jadeseal7 said:You could really tell the difference back when Daniil Kvyat was behind the wheel—certainly more so than with this absolute maniac driving now.
And just like that—it’s clear that Alonso is especially fired up when it comes to Hamilton, though honestly, there aren't really any mysteries left to solve there. 🤣
Two idiots, really. One is trying desperately to block a car that's a second and a half faster, while this other guy in the quicker machine is trying to force his way past a lunatic who's clearly lost it for the reasons mentioned above.
At least we got a little trip back to 2007. Old friends always remain old friends.🤣
So, there are 103 different ways Hamilton walks away with the title in Mexico, and only 8 scenarios where Vettel stays in the hunt...
If Hamilton doesn't wrap this up right now, I'm expecting a total meltdown on par with 2007.🤣
Hamilton needs just 9 points to become champion, regardless of how Vettel performs.
Suppose Hamilton is absent from Mexico and Vettel takes the win; that puts the score at 66-25. In that case, Hamilton enters the final two races with a 41-point cushion.
The US Embassy is practically calling the shots here, and since the judges are picking the tire strategy for the entire weekend, it’s a goldmine for the sportsbooks. It’s looking almost certain that either Hamilton or Bottas will snatch the fastest lap during the race.
There is a massive gap in how they’re playing the tire game compared to Red Bull and Ferrari, who opted for a much heavier load of harder sets.
I have to say, I'm a bit surprised by how Aggressive Mercedes is being with this approach!
Timothy Castillo6 said:Man, he’s been shouting it from the rooftops for ages—he’s always said Ferrari completely wrecked him, held him back, and totally trashed his career because their crew is absolute garbage.
Oh, right!! Well, obviously he wouldn't be making those claims if it weren't for what happened with Vitaly Petrov and that scary performance where he swept half the grid at Spa—taking everything except Vettel.👎
Timothy Castillo6 said:Looking ahead to 2018: If they don't snag the title in the next couple of seasons, Vettel is going to be looking for any excuse to bail out. And once he does, we're going to see this whole fallen powerhouse start its downward spiral (and it won't just be because Vettel left). In the end (though let's see how 2018 actually plays out), there are going to be some things where Alonso was actually right all along.
What exactly are these visions of Alonso's? I'm not sure what he even said.
Digital spaces are infinite, really. You have as much paper as you need; just keep opening new pages. Eventually, it all just ends up in some digital landfill somewhere.
There is zero chance you can get rid of the fan club for Max this way. Are you being serious? We have plenty of Max fans right here!
Austin Rodriguez5 said:At first I assumed you were trolling, then I realized we were talking about The Witcher 1 rather than 3. 😁
It is good that you are happy with the purchase; that is what matters most. 😁
He He Witcher 1 is plenty for me, maybe the second one if I feel like it. I am not exactly a devotee of the latest releases, nor do I feel obligated to play every new title that hits the market. To my mind, Half-Life 2 remains the greatest game ever made. I also have a fondness for the FlatOut series—the pure, mindless destruction is quite enjoyable.
On another note, along with the GT 1030, I managed to borrow a GeForce GT 710 with 2GB of DDR3. I plan to compare it against the Radeon HD 5450 to see what the actual difference is. Some people here claim there isn't much of a gap, so I will test it tomorrow and share the results with everyone.
I suspect there will be a significant difference compared to the Radeon HD 5450 🙂, especially since the Radeon HD 5450 is overclocked from 650/533 to 750/620.
Pa, paired up with a GT 1030, The Witcher is just flying. It’s actually terrifying to look at the frame rates Fraps is pumping out. I cranked everything to Ultra—every single setting—and compared to my old Radeon HD 5450, this thing is basically a Star Trek ship. Games that used to struggle at 20fps are now hitting over 100. Battlefield 3 on the Radeon HD 5450 was a nightmare; I had to run it on Low at 800x600 in a window just to scrape past 20 fps. Now, it’s cruising above 40 on High at 720p. It's an incredible card. I'm definitely satisfied, and naturally, I went straight to Steam to buy Witcher 2 immediately. 🙂
Edit, I opened up this SFF case today and took a look at the CPU heatsink. It's this tiny copper cooler attached to some plastic with a fan that sits quite a distance physically from the actual cooler. It honestly fascinates me how the powerful e7500 doesn't even cross 42°C after two hours of gaming and various benchmarks in a dusty case, in a room without AC, in the middle of a 3 PM heatwave. Measured via HW Monitor, there is no way the CPU temperature goes above 42°C. It seems to me I could easily grab a Q9400 or a 9550 and they would stay well-cooled; they might hit 55°C, perhaps. I simply don't understand what magic this little copper heatsink is using to cool so effectively.
I ended up ordering a GT 1030 for $183, thanks everyone. I’m fairly certain it was the right call. Heading out to pick it up near Central Park later today.
Compared to the Radeon HD 5450, there is likely going to be a light-year difference in speed.🙂
fadedorca66 said:If there isn't a review out for a specific card, you can pretty much assume it's garbage. It clearly wasn't even worth a reviewer's time to look at it.😁
Go with the GT 1030. It costs a bit more, sure, but it's newer and features better tech—things like HEVC and H.264 encoding, plus updated HDMI support. You'll find it much easier to repurpose for an HTPC later on, or just flip it for a decent price when you're done.
As for the Quad cores, we first need to establish what the motherboard actually supports.
I wouldn't say that. Previously, the issue was that the GDDR5 version only recently hit the market; the standard GeForce GT 710 was originally intended to run solely on DDR3. I want to see the actual potential of the chip. All the DDR3 versions hover around an effective 1800MHz, whereas this one runs at 5000MHz. That is a massive leap in memory bandwidth, likely exceeding a 10GB per second difference compared to DDR3.
What interests me is the OC potential of that GeForce GT 710 chip. From what I've gathered online, absolutely everyone manages to push it 300MHz past its native 950MHz frequency without any real struggle. If you catch my drift, perhaps $113 might be a solid deal in the end.
I am not looking for a dedicated gaming card. I simply want something capable of running the aforementioned titles—maybe Far Cry 2, Battlefield 3, and similar old relics. I have no intention of trying to play GTA 5 or Battlefield 1, nor am I searching for anything meant for those.
Keith Anderson3 said:An 1050ti won't matter one bit if he's bottlenecked by a motherboard limited to 2 or 4 GB of RAM, which seems highly probable here.
Also, regarding those Q8200-Q8400 chips, I've seen a few going for $60, so dropping the price by another 50 is definitely doable. 😉
It’ll be a solid configuration. 😉
The motherboard has four DDR3 slots, two of which are vacant. It's an HP 6000 pro SFF machine, likely capped at 8GB of RAM since it currently runs two 2GB modules at 1333MHz.
For some inexplicable reason, the system only supports Core 2 Duo and Series 9 Quad processors. It refuses to recognize the Q6 or Q8 series. It defies logic, yet that is the reality. My options are either the top-tier E8500 dual core or moving up to a Q9400 or Q9550 processor. 🙂
The current powerful e7500 performs quite adequately; I haven't encountered any performance deficits during standard use. I suppose the goal is to play newer titles that the Radeon HD 5450 can't handle anyway.
To clarify, this isn't my primary rig. This little unit belongs to my 14-year-old kid. He's a heavy RPG player and does great in school, so he's allowed about an hour or two of gaming per day.🙂
Timothy Kim60 said:If cash isn't an issue, just pick up a used quad-core for a 775 system along with a 1050ti low profile. Anything listed below that is just junk. And don't even bother thinking about a GeForce GT 710; you won't see any meaningful difference compared to a Radeon HD 5450. It's a waste of money.
Thanks, I’ll probably just grab a GT 1030 since that GTX 1050 is out of my budget. I actually wanted to find a review for a GeForce GT 710 with DDR5, but I couldn't track one down. My expectation is for the card to run The Witcher 1, Oblivion, and Gothic 3 on high settings, and eventually handle Skyrim and The Witcher 2,3 on low or Medium at 720p.
The Radeon HD 5450 I currently have running The Witcher 1 struggles at 720p on high settings, hitting maybe 9-20fps in open areas, which is completely unplayable. Even dropping the details to Medium doesn't get me past 25-30fps in the best-case scenarios in open environments. 🙂
Keith Anderson3 said:The 740 is just a rebranded 650, and he mentioned on a hardware forum that he was considering picking one up. 😉
I am certainly considering it, though the issue is that it isn't available in a low profile version. My main dilemma remains whether it's worth spending $100 more on an NVIDIA GT 1030.
wiredotter14 said:The GT710 isn't meant for any actual gaming. An NVIDIA GT 1030 is sufficient even for light 1080p tasks. If you can manage it, try to stretch your budget for that, or perhaps find a used GTX 750(Ti), though I doubt you'll find a decent price.
The GT1030 stays under $200 and the card won't lose much value.
Thanks, I am aware the 710 isn't anything special, but the DDR3 version is twice as fast as an HD 5450. My target was the GT710 with GDDR5 memory, $113 brand new, but I cannot find a single fucking review for the GDDR5 version.
In my view, the GT710 was crippled by slow DDR3; this GDDR5 variant operates on memory exceeding 5000MHz.
Keith Anderson3 said:I previously ran an Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 paired with an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650. It felt like that processor had reached its absolute limit there. Still, it handles 720p adequately. Quite well, actually.
True, but I specifically need a low profile card. Plus, power draw is a major concern because I'm working with an HP SFF unit that only has a 265W power supply.
As far as I am aware, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 doesn't even come in a low profile version, and if I recall correctly, it pulls about 100W.
So, here is the situation: I'm working with an old SFF HP desktop, running an Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 with 4GB of DDR3. Right now, it has an HD 5450 tucked inside, which is frankly far too slow for even moderately recent titles. Is it actually worth picking up a GT 710 with GDDR5 memory, or should I just push myself a bit further and aim for an NVIDIA GT 1030? My main goal is simply to get games running reasonably well on low settings at 720p resolution. Is that even feasible with this specific configuration, considering that upgrading to anything else isn't on the table for the foreseeable future?
