Jump to content
Hero

Retired

Citizen
  • Content Count

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

About Retired

  • Birthday 01/01/1901

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

845 profile views
Completed Training
No Training Completed
  1. I played EVE Online for twelve years or so, fun in battles large and small. As mercenaries, we basically ran around executing contracts for folks willing to pay for control of star systems and/or system resources. The video below is a random example and told from our opponents comms' and perspective, involving about three hundred pilots total on both sides. Let's just say TeamSpeak was difficult to keep in order from time to time with that many folks on. Believe it or not this was one of the smaller engagements for system control we experienced. Always outnumbered, many of our strategies focused on single decisive engagements to break the will of our opponents to fight. Before this battle, we were able to collect considerable intel on our adversaries and feigned weakness so they would commit all the remaining forces they had available to defend the system we were attacking. Once they put all chips on the table, we moved in two heavy groups from multiple directions on the entry wormhole (where the video link begins). Once convinced they could bring no other ships to the field, we destroyed the hostile logistics (guardians) and just started causing massive financial loss until they retreated. They had a spy listening in on our comms' (par for the course in eve), so they did eventually call my ship on the field primary target (Max) hearing me directing the fleet and target calling. We were listening to them as well, so our logistics was ready to dedicate some ships to keep me alive. It is doubtful we will see this many ships on the field in Star Citizen, but I do hope electronic warfare and other features will be in place to encourage strategic/tactical play and not just make it about who has more guns in a fight. We shall see!
  2. Later I realized my 9900k heat issues were strictly voltage regular module (VRM) related, and the blowup I had was actually caused by a faulty component (although I blamed myself for walking away while on Prime95, it would have happened regardless). I purchased an Aorus Gaming Master with a more robust VRM for the 9900k, and that resolved my problem. I still kept the Aorus Gaming 7 with the 8700k and am now using it as my streaming rig over the network via OBS/NDI. The 9900k is running a custom loop at 5.2 Ghz on all eight cores, the 8700k is running at 5.0 Ghz on six both with low thermals. I could push them further, I just do not see any real difference on benchmarking/gaming on either rig. I'm running two extreme overclocked 1080tis on the 9900k so the only thing that could pass these benchmarks on the GPU side are two 2080tis and I just do not feel that is reasonable considering pricing. Summarized: In having both, I really do not see a difference in gaming between the 9900k and 8700k. If I set them to the same frequency, they are pretty much identical in performance in most gaming titles. Productivity-wise the 9900k takes the cake with those two extra cores and runs a little cooler with solder. The 9900k also seems to be more stable at high frequencies as well, acting more like a bin product (8086k). I almost get the feeling intel's design brief for the 9900k was taking the 8086k material and production process and squeezing in two extra cores with solder. In BFV multiplayer, I'm at the limit of my 165 refresh 99% of the time with medium settings (droops when V-1s land near me).
×
×
  • Create New...