This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Gametrailers gives Battlefield 4 PC 9.5 + PS4 vs X1 video comparison

#21Snuckie7Posted 10/29/2013 12:48:03 AM
a687947 posted...
Snuckie7 posted...
a687947 posted...
You don't get how averages work do you?


You don't get how minimums work do you?


So you don't understand how averages work. Please learn to comprehend what people are saying before making yourself look like a moron. Also just because, 53 FPS was the minimum that was reached on their computer, presumably playing Battlefield 4. I think this adequately shows my understanding of minimums, at least in the case of this person playing Battlefield 4 on their computer.


If you understood minimums, why would you bring averages into a discussion about minimums?
---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | MSI 7950 Twin Frozr III | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W
#22a687947Posted 10/29/2013 12:52:33 AM
Snuckie7 posted...
a687947 posted...
Snuckie7 posted...
a687947 posted...
You don't get how averages work do you?


You don't get how minimums work do you?


So you don't understand how averages work. Please learn to comprehend what people are saying before making yourself look like a moron. Also just because, 53 FPS was the minimum that was reached on their computer, presumably playing Battlefield 4. I think this adequately shows my understanding of minimums, at least in the case of this person playing Battlefield 4 on their computer.


If you understood minimums, why would you bring averages into a discussion about minimums?


So you also lack reading comprehension? It was specifically stated that they averaged 60fps, even with a minimum of 53fps, not once was it claimed that it never dropped below 60fps
#23Snuckie7Posted 10/29/2013 12:55:21 AM
a687947 posted...
Snuckie7 posted...
a687947 posted...
Snuckie7 posted...
a687947 posted...
You don't get how averages work do you?


You don't get how minimums work do you?


So you don't understand how averages work. Please learn to comprehend what people are saying before making yourself look like a moron. Also just because, 53 FPS was the minimum that was reached on their computer, presumably playing Battlefield 4. I think this adequately shows my understanding of minimums, at least in the case of this person playing Battlefield 4 on their computer.


If you understood minimums, why would you bring averages into a discussion about minimums?


So you also lack reading comprehension? It was specifically stated that they averaged 60fps, even with a minimum of 53fps, not once was it claimed that it never dropped below 60fps


And? That's a minimum of 53fps, which is below 60, which is what I said.
---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | MSI 7950 Twin Frozr III | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W
#24a687947Posted 10/29/2013 1:07:06 AM
Snuckie7 posted...
a687947 posted...
Snuckie7 posted...
a687947 posted...
Snuckie7 posted...


You don't get how minimums work do you?


So you don't understand how averages work. Please learn to comprehend what people are saying before making yourself look like a moron. Also just because, 53 FPS was the minimum that was reached on their computer, presumably playing Battlefield 4. I think this adequately shows my understanding of minimums, at least in the case of this person playing Battlefield 4 on their computer.


If you understood minimums, why would you bring averages into a discussion about minimums?


So you also lack reading comprehension? It was specifically stated that they averaged 60fps, even with a minimum of 53fps, not once was it claimed that it never dropped below 60fps


And? That's a minimum of 53fps, which is below 60, which is what I said.


Well at least you know which number is lower, that's a start. Although it is completely irrelevant to what you originally replied to considering the 53fps was already stated. What exactly does that have to do with their computer averaging 60fps? Which was the point of their post.
#25Snuckie7Posted 10/29/2013 1:15:29 AM
a687947 posted...
Snuckie7 posted...
And? That's a minimum of 53fps, which is below 60, which is what I said.


Well at least you know which number is lower, that's a start. Although it is completely irrelevant to what you originally replied to considering the 53fps was already stated. What exactly does that have to do with their computer averaging 60fps? Which was the point of their post.

Irrelevant to what I replied to? Maybe you should work on that reading comprehension a bit, or did you miss this line?

So much for the whole "You need moar corez!"

---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | MSI 7950 Twin Frozr III | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W
#26KenimaticPosted 10/29/2013 1:18:39 AM
Oh God, please.
#27KenimaticPosted 10/29/2013 1:18:53 AM
Why can't we be friends.
#28nIMr0D888Posted 10/29/2013 1:24:06 AM
[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]
#29Tommy2GoGoPosted 10/29/2013 3:56:44 AM
"It Appears That Most Pc Gamers Are 30 Year Old Social Degenerates Who Call Them Selves The Master Race You're Just Jellous That You Have No Childhood Any. More"
I lol'd.