speccy thread expensive useless card edition

File: Speccy 9-26-16.jpg (260KB, 808x861px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 808x861px

>>57983553
>expensive useless card edition
it's a single slot card that can output to 9x1920x1200 displays at once.


How exactly is that expensive OR useless? It's a niche product sure, but for the purpose it serves $1700 is a perfectly reasonable price tag.

>>57983582
but I can't game with it at work

File: Screenshot_20161213-201734.png (478KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

478KB, 1080x1920px

>Where's Your 1080 now?

>>57983593
sucks for you, but that's not what the card was designed or built for. Using a GPU that is purpose built for a specific task and asking it to do something else isn't exactly going to go over well.

At the end of the day, it's a great GPU, just not what you want.

>>57983582
/thread

>>57983582
>5K by 4K
Doesn't the Mac or surface accomplish this with laptop gaymen gpus?

>>57983678
on a single panel sure.

No laptop has the ability to drive 9 displays however.


Also, iMac 5k is 5120x2880 for 14,745,600 pixels
The Surface Studio is 4500x3000 for 13,500,000 pixels

This GPU can theoretically output 5760*3600 for 20,736,000.

That's 5 million pixels more than the 5k imac.

>>57983641
Yeah, I'm building a 3x3 TV wall for work. Not for gayming, but I get upset that it can't game a shit Minecraft-like game.

>>57983744
But what would make this gpu different from say the 1080's gpu with 9 mini-HDMI ports tacked on to the board by the reseller?
I mean holding up 9 screens of desktop isn't impressive, I just want to know where this price comes from if a gpu half the cost has the same horsepower?

File: AMD-Radeon-HD-5870-EYEFINITY-EDITION-360W.png (122KB, 360x252px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 360x252px

>>57983582
Why does Matrox even still exist?
AMD had cards that supported 6 displays many years ago (HD5000 series). There's also models of Nvidia cards that can drive 6 displays, some of them as low-end as a 950.
If a low-end card can run 6 displays, it can't be that hard to make it 9 or even double it to 12.

Pic related, an antique gaymen card that can run 6 screens.

>>57983776
>tacked on to the board by the reseller?
There is more that goes into an output besides the physical port, there needs to be the correct number TMDS transmitters for digital connections such as HDMI or Displayport. For older VGA outputs you just needed a RAMDAC for each output.

Further, the GPU itself has to be designed to output to certain TMDS, all Nvidia consumer GPUs top out at 4 displays, AMD cards can go up to 6.

More than that requires a custom GPU core like the OP, or multiple GPUs.

>>57983873
see
>>57983888


AMD and Nvidia could make consumer level GPUs that can output to that many displays, but they'd be retarded to do that.

The large video wall market isn't a HUGE money maker, but when your primary market is to large corporations and other businesses, there is no reason to bring those features down to the consumer cards since the corporate IT guy has plenty in his budget for the "real" video wall GPUs which cost $1000+ like OPs.

The driver support and multi-display management tools generally provided are also MUCH better than consumer level garbage.

>>57983888
But those are all board restrictions right? Not the gpu itself?
I can run 9 seperate desktop windows in 5k easily on a $200 card, it can't just literally be the extra connections that add $1000 to the price?

>>57983920
>Not the gpu itself?
No it's the GPU itself, it needs to have physical connections to these outputs, and AMD and Nvidia currently don't make their consumer GPUs with more than ~6 connections(again, depends on AMD or Nvidia)

This is why looking pretty much anywhere online you'll see people asking why their GTX 1080 can't output to 5 displays even though it has 5 outputs.

File: speccy2.png (200KB, 1838x967px)

200KB, 1838x967px

posting just because i want to point out how cold my air cooled skylake is running take that water cooled memests

>>57983972
>he thinks idle temps mean anything

kek

I could open my window and bring my idle temps down under 15c

File: image.jpg (67KB, 670x635px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 670x635px

This is after some hot and heavy gaymen
Do I buy something else now or what?

>>57983993
i'll prime95 heat test it with the current build just because i'm bored... gimme a sec

>>57984006
You're set for now, upgrade peripherals if you need to. Speakers, headphones, mouse, keyboard, etc.

Can't really see any upgrade that would be viable for you, the only things you can do are stupid, like replacing the i5 with an i7 or something equally a waste of money.

>>57984020
for actual scientific value we need to know the ambient air temp.

if your ambient air temp is 5c, it really doesn't matter what cooler you have running, even a stock heatsink would give you good temps.

File: image.jpg (21KB, 435x300px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 435x300px

>>57984026
I have good monitor speakers, just got a G502 mouse, just got a mixer/DAC and already have headphones
The only thing I haven't upgraded is my $15 wireless keyboard because I heard mechanical keyboards were the biggest meme of all and should be saved for last
I know my computers good now but I still want to buy things

File: heat.png (180KB, 1507x744px)

180KB, 1507x744px

>>57983993

ambient room temp is 70

>>57984081
>biggest meme of all
Lol, i mean they're pricey because the mechanical switch isn't exactly super cheap to make, and if you're spending that much on the switch itself, most manufacturers spend decent money on the keycaps and the chassis as well.

So its not like you're buying garbage that is marked up for no reason.


Also, anyone who has typed on an older keyboard, such as an old IBM, or if you've ever used an older cash register with those clacky keys, you should already know what a mechanical switch feels like.

Consumer mechanical keyboards are generally less clacky than cash registers or the older IBMs however. Cherry MX blues will give you a clack (but not SUPER loud), cherry MX reds will only clack when you bottom out, there is no clack when it actuates.


Lots of variables and i'd recommend checking out mechanical keyboard general thread for more information. There are meme mechanical keyboards, and there are solid normal mechanical keyboards.

File: kykt.jpg (54KB, 417x402px)

54KB, 417x402px

:^(

>>57984099
>90c+ across the cores

anon...that's terrible.

My 5820k at 4.4GHz doesn't even break 80c under load and it has 2 more cores than your 6700k.

>>57984130
that's prime95 heat torture test

>>57984136
I can clearly see what it is.

>>57984140
then bust it out on yours with the latest build

>>57983607
Wait, those new WX cards are that cheap?
Fuck, time to sell the w7000's

>>57984116
Basically the only mechanical keyboard I would consider is the corsair K65 if its still $50, because it is $50
I don't type a lot, most of my heavy keyboard use is basic shortcuts and stuff so I use them more as buttons than as keys, but a little more fluid motion can't hurt

File: me.png (27KB, 476x353px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 476x353px

I don't understand this edition thing.
Are normal cards not allowed or something?

File: 2016-12-13 15_03_14-CPUID HWMonitor.png (28KB, 534x688px)

28KB, 534x688px

>>57984153
Max I hit was 85c on two of the cores. And it was peaking there, steady at basically 78-80c.

>>57984185
I think they have a sale right now for the K65 for like $60.

File: screen.png (444KB, 1920x1080px)

444KB, 1920x1080px

>>57984269
here's a more realistic under load temp result

>>57984099

140W for 4.2ghz nigger that's retarded.

File: speccynew.png (39KB, 710x565px)

39KB, 710x565px

>>57983553
Does a half year oold M.2 NVMe card count as expensive and useless?

I think so

>>57984359
it's not a laptop why do i give a fuck

>>57984380

Cause your tdp is setup for a higher overclock. You don't need that for 4.2ghz. Efficiency.

>>57984380
He's saying your voltage is shit for how low clocked it is, hence the high power draw, and probably why your temps are garbage.

>>57984398
if i sell this cpu one day, they can overclock it, i don't fucking care about overclocking

>>57984408
see >>57984326

>>57984398
That's power consumption, not TDP. 140W is high, though. Probably because of his excessive core voltage.

>>57984411

You're killing my grandchildren with your consumerism and lack of awareness about sustainability.

File: temp.png (45KB, 782x486px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 782x486px

Meh, getting old i know.

>>57984430
>1.31V for 4.2GHz
You suck at this. Even my absolute trash heap 3570k will do 4.6GHz at that vcore.

>>57984430
i've got you senpai, i was waiting for it to run as long as yours had, I can post it now if you just want to see it before then though.

Temps are a solid 3-5c under yours however.

>>57984457
i don't care

>>57984467
it's stock you autist

>>57984487

Stick to consoles

>>57984487
100% unlikely.

>>57984497
i don't play games so there's no need

>>57984508
aside from the heatsink (enzotech extreme-x rev a w/ 3000rpm noctua pwm fan) it's stock

>>57984099
>running prime95 above 26.6 on skylake and haswell
produces extremely unrealistic power draw and temperatures
retard

>>57984536
which is why i did it, to showcase how great the fucking enzotech extreme-x rev a heatsink is, so beg them to make them again

>>57984532
100% unlikely. No way is Intel shipping processors that are consuming 140W of power, hitting 90C with an aftermarket heatsink, and needing over 1.3V just for stock clocks.

>>57984567
they shipped me one

File: 2016-12-13 15_22_06-.png (657KB, 1909x1435px) Image search: [Google]

657KB, 1909x1435px

>>57984487
I highly doubt that.

My 5820k from a generation before your 6700k runs at 4.3GHz (100Mhz above yours) at 1.274v


>>57984326
>4 core 8 threads at 4.2GHz
>75, 75, 68, and 72c
>1.3v

Vs my 5820k
>6 core 12 threads at 4.3GHz
>72, 66, 75, 73, 71, 65c
>1.274v


Since I have two more cores, AND I have 100Mhz clock speed bump, I SHOULD be 5c+ hotter than you.


Your temps are crap for a quad core.

>>57984575
Send it back, then, how can you even accept that shit?

>>57984584
because i'm not an autist

>>57984583
What is the stock VID?

>>57984601
my 5820k was around 1.19v stock, but stock for a 5820k is 3.3GHz. mine is at 4.3GHz.

>>57984613
>around 1.19v stock
Though now that I think about it, it might have been even lower and 1.19v is where i started my OCing trial & error...


Can't remember to be honest.

>>57984553
no its actually bad you shouldnt be running anything higher than 26.6 since that doesnt use avx 2 instructions. If you read the intel temperature guide this is the real way to test real world load temps

File: Untitled.png (598KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

598KB, 1920x1080px

>>57984536

You niggers just need to accept Intel defaults are the best and your overclocks are placebo

>>57984695
my 5820k stock is 3.3GHz, but it can VERY easily hit 4.2GHz, and mine can even hit 4.7GHz if I decide to play fast and loose with the voltage (4.7GHz takes around 1.36v)

I would hardly call my 4.3GHz OC a full 1GHz over stock, insignificant.


Intel's stock clocks on the 5820k are retardedly low.

File: muh specs.png (37KB, 696x525px)

37KB, 696x525px

Gonna upgrade from this GTX 950 to at least a Radeon RX 470, if not a 480 (the GTX is a holdover from my old Athlon X4 build).

>>57984126
yurofag detected

File: speccorum.png (41KB, 797x605px)

41KB, 797x605px

ha, i have two expensive useless cards

>>57984668
it's good it didn't hit 100c so damage done

whoops, oh well i can buy another one if it shits itself

>>57984777
TJMax is when throttling starts, it's not where damage occurs.

>>57984777
100c isn't the "damage" point of a CPU, with the newer intel CPUs it is recommended they stay under 80c at full load, even if you're doing a major OC (4.5GHz+), it shouldnt go over ~85c under load.

Anything over 90c is considered unsafe for any newer generation intel CPUs.

>>57984832
Intel says 105° is where a 6600k starts damaging

>>57984833
>with the newer intel CPUs it is recommended they stay under 80c at full load
By Intel? Because I've never seen them state this.

>>57984833
i doubt it even did anything

>>57984846

They have to say that because laptop manufactures skimp on cooling and need facts and figures to say their 100c nominal loads are safe. Macbook users throw them away every generation anyway.

File: speccy 4930K.png (2MB, 1920x1080px)

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>57983553

File: aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.png (642KB, 1920x1080px)

642KB, 1920x1080px

memes really

>>57985626
activate windows you blazing faggot

File: speccy_dec16.png (40KB, 710x549px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 710x549px

Waiting for Vega so it can be even more useless.

>>57986934
>2016
>haswell

>>57983593

You have an i3 too. Not sure what kind of gaming you'd be doing even with a non-Matrox GPU.

File: specs.png (56KB, 795x666px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 795x666px

>>57983553

>>57986947
Is Skylake-X a thing yet? No, it is not.

>>57986682
what advantages would it have to activate windows?

File: Shit.png (48KB, 660x528px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 660x528px

Currently doing a full upgrade to my computer to something that's not shit, would I be able to get anything out of this if i sold it?

File: speccy.jpg (58KB, 807x569px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 807x569px

ultra small form factor build
low profile 2gb gddr5
considering buying an i3 what do yall think

>>57987065
the i5 is the only thing worth anything there

>>57987065
Wait two more years and then upgrade. That processor is good enought for two years, then you can make a full upgrade. Maybe your SSDs will die in two years and you will make a real future maximum upgrade.

File: pc.png (109KB, 1153x794px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1153x794px

>>57987190
Damn, i guess i could setup it as a steam machine for my living room.
>>57987440
Thanks but i'd rather just upgrade now, instead of putting myself in an endless cycle of "just wait till next year". I can barely run R6S and it constantly stutters, battlefield runs at medium -low settings at around 45 fps (dips down to 10-20 in chaotic fights). I was given these parts and built the computer myself but I wanted to truly pick and build my next machine that would last a while and go through overclocking and water cooling. I read that the z87 doesn't allow for really any kind of overclocking so i went with a board that does which means my current cpu wont work with it. in turns meaning i start from scratch anyways and a whole new build, so i was like fuck it i don't wanna "get by" for the next few years I want to be great for them.

This is what im thinking of right now, though i would like to hear some suggestions if possible.

>>57986947
It's haswell-E you dip

File: 1435579608241.jpg (7KB, 249x249px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 249x249px

>>57988175

>paying for windows 10

>>57988175
if you are gonna pay for a windows key, at least be smart about and do it on reddit for like $35.

or ebay.

Just dont pay full price

>>57988837
Play Asia sells them for $25

>>57987043
Broadwell-E is a thing.

File: speccy.png (81KB, 693x552px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 693x552px

>>57988894
I only spent $200 dollars on this

>>57989006
yeah a 5% IPC improvement thing for $150+ more. Oh and they can't OC to as high a clockspeed generally so the 5% IPC bump gets mostly negated.