GhostDog

So I installed 2.5OB and I think it worked as you described, copying needed files from the existing installs and downloading the rest. When 2.5 stable is released, will 2.5OB get updated, or 1.5.8?

So, if I have 1.5.8 stable, and 2.2 open alpha, which one do I update to get to 2.5 beta? And which one will get updated with 2.5 stable?

Assuming your monitor is the AOC U2879VF, you may need to enable V-sync in your games. The monitor's refresh rate is only 60hz, and I expect your GPU is pushing frames at a much higher rate (at least at resolutions below 4K). The monitor has FreeSync, but FreeSync is incompatible with Nvidia cards, and since FS is a competing technology, Nvidia has no plans to change that as far as I know.

Have you ensured that you've selected "high performance" in the Windows power settings? Depending on how a game is coded, this can impact gaming performance, as the system will sometimes put cores to sleep when they're not active if you're not in high performance mode. It's an easy thing to overlook. Also, what kind of monitor are you using?

I'll be putting together a new rig in a few weeks after all the parts arrive. I'll try to do some benchmarking with 8GB and 16 GB and report back on the results.

Is your test system the one listed in your sig?

If budget efficiency is your goal (and I think it has to be no matter the size of your budget), then I think you always want to optimize the price/performance ratio, i.e. get the best performance possible for the lowest price possible, within your budget, bearing in mind that "best performance" is relative to your personal goals. If bragging rights is your goal, then by all means spend away on a benchmark crushing beast. If task specific performance is your goal, find the system that's best suited to that task, for the lowest price.

What other processes are running?

So, while scrutinizing more closely the claims and counterclaims regarding Kaby Lake vs. Ryzen, I came across what was for me new and troubling information. Apparently, the driver framework that MS uses for DX12, Windows Display Driver Model 2.0, forces the GPU to use the Windows 10 graphics compositing engine, so that the display will support the various UI overlays that MS wants to integrate across all devices and platforms, such as a recording bar and on-screen keyboard. From the article I found: At this stage in DX12's development, utilizing the OS compositing engine has some peculiar effects on display output, like automatically capping the framerate at 60 FPS, no matter the refresh rate of the monitor or the in-game V-sync settings. The benchmark testing conducted by the author on "Ashes of the Singularity" revealed that AMD GPU drivers were achieving this by simply dropping frames when the GPU output exceeded 60 FPS, similar to how some low end displays claim to be able to "overclock" their refresh rates. Thus, the in-game benchmark reported much higher framerates than were actually output to the screen. Nvidia avoided this result by using a workaround in DX12 to bypass OS compositing and directly control the display. The aforementioned article explains all this in full detail. In my view, MS is using DX12 as part of a strategy to try and force all games built for Windows to behave like XBox console games, no matter what platform they're intended to be played on. This only increases my distaste for the Universal Windows Platform and my skepticism of its goals. I truly wish there was a realistic alternative. In addition, all of this underscores for me the importance of deconstructing the hype surrounding metrics such as FPS, thread count, and core count and closely examining how any given architecture impacts the experience of the end-user in real-world terms. Maybe in the near future, all of this will be moot, as we'll all be running around sporting all-in-one VR visors or some such, but moves like this make me feel like the era of PC building for anything other than boutique purposes is quickly coming to a close.

Agreed. Not only that, it's hard to know what is causing the RAM usage without seeing benchmarks and knowing the system configuration and what processes might be running in the background. Seems like most of the DCS specific evidence is anecdotal. Aside from that, my own question with regard to 16GB v. 32GB is, does more RAM result in perceptible performance gains. If not, why bother, IMO.

Well, based on my research as well as feedback from this forum and others, I've already pulled the trigger on an i5-7600K. I feel confident that it will suit my needs.

The numbers that I looked at don't reflect that. In any case, I can't evaluate which CPU is "better" in the abstract. I chose the platform that seemed more suitable for me and my purposes, based on the data.

Thanks. I'll be using a 27 in. 1440p 2K screen. I'll add it to the list.

I'm not up to speed on the relationship between unit population size and system RAM usage. A primer would be appreciated. Personally, my philosophy about the future when it comes to PCs is to build the best system that you can for your present needs, while allowing a bit of headroom to further optimize with what will by then be cheap past-generation components a couple of years down the road. That's always given me the most bang for my buck.

I've had fun researching and getting feedback for my latest PC build. In the past, I went with general advice from gaming forums and reviewing sites when selecting components, but this time around, I focused a little more intensively on data and benchmarks in configuring my build. I thought it might be useful to share some of the lessons I learned. 1. Build a rig suitable for your primary purpose. Theoretical performance and synthetic benchmarks are all well and good in the abstract, but how will your system perform on the primary tasks you will be carrying out? Studying real-world benchmarks led me to switch from AMD to Intel for the first time, since games will be my most demanding applications by far, and Intel has better gaming performance. 2. Build around a complementary cpu/gpu pairing. Previously, I focused on the best CPU/mobo I could afford, and selected other components accordingly. But since gaming is my most computing intensive task, I learned that it makes more sense to focus on a complementary CPU/GPU pair that will maximize data throughput without bottlenecking either. Speaking of data throughput: 3. Bigger/faster does not always equal better. It makes no sense to build more capacity in any of your subsystems than can ever be reasonably utilized. For example, having a CPU that can OC to 4.8+ GHz makes no sense if you don't have the components to achieve a stable OC at that frequency. Having more than 16GB of RAM makes no sense if even your most demanding applications will never utilize anything more than 12GB. And so on. When selecting components, my watchword became performance gains. I only considered upgrading a component if it meant obtaining meaningful performance gains or adding useful functionality for my specific configuration. 4. Understanding how each subsystem processes data is critical. For instance, learning about the relationship between GPU memory clock speed, bus width, and memory size helped me to avoid making some poor GPU choices (https://superuser.com/questions/1186150/gpu-memory-bandwidth-vs-speed). That led me to further consider the relationship between the PCI bus, mobo chipset, and the memory and storage subsystems. In the end, considering how the major subsystems work together to create an efficient, high-performance PC that is optimized for the user's primary tasks (as well as his budget) is worth the time and effort, and results in what I consider to be a thing of beauty. 5. There are lots of very smart people out there who are happy to provide their insights and advice. It's impossible for any one person, even an expert, to know everything. It's always helpful to seek advice and feedback on your planned build before you pull the trigger. With that in mind, here's a link to the build that I finally settled on. I'd appreciate feedback: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/xsLKVY Edit: the Samsung Pro Evo is only for illustrative purposes. I actually chose a PNY CS2030 480GB, but it wasn't on the part picker list. Edit2: list updated to include monitor. The model in the list is different from the actual monitor, in that it uses an IPS panel, but it is approximately the same price and resolution.