The Computer Question Thread

[kojak]

Issue was present with my old card (8800 GTS 640); I thought it was just a symptom of being underpowered for current games until I installed the new card and it's still happening.  It's present in Far Cry 3, Assassin's Creed 3, StarCraft 2, and Hitman 5.  It's NOT happening in BF3 or MW3, at least I couldn't get it to freeze during a level or two.  

 

It's not a "hard" freeze, I'm able to start Task Manager and the display works fine outside the games.  Most games recover after a few seconds and I can continue playing.  With reduced settings I was able to play FC3 for hours with only one or two freezes.  

 

It does happen more often with higher settings.  I've been using the Hitman benchmark to test, and on "high" I'll see a couple 10FPS stutters and a couple of 3-5 second full freezes within the demo--not the performance I expected from a 660ti.  I can dial the settings down so it won't freeze during the short benchmark, somewhere between "low" and "medium".  

 

What I've tried out so far: 

RAM: no errors in Memtest, issue presents with either stick and in dual channel

MB/CPU: Tried both PCI-E slots, latest firmware, stock clock.   

GPU: Tried a couple older drivers, and two different cards.  Tried locking Physx to the CPU, no change.  

PSU: Identical freezing on four different power supplies, or running video card off dedicated PSU.  

HDD: removed storage drives, running only the SSD it still freezes.  

 

[evansy]

i5-3570K

GTX 660 ti

8 GB RAM

 

TT 600W PSU

games and OS installed on a Samsung 840 250gb drive

I've got the same set up with a coolermaster 600w and it runs fine.

Is the memory set up properly? I've heard of that causing problems with gaming before.

[kojak]

Today I bought a new motherboard, a completely different brand, and there's no change in the freezing issue.

 

Freezes only during games, more frequently with higher settings, and I usually notice a freeze or two on loading pages.  Audio continues and the mouse works during the freeze (1-10 seconds), only the graphics rendering stops.  Even weirder, in certain games hitting ctrl+alt+del and starting the task manager makes it freeze less often. 

 

Any ideas on what to test/swap next?

[amateurstuntman]

Do you have an unshielded black hole or any other type of singularity in your house?

Is your house directly over the top of the LHC?

 

Could there be any other device or ancient alien artefact altering the local structure of space-time?

[hitmanNo2]

May want to check for an ancient Indian burial ground under your house whilst your at it.

[kojak]

I shouldn't have bought this computer case wrapped with demon skin....

[futnut]

Kojak, at the risk of sounding patronising (sorry!) have you looked at the event logs? Really we're interested in the Application and System event logs. Have a look at around the time of the stuttering. There is also definitely an AMD/ATI specific log under 'Application and Services log' but I don't know if there is such a thing for NVIDIA, be worth a look. If this is a hardware issue then there is a good chance that the logs will reflect this. 

 

I did have a similar issue and as previous posters have mentioned it was down to power, specifically graphics card voltage; I actually had crash to desktop after the stuttering though. I was able to increase the voltage to the card (ATi 7950) in the ATI catalyst controller OC properties and the problem went away. You have to be careful doing this though maybe increase it in 5% increments. All the usual stuff applies...not responsible for any damage incurred...etc... this is just friendly advice that may or may not point you in the right direction! Good luck!

[kojak]

Thanks, I did check that and there was nothing logged during the stutter, I think because it was a severe slowdown and nothing actually crashing.  Nothing helpful was revealed by running various diagnostic software during games either (except that my framerate was slowing to a halt at random intervals).  I wound up exchanging the video card and SSD for new (identical) parts and doing a full W7 reinstall. This "shotgun" approach fixed the issue, and while it would have been nice to isolate the problem I'm just glad it's gone.  

 

Now that it works, I'm pretty pleased with the 660ti.  So far all my games run smoothly with maxed settings, and I haven't done any overclocking yet.  

[aznriptide859]

OK so it's time I upgraded my gaming PC. I will be out of college soon and my Shuttle form factor is starting to not cut it anymore, plus my CPU/GPU combo has strained ever since I can't play World of Tanks or Metro Last Light on the highest settings.

 

With the coming of Haswell and the GeForce 7xx series, I wonder if it's time to upgrade to the max, or simply something that's better than my current rig. I have a 500W PSU and the NZXT Phantom 410 lined up, as well as some sort of SSD for my future OS.

 

The main uncertainty factors are the CPU and GPU. I can't decide if I should go forward with Haswell, or stick to Ivy Bridge (which is probably cheaper). The GPU has to be nVidia (no more ATI thank you very much), but I'm unsure of which model, especially in the suggested 6xx series, is the best "bang for the buck". The mobo can be decided later - RAM will definitely be 16GB DDR3, but I can worry about that later.

 

Does anyone have insight on which GPU model and CPU generation I should go for? My budget is heavily varied; I can skimp on some other products, but I would like to definitely get a better GPU than I have now, and a CPU that won't bottleneck my GPU nor limit my future options for upgrades/replacements.

 

My current rig:

 

Shuggle SP45H7 Barebone

OCZ 4 x 2GB DDR2-800 RAM

Core 2 Quad Q9550

Sapphire ATI HD6870

 

Weird after thought - is my CPU currently bottlenecking my GPU? I remember upgrading my video card from a 5750 to a 6870 in late 2011, yet it seems it's still middle tier in the GPU charts, or am I mistaken?

[Stuey]

Hi all,

 

I'm about to replace the hard drive in my laptop cos I've filled up my 320 GB one - are 7200 rpm drives significantly faster than 5400 rpm ones? My laptop came with a 7200 rpm but it dies after a year D: now I have a 5400 in it, at the time a bloke in the office was all 'yeah don't bother with 7200s they just break sooner and don't make any difference' - any truth in that?

 

My third option is one of these hybrid drives. Worth it?

[DrAlexanderTobacco]

Hi all,

 

I'm about to replace the hard drive in my laptop cos I've filled up my 320 GB one - are 7200 rpm drives significantly faster than 5400 rpm ones? My laptop came with a 7200 rpm but it dies after a year D: now I have a 5400 in it, at the time a bloke in the office was all 'yeah don't bother with 7200s they just break sooner and don't make any difference' - any truth in that?

 

My third option is one of these hybrid drives. Worth it?

The bloke in the office is wrong - The speed of the disk does not necessarily correlate to drive lifespan.

 

Hybrid drives are pretty cool but I'm not sure about the ones for laptops. I would just recommend a standard 7200rpm one, Western Digital or Seagate.

[mightyjebus]

7400's are generally faster then 5400 especially when it comes to booting or accessing the HDD whilst running several applications. They are just as reliable as 5400's but more expensive.

 

Another option is to get rid of the CD/DVD drive and replace it with a HDD caddy (ebay for around £16) which can have a second HDD fitted. The benefit of this is you can transfer all the stuff from the 7400 360GB drive onto the new drive and keep the old one as your main drive for games, applications etc which should run fine.The new drive can be a 5400 (up to 2Tb now) which can be used to store movies, music and applications you don't use regularly saving space on the main HDD.

 

You can get 10,000 drives but these are very expensive and there is also the SSD HDD's which are really expensive but they do boot and run applications very fast. I'm running one of them as a primary in this laptop I'm typing on and I have a 1Tb 5400 HDD in the CD/DVD drive for movies etc.

[amateurstuntman]

How much space do you really need in a hard drive?

If you have a totally full 320Gb drive what is it full of?

Is it perchance?

 

If it's not then you should have it backed up, not just all on one 2.5" drive hoping the drive won't fail.

If it's backed up, does it really need to be on the laptop too?

 

If it is , is it absolutely vital that you carry all that around the planet?

If you aren't carrying it anywhere and are just using a laptop as a crappy double-priced, half-powered desktop then wouldn't you be better off with a proper desktop and a decent redundant storage system?

 

 

Be honest with yourself.

 

99% of people don't need all that storage space.

 

I have a 64Gb SSD in my laptop and a 32Gb SD card.

The number of times I have run out of space is zero.

 

I do have 3Tb of space on a Raid 5 array on my desktop which I use to store things but I don't feel the need to clog up my laptop with every episode of Star Trek in case I get 10 minutes to myself.

 

 

You almost certainly don't need to get a bigger hard drive.

My recommendation to you would be to get a high speed, low capacity SSD and a caddy to turn your existing hard drive into a portable one.  USB3 is fast enough that if it is just clogged up with films, TV and then you can still watch them fine plus, now you can lend them to people too.

 

That'll cost less than a hundred quid.

[futnut]

I agree with Amateurstuntman, it'll be better for battery life as well if you go the SSD option and setup a backup and archive schedule to a bigger external disk. I'd personally  go for a larger disk than 64GB, 120GB SSD should be fine, leave around 80GB for OS and updates down the road, leaving you with ~30GB to play around with.

 

Laptops generally come with a 5400 RPM HD because of the lower power requirements and therefore extended battery life. Very rarely do you see workstations with anything less than a 7200 RPM because power is less of a concern. 7200 RPM gives you lower read/write latencies which translates to less waiting for the computer. However SSDs beat mechanical disks by an order of magnitude so if performance is an issue; SSDs win hands down.

 

What the bloke in the office may have been getting at is that 7200 RPM HDs are spinning at a much faster rate which should mean, all things being equal a lower mean time between failures (MTBF) due to increased heat, more mechanical stress etc... Whilst logically this makes sense, a good way to determine the usable life of a HD is to look at the manufacturer's warranty period. I have not noticed a difference between the warranty periods of the 5400RPM or the 7200RPM units.

 

Watch out for OEM drives if warranty is important to you, the warranty is usually shorter, hence the cheaper price.

 

The thing to remember is that all HDs fail, it's just a question of when. A robust backup and archival regimen is the only way to protect your data, with this in mind why would you a need large laptop HD?

[amateurstuntman]

Good point, I only need a 64Gb SSD because I'm on Ubuntu - Ubuntu don't bloat.

 

<Dons sunglasses, does a burnout and rides off on motorbike>

[Stuey]

The bloke in the office is wrong - The speed of the disk does not necessarily correlate to drive lifespan.

 

Hybrid drives are pretty cool but I'm not sure about the ones for laptops. I would just recommend a standard 7200rpm one, Western Digital or Seagate.

 

I thought he might be, but then my 7200 had just died after 1 year of use so at that point it seemed reasonable. In reality I probably just got a bad drive.

 

7400's are generally faster then 5400 especially when it comes to booting or accessing the HDD whilst running several applications. They are just as reliable as 5400's but more expensive.

 

Another option is to get rid of the CD/DVD drive and replace it with a HDD caddy (ebay for around £16) which can have a second HDD fitted. The benefit of this is you can transfer all the stuff from the 7400 360GB drive onto the new drive and keep the old one as your main drive for games, applications etc which should run fine.The new drive can be a 5400 (up to 2Tb now) which can be used to store movies, music and applications you don't use regularly saving space on the main HDD.

 

You can get 10,000 drives but these are very expensive and there is also the SSD HDD's which are really expensive but they do boot and run applications very fast. I'm running one of them as a primary in this laptop I'm typing on and I have a 1Tb 5400 HDD in the CD/DVD drive for movies etc.

 

Replacing the CD drive is an interesting idea, never heard of that! I kind of like having my CD drive though, will probably keep it.

 

 

If you aren't carrying it anywhere and are just using a laptop as a crappy double-priced, half-powered desktop then wouldn't you be better off with a proper desktop and a decent redundant storage system?

 

It's funny you should say that because that's exactly what I want to do - build a proper PC for gaimz and other intensive stuff and replace my laptop with a thin, light one with good battery life that I can carry round uni all day. Can't really afford to do that right now though (maybe soon).

 

So for now this is my only computer, I think I have more games and software than even a 128 GB SSD could hold, so that's probably not an option for me. While moving all my films and TV and stuff onto an external is something I was contemplating doing, hard drives are so cheap if I'm going to buy another one I might as well get a 1TB 7200 for like £60 and be done with. Everything in one place is always nice, then I can pop my current drive into the caddy I have and use it to back up the important stuff.

[amateurstuntman]

OK.

It depends on what you use to play games, if you use steam you can have your games on a different drive to the OS.

 

Depending on the layout of the inside of you laptop you might (since you implied it is not thin and light) have 2 2.5" HDD bays.

You might also have the space to fit a mini PCIe SSD and 1 or 2 platter type drives, maybe even in RAID depending on your MoBo.

 

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/256gb-toshiba-thnsnh256gmct4paga-msata-19mn-mlc-25-int-ssd-471mbps-read-450mbps-write

 

OS and programs on the PCI-e and games on the platter.

TV and movies on the external.

[DrAlexanderTobacco]

If you're looking at building a PC gaming box, and haven't before, it might be worth waiting to see what the SteamBoxs are like.

[Stuey]

OK.

It depends on what you use to play games, if you use steam you can have your games on a different drive to the OS.

 

Depending on the layout of the inside of you laptop you might (since you implied it is not thin and light) have 2 2.5" HDD bays.

You might also have the space to fit a mini PCIe SSD and 1 or 2 platter type drives, maybe even in RAID depending on your MoBo.

 

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/256gb-toshiba-thnsnh256gmct4paga-msata-19mn-mlc-25-int-ssd-471mbps-read-450mbps-write

 

OS and programs on the PCI-e and games on the platter.

TV and movies on the external.

 

I have an average 15" laptop (Compal NBLB2), only one HDD bay sadly. No idea what mSATA is, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it probably doesn't have that either. I think my only option for a second HDD is replacing the optical drive, not super keen to do that as it does occasionally come in useful.

 

If you're looking at building a PC gaming box, and haven't before, it might be worth waiting to see what the SteamBoxs are like.

 

As easy as that would be I'd rather not buy what is essentially another console, I want a PC for a reason!

[amateurstuntman]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:dek4qWMmpN8J:ftp://65.106.72.164/Notebook/Archive_Notebooks_Drivers/Compal/NBLB2/Manuals/Service_Manual/NBLB2_Service_Manual_20100210_ver0.0.pdf+&hl=en

 

P67 items 20 and 21 look like they will support an mSATA drive.

[Stuey]

I get a HTTP 400 error with that link

[amateurstuntman]

Doesn't matter, it's just the service manual for your laptop.

It has two slots for mSATA drives but they will have the wireless cards etc. in them.

[bladerunner168]

1900 x 1200 vs 2560 x 1440 gaming

 

I'm building a new rig in November (Haswell 4770K, 16GB RAM, AMD R9 290X) and I have yet to experience/see a 2560 x 1440 game session live/in person.

I currently run a Dell 24" which has a resolution of 1900 x 1200, upgrading to a 27" monitor that will run 2560 x 1440 will cost around £450.

 

Whilst this is in my budget, in your opinion, does the extra resolution really add that much to the experience i.e. "once you tried it, you won't want to go back" type feeling.

 

Does anyone have user experience here?

I know it's obviously a subjective point but free free to chip in with an opinion.

 

Cheers! 

[hitmanNo2]

It's something I've been considering for a while.  I had a brief play on one but not really enough for me to think I couldn't live without it.  Though I have a feeling it will be like the jump from say a 19" 4:3 to a 24" wide screen.  You certainly wouldn't want to ever go back.  This is what a hear from others too.  The extra screen estate for documents makes it pretty worthwhile imo too.

 

You should also check out the screens from South Korea on ebay.  If you do your research and know what you're looking for, you can save loads.  That £450 certainly seems high to me.

[amateurstuntman]

5760 x 1024?