Isn't the 10,000 thing from old SD cards from the early 2000s?
Printable View
Isn't the 10,000 thing from old SD cards from the early 2000s?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SegataS
It's certainly gotten much better, but he's talking about 1TB of writing a day to a 100GB SSD for 5 years, which equals about 1.5 Peta-Bytes. That's a ridiculous amount of data.
Hence why I'm saying the claim is outdated (Flash can tolerate at least one or two orders of magnitude more than that, before we even start talking about wear levelling). The problem is that it's still being cited all over whenever explanations of Flash memory are brought up.Quote:
Originally Posted by SegataS
I think that bringing this up is relevant because one of the main fears behind switching to SSD is that if you have something that writes constantly to the drive (as software constantly writing to caches and doing constant logging do), you could risk rendering it unusable pretty quickly. But it's much less of a problem nowadays (some people even suggest that SSD is safe enough for swap pages by now - although for the record, in my experience the OS rarely touches it even when it's running out of RAM, since often a lot of the memory is dormant and only brought back up by the program after you click on something).
I don't have a 6TB hard drive. I can appreciate load times are a factor for you and others. I don't find the loads times that bad and only in games like Dark Souls series... where one dies all times and the game needs to reload the data back in, does it really bother me.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
No idea in the USA, but in the UK OFCOM finned Broadband providers and so now it's against the law here, to overstate the Download speeds by such a margin. So while downloading various games when you want to play them, is an option for a lot, its also a hassle for others with slow broadband.Quote:
You do realize that 1.5MB is equal to what internet providers would advertise as 12Mb, right?
At the end of the day, what I like about consoles is when you buy the system everything you need to play games is in the box as standard and when you buy a game you know it will work for that console, no if's no buts and no looking at minimum tech spec's or what version of Windows one got... They just work.. and that for me is why I find PC a little more hassle, even if they are amazing platforms for games
Gee look who it is derailing a topic tp take a big wet shit everywhere.
well.. I'm playing on PC for thirty six years and is nothing more easier than now...
its a console like experience, you just need to configure it.
first hint is use steam, also you can connect any joypad on it and configure it at big picture to compatibility for any game in your entire library,
so you can plug generic usb joypads, ps3, ps4 controler and the games will detect it as native controler without insue
for example i'm playing DBZ Fighter Z using i fight comander 4 for ps4 and the game only supports xinput, when i enter on the game i have to do nothing
all is configured and working fine..
So to be a PC gamer you must bulty your setup and prepare it for both scenario, work and play games with you need.
The first post its a common thing for the people that really don't know how do these things..
in this case better call a friend to help.. for at least configure the general things..
because in the end it is a PC, you builty your own experience..
if you dosen't usually do these things you got some problems
What isn't on topic here then. Its all about gaming on the PC and Consoles...Quote:
Originally Posted by SegataS
You need to relax. He isn't derailing your topic. He is saying his thoughts on computers and why he prefers consoles.Quote:
Originally Posted by SegataS
I don't think PC gaming is that big of a hassle, but the digital only stuff and the extreme fanboys doesn't make me want to invest that much into it. Not to mention titles that will never make it to GOG or Steam. I appreciate DOS stuff a bit more.
It's not just load screens to get to the next level. It's not having graphics hitches when the game has to load more assets from storage, which happens often in an open world environment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Andromeda
It's not false advertising. 1.5Mega-Bytes is equal to 12 mega-bits of download speed. My 75Mb/75Mb connection is 9.37 Mega-Bytes of download speed, or 75 Mega-bits.Quote:
No idea in the USA, but in the UK OFCOM finned Broadband providers and so now it's against the law here, to overstate the Download speeds by such a margin. So while downloading various games when you want to play them, is an option for a lot, its also a hassle for others with slow broadband.
It's really not that complicated at all. Yeah, if your computer is a potato, you're going to be looking at required specs for all of the high end games. Nvidia card owners can open up GeForce experience and let the software adjust all of their games on their PC to the optimum settings if they like. Even my old living room PC with a 6 year old i5-2500K, 16GB of RAM and a 5 year old GTX 780 can run anything on PC @ 1080p.Quote:
At the end of the day, what I like about consoles is when you buy the system everything you need to play games is in the box as standard and when you buy a game you know it will work for that console, no if's no buts and no looking at minimum tech spec's or what version of Windows one got... They just work.. and that for me is why I find PC a little more hassle, even if they are amazing platforms for games
I still play my PS4 with modern games, but most of the titles I got for it were either Sony exclusives (Darius Burst Chronicle Saviors, Uncharted, Horizon..etc), not very demanding (Pinball Arcade, PAC-MAN CE, etc) or at a really good price.
I'm pretty disappointed that I can't use my PS3 arcade stick with my PS4, without buying a dongle to fool the PS4 into thinking it has a PS4 arcade stick plugged into it. I can take the same arcade stick over to the PC, it will recognize it and update the drivers to use it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyron
There was a time I was on the ATi bandwagon (yes Pre AMD). Then the first PC I got with Nvidia and lever looked back. Their driver support is insane. They still release updates for a 660M. If I still used that laptop I would have just installed an updated the other day but instead went to this machine.
I never went to AMD because of all of the stories I'd heard about their drivers. I was running Crysis 3 with a couple of GTX 460s in sli and it ran pretty well @1080p on high settings.
I decided to drag out the old GTX 670 from 2012 to see how well it would run Far Cry 5 on my old 2012 rig. The drivers updated for the card and it did a decent job (considering how old it is) of running the game at medium settings.
In Dark Souls III when you die (which happens a lot) it needs to reload. That bugs the hell out of me and where I would agree with you overloading times and looking to use an SSD drive. But that's the only game where load times are really an issue tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
I'll be accused of going off topic, but in the UK OFCOM have stopped such advertising in area's that can not get close to the advertised speed, now they must advertise the minimum speed as well as the maximum. Most PC games use steam and in a lost of cases only are able to be installed via Steam; If one wants to play Yakuza 0 on the PC (to keep on topic and also SEGA related lol ) You'll need Steam and to download it. If you got a rubbish BB connection or live in an area, where the speed is terrible (ie rural) then one isn't so keen on downloading games they fancy to play there and then... Yakuza 0 on its own is 50 Gigs and if you're on just 1.5 MB per sec (top speed) thats like a day of downloading, before you can even play the game. At least on the console, you can buy Yakuza 0 in disc form and install the game.Quote:
It's not false advertising. 1.5Mega-Bytes is equal to 12 mega-bits of download speed.
So when you are faced with that, one 'might' look to keep a lot of games already installed on the HD
But its somthing you haven't got to look or worry about on the consoles, hence 'less hassle'. You just know if you buy an XBox One or PS4 game at any time of the system lifespan the game will work, no worries over what OS system ones got, no worries over GFX or Sound drivers no worries at all.Quote:
It's really not that complicated at all. Yeah, if your computer is a potato, you're going to be looking at required specs for all of the high end games
Just buy the game and play it.
Its the same for buying hardware.. Buy a brand new console and in the box... you get all the leads, the pad, the system, the HD needed to play the games as standard ... PC that isn't the case at all, you may not get a joypad as standard (might also need a PC adapter to use XBox pads etc), HDMI leads as standard, do you have USB 2 or USB 3, sometimes not even the OS systems or Hard Drive or even Wi-Fi, Bluetooth has standard... There is no standard, for that with the PC.... That's the difference and why for some PC's are that little more of a hassle.. straight out of the box
I haven't been much of a console gamer since SEGA left the hardware business. I've prefared PCs ever since.
PC gaming is far from a total hassle unless you mean playing the latest AAA title with the settings maxed out on some 4K monitor on a cheap premade budget model PC or playing a really old game that makes use of hardware that a modern system doesn't have anymore.
The hard drive argument is valid both ways, those that don't mind a slower drive to have all their games and media libraries immediately accessible (I fall under this category) or someone wanting only the games they're currently playing installed as long as the storage medium is nice and fast. Shouldn't matter either way. It's storage at the end of the day, it'll always improve slowly over time.
My computer boots under 30 seconds with it's only (WD Blue Label) hard drive and I'm all login to Windows in under 20 more seconds (this is coming from a cold boot). Of course my drive is 7200 RPM with a single platter at 1 TB of storage??? Then again my music library only eats about 60-something GB (mostly FLACs) and slowly grows by a couple of gigabytes every year.
AMD vs NVIDA argument: Don't care too much as long as it's working properly and does what I need it to do for my rig.
AMD vs INTEL argument: As long as my work loads can be done efficiently, than it's good.
Hard Drive vs SSD argument: Hard drives for now.
Optical Disc VS Download: I use both (about equal with music especially), more physical for movies, more digital for newer games.
Local Media Storage vs Streaming: I use both, streaming is mainly for discovering new content to add to my digital collection that I personally like.
We're in a very interesting time for data storage. For most of the 20th century, there was an established paradigm for personal media; such as books, music, and later film etc. A small library at home playable by a mass-produced reproduction device (phonograph for example). Records gave way to CDs and tapes.
Now, we're in an in-between transitional period. Most people that care still cling to plastic discs for storage, while others use the network to access whatever they want on-demand without any ownership at all. Kind of how people listened to music before the advent of recorded sound, one time on-demand performances. Since this new model has only been around for less than 10 years realistically, it's inevitable that some media published this way will disappear forever due to no real preservation. It's interesting how this will evolve.
People used to think TV would make the movie theater obsolete, but both learned to co-exist. Maybe the same thing will happen with streaming and local media.
Just because I've already spoken to him doesn't give you free reign to shit on him in this thread. Dial it back a bit buddy.Quote:
Originally Posted by SegataS