Recent comments in /f/gadgets

Mike7676 t1_j023fqk wrote

Reply to comment by FarterTed in Infinite lives: the company saving old arcade machines by diacewrb

I think it is. Big difference as adults in a modern world is we have emulators and raspberry pi and the ability to basically call up any games we remember as kids, play them for a few minutes and move on. I recall being like 7, at my local malls arcade and with a handful of quarters trying to decide which games to play to make it last.

7

FinnProtoyeen t1_j01xgi0 wrote

Reply to comment by AndarianDequer in Infinite lives: the company saving old arcade machines by diacewrb

I think that's pretty much the purpose of arcade cabinets, they were designed to be fun enough for people to want to play it, but also to be so hard it kicks you off the cabinet so you either spend your quarters to play again or to let someone else play and spend their quarters. It wouldn't make an arcade money if some kid hogged a machine for hours off of one quarter

31

Mango_In_Me_Hole t1_j01xet9 wrote

Reply to comment by lemlurker in Does a kettle use more electricity than a TV? How much power your gadgets use by diacewrb

Right but this is an article from The Guardian comparing the energy cost of appliances in the UK. People in the UK and Ireland often use their kettled a lot. Multiple times per day.

And LED TVs are pretty much standard now. It’d be hard to find a TV that consumes anywhere close to 200W. 100W is more plausible, but even at that point it’s still wrong to assume that the TV will use more electricity than the kettle in the average UK home.

8

diacewrb OP t1_j01wd9z wrote

Reply to comment by Mango_In_Me_Hole in Does a kettle use more electricity than a TV? How much power your gadgets use by diacewrb

A lot of people still have and use older less efficient flat panels that aren't LED backlit and some older folk still have have their CRTs.

A TV isn't like a smartphone where you upgrade every year or 2 then keep the old one in the back of a drawer somewhere. Getting rid of you old TV for a newer one when it still works isn't really a consideration for many folk.

7

Mango_In_Me_Hole t1_j01vnwq wrote

Reply to comment by lemlurker in Does a kettle use more electricity than a TV? How much power your gadgets use by diacewrb

The watts of the kettle don’t really matter. There is very little power waste in a kettle, so a low-power kettle will still use the same amount of energy as a high-power kettle. The only difference is the amount of time it takes to boil the water.

A litre of water generally takes about 100Wh to boil. In my family, the kettle could easily be used 4-5 times in one day, adding up to around 500Wh per day.

Also 200W is insane for a modern TV. My 50in LED TV only uses about 60W. I’d have to watch tv for more than 8 hours per day for it to use as much energy as the kettle. And in my case, it’s only turned on for about 3 hours per day.

Even if the kettle was only used four times per day, it would still consume more than twice the electricity of my TV.

40

mandelmanden t1_j01v261 wrote

Reply to AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT / XTX review: 4K performance for less | AMD’s top RDNA 3 GPU manages to beat the RTX 4080 in many games at a $200 lower price. But ray-tracing performance is far behind Nvidia. by chrisdh79

Good performance, but far more than most people are even close to needing.

Until everything is raytraced, performance will just be weird. It can just barely make playable non-scaled on my monitor - I don't have 4k and don't want it - but for everything that's not RT it just grossly overshoots performance. 3440x1440 would be 100s of frames in everything, and my monitor is 75hz... I'm not going to change that out.

So, let's see the 7800 XT and the 4070 what they can do. Though I guess I'll just wait another generation again.

1

AndarianDequer t1_j01swsv wrote

Reply to Infinite lives: the company saving old arcade machines by diacewrb

I think the biggest difference for me is that old school games, you die too quickly, the game is too hard, and for ones that you have to use quarters for, we run out of money too fast. Most of these games are actually a lot of fun and the fun is extended when you can alter the difficulty or continue with infinite lives.

27

AndarianDequer t1_j01sg42 wrote

Reply to Infinite lives: the company saving old arcade machines by diacewrb

I think the biggest difference for me is that old school games, you die too quickly, the game is too hard, and for ones that you have to use quarters for, we run out of money too fast. Most of these games are actually a lot of fun and the fun is extended when you can alter the difficulty or continue with infinite lives.

−3

lakerssuperman t1_j01qf8l wrote

Reply to AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT / XTX review: 4K performance for less | AMD’s top RDNA 3 GPU manages to beat the RTX 4080 in many games at a $200 lower price. But ray-tracing performance is far behind Nvidia. by chrisdh79

So I don't game anywhere near what some of you do. I just don't have the time with kids and stuff taking priority, so I'm watching more from the sidelines. RT sure seems like a prestige feature that can look better, but not always across the board.

It seems a bit like 4k and HDR in movies. I've watched some movies where the uptick in resolution was pretty noticeable and the HDR did stand out, but only via direct comparison. Watching the 1080p SDR scaled to 4K still looks awesome and you wouldn't know you're missing much, even with the most pronounced 4K vs 1080p difference. On top of that you need a TV that can really do HDR to see the difference.

My point is, RT doesn't feel like a slam dunk across the board must have in every game and therefore I struggle to see why it's absolutely must have, especially if the raster performance of the card is so good for a cheaper number.

1