Jump to content


Member Since 06 Jan 2004
Offline Last Active Today, 06:23 AM

#12818199 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 21 July 2015 - 02:37 AM

according to the video card Nazi on CAG, $200 ain't mid-range.   :- and my $300+ GTX 970 barely meets the "mid-range" standard


Read a couple threads back for reference and how the Batman Arkham Knight debate got started

Re-read my post. I called $200-300 mid-ranged.

3.5 GB 970 normally is above $300 which is above mid-range pricing - but isn't priced at the high end, though performs like a high-end card.

970's somewhere in-between mid-ranged and high, price-wise.


High-end to me would be more like the 980's variants - 4GB 980 and 6GB 980 Ti.

Titans are just extreme.



Is there a site that tells you what everyone's hardware is worth and whether it's low mid or high range? If so you should all post the retail value of the parts in your computer even though there's no way you could actually sell it for that price, because we all really care and need to know.

You could always go by Tom's Hardware's range:




Tom's Range is interesting. I wouldn't consider < $200 as mid-range. That's more entry level stuff. You know, I would not really consider my 4GB 960 a enthusiast card (that $200+ range), which is what Tom's Hardware calls $200-300 in this article. Enthusiast titles probably suits more for 970 club ($300-400 club), as that isn't even getting into the way more expensive club of Nvidia cards - i.e. the high-end club of the 4 GB 980, 6GB 980 Ti, and the ridiculously high-end 12 GB Titan.

#12817806 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 11:23 PM

MysterD Can you STFU about hardware already? Don't you have some DRM to rant about or Red Dead Redemption getting a PC port or that one time The Secret World was $5 on GMG?

Insert all my rants here:

DRM rant; TSW rant; console to PC ports like RDR rants; pricing rants; bundle rants; VRAM rants; etc etc.


There ya go!

#12817769 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 11:02 PM



I'm not sure what your point is with this?

I asked you want settings you aim for when running a game b/c it could be important - could swing which card you might want to go for next.


The 660 was like a $200 card iirc so I'm assuming it fit Pas budget and when he's ready he'll upgrade to a better card let's say around the same price $200 and get a much better modern card.  What you're advocating is that when Pas was going to buy his 660 he should have spent $400 instead of $200 so that 5 years later he could have an older card that might or might not be able to keep up with newer games/technology and still probably be older and less capable than a current generation $200 card?


Nope - there never was and never will be really any need to spend $400+ on release of a higher-end card, when you can often go for a $200-300 mid-range card and be set for quite a while. Often, the bang-for-buck ratio goes way down, when you decide to bet the farm on a card and go for a higher-end one. And who knows how much can change, in a few years - namely architecture-wise, model-wise, generation-wise & card-wise.


Let's see - in May 2011, I bought a 1 GB 560 Ti (around $210, IIRC) when building that PC; & now in July 2015 have upgraded to a 4 GB 960 in 2015 ($204).


If I wanted a 4GB in 2011 - well, the Radeon HD 6990 was around $729. Too rich for my blood, to spend all on one part all at once here. Not worth it, IMHO. I'm not a millionaire.


I do think normally mid-range cards (i.e. $200-$300) when upgrading do hit that sweet spot of the worthwhile bang-for-buck factor - especially if you are someone like myself who constantly likes to tweak the in-game settings; video-card software's settings; runs gaming app's to monitor game performance + control it if necessary - all to get every possible frame & detailed pixel they can out of their card to find something they're happy with.



I don't think 2GB 960 ever really belonged in the mid-range pricing for $200, when it came out - should've been a 3GB, at that price. This is especially given how VRAM hungry these new games were when it came out + especially now w/ some of the newer ones. I think the 4GB 960 solves that VRAM hungry problem & is worth the few extra bucks when it's on sale, though (in the $220 or less range).

#12817671 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 10:16 PM

Uh.. pasports didn't mention VRAM at all in his post. I think he just meant he wants a better GPU overall.

No, he didn't. But he did mention Witcher 3, which requires a 2GB VRAM 660 for a minimum.

Please correct me if I'm wrong here - but IIRC, I think the 660 was only found in a 2GB VRAM flavor.



You can try running W3 with 1GB VRAM card like I did - I had a 560 Ti, before my recent upgrade. Sure, it boots up and all. But, you likely won't run at 1080p + 30 FPS. Expect to drop the resolution to sub-1080p, just to hit 30FPS or better.

#12817651 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 10:09 PM

Okay, so it's 166% of the price.  My point remains.  

The price is low at $135 for 2GB 960, but at what cost?

Short life span? Ready to upgrade very quickly again in a year or so?


Even Pasports ain't sure how long his 2GB 660 will cut it - but, he's has his card for a while. I've always recommended the "Buy a new vid-card every few generations when there's a major increase of power required" approach. His curiosity of the 2GB 660 cutting it, when games like W3 want more VRAM just to run them - that says plenty.


And for more on "saying plenty to me" - so do so many of these lazy, basic, unoptimized PC ports (thanks to new consoles here) that just want us to deal w/ these growing pains + have more raw-power of VRAM just so we can run games at 1080p, which is a setting I've been running my games at for years!


I should probably have asked this question earlier in the first place, but I'll ask now.

What settings do you try to aim to run your games at?

Resolution - 720p? 1080p? 1440p?

Framerate - 30 FPS? 60 FPS?

Game Settings - Medium? High?

#12817557 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 09:17 PM

MysterD, I get all that, but most gamers aren't trying to run every new game on ultra 4K shadow sweat piss cumstain graphics or future proof or whatever.  I tend to buy cheap shitty gfx cards and they tend to handle what I want to play at levels that I deem acceptable.  Again, I'm not running FRAPS and tweaking graphics 100x when I play.  I just want to be able to finish the game.  I've had no problem with anything I throw at my AMD Radeon 67xx whatever card I got and while I assume most CAGs don't go that cheap, most are certainly not trying to get 100 FPS on Ultra

I'm NOT running 4K here.

I'm running here at 1080p & want 30FPS or better.

And I'm definitely NOT getting 100 FPS on these games - especially when running things at Very High or Ultra.



$1.99 Grandma games a gooooooo!!!! Culpa Innata is pretty cool though, just really, really old. It's an adventure games and not HOG.

I'll also vouch for Culpa Innata.

That's a severely underrated adventure game.

#12817535 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 09:04 PM

Coincidentally, if you did want a 2GB 960 and have a Visa there is some sort of Slickdeals witchery that can get you one for $135 after rebate.  Don't tell Mr. D, his D is all cried out.  

There's nothing for me to cry about. It's only the 2GB 960 at $135.

Better off with a 4GB VRAM 960, 970, 980; or any of the AMD's at 3GB VRAM or more (280, 280x, 380, 380x, etc).


Man, I was following that thread since it was first posted last night and never saw one in stock.  Way too much trouble to get in on that deal.  Anyway, my upgrade plan is to stick with my antiquated 1gb 7850 until I finish my backlog.  By then I should be able to upgrade to a Death Star.

I don't think it's worth $135 for the hassle + especially with that sale just having a small amount of only 2GB of VRAM. 2 GB VRAM is not that much, given the amount of VRAM out there on the market for newer cards. Ain't much of a present in that 2GB for a new card, nevermind a future - especially when games like W3 + ACU want that as a minimum. When you want to upgrade, you want to make a big worthwhile leap...so you don't have to do it for a while.


If it was the 4GB 960 for $135, that would be a very nice deal. But, it's not - only the 2GB version on sale at that price.


There's too many games that my 4GB 960 is eating easily over 2GB of memory here, when sticking 'em at Higher settings (such as Very High or Ultra) at 1080p -  For starters, here are some of those 2GB+ using games: The Evil Within, Watch Dogs, AC Unity, Far Cry 4, and especially Batman AK.

#12816979 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 04:51 PM

Man, I already had a headache. Didn't need to read that MysterD is using a 800w PSU for a 4 GB 960. My brain is melting.



When I first put this PC together, I kept the idea open purposely. That was just in case I decided to SLI since the X58 Sabertooth supported it. Hence, buying huge number of watts - just in case. At that time, I found the SLI idea attractive.


Unless somehow some cards get dirt-cheap and I buy two of them - I really don't see it happening.


I think I'd rather nowadays just buy one newer + better card instead.

#12816910 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 04:22 PM

Well the time has come: time for a new rig. Starting mostly from scratch, any advice is greatly appreciated and will be ignored.

Some kind of i7 processor or AMD equiv., I'd say. I ain't really been super-hip on newer processors (as my i7 950 is holding up now, but you can do much better than that now). Some games flat-out require a i7 (i.e. Wolfenstein: TNO); or actually recommend it (i.e. Wolf: TOB). Me, I've always preferred Intel over AMD, in most instances.


Decent number of watts on PSU. Just in case you SLI/Crossfire later or buy a very beefy video card, pay attention to what you buy - you might want more. I have 800W myself (which is overkill here), but just in case I catch a sick deal and want to take a shot at SLI'ing. My 4GB 960 card only wants 400W for a minimum. You want to be above the min. by a fair deal. Some of the newer AMD cards are quite power-hungry + watt-hungry (i.e. see 8GB R9 380x) - so, keep that in mind if you are headed down the AMD route.


RAM - I have 16GB DDR3 memory. It's fine, for now. But you'll probably want more than that, since you're starting fresh w/ new build.


Aim for a vid-card with 3GB to 4 GB of VRAM or more!

This raw power of having bigger amounts of VRAM is just going to be needed. It's a growing trend, like it or not.


It doesn't help that PC ports - especially from AAA companies - can wind-up being undercooked, lazy, basic, not much optimizing put into it, and things of that sort...which have led to the high-end VRAM requirements of games like AC: Unity, The Evil Within & Batman AK at even 1080p. We'll get into that a bit, momentarily.


Most of the above stuff are multi-platformed games for PC + consoles. This is a problem for PC versions on multi-platformed games. PS4 is out-selling the X1, so you can expect more companies leaning towards building around PS4 hardware (since that's the new-gen console leader). Also, most games on consoles + PC have dropped even making PS3 + X360 versions - so, the increase spike of PC requirements is inevitable b/c they are not using those old systems as the lowest common denominator anymore!


So, here's more problems: the shared 8GB DDR5 RAM on the PS4 seems to be a problem dev's are complaining about that are doing multi-platforming of their games - see here, from Avalanche on PS4 vs. PC and why PC games need more VRAM (this is an old article, but you might get the detailed reasoning better there if you want the detailed explanation). B/c the PS4 RAM's shared, the dev's can just often just dump stuff wherever w/out too much of a care (especially since it's a fixed-box + can run on the metal w/out much getting in the way). PC needs that crap allocated somewhere + quickly; and then there's the DirectX API that is not currently at a low-level layer (i.e. DX11 and below), so this can get in the way a bit of performance. Basically, more VRAM on the PC side for your GPU is just necessary to handle this mess.


I constantly see my 4GB GeForce 960 card eating up anywhere from 2-4 GB VRAM on any modern PC titles, depending on the settings I'm running it at. At 1080p on my PC - Watch Dogs, Batman AK, Witcher 3, Far Cry 4, AC Unity, The Evil Within - these are all eating up ridiculous amounts of VRAM.


Where you go - your call. NVidia 960 (4GB option only there), 970, 980, Titan; or AMD's 280x, 380x, 390 - take your pick. Pick something for you at 3-4 GB VRAM or more. Depends on what you're used to and what you prefer, for whether AMD or Nvidia. Some prefer AMD for the bang-for-buck performance; some often prefer NVidia for stability + drivers.

#12816786 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 03:27 PM

GreenManGaming Summer Sale - Day 11: Out Of This World Sale.


Big List of the sale here.

#12816209 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 02:43 AM

I'm trying to get an English teaching professorship at Showa Boston. Aren't we all having fun sharing random stuff?

Well, c'mon - GMG did such a good job knocking the deals out the park today! Gotta' talk about those deals!

#12816197 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 02:36 AM

Remember when MysterD ordered Godfather's Pizza or something like that?  For the puppy bowl?  Or Super Bowl?


Pizzeria Regina (the original down in the North End) is tons better than that chain.



MysterD could be ordering 20-piece chicken nuggets for all I care.

MysterD is not really a fan of fast-food...especially McDonald's.

The only thing worth half of a damn there is their fries.

#12816123 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 02:02 AM

I've found the perfect way to keep yourself from buying Steam games.  I hit 999 2 weeks ago and ever since all I've managed to do is say "OMG, there's no way THAT is going to be my 1000th game!" over and over again.  I've saved SO much money through unbought bundles. (gotta be at least 4 or 5 dollars by now)  :rofl:

You could buy the bundles (not from Steam); hold onto the keys; buy game 1000 as something special and activate that first; then activate the bundle keys.

#12816046 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 20 July 2015 - 01:19 AM

Over the last 6 years, you've spent 5933 hours playing this selection, which includes 1526 items, is valued at $17169.3, and requires 3981.8 GB

How many burgers have you eaten and moonshine bottles have you drank?


I had this awesome bacon burger topped w/ a piece of BBQ short-rib yesterday at Stockholder's Steakhouse. It was a special there. They should make it a regular item on their menu. I dig their bacon burger, anyways - it's really good. But, the short-rib on top so changed the dynamic + made it freaking awesome!

#12815723 Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Posted by MysterD on 19 July 2015 - 09:34 PM

i search Steam for the recommended "the waiting game" and yielded no result


MysterD lied!  :drool:

Of course not.

Valve hasn't put a store page up for HL3 yet.