Vertical fov is already the same on every possible setup for the same fov_desirec value, including eyefinity.
You only have less horizontal fov with 4:3.

chris' fps configs.
For both.
Frame drops are just part of TF2 and have nothing to do with your netsettings
If your internet randomly disconnects (not just when playing tf2) then your connection or your router has a serious problem.

sv_restrict_aspect_ratio_fov 1/2
1 is the default. The etf2l config manually disables this restriction by setting it to 0.

#5
Most if this is correct, but cl_cmdrate/cl_updaterate > 66 is just bullshit.
It just screws up cl_interp_ratio.

Quote from the valve developer wiki (Basic Networking)

Edit: I just saw that you got that from stabby. stabby stabby's advice concerning the TF2 engine is horrible. He reccomends settings that cancel each other out, launch parameters that don't even exist and a lot of other stuff that is questionable at best.

Edit2: 60000 is fine, higher than 100000 won't change anything, it's unlikely that you even need more than 60000. If your rate is higher than your download/upload it might raise your ping, but honestly TF2 won't ever need more than 100kbits download and even less upload. Unless you're using ISDN and not DSL you'll be fine.

For pubs the nerf might be ok. Moving like a electroshocked monkey is hammering on your keyboard could get you out alive.
But essentially it got nerfed into oblivion. The equalizer split was good, it removed the option to just go beserk and wreck everything while on 10 HP but this...

Just take a look at it:
High HP:
- can't get healed
->inferior to every other weapon

Low HP before the nerf:
+ move faster
- can't get healed
(-) fast = "SHOOT ME" sign
->if you're close, you're dead, otherwise you might get away

Low HP after the nerf:
+ move faster
- can't get healed
- VISIBLE "SHOOT ME" SIGN
- mini-crits
- mini-crits 1 second after you switched weapons
->you're dead, mini-crits from across the map will kill you

There's only one situation where rocketjumping or the disciplinary action wouldn't do the same/better: You're alone, around a corner, everyone is far away so no one can kill you, no one can heal you, you can't use the whip and you don't have enough HP left to jump.

That doesn't even happen in comp (unless you get yourself down to 10 hp after spawning). Apart from rollouts it's useless.

As a matter of fact Valve stated that they would ban all OpenPlugin users and they did. Some people using self-compiled versions might not have been banned but that's about it.

Your post contains of two sentences which contradict each other:
"This account right here got banned because of it."
"(...) so i don't think Open Plugin's gonna get someone banned."
?!

Oh and how did you change your profile description if your account was hijacked?

demoman atm
mouswheel ftw

exec "default_class.cfg"

bind "MOUSE1" "+attack"

bind "MOUSE2" "+attack2"
bind "MWHEELUP" "invprev"
bind "MWHEELDOWN" "invnext"

bind "1" "slot1"
bind "2" "slot2"
bind "3" "slot3"

unbind "q"
bind "q" "mp_showrespawntimes"
bind "r" "+reload"
bind "t" "incrementvar r_drawviewmodel 0 1 1"

bind "F1" "load_itempreset 0; exec demoman.cfg"
bind "F2" "load_itempreset 1; exec demoman.cfg"
bind "F3" "load_itempreset 2; exec turnscript.cfg"
bind "F4" "load_itempreset 3; exec demoman.cfg"

tf_remember_activeweapon "1"
cl_autoreload "1"
r_drawviewmodel "1"
viewmodel_fov "75"
crosshair "0"

//joinclass script
alias -joinclass "bind 1 slot1; bind 2 slot2; bind 3 slot3; bind 4 slot4; bind 5 slot5; bind 6 slot6; bind 7 slot7; bind 8 slot8; bind 9 slot9"

This is exactly the point i'm trying to make.
You get the same performance for the same price if you max Ivy Bridge out. Why go for Ivy Bridge then? It has no further potential. People tend to forget that AVX2 (256 bit vs AVX 128 bit), FMA, additional execution ports and DOUBLED CACHE BANDWIDTH (lol intel) give Haswell a lot of reserves for more optimised programs.

Denied
Look down for explanation.

The IPC increase is actually 5-15% for programs not using AVX/AVX2 or FMA3.

Haswell is not much worse in terms of thermals compared to Ivy Bridge either. Both are shit compared to Sandy Bridge though.

The overclockability however varies greatly between the individual Haswell chips.

Your worst case is basically 4.2GHz, pretty much any aftermarket cooler should have no problems handling the heat. Even with only the average 10% IPC increase you'd need to OC Ivy Bridge to 4.6GHz to tie in terms of performance.
Good luck overclocking Ivy Bridge to 4.7GHz without an expensive cooler to outperform Haswell.

Best case: 4.6GHz on air with a good cooler, 4.3-4.4 with a cheaper cooler.

CPU + mobo will be 30-50$ more for Haswell than for Ivy Bridge.

You'd have to spend like 50 bucks more on a cpu cooler for getting Ivy Bridge to a speed where it could compete with Haswell on a cheaper cooler.

Holy necro

K or non-K?
I'd recommend 4670K + Gigabyte Z87X-D3H.

You have three options:
1. Spend 200$ for a FX-8350 but expect fps drops down to 60.
2. Spend 400$ for an i5-4670K and a new motherboard and get >120 fps almost always (probably 200+ in 6s).
3. Spend 700-800$ for an i7-3930K/4930K and a new motherboard and forget what fps drops are

3 > 2 > 1
You want to save money and you're fine with the fps drops? ->1
You have enough money for 2 and don't want to whine about lag? ->2
You're rich and like throwing money at overprized hardware? ->3

Did you read that in your horoscope? It's about as scientific as that.

Yes, everything will be stretched wider. If someone wants to see how it looks just watch kaidus' stream.

LOOK AT BOTH IN FULLSCREEN THIS SITE RESIZES THEM MAKING 4:3 A LOT HIGHER
16:9 1366*768
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=157204789

http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/919015141309381835/BBD776F7812B33067AC8D38DF07319E6BEBB0019/

4:3 1024*768
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=157205382

http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/919015141309414142/70A1AFF74FB7354F9BE267003D527919F909CB2F/

Vertical fov stays the same, fov per pixel, fov per inch, etc. stays the same. It basically looks like someone cut off a bit of your screen on the sides compared to 16:9.

No, because of the black bars you get on the left and right side a 16:9/16:10 used in 4:3 has effectively a smaller size than a 4:3 monitor with them same ". Even when used in 16:9/16:10 the models will stay the same size. Therefore the models are actually a bit larger on the 4:3 monitor irl. That might be a part of how the myth "4:3 gives you bigger models" was created.

You clearly don't know how fov works.
Unless you switched monitors from 16:9 to 4:3 (both same ") just to use 1024*768 the models will be exactly the same size.