This thread will attempt to provide a place to discuss past/present/future PC gaming deals. While mainly focusing on Steam games, any standout sales may also be presented. I will not be updating every Daily/Weekly/etc. sale. The tools to help individuals become a smarter shopper will be provided below.
See this POST for links to store sale pages, threads of interest and other tools to help you become a more informed PC game shopper.
Control Ultimate and The Postman Death Stranding on GMG both seem like Humble Monthly traps to me. I mean I am still tempted but this feels like one of those things where I buy it and within a month or two one or both show up in monthlies.
Do I buy Hades on PC or on Switch? Rarely do I see a game selling on both at the same price, Switch is usually way more expensive.
I suppose if I'm going to drop $20 on a game right now, might as well do it on the Switch. Lord knows I'll be able to pick it up on PC for much cheaper down the line if I end up really wanting it on PC.
I think that is one of the games you can get much cheaper on the Switch Argentina shop. I know you can get Hollow Knight for switch for like two bucks or something stupid. I've never bothered but apparently it is not much trouble to do so.
First VR set or upgraded to Index from something else? Index is on my "buy eventually" list if for no other reason than to play some of the better games on a better headset. Tetris Effect, Beat Saber, etc. And finally Phasmophobia when I decide it is time to die. I want to go out standing up like an action hero or anime character. Although I think Whitebeard died because he was stabbed and shot a billion times rather than having a heart-attack and pissing himself while playing a video game but these are minor quibbles.
Yo Dawgs, let me know if you stumble on any good TV deals (you can pretend it's for a gaming monitor to keep it on topic). So far, only decent one I've seen is: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08857ZHY4/
Yo Dawgs, let me know if you stumble on any good TV deals (you can pretend it's for a gaming monitor to keep it on topic). So far, only decent one I've seen is: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08857ZHY4/
First VR set or upgraded to Index from something else? Index is on my "buy eventually" list if for no other reason than to play some of the better games on a better headset. Tetris Effect, Beat Saber, etc. And finally Phasmophobia when I decide it is time to die. I want to go out standing up like an action hero or anime character. Although I think Whitebeard died because he was stabbed and shot a billion times rather than having a heart-attack and pissing himself while playing a video game but these are minor quibbles.
Second, have/had a CV1. Oculus is going down a dark path Facebook can screw off with their nonsense.
It's an impressive upgrade in terms of tracking fidelity, control feel, and display. I played for a few hours, poking at the demos, a little Beat Saber (which I have to re-re-re-update), and lingering on launching Half Life Alyx, but I have work to finish for school still and dinner to make.
An extremely premium product, beyond what the CV1 is and beyond what the current Facebook headsets are, but then again, that's a different market now. I may ReVIVE into my old library, but part of me wants to write it off as a loss and move on. I'll buy SuperHot VR again (worth it) and forget about that dark part.
I think that is one of the games you can get much cheaper on the Switch Argentina shop. I know you can get Hollow Knight for switch for like two bucks or something stupid. I've never bothered but apparently it is not much trouble to do so.
Hmm looks like they might have tightened it up, get "Error Code 9001-1633 This site is not currently available in your country/region". Might need a VPN now to do it. I don't have one handy installed atm.
Per itad, I dont think any have gone on sale in years. Really disappointing cause they are quality games, especially 2014, and 2013 has more decks, though it was a little buggy.
It seems the only difference between the 1st and 2nd ones is the i5 generation (9th vs 10th) and the 2nd one boasts "100+ FPS". The third one has a RTX 2060 instead of a GTX 1660 Super...but I don't know if that improvement is a good deal for $70 more. That's pretty much the upper end of my range before monitor.
And on the home page, Newegg put this in front of my face as the "Deal of the Day". From what I can tell the difference is that the graphics is 1660 (not Super) and it's an AMD Ryzen 5 series instead of the Intel i5. I think they've been tracking my item views, lol... https://www.newegg.com/skytech-st-arch3-0-0054-ne-archangel/p/N82E16883289048?Item
(But lookit that RGB, ooo, shiny. )
All four of these come with a Team Group 240GB SSD, so is that the sort of thing that could be additional storage? An instant upgrade, as it were?
I haven't had a curved display so I don't know how important that factor should weigh in my decision. I'm guessing that if I can, it's better to go with 144hz refresh rate instead of 60hz or 75hz (there's a 27" Samsung with 60hz refresh for $150, the same price as the 24" Samsung with 144hz. Also, would I really get the benefits of the 1440 resolution on the Acer (which is 75hz refresh)? From my cursory n00b research, 1440p would stretch the capabilities of the 1660 Super a bit too thin.
HALP. I'm getting pulled deeper into the specs... :shock:
Having looked at all this on Newegg, I'm tempted to just head over to Microcenter for that HP Omen Obelisk, slap this monitor in the cart to make it a match and be done with it:
A hundred hours later (I know...I'm ashamed) and I'm finally finished with Yakuza: Like a Dragon. Overall, I really enjoyed it but I'm not sure it's a game I'll be coming back to as often as any other game in the series. Really wish they had added some of the minigames from Judgment to the Sega arcades, and there's almost nothing to do in Kamurocho. Part of it's my fault for trying to do so much, so early into the game. And while it's clearly the most ambitious game in the series overall, the budget and time constraints are once again super apparent. Not to mention things that haven't been fixed many games later, like some characters bobbing up and down in cutscenes, and issues with character clothing in cutscenes (on more than one occasion the main character's jacket had a mind of its own and made it hard to pay attention to what was going on).
But my biggest gripe is their handling of downloadable content. $15 for a few costumes that would usually be included post-game (well...5 and 0 were the last time they made a real effort in this department)? Charging for job classes when there are so few as it is? $15 JUKEBOX DLC?
The i5-9400 and i5-10400 are essentially the same processor. The 10400 has better eight core performance but probably not something you'd notice (games generally aren't made to utilize eight cores). I'd say it's just up to you if you want to spend the extra fifty bucks on it with no "bad" choice. Or save that $50 for the monitor.
The 1660 Super is significantly better than the 1660 so that fourth option is a nonstarter to me. The 2060 will give you notably better performance for the 1660 Super -- about 10-15 frames per second at 1080p High. In older games, that probably doesn't matter much but, in newer games, it could be the difference between hitting 60fps or not. Still, it's a hundred bucks more and the 1660 Super will certainly give you playable results so, again, it's just a question of how elastic your budget is and how much you want to spend on a monitor. The only "bad" choice out of these is the 1660 (non-super) option. Oh, and the 2060 will give you ray tracing (albeit the lowest tier card with official RTX support).
I feel like #2 is the odd man out -- not significantly better than #1 to justify the $50 but behind #3. So it's really a question of whether you want to spend $750 or $870. If you can swing it, the 2060 system is clearly better but the $750 one is nothing to feel bad about. Either is leagues better than the all-in-ones you were considering.
[Edit: Further downthread, Tibor makes good points and I'm recommending the #3 option]
If you have a Costco membership, they have a MSI Optix 27" monitor that was well reviewed and will (unoffically) work with GSync when activated through the Nvidia control panel. I'd probably stick to 1080p with your available cards and value high settings/fps over 1440 resolution but that's just me.
These aren't really mutually exclusive ideas. You could buy a known good product because it's on sale for Black Friday...
I'll admit I was tempted to pick up an Element or a TCL as a monitor/TV for my kid but after some research, I think it's a bad call. 2/3 of the price of a better brand potentially lost in a year if the device dies an early death isn't exactly a savings.
I'm now looking at Toshiba and Samsung...and will probably buy nothing.
It seems the only difference between the 1st and 2nd ones is the i5 generation (9th vs 10th) and the 2nd one boasts "100+ FPS". The third one has a RTX 2060 instead of a GTX 1660 Super...but I don't know if that improvement is a good deal for $70 more. That's pretty much the upper end of my range before monitor.
And on the home page, Newegg put this in front of my face as the "Deal of the Day". From what I can tell the difference is that the graphics is 1660 (not Super) and it's an AMD Ryzen 5 series instead of the Intel i5. I think they've been tracking my item views, lol... https://www.newegg.com/skytech-st-arch3-0-0054-ne-archangel/p/N82E16883289048?Item
(But lookit that RGB, ooo, shiny. )
All four of these come with a Team Group 240GB SSD, so is that the sort of thing that could be additional storage? An instant upgrade, as it were?
I haven't had a curved display so I don't know how important that factor should weigh in my decision. I'm guessing that if I can, it's better to go with 144hz refresh rate instead of 60hz or 75hz (there's a 27" Samsung with 60hz refresh for $150, the same price as the 24" Samsung with 144hz. Also, would I really get the benefits of the 1440 resolution on the Acer (which is 75hz refresh)? From my cursory n00b research, 1440p would stretch the capabilities of the 1660 Super a bit too thin.
HALP. I'm getting pulled deeper into the specs... :shock:
Having looked at all this on Newegg, I'm tempted to just head over to Microcenter for that HP Omen Obelisk, slap this monitor in the cart to make it a match and be done with it:
Go after the ones w/ either the 1660 Super or the 2060. That looks like where you're going, given your budget. And both of those choices, to me, are damn good 1080p60fps picks.
If you really want Ray-Tracing support, you might want to go 2060 here.
If you plan to play stuff like Cyberpunk 2077, Ghostrunner, Control, WD: Legion, Atomic Heart, COD Black Ops Cold War, Vampire Bloodlines 2, Far Cry 6, Metro Exodus, etc etc - you might want to go w/ the 2060 PC. Check that list.
If anything in that RT List is a game you'll live in and play the life out of; and/or there's a lot of games in that list you have an interest in that you plan to buy - you might want to bite the bullet to go RTX 2060 here; take the PC with the 2060. At least the option's there to RTX it, if you want to; and performance on the 2060's better than 1660 Super.
If you really don't care about RTX and the titles supporting it now & in the future - go 1660 Super.
Given that the new consoles do support RT, you might even want to aim there. I do wonder when we'll see...games actually force RTX as a damn requirement; similar to when Shaders became a big deal (and requirement) in the GeForce 2+3 generation in early 2000's. Could be a few years, I'd guess.
You could always, if you want to do RT stuff & if a game supports DLSS 2.0 (Deep Learning Super-Sampling, it's an upscaling & super-sampling trick from NVidia) - use DLSS 2.0 to try to get better performance out of RT-games. Pretty much, RTX is demanding as hell on systems...and we'll need every trick in the book for performance here. As someone who wants a good deal of both graphical candy and performance - I'm thinking DLSS 2.0 is gonna help us gamers out a lot.
Side note - I'm gonna be curious to see what AMD does, once they have their own DLSS-style trick.
Heck, I'd even say 900p with a DLSS 2.0 to 1080p could be worthwhile, for more frames...if need be. Messing around w/ DLSS 2.0 is something I'll check out, once I get my 3070 desktop.
I saw this interesting video on someone trying to work DLSS 2.0 on games supporting it w/ wicked-low and normal resolutions - and it was really interesting to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gQ202CFKzA
I will use 900p on laptops here and there (especially older laptops), even when tied to a monitor (as long as it ain't huge to expose the res') - and honestly, not that much difference b/t that and 1080p even on say 25'' here.
1440p and 4K looks way better, though - but it's a heavy price to pay right now. You've been warned of its costs.
I would say - if you plan for 1440p on everything, I don't know if a 1660 Super or 2060 Regular is it, if you want to hit 60fps. See here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQZezLN-CcI
Some games can do 1440p 50-60fps or so; some won't. To me, 2060 regular looks mostly like a 1080p card on recent stuff.
For 1440p or better - you'll likely be looking into a 2060 Super (which is basically a 2070); 2070 variants; 2080 variants; 3070; 3080; and 3090. And this stuff - yeah, this stuff ain't cheap. It'll break your $1000 budget.
Let's be real - 1080p or 1440p is probably fine for most people.
I think the questions now for most here after that is:
"Do I want to do RTX stuff or not?"
"Do I want high framerates...or not?"
About SSD - you can always replace the one you have. Granted, I never did one myself. Can't speak on how to really do it. I'm lazy, let's be real. I should do it, but haven't.
But, I'd really want a 512GB SSD for the OS on NVMe. We got Windows 10 now eating anywhere from 16gb to 32Gb here (thanks, Microsoft bloated OS!) - and then we got murderous games like COD Modern Warfare and COD Black Ops Cold War eating at least 230GB each, in which one of those in full would not fit on 256GB SSD.
I have a SSD for my laptop - and ugh, I really now wish it had more space. It's nice that it has a 1TB HDD second drive for storage - but I do wish my laptop had more SSD space on the front OS-drive. SSD's are just so much faster; especially for game-loads and OS boot-ups.
If you're gonna get another SSD later - get one with some space; and make it your secondary drive, if you don't plan to replace the main one.
There are also devices/converters, if you want to have a SSD and just plug it right into your PC via USB...if it ain't USB-based straight out the gate.
Monitors: I'd say once you go say high framerates, you'll never want to go back (to 60fps). Even when you do or have to (b/c you run into a demanding or un-optimized game) - it's like "Well, this (60fps) is good, but...it still could be way better." 120hz, 144hz, 240hz - yeah, this stuff can really spoil you. Nothing like having all this smooth-ness and you don't have input lag or latency on your end. You don't have to worry w/ the monitor trying to keep up w/ you and your skills, as it's all way smoother...and feels more in sync w/ what you're doing, as a player.
Put FreeSync or G-Sync on it - even better. But, yeah; G-Sync's pricy. Free-Sync is cheaper and should be fine. A-Syncing methods are a Gaming God-send; especially when paired w/ high refresh rate monitors.
I've also PARDONED MichaelFlynnCat and signed a tremendous, much needed EXECUTIVE ORDER to make BlackoutZ: Slaughterhouse Edition free on Steam! Get this while you can! BidenCat will side with the RADICAL LEFT to ban free games and make ALL GAMES MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE!
I've also PARDONED MichaelFlynnCat and signed a tremendous, much needed EXECUTIVE ORDER to make BlackoutZ: Slaughterhouse Edition free on Steam! Get this while you can! BidenCat will side with the RADICAL LEFT to ban free games and make ALL GAMES MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE!
These aren't really mutually exclusive ideas. You could buy a known good product because it's on sale for Black Friday...
I'll admit I was tempted to pick up an Element or a TCL as a monitor/TV for my kid but after some research, I think it's a bad call. 2/3 of the price of a better brand potentially lost in a year if the device dies an early death isn't exactly a savings.
I'm now looking at Toshiba and Samsung...and will probably buy nothing.
This is anecdotal but the parents and mother in law both got elements on bf 4-5 years ago and they're both still running fine. TCL has also been selling their own sets for a decade now and don't have any known longevity issues.
The TCL at target is a 4 series which is supposed to be pretty good for what it is.
The concern with BF TVs is that you're not really getting a deal if they just make a tv with inferior components that they can price that cheap. That can be the case but at $250 for any 65" TV I'd say as long as it runs your getting a deal.
The i5-9400 and i5-10400 are essentially the same processor. The 10400 has better eight core performance but probably not something you'd notice (games generally aren't made to utilize eight cores).
No, the big difference between the two cpu's is the 10400 has hyperthreading. Its a 6 core 12 thread processor. The 9400 is a 6 core 6 thread processor. At $50, I'd still get the 10400 over the 9400. There are some games that will be bottlenecked by drm like denuvo on a 6 core cpu, the hyperthreading will help.
Unless the discounts are deep, the new intel 10k chips this year are the better long term option because they all should have hyper threading (the desktop parts anyway).
This reminds me of showing up to freshman lecture classes blazed out of my gourd, sitting there thinking about all the hot girls' legs while in class, and how there are prolly a bunch of them outside RIGHT NOW in the mall (garden area), anxiously awaiting my next cigarette break.
No, the big difference between the two cpu's is the 10400 has hyperthreading. Its a 6 core 12 thread processor. The 9400 is a 6 core 6 thread processor. At $50, I'd still get the 10400 over the 9400. There are some games that will be bottlenecked by drm like denuvo on a 6 core cpu, the hyperthreading will help.
Unless the discounts are deep, the new intel 10k chips this year are the better long term option because they all should have hyper threading (the desktop parts anyway).
That's fair. It looks like a 0-10fps gain in real gaming performance but, if I was willing to suggest the 2060 might be worth it for 10-15fps, then $50 for the i5-10400 is certainly justifiable.
In fact, with both the i5-10400 and RTX 2060, I'd say that the #3 system at $100 over the i5-9400/1660S system is the clear winner if you can afford it.
This reminds me of showing up to freshman lecture classes blazed out of my gourd, sitting there thinking about all the hot girls' legs while in class, and how there are prolly a bunch of them outside RIGHT NOW in the mall (garden area), anxiously awaiting my next cigarette break.
It honestly fluctuates based upon what you are wanting/needing. I would look at the lists, see which list catches your eye, and then find the right TV from the list.
Looking at the list of games adding or releasing with ray-tracing, I would be interested in the CD Projekt Red titles: Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk 2077, and I already have Witcher 3 Complete on Xbox One S and PS4 slim. I'm generally a late adopter with both consoles and PCs, and technology in general (using the 'old' iPhone SE and using a 'dumb' Insignia 1080p HDTV because my Walmart clearance 4K Vizio bit the dust last year). This is in large part for budgetary reasons. I can see myself getting Cyberpunk 2077 on an Xbox SX or a PS5...but as a complete edition, probably in 2023 or 2024 when it hits 75% off. :lol:
(I also noticed that AMD doesn't seem to have much checked in that list on the wiki page--are their ray-tracing big guns the ones that are about to be released and are being talked about here in the thread? It won't affect me for a few years, but it'd be good to know)
Based on that, knowing my own gaming and tech-adoption habits, I'll probably be getting one of the 1660 Supers. It's just a question of whether I go with one of the ABS versions from Newegg or the HP Omen version from Microcenter, or see something in the same range at a different site. I am kind of leaning toward the HP right now, actually (familiar brand, for better or worse), but I'm not sold on it yet. Maybe in the next 24-48 hours. Just in case, what would the AMD equivalent of the i5 9400 and 10400F be? I'm guessing some of the Ryzen 5s?
It appears my hunch about the 1440p monitor was right, that it's better suited for more powerful graphics cards than I want or need at this time. I'm not in a rush to push past 1080p resolution either on PC or consoles until those stats about what gamers are playing on shift more toward 4K. I think my choice of the monitors comes down to the trade-off between size and refresh rate. The 27" monitors I was looking at have 60hz and 75hz, while the 24" monitor has 144hz. I'm leaning toward the 27" 75hz HP at Microcenter, but again I'll be doing some more shopping in the next couple of days, so who knows.
The (n00b) questions I still have about monitors are:
1. Is a curved screen worth the extra cost if most of my gaming is not 'twitch/shooter' games, and if I still plan to use Microsoft Office and other productivity software? (probably nothing more demanding than Google Earth or SketchUp--I won't be a YouTube or Twitch creator/gamer or anything even close)
2. Will an Intel processor work well with a monitor with FreeSync? Is FreeSync meant primarily for AMD and Gsync for Intel?
3. It seems most gaming monitors don't have speakers or built-in webcams. I'll probably want to use the computer for Zoom/Skype calls. Would the basic Logitech stuff do the job? I'm not going to be making my own streaming content but I'd like to stream movies and music.
This should be the last set of questions. You've all been really helpful. Stay safe out there today if you're heading out to shop!
Based on that, knowing my own gaming and tech-adoption habits, I'll probably be getting one of the 1660 Supers. It's just a question of whether I go with one of the ABS versions from Newegg or the HP Omen version from Microcenter, or see something in the same range at a different site. I am kind of leaning toward the HP right now, actually (familiar brand, for better or worse), but I'm not sold on it yet. Maybe in the next 24-48 hours. Just in case, what would the AMD equivalent of the i5 9400 and 10400F be? I'm guessing some of the Ryzen 5s?
AMD versions would be a Ryzen 5 3600 (last gen) or Ryzen 5 5600X (new gen). Looking around, you're more likely to see the 3600 in pre-builts. It has inferior gaming performance to the i5-9400/10400 processors. On the GPU side, the 1660 Super falls in a space between the RX 580 & RX 590 or the 5500 XT and 5600 XT.
I think there's valid things to be said about wanting to get a pre-built from a known brand where you feel more confident about customer support, etc especially if you're not the sort of comfortably tinker with your system. I think you'd be perfectly happy with the Omen and certainly way happier than you'd be trying to game on your original choices with integrated graphics Plus, if you're local to Micro Center, you can just pick it up.
Will an Intel processor work well with a monitor with FreeSync? Is FreeSync meant primarily for AMD and Gsync for Intel?
FreeSync (AMD) and GSync (Nvidia) are GPU, not CPU, formats. Traditionally you needed a Freesync monitor for AMD and a GSync for Nvidia but, recently, Nvidia opened up GSync to work on a lot of FreeSync monitors either officially or unofficially. The list of officially supported monitors is fairly small but a lot work unofficially -- I suspect Nvidia keeps the "certified compatible" list artificially small so you don't disregard GSync monitors entirely. If selecting a FreeSync monitor, I'd just google for reviews or "Monitor name GSync" to see if people have gotten it to work. You CAN use your video card on any monitor regardless of compatibility but you'd lose the benefits of adaptive sync which makes the experience visually much smoother by handling frame rate dips and other issues. Tech note:
GSync monitors are usually much more expensive than FreeSync because they contain an actual hardware module in the monitor itself to do the syncing whereas Freesync is all software on the GPU side. So, if you're price conscious, you'll almost certainly go with a FreeSync monitor. When Nvidia opened it up, they added a software version that you can try activating through the Nvidia control panel regardless of monitor. Obviously Nvidia would prefer you use a Gsync monitor for both name and because they get a licensing kick for the module but they apparently realized that they were making themselves less attractive to budget-savvy consumers.
Internal speaker monitors are usually trash and a $30 set of Logitech or Creative speakers will sound better anyway.
Sorry for not being more helpful on the monitor front; I have fewer opinions there. I lucked into a nice monitor deal a year or two ago and have been riding that pony ever since. Out of what you listed, I would take the 27" 75Hz screen, assuming it works with GSync. If you're at Micro Center, they have the MSI Optix which would work (but would be $60 more, assuming you're looking at one of the $139 screens)
(I also noticed that AMD doesn't seem to have much checked in that list on the wiki page--are their ray-tracing big guns the ones that are about to be released and are being talked about here in the thread? It won't affect me for a few years, but it'd be good to know)
Ray-Tracing from AMD on the PC-side of things are in their new 6000 series of video cards and on whatever they got powering the new consoles for the custom iGPU.
Right now, NVidia is on Gen 2 of RTX (with 3000 series; Gen 1 of this was the 2000 series), while AMD is on their 1st Gen here of RT (6000 series and also w/ whatever the new consoles are using for the custom-AMD iGPU).
NVidia has an advantage here, as they've already had a few years to optimize this RTX stuff a bit; and they also have DLSS 2.0 here.
AMD did do fine on terms of performance for straight-up RT on the 6000 series (namely, go look at the 6800 cards for performance on YOutube, Tom's Hardware, all those kind of places) - yeah, especially for their first rodeo on this on the market, as this stuff is really demanding.
But, right now - for AMD on their 6000 cards, there is also no DLSS 2.0-style (super-sampling & upscaling) feature here to improve performance yet for us. There is supposedly one coming from AMD...and I'll be intrigued to see where AMD goes w/ it, once they got something ready for the market.
One of the few games looked like DIRT5 had an advantage on RT for AMD, as that game seems to be AMD-optimized anyways.
Sony is probably the absolute best but you're going to pay a premium price. LG is cheaper but still pretty expensive. Samsung higher tier line is slightly cheaper. It's all still hit or miss though. I just had a Samsung go out on me after 1.5 years, but had bought an extended warranty on it. My neighbor is constantly having her Samsung repaired as well. As far as cheap Black Friday TV's. I've had great luck with Hisense, I also have a TCL which freezes from time to time but that's mostly the Roku interface causing issues.
)
