Builds 9000 dollar PC

>builds 9000 dollar PC
>Low settings
Explain.

Attached: 1563139368951.jpg (1024x911, 159K)

>9000 dollar PC
Are you running quadros or something

frames > gwafix

I play fighting games and the lower the graphics the lower the input lag for me. Puts me at an advantage if opponent has his on max.

MAXIMUM FPS

Attached: power level maximum.gif (360x360, 1.96M)

>manipulating settings to get an edge
thats called cheating.

Retard

Checkmate

Attached: vVkoPPU.gif (250x250, 992K)

>have to turn off some post processing effects (chromatic aberration, film grain) because my eyes start burning after 30 minutes of play
who would subject themselves to this bullshit

Attached: 1526021504228.jpg (574x695, 95K)

To maximize fps. For e.g. recoil of guns in KF2 tied to game fps, higher fps results in less recoil.

Except the frames are good for nothing unless you have a screen to match.

I M M E R S I O N

Okay? Why would you spend that much on a PC and not get at least a 120hz monitor? Did you have a point?

Because that's what 80% of people do?

>post processing effects: low/medium/high

Attached: 1513662311944.jpg (637x946, 57K)

if the developers design the game where lower settings provides an advantage that's the dev's fault
like one game where if you're on medium/high you see tall grass but on low you don't
doesn't matter if it is cheating

>changing the fucking graphics settings is cheating
Nigga you dumb. Very, very dumb. For real.

>higher fps in KF2 results in less recoil.
Is that actually true? Does full-auto FAL on Sharpshooter become as godly as it is on Commando with, like, 200 FPS?

VR and great grafix@ 60fps (because 60 fps is honestly completely sufficient)

That's a trend, not a justification
And it's also probably less than that

Those are literally the opposite of immersion. They're camera imperfections, not something that a human being would ever see.

>because 60 fps is honestly completely sufficient
So is 720p, but this isn't the fucking stone age

My response was more of a joke, but I forgot that is a legitimate problem.

>60 fps is honestly completely sufficient
It's not, and if you ever played above it then you wouldn't think so.

They don't know that. ;)

This is a good point, I hate when games try to make me think like I'm in a Michael bay movie or some shit.

gaymer: "Why can't my games look like movies"
Developers: "alright"

My GTX 970 will probably last me for the next couple years considering VR devs won't make anything not made in unity @ low poly optimized for the top 10 GPUs on steam hardware survey and 1080p60 looks fine for me on monitors.

*console "gamer"

Except I recently got a laptop with a 144hz screen, and I've tested it (at 144fps, I'm not dumb). It looks pretty good, but doesn't make a huge difference, and I'm still happy with 60. Wouldn't go for anything lower than that tho.

"Her" "turn"

There isn't anything lower
Also you best be hitting high enough framerates, otherwise it's pointless

If u have a good pc you shouldn't need to lower settings as you should have high frames even on high graphics, unless the game is optimized like shit

It's a $9000 pc from 2004?

I had a 144Hz monitor for a week a couple years ago. The only time I actually notice it is with mouse cursor movement, but when I'm actually focused on playing a game that feeling of "smooth motion" just goes away and feels as natural as it did playing @ 60Hz, for me personally.
The only reason I returned the monitor is because it was a disgusting TN panel and no matter how much I calibrated it, it just looked god awful next to my second monitor which had an IPS panel.
I haven't regret doing it.
I said to myself I'll invest in one when IPS/VA 144Hz monitors become cheap since at the time they were $500 for one, where as today they actually are relatively affordable now, but my current monitors are still perfectly fine so I don't really have an excuse to switch them out.

As I said, I've played with it at +144 fps. It looks good, but IMO it's more or less unnecessary.

Attached: 1556998569352.gif (390x339, 170K)

>unless the game is optimized like shit
So around half the games that come out these days

But with what games though

What does that have to do with anything? 144 fps is 144 fps, no matter the game.
I first tested it with Half-Life 2.

>Play on highest settings
>Bloom, sun shafts, shadows, huge quantities of grass and muzzle flash obscure opponents
>Play on lowest settings
>Can spot enemy players from 50,000ft away

Try it with HL1 if you're going to do a source game, bhopping is heaven since you go faster
Otherwise use it for games that aren't from 15 years ago

>tfw bought a 2080
>play Battlefield 4 and at the lowest settings so I can see people better

D E V I L I S H

pure evil. literally hitler

I've noticed with expensive graphics cards you'll still get high frames even with shitty optimization, but it's def true alot of new games these days especially multiplayer run like shit on older hardware. I have a 760 and I was trying to run apex legends and it runs fucking awful even on low settings, not even playable, but when I boot up dayz or pubg I'll have all the frames, even with pretty good graphic settings. New battlefield is unplayable, but bf4 i have tons of frames on native 1080p

i want my 9000 dollar PC to last a really really really long time

need that 244fps for my screen bro

>muh 240hz
>muh esports
Most of these retarded gaymers aren't even good enough to take advantage of more than 60fps, the fact that some retards but pc parts because they think they will do better is pure delusion

Post your meme purchased.
I regret nothing.

Attached: 11bee88196c4544488dc07.jpg (1280x1280, 195K)