting some severe performance issues and some stability concerns. Plus this was with Thief vanilla. I couldn't even get the other two to work. Maybe I did something wrong, but as I see it right now, DirectDraw and Windows 8.1 is definitely a no-go. Not even DirectDraw, but Direct3d in general. Loading up Thief, I moved around a little awkwardly, but I guessed it was just because I hadn't touched the game in a bit. Nope, Windows 7 runs smoothly at high speeds, especially if dedicated to one core (which I did do in Windows 8.1 before testing any of this).

Please, tell me what I did wrong. Tell me when I installed the latest Nvidia drivers with the included install of Visual Studio I made a mistake and that if I had done X, my game would perform perfectly.