I got i5 3570k and I was thinking about upgrading to Ryzen b

>>62469431
Ryzen is about Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge in terms of IPC, no surprise here.

>>62469508
I'm kinda dissapointed. Wanted finally upgrade my cpu but can't find any good reason for it even after 4 years.

>>62469431
nice, I was thinking about upgrading my i5 3570k but insteadI'll just go buy a 1080ti today to replace my r9 290

I went from 3570k to 1700x and it's been a nice improvement especially in frostbite games

>>62469508
No, it's haswell/broadwell

File: cQr6w9I.jpg (878KB, 3440x1440px) Image search: [Google]

878KB, 3440x1440px

>>62469431
>listening to linus shill tips
>ever

Faggots gonna be faggots, I suppose.

>>62469691
Nice, I bought gtx 1070 year ago. Replaced my 280x.

>>62469741
>>62469691
My computer parts:
cpu's:
>ati 600x, ati 5770, amd r9 280x, gtx 1070
gpu's:
>amd athlon 2600, amd phenom II 1055t, i5 3570k

>>62469431
>hurr durr I only care about games for mature gamers such as myself
Leave /g/. Go away. Fuck off to /v/.
>>62469508
>retarded shilltel doesn't know the difference between clockspeed and IPC
What are they even paying you fuckheads anymore? Shekels getting pretty tight over there.

>>62469662
Ryzen is for people who is fine with ~SB/IB single core performance while needing more cores at an affordable price.
>>62469719
Haswell is pretty close to IB/SB, the difference is minute.
>>62469825
>he thinks clock speed is everything

>>62469867
What do I need to do to benefit from extra cores? I have 4 now.

File: 5787722.png (23KB, 500x459px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x459px

>>62469825
>Your use case upsets me!

>>62469897
Video editing and stuff like that. No reason to upgrade from even Sandy Bridge if you only play games. A 1070 runs perfectly fine on a 2600K.

>>62469508
Why are Intel shills so ignorant about what IPC actually means?

>>62469431
Linus is riding the cuck truck all the way to Intel HQ. Even the latest i5 isn't worth it over Ryzen. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-ryzen-5-1600-1600x-vs-core-i5-7500k-review

went from 3570K to a 1700. Can do way more at the same time, gaming is faster too. :)

>>62469976
From Wikipedia:"...the average instructions executed for each clock cycle". Based on that, I am correct. You have nothing to stand by your claims, and is probably the samefag from >>62469825.

>>62469431
>16GB DDR3-2400
Practically no PC from that era actually runs that kind of RAM. Typical systems run much slower RAM speeds, which gives a much worse experience in current games.

Also notice how he deliberately choses the lowest clocked Ryzen chips and doesn't even overclock anything.

File: ryzencpuz.png (16KB, 396x396px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 396x396px

>>62470534
Ryzen matches Devil's Canyon in single threaded performance clock for clock though.

>>62470710
>cpu-z 1.8
>actually using the version where they "fixed" ryzen scores

>>62469897
Everything benefits from extra cores, even games that don't use them, as background applications won't fuck with your game nearly as much, most benchmarks are taken on fresh systems and fresh reboots, not day 73 with a program in the background eating 6% of the cpu for 48 hours.

some people have no issue with rebooting and starting a game to get the most, I do.

lets also make clear the difference is small. there was a linus video about cores and gaming back with farcry 3 or 4 as an example where if you had quadcore, you were stuttering, 6 core took it away almost entirely, and 8 cores killed it. This was more showing off .1% lows, as the average fps went down from quad to 8 core, but 8 cores was FAR more playable. having played recently killing floor 2 on my ryzen and my brothers 4790k at 4.8 yea, the difference is fucking astounding how much better my 8 core at stock feels to his oc quad core because there is no stuttering there are no small hiccups.

Just keep in mind, benchmarks don't tell the whole story because they can't, they can only synthetically load a cpu to try to simulate a several day uptime or normal use load

>>62469976
simple.

intel could put out a cpu that does 100 things per cycle but its only 300mhz and no oc
or they could put out a cpu that does 1 thing per cycle but it hits 4.0 and can go further

which one is faster?

you ARE NOT ABLE TO DISCOUNT CLOCK SPEED FROM IPC because the resulting performance is reliant on both.

>>62469691
I wouldn't bother
amd put out vega and its hampered by drivers at the moment, along with nvidia seriously considering a price drop of the 1070 and putting out a 1070ti.

that said, gpus are not viable till after october when miners have to either switch to a 1080ti or titans as the ram is to small on anything lower.

>>62469731
where is anything on the charts wrong?

>>62470574
and then he overclocked everything.

>>62469431
drink bleach and die

>Muh linus sex tips
https://youtu.be/t8K2yc11eC4
r5 1600 is only 5% slow on average behind the 7700k at 1080p in muh gaymes and only 2% slower in 1440p. While being $120 cheaper.
Intel btfo.

File: 21270911_711651639034304_748700508504152267_n.jpg (14KB, 565x565px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 565x565px

I had 3570k and upgrade to 1700x. I had no idea it was bottlenecking my 1060.

I was looking into Ryzen performance as well due to a current campaign by AMD where you get a R7 1800X for 400€ instead of the usual 560€ through selected vendors but turns out that the 1800X performance for high-fps gaming (120Hz+) is so far behind Intels processors, particularly the 7700K, to a point where the entire Ryzen lineup is not an option anymore.
The only people to benefit from Ryzen are ones who either cap fps at 60 or run a lot of CPU intense stuff next to the games, such as encoding tasks when streaming or recording. The latter can be done via GPUs though - the same goes for most computationally intense workstation tasks. Come to think of it, I struggle to come up with a gaming related scenario in which Ryzen has an advantage.

It's the same issue as AMDs last generation processors had - having more cores but them being so slow or inefficient compared to Intel that all the software on the market runs worse on AMD.

>>62471805
you fucking brain dead the single core performance of ryzen isnt as bad as your jewish lies make it sound

>>62471805
5ml of jewcum has been deposited between your heatspreader

>>62471842
>>62471846
Except that every non-synthetic gaming benchmark shows better performance on the various Intel CPUs before the first AMD one becomes relevant.
If your only argument is a red herring, why even post?

>>62471884
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RMbYe4X2LI

kys

>>62471925
If you watch the video you will actually notice that the Intel CPU performs better. That's before considering the lower clocking RAM they use in that comparison.
By the way, a "theoretical advantage" is none at all if there's no software to make use of the additional cores - which current games simply do not do.
You can be contrarian all you want, AMD just has nothing to offer when it comes to current real-world applications.

File: 2600k-revisit-mll.png (87KB, 806x681px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 806x681px

>>62469431
>i5

Enjoy your stutter.

>>62471246
>4 fps difference with intensive shit in the background
>Tested on a g4560

>>62471449
>GTX 1080

File: Untitled.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>62471980
deluded

>>62472006
yea, even synthetic benchmarks show how shit dual cores are

File: 1415933765136.jpg (36KB, 470x345px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 470x345px

>>62472002
>4790k still stronk

>>62472017
Now look at all the previous games, which show the opposite.
Cysis 3 is the only game on the market which scales exceptionally well with additional cores - and it's not relevant to the gaming market as it's nearly 5 years old and isn't played by anyone.

>>62469431
if you're not retarded, then you realize that intel is still top dog for gaming. for production workloads, intel is slightly ahead of amd, however amd processors offer considerably greater performance per dollar
>>62469731
i watched his videos to show me how to assemble my computer. was pretty helpful

File: stutterlake2.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>62472080
deluded

>>62472110
This is a flawed comparison in itself as the i5 7600K is a 4-core without HT/SMT while the Ryzen 5 1600 series has SMT. You'd have to compare the Intel 7700K with the Ryzen 1600 series but if you want to go by cost by all means compare the 7700K to the 1700X. In either case the 7700K pulls ahead. That's the real issue at hand you fail to grasp and your badly conceived comparisons of unrelated hardware are not helping to make any point here.

File: goal-posts-moving.jpg (151KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 640x426px

>>62472203
lmao

File: crop.jpg (436KB, 1704x964px) Image search: [Google]

436KB, 1704x964px

>>62472224
I didn't, you tried to - a few times and I even called you out for it.
By the way:
deluded [spoiler]:^)[/spoiler]

File: 1505344124336.jpg (17KB, 316x315px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 316x315px

>>62472261
>the entire Ryzen lineup is not an option anymore.
>The only people to benefit from Ryzen are ones who either cap fps at 60 or run a lot of CPU intense stuff next to the games, such as encoding tasks when streaming or recording.
>Except that every non-synthetic gaming benchmark shows better performance on the various Intel CPUs before the first AMD one becomes relevant.
>If you watch the video you will actually notice that the Intel CPU performs better.
>By the way, a "theoretical advantage" is none at all if there's no software to make use of the additional cores - which current games simply do not do.
>Now look at all the previous games, which show the opposite.
>Cysis 3 is the only game on the market which scales exceptionally well with additional cores
>This is a flawed comparison in itself as the i5 7600K is a 4-core without HT/SMT while the Ryzen 5 1600 series has SMT.

lmao

>>62469431
wait for zen2.
amd went too conservative with the lpp.
but it does save power and intel is the new housefire.

>>62472407
AMD designed Zen from the ground up as a server chip, as far as I can tell. They wanted to maximise IPC and minimise power draw. I don't think we'd be seeing 32 core EPYC processors if they had designed the chip to clock high.

>>62471346
vega is obviously a blunder and from the first listings of vega56 I can get a 1080ti for an extra $100.

>>62472407
Just Wait (tm)

File: oh my god.jpg (488KB, 1921x1080px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 1921x1080px

HOW EMBARRASSING

how will AMDfags ever recover from this?

>>62472610
>255 fps

UNPLAYABLE!!! AMDRONES BTFO!!!

>>62472610
I hate that TF2 doesnt get this kind of performance.

>>62469431
Lots of salt in thread.

Anyway if Linus can make 50% of his videos like this instead of the "HOW MANY RGB CAN I CRAM UP MY ASS IN OMG $$1!$ BIULD" kind, might subscribe.

>>62469431
>>>/v/

File: hidelinus.png (45KB, 1306x892px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 1306x892px

Add stuff as you wish, this image is under GPL.

>>62472858

Whether or not it's "playable" isn't the point AMDumbass, its to show relative CPU performance.

Just upgrade
Its worth it

>>62469897
4 cores? what do you need 2 cores for?

>>62473439
good single core goyim, good

File: 1501099942960.png (20KB, 493x280px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 493x280px

>>62469508

>>62472017
>those frametimes
lel

>>62472080
Except it's a fine representation of what quite a few other games released in 2016 and 2017 have been moving toward, and what gaming will move toward in the future.

>>62472610
Is there a point to anything over 240 though?

>>62472080
>Cysis 3 is the only game on the market which scales exceptionally well with additional cores
Arma3, DayZ, PUBG, GTA5, any 4x and any RTS would disagree.

>>62473560
these are some terrible examples

File: 1305995619781.png (40KB, 509x572px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 509x572px

>>62473586
>One of the most played multiplayer games on the market is a terrible example.

>>62473605
not what I said
I don't actually mind that one as an example, even if it's a shit memegame

>>62473100
>actually replying

File: 14623910195620.jpg (102KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1280x720px

>>62469508
kek
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj5MtsSZJIk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8K2yc11eC4

but then again brasilians dont have any form of physics to work with so its natural

>>62473100
relative cpu perfomance on a engine of 2004
might as well use unreal engine 2 games also

>>62472547
if you don't think a driver update enabling the gpu to go from 4 to 17 primitives will do anything or happen, go for it, but come october the gpus are going back to around msrp, i would honestly wait till then regardless

>>62471246
this.

>>62472006
occasional stutters barely impact average fps.

>>62474609
you can take 80fps that has a small stutter every now and then, ill gladly take 70fps that never stutters.

File: 1502894442693.png (174KB, 696x678px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 696x678px

>>62471246
So much this

>>62472967
You and me. It's sad that people are pissed off over the lack of content instead of a lack of performance updates.

>>62473100
In a dead engine from 2003? wow seems quite relevant to me

>>62470710
>cpu-z
Might as well use pissmark at this point.

>>62469431
You only buy intel if you think stutters don't matter.

>>62473560
Arma3 uses only one core. i3 even beats i5

>>62474198
>not using wolfenstein 3D as benchmark

>>62469867
>>62469508
>>62469431
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0P8CxpI98w

There are many videos out there.

This is 3570K vs 6700K vs R7 1700

Ivy lags behind Ryzen, lags even harder behind skylake. The difference between 1600/1700 is minuscle in most games, so should be same.

>>62471246
>Everything benefits from extra cores, even games that don't use them, as background applications won't fuck with your game nearly as much, most benchmarks are taken on fresh systems and fresh reboots, not day 73 with a program in the background eating 6% of the cpu for 48 hours.
Yeah I didn't think about this, thanks.

>>62471346
gtx 1070ti sounds retarded when there is already gtx 1080

>>62472002
Maybe I will just buy 3770k for cheap then I don't need to change motherboard and ram.

>>62475812
unless you did actual design work or something, why would anyone on the planet change their 6700k right now?

Easily gonna get 10 years life out of that. By which point you get a whole new lineup to pick from

>>62475812
I think I should just go for i7 3770k upgrade would be only like 40€.

>>62476451
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbGT-u4i3EY

>>62476402
Possibly.

>>62476481
Yeah I think I'm just going for 3570k->3770k swap.

>>62469431
>>62472407
> wait for zen2

Pretty much this.

I have a 4670K and I don't see much point right now to upgrade.

What I wonder about: What are the chances at the time around Zen2 comes out that the new AMD motherboards are going to have new features the current boards with the same socket don't have?

>>62469431
the problem with i5 like 3570k isnt gaming performance, its when you have 100tabs open, torrenting something, listening/watching movie/stream/music and gaming at the same time on other monitor.

Im using 3570k myself, and i need to close all the shit down, if i want to play without random lagspikes/etc.

So yes, upgrading to ryzen isnt really true performance boost, its more of comfortability boost. Having 6-8cores is amazing these days for home user. Sadly dont have extra money to upgrade right now.

>>62476699
>its when you have 100tabs open, torrenting something, listening/watching movie/stream/music and gaming at the same time on other monitor.
None of that really uses that much CPU

>>62476732
bullshit, chrome with twitch and other shit open can spike to up 50% of my 3570k @4.5ghz, fireshit is better in that it will crash before spiking to 50%

File: desktop phenom logo update copy.jpg (169KB, 894x588px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 894x588px

Hehe, Phenom II FTW! Why the fuck would I upgrade when the only games I play are older titles from 1997- 2004? Video encoding/photo editing? Handles those tasks fine. 1080P video streaming from youtube/media server? Playback is smooth as a baby's ass. I think that covers it all.

>>62476860
Does the I5 3570k just suck at multitasking ?
Reason why it does ?

>>62476648
Probably better support for faster RAM would be included by zen2, might be able to take advantage of 4.5Ghz of ram speed, this would indeed be a boon for AMD Zen platform

File: chrome_2017-09-17_20-03-18.png (43KB, 981x328px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 981x328px

>>62476860
on my i5 3570k at 4.1ghz I got twitch and a few tabs open and cpu usage is at 3%

>>62477018
that's why I said it can spike up to 50%, it ofc doesn't always run at that, try to use twitch at 1080p 60fps for a while and you will see it at some point
>>62476943
imho tasks are getting heavier and it doesn't always is able to keep up

>>62477018
i have around 50 tabs open in waterfox + stream + deluge = around 15-20% usage, if i open a game right now and cpu usage goes over something like 70%, i would def feel slow down or spikes.

>>62476648
there wont be much new features, but new mobos and cpus should support higher frequencies. Thats basically the point of zen 2 high ghz and better ipc.

>>62477191
>waterfox
firefox is a resource hog compared to chrome
>50 tabs
autism
>>>62477018
>1080p 60fps
you believe you then

>>62477279
firefox uses less ram and more cpu. Also im using waterfox instead of firefox, since waterfox just doesnt crash at all, unlike firefox, which would crash for me daily.

>>62477319
I tried nightly and found it comfy but I went back to chrome because it was so bloated

File: mfw.jpg (57KB, 421x436px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 421x436px

>>62469431

Ryzen is good for benchmarks and applying video filters

Otherwise AMD is 6 years behind Intel for games

File: 1501250462016.png (32KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x600px

>>62477445

>>62477445
>>62477563
You don't need to be upset.

>>62469662
There's barely anything new that makes it worth upgrading 3570k. Especially not with the 3570k being OC'able out of the ass.
Maybe next generation, but not current ones.

And here I am still using the first gen i7
There's literally no reason to change anything

>>62478758
I was thinking about just upgrading to 3770k.

Ryzen to 3570k would be an upgrade for a gamer

>games
go back to /v/ faggot

>>62479059

look at the 2600/2700k's aswell.

i picked up a "untested/for parts" 2700k for £40 and sold my 3570k for £70.

>>62480117
Why would I look for t hem when I have motherboard ready for 3770k?

>>62469431
>gaymes
Human trash belongs to >>>/v/
Please, remove yourself from here.

File: Ryzen7_7700k_1080ti.png (2MB, 1920x1440px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1440px

>>62477445

>>62482487

Let me pre-empt the inevitable reply - please delete the following as needed;

>those games are all gpu bound
>[GAME] runs like shit on everything
>[GAME] runs on a fucking toaster so the result is meaningless
>Nobody plays [GAME] so its worthless to benchmark it
>[GAME] has already been patched to nerf Intel because AMD sponsored it
>These results don't count because they don't agree with what PurePC.pl got when testing

>>62482487
>>62483066
>Being this mad over inferior Ryzen performance that you resurrect a dead thread, twice.

>>62483201
>dead thread

You sure about that?

>>62469431
I have an i5 2400 stock. Still no reason to upgrade.

>>62482487
>8 cores 16 threads
>4 cores 8 threads
>performance ~same

what did he mean by this?

>>62483659

That the 16 thread chip is basically idling while the 8 thread one is running flatout.

>>62483659
>>8 cores 16 threads
wow

>>62472110
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tfTZjugDeg

>>62483877
>AdoredTV

considering upgrading my 2500k to a 2600k, just oc the shit to 4.5ghz and im good for a while again.

I dont render shit, i stream using GPU encoder..

>>62483799
why is performance the same, can ryzen not utilize all cores fully like the construction chips?
>>62483801
2cryptic5me

>>62484112

>why is performance the same, can ryzen not utilize all cores fully like the construction chips?

The games simply aren't addressing the available resources. The opposite happens when you run something like (say) cinebench or blender - it CAN actually use as many threads as you have available and in such workloads a a 1700x annihilates a 7700k.

Why i7 3770k is still so expensive? You can sell i5 3570k like for 80-90€ and i7 3770k for 170-180€.

>>62469431
? are you retarded? ryzen basically makes every intel cpu obsolete except for the pentium g4560 and the 7700k. why the fuck would you get a i5 on a completely dead platform when you could get a brand new one which performs only a tiny bit worse than the 7700k and costs almost half as much. not sure if bait or not.

>>62484416
What? i5 3570k was released 4 years ago.

>>62484481
AMD fans are so zealous they don't even bither reading posts any more, at this point they just see "Intel" and start frothing at the mouth. It's pretty much impossible to discuss Intel on this board without the thread being spammed with pics of the CEO and that retarded monkey meme, /g/ is worse than /v/.

File: lol.png (1MB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x1000px

>>62484564

>>62484570
Thank you for proving my point.

File: 1495358050273_0.png (495KB, 1070x601px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 1070x601px

>>62484591

>>62477151
>twitch at 1080p 60fps
Look into Streamlink Twitch GUI plus mpv or VLC. I use when I'm gaming and I notice barely any performance impact, but I'm mainly playing TF2. (which is still sensitive to CPU usage because it's poorly optimized)
Also what games are you playing and what's your GPU?
Finally I've heard (from a video posted here) that faster RAM can have a decent impact.

File: Really.jpg (180KB, 897x698px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 897x698px

>>62475707
Obviously.

>AMDrones keep posting AMD Unboxed benchmarks
(lol

>>62469431
I went from 3570K at 4.4ghz to ryzen 1700 at 3.6ghz and the single threaded performance is near double in some cases, and forget about fucking multi threading.

>>62485910
Lying aint nice.

>>62471552
Still running that CPU and a 770 here. Works for me still.

>>62486197
>>>62485910
>Lying aint nice.
Nobody is lying. Autist

>>62486809
cpu choking because of heavy background tasks isn't the same as doube IPC retard

File: speccit.png (87KB, 814x576px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 814x576px

>>62472062
mein negger

>>62486809
Not that guy, but what youre saying is that if we gimp ryzen and take away the things that make it better and take it to be at the same range as that intel chip, intel is better? Well no shit? I can do the same with the fx 8350 and that was a shitty cpu.

>>62486996
No one's denying Ryzen is better at multitasking autist, but saying Ryzen is double the single thread performance of Ivy Bridge is factually incorrect. It's generally agreed Ryzen is around Haswell/Broadwell levels clock for clock, and he even admitted his i5 was clocked higher.

>>62486996
Meant for
>>62486850

>>62487034
Well I get that. I wasnt saying otherwise. Realistically speaking though, why is single or dual core preformance so relevant now days? Intel shills push that so much but I don't get it. The difference between 3.0ghz and 4.0ghz altho significant in benchmarks I can't tell any reason to really care about it. Is there any real work usage for 1ghz more that really impacts or gives me a good reason to consider using less cores?

>>62476862
Same, i have an 1100T and despite slurping alot of power it still works pretty decent.i might upgrade when ddr5 ram comes out in 2019-2020

>>62487235
>ddr5 ram comes out in 2019-2020

Not going to happen.

File: 1470152167113.png (83KB, 328x408px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 328x408px

ITT

>>62469431
>i5 3570k
i have this chip in my main rig. i see no reason to upgrade at this time.

File: 15056979584080.png (2MB, 1920x1170px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1170px

>>62469431
>upgrading to AMD bullshit
>2017
Lol.

File: 15056979584271.jpg (666KB, 3008x2000px) Image search: [Google]

666KB, 3008x2000px

>>62487866
Eighteen cores of steel for 600 bucks.
And no idiotic problems with "fuck that shit fapric" bus.

File: 1497568194721.png (307KB, 915x678px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 915x678px

>>62487866
>>62487888

>>62470499
serving up moar monkey stew for u

>>62472017
>great cherrypicked example from the wide-faced AMD shill channel
if you can scrape together another 200 pesos you two can join the civilized world with a real CPU

>>62469431
I moved from a E3 Xeon to an R7
lost 3 FPS in Cenebench R15

>>62484348f y
its the final form 1155 cpu. A lot of people are still holding onto that platform. If you dont plan on a big oc. 3770 non k can be clocked +4 to max turbo. you will end up at 4ghz all cores, 4.2ghz 2 cores or less. If you dont want to delid, a 2600-2700k will be better as it is soldered. If you dont plan on overclocking, check out xeon 1230<, v2 is ivy.

File: 1502055422354.png (350KB, 672x794px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 672x794px

>>62488919

>>62469431
i5 2400 16gb ddr3 gtx1050ti here
playing all new games on high 1080 some on ultra
unless you need 2x/3x MOAR COARS for non gaming stuff, then sure

>>62477445
>AMD is 6 years behind Intel for games
So like.....10% performance difference for half the price?

Even if that was true it's still hilariously shitty on Intel's part. That's what happens when you release Skylake again for 3 years in a row.

>>62490148
Ebin argument shillfag. How about providing some unbiased benchmarks?

File: 1494269396244.png (178KB, 956x842px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 956x842px

>>62490244
Not as easy as it sounds.

>>62469731
I watch him for the crazy shit he does with sponsor money and parts, like that setup with one PC wirelessly powering 8 remote gaming stations.

>>62485694
That option is for shits and gigs.

File: 1502488836418.jpg (24KB, 267x297px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 267x297px

>>62490244