Looks like the CX430 Setsul mentioned is possible to get for like 18 bucks: http://slickdeals.net/f/6615850-corsair-cx430-v2-3-430w-80-bronze-power-supply-17-99-ac-ar-fs-with-shoprunner-newegg

antec neo eco 620W (apparently made by seasonic) for 41 bucks after rebate.
http://slickdeals.net/f/6615998-antec-neo-eco-620c-620w-power-supply-41-after-30-rebate-coupon-free-shipping

Damn not bad deals...I may get the 620w myself for a future build.

It is most likely the PSU going bad :(

Screen tearing is greatly reduced (much less noticeable) largely as a consequence of the 120hz/144hz refresh rate, so I think they kind of play into eachother.

Ggglygy sorry about that, was at work, accepted now.
I usually am not free until 9/9:30 pm pst most nights, you an eastie?

If time and logistics weren't a challenge, probably, but you don't really lose much this way. You are playing against the same opponent for the entire test, so the opponent is already controlled in essence.

The only variable that is changed is the refresh rate of the monitor. Same setup, same arena, same class, you're just taking the sum of two people's results at once.

bear- what would be a better scenario? It doesn't get much more controlled than the exact same tiny arena and 1v1 duel. Yes there is a large amount of variability one round to the next but depending on the number of trials you can also determine if it's statistically significant. That's what statistics is all about.

In the interest of time it makes sense to have both players swap at the same time as you're going to get a bigger delta.

Tom- the whole point is to collect data to back it up.

I’m curious if those with 120hz/144hz TN monitors in the TF2 community would be able to help with a little data collection to help quantify performance differences between 120hz and 60hz gameplay. I realize this is a tired subject, but bear with me.

Who: you and a buddy who both have 120hz or 144hz monitors.
Why: Get some quantifiable data on your performance differences on 120+hz vs 60hz monitors. There’s plenty of anecdotal information out there on the improvements, but it would nice to be able to quantify some of the possible performance deltas for others. Interestingly even outside of this community barely any formal data actually exists. Also, I’m a statistics and data nerd at heart. :)

How: I feel like mge is a pretty ideal controlled test case between two players.
Choose one arena and one class (preferably scout or soldier) for the entirety of the test with your friend.

One set of rounds are played with Player A @120hz/144hz vs Player B @ 60hz

Preferably you play at least 3 rounds. The more rounds the better to form a moderately confident baseline, but I’ll take what I can get.

Record your scores for each individual round.

Now swap your refresh rates:

Player B uses 120hz/144hz vs Player A @ 60hz

Play the same arena and choose same class as before.

Record your scores for the same amount of rounds.

Report back your results for each round.

It would be nice to note if you are using lightboost or not or if you aren’t able to push enough fps to keep 120+ majority of the time.

I know this is asking a lot but I'm sure some of you are probably interested in this kind of data as well. Thanks in advance for any help!

here's your 2 GB stick:
http://www.kingston.com/datasheets/KVR16N11_2.pdf

So did you try Taro's recommendation?

If you think it's a memory issue your options are basically try some different sticks at this point. There's no point matching the sticks you have because you need to operate under the assumption they are bad since the issue persisted when you tried each stick by itself.

I'm still not sure why you wouldn't be pursuing other troubleshooting routes in the meantime, but you seem convinced it's a memory issue so hopefully some new sticks fix your issue. (ideally you can borrow some to test, otherwise $$).

Don't mix a new stick with your existing ones, just treat the existing ones you have as bad and don't use them.

so can you state the solution so that joe internet user who experiences your problem in another galaxy can look back at this thread and find a fix for his same problem too :) Is it just that spotify was running?

single channel memory shouldn't be a 'big bottleneck', you wouldn't even notice it under normal circumstances and it shouldn't affect OS performance to any meaningful degree. You're looking at 1-2% impact on performance vs dual channel in specific applications, if that. Only noticeable through benchmarks.

If it's the memory that's the issue it's not because its single channel

Since we don't know exactly what was done on day 1 (when your problems began), and what has been installed from the get go it makes sense to eliminate driver conflicts as an issue. As unlikely as you may think it is, it's still important to do it and rule it out.

The key to troubleshooting is to eliminate the low hanging fruit and work your way up. Low hanging fruit is software issues. You've already been replacing multiple pieces of hardware with no result so I would think you'd be a little more willing to explore things that won't affect your pocket book.

I've been troubleshooting random shit with computers for 20 years and it never pays to leave a stone unturned.

Have you swapped in your previous graphics card at this point or do you no longer have it?

Just to rule another thing out Boot into Safe mode and Run driversweeper
http://www.guru3d.com/content_page/guru3d_driver_sweeper.html

It can clean up any issues with mouse/audio/video drivers.

I'm guessing you already pulled the trigger, but I have 2 Dell U2412m at work, and I have a Asus VG248QE at home.

While the colors are nice on the Dell's it's not that big of a difference, I certainly wouldn't choose it over 144hz if I played any kind of games. The only case where I'd pick the dell's is if I was doing important color work, but then again I'm a smooth frame junky.

After calibrating my Asus I really don't notice a glaring difference when I get home. 144hz is pleasant.

okay so you don't currently have ccc on your computer. Just to be sure there's no old drivers flying around you should try driversweeper, if you have not.

Since you already talked about wiping your hard drive I'm assuming you already did a full format and fresh windows install since experiencing the issue.

Any unusual CPU activity in task manager when you are 'idle'?

Okay, You mentioned the problem started when you switched to a new graphics card and it doesn't really sound like that has been completely explored.

Just because you see performance issues on the desktop does not mean something involving the change in graphics card (and it's drivers) is not the issue. I had a similar issue when I swapped cards and I traced it down to driver conflicts (and ATI catalyst control center) creating general windows performance problems. Video playback was laggy, and I'd get framerate hitches and other performance issues on the desktop.

Do you have ATI catalyst control center installed for your card? Have you looked at CPU utilization in task manager when you're experience performance issues?

Do you see anything taking CPU cycles when you're idle? The main culprit for me was catalyst control center which I believe is ccc.exe. You do not need the catalyst control center to use your graphics card, it can be uninstalled. In fact you should probably try uninstalling all your graphic drivers and if you have it catalyst control center, and then reboot. Then use the following program to clean up any graphic drivers still left over:
http://www.guru3d.com/content_page/guru3d_driver_sweeper.html

You could also have driver remnants from your previous card causing an issue, the driver sweeper program can remove those. Reboot again and do not manually install any driver. Windows will likely automatically install a driver- without manually installing any driver see if you still are experiencing the performance issues.