PC Gaming on your couch

[Slone]

thanks for all the suggestions.
I notice that no one ever wants to use AMD CPUs, why is that?
I like this one a lot, but it's hard to compare it http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819113284

- - - Updated - - -

also, do i really need a liquid cooler?

[Deleted]

Cause AMD cpu's are not as good as intel for gaming. Not really no unless you go for a small build or a thin case than can't support 160mm tall cpu cooler. (ie the one i proposed doesn't so went for water that costs as much as a good air cooler).

[Arbiter]

thanks for all the suggestions.
I notice that no one ever wants to use AMD CPUs, why is that?
I like this one a lot, but it's hard to compare it http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819113284

- - - Updated - - -

also, do i really need a liquid cooler?

Don't let the "8 core" advertisement fool you. It's actually 4 cores and 8 integers, much like intel's i7 processors in general terms (it's called threads for intel and the way they work is a bit different. not worth going into detail.), except the single core performance of that CPU gets shit on my even dual core intels like the Pentium G3258, while only being about as good in multithreaded applications as the 4690k. They are also fairly power hungry and run pretty hot.

The fact that it's only roughly as powerful as a quad core 4690k is an instant indicator that the single thread performance is only half as powerful as the average intel.

[Vash The Stampede]

I have a HTPC that I occasionally game on. It's just a left over parts PC that I have hooked up to my DLP HDTV 73". For sound I use a receiver with 5.1 speakers. Keyboard is usually on my lap and mouse is on the arm rest. I use Xbox 360 controller wireless for some games.

[Slone]

do some of these games support same-system co-op when you play on a PC?

[Arbiter]

do some of these games support same-system co-op when you play on a PC?

Depends. Pretty much all of your mainstream titles do not, no, but some flash games and other smaller based games that don't require many controls could have a second player option to use the other side of the keyboard, and there's a few games (very few) that allow you to use multiple controllers to play. A computer is definitely not something someone buys to use as a multiplayer system.

http://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/List_of...tiplayer_Games

This is pretty much the list of games that support it.

Have to admit, I didn't know until you asked but there are some hackable multiplayer options that seem really cool. Like Borderlands 2. Just need a good enough computer to run 2 instances of the game and preferably 2 monitors, which is awesome.

[Terahertz]

I played Shadows of Mordor on my samsung ue42f5500 with a gtx 680 on high settings with ease.

Idk about other TVs since this is my first big TV, but for some reason I can only play on 1600x900 resolution on it. It's the only resolution that looks decent. Granted the TV isn't meant to be specifically used as a computer monitor, besides the "lower" resolution the graphics still look absolutely amazing.

But yeah, I'm really happy with the TV and so was my father. In fact, he was so happy with it he bought one just to use as a computer monitor ._.

I'm still new to all of this as well but I would strongly suggest buying a USB hub or have some kind of app/remote control that allows you to control your desktop from a distance.

A USB hub would help so you can have your mouse and keyboard next to you while on the couch.

Idk about display switchers though. I just switch my displays through right-clicking the background > Screen Resolution > Show desktop only on X

And well naturally I have my TV hooked up through HDMI.

[Vash The Stampede]

I notice that no one ever wants to use AMD CPUs, why is that?
I like this one a lot, but it's hard to compare it http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819113284

- - - Updated - - -

also, do i really need a liquid cooler?

AMD CPUs aren't bad, but here they get a bad reputation. Truth is if you're looking at spending $200 for a CPU the 8350 is a good CPU. Is it the best for gaming? No. But if you do other things like stream video it's very useful. If you already have a good AM3+ motherboard you could just plop that CPU in. There's always that what if games were properly multithreaed? At that point the 8350 would be a strong performer. But truth is most games are extremely reliant on single threaded performance. You also don't really need a water cooler, but even Intel CPUs reach 80C+ in temps nowadays. So it's a good investment, especially if the cooler is AMD/Intel compatible.

Jaz explains it better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrwU...ex=150&list=WL

[Arbiter]

We don't give them a bad reputation. We call them as they really are. This is a gaming forum and majority of people here looking for builds are looking for gaming rigs. AMD doesn't currently belong in a gaming rig and hasn't for a while. Will this change eventually? Possibly.

But you say "spending $200 for a CPU the 8350 is a good CPU". How? For about $200, you can purchase a 4690k which is comparable in every aspect and excels in single threaded tasks. You're sacrificing better power consumption and a LARGE amount of single threaded performance just to save $30-50 and if you weren't gaming then this would mostly be acceptable, but you're better off with an i3 in terms of gaming if you want to save that money.

We all wish Intel had competition but the truth is they don't at the moment. We just choose not to deny facts.

[Vash The Stampede]

We don't give them a bad reputation. We call them as they really are. This is a gaming forum and majority of people here looking for builds are looking for gaming rigs. AMD doesn't currently belong in a gaming rig and hasn't for a while. Will this change eventually? Possibly.

But you say "spending $200 for a CPU the 8350 is a good CPU". How? For about $200, you can purchase a 4690k which is comparable in every aspect and excels in single threaded tasks. You're sacrificing better power consumption and a LARGE amount of single threaded performance just to save $30-50 and if you weren't gaming then this would mostly be acceptable, but you're better off with an i3 in terms of gaming if you want to save that money.

We all wish Intel had competition but the truth is they don't at the moment. We just choose not to deny facts.

The mentality around here is that 8350 just sucks totally for gaming, but that isn't true. Every tech based website still considers the 8350 to be a great price performance choice for gamers. It's like literally just this forum that I find this kind of attitude towards AMD. Something like $30-$50 can be a deal breaker for some people who might be building a gaming PC on a budget. Would I ever recommend an i3 for anything? No, cause AMD makes better stuff than an i3 for that price range. Even the Intel Core i5-4590 has a hard time with the 8350 and they do tend to trade blows. Can the i3 be faster? Sure in some rare situations it can. It's probably faster in WoW then the 8350. The G3258 is bad ass and can even beat some i7's with a good overclock.

[Arbiter]

The mentality around here is that 8350 just sucks totally for gaming, but that isn't true. Every tech based website still considers the 8350 to be a great price performance choice for gamers. It's like literally just this forum that I find this kind of attitude towards AMD. Something like $30-$50 can be a deal breaker for some people who might be building a gaming PC on a budget. Would I ever recommend an i3 for anything? No, cause AMD makes better stuff than an i3 for that price range. Even the Intel Core i5-4590 has a hard time with the 8350 and they do tend to trade blows. Can the i3 be faster? Sure in some rare situations it can. It's probably faster in WoW then the 8350. The G3258 is bad ass and can even beat some i7's with a good overclock.

When talking terms of the best performance you an obtain at a certain price, the 8350 still falls short of an i3 while being more expensive....so no we don't consider it a "great price performance chance for gamers". Half the power in single threaded performance is a big ass drop. We'd never recommend that to someone. Yes, some games don't require much CPU power, but many do. And no, AMD doesn't make better gaming CPUs at the price range of an i3 (you'd have to overclock ridiculously high to even come close), but please feel free to show me links to these magical benchmarks that prove that. You're also wrong about the 4590 and 8350, while the 8350 will beat it in multi thread, it will still fall heavily short in single thread.

You want to fanboy a sub par CPU in gaming, that's your choice. Don't try and talk down on us accusing people of biased opinions for giving facts to people looking for genuine information. I can't speak for a small amount of the population, but the majority offer no biased opinions when suggesting hardware. We stick with brands with the lowest fail rate and highest quality parts that performance the best for the needed situations on the needed budget. That is all. $50 range? There's an intel processor that will excel in that. $120 price range? There's an intel processor that will excel in that. $200 price range? Again, there's one that excels.

[Vash The Stampede]

When talking terms of the best performance you an obtain at a certain price, the 8350 still falls short of an i3 while being more expensive....so no we don't consider it a "great price performance chance for gamers". Half the power in single threaded performance is a big ass drop. We'd never recommend that to someone. Yes, some games don't require much CPU power, but many do. And no, AMD doesn't make better gaming CPUs at the price range of an i3 (you'd have to overclock ridiculously high to even come close), but please feel free to show me links to these magical benchmarks that prove that. You're also wrong about the 4590 and 8350, while the 8350 will beat it in multi thread, it will still fall heavily short in single thread.

Do me a favor and show me links, but not to one benchmark. You'll say I'm wrong anyway but benchmarks don't lie. Cause you can't use one application or game to determine over all performance.

http://techreport.com/review/26977/i...sor-reviewed/6

Here you'll see the 8350 matches that of the i5 4590 in Crysis 3. In WatchDogs it falls short of the i5 but it clearly beats an i3. Arkham Origins is clearly a winner for Intel and the i3 does beat the 8350. And in Thief in D3D is a clear win for i3 over 8350.

So far the guy Jaz from that YouTube video is correct to say that the 8350 trades blows with Intel with Intel hitting back more often.

Don't try and talk down on us accusing people of biased opinions for giving facts to people looking for genuine information. .

If the shoe fits.

[Arbiter]

Do me a favor and show me links, but not to one benchmark. You'll say I'm wrong anyway but benchmarks don't lie. Cause you can't use one application or game to determine over all performance.

http://techreport.com/review/26977/i...sor-reviewed/6

Here you'll see the 8350 matches that of the i5 4590 in Crysis 3. In WatchDogs it falls short of the i5 but it clearly beats an i3. Arkham Origins is clearly a winner for Intel and the i3 does beat the 8350. And in Thief in D3D is a clear win for i3 over 8350.

So far the guy Jaz from that YouTube video is correct to say that the 8350 trades blows with Intel with Intel hitting back more often.



If the shoe fits.

Links benchmarks to one of the few games that takes advantage of the 8 integers. Thinks he has it all figured out. It falls short of the 6 core processors because the 6 cores are still much better than the 8 integers. Only beats WatchDogs vs i3 because it's also one of the few games that can even take advantage of 4 cores.

So why not link benchmarks to standard games that only take advantage of 2-3 cores, since it is the normal standard of games. You can't base a CPU off of those few games that can take advantage of it.

See the luxury of having spend the time doing the research and proof in the past, I don't have to waste my time over one guy who wants to state his opinion instead of facts. You are more than welcome to do the research yourself, but no one here who knows anything about the power of those CPUs in games is going to agree with you. And for good reason.