Hadwell

if you do get motion sickness, it might be only temporary, when i first got the oculus rift, i'd start feeling sick after about 20 minutes, worst game was quake 2 VR, but after a while i could play for 2 hours no problem... as it is, i find VR sets too uncomfortable to wear much longer than 2 hours anyway... but i don't get motion sickness in anything at all anymore.

you can have military airplanes in a non-combat simulator... any sim thats designed from the ground up for doing combat in is a combat sim, so FSX with a mod that lets you fire weapons isn't really a combat sim... CFS isn't just MSFS with guns, it has a whole scripting system, and AI and assets to go along with it, requires fundamental changes to the engine to work. on that note, if a non-combat sim gets a mod that lets you do combat, the mod should be mentioned under the combat category, and not the original sim it's derived from.

I'm 31, my first flight sim was the 16 colour DOS version of Red Baron, but i would say the average age, not age range, is 35... when I played IL2FB, now called IL2 1946, in the early 2000s (i really miss those days), most of the people I played with were 50+, but i think younger people are more interested in jets and gadgets than ww2 prop planes... also think IL2FB is the oldest flight sim that still has a following

You can have vsync on in-game and set to 144hz and gsync will still work, in games where you get more than 144 fps it keeps your video card and cpu from doing more than they have to. Fov is not aspect ratio, most fps games have set fov that scales with resolution, to keep things relatively fair... no people that can see 360 degrees with a fisheye lens... card and puzzle games generally don't scale, so higher res means smaller cards that have the same pixel count Also means games with a set fov either don't allow wider resolutions, or you lose height to gain width...

http://www.pcgamer.com/samsung-to-increase-dram-output-as-ram-prices-continue-to-climb/

yeah you're right it starts at 0, not 1...

if you're going to set process affinity... 1,3,5 and 7 are physical cores 2,4,6 and 8 are logical cores on a 4 core, 8 thread CPU... so you want to set DCS on cores 3 and 5... or 5 and 7... it really doesn't make a whole lot of difference though...

resolution matters, the higher the resolution, the closer your screen can be and it still look non-pixely... 1080p 27" a meter and a half is great, 1440P 27" is good anywhere over half a meter, 4K, pretty well any size is ok... having a 60" TV a bit over half a meter from your face is a bit ridiculous, so i guess any size within reason... but then it also depends on how good your eyesight is... some people really like VR as it is now, but its so pixely, it just totally ruins the immersion for me, i'd rather use a regular monitor so I can actually see as good as people not playing with VR, not be intentionally and knowingly keeping myself ignorant for the sake of depth perception and 1-1 head tracking. I suspect those that only play VR have bad eyesight, compared to me at least, so the giant pixels aren't so giant to them...

I've been using asus since my A7N8X-E Deluxe Athlon XP, i freaking loved that computer... still have the mobo, 2GB DDR ram, Nvidia 6800GS and 3200+ CPU in a box somewhere... would be awesome to rebuild it for a nice win98 retro gaming machine... totally recommend asus... before that I had a gigabyte motherboard and an athalon XP 2500+, but all the caps blew on the motherboard within a year... i think a lot of motherboards suffered from bad caps for a couple of years around that time, so it's probly not an issue anymore...

according to what i've seen, you're not supposed to use the nvidia control panel to select the refresh rate, but instead right click on the desktop, go into screen resolution, advanced settings, monitor then select the refresh rate there... also maybe you need the monitors drivers installed, not just the videocards?

the spitfire is an interceptor, they forgo armor and fuel capacity for firepower, airspeed and manuverability... the Allison P-51 was originally a ground attack plane, but after they upgraded the engine to the Merlin, they realized it could be used for long range escort, it's heavy and not the most manuverable(see laminar flow wing), but compared to what the germans had, especially pilot wise, by the time the definitive P-51D came out, it was more than adequate. i think the P-51 gets too much attention, the P-47 had a much bigger role in ww2.

the 1080ti won't use all the bandwidth of an 8x pci-e 3.0 slot, so using two in 8x will be just as good as two in 16x... that being said, the 8700K, or any CPU on any chipset for that matter, will be too slow to really make good use of two 1080tis, as just one 1080ti turns any cpu into a bottleneck.

is it the newer one, like, made in the last year? or is it the old one from around the same time as the 980? pascal is new, not a year old yet, maxwell is a couple years old now... really... PC's haven't gotten much faster in the past few years... it's to the point where once you have a maxed out system, it's like 2000$ for 10% more performance every year.... when you have a 1080ti, even the fastest CPU you can buy is a bottleneck for pretty much any game except for the 1 or 2 games out there that are highly multithreaded...

3930K is sandy-e and you can o/c it to 4.5ghz. the 2600K is sandy, and it will easily get to 4.6 ghz, but many of them will o/c higher... for DCS your best bet is still the highest ghz and ipc cpu you can get. NOT the highest core count cpu you can get. at the moment that's the 8700K, easily overclocks to 5ghz on air, and de-lidded and on water it'll get to 5.2ghz... running the 3930k and the 8700K at 4.5GHz, the 8700K is about 15-30% faster, depending on the benchmark. and yes, you will need a new motherboard and new ram... Titan X's are confusing... there's the Titan X maxwell, Titan X pascal, and Titan Xp also pascal.... depending on what titan X you're running, a better option might be upgrading to a 1080ti... the 1080ti is 5% slower than the titan Xp, 5% faster than the pascal, and 70% faster than the Maxwell.... also im rounding these %... some of the benchmarks are like... 13.8% here, 68% there... so i just make it 15% or 70% kinda thing.... looking at a dozen benchmarks and then averaging...

Get one like a 100GB SATA cheap SSD one for windows, and a seperate M.2 500GB one for games, then a cheap 1TB mechanical drive for non-gamey stuff... I have in my computer a 240GB and a 500GB SSD and a 4TB HDD, I'm always filling up both my SSDs with games and having to delete one game to play another...

I do miss the old mig-21 radar, it made it way more fun to fly against the modern fighters, but it's still ok, just don't expect to kill anything down on the deck using the radar alone anymore...

you can overclock the 8700K and 8600K to 5GHz, with good cooling, even higher... if you're going to get a K part, you're going to run a better cooler than that cheap hunk of aluminum intel should really stop including with their cpus, save it for something more useful, like beer cans...

uhh i remember when ram was 450$ for 16MB.... ram is rediculously cheap... with ram prices as they are today, 16MB of ram is less than 20 cents...

The big question is... is the ability to hook up a dozen SSDs and multiple videocards more important than faster ram and cpu? if you're only going to have 1 or 2 SSDs and maybe a mechanical drive for storage, and 1 videocard, then intel is way better, since nobody buys a K part for running at stock speeds, and if they do, they're ignorant of the reason K parts exist. the 8700K pretty well always hits 5Ghz, and some up to 5.2GHz... the reason you'll buy AMD, if you're not going to have a dozen SSDs, is because you want good performance for value, though i would argue the 8400 is really good value compared to ryzen, even though it's not a K part... I would also argue video rendering with the CPU instead of the GPU is kinda stupid, especially if you have an nvidia card....

Also consider that nvidia cards basically overclock themselves out of the box, and even with a 1080ti you can't get much more performance out of it, not even volt modding or bios editing changes its performance all that much... I would suspect that the 1070ti will be no different, in that it overclocks itself, so even though it seems like you can't overclock it, it's actually automatically doing it...

V-sync doesn't effect g-sync... they're unrelated... v-sync is a confusing way of saying framerate limiter G-sync is a chip in the monitor that makes sure only full frames get displayed on the screen regardless of framerates.

software limitations more to do with graphics and APIs than cpu...

also don't forget that not everything can run in parallel, all cpus do is math, just very fast, and you can't have 8 cpu's doing a single math problem... parallelism (having multiple cpus) works because you can have different math problems running on each cpu... when one math problem has to be solved so next math problem has all the information it needs to be solved, you need better single-core performance... hence why DCS is so single-threaded... they do plan on seperating AI and such to different cores in DCS, but they've also said that won't make a big difference, explaining why they haven't done it already...

appearently the next batch of 8700Ks won't be available for 2-4 weeks and the 8700K wasn't supposed to be released till Q1 of next year, ryzen kinda forced intel to release the 8700K before they had enough stock... also a bunch of new chipsets for the 8700K will be coming in Q1 of next year. I would say, based on reviews and benchmarks, the 8400 is the best "bang for buck", and the 8700K is the most "future proof" cpu out there right now. intel always does this... they wait until AMD has something that's near their cpus in performance, then release something just a bit better. there's a reason why the 2600K has been such a good cpu for such a long time... I think intel jumped the gun and released something a bit too good for the time(the 2600K), so from the 2600K up to the 7700K it was just intel competing with itself, wich is why the performance gains had been so shit up till ryzen...

yeah at 4K i bet the 1080ti makes a huge difference.