I kept thinking something was wrong when the desktop seemed to need excessive gamma adjustment to look right and started changing other things.

I finally realized that any changes to the TV's HDMI brightness or contrast made Quake look really bad. I put them back to the 50% default (same as what the VGA input was set at), and just used the built-in Windows DCCW to set the gamma to whatever it took to look right.

The DCCW slider has no numbers, but if the default center position is considered 50%, then where it looked good on the GTX 550 was no lower than 40%. The new GTX 1050 needs more like 20-25%, which seems like a big difference to me.

I did leave the TV's color setting down at 30% because the default was way oversaturated. Whether that's due to the TV, the video card, or just the difference between VGA and HDMI, I don't know.

Those occasional flashing surfaces in Quake are somewhat annoying. I've even seen some completely disappear, but only for a instant. It's random and doesn't repeat no matter how much I move around near the same spot and viewing direction. It almost has to be some kind of driver issue. 

Rick, I haven't seen you mention which Quake engine you're using. Or is it really ol' Fitzquake 0.85?

With the latest NVidia drivers I had a flashing issue for some builds of Mark V, but not the latest build. I don't know if Baker did something explicitly to fix it.

I've never had that flashing problem with the latest couple of Quakespasm builds. I do see it occasionally with ezQuake 3.0.

So there's something about the Quake engine renderers that can trigger the issue. 

Correct. I've only looked at Fitzquake so far. I also test stuff on Quakespasm but haven't had a chance yet. My copy of Mark V is probably not the latest version. 

can i7 3770K CPU PC use better GPU than GTX970 or would the performance from any better GPU be bottlenecked by this old CPU? there is no better CPU form my MoBo socket than the i7 3770K, which MoBo/socket to get nowadays? (play mostly DX9 games) thanks 

3rd Gen Intel could probably be fine with a 980ti. I am not sure about Pascal as I haven't done my homework for that yet.

Although upgrading from 970 to 980ti may not be worth it if you are gaming at 1080p 

I think whether or not to upgrade, and what to upgrade to, depends on what you are using now. 

No, your 3770k will not be a bottleneck in a system with even current gen cards (gtx 1080/Titan). You may lose a negligible amount of frames in very CPU intensive games, but that's it.

If you're on a budget I'd recommend giving your CPU a little OC and consider the gtx1070, which is about 25% faster than your 970. 

Almost $400 for a 25% improvement does not sound like a good deal to me, but then I'd never spend more than $300 on a video card even if it was for a brand new computer.

I never thought I was a tightwad. I guess I was wrong. 

$400 isn't cheap (might be able to find one for $300 on ebay). Sadly, that's the most economical performance boost atm. He's already at the price/performance sweet spot so any increase in performance from that will be premium dollars. Even if he spent 4x that much on a new build he would still only be at about a ~50% performance increase (in gaming).

My advice if you don't want a small upgrade to tide you over is to just save $$ until the next generation of cpus/gpus release (not ryzen, think icelake/volta) then buy after the first price drop.

play mostly DX9 games

Then upgrading probably isn't critical atm. I'd just wait. 

1920x1440@85Hz of course 

http://imgur.com/a/1b9zd 

I agree with Killpixel wait - especially at that resolution and DX9.

One word of advice: you will never regret saving up and building a top end system. They last longer as you waste less time and money upgrading over the years. I think it's better to "suffer" for a while and save up for a very powerful system paying attention to CPU/MoBo/GPU trends. Watch out for GPU price drops when nvidia announces new tech. I've gone the cheapskate route where I've bought a decent MoBo and then every few years upgraded CPU and video card but that's actually proven pretty wasteful overall. Save up and go big when the timing is right, I've never regretted it. 

stream 

AnandTech on Threadripper

Ever wanted to compile a sock map in 3 seconds? 

I am considering a hardware upgrade, but a new CPU now would mean a new motherboard (because fucking sockets are all over the place in shape) and then probably also a new OS.

I want to stay on [B]indows 7 for as long as possible. It's what I am currently using for my workstation.

Why can't anything be easy? 

if you can afford it, I'd say do it! getting win7 to work will take a little tlc since microsoft is only supporting the platform on windows spyware edition :( 

I don't want Windows 10.

Well, I can afford it, I'm just wondering if it would be worth it. I see that for 3D-rendering and stuff it's quite good, which is what my main purpose for using it would be. 

I don't want Windows 10.
I don't think we're gonna have much of a choice in the very near future: we're starting to see games announced for Win10 only. 

Just bought a Razer Lancehead for $80 USD. Im coming from a Logitech G400. I had a SteelSeries Rival 300 for a litte bit but returned it.

The Rival line of mice suffer a fatal flaw, in my opinion. Mouse1 and Mouse2 buttons are designed in a way that allows them to rub into each other and can inhibit the travel of the opposing button. It blew my mind that this was allowed to happen.

The Razer Lancehead is ambidextrous so any of you who are left handed may like it.

Only complaint would be the side buttons are a bit too low so I accidentally hit them. A little bit of grip retraining is in order. 

I use small ambidextrous laptop-size mini-mice. I find they offer good control and the size is best for wrist (no rsi) compared to these oversized heavy gaming mice/Razers with a million buttons... anyone else use mini mice? 

are fine for those who don't rest their palm on the mouse. I use Logitech's ergonomic mice, they're just perfect for my hand. I've owned a MX-510 for years now and TBH I'm quite amazed it's still working... 

I still own and use my original 2005 era Diamondback. It's smallish and has always felt right to me. I don't pick my mouse up while playing games. I use a high sensitivity. I don't like the more "ergonomic" mice these days. Feels like I have my hand placed on a rock. I never use the side buttons.

https://www.amazon.com/Razer-Diamondback-Salamander-Gaming-Mouse/dp/B00076TH8S

I guess the newer version was overpriced and not well received. 

I recently trashed my mx-518 of 5 years and replaced it with a G400s - it's essentially the same mouse with better optics. I'm not a fan of the razer mice I've tried (love their keyboards though). 

I use a "vertical" mouse that I bought from Anker on amazon:
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FPAVUHC/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

It's pretty great so far, but the plastic it's made from has not always held up that well in the long run - back in like, 2010 or so I owned a Razer Abyssus that was made of similar stuff and ended up "peeling" from sweat. Pretty gross!

The vertical mouse is really comfortable in my experience. It's supposed to be good for your wrist since having it perpendicular to your desk rather than parallel is a more natural position. I never had wrist problems before, but I also don't now so I can testify that it doesn't cause them... 

Mugwump yeah true, I use a wrist support glove on both hands:

http://www.fishpond.co.nz/Health/IMAK-SmartGlove-Wrist-Support-Smart-Glv-Sm/0741360138186