MSI's Gaming 27T AIO May Not Need All 8 GB Of VRAM

Status
Not open for further replies.

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
What is "Super RAID 4"? I have been doing RAIDs for along time and almost never seen RAID 4. I did do some digging and the only RAID 4 I found was a mix between 3 (another rare RAID level) and 5 (very common) and requires at least 3 drives to be done.

Must be some marketing jumbo. That and the 8GB of VRAM is overkill.
 

poochiepiano

Distinguished
Nov 1, 2010
222
0
18,710
13
at the same time, if they chose to take off some of the vRAM, people would be crying over the gimping of hardware for AIOs and trying to nickel and dime customers with mediocre equipment at a premium price.
 

FUNANDJAM

Honorable
Nov 11, 2014
19
1
10,515
0
No gsync? Unless I completely overlooked it, I didn't see it mentioned anywhere. I'd be glad if someone pointed out where it says it has it. Now that laptops have gsync in them, you'd think that at the starting price of about $2700 that this device would have it too.
 

turkey3_scratch

Polypheme
Ambassador
"As it is a common misconception that more RAM or vRAM always leads to higher performance, this is mostly just a marketing tactic."

So is the fact that they put I7s instead of I5s in gaming-oriented computers.
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator


Actually a i7 does have some benefits for come games and on higher end GPUs (normally dual GPUs more) while 8GB of VRAM for the majority of games is pointless at 1080P even maxed out.
 

jase240

Honorable
Aug 4, 2012
116
0
10,690
4
What is "Super RAID 4"? I have been doing RAIDs for along time and almost never seen RAID 4. I did do some digging and the only RAID 4 I found was a mix between 3 (another rare RAID level) and 5 (very common) and requires at least 3 drives to be done.

Must be some marketing jumbo. That and the 8GB of VRAM is overkill.
It says that is is a 4TB and a 2TB hard drive in "Super RAID", probably JBOD and not really RAID at all.

JBOD( Just a Bunch Of Disks ) only adds capacities together of drives and does not improve speed nor add redundancy at all.
 

turkey3_scratch

Polypheme
Ambassador


True but currently it won't be worth the extra $100 over the I5. I see lots of gaming PCs prebuilt with an I7 and a GTX 960 for instance.
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator


So pretty much just marketing.
 

hst101rox

Reputable
Aug 28, 2014
436
0
4,810
14
What is "Super RAID 4"? I have been doing RAIDs for along time and almost never seen RAID 4. I did do some digging and the only RAID 4 I found was a mix between 3 (another rare RAID level) and 5 (very common) and requires at least 3 drives to be done.

Must be some marketing jumbo. That and the 8GB of VRAM is overkill.
Hehe! I made the same mistake when MSI came out with 'SuperRAID 2'. It really confused me because RAID 2 isn't really used. But figured out they meant 2.0 of their RAID 0 tech.
4.0 are PCI express SSDs. I think 3.0 is m.2 SATA style SSDs.
 
What would make far more sense:

1) 4GB VRAM and put savings into screen
2) 2560x1440 screen
3) RAID SSD? (diminishing returns say why bother?)
4) 16GB vs 8GB... I'm okay with that.

I just can't get past the 1080p screen. I don't have a problem with 16GB DDR4, RAID etc if that's something someone wants but it would simply make more sense to drop/lower one of these components to put in a 1440p for the same size.

1080p looks horrible when viewed close as well on a 27" screen. Poor pixel density.
 

ErikVinoya

Honorable
May 11, 2014
202
0
10,710
21
MSI All-in-One PC AG270 2QC 3K-001US over at NewEgg is a similar model but with a 2K screen, 970m 6GB, 12GB RAM, 1TB HDD + 128GB SSD.

Only $1500.

Its a slick deal.

Newegg Link
Why is it that this has 1440p screen and 970M GPU, while in the one here in the article has a 1080p, and a more powerful 980M GPU?
 


Hmm, perhaps I need a comma or something in there for clarity. It isn't meant to be read Super RAID 4, but as Super RAID between a 4 TB and a 2 TB drive. It is mostly marketing, but seems like something I should reach out to MSI to clarify.
 


MSI didn't mention G-Sync support, so unless they neglected to mention it, it doesn't have it. Would be nice though.
 


I use a 32" 1080p display, and I think it looks good, but that is an opinion. I certainly agree that as it is, this should not have a 1080p display though. 4 GB vRAM with a 2K display would be much better.

I also didn't really go into it in the article as I personally love to have tons of storage space, but the 4 TB HDD is really over kill too, let alone having another 2 TB with it. Most users aren't going to use even a third of that, so it would make a lot of sense to drop down to a 2 TB HDD and either lower the cost or toss that money into the display also.
 

FUNANDJAM

Honorable
Nov 11, 2014
19
1
10,515
0


MSI didn't mention G-Sync support, so unless they neglected to mention it, it doesn't have it. Would be nice though.
It's not that it is a bad device, I just feel like MSI missed a really big opportunity with this AIO at such high premium price by not having gsync included, even if it is only could do up to a max of 60hz. Most likely the successor to it will have gsync.
 

rwinches

Distinguished
Jun 29, 2006
888
0
19,060
30
The point here is the capability of adding two more monitors at 1080p.
Not having a desktop tower is the pitch, which might appeal to the targeted buyer that would pony up $2700 for this.

 

thormejh

Honorable
Feb 10, 2014
57
0
10,640
4
everyone always has something to complain about, why does everyone want 1440 in things that cant handle that resolution? i have a 980m in my 1080 and yea it works great at 1080 75hz, but put it up to 1440 and its not working so great anymore. so then what, you already have to lower the settings when you just bought it? and next year you are already on medium and low? please.
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator


The point is that there is no reason for 8GB VRAM on a 1080P screen. They have another one of these with a 1440P screen with a GTX 970m instead. It is just bad design choices. It should have been the other way around (the 1440P screen should have had the 980m with 8GB and the 970m should have been in this one).
 

FUNANDJAM

Honorable
Nov 11, 2014
19
1
10,515
0


You can do the same with a laptop by adding monitors. My point is that so many laptops are now advertised with gsync as a main selling point and they cost much less than this AIO.
perfect example, is an msi laptop that has same 980m AND does gsync but at $1700:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834152899&cm_re=GT72_DOMINATOR_PRO_G-_-34-152-899-_-Product

I get it, it's a 27"in screen, but at $2700 I feel the price is entirely way too high without gsync. I'm sure whoever buys this will have a good experience, just a shame no gsync.
 


Umm..
I'm not sure why you said your 1080p 32" looked okay, then right after agreed the screen in question should be a higher resolution.

Anyway, the recommended pixel density is calculated as a function of diagonal to viewing distance. If you have a 1080p 32" perhaps that's an HDTV viewed from a large distance but I'm just guessing.

I'm a 1:1 ratio on my 27" (about 27" away from monitor) and I can say that a 1920x1080, 27" monitor from the same distance looks a lot worse.
 
I use a 32" 1080p display, and I think it looks good, but that is an opinion. I certainly agree that as it is, this should not have a 1080p display though. 4 GB vRAM with a 2K display would be much better.

I also didn't really go into it in the article as I personally love to have tons of storage space, but the 4 TB HDD is really over kill too, let alone having another 2 TB with it. Most users aren't going to use even a third of that, so it would make a lot of sense to drop down to a 2 TB HDD and either lower the cost or toss that money into the display also.[/quotemsg]

Umm..
I'm not sure why you said your 1080p 32" looked okay, then right after agreed the screen in question should be a higher resolution.

Anyway, the recommended pixel density is calculated as a function of diagonal to viewing distance. If you have a 1080p 32" perhaps that's an HDTV viewed from a large distance but I'm just guessing.

I'm a 1:1 ratio on my 27" (about 27" away from monitor) and I can say that a 1920x1080, 27" monitor from the same distance looks a lot worse.
You miss understand my reason for wanting a higher resolution. I care very little for the PPI rating on a display, and actually prefer large displays. If I could pick between a 24" or 50" 1080p display, I would take the 50" every time.

I think the resolution needs to be higher in order to take advantage of the hardware inside, and because it creates a better image overall. I personally don't care if that image is scaled over a large display or on a smaller one, as I feel the image is just as good either way, but I sit about 3 feet from my display typically when using it and don't have the best eye sight so I like larger displays.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS