|
njsykora posted:I'm trying to parse that and can't understand how what you're asking for is any different from a normal USB-C power supply? My laptop doesn't use USB-C for power delivery
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 09:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:26 |
|
|
So you want a universal laptop power adaptor, but to have a USBC input on it so you can use it with a power brick?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 10:49
|
|
|
kirbysuperstar posted:So you want a universal laptop power adaptor, but to have a USBC input on it so you can use it with a power brick? I think so yes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 10:59
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I'm intrigued and interested, but my big question is: could this be used to power a laptop with a power bank? The power bank's female USB-A port, with the USB-A male end of a charging cable, running to the USB-C male end of a charging cable, plugged into the female port of the power delivery device, which then plugs into the power adapter port of the laptop. In theory yes, I think, but it's going to depend on the power bank in question and the input voltage requirements of the laptop. You'll want to check the spec sheet for the power bank to make sure it can deliver the required voltage. There's also the possibility that even if the voltages work out that your power bank may only charge the laptop slowly. You see this sometimes with newer laptops that support USB-C charging natively, using an underpowered charger will merely slow the drain if the laptop is in use. Still potentially useful, but something to keep in mind.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 14:13
|
|
|
A USB battery power-bank is gonna output 5v, USB-C high power is I think you could directly charge a laptop that takes power over USB with a power-bank, but it's slow and not worth much. You could not do an arbitrary conversion of the battery bank's power into some other DC to power a laptop, because there are amperage limitations. Looking up a decent $50 anker battery bank, it does 4.8 amps max output. At 5V that's 25 watts. A laptop that's getting powered from its DC jack expects that it is being powered by the AC-DC converter it came with, which almost certainly is rated higher than 25 watts. The laptop will overdraw power. This will cause failure of either the DC-DC converter or the battery bank. Anything you see that's a usb plug on one end and a power jack on the other is amazon "we'll sell you anything, even if it destroys your stuff" scam junk. tl;dr no I have a raspberry pi that's a dedicated music player. It outputs sound to a mini-receiver via digital coax. The mini-receiver is powered by 12v DC. Instead of adding yet another wall-wart to power the pi, I wired a little 12v-5v DC converter into the chain. (The reciever had enough airspace in it's box that I could fit it internally.) So my pi is apparently powered by a USB cable that comes out of the receiver. So you can do dumb and weird things with DC-DC converters, they're cheap and efficient. But you have to look at specs. Klyith fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Dec 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 15:17
|
|
|
There are cables like this that have a PD trigger built in to get different voltages out, like this one that is 20v out with an HP laptop connector on it If you had a power bank that did PD and supported 20v out and could support the current (looks like there are powerbanks that can) then you could use that to charge a laptop.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 20:13
|
|
|
Klyith posted:I have a raspberry pi that's a dedicated music player. It outputs sound to a mini-receiver via digital coax. The mini-receiver is powered by 12v DC. Instead of adding yet another wall-wart to power the pi, I wired a little 12v-5v DC converter into the chain. (The reciever had enough airspace in it's box that I could fit it internally.) So my pi is apparently powered by a USB cable that comes out of the receiver. It's also the one place where I've found pulseaudio has a legitimate use, because it has the ability to use multicast and RTP - although it does require that you've got NTP properly configured.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 20:20
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:LTT recently did a video about how USB-C can be used for power delivery in instances that would otherwise require a power brick. I tried a cursory look-around and sure enough, there are devices are basically a female USB-C port on one end, and then the male rounded power-adapter plug on the other end. Presumably you could plug a charging cable's male end into the USB-C port, and the other end goes to a charger, and power your laptop that way. It depends on the power brick/bank, if the port doesn't talk usb-pd it will be stuck at 5v/2A or less. PD is what tells the laptop which voltages/amps to use and go higher, up to 19V/5A. I've recently purchased a cheap power bank whose usb-c port has usbpd up to 65w. Usb-c to barrel is usually aliexpress quality so i wouldn't trust it to not burn your house down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 21:43
|
|
|
Klyith posted:A USB battery power-bank is gonna output 5v, USB-C high power is There are batter packs specifically for these applications, but they start at $200 instead of $50 for this very reason. Anker markets these products under their “power house” line. e.g. https://www.anker.com/products/a1710?variant=37438708711574&ref=collectionBuy Anker scales that line up to silly levels, they have a $2200 one that is clearly designed to be a less deadly generator replacement. https://www.anker.com/products/a1780?variant=42174367400086&ref=collectionBuy
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 21:46
|
|
|
USB-C PD power banks that support laptops have been around for years. https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-usb-c-battery-packs-and-power-banks/ This article is 5 years old. It gets updated frequently, but still. They have always been typically targeted at low power USB-C devices like MacBook airs and chromebooks and such.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 23:28
|
|
|
Thank you for all the responses.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:30
|
|
|
USB-C PD implementations annoy me. My current laptop (Asus Zephyrus G14) supports it but charging with USB-C disables the battery health functionality that lets power delivery bypass the battery once it's charged instead of endlessly charging and discharging it. USB-C -> Barrel Connector might be a way around that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:39
|
|
|
Tiny Timbs posted:USB-C PD implementations annoy me. My current laptop (Asus Zephyrus G14) supports it but charging with USB-C disables the battery health functionality that lets power delivery bypass the battery once it's charged instead of endlessly charging and discharging it. USB-C -> Barrel Connector might be a way around that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:40
|
|
|
I think it’s just that it makes the circuit design a lot more complicated so it’s a matter of 
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:45
|
|
|
in other youtube drama news Digital Foundry's John Linneman and HWUB were trading tweets over the issue of "Fortnite on UE5 is pretty but nobody's ever going to see it because no real PC gamer is going to leave the settings like that" https://twitter.com/dark1x/status/1599720831021875203 https://twitter.com/HardwareUnboxed/status/1599724218945482752 https://twitter.com/dark1x/status/1599725973049839617 it doesn't seem like either of them got "mad" per se but this last tweet bugged me for how passive-aggressive it came off as
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:45
|
|
|
i think there are a lot of people who would rather play poorly but look at a pretty game than turn all the settings down to get maximal fps and minimal latency to score more headshots on 8 year olds
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:56
|
|
|
Is it just me or have the DF guys been getting in a lot of slapfights recently? They seem to be very “you agree with me or you’re an idiot” as of late.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:01
|
|
|
I think there are a lot of both and the frustrating thing is a lot of times you don't know who you are going to be paired up with in modern multiplayer games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:03
|
|
|
You don't understand I need a 4090 so I can run fortnite at 500fps
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:03
|
|
|
it is pretty ironic that console gamers are more likely to use the fortnite eye candy, because those systems can handle it at 60fps and that's all you need to drive the TVs most people have PCs can just as easily hit 60fps but the proliferation of cheap 144hz+ monitors means most players are aiming much higher
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:04
|
|
|
lol Fortnite isn’t Counterstrike. You don’t need to run it at 800x600 and 500fps to make the heads bigger and give you an extra microsecond to click them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:06
|
|
|
I mostly play single player because I'm not competitive and can't be bothered to learn how to not die on spawn repeatedly, but the example given in the twitter thread of a guy thinking he's hiding in the grass when on the other computer with the settings turned down he's out in the open not hidden at all really nails it. It's not about FPS so much as it's about not putting fancy graphics in the way of visual clarity. No graphics means you can see the things you want to shoot more easily. Edit: I should say I've never played Fortnite and the only clips I've seen are when someone uses it as a benchmark and shows a few seconds of gameplay.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:07
|
|
|
HUB are right that most PC players are going to do whatever they need to to hit max FPS, because the PC playerbase is going to be way more hardcore. Then most Fortnite players will be on consoles and phones and probably never see these tech demo shots because yeah sure they can technically run these features but they sure as poo poo aren't going to end up looking like those promo shots. It's like Minecraft RTX where yeah sure it's a nice thing for people to look at and show off Unreal Engine 5 but you're kidding yourself if you think people are actually going to play the game regularly like that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:11
|
|
|
Shipon posted:i think there are a lot of people who would rather play poorly but look at a pretty game than turn all the settings down to get maximal fps and minimal latency to score more headshots on 8 year olds It's me, the guy who plays Battlefield 4 and 1 in 2022 on a 3080 with my settings purely for clarity of vision and a 1% frame time of just below my monitors refresh rate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:13
|
|
|
njsykora posted:Then most Fortnite players will be on consoles and phones and probably never see these tech demo shots because yeah sure they can technically run these features but they sure as poo poo aren't going to end up looking like those promo shots. the new eye candy seems to look and run fine on PS5/XSX from the videos i've seen, the only caveat is that it's limited to the 60fps mode, enabling 120fps drops it back to UE4 tech most people don't even have 120hz capable TVs so the majority of console fortnite players with current gen systems will end up using the eye candy
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:14
|
|
|
His real beef was with the implementation of nice visual features imposing a competitive disadvantage. He just sounded like a frame rate snob because of raising the subject like a weirdo. They actually go on to have an interesting conversation once they get past the Real Competitive Gamer condescension….which I agree is particularly off in the context of Fortnite, a game with how many hundreds of millions of accounts at this point? Guy acts like nobody’s ever poured a cold one before playing a competitive multiplayer game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:16
|
|
|
TomR posted:I mostly play single player because I'm not competitive and can't be bothered to learn how to not die on spawn repeatedly, but the example given in the twitter thread of a guy thinking he's hiding in the grass when on the other computer with the settings turned down he's out in the open not hidden at all really nails it. It's not about FPS so much as it's about not putting fancy graphics in the way of visual clarity. No graphics means you can see the things you want to shoot more easily. That’s been a thing for decades and is usually solved by devs ensuring that certain settings can’t be turned all the way off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:16
|
|
|
HWUB Steve tends to categorize gamers into just two or three distinct camps at the extremes of the hobby and doesn't really acknowledge any of the many, many people in the middle. I'm reminded of a Q&A from a bit over a year ago where he said he doesn't understand why people keep bringing up increasing TDPs as an issue because "buyers of high-end hardware all overclock the snot out of their processors anyway." And all people who play multiplayer games play on the lowest settings possible, and so on. He takes the extreme ends of every spectrum and generalizes them, which is not a realistic way to look at the wider market.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:49
|
|
|
njsykora posted:HUB are right that most PC players are going to do whatever they need to to hit max FPS, because the PC playerbase is going to be way more hardcore. Then most Fortnite players will be on consoles and phones There are a shitload of PC fortnight players and most of them aren't hardcore gamers. Most of them are teens. (OTOH most of them are probably using a laptop / family pc with intel integrated video that can't do raytrace at all and need low settings for reasons other than competitive advantage.) Arivia posted:Is it just me or have the DF guys been getting in a lot of slapfights recently? They seem to be very “you agree with me or you’re an idiot” as of late. The DF guy wasn't the one saying something incredibly broad like "everyone who plays a game plays it like this" and refusing to climb down. Anyways the tech seems really exciting regardless of which game it's in or how many tryhards are turning it off. Good lighting makes a huge difference in how lifelike a game feels, and Lumen being efficient enough to do those effects with low-end RT hardware is amazing. Feels like the first generation of RT extensions developed by nvidia were brute forcing it or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:50
|
|
|
some additional context: hwub recently got some community feedback to do their mp fps game benchmarks on lower settings to reflect how people are likely to play them competitively, and they quickly expanded their benchmarks to include this. pretty standard fare, and it was cool to see them go about it the way they did instead of the typical youtuber/streamer getting pissy about the lightest critique ryzen+radeon perform really well in those situations too this is also a good opportunity to tell developer to let players have a custom "quality" and "performance" profile for when they want stuff to look good and when they want to be sweaty. watching all the biggest streamers broadcast last night's fortnite event with their pro gamer settings was really frustrating kliras fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Dec 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:53
|
|
|
HUB guy has said on videos that he always plays multiplayer games at the lowest visual settings.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:53
|
|
|
Shipon posted:i think there are a lot of people who would rather play poorly but look at a pretty game than turn all the settings down to get maximal fps and minimal latency to score more headshots on 8 year olds Look at the pretty game AND headshot all the 8 year olds. Live your best life
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:59
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Is it just me or have the DF guys been getting in a lot of slapfights recently? They seem to be very “you agree with me or you’re an idiot” as of late. DF has always held INCREDIBLY strongly to extremely subjective and arguably weak positions, it's just that usually those have been in videos that no one bothers arguing with rather than direct arguments with another person. HUB Steve's argument is not about FPS, it's about visual clarity. No doubt opting in to lower-contrast gaming puts you at a significant competitive disadvantage and not many people with a brain are going to do that in Fortnite. You don't opt in to low clarity, you set settings for maximum clarity (or close, if you are a weakling who wants some eye candy that doesn't cost you much competitive performance). I don't play Fortnite, but if I did no way in hell I'd be opting in to the new lighting model given a choice. It's significantly lower contrast and that is a major disadvantage. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Dec 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 16:21
|
|
|
the main lowered settings in fortnite pre-gi are for removing tree shade cover and a bunch of postprocessing crap getting in your way when scoping in normally i don't find that lowered settings in fps games improve clarity beyond framerate, but fortnite seems to actually benefit a bunch. on top of the all the visual clutter of the forts. shadows cast in any which way usually don't benefit the player
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 16:31
|
|
|
kliras posted:some additional context: hwub recently got some community feedback to do their mp fps game benchmarks on lower settings to reflect how people are likely to play them competitively, and they quickly expanded their benchmarks to include this. pretty standard fare, and it was cool to see them go about it the way they did instead of the typical youtuber/streamer getting pissy about the lightest critique There's absolutely value to that, and plenty of the audience that looks at performance reviews and benchmark videos are also the people who play competitive games at minimum settings despite their max-spec hardware. But like, after making a semi-joke reply you can climb down and explain the joke to the guy who took it too seriously, rather than double down and turn it into a slapfight where the other guy is doing it wrong. Benchmarking is an objective science with a subjective component: what are you optimizing for? K8.0 posted:DF has always held INCREDIBLY strongly to extremely subjective and arguably weak positions Everybody who plays competitive FPS games does so with min settings and cares about things like 0.1% lows: an objective position. The DF guy is the one saying things like "I think" and "I believe" and asking if anyone has data (which epic absolutely does).
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 16:34
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:You don't opt in to low clarity, you set settings for maximum clarity (or close, if you are a weakling who wants some eye candy that doesn't cost you much competitive performance). I don't play Fortnite, but if I did no way in hell I'd be opting in to the new lighting model given a choice. It's significantly lower contrast and that is a major disadvantage. I think the point is that Fortnite gamers aren't a monolith and many aren't serious competitors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 16:36
|
|
|
also there's no excusing the players who turn everything down including texture filtering. like, c'mon dude and then there's the whole discussion about whether to leave on something like dlss/fsr one of the things i love about valorant is that it pretty much always looks solid, even on minimum settings. it even has dedicated clarity settings which are a little poorly explained though
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 16:40
|
|
|
kliras posted:also there's no excusing the players who turn everything down including texture filtering. like, c'mon dude i see a lot of apex players turning the texture streaming pool size down to minimum, presumably in an attempt to lower texture resolution for better clarity, but the streaming system still tries to stream in high resolution textures and has a non-stop panic attack as it loads in a texture then immediately has to purge it to load something else, causing LOD popping/flicker everywhere, constantly it looks awful and over-burdening the streaming system is probably a performance detriment in a game like that i think it's beneficial to have a clean and stable image, so that any movement you notice is likely to be something you actually care about and not just a graphical glitch
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 16:50
|
|
|
yeah, apex legends' entire texture system is one of the most frustrating things about the janky source engine base, and i haven't for the life of me seen anyone who's been able to explain which setting you're really supposed to use for it it was literally one of the things that made me ditch the game, because it just looks like it's going to be a graphics and performance mess regardless. and maybe you can overcompensate by throwing some crazy gpu at it, but it just annoyed me how unoptimized the engine felt apex legends 2 can't come out soon enough. i wouldn't be surprised if respawn look forward to not having to work with whatever the current code base is as well
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 07:26 |
|
|
kliras posted:apex legends 2 can't come out soon enough. i wouldn't be surprised if respawn look forward to not having to work with whatever the current code base is as well To hell with Apex Legends 2, they need to make Titanfall 3
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 16:56
|
|