PC gamers, what do you do when you hit the limits of your system?

[TheHighway]

Wait for enough new games and stuff to justify a new system. I did want to upgrade when Windows 7 came out but my lappy was only a year old at that point. I'll probably end up waiting for Windows 8. By that time there will be plenty of new shiney games to play.

Noooooooo Windows 8 is the most horrible thing I've ever seen ;-;

 

[Mint Rubber]

When you've reached the limits of what you can push in terms of performance, what do you do?

In ages past I upgraded my graphics card a few times and I did do a complete overhaul of the rig 2 times in about 10 years (first pc was an old AMD K5 I think, second one an AMD Athlon, third one is an AMD Phenom).

I only upgraded my pc when I couldn't actually start up and play several games in a row (last one to make up my mind was Crysis).
Other than that I don't do upgrades for graphics nirvana. I generally dumb down the AA, the shaders, the character models, the shadows, etc. Hell, I had to play the first Gothic with textures that looked like MS Paint. The only thing I never touch is the view distance, looking out into the horizon is a big thing for me in games.

The last game I had to dumb down in graphics was STALKER: Call of Pripyat. I lowered the shadows, the so-called "God Rays" and the real time lighting fidelity.

Long story short: if I have to, I'll lower the details in favor of fluidity. I'll shell out cash only if I find that several games I'm interested in are completely unplayable on my current PC.

 

[ReinWeisserRitter]

Dial down the settings. I generally don't give a crap as long as it runs smoothly in the end.

Generally not a problem, though.

...Wait.

Having a higher FPS also means ... improved game physics.

What? It means absolutely no such thing.

 

[ResonanceSD]

.

Yes. Raw framerates. I imagine you have a 120Hz monitor which can actually take advantage of those.

Nope, I cbf with 3D and having half your framerate. I just want to be able to run EVERYTHING very smooth for the next few years.

My point being you can't actually see more FPS than your monitor can display Hz. So you know, your toaster oven is somewhat under utilised.

Having a higher FPS also means improved game physics.

No, no it doesn't. PhysX will do that. Improved FPS will not.

 

[z121231211]

.

Yes. Raw framerates. I imagine you have a 120Hz monitor which can actually take advantage of those.

Nope, I cbf with 3D and having half your framerate. I just want to be able to run EVERYTHING very smooth for the next few years.

My point being you can't actually see more FPS than your monitor can display Hz. So you know, your toaster oven is somewhat under utilised.

Having a higher FPS also means improved game physics.

No, no it doesn't. PhysX will do that. Improved FPS will not.

I guess I just don't know how it works, but don't physics engines benefit from only having to predict what happens in 10ms (100fps) rather than 16.67ms (60fps) or 33.33ms (30fps)? Or do they not run every frame or run on an entirely different framerate?

 

[justnotcricket]

When you've reached the limits of what you can push in terms of performance, what do you do?

Well, time of the year to visit GoG.

Pretty much this. I don't actually identify as a 'PC gamer' specifically (I hate those terms), but I have a PC, and it has games on it. I think the most sophisticated thing it can run is Civ V on medium settings, which is why GoG is such a wonderful thing I'm planning an upgrade, but at this point the list has stretched from 'graphics card' to 'processor...ram...graphics card...etc' and I'm trying to build up a new system. Hopefully a cost-effective one, as I want to continue to be able to play PC games, but playing the latest thing on max settings.

I guess the problem is that because I'm not primarily a PC gamer, I don't have a good intuitive feel for the best setup for me. The only thing that's actually on the cards is that my boyfriend wants to be able to play Shogun 2 Total War on decent settings, and I'd like to be able to play the upcoming Civ V expansion with the graphics set to max (I want my frigates to have reflections in the water...mmm...frigates...). Those probably aren't necessarily terribly ambitious things, but I also don't want a system that's *totally* obsolete again in 6 months.

In the meantime, I'm rocking the Baldur's Gate era ;-)

 

[somonels]

#1 Find a workaround
#2 Adapt
I'm on my fifth year with this one:
*had to change the graphics card because some eco-crybabies threatened to end their pathetic lives because solder contained true, honest-to-god lead, and I didn't want to run a coolant-less 8800 gts(320)
*had to repair (DIY or GTFO) my monitor because some eco-crybabies threatened to end their pathetic lives because capacitors held the soul of satan and prevented jesus from rising a fifth time
*PSU fan is getting tired, should really oil it
*planning on using it (most of it) for at least three more years, the critical component is my cheapy side mobo.

 

[Lectori Salutem]

.

Yes. Raw framerates. I imagine you have a 120Hz monitor which can actually take advantage of those.

Nope, I cbf with 3D and having half your framerate. I just want to be able to run EVERYTHING very smooth for the next few years.

My point being you can't actually see more FPS than your monitor can display Hz. So you know, your toaster oven is somewhat under utilised.

Having a higher FPS also means improved game physics.

No, no it doesn't. PhysX will do that. Improved FPS will not.

I guess I just don't know how it works, but don't physics engines benefit from only having to predict what happens in 10ms (100fps) rather than 16.67ms (60fps) or 33.33ms (30fps)? Or do they not run every frame or run on an entirely different framerate?

Depends on whether physics calculation and frame rate are synchronized. Personally, I have no idea if this is the case, seeing how complex modern games are and often use separate engines for stuff like physics.
I wouldn't be surprised if they aren't synchronized, though.

 

[MercurySteam]

Cure cancer I guess.

There actually is a project running where you can use your PC's computing power to help cure disease. It's called Folding@home. [http://folding.stanford.edu/English/HomePage]

 

[ResonanceSD]

.

Yes. Raw framerates. I imagine you have a 120Hz monitor which can actually take advantage of those.

Nope, I cbf with 3D and having half your framerate. I just want to be able to run EVERYTHING very smooth for the next few years.

My point being you can't actually see more FPS than your monitor can display Hz. So you know, your toaster oven is somewhat under utilised.

Having a higher FPS also means improved game physics.

No, no it doesn't. PhysX will do that. Improved FPS will not.

I guess I just don't know how it works, but don't physics engines benefit from only having to predict what happens in 10ms (100fps) rather than 16.67ms (60fps) or 33.33ms (30fps)? Or do they not run every frame or run on an entirely different framerate?

Wtf? the trajectory of an object in a game has nothing to do with how it is displayed by a graphics card. Framerates change, physics objects don't.

 

[ResonanceSD]

Cure cancer I guess.

There actually is a project running where you can use your PC's computing power to help cure disease. It's called Folding@home. [http://folding.stanford.edu/English/HomePage]

Sigh, I feel slightly guilty about getting rid of CUDA programs -_- my PC is off when I'm not using it, and when I'm using it, it's on at full power.

Also GPU longevity. These cards cost $1000+ -_-'

 

[Oirish_Martin]

Clean it out, reoptimise, see if that brings a bit of life back into it.

Plan an upgrade, then usually raid GOG.com for some budget oldschool titles to keep me occupied. I'm generally at peace with the idea of only being able to run new titles for a short while, as once my pc lags behind I then turn to the classics

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Upgrade. I probably won't need to for a while yet, though.

 

[z121231211]

.

Yes. Raw framerates. I imagine you have a 120Hz monitor which can actually take advantage of those.

Nope, I cbf with 3D and having half your framerate. I just want to be able to run EVERYTHING very smooth for the next few years.

My point being you can't actually see more FPS than your monitor can display Hz. So you know, your toaster oven is somewhat under utilised.

Having a higher FPS also means improved game physics.

No, no it doesn't. PhysX will do that. Improved FPS will not.

I guess I just don't know how it works, but don't physics engines benefit from only having to predict what happens in 10ms (100fps) rather than 16.67ms (60fps) or 33.33ms (30fps)? Or do they not run every frame or run on an entirely different framerate?

Wtf? the trajectory of an object in a game has nothing to do with how it is displayed by a graphics card. Framerates change, physics objects don't.

I'm thinking of a delta variable. So if an object is moving at 5m/s and it's been 16ms since the last refresh it would move .08 meters. 0.08 meters every 16ms is a lot smoother than 0.16 meters every 32ms. The more milliseconds you have to compensate for the bigger chance for error (like the object moves into another object or even goes through an object it was supposed to collide with).

I was also thinking that for every frame the game does physics and calculates other game variables (guns were shot, player looked in a different direction, enemies were spawned) then outputs everything needed to the graphics. I guess those could work alongside eachother, but the result is the same: if the physics update more often then they'll react better/as intended. PhysX uses the GPU as well, so a higher framerate should also mean more physics calculations.

Though I speak from my limited game programming experience, so I could be wrong.

 

[ResonanceSD]

.

Yes. Raw framerates. I imagine you have a 120Hz monitor which can actually take advantage of those.

Nope, I cbf with 3D and having half your framerate. I just want to be able to run EVERYTHING very smooth for the next few years.

My point being you can't actually see more FPS than your monitor can display Hz. So you know, your toaster oven is somewhat under utilised.

Having a higher FPS also means improved game physics.

No, no it doesn't. PhysX will do that. Improved FPS will not.

I guess I just don't know how it works, but don't physics engines benefit from only having to predict what happens in 10ms (100fps) rather than 16.67ms (60fps) or 33.33ms (30fps)? Or do they not run every frame or run on an entirely different framerate?

Wtf? the trajectory of an object in a game has nothing to do with how it is displayed by a graphics card. Framerates change, physics objects don't.

I'm thinking of a delta variable. So if an object is moving at 5m/s and it's been 16ms since the last refresh it would move .08 meters. 0.08 meters every 16ms is a lot smoother than 0.16 meters every 32ms. The more milliseconds you have to compensate for the bigger chance for error (like the object moves into another object or even goes through an object it was supposed to collide with).

I was also thinking that for every frame the game does physics and calculates other game variables (guns were shot, player looked in a different direction, enemies were spawned) then outputs everything needed to the graphics. I guess those could work alongside eachother, but the result is the same: if the physics update more often then they'll react better/as intended. PhysX uses the GPU as well, so a higher framerate should also mean more physics calculations.

Though I speak from my limited game programming experience, so I could be wrong.

You also speak from a dark orifice. How quickly an image refreshes on a screen has got NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW THE TRAJECTORY OF AN OBJECT IS CALCULATED

 

[distortedreality]

Been a long time since a computer i've built reached a performance barrier.

If I know of a game that I want to get that will push the barrier, i'll start planning an upgrade. I generally try to stay ahead of the curve in that regard.

My rule used to be that as long as I was a generation ahead of the recommended specs for a game, i'd be ok. That is getting harder to do these days, but it's also becoming less relevant in most cases.

 

[ResonanceSD]

When you've reached the limits of what you can push in terms of performance, what do you do?

Well there are many stages

Stage 1: Denial
CPU overheating error?
Pah it is probably just the one time. It wont happen again. It was probably an error in the game. It will get patched.

Stage 2: Anger
AGAIN?! F*** I PAID A FORTUNE FOR THIS SYSTEM! HOW THE HELL CAN YOU JUST BAIL ON ME NOW! THIS WORTHLESS PIECE OF F***!

Stage 3: Bargaining
Ok Ill lower the settings. I dont need to see shadows. Maybe just update my drivers

Stage 4: Depression
Damm it all... I spend 4 months salary on this piece of junk? what is wrong with me? Why do I keep making stupid decisions?

Stage 5: Acceptance
Meh... You know what? It is about 4 years old now. Bound to happen eventually. And I would have spend the money on alcohol anyway. Time for upgrades.

I'm sitting here thinking of what I could get with four months salary.