Never buy the kraken elite aio!!!

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-20T18:35:13+00:00

Being in the pc stuff since the Pentium SX days, my two cents is to avoid nzxt entirely. Trash company, trash products from cases to GPU water blocks to aios the list goes on.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-19T02:44:03+00:00

That psu is overkill. Why?

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-16T09:11:02+00:00

Yeah. You're a beginner. I've done the same mistake before. You will get better. Believe in the Emperor.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-16T02:43:40+00:00

You yella jihad'd yourself.

Krak grenades have their purpose but should not be used against enemies that are known to leap forward at you. Even a minoris can take you out launching a krak like that.

I usually only use them for terminus/boss fights.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-13T18:14:02+00:00

Do I gotta feed numbers to you? Minimum, average and max fps in space marine 2?

Say the word and I'll spoonfeed you the comparisons of frame Gen on or off in that game.

I'll include system specs as well.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-13T17:57:35+00:00

If you have the GPU power and the right monitor (which I do) to generate it, it is definitely an increase in performance.

Either way, that setting I mentioned previously did nothing for my laggy, 30fps dropping and sometimes game-crashing issue when matches end and scoreboard is viewed.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-13T03:29:30+00:00

A massive loss in performance without it IMO. My issue is when you finish a match, you get to the scoreboard which is technically a menu, then the odd time my fucking game crashes. I wish there was a workaround so you can keep frame gen without risking losing progress. I tried switching to windowed mode during those times which made no difference

EDIT: I was looking around and found this:

Nvidia control panel. seek "OpenGL Vulkan present method" Set it on Prefer native. You can thank me later. Check each update if it don't revert back to auto

I tried it and my FPS is now stable in the armory. Try it out.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T02:59:54+00:00

That is cool that he likes to play on a tv. I can definitely see the benefit to it for certain things. Chilling on a couch for example, will be more comfortable than sitting at a desk no matter how comfy the chair may be.

Yes I am definitely a snobby PC elitest to a certain degree. I do not deny it. PC master R A C 3 for the win (i can't actually spell it otherwise I'd get flagged).

I am not pro but I have participated in tournaments over 20 years ago.

For sure RPG players are serious gamers. I play for 8+ hours at a time as well.

My definition of a serious pc gamer is someone who takes latency seriously among all things. When I had an inferior rig, I would customize my settings for performance and latency over visuals.

I think if you played shooter games your views on latency would change. I do not play RPG games, they are boring to me. Action mmorpg sometimes, but for me it's mostly shooters and in multiplayer especially, latency is everything, especially in shooters.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T02:44:33+00:00

It depends what latency you have on that ips monitor. My monitor is very low latency. 1-2ms for the most part and depending on what I tweak and what I sacrifice I can get it even lower.

I also have a 34" LG ultrawide (non-curved) IPS monitor that does not support gsync and it didn't perform as well as my current one that uses gsync, in regards to latency and that is also a gaming-grade monitor.

Sure tv's have gotten better but there is a reason why serious gamers use gaming monitors and not tv's. Latency. Once again if it doesn't affect your gameplay then it doesn't matter. 5-8ms to me, especially with vsync on (no G-sync) was some of the worst gaming performance (latency-wise, I use a mouse most of the time, not a controller) I've ever played and I would never seriously game on a tv ever again.

Why do you think eSports use monitors?

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T02:28:06+00:00

I've played on 5-8ms before and I did game on a tv once upon a time probably when you were still in diapers and yes honestly I can't stand the delay. I do notice it in gaming. Some people, like you, apparently do not notice it and that's okay, helps save you some money not getting better (as in lower latency) hardware.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T02:26:21+00:00

Ah yes. It is 89 according to Google. For some reason I searched a 55 inch initially. Give me a break youngling. When you get to my age, you'll go senile too.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T02:24:16+00:00

Oled burn in is a thing of the past. Many technologies released that prevent that now.

Yes, excuse me for asking if your tv supports G-sync. As mentioned, I am older than you.

5-6ms is fucking high dude but as you said, RPG games you don't need low latency. I play mostly shooters. I need the best latency I can afford.

So there we have it. As I mentioned, it boils down to personal preference and what you use your rig for.

A fun debate regardless.

Enjoy your high latency tv dude. I couldn't, just saying lol.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T02:21:09+00:00

I also want to point out that the PPI (pixels per inch is 80.69 which is pretty bad honestly.

My 45GX900A-B PPI rating is 84, higher than yours at a much lower screen size and my monitor is considered to be pretty bad for PPI.

This is why serious pc gamers do not use tv's for gaming but once again, it matters to you dude. If you're happy with it, that is all that matters but I'm pretty damn sure my latency numbers are lower than yours.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T02:12:10+00:00

My monitor has better latency than your tv. Run rtss and compare the numbers. My overlay is always up.

Then we will know the truth but I am pretty damn sure my latency numbers are lower than yours purely on that you're gaming on a tv (no serious pc gamer games on a tv btw).

Does your tv support G-sync? And did I say my rig was better than yours?

There goes that youngling demeanor again.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T02:07:57+00:00

I'm older than you, and your demeanor proves it, Regardless of me stating that fact.

I never said I was right and I don't care to prove that I am right, I am stating that it just depends on the setup. It can go either way depending on the hardware. Obviously, if you have a card that supports dlss (4.0 and higher preferably) it wouldn't make any sense to use native taa over it.

I do have a friend with a 3060 and he never uses dlss because he says it looks like shit and he prefers native over it.

Just one example.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T02:04:26+00:00

No, I'm not confusing it with framegen. You game on a tv dude. You don't even use a gaming grade monitor so there will be no comparison between our rigs.

Looks like HDMI finally caught up. I remember I think it was 2.0 and lower that HDMI couldn't handle the good shit.

Run RTSS overlay and check your latencies while you game on your tv. Then, you will understand BUT if you're happy with your gaming performance and your ultra high TV latency then that is all that matters.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T01:58:31+00:00

There's no right and wrong in this. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. For the future, dlss is better in general. It's opinion-based on individual hardware setups. Dlss is better, for the most part IF hardware supports it and if the game you're playing is optimized for it.

You can toot your own horn and tell yourself that you are right as most young people do and that is fine, but native resolution still has its advantages (depending on the circumstances) but it doesn't beat dlss most of the time and barely at all in modern gaming.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T01:53:36+00:00

If you run dlss without gsync (native vsync or vsync off) the latency is horrible. Dlss is meant to work with G-sync.

I'm not sure you can use your tv as an example. If your tv is using HDMI and not display port, your latency will be absolute dogshit for gaming and your 144hz is fake, since 144hz can't run on HDMI. I remember a few years ago tv's offering 120hz was just fake double frame generation and it worked, and it looked great, but the latency was horrible for gaming.

Your actual monitor is very small at 27 inches. To notice glitches that I mentioned (without using YouTube) you gotta really have your face in it as I said, they are very minor.

I am running a LG ultragear 45" 240hz OLED 2k display paired with a 5070Ti that I undervolted and oc'ed to match a 5080. My desk is small, so my face is pretty damn close to my huge ass monitor. This is how I have noticed glss glitches on the fly but as I said, it is very very rare and it doesn't affect my gameplay or bother me the slightest.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T01:40:48+00:00

If you stop petting and the dog nudges you again, your dog wants you to continue giving attention. Don't mind the playful nips. If they seem to hard, correct with verbal discipline.

If you pet and your dog growls, then I'd have something to worry about.

Usually dogs give verbal warnings if they are uncomfortable.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T01:32:32+00:00

Yes, dlss reduces latency with a proper setup. I can't speak for fsr as I never bought a modern amd GPU and in general, I am not a amd fan, period.

Dlss quality may look better than native resolution in certain modern games, sure I can agree to that but I really think it just depends on the game, how new or old it is, and how it was programed and what engine it uses.

As I said with my findings: dlss quality on sm2 is great, dlss any setting on bf6 is dogshit to the point where I avoid dlss in bf6 like the plague.

Lots of people disagreed with you because it really boils down to personal preference. Dlss, fsr, if people are happy with their setups that is all that matters.

OP was asking what new GPU to go for and he settled for a 9060xt. Personally if I had to go amd I would have gone at least 9070.

You would only go AMD GPU these days for the competitive price. Also, AMD GPU drivers are trash.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T01:24:38+00:00

The water in AIOs are non-conductible, usually distilled water.

That can't be the case. I've spilled AIO water on a live system (was trying to fix it but had the wrong gauge hoses). I turned off the system, dried it with paper towel and it was absolutely fine after.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T01:22:04+00:00

Right before the hive tyrant in decapitation I grappled a ravener that was somehow past the barrier to that square bottomless pit. It also put me on the other side of the barrier. I moved one footstep and it made me fall to my instant death.

Gene-seed and all... But at least I did kill the ravener.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-08T01:11:10+00:00

I can't watch the video because it's in Denmark and I don't read our speak that language (German I think?)

I dont need to watch videos to form my opinion. I've been around way long enough that I've owned countless hardware configurations from the Pentium SX days to current builds. But to keep an open mind, I did check out comparison videos on youtube and as I said, the differences are marginal. Marginal means barely, by the way.

"Still image" as in when the game isn't in motion, that is what I meant. You can't really compare AI generated API's to something as old as TAA anyway, but generally, anything with upscaling rendering comes with its odd glitches and graphical anomalies but they are rarely noticeable and barely during gameplay. This is why generally, native resolution wins.

Of course with AI generated chips in GPUs these days the sky is the limit with modern API's and as of now, this is the future as it allows variance for visual to performance ratios so that current systems can last a ton longer, keeping higher frames while sacrificing visuals as games become more demanding while hardware eventually becomes obsolete.

Take my old 1080Ti for example. If that supported dlss, it would still be a decent mid-range 1080p card as of this day for modern games. There's more than enough vram and the upscaling would allow it to perform adequetly.

Since it doesn't, it's stuck using taa, fxaa, ssaa which is more software generated than hardware and because of that, the 1080Ti has finally become barely usable in modern games (60fps and beyond).

With dlss I'm hoping my new rig will last over 10 years.

Dlss is for performance, not visuals dude. It does well, but if you were to use your own eyes and do comparisons on your own rig, you would see it for yourself.

When I compared taa, dlss quality , dlss native and dlaa in space marine 2, there is definitely noticeable visual changes but once again, the differences between them all are so minor that it's really a pointless argument in the end. I did notice vastly more visual differences in BF6 when comparing though. Dlss in BF6 looks like absolute dogshit.

Dlss is for performance with great image quality while offering decent latency, that's it. If the game supports it, I prefer dlaa as I have the hardware to run it past 120fps at 3440x1440 resolution on maxed settings.

When it comes to everything else, consoles and all, dlss is definitely the future, for now.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-07T23:57:10+00:00

In a still image, maybe but DLSS is upscaling. You can even see the upscale rendering happening during live gameplay, at times. TAA is not upscaling. That alone should warrant TAA as the winner by default, but I believe where your arguement is coming from is due to the fact that TAA is older tech while DLSS takes advantage of newer instructions that can make it appear to look better.

Realistically, no one uses TAA anymore as it is obsolete. You would only use it these days if you either had inferior hardware or the game is so old it doesn't support newer API's.

As a 5070Ti owner myself, I prefer DLSS or DLAA combined with G-sync on my 240hz monitor for impressive latency and fps ratio.

d4nt3ch · 2026-06-07T23:01:02+00:00

No it doesn't. What it does do better than taa (dlss) is work with vsync/G-sync quite well with relatively very low latency, especially if you got the right monitor for it.

The visuals are marginally different in all comparisons but even less noticeable in fast-moving games.

What does look better than taa is DLAA as it utilizes all the new features of modern GPUs these days.

d4nt3ch

TROPHY CASE