Jump to content

TheyCallMeGunny

Members
  • Content Count

    395
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by TheyCallMeGunny

  1. Yeah I tested it. The version of iTunes they had was several years old.
  2. BF3+Avast Avast can cause Battlefield 3 to crash. Most commonly it's the "web-Rep plugin", but other components also cause crashes. Even with shields disabled. Fix: uninstall Avast. BF3+Stutter If you have less than 8GB of RAM, or 1.5GB VRAM: Your computer might play the game smoothly at ultra for a while, then the game may begin to freeze up repeatedly (aka stutter.) Fix: Turn Texture Quality to High, possibly POST-AA to medium if persists. Requires large amounts of memory during certain calls at Ultra Textures/High Post-AA. All other settings can usually be left at Ultra. BF3+Slideshow framerates on capable hardware Sometimes the game just plays like crap. You go from 100FPS one day to 16 the next. I had this issue before. Fix: This game is extremely particular about drivers and installation. Click the link below for a detailed explanation and guide to getting it "just right." Battlefield 3- Nvidia Driver Guide Also make sure not to change any registry values associated with your video card drivers (ie using registry cleaners: Make sure not to alter any of these values- As they occasionally make mistakes and trigger this seemingly random issue.) *As for AMD: Can't help you. Have to ask someone else. So far, these are the only "simple fixes" I've found to common problems. Might remember some later and edit them in. Just wanted to share a few tips for making such seemingly daunting issues easier.
  3. Explained in original post. Long explanation first: Simpler way to get a similar effect at end of this response. As for how I applied it: I cut pieces to fit around each side of the heatsink and attached them OUTSIDE of the case (No way to do this internally.) I had both fans on the heatsink when I applied the panels. I cut a piece to match the shape and size of each face of the heatsink+fans just long enough to bend around the outside lip of the fan , and fastened them on with "corner pieces" which were used to glue the adjacent side plates on. I made sure the entire surface area was covered, and at the end decided to put 2 holes in it, as I was worried it might cause too much static pressure without some form of exhaust. Then I just mounted it by putting a screwdriver through the holes and screwing it in, then took a few spare tabs and sealed them back over the screw holes. ____ As for DrDeath's response: I don't think mine is better than the Noctua D14, I believe it's more to do with how little air was actually flowing THROUGH the fins originally. Think of a whale tail: Mine have a bend that allows air to escape straight off the end of the blade instead of pushing more through front to back. My fans push as much air at a sideways angle as they do forward: They have "fin" shaped blades that are bent at the end and push air in a 180 degree area. IMO that would explain the difference: Half the air was barely touching my heatsink without a shroud- Now all of it is being forced through it. As for the simple way to make one, I'd assume it'd have the same effect but wouldn't look as nice: They make aluminum tape. It's just thin sheet aluminum with one sided adhesive on a roll of tape. Same material as what I used, just thinner (and therefor pliable.) I'd assume you could just tape all around it if you wanted to. I just wanted mine to stay "flat", so I used actual pieces of aluminum: Cut them with a hacksaw (keeping in line with edge of work bench to avoid bending the edges), drilled holes with a dremel, and bent them in a vice to shape the corners. Then I just sealed each piece by scraping the edges up and applying rubber cement.
  4. I don't have to output to .avi. I'm saying that Afterburner records to avi files. So I'm starting with an avi file. I can use any format compatible with youtube uploads to output to.
  5. Game recordings: Afterburner, 100% quality (exactly as displayed on screen while gaming), MJPG compression, [email protected], 8 channel [email protected], 96KHz. Recordings also seem to include GX positional audio, as I can hear in replays. Would only be noticable with other users that have an ASUS GX audio enabled card I assume, so it's not important that the encoder keeps the GX audio. File format of recorded video is .avi. I typically try to render in a 27-30FPS file, as on youtube a 60FPS video isn't important IMO. Though public opinion may differ. Btw, +1 bluecow. I'll give that a try next time and let you know how it turns out.
  6. I've gone through a bunch of video compression and encoding programs, trying to find something to shrink my video files with preferabbly no quality loss. For the longest time I've just stuck with Handbrake. But I know there's better options out there (or maybe I've just not configured it properly.) Especially because of the million youtube users who can upload pristine gaming videosL I find it hard to believe they have 100 hours of video sitting around uncompressed. Does anyone know of a program, even if it involves very particular encoding settings, that can compress video to a manageable size, yet still maintain pristine quality of the videos? You see pirates compressing 720p movies to 400MB, youtube users with hundreds of hours of uploads that have been edited (meaning they likely had more video that didn't get used) and more- I know there has to be something better than just standard old handbrake and .flv converting.
  7. Let's say it is caching to RAM: Why do you imply that's a bad thing? It has been able to maintain the speeds indefinitely. As I stated, I really noticed this during several massive file transfers of virtual machines and backups. And the speed was sustained throughout the moves. So even if it is just RAM caching: it must be writing them out before the RAM fills up. Anyways, as posted in OP: My RAM usage doesn't increase much if at all when copying files: I've noticed a 0-2% increase in RAM usage during any of these file transfers: not very noticeable since it's usually below 30% usage. I assume caching would at least show up in my resource monitor? (which is on my desktop 24/7, updates every 1 second.) So I don't think it's "false" data being reported. I can't tell you exactly how fast it transfers from second to second without recording/benching: But I can tell you that those file transfers used to take several times longer than they've been taking the last two days. Can't tell the difference with photos and music, but with the backups the difference became clear as day. Btw my speeds have never reported 200MB/s as yours did. They've been starting between 100-120MB/s. And then they typically hold between 100-110MB/s according tot he copy window. That's believable for me, as they typically benchmark in HDDTune at 120-130MB/s depending on the day (These benches were run with the 4GB RAM, I don't even have this installed anymore.)
  8. EASEUS Partition Master Pro. Clone the drive, just don't include free space in the cloning. It'll clone it as though the entire drive was 60GB. If you pay attention to the options menu: It can be cloned bootable even without free space cloning. Fresh install is ALWAYS best. But if you're in a hurry, that's my recommendation.
  9. I've considered that Windows isn't using the hard drive page file as much, due to having more RAM to play with: Therefor freeing up HDD usage. But my memory usage is practically the same as it was with the 4GB. So I've ruled that out. As to your post: it makes sense to me in drive-to-drive transfers, but I don't see how it would have a noticable effect on copying a file on the same drive it's already on. But I might be wrong, I never really put much time into the workings of hard drives as it's not something you can overclock lol.
  10. Formatting will ALMOST always fix the issue. BUT.. Some drives have another issue entirely: I've had 20 hard drives in and out of this computer, 6 of them just refused to be automatically assigned a drive letter. So if formatting doesn't work: Assign a drive letter to it manually (Also done in disk management.) I don't know why, but some drives just don't let Windows do that automatically. -Glad you fixed your issue. But some people read solved posts to find their own solution, so I figured I'd add this in. Seems completely obvious: But sometimes you don't think to assign a drive letter after you've tried formatting, partitioning and all that crap: Because it's supposed to be done automatically by Windows. It's almost too obvious sometimes, gets overlooked.
  11. i've had the same array of hard drives for a few years now. They've always had burst speeds of up to 120MBps, sustained around 35MBps. I've only made ONE change to my computer recently: Upgraded from 4 to 8GB of RAM. Nothing else has been done, not even a noticable defrag. My sustained speeds are now over 100MBps copy-pastes and drive to drive transfers. This has been noticed during about 8 drive transfers of 100GB at a time, and several other backups I've done for some of my virtual machines. Was it the memory upgrade that did that? Because I don't see my memory usage increasing noticably during the copy and pasting: But it's also the only thing I've changed that seems to be related to increased drive transfer speeds. --This post is pure curiosity. I am happy for increased drive speeds, but would like to know if the memory is the reason for it. Considering I rarely used more than 50% total system usage of my 4GB during file transfers anyways: It doesn't seem like the two should be related. But I can't think of any other changes to my system.
  12. So we all know bulldozer was a fail. It was a big hit to AMD, and due to it's letdown Intel has even been sandbagging their own new CPUs. Which means the lead Intel could have is less than it could be, since it really doesn't even have competition anymore. I recently "finished" my build. But I'm planning on building my girlfriend a new computer, and may give her my CPU+Mobo and just buy a better set for myself. I currently have an AMD build, and am a bit concerned for lack of future support for the brand. So I'm considering buying an Intel board and CPU, likely LGA1155. This is planned between 6-12 months from now. So now for the question, since my situation's been explained: Does AMD have anything coming up in the near future that could save their brand? Because I'd rather just buy a new CPU and not have to give my $200 mobo away with it. For me, price is the sole reason for not switching to Intel: If I can get a ~$150 CPU by sticking with AM3+ instead of a $150 CPU and a $200 mobo.. I'm not too concerned about 10% less bang for my buck. What worries me is that if I buy a new CPU, what happens if AMD doesn't pull out of this hole they've been digging deeper for years? I'd like to have an open upgrade path without having to switch out half my rig's internals. -Edit: my motherboard supports AM3 and AM3+. I currently have a Phenom II X2 555 BE in it. Unlocked to triple core and overclocked. I'd really like to have more cores, since I'm often running a virtual mac OSX on my computer and I'd prefer to feed it more than just a single core. So, is there anything in my socket coming up that might be worth waiting for? Or should I just give up hope and plan on switching to intel when build time comes? The girlfriend doesn't need a super high performance PC: She just needs a new one as hers is almost 10 years old now. Hence why giving her my hand-me-downs is so ideal: they're by no means old or slow while they're also not the best. So it'd be a perfect fit for her. -Edit 2: We just took out a loan to buy a house, and it's by no means livable. I'm going to be living in filth for a few months guitting and remodeling it until her and the daughter can move in with me. So I really CAN'T spare a whole ton of money unless something truly outstanding is coming along for either brand. I either want cheap but substantially better: Or the absolute best. I don't have the option to buy in the middle for at least a few years to come.
  13. My motherboard has a sensor built-in: Sits underneath the CPU in the socket. Since it's an ASUS motherboard: I usually just use AI Suite II to read it: Since it came with the motherboard. But a lot of benchmarking programs also read the sensor: Btw the sensor is labeled as "CPU" in every program, but it's just reading the underside of the CPU, not internally reading the cores themselves. To read the temps for this particular test I used: AI Suite II, OCCTPT and Everest. Just to make sure they all matched, which they did. AI Suite doesn't read internal core temps, but the other two do. Still, since it's always unlocked (except for this particular test): I don't usually need internal temp readings since they're not available. So I usually just use AI Suite in day-to-day usage.
  14. I made a mod today. I have a Hyper 212 Plus CPU cooler, in Push/Pull config with matching fans. They are very high CFM (60-110CFM each) but blow a lot of air at an angle: Allowing it to escape the fins of the heatsink and flow elsewhere. So I made a shroud for it. Details about shroud are at end, but here's the basic temperature differences: My temperature ranges WITHOUT SHROUD: 36C at completely idle, 49C at max load. (According to motherboard's CPU sensor- internal sensor is locked. But that's in another topic.) My temperature ranges WITH SHROUD: 31C at completely idle, 42C under max load. So it seems the shroud made a big difference, especially under load. Idle is close to my ambient room temperatures (24C room temperature.) I made my shroud out of 2mm thick brushed aluminum with adhesive sealant. So I basically made an airtight enclosure all the way around my heatsink and fans: With two small holes (shaped like drinking straws) on the bottom (near CPU) to exhaust excess pressure. I had to drill holes for the screwdriver, and reseal them after I screwed it in place with adhesive and small shaped pieces of the same brushed aluminum. I basically "capped the holes" and added sealant to keep with the idea of keeping it airtight. -Edit: Using aluminum also made the cooler silent. I can turn it on silent (~30%) or 100%, and I can't hear a difference anymore. It's quieter than my case fans now. This was an "accidental" effect, I didn't actually consider this when building it.
  15. I have an unlocked processor, it's a dual core unlocked to a triple core and overclocked like crazy. So naturally the temperature sensors of the cores don't work. I wanted to get the closest estimate to the ACTUAL temperatures as I could (compared to the motherboard sensor under the CPU that does work when unlocked.) I did a 3 hour benchmark with OCCTPT, Made sure to reset my CPU back to dual core and left my cooling configuration exactly as I have it any other time. Doing this I learned that the motherboard sensor was ALWAYS between 9.5C and 11C higher than the actual core temperatures. If the CPU core read 20C, the motherboard sensor would say between 29.5C and 31C, and so on. I left it run 3 hours, monitoring it all the way with screenshots every few seconds from FRAPS auto-screenshot feature, as well as watching when I could. Do you guys think this sound like an accurate way to understand my overclock's temperature? Because my overclock ranges from 36C to 49C at all times according to my external sensor: And it's a pretty hefty overclock (3.2GHz to 4.29GHz, double core to triple core.) So that's basically saying that my CPU is ACTUALLY between 25C and 42C at all times. Something to keep in mind: Many people say these temperatures can't be right automatically: But you have to remember that my dual core was manufactured as a quad core in the first place: Just had 2 of the cores locked to be sold as a dual core. So if you keep that in mind, these temperatures make a little more sense. I considered the internal sensors might be off due to the low temperatures recorded. But that would mean BOTH internal core sensors were off. I have a VERY hefty air cooling set-up, with case flow well over 700cfm. CPU cooler is a Hyper 212+ with 120CFM-220CFM push/pull config and AS5 spread very meticulously. Keep this in mind when answering about whether these temperatures and this method seem accurate.
  16. BSOD, or blue screen of death. We see a lot of threads about users with this issue, so instead of going through and answering each one with the same "checklist" of things to do: I'm making a thread about the usual things to check and try to find your issue. This is just a small list of the 5 most common issues to cause a BSOD and the ways to repair them. More than 5 ways exist, but to list every solution to everything would take forever. 1- Overclocking. Set your clock speeds back to factory settings. This is particularly important of CPU and RAM: as they are the most common culprit of a BSOD. This includes memory timings. Also, resetting a GPU overclock may stop the issue. If you attempt to overclock again: Do it one component at a time. Do not jump in and overclock CPU, RAM, and GPU in one go: You'll never figure out which one was the issue this way. 2- Bad memory. Download memtest 86+, install it for use in BIOS. Remove all memory. Installing 1 stick at a time, test the memory for at LEAST a full pass of all 9 tests. If a stick fails at stock speeds: It most likely needs replaced with a new one. 3- External Building. Take your components out of the computer chassis. Build the computer on a NON-STATIC surface such as a cardboard box or wooden desk. Start the computer after installing EACH component by jumping the power pins with a screwdriver or similar conductive object. Listen for the error beeps. If the computer boots without issue, then gives off an error warning after installing one component: That component is faulty. 4- Swapping. Motherboard-only diagnosis. Try to borrow a motherboard or use an old one that works with your current components. Make sure it fits your CPU socket and memory type before doing so. If it works now: Odds are your old motherboard could be the issue. 5- OS and file integrity. Run chkdsk.exe (Windows 7 steps below) Insert your OS install DVD. Boot into it by selecting the proper boot device at POST screen. Select your language. Select "Repair your computer". Select your operating system from the next menu. Select "Command Prompt." Type: "fsutil dirty query x:" x: stands for your boot drive (usually C) Type: "chkdsk c: /f" This will run checkdisk and attempt to fix any errors. Start Windows back up and see if the error repeats itself: Could've just been a dirty bit in a program you were running. After any repeated BSOD's, it is advisable to install a fresh copy of Windows. How many times it crashes before you do so is up to you, but usually 5 BSODs in a short period of time is a good indication of OS corruption. Either way, it doesn't hurt to reinstall everything: Just takes a good bit of time.
  17. Stop pirating, switch ISPs, use a proxy. Third one could be effective depending on how your ISP monitors these things. First two are guarantees to work.
  18. I take back all my anti PhysX card posts: Discussing the pros and cons of an extra card dedicated to PhysX got me thinking of a way to cool my set-up down. As everything is ice cold EXCEPT my crappy old PhysX card, and it was heating up my main GPU. So I grabbed a metal rod, some small clamps, a little solder, and a bracket fastened to a washer: And I made a "shelf" that raises both of my cards at a slight angle and clamps them in place for absolue zero vibration (also taking the weight of the Twin Frozr II off my main GPU: Preventing warping.) This gave a larger air-space between the two GPUs and the sound card, and also quited down the Physx card as the pressure removed the rattling that was coming from the plastic sleeve over it's heatsink: And now my main GPU runs only a few degrees hotter than it did without the PhysX card, and my PhysX GPU runs quiet. So now that it's neither loud nor too hot, I've got my PhysX card installed again and am happy with it.
  19. Another 4GB CORSAIR VENGEANCE. A second cheap webcam, for video chatting with the gf. Mailed the payment for my lisence test, actually getting my f'n lisence renewed soon. Been expired for over 18 months now
  20. Personally, I don't like Dolby Headphone in gaming. Mostly because it seems limited in games anyways. I'm not knocking DH, it has it's uses in movies and even some music: It's just not very good at gaming IMHO. For instance, game I've been re-playing a lot lately: the Witcher 2. Dolby Headphone; When a character begins speaking, their voice will come from a certain channel, let's say front left for example. If you turn while they're speaking: It's still front left until it loads their next line of speech. I've noticed this in a lot of games. For me, EAX and GX are the only forms of positional audio that actually work. And you don't need positional audio in racing games. They are competitive yes, but the audio of them isn't. As long as you can hear the engine over-revving you have all the audio quality you can get use of. I even get use of positional audio in non-FPS games. Again, Witcher 2: It's an RPG, and a difficult one at that. Instead of a slight cue that a nekker is about to sneak-attack-smack me in the back of the head, I actually hear him exactly enough that I reflexively turn around and counter it without having to say "is that a rear or side sound?" A footstep is enough to tell me, "Oh, he's about 10 feet behind me and a foot to the left", as I turn around and knock him on his butt. That's the thing about positional audio: you don't get "cues": You hear it true enough that you don't have to think about it at all; It's so accurate it's reflex from the first game.
  21. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00722RHN2/?tag=047-20 /facepalm.. -Edit: BAHAHAHA!!.. I showed my brother the site, and the link above. Mentioned how the site has some of the most retarded stuff ever. Next thing I know he says: "Batman brake light cover, hold on!" and shoves me out the chair and buys it immediately.. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001GSIJYY/?tag=047-20 I thought that was kinda funny... -Edit 2: He runs downstairs with his shirt half on.. And buys this now: http://www.amazon.com/Black-Batman-Batarang-Knight-Folding/dp/B00269N7J4/ref=pd_sim_auto_3 My brother is a nut.. I'm going to recommend the batman snuggie just to troll him. -Edit 3: He just bought the snuggie too -.- A full grown man, and a Marine.. And he's like a kid in a candy store with batman stuff...
  22. You have a point. That scarecrow scene was kinda bada$$ with it. I just wish they made it more about appearance than about trying to cram as much as possible into the game. There's very few scenes they really seemed to aim towards the visual side, and more that just seemed like "benchmarks." -Edit: What I wish they did was find a way to have solid physx computed by the GPU (instead of CPU.) THAT would give a serious purpose to PhysX on a GPU. Solid PhysX for those who don't know, is essentially solid matter movement: Like a building collapsing, a tree being knocked over, or a cannonball being hurled through the air- These are usually always processed by the CPU. Then there's soft and particle physx: Flags flapping in the wind, particles and debris flying out of a surface, grass bending in the wind, and cloth folding as an object passes through it. This is done with the GPU. Reason they do it this way is that for an object to bend or change shape (soft physx) it has to be re-rendered: As it's changed form and the GPU is basically creating a new object. Or for particles to fly from a bullet impact, they have to be rendered as a new object. Thus is a heavily graphic task of rendering. Where the CPU just predicts movement of an object that retains it's shape, but follows a course of movement, such as gravity or the effect of resistance/force. This is purely mathematical equations with no visual rendering involved. But there's rarely such a need for a PhysX card to soft and particle PhysX. If they started programming solid PhysX to be rendered on a GPU: I'd definitely reinstall my PhysX card. Until then, I have it in a box. Might occasionally install it for games that won't play right without it: But otherwise it's just a temperature hazard and fan volume nuisance because my PhysX card runs several times hotter than my main GPU, and it just rises up onto the main. I guess if your PhysX card is cold and quiet, it'd be fine to use. But PhysX cards are usually cheap leftovers or older cards you've upgraded from: And so usually consumers don't put the cooling into them that they have on their main GPU.
  23. That falls into the "glorified physx benchmark" category, not really gaming. Every so often a game is released that's intentionally stressful on physx: Most likely to make consumers want to upgrade and promote impulse buying. And usually the added effects don't even look good in these games (Is the case in Arkham City and Dark Void for example): It's just random paper and rock flying out of every surface in a way that doesn't make sense or even add to the game's appeal. PhysX is put to good use in many games.. But IMO: Has never been done right in a game that taxes it so heavily. It's an addition, not a cornerstone, and developers seem to forget this. Red Faction Geurilla didn't require a physx card, and it made great use of PhysX by doing solid physx on CPU, with very light (therefor realistic) effects of debris processed through GPU. It was a game BASED on PhysX, but not meant to be a torture test. Sorry.. I get irritable about these games. There was a time I didn't have the hardware to play them like this, and now that I do.. I honestly think they looked better without all the over-used and abused effects.
  24. Yeah, I have a GTX 560 Ti 1GB as well, majorly overclocked. Then I have a GTS 250 1GB Core Edition from XFX: My old GPU. I tried using it as a PhysX card. It did one thing and did it well: Took my 560 from ice cold and jumped it up 20C, made it louder, and sucked up a lot of my PSU's headroom making my overclock shaky. Point is: With a modern card, you don't need a PhysX processor. I learned the same way you did: I tried it and saw how badly it failed. Anyways, the 560 ti is a very cool running card temp-wise.. Most older GPUs are 20-30C higher at idle than these get under load.. And that heat rises right onto the 560: taking away a major bonus of buying a thermally efficient card in the first place. Sell it, or make it a hand-me-down. My advice.
×
×
  • Create New...