Black Friday/Cyber Monday Weekend Hardware Deals

There are many good deals on computer hardware and accessories this weekend.  I have a few linked below.

Memory:
CORSAIR Vengeance RGB 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 3000MHz C15 Desktop Memory - $124.99
https://amzn.to/2TKryL4
Its RGB and its 3000 MHz for $125.  Its an amazing deal.

Mice:
CORSAIR Dark Core SE - RGB Wireless Gaming Mouse - 16,000 DPI Optical Sensor - $59.99 usually $89.99
https://amzn.to/2zp1snY

CORSAIR Glaive - RGB Gaming Mouse with Interchangeable Grips - 16000 DPI $54 usually $69.99
https://amzn.to/2BvNMsT

CORSAIR M65 Pro RGB - FPS Gaming Mouse - 12,000 DPI Optical Sensor - $29.99 usually $59.99
https://amzn.to/2Kv8ADF

Tier 8 Post 1.0 Matchmaking Analysis

Introduction and Methods:

I noticed previously that tier 8 matchmaking was awful and I wanted to look at matchmaking in general.  I recoded data about my solo pub battles since patch 1.01 in an Excel spreadsheet.  After I started recording the game data, I learned that the community contributors that were at Tankfest were told that the system to make you more likely to be middle or top tier after being bottom tier was not implemented.

I played 1,013 solo pub battles since the release of patch 1.01 until this week.  For every battle, I recorded tank played, tank tier, battle tier, battle type(3/5/7, 5/10, or all the same tier), win/loss/draw, and other information.  Most of the battles were played during 7 to 11 PM East coast time on the US Central server.

Out of those battles, 484 of them were tier 8 tanks.  Of those tier 8 battles, 52 of tier 8 battles were pref matchmaking tier 8 tanks.

Computer Hardware Deals 7/20/2018

Graphics Cards:

MSI RX 580 8G for $229.99. Regular price $309.99
Sale Price of $259.99 - $30 rebate = $229.99
https://amzn.to/2Lde6yz

Hard Drives:

HGST Deskstar NAS 3.5" 8TB 7200 RPM Hard drive $219.99 promo code EMCPWRP26 regularly $299.99
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822146142

Computer Hardware Deals 7/8/2018

AMAZON

Graphics Cards:

XFX Radeon RX 580 8GB GTS XXX Edition 1386MHz OC+ -  Regularly $339.99 on sale for $289.99
https://amzn.to/2KQb56e
This is one of the lowest prices I've seen on an RX 580 in months!

EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 SC GAMING 6GB -  Regularly $319.99 on sale for $279.99
https://amzn.to/2u5oQV3

2400g vs i3-3240: Does the CPU matter with a lower end graphics card?

In our previous test, it was shows that the 2400G's Radeon™ Vega 11 Graphics doesn't have the same in game performance as the RX 460 2GB, which was released in August of 2016 or the GTX 750 ti 2 GB which was released in February 2014.

Other tests have shown that the 2400G's Radeon™ Vega 11 Graphics doesn't perform as well as a GT 1030 in most games.  Also, other tests have shown that the 2400G's Radeon™ Vega 11 Graphics can be outperformed in most games by an Intel G4650 and GT 1030.  However, it may be useful to have the 4 cores and 8 threads if you plan to perform a graphics card upgrade in the future to something faster than a GT 1030.

AMD 2400G performance in World of Tanks 1.01

In February 2018, AMD released the 2400G.  At the time, there was a high demand for graphics cards due to crypto currency mining and graphics card prices were elevated.  In the past few weeks, graphics card prices have come down closer to MSRP for most graphics cards.  Also AMD drivers have matured and the initial issues with the 2400G and 2200G that some users experienced were resolved.

After the release of the 2400G and 2200G, World of Tanks 1.0 was released.  Wargaming has had time to work on issues related to the new graphics and game engine changes.  Now that most of the game issues and driver UEFI/BIOS, and software issues are resolved with the 2400G, its a good time to really see how the 2400G performs in World of Tanks.

Some users on the World of Tanks forums have stated that the 2400G and its onboard Radeon™ Vega 11 Graphics are perfectly capable of playing World of Tanks 1.0 smoothly on the Ultra graphics preset at 1920x1080 resolution.  Tests with other games have shown that the 2400G's Radeon™ Vega 11 Graphics are comparable to the GT 1030 in most games.

WoT enCore vs WoT 1.0 Common Test

Last year Wargaming tested the new maps on the Sandbox server.  The WoT enCore app was made available in December 2017.  The WoT 1.0 test server was made available earlier this year.  After players tried the WoT enCore app to test their system performance, many wondered how that correlates into WoT 1.0 game performance.

In our previous article, we tested WoT enCore with FRAPS to determine how the score converts to real FPS.

Methods:

For a comparison of WoT enCore and WoT 1.0 common test, we used a 1.0 test server replay on the Abbey(monastery) map.  The replay did not use the same exact path through the map that is used in the WoT enCore app.  However, some of the battle took place around the Abbey in the center of the map and there was also sme of the battle on the 1 and 2 lines of the map.  Both started from the south spawn.

In both the enCore test and WoT 1.0 replay tests Fraps was used to measure average and minimum FPS.  In WoT enCore, the FPS measurement was started at 2:40 on the clock and stopped at 0.02 on the clock.  In the WoT test server replay, a longer measurement period was used starting 15 seconds after the countdown timer reached 00:00 and stopped 3 minutes and 25 seconds later.

The FPS results and the WoT enCore score results are the average of two measurements.

A variety of graphics cards were tested along with two different CPUs.
Graphics cards used:
EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FTW3 Hybrid Gaming 11G-P4-6698-KR
EVGA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti SC Gaming 04G-P4-6253-KR
ZOTAC GeForce GTX 1050 Mini ZT-P10500A-10L
EVGA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 02G-P4-3751-KR
PowerColor Red Dragon Radeon RX 460 AXRX 460 2GBD5-DH/OC

CPUs used
Intel i7-6700K at 4.6 GHz water cooled.
Intel i3-3240 at stock speed and air cooled.

What does your WoT enCore score really mean?

Wargaming released the enCore app in December of 2017.  The app gives you a result score and a general idea if WoT 1.0 will run well on your current computer hardware.  Many World of Tanks players wanted to know what the results really mean and how they relate to in game FPS.

Wargaming states on the WoT enCore FAQ, "World of Tanks enCore is a demo app and not a benchmark, and that’s why points are used. They reflect your PC performance adequately, and let you compare it to other scores. 10 000+ points is an excellent score, meaning that World of Tanks with Core will run extremely smoothly on your PC, precluding any FPS drops. A score of 8001+ (“gold”) is an excellent one. Anything between 3001 and 8000 (“silver”) is good, and a score below 3000 (“bronze”) is passable."

I had a theory that the scores relate to FPS. A test was developed to see if there is a correlation between WoT enCore scores and actual FPS.

NA Server Clan Commander Caught Using Illegal Mods

The commander of the NA server clan(11ADR) Noobwargamer_Reborn, was recorded on twitch.tv using illegal mods. Someone watching the stream did a video capture and uploaded it.

Another video link here:
https://oddshot.tv/s/z2Oorr

He is using mods that show laser beams of where gun barrels are pointing, tracers that stay after a shot is fired, deforestation mods that remove bushes and leaves, and possibly an aim bot.

He also has another account named: noobwargamer

Multiple players field support tickets about this.  I wonder if Wargaming will ban him or if they don't care?

FPS comparison of 9.20 vs Sandbox on the same map tested with multiple graphics cards

With the upcoming high quality maps being previewed in videos and tested on Sandbox, many World of Tanks players wonder if the better graphics will make their gameplay experience worse due to lower frame rates in game.

I luckily had the opportunity to compare WoT 9.20 and Sandbox.  I had a replay of a battle on the Mines(Hills) map from the south spawn that I recently watched, then I played a battle this morning on the same map from the same spawn on Sandbox.

This game me a unique opportunity.  In the Sandbox battle, I could drive to similar locations during the battle on sandbox that were used in the WoT 9.20 replay and use it as a comparison for FPS in game.  Due to RNG and player movements, I can't say its an exact comparison.  However the battles both progressed similarly.  I first drove my medium tank to the rock around F4, then fell back to help a teammate progress up the 1-2 line area following the movements in the 9.20 replay.  The 9.20 battle was a tier 9 battle and the Sandbox battle was a tier 10 battle.  Both battles were in medium tanks.

New World of Tanks HD maps video

World of Tanks North America released a new video showing the latest HD map updates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOd65TpsLcY

Overall, I like the appearance of the new maps.  The current maps do look dated, especially at higher resolutions.  The new maps make World of Tanks look like a more modern game.

I saw the ship on the Himmelsdorf map and I wonder if its the Tirpitz, Scharnhorst or another German ship? If you think you know what class of ship it is, comment below with information about why you think its a certain German ship class.

How to change your field of view setting for 21:9 and other non standard aspect ratio monitors in WoT

The Ultrawide 3440x1440 and 2560x1080 monitors are becoming more popular.  According to the Steam Hardware Survey and other resources 21:9 aspect ratio monitors are greatly increasing in popularity.  However World of Tanks does not properly support the proper field of view for 21:9 aspect ratio monitors which can lead to the edges of the image appearing distorted and/or parts of your field of view being cut off on the top and bottom of the screen that would be visible when using the 95 Field of View (FOV) setting with 16:9 aspect ratio monitors.  When you use the 120 FOV setting, the edges of the screen still appear distorted.  However 120 is the limit of the in game slider in the graphics options.

Another issue is some player who stream World of Tanks play the game in a window and not in full screen mode so they can monitor the stream and have other streaming related apps open on the same monitor.  Sometimes the window size they sue for World of Tanks is a non standard resolution if they resize WOT to take up a certain space on the screen.

I found a fix for this issue that takes only a few minutes and can be done by using notepad.

Step 1:

Open file explorer and go to:
C:\Users\**Your User Name**\AppData\Roaming\Wargaming.net\WorldOfTanks

Full Size Image Link

9.18 Matchmaking Bug

It appears that not only are tier 8 tanks hampered by the post 9.18 matchmaking and only get to be top tier 15-21% of the time when they were top tier 35-41% of the time pre patch 9.18.  In addition to that, there is another matchmaking bug.

The tier 8 solo platoon bug has been confirmed to be on the NA server as well as the EU and RU servers.   If you create a platoon, don't invite anyone, then play tier 8 tanks you get tier 8 battles over 50% of the time in tier 8 tank.  Some players are reporting that they get tier 8 battles 100% of the time.  Post 9.18 tier 8 tanks were getting tier 8 battles about 20% of the time in the 7 PM to 11 PM time frame.  The bug more than doubles your chance of getting a tier 8 battle in a tier 8 tank post 9.18 and sometimes gives you all tier 8 battles depending on the server population.

One EU streamer did this for about 4 hours yesterday and got almost all tier 8 battles in his tier 8 tanks.

This bug also seems to work with other tiers with mixed results.

Wargaming management in Mink stated they are aware of the bug and plan to fix it.  There is no estimate on the fix time frame though.

My Evaluation of the World of Tanks 9.18 Changes

Wargaming recently released the 9.18 patch on the NA server.  The patch was released even after many players saying on Sandbox and Common Test that there are some issues they didn't like and need to be worked on.

Here are the changes:

• Reusable Consumables
• Improved Matchmaker
• Light tank branches extended to tier 10
• SPG/Arty Changes

Gaming monitors: 4K vs 2K vs 2K Ultrawide

Last year, I was shopping for a new monitor for my PC.  My 1920x1200 Samsung monitor was showing its age and the back-light started getting dim.  I looked at 1920x1080, 2560x1080, 2560x1440(2K), 3440x1440, and 3840x2160(4K) monitors.

After looking at all my choices, I ended up with a 3440x1440 100 Hz Ultrawide monitor with G-Sync and an IPS panel.  The ASUS PG348Q.  I went with 3440x1440 for several reasons.

My first reason is the ability of the human eye to see small details.  I sit somewhere between 30" and 36" away from my monitor.  With a 3440x1440 monitor at the 34" monitor size, the pixels are smaller than the resolution someone with 20/20 vision can easily distinguish when they are 30-36" away from the monitor.  At 30" away the human eye can see the equivalent of 0.222mm dot pitch.  At 36" away the human eye can can see the equivalent of 0.266mm dot pitch.  A 3440x1440 monitor is right on the edge of visual acuity for most people at that distance.  Now if you sit with your face 18" away from the monitor a smaller dot pitch may help, but if you have to sit that close, you may be blind and not able to distinguish the difference anyway.

Upcoming World of Tanks HD maps Video

A Russian World of Tanks YouTuber posted a video where he gets to see and experience the upcoming World of Tanks HD maps.  We see parts of the Mines and Cliff maps.

Hardware specs are unknown.  The times where the in game FPS counter can be seen seem to show low 40's to low 60's for FPS.  V-Sync didn't appear to be enabled when the graphics settings were shown.  Also, the video was a little blurry and unfocused on the screen when the graphics settings that would show the resolution were shown.  It did appear that all graphics settings were turned to the highest settings for the beginning of the video.

The YouTube video is here:

At 7:08 and 9:10 in the video you can see the tank drive into a pile of lumber and all the pieces fall individually.  Also, you can see the water effect of the waves in many parts of the video.

One person in the video seemed to mention May20th.  However I don't know what the relevance of
that date is.  Also there was someone mentioning the end of the year.

Ryzen, A success or failure? Both? Neither?

AMD Ryzen R7 Release

There has been quite a bit of hype about the AMD Ryzen CPUs and anticipation of their release.  Its been years since AMD has really released a new CPU or a PCU based on a new architecture.  Until recently, the fastest AMD CPUs you could buy could double as a space heater and generally performed worse than their Intel produced counterparts in most tasks.  The embargo was lifted on the AMD Ryzen R7 recently.  Many different reviews, benchmarks, and other tests were released from the popular, reputable computer hardware and gaming review sites and YouTube channels.

Is Ryzen the best for gaming?

If you look over all the reviews you can see the R7 1800x still falls behind the i7-7700K and i7-6700K in most gaming benchmarks that are not GPU limited.  For example, in Techspot's Review, the R7 1800X performed similarly in gaming benchmarks to the i7-3770K, which was released in 2012.  Other reviews showed similar results with the R7 1800X lagging behind the i7-7700K in most games that were not GPU limited.

So, the big question is, if I'm building or buying a new PC very soon to be mainly used for gaming, should I buy one with an 1800x or an i7-7700K assuming they have similar specs?  I'd suggest the i7-7700K if you are using the PC mainly for gaming.

Why would I suggest the i7-7700K over the R7 1800x or 1700X for gaming?  I'd suggest the 7700K for several reasons:

Is AMD cheating in RyZen benchmarks?

Special benchmark settings were discovered int he UEFI/BIOS of the motherboards sent to reviewers that already received their RyZen kits.

It looks like there are special settings for AIDA, Geekbench, and Cinebench.  Will this be as big as the VW emissions scandal?  I guess we will find out tomorrow when the embargo is lifted.

Photo from CPC Hardware's twitter:
https://twitter.com/CPCHardware/status/836967901399744513

Sandbox changes in World of Tanks

Wargaming announced some changes they are testing in the sandbox server:

Changing shot dispersion so that shells are more likely to land toward the outside of the aim circle
"Shot distribution within the aiming circle. The revised mechanic has fewer shots clustered closer to its center. As a result, hitting weak spots at range is more difficult for the guns that have bad dispersion (0.4 or more), while aim time, armor, and gun stabilization become more important. Those who participated in the first Sandbox iteration will find the new solution is nearly the same as then, but this time, the perception of this change is unaffected by other significant changes surrounding it."

Drop in penetration over distance
"AP and APCR shells penetration values begin decreasing at 50m (not 100m) and they lose 18% and 23%, respectively, of their initial values at 500m. This should facilitate action-packed, close-range engagements and make armor thickness more relevant, while maneuvering in the enemy's sight becomes safer with distance. We tested a similar solution in the first iteration, and found it too radical. Now we’re testing reduced penetration falloff to see if it’s enough to make maneuvering and flanking safer, without disrupting the fun."

Changing the alpha damage for some guns
"At the same time, we’re increasing the damage of 120mm guns to the damage rating of the 122mm guns (at the moment, this minuscule difference in caliber results in a 10% reduction of damage: 400 vs. 440). Their reload time gets increased as well, to keep the DPM intact"

Decreased alpha damage for some guns
"Currently, vehicles with very high alpha damage (the JagdPz. E 100, FV 4005, or FV 215b (183)) foster artillery-like gameplay. We’ll try to fix it by reducing excessively high alpha damage of very high-caliber (170+mm) guns, while also improving their reloading time to keep the DPM unchanged."

A new stun effect that's revised and improved after last year’s Sandbox test
"Implements the ability to reduce the stun effect and lift it completely with consumables, which are now multi-use
Added stun indicators that should help both teams quickly assess the situation and adjust their battle plans"

Revised ammo loads and shell and combat parameters
"No AP and HEAT shells for SPGs
Decreased penetration and alpha damage for HE shells, while also improving their accuracy, dispersion on the move, aiming and reload time"

Increased blast radius and revised the damage falloff within it

Introduced target area marking so that SPGs can show friendly vehicles where they aim

New alternate aim for SPGs to make artillery gameplay more engaging and efficient

What Went Wrong With World of Tanks Superbowl Advertisements?

World of Tanks Superbowl Advertisements - Were they the right choice?

World of Tanks had four Superbowl advertisements.  They were listed on the World of Tanks web page in a new item:
http://worldoftanks.com/en/news/general-news/tune-in-big-game/
You can watch all four on that link.

I talked with a random sampling of people who don't play World of Tanks that watched the Superbowl.  They included relatives, friends, coworkers, and some employees of local businesses.  Most of the gamers and the non gamers said they don't really remember the commercials that well and there was nothing in the commercial that made them want to go to the web site in the commercial or find out more about the game.

The few that remembered the commercials and said they laughed at the commercials were in the 12-22 year old age range.  The issue with that is World of Tanks is a free to play game that requires players to spend real money on additional game items to make a profit.  Most 12 to 22 year old people don't have a large disposable income.  Wargaming previously said the average World of Tanks player is a male in his 30's.  The commercials need to be targeted to people older than teenagers and people in their early 20's.  In my own experience playing the game, players in their mid 20's and younger than that usually don't spend much money on the game.  Even a $25 purchase of in game goods seems difficult for them when they can buy a whole other game or game collection on Steam for the same price or take their significant other out to a movie for the same price.  Wargaming needs to target people with more disposable income than players in the 12 to 22 year old age range.