I got this tower that is of no use to me anymore, and I'm interested in getting some cash back for the individual components(i.e. RAM stick, Vid Card etc). Are there any,....lets say, PC Pawn shops, so to speak, where I can do that, or am I S.o.L?What store/shop can I go sell my PC parts?
Ebay is always an option. There areprobably some computer stores that will buy your pc parts, but I don't know of any.What store/shop can I go sell my PC parts?
Try here first: [url]http://www.craigslist.org/[/url]Before going on eBay.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
ntel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo processor E6700 (2.66GHz) or Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Quad pro
Need help deciding.ntel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo processor E6700 (2.66GHz) or Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Quad pro
Same here, this is being asked across many boards atm.From what I gather everybody has a different opinion , heres a few variations:1) Quad Core is pointless because games wont use it before the TRUE quads are out1 Counter ) Penryn only has 4 more MB L Cache , its not a big increase over Qseries (but overclocks better, uses less watt), TRUE NATIVE doesnt come out until 2009. (Basically not worth the wait)2) EXX50 (2.6+) is better, because higher clock speed will be more important.2 Counter ) The difference between say 2.4 GHZ Quad and 3.0 GHZ is not that big - around 5-6-8-9-10 FPS difference in SINGLE THREADED %26 2-core only , Quad core will be more future proof for those games (which are coming Q4 and 2008) will have more optimization for Quad Cores)3) 2 Core higher clockspeed is better now for CURRENT games (which is true).3 Counter ) But most games now dont even need a Duo Core at all to max (Including STALKER) , Crysis only needs E6600 for Ultra High (Confirmed by Crytek CEO) so why have have higher speed Duo Core, whena Quad Core will already max CURRENT games anyway (But with slightly slower loading times).I dont know, some people thing ''Quad is for bragging rights, all flash no show'' or ''High clocked 2 Cores is just for GHZ whores''.Its all a gamble, personally I'm leaning towards Quad Core, I'm not an Frame-rate or Overclocker junkie, I jsut want some future proof hardware , I dont find Penryn (6 months off) worth the wait, I could get a Q6600 now , leave it at stock or slightly O/C it , and save that future penryn money towards the Nvidia 9800 series which would overall give a much bigger improvement in games.No doubt some people will correct me on this ... I dont mind, I cant predict the future , but logically 4 cores > 2 no matter how you look at it, also 8 MB Cache > 4 MB L Cachentel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo processor E6700 (2.66GHz) or Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Quad pro
Thanks for the input.
it depends if you're doing a lot of video and sound editing, photoshoping, endoding, decodingor otherapplication that utilizes quad core to get the task done faster. if you're only doing gaming and nothing else, just gete6600. but then again, the price difference between e6600 and q6600 is not that muchafterJuly.
[QUOTE=''SDxSnOOpZ'']it depends if you're doing a lot of video and sound editing, photoshoping, endoding, decodingor otherapplication that utilizes quad core to get the task done faster. if you're only doing gaming and nothing else, just gete6600. but then again, the price difference between e6600 and q6600 is not that muchafterJuly.[/QUOTE]Indeed, E6600 would definatly be enough for along while, but since there isnt a massive price gap I'm not so sure it would be a wise choice, I mean check this out:![]()
Lost Planet, a System hogging game, which makes some use of the Quad cores, already has a nice performance improvement even at stock speeds of Q6600 ... I mean whats stopping most future games that support it from following suit?
Same here, this is being asked across many boards atm.From what I gather everybody has a different opinion , heres a few variations:1) Quad Core is pointless because games wont use it before the TRUE quads are out1 Counter ) Penryn only has 4 more MB L Cache , its not a big increase over Qseries (but overclocks better, uses less watt), TRUE NATIVE doesnt come out until 2009. (Basically not worth the wait)2) EXX50 (2.6+) is better, because higher clock speed will be more important.2 Counter ) The difference between say 2.4 GHZ Quad and 3.0 GHZ is not that big - around 5-6-8-9-10 FPS difference in SINGLE THREADED %26 2-core only , Quad core will be more future proof for those games (which are coming Q4 and 2008) will have more optimization for Quad Cores)3) 2 Core higher clockspeed is better now for CURRENT games (which is true).3 Counter ) But most games now dont even need a Duo Core at all to max (Including STALKER) , Crysis only needs E6600 for Ultra High (Confirmed by Crytek CEO) so why have have higher speed Duo Core, whena Quad Core will already max CURRENT games anyway (But with slightly slower loading times).I dont know, some people thing ''Quad is for bragging rights, all flash no show'' or ''High clocked 2 Cores is just for GHZ whores''.Its all a gamble, personally I'm leaning towards Quad Core, I'm not an Frame-rate or Overclocker junkie, I jsut want some future proof hardware , I dont find Penryn (6 months off) worth the wait, I could get a Q6600 now , leave it at stock or slightly O/C it , and save that future penryn money towards the Nvidia 9800 series which would overall give a much bigger improvement in games.No doubt some people will correct me on this ... I dont mind, I cant predict the future , but logically 4 cores > 2 no matter how you look at it, also 8 MB Cache > 4 MB L Cachentel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo processor E6700 (2.66GHz) or Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Quad pro
Thanks for the input.
it depends if you're doing a lot of video and sound editing, photoshoping, endoding, decodingor otherapplication that utilizes quad core to get the task done faster. if you're only doing gaming and nothing else, just gete6600. but then again, the price difference between e6600 and q6600 is not that muchafterJuly.
[QUOTE=''SDxSnOOpZ'']it depends if you're doing a lot of video and sound editing, photoshoping, endoding, decodingor otherapplication that utilizes quad core to get the task done faster. if you're only doing gaming and nothing else, just gete6600. but then again, the price difference between e6600 and q6600 is not that muchafterJuly.[/QUOTE]Indeed, E6600 would definatly be enough for along while, but since there isnt a massive price gap I'm not so sure it would be a wise choice, I mean check this out:
Budget $3500 help me build my rig
Ok I will be definetly buying a new computer in the 2nd week of August :)
I was on here last month asking for recommended systems and I will be buying all things needed 1st-2nd week of august SO what computer would you recommend with $3,500 ? Im looking to go all out as i will have enough money to upgrade every year if need be.
So can you tell me what rig you would build with that budget all help suggestions and comments will be taken on board as im 3 weeks away from buying this :) Budget $3500 help me build my rig
So you need a monitor, speakers, OS, keyboard %26 mouse along with the PC itself?Budget $3500 help me build my rig
yeah the whole lot apart from a Monitor which I already have :)
What size monitor do you have?
22'' Widescreen
3500 is kinda overkill especially if your not getting a huge monitor.
Here you go.[url]http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/wishlist/PublicWishDetail.asp?WishListNumber=7527187[/url]Although I don't see the point of making a build 1 month before buying, since prices will change and new things will possibly come out that offer a better bang for the buck.
[QUOTE=''Hiryuu_'']Here you go.[url]http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/wishlist/PublicWishDetail.asp?WishListNumber=7527187[/url]Although I don't see the point of making a build 1 month before buying, since prices will change and new things will possibly come out that offer a better bang for the buck.[/QUOTE]its because I like to see what system people build if they had the money and various opinions etc help my decisions thanks for building a system from the ground up :) appreciate it
You're in England right?Prices are pretty high over here so dont expect to get as much for the money! But I suppose if you have such a great budget it doesnt matter that much...
[QUOTE=''skinnypete91'']You're in England right?Prices are pretty high over here so dont expect to get as much for the money! But I suppose if you have such a great budget it doesnt matter that much...[/QUOTE]Yes I am in the UK but i can buy my parts from the USA as i have family there :)
How about giving me half...or buy that same monitors and make it 44''!!!!!!!!!!!!!
how about NO :P :) i think 22'' is enough im only 2ft away from my screen so it will be finei just want every other part of my system to be a bit over the top :p
You should ask what to buy JUST before you go and pay for it (as Hiryuu said, new stuff at better prices will probably come out).1. Are you looking for a CrossFire/SLi rig (even though it's overkill for a 22'')
2. How long after this do you think you'll be upgrading/buying again?
3. Do you have any brand preferences?
4. Do you want to gamble with Vista?
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']You should ask what to buy JUST before you go and pay for it (as Hiryuu said, new stuff at better prices will probably come out).1. Are you looking for a CrossFire/SLi rig (even though it's overkill for a 22'')
2. How long after this do you think you'll be upgrading/buying again?
3. Do you have any brand preferences?
4. Do you want to gamble with Vista?[/QUOTE]SLI i am not looking for atm.. i will probably do this 6 months time etc when i will buy 2 killer cards... for the timei will upgrade 6-12 months after i buy this system but probably only the Graphics Cards... or cpu etc depending how much the tehcnology has improved by then...no.3 no i dont as i really dont know too much about pc's but I want an Intel CPU and an Nvidia graphics card :)yes i will gamble with vista as i will have to go that route eventually :)
come on people help me :) please
Help you with what?
Intel just came up with the qx6850, but I'm not sure if there's anywhere you can buy it just yet. It'll probably be $1k.dermatologist
I was on here last month asking for recommended systems and I will be buying all things needed 1st-2nd week of august SO what computer would you recommend with $3,500 ? Im looking to go all out as i will have enough money to upgrade every year if need be.
So can you tell me what rig you would build with that budget all help suggestions and comments will be taken on board as im 3 weeks away from buying this :) Budget $3500 help me build my rig
So you need a monitor, speakers, OS, keyboard %26 mouse along with the PC itself?Budget $3500 help me build my rig
yeah the whole lot apart from a Monitor which I already have :)
What size monitor do you have?
22'' Widescreen
3500 is kinda overkill especially if your not getting a huge monitor.
Here you go.[url]http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/wishlist/PublicWishDetail.asp?WishListNumber=7527187[/url]Although I don't see the point of making a build 1 month before buying, since prices will change and new things will possibly come out that offer a better bang for the buck.
[QUOTE=''Hiryuu_'']Here you go.[url]http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/wishlist/PublicWishDetail.asp?WishListNumber=7527187[/url]Although I don't see the point of making a build 1 month before buying, since prices will change and new things will possibly come out that offer a better bang for the buck.[/QUOTE]its because I like to see what system people build if they had the money and various opinions etc help my decisions thanks for building a system from the ground up :) appreciate it
You're in England right?Prices are pretty high over here so dont expect to get as much for the money! But I suppose if you have such a great budget it doesnt matter that much...
[QUOTE=''skinnypete91'']You're in England right?Prices are pretty high over here so dont expect to get as much for the money! But I suppose if you have such a great budget it doesnt matter that much...[/QUOTE]Yes I am in the UK but i can buy my parts from the USA as i have family there :)
How about giving me half...or buy that same monitors and make it 44''!!!!!!!!!!!!!
how about NO :P :) i think 22'' is enough im only 2ft away from my screen so it will be finei just want every other part of my system to be a bit over the top :p
You should ask what to buy JUST before you go and pay for it (as Hiryuu said, new stuff at better prices will probably come out).1. Are you looking for a CrossFire/SLi rig (even though it's overkill for a 22'')
2. How long after this do you think you'll be upgrading/buying again?
3. Do you have any brand preferences?
4. Do you want to gamble with Vista?
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']You should ask what to buy JUST before you go and pay for it (as Hiryuu said, new stuff at better prices will probably come out).1. Are you looking for a CrossFire/SLi rig (even though it's overkill for a 22'')
2. How long after this do you think you'll be upgrading/buying again?
3. Do you have any brand preferences?
4. Do you want to gamble with Vista?[/QUOTE]SLI i am not looking for atm.. i will probably do this 6 months time etc when i will buy 2 killer cards... for the timei will upgrade 6-12 months after i buy this system but probably only the Graphics Cards... or cpu etc depending how much the tehcnology has improved by then...no.3 no i dont as i really dont know too much about pc's but I want an Intel CPU and an Nvidia graphics card :)yes i will gamble with vista as i will have to go that route eventually :)
come on people help me :) please
Help you with what?
Intel just came up with the qx6850, but I'm not sure if there's anywhere you can buy it just yet. It'll probably be $1k.
Whats your Vista raiting?
Mines is a 4.6 right now. What about you guys.Whats your Vista raiting?
5.5... Damn 3.5ghz CPU aint enough these days...Whats your Vista raiting?
4.3 My processor suks
5.3 my 3.0Ghz and 7600GT are holding me back
Graphics is 5.9 and overall is 5.1.
iam at 5.2 only because of my e6600 o well...
[QUOTE=''Dark_Dracos'']5.3 my 3.0Ghz and 7600GT are holding me back[/QUOTE]You got a dual core processor ?Regarding to your sig you have athlon 3700+ %26 your score cannot be 5.3
Processor: 3.9
Memory (RAM): 4.5
Graphics: 2.2
Gaming Graphics: 3.2
Primary Hard Disk: 5.4
5.3, 5.9 on graphics with my 8800, but the processor only gets a 5.1, ram a 5.3.
what is this you people are speaking of?
[QUOTE=''EJ902'']Processor: 3.9 Memory (RAM): 4.5 Graphics: 2.2 Gaming Graphics: 3.2 Primary Hard Disk: 5.4[/QUOTE]R u using X200 %26 533MHz RAM ?
[QUOTE=''BobSacamento'']what is this you people are speaking of?[/QUOTE]If you are using Vista you can see a score (Right click on computer then properties)
[QUOTE=''lmcool47'']iam at 5.2 only because of my e6600 o well...[/QUOTE]I also have a E6600, but it's rating is at 4.7!! It's the lowest thing everything else is at 5.9!
[QUOTE=''LahiruD''][QUOTE=''EJ902'']Processor: 3.9 Memory (RAM): 4.5 Graphics: 2.2 Gaming Graphics: 3.2 Primary Hard Disk: 5.4[/QUOTE]R u using X200 %26 533MHz RAM ?[/QUOTE]
Close with the graphics card, it's an X300, not so close with the RAM which is 1GB.
[QUOTE=''EJ902''][QUOTE=''LahiruD''][QUOTE=''EJ902'']Processor: 3.9 Memory (RAM): 4.5 Graphics: 2.2 Gaming Graphics: 3.2 Primary Hard Disk: 5.4[/QUOTE]R u using X200 %26 533MHz RAM ?[/QUOTE] Close with the graphics card, it's an X300, not so close with the RAM which is 1GB.[/QUOTE]I asked you the speed. You are using 1GB DDR2 533MHz RAM I think 2 sticks (512MB x 2). If you put 4GB of 533MHz RAM you will still get 4.5 Score.Bcoz it used the speed of the RAM not the size.I'm also using DDR2 1GB 533MHz RAM %26 I used ATI X200
[QUOTE=''LahiruD'']I asked you the speed. You are using 1GB DDR2 533MHz RAM I think 2 sticks (512MB x 2). If you put 4GB of 533MHz RAM you will still get 4.5 Score.Bcoz it used the speed of the RAM not the size.I'm also using DDR2 1GB 533MHz RAM %26 I used ATI X200[/QUOTE]
Ah, sorry, I wasn't paying attention, I read MHz as MBs somehow.
I'm not certain but I believe it is around 533MHz.
i get a 5.5 with amd x2 5200 @ 3.12ghz everything els scores 5.9 except hardisk speed which scored 5.8
are these scores even credible? What do they mean? Is the number out of something?
all scores are out of 5.9 which is best you can get, but i think microsoft is going to increase scale as computers get better. its really just more of a guide line for stupid people. instead of saying you need a certain cpu speed and graphics card, software will just say you need a system score of 3.5 min and recommended score of 4.0.
Heres mine, kind of sucks.duo6600 2.4ghz///8800gts640///2g ram 800![]()
5.5... Damn 3.5ghz CPU aint enough these days...Whats your Vista raiting?
4.3 My processor suks
5.3 my 3.0Ghz and 7600GT are holding me back
Graphics is 5.9 and overall is 5.1.
iam at 5.2 only because of my e6600 o well...
[QUOTE=''Dark_Dracos'']5.3 my 3.0Ghz and 7600GT are holding me back[/QUOTE]You got a dual core processor ?Regarding to your sig you have athlon 3700+ %26 your score cannot be 5.3
Processor: 3.9
Memory (RAM): 4.5
Graphics: 2.2
Gaming Graphics: 3.2
Primary Hard Disk: 5.4
5.3, 5.9 on graphics with my 8800, but the processor only gets a 5.1, ram a 5.3.
what is this you people are speaking of?
[QUOTE=''EJ902'']Processor: 3.9 Memory (RAM): 4.5 Graphics: 2.2 Gaming Graphics: 3.2 Primary Hard Disk: 5.4[/QUOTE]R u using X200 %26 533MHz RAM ?
[QUOTE=''BobSacamento'']what is this you people are speaking of?[/QUOTE]If you are using Vista you can see a score (Right click on computer then properties)
[QUOTE=''lmcool47'']iam at 5.2 only because of my e6600 o well...[/QUOTE]I also have a E6600, but it's rating is at 4.7!! It's the lowest thing everything else is at 5.9!
[QUOTE=''LahiruD''][QUOTE=''EJ902'']Processor: 3.9 Memory (RAM): 4.5 Graphics: 2.2 Gaming Graphics: 3.2 Primary Hard Disk: 5.4[/QUOTE]R u using X200 %26 533MHz RAM ?[/QUOTE]
Close with the graphics card, it's an X300, not so close with the RAM which is 1GB.
[QUOTE=''EJ902''][QUOTE=''LahiruD''][QUOTE=''EJ902'']Processor: 3.9 Memory (RAM): 4.5 Graphics: 2.2 Gaming Graphics: 3.2 Primary Hard Disk: 5.4[/QUOTE]R u using X200 %26 533MHz RAM ?[/QUOTE] Close with the graphics card, it's an X300, not so close with the RAM which is 1GB.[/QUOTE]I asked you the speed. You are using 1GB DDR2 533MHz RAM I think 2 sticks (512MB x 2). If you put 4GB of 533MHz RAM you will still get 4.5 Score.Bcoz it used the speed of the RAM not the size.I'm also using DDR2 1GB 533MHz RAM %26 I used ATI X200
[QUOTE=''LahiruD'']I asked you the speed. You are using 1GB DDR2 533MHz RAM I think 2 sticks (512MB x 2). If you put 4GB of 533MHz RAM you will still get 4.5 Score.Bcoz it used the speed of the RAM not the size.I'm also using DDR2 1GB 533MHz RAM %26 I used ATI X200[/QUOTE]
Ah, sorry, I wasn't paying attention, I read MHz as MBs somehow.
I'm not certain but I believe it is around 533MHz.
i get a 5.5 with amd x2 5200 @ 3.12ghz everything els scores 5.9 except hardisk speed which scored 5.8
are these scores even credible? What do they mean? Is the number out of something?
all scores are out of 5.9 which is best you can get, but i think microsoft is going to increase scale as computers get better. its really just more of a guide line for stupid people. instead of saying you need a certain cpu speed and graphics card, software will just say you need a system score of 3.5 min and recommended score of 4.0.
Heres mine, kind of sucks.duo6600 2.4ghz///8800gts640///2g ram 800
How is my PC build?
Should i get a4GB or 2GBCorsair XMS2 6400@800MHz or stick with this one?INTEL Core 2 Duo Q6600 Quad-Core, 2.4GHzULTRA PRODUCTS ChillTec Thermal Electric CPU CoolereVGA, nForce 680i SLI 775 A1, LGA775, nForce 680i SLI, 1333MHz FSBKINGSTON, 2GB (2 x 1GB) HyperX PC2-9600 DDR2 1200MHz CL5 (5-5-5-15) SDRAM 240-pin DIMM, Non-ECC, w/ Heat Spreader eVGA, e-GeForce 8800 GTX 621MHz, 768MB Sound Blaster?X-FiTM XtremeGamerWESTERN DIGITAL, 400GB WD CaviarTHERMALTAKE, Armor Black Full-Tower Case w/ Window %26 25cm Fan, EATX, No PSU THERMALTAKE, Toughpower 850W Power SupplyHow is my PC build?
Corsair is not better tha Kingston so remain with it.That rig is great. I will not change anythingHow is my PC build?
What Operating System are you planning to use?
[QUOTE=''wklzip'']What Operating System are you planning to use?[/QUOTE]2Gb is enough for both
im planning to use Vista home premium 32-bit. Thanks guys
Awesome list, but I'd strongly suggest checking out Thermaltake's V1 instead of that expensive Ultra ChillTec. V1 peforms almost near it with cost way less than the Ultra's...[url]http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=662%26p=3[/url]Stick with the Kingston you got on that list.
Corsair is not better tha Kingston so remain with it.That rig is great. I will not change anythingHow is my PC build?
What Operating System are you planning to use?
[QUOTE=''wklzip'']What Operating System are you planning to use?[/QUOTE]2Gb is enough for both
im planning to use Vista home premium 32-bit. Thanks guys
Awesome list, but I'd strongly suggest checking out Thermaltake's V1 instead of that expensive Ultra ChillTec. V1 peforms almost near it with cost way less than the Ultra's...[url]http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=662%26p=3[/url]Stick with the Kingston you got on that list.
the best processor, mobo, case/cooling, psu
for a total of$2000 or less?i have the other parts alreadythe best processor, mobo, case/cooling, psu
need help?!the best processor, mobo, case/cooling, psu
$2000 for those components? Here would be my personal list...Lian Li's PC-V2000B
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811112062[/url]Thermaltake's Toughpower 1200W
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817153054[/url]Intel QX6700
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115011[/url]Gigabyte's GA-P35-DQ6
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16813128046[/url] Watercooling Components (Copied off of HardForum's sticky):
Maze4, 1/2'', Lucite top - $34.95
Hydor L25, 185GPH - $37.95
The Heater Core with 1 fan shroud - $42.99
ClearFlex 60, 10 ft - 10 x $1.25 - 20% = $10.00
Plastic clamps - 8 x 0.75 = $6.00
T-fitting - $1.75
Evercool Chrome Aluminum Fan 120mm - $11.95
4oz Water Wetter - $3.50
need help?!the best processor, mobo, case/cooling, psu
$2000 for those components? Here would be my personal list...Lian Li's PC-V2000B
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811112062[/url]Thermaltake's Toughpower 1200W
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817153054[/url]Intel QX6700
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115011[/url]Gigabyte's GA-P35-DQ6
[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16813128046[/url] Watercooling Components (Copied off of HardForum's sticky):
Maze4, 1/2'', Lucite top - $34.95
Hydor L25, 185GPH - $37.95
The Heater Core with 1 fan shroud - $42.99
ClearFlex 60, 10 ft - 10 x $1.25 - 20% = $10.00
Plastic clamps - 8 x 0.75 = $6.00
T-fitting - $1.75
Evercool Chrome Aluminum Fan 120mm - $11.95
4oz Water Wetter - $3.50
what sorta range do you get with a wireless router?
does it depend on whether its a 802.11a,b or g signal?what is the average distance usually?thankswhat sorta range do you get with a wireless router?
802.11b/g can typically operate up to 150 feet indoors and 300 feet out doors.802.11a isn't around much more, and they operate a bit shorter than b/g.However, the operation ranges largely depends on the layout of the building you're trying to deploy at.
802.11b/g can typically operate up to 150 feet indoors and 300 feet out doors.802.11a isn't around much more, and they operate a bit shorter than b/g.However, the operation ranges largely depends on the layout of the building you're trying to deploy at.
Help w/ OSes
Ok I am about to order my comp from newegg. However, before I order it I need some help w/ operating systems.
I am planning on getting vista home premium, for future dx10 and whatnot. I have heard some people have problems w/ vista and I have a friend who has no problems at all w/ it. After assembling my comp and inserting the Vista disc, and something goes bad (doesnt work or soemthing) is it possible to run Linux Ubuntu? I know u have to dl Ubuntu and is it possible w/o an OS to get to the internet?
Is Ubuntu anygood? I am pretty sure Vista will work and I heard a beta for SP1 is coming out soon so hopefully vista wont become a resource hog and be more stable.
Another question, what kind of scores will i get in vista w/ an C2D E6320 OC'ed to 2.66 ghz, 2 gigs RAM 800mhz, and a EVGA 7600GT 256 gddr3 oced, and possibly flashed?
the processor is temporary until 45nm tech comes out, and the GPU is temporary until nvidias 9 series comes out.Help w/ OSes
Ubuntu has been a very popular Linux distro, and I think it will work on most of the current systems available from what I've seen.However, if you're afraid of Linux and still a Windows guy at heart, I suggest checking out ReactOS:[url]http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html[/url]Basically an open source Windows.Help w/ OSes
yeah but the question I have is how do i get ubuntu onto my comp if my comp isnt reading the vista disc? Would i have to go through another comp, burn ubuntu onto a cd then install it into the new comp?
and how stable is vista right now?
Correct, Ubuntu needs to be downloaded and burnt onto a disc. Or you can order their CD.Vista is solid enough for me to be used as a daily OS, runs most of my games just fine.
Download Ubuntu now burn and then when you get your computer install it. Vista is fine I'm using Ultimate right now (32-bit) and haven't had any issues except when I try to push the OS or tweak system settings, only thing you might run into issues is old driver support for like a printer or something, but overall its a lot better then when I originally got it through MSDN before it went live.
I am planning on getting vista home premium, for future dx10 and whatnot. I have heard some people have problems w/ vista and I have a friend who has no problems at all w/ it. After assembling my comp and inserting the Vista disc, and something goes bad (doesnt work or soemthing) is it possible to run Linux Ubuntu? I know u have to dl Ubuntu and is it possible w/o an OS to get to the internet?
Is Ubuntu anygood? I am pretty sure Vista will work and I heard a beta for SP1 is coming out soon so hopefully vista wont become a resource hog and be more stable.
Another question, what kind of scores will i get in vista w/ an C2D E6320 OC'ed to 2.66 ghz, 2 gigs RAM 800mhz, and a EVGA 7600GT 256 gddr3 oced, and possibly flashed?
the processor is temporary until 45nm tech comes out, and the GPU is temporary until nvidias 9 series comes out.Help w/ OSes
Ubuntu has been a very popular Linux distro, and I think it will work on most of the current systems available from what I've seen.However, if you're afraid of Linux and still a Windows guy at heart, I suggest checking out ReactOS:[url]http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html[/url]Basically an open source Windows.Help w/ OSes
yeah but the question I have is how do i get ubuntu onto my comp if my comp isnt reading the vista disc? Would i have to go through another comp, burn ubuntu onto a cd then install it into the new comp?
and how stable is vista right now?
Correct, Ubuntu needs to be downloaded and burnt onto a disc. Or you can order their CD.Vista is solid enough for me to be used as a daily OS, runs most of my games just fine.
Download Ubuntu now burn and then when you get your computer install it. Vista is fine I'm using Ultimate right now (32-bit) and haven't had any issues except when I try to push the OS or tweak system settings, only thing you might run into issues is old driver support for like a printer or something, but overall its a lot better then when I originally got it through MSDN before it went live.
Question about RAM..............
say u wanted 4GB, would it be better to have 4x1GB, or 2x2GB, and why?Question about RAM..............
any1?Question about RAM..............
Well, I think 2x2gb would use less power so I guess 2x2gb would be better.
If your mobo supports 8gb or more, and are later planing to upgrade i would say get 4gb and later other 4. (completely unnecessary but do as you want xD) In other case get 2x2gbdermatologist
any1?Question about RAM..............
Well, I think 2x2gb would use less power so I guess 2x2gb would be better.
If your mobo supports 8gb or more, and are later planing to upgrade i would say get 4gb and later other 4. (completely unnecessary but do as you want xD) In other case get 2x2gb
HD2900XT or 8800GTX
I've been reading through various reviews and I can't decide on whether to get the HD 2900XT from DAAMIT or the 8800GTX from Nvidia. The 2900XT will cost me roughly 200 bucks less, and I have heard some reviews saying that it ran games better at higher resolutions... while other reviews contradicted that. I also heard some reviews saying it got 10 frames higher on a Crysis demo.... but I don't even know whether to beleive that considering Crysis was still in Alpha stages at the time.
Money is not a problem, all I care about is getting the best possible performing card, that will run all games maxed out at 1680x1050.HD2900XT or 8800GTX
What are your actual pc specs?HD2900XT or 8800GTX
Answer is simple 8800GTX
My PC can handle both cards if that's what you're wondering. 7800GTX, an AMD Athlon 3800+64 XP X2, a PCI Express motherboard in which either card can definitly fit, the motherboard is SLi compatable, and I recently bought a brand new powerful PSU (It glows blue :D)to handle any future cards.
Get the 8800gtx.
Anyone like to elaborate on why I should pick the 8800GTX? I'm leaning towards it already, considering I could always buy 2 and make it SLi if I need extra power... but still...
Screw it, I'm waiting until August when the Quad Core for intel will drop 200 dollars in price, then I'm changing my motherboard so it can support the Quad Core, getting 2gigs or more of ram (Since the 2 gigs I have right now supposedly won't be compatable with the newer motherboard), and getting an 8800GTX. GG.
2900xt could surpass the gtx in the future. It is already begining to rival it
[QUOTE=''lettuceman44'']2900xt could surpass the gtx in the future. It is already begining to rival it[/QUOTE]
Yes...but Nvidia is already finishing the Nvidia 9 series
those wil blow away th 2900
[QUOTE=''BlackHawk340''][QUOTE=''lettuceman44'']2900xt could surpass the gtx in the future. It is already begining to rival it[/QUOTE]
Yes...but Nvidia is already finishing the Nvidia 9 series
those wil blow away th 2900[/QUOTE]but he didn't ask about that
[QUOTE=''Rottenberry'']Screw it, I'm waiting until August when the Quad Core for intel will drop 200 dollars in price, then I'm changing my motherboard so it can support the Quad Core, getting 2gigs or more of ram (Since the 2 gigs I have right now supposedly won't be compatable with the newer motherboard), and getting an 8800GTX. GG.[/QUOTE] GG
Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass !
[QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS!
[QUOTE=''inyourface_12''] [QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS![/QUOTE] ITS BETTER THAN ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS BECAUSE IT HAS ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS!!!!!1
[QUOTE=''inyourface_12''][QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS![/QUOTE]OH NAOS,LAIK TH4TZ 2 MACH!!!111
[QUOTE=''AARONRULZ1''][QUOTE=''inyourface_12''] [QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS![/QUOTE] ITS BETTER THAN ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS BECAUSE IT HAS ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS!!!!!1[/QUOTE]Obviously, and also because it has a butterfly flying over that monkey :p
[QUOTE=''wklzip''][QUOTE=''AARONRULZ1''][QUOTE=''inyourface_12''] [QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS![/QUOTE] ITS BETTER THAN ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS BECAUSE IT HAS ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS!!!!!1[/QUOTE]Obviously, and also because it has a butterfly flying over that monkey :p[/QUOTE] And you can also download some stuff off of it :o
Money is not a problem, all I care about is getting the best possible performing card, that will run all games maxed out at 1680x1050.HD2900XT or 8800GTX
What are your actual pc specs?HD2900XT or 8800GTX
Answer is simple 8800GTX
My PC can handle both cards if that's what you're wondering. 7800GTX, an AMD Athlon 3800+64 XP X2, a PCI Express motherboard in which either card can definitly fit, the motherboard is SLi compatable, and I recently bought a brand new powerful PSU (It glows blue :D)to handle any future cards.
Get the 8800gtx.
Anyone like to elaborate on why I should pick the 8800GTX? I'm leaning towards it already, considering I could always buy 2 and make it SLi if I need extra power... but still...
Screw it, I'm waiting until August when the Quad Core for intel will drop 200 dollars in price, then I'm changing my motherboard so it can support the Quad Core, getting 2gigs or more of ram (Since the 2 gigs I have right now supposedly won't be compatable with the newer motherboard), and getting an 8800GTX. GG.
2900xt could surpass the gtx in the future. It is already begining to rival it
[QUOTE=''lettuceman44'']2900xt could surpass the gtx in the future. It is already begining to rival it[/QUOTE]
Yes...but Nvidia is already finishing the Nvidia 9 series
those wil blow away th 2900
[QUOTE=''BlackHawk340''][QUOTE=''lettuceman44'']2900xt could surpass the gtx in the future. It is already begining to rival it[/QUOTE]
Yes...but Nvidia is already finishing the Nvidia 9 series
those wil blow away th 2900[/QUOTE]but he didn't ask about that
[QUOTE=''Rottenberry'']Screw it, I'm waiting until August when the Quad Core for intel will drop 200 dollars in price, then I'm changing my motherboard so it can support the Quad Core, getting 2gigs or more of ram (Since the 2 gigs I have right now supposedly won't be compatable with the newer motherboard), and getting an 8800GTX. GG.[/QUOTE] GG
Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass !
[QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS!
[QUOTE=''inyourface_12''] [QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS![/QUOTE] ITS BETTER THAN ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS BECAUSE IT HAS ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS!!!!!1
[QUOTE=''inyourface_12''][QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS![/QUOTE]OH NAOS,LAIK TH4TZ 2 MACH!!!111
[QUOTE=''AARONRULZ1''][QUOTE=''inyourface_12''] [QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS![/QUOTE] ITS BETTER THAN ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS BECAUSE IT HAS ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS!!!!!1[/QUOTE]Obviously, and also because it has a butterfly flying over that monkey :p
[QUOTE=''wklzip''][QUOTE=''AARONRULZ1''][QUOTE=''inyourface_12''] [QUOTE=''wklzip'']Why not get a 8400gs, that card is badass ![/QUOTE]or an ati radeon with ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS![/QUOTE] ITS BETTER THAN ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS BECAUSE IT HAS ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT MEGS!!!!!1[/QUOTE]Obviously, and also because it has a butterfly flying over that monkey :p[/QUOTE] And you can also download some stuff off of it :o
HP Multimedia Keyboard
Recently installed vista and my multimedia keyboard buttons dont work (the ones you program). When i go to keyboard options under the list of programmable buttons none are listed... Ive downloaded the latest drivers from HP, but they dont seem to work. Anyone have any ideas on how to get these buttons working? Thrid party alternatives possibly?HP Multimedia Keyboard
Mine dont either I think I have the same the volume buttons work but the other ones dont. I dont really care tho I would go into a chat with HP and see whats up.HP Multimedia Keyboard
anyone else have any suggestions?
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
Mine dont either I think I have the same the volume buttons work but the other ones dont. I dont really care tho I would go into a chat with HP and see whats up.HP Multimedia Keyboard
anyone else have any suggestions?
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
Power suplly question to see if it fits my rigs specs
I own a HP Pavillion a1600n with a PNY Nvidia GEfore7900 GS and 1 gig ram... i have to know if the following power supply will fit in my computer correctly... When i play oblivion n stuff i get random system shutdowns so i need to get a new PSU..I am a newb at figuring this stuff out but here....http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817189014and this is the site wer it says my systems specs...http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c00757531%26lc=en%26cc=us%26dlc=en%26product=3245022%26lang=enPower suplly question to see if it fits my rigs specs
Good brand nice amps you should be ok but why did you get that with a pre-built psu it was bound to do that!Power suplly question to see if it fits my rigs specs
because i am a huge nub cake so hopefully now it wont just randomly reboot itself during oblivion and other games?
because i didnt know anything about anything wen i bought the computer n stuff
because i didnt know anything b4 i bougt the commputer
can someone else confirm that this is ok and will fit my computer good? i have the lil stock cases that comes witht hte a1600n and wana know if itll fit and if i have enough connectors for all my stuff
ljgd
Good brand nice amps you should be ok but why did you get that with a pre-built psu it was bound to do that!Power suplly question to see if it fits my rigs specs
because i am a huge nub cake so hopefully now it wont just randomly reboot itself during oblivion and other games?
because i didnt know anything about anything wen i bought the computer n stuff
because i didnt know anything b4 i bougt the commputer
can someone else confirm that this is ok and will fit my computer good? i have the lil stock cases that comes witht hte a1600n and wana know if itll fit and if i have enough connectors for all my stuff
ljgd
Hardware setup for a classic game
I recently downloaded a game called Battle Bugs. It's an old PC strategy game, loads of fun, back from the age before Pentium processors. It runs pretty well, but its setup screen is one of those that only accepts maybe 10 different sound cards, and mine are too new to be listed on that old setup screen, which basically just contains Adlib, Sound Blaster, Tandy Sensation, and a few others.. Is there anything I can do to get sound on this older game, or should I try to buy an old card?
$500 to upgrade computer - what should i buy?
Well last Sunday i went on holiday to America and my mum gave me $700 to spend; which ive already spend $20; anyways i go back to england in 5 weeks and i wish to spend the cash buying better stuff for my computer so i can play games.I have $500 to spend but i could bump it up to $600 if i wanted to; I have 3.3GHZ computer at home with less than 500mb RAM rubbish graphics card and thats all i can remember, so my main things would be 1) RAM 1-2GB should be enough right? cheapest RAM (link me to website)2) Video card - this is my next thing it needs to be as good as i can get so i can play games at the moment and games to come next year AGP OR PCI - E (Well i can get a really good one; but i have Christmas 07 to buy a video card worth 100-200 quid but honsetly if i buy a video card know whats the point buying one Christmas? and the other problem is i don't praticuly not want to get video card know and just buy a really good one Christmas; so in other words i want to buy it know and last until Christmas next year or Summer next year.)3) Mother board - Well if i want to get a PCI - E video card.What do you guys think will be cheapest for me to get then? Now Ram obivously; 1)AGP video card keep rest of cash and save; then next year get new mother board aswell as a new PCI - E video card2) now Ram, mother board PCI - E card, then next year upgrade PCI - E card and get a better one?is that all i need then lol? $500 to upgrade computer - what should i buy?
anyone?$500 to upgrade computer - what should i buy?
Your post is sort of...choppy. Anyway, since you only have 500$ I would get an AMD(Socket AM2) processor; people on this board will argue all day about how much better intel is, but AMD is budget and pretty good. Go ahead and get 2gigs. of RAM, and a 7950GT or something. Go to newegg.com and see what you can buy.
choppy? i would go to newegg but i have not idea what im looking for
You obviously have some idea of what you are doing, just find a motherboard, processor, ram, and video card; post the link here and we will tell you what you are doing wrong......I`m not good with helping people.....if you cant tell. Just go to newegg.com and look under computer hardware.
Well your in the UK so most of us cant really help you but maybe if you made a thead like, ''can some one help me make a $500 quid computer (btw I am in the uk)'' then the people from the UK would maybe come and help you.
kk will do i dont need a new prosser if mine is 3.3GHZ... is ram video card and maybe motherboard the only things i need for games to run really good?
[QUOTE=''TrailorParkBoy'']Well your in the UK so most of us cant really help you but maybe if you made a thead like, ''can some one help me make a $500 quid computer (btw I am in the uk)'' then the people from the UK would maybe come and help you.[/QUOTE]I did say im in america for 5 weeks
[QUOTE=''kier1992''][QUOTE=''TrailorParkBoy'']Well your in the UK so most of us cant really help you but maybe if you made a thead like, ''can some one help me make a $500 quid computer (btw I am in the uk)'' then the people from the UK would maybe come and help you.[/QUOTE]I did say im in america for 5 weeks [/QUOTE]
Then build it when your in America, every one not in America has to pay alot more for computer parts generally.
Well If your processor is Intel, I recomend you to buy 2 GB of RAM Corsair Value Ram DDR2 667, Videocard MSI Nvidia 8600 GTS, Motherboard EVGA Nvidia Nforce 680i. All this in newegg or tigerdirect. This for 500But my advise Buy a videocard EVGA 8800 GTS 320MB + Power Suply 500 W Sli Certified + EVGA Nforce 680I + 2GB of RAM DDR2 667 any brand but not the cheapest one (read reviews). This for 700 US$
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
anyone?$500 to upgrade computer - what should i buy?
Your post is sort of...choppy. Anyway, since you only have 500$ I would get an AMD(Socket AM2) processor; people on this board will argue all day about how much better intel is, but AMD is budget and pretty good. Go ahead and get 2gigs. of RAM, and a 7950GT or something. Go to newegg.com and see what you can buy.
choppy? i would go to newegg but i have not idea what im looking for
You obviously have some idea of what you are doing, just find a motherboard, processor, ram, and video card; post the link here and we will tell you what you are doing wrong......I`m not good with helping people.....if you cant tell. Just go to newegg.com and look under computer hardware.
Well your in the UK so most of us cant really help you but maybe if you made a thead like, ''can some one help me make a $500 quid computer (btw I am in the uk)'' then the people from the UK would maybe come and help you.
kk will do i dont need a new prosser if mine is 3.3GHZ... is ram video card and maybe motherboard the only things i need for games to run really good?
[QUOTE=''TrailorParkBoy'']Well your in the UK so most of us cant really help you but maybe if you made a thead like, ''can some one help me make a $500 quid computer (btw I am in the uk)'' then the people from the UK would maybe come and help you.[/QUOTE]I did say im in america for 5 weeks
[QUOTE=''kier1992''][QUOTE=''TrailorParkBoy'']Well your in the UK so most of us cant really help you but maybe if you made a thead like, ''can some one help me make a $500 quid computer (btw I am in the uk)'' then the people from the UK would maybe come and help you.[/QUOTE]I did say im in america for 5 weeks [/QUOTE]
Then build it when your in America, every one not in America has to pay alot more for computer parts generally.
Well If your processor is Intel, I recomend you to buy 2 GB of RAM Corsair Value Ram DDR2 667, Videocard MSI Nvidia 8600 GTS, Motherboard EVGA Nvidia Nforce 680i. All this in newegg or tigerdirect. This for 500But my advise Buy a videocard EVGA 8800 GTS 320MB + Power Suply 500 W Sli Certified + EVGA Nforce 680I + 2GB of RAM DDR2 667 any brand but not the cheapest one (read reviews). This for 700 US$
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
Ipod nano not compatible with vista 64?
I have vista 64 bit, and I my ipod nano, fails to recognize both itunes and my computer. I have the lastest itunes software too..I even tried chaging usb ports, , but still no luck, I even tried reseting the ipod.Ipod nano not compatible with vista 64?
Why are you running the 64 bit version anyway? Ipod nano not compatible with vista 64?
becuase it came with my computer.
Weird, maybe the itunes is not compatible yet with vista 64 bit.
[QUOTE=''Andrew0987'']Why are you running the 64 bit version anyway? [/QUOTE]Cause it works, and works quite well :D I've had zero problems, no looking back!OP, sorry bro, I'm running Vista 64-bit on my desktop, but I'm not using iTunes, I can't confirm anything for you. BUT, from googling what some other people are saying, apparently it does work, for example''iTunes works fine on 64-bit Windows. And so does the iPod. I've been sync'ing my iPod on 64-bit Windows without a hitch, it's just the iPhone that doesn't work.'' There is no iPhone sync support from Apple for 64-bit yet, which it sounds like has alot of people upset and conspiracy theories have started (trying to undermine/discredit Microsoft for example) :PBut iTunes, sounds like it should work...
never mind, I found out, why it isnt recognizing.... the USB cable that came with the ipod is busted! I have to push in hard to be able to connect it. usb cable is busted.
Just that, iTunes 7 sucks
Why are you running the 64 bit version anyway? Ipod nano not compatible with vista 64?
becuase it came with my computer.
Weird, maybe the itunes is not compatible yet with vista 64 bit.
[QUOTE=''Andrew0987'']Why are you running the 64 bit version anyway? [/QUOTE]Cause it works, and works quite well :D I've had zero problems, no looking back!OP, sorry bro, I'm running Vista 64-bit on my desktop, but I'm not using iTunes, I can't confirm anything for you. BUT, from googling what some other people are saying, apparently it does work, for example''iTunes works fine on 64-bit Windows. And so does the iPod. I've been sync'ing my iPod on 64-bit Windows without a hitch, it's just the iPhone that doesn't work.'' There is no iPhone sync support from Apple for 64-bit yet, which it sounds like has alot of people upset and conspiracy theories have started (trying to undermine/discredit Microsoft for example) :PBut iTunes, sounds like it should work...
never mind, I found out, why it isnt recognizing.... the USB cable that came with the ipod is busted! I have to push in hard to be able to connect it. usb cable is busted.
Just that, iTunes 7 sucks
Radeon X1950 Pro or Geforce 8600GT ?
Hi, I am going to upgrade my pc soon and I've seen a Jetway X1950 Pro for ?0 and a Geforce 8600GT for ?0 and I was wondering which one to get. I know that the X1950 is faster but the 8600 has Directx 10. I'll be looking to play new games like Bioshock and C%26C 3, Company of heroes and the forthcoming update etc..
Thanks for any info and opinions anyone can give.
Radeon X1950 Pro or Geforce 8600GT ?
X1950Pro.Radeon X1950 Pro or Geforce 8600GT ?
I am after graphics rather than stupid amount of frames per second or insane high resolutons that my monitor can't support. Would the recommendation still be the same? Directx 10 looks like it has some special graphics, like that thing in World in Conflict where the wind and vehicles affect smoke etc...
Seriously do you even know how well the 8600GT will play WiC Dx 10?
i would go with the x1950pro and what size monitor do u have by the way
x1950Pro is cheaper and better
19 inch widescreen 1440x900.
So why is it better?
just look at the benchmaks and you will see...
X1950 Pro.
[QUOTE=''U1'']19 inch widescreen 1440x900.
So why is it better?
[/QUOTE]You'll be able to set the options higher and play at a smoother fps.
For something that's out of date out of the box, even ?0 seems expensive. Meanwhile people are saying that the 8600 is slow, and that the best card to get is around ?00, which is the same price as the Xbox 360 will be soon. It seems to me that there isn't a sensible choice, only big compromise if you don't want to pay big prices...
The x1950pro is a very nice card that will serve you well.
save some mor mony and but a 8800GTS 320/ 640 dependes on your res.
[QUOTE=''U1'']For something that's out of date out of the box, even ?0 seems expensive. Meanwhile people are saying that the 8600 is slow, and that the best card to get is around ?00, which is the same price as the Xbox 360 will be soon. It seems to me that there isn't a sensible choice, only big compromise if you don't want to pay big prices...[/QUOTE]Admittedly the X1950 isnt exactly brand new but it will still max most games for a while yet, its prbably the best choice for a DX9 card, that or the XT version. It offers a lot of power for a fairly low price. If you want to get a decent DX10 card, it will cost a lot more - around ?80 for an 8800GTS.
I'm getting a 8600GT on monday, it performs about in pair (better in some cases) with the 7900/x1950, but the drivers can get better as it's a very new card, it uses less power, supports DX10... what else do you want?
Thanks for any info and opinions anyone can give.
Radeon X1950 Pro or Geforce 8600GT ?
X1950Pro.Radeon X1950 Pro or Geforce 8600GT ?
I am after graphics rather than stupid amount of frames per second or insane high resolutons that my monitor can't support. Would the recommendation still be the same? Directx 10 looks like it has some special graphics, like that thing in World in Conflict where the wind and vehicles affect smoke etc...
Seriously do you even know how well the 8600GT will play WiC Dx 10?
i would go with the x1950pro and what size monitor do u have by the way
x1950Pro is cheaper and better
19 inch widescreen 1440x900.
So why is it better?
just look at the benchmaks and you will see...
X1950 Pro.
[QUOTE=''U1'']19 inch widescreen 1440x900.
So why is it better?
[/QUOTE]You'll be able to set the options higher and play at a smoother fps.
For something that's out of date out of the box, even ?0 seems expensive. Meanwhile people are saying that the 8600 is slow, and that the best card to get is around ?00, which is the same price as the Xbox 360 will be soon. It seems to me that there isn't a sensible choice, only big compromise if you don't want to pay big prices...
The x1950pro is a very nice card that will serve you well.
save some mor mony and but a 8800GTS 320/ 640 dependes on your res.
[QUOTE=''U1'']For something that's out of date out of the box, even ?0 seems expensive. Meanwhile people are saying that the 8600 is slow, and that the best card to get is around ?00, which is the same price as the Xbox 360 will be soon. It seems to me that there isn't a sensible choice, only big compromise if you don't want to pay big prices...[/QUOTE]Admittedly the X1950 isnt exactly brand new but it will still max most games for a while yet, its prbably the best choice for a DX9 card, that or the XT version. It offers a lot of power for a fairly low price. If you want to get a decent DX10 card, it will cost a lot more - around ?80 for an 8800GTS.
I'm getting a 8600GT on monday, it performs about in pair (better in some cases) with the 7900/x1950, but the drivers can get better as it's a very new card, it uses less power, supports DX10... what else do you want?
Spec Ques...please reply
i have a 8800 gts 640mb, e6600, and 2gb ram...can i play a game like crysis at 1680 x 1050, at pretty high to max settings, and at a stable framerate?Spec Ques...please reply
I believe you will be fine.Spec Ques...please reply
Yes, maxed also with AA at low levels.
i think so...
I believe you will be fine.Spec Ques...please reply
Yes, maxed also with AA at low levels.
i think so...
Top of the line GTS or bottom of the line GTX
Ive narrowed it down to these two: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2824835%26CatId=2514http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2597917%26CatId=2513Which is better?Top of the line GTS or bottom of the line GTX
The GTX is way faster, its core clock maybe 5mHz slower but its has 25% more stream processors and a faster memory speed and more memory allowing for a lot more bandwidth. Top of the line GTS or bottom of the line GTX
[QUOTE=''shadow53'']Ive narrowed it down to these two: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2824835%26CatId=2514http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2597917%26CatId=2513Which is better?[/QUOTE]The 8800GTX.
the fan on the gts looks cool :D haha but thanks.can you tell me what drivers i need?oh and is 600 watts enough for that bad boy?dermatologist
The GTX is way faster, its core clock maybe 5mHz slower but its has 25% more stream processors and a faster memory speed and more memory allowing for a lot more bandwidth. Top of the line GTS or bottom of the line GTX
[QUOTE=''shadow53'']Ive narrowed it down to these two: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2824835%26CatId=2514http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2597917%26CatId=2513Which is better?[/QUOTE]The 8800GTX.
the fan on the gts looks cool :D haha but thanks.can you tell me what drivers i need?oh and is 600 watts enough for that bad boy?
psu compatible with my comp?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817182017is that psu compatible with my antec 900 and will it support an overclocked E4400 @ 3GHz and fully run an x1950xt? thanks guys psu compatible with my comp?
It will fit but I say you're better off with one of the Corsair ones..
It will fit but I say you're better off with one of the Corsair ones..
I feel stupid for this, but...(removing AGP video card)
I'm having a hard time removing a dead AGP video card from one of my older computers. I have a replacement on the way, and am trying to remove the current video card. The problem? I can't get the dang retention mechanism unlocked. This wasn't a computer I built, I haven't had to mess with this specific kind of lock before, and the manual for my motherboard isn't helping me much. [url=http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets/agprm/index.htm?iid=ipp_810chpst+info_agp%26]This[/url] is the culprit. The tab on the dang thing is right next to a capacitor on the motherboard, so I don't want to try using my hands to force it off. Tweezers don't reach it and I can't do much with a screwdriver except bend it. I'm not entirely sure how its even supposed to be moved. This is really making me feel stupid. Any help would be appreciated.I feel stupid for this, but...(removing AGP video card)
You have to just move a little bit that thing. I feel stupid for this, but...(removing AGP video card)
Or break it.
I always had that problem with my 6800 GT. The card was so big that you couldn't get at the lever at all.Eventually I just got frustrated and used a tool that is skinny with a good reach (pencil, screwdriver, etc.) and removed all other devices from my computer and just used the tool to get at the lever. It seems like a lot of work (well it is for what you're trying to accomplish) but it can be done in a matter of minutes.If your computer were laying on its side on your cpu was facing directly upwards, you would have to push the lever down towards the ground to get it to release. In other words, you're pushing it towards the motherboard.
some AGP slots have kind a lock behind it...
You have to just move a little bit that thing. I feel stupid for this, but...(removing AGP video card)
Or break it.
I always had that problem with my 6800 GT. The card was so big that you couldn't get at the lever at all.Eventually I just got frustrated and used a tool that is skinny with a good reach (pencil, screwdriver, etc.) and removed all other devices from my computer and just used the tool to get at the lever. It seems like a lot of work (well it is for what you're trying to accomplish) but it can be done in a matter of minutes.If your computer were laying on its side on your cpu was facing directly upwards, you would have to push the lever down towards the ground to get it to release. In other words, you're pushing it towards the motherboard.
some AGP slots have kind a lock behind it...
could this PSU run my rig or am i rterded
i own a HP a1600n, pny nvidia 7900 gs,2 gig ram, this site for the computer...http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c00757531%26lc=en%26cc=us%26dlc=en%26product=3245022%26lang=enand this da PSU that i wana see if itll fit and itll workhttp://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817189014
Any way to rename your primary drive?
Just installed XP on my new harddrive, and the drive which is normally called ''C'' is named ''I''. Now normally I wouldn't care about this, but when I try to install my soundcard drivers, it tried to extract to the C drive, and that's just not there anymore.So I was wondering if there was any way I could rename my primary ''I'' drive to ''C''? Or, if possible is there any way I can extract the .exe driver file to ''I''? It normally just runs automatically and gives me an error saying the C drive could not be found. ThanksAny way to rename your primary drive?
You might just have to save your data and reinstall windows. That is the only solution I know of.
You might just have to save your data and reinstall windows. That is the only solution I know of.
AMD Barcelona or Intel Penryn
Which processor will be faster ?AMD Barcelona or Intel Penryn
No one knows for sure. If I were to take a guess, it would unfortunately be that Penryn will be faster (and I say unfortunately because AMD really needs a break; Intel's really been a **** to them lately with their onslaught of Core 2 Duo and Quad releases (not that that's bad for us consumers)).AMD Barcelona or Intel Penryn
I'm also guessing Penryn will be faster than Barcelona
im willing to bet that they are prett even clock for clock but amd is screwed because intel will beat them to nehalem
All AMD shows are synthetic benchmarks. Intel have shown benchmarks that show a 15-20% increase in certain apps. Anandtech previewed Barcelona and it showed it being a little slower that conroe at the same clock speed. If penryn launches at high frequencies then Amd is in trouble. For now I say Penryn will be faster.
Intel would be the best bet. AMD is lagging right now, and from the rumors, it sounds like Barcelona is going to be a disappointment.
the 45m technology in the penryn looks to give it an edge.
Penryn will be better.
but shouldn't we be comparing Phenom and Penryn? Cause Barcelona is a server cpu
[QUOTE=''lettuceman44'']but shouldn't we be comparing Phenom and Penryn? Cause Barcelona is a server cpu[/QUOTE]http://www.dailytech.com/Intel+Prices+Penryn+Xeons/article8074.htm
[QUOTE=''LahiruD''][QUOTE=''lettuceman44'']but shouldn't we be comparing Phenom and Penryn? Cause Barcelona is a server cpu[/QUOTE]http://www.dailytech.com/Intel+Prices+Penryn+Xeons/article8074.htm[/QUOTE]o, lol my bad
For my money, im gonna say go intel, i havent had a intel processor since a old dual cpu pentium pro 180, but now im gonna have to go intel, amd is just not giving me good reason to stay with them.
Who knows but ill put my money on the penryns.
Server side of things, Barcelona is going to gain LOTS of market share back for AMD.As for desktop, that is a toss up.
BTW- whoever said that AnandTech.com previewed K10 and said it is the same as C2D is just wrong. You cannot compare performance just by looking at die shots or going over the architecture's specs.K10 has a good shot at competing with Penryn if they can quickly hit 2.4-2.6ghz or more.
If they are of similar performance and price, and easily surpass the Q6600, then I have a feeling I will be going with a Phenom chip.
More than likely Phenom,even though there's a good chance it'll get raped by yorkfield,its more than enough for the games i play/will be playing,plus you can get a X2 3600 and a BIOSTAR TA690G and OC it to 3GHz :wink: thats more than enough power for todays games.
No one knows for sure. If I were to take a guess, it would unfortunately be that Penryn will be faster (and I say unfortunately because AMD really needs a break; Intel's really been a **** to them lately with their onslaught of Core 2 Duo and Quad releases (not that that's bad for us consumers)).AMD Barcelona or Intel Penryn
I'm also guessing Penryn will be faster than Barcelona
im willing to bet that they are prett even clock for clock but amd is screwed because intel will beat them to nehalem
All AMD shows are synthetic benchmarks. Intel have shown benchmarks that show a 15-20% increase in certain apps. Anandtech previewed Barcelona and it showed it being a little slower that conroe at the same clock speed. If penryn launches at high frequencies then Amd is in trouble. For now I say Penryn will be faster.
Intel would be the best bet. AMD is lagging right now, and from the rumors, it sounds like Barcelona is going to be a disappointment.
the 45m technology in the penryn looks to give it an edge.
Penryn will be better.
but shouldn't we be comparing Phenom and Penryn? Cause Barcelona is a server cpu
[QUOTE=''lettuceman44'']but shouldn't we be comparing Phenom and Penryn? Cause Barcelona is a server cpu[/QUOTE]http://www.dailytech.com/Intel+Prices+Penryn+Xeons/article8074.htm
[QUOTE=''LahiruD''][QUOTE=''lettuceman44'']but shouldn't we be comparing Phenom and Penryn? Cause Barcelona is a server cpu[/QUOTE]http://www.dailytech.com/Intel+Prices+Penryn+Xeons/article8074.htm[/QUOTE]o, lol my bad
For my money, im gonna say go intel, i havent had a intel processor since a old dual cpu pentium pro 180, but now im gonna have to go intel, amd is just not giving me good reason to stay with them.
Who knows but ill put my money on the penryns.
Server side of things, Barcelona is going to gain LOTS of market share back for AMD.As for desktop, that is a toss up.
BTW- whoever said that AnandTech.com previewed K10 and said it is the same as C2D is just wrong. You cannot compare performance just by looking at die shots or going over the architecture's specs.K10 has a good shot at competing with Penryn if they can quickly hit 2.4-2.6ghz or more.
If they are of similar performance and price, and easily surpass the Q6600, then I have a feeling I will be going with a Phenom chip.
More than likely Phenom,even though there's a good chance it'll get raped by yorkfield,its more than enough for the games i play/will be playing,plus you can get a X2 3600 and a BIOSTAR TA690G and OC it to 3GHz :wink: thats more than enough power for todays games.
torn between mobos?
not sure which one to get? i know i want sli and ddr2 ram.EVGA 122-CK-NF68-A1 LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail ASUS Striker Extreme LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI ATX The Ultimate Gaming Motherboard - Retail torn between mobos?
strikertorn between mobos?
I dont think there much difference there.
The eVGA board is likely cheaper,go with that,you ain't missing anything from the ASUS.dermatologist
strikertorn between mobos?
I dont think there much difference there.
The eVGA board is likely cheaper,go with that,you ain't missing anything from the ASUS.
I cant update Vista or windows defender.!
Its been like this for a few days now, i try to update and i get this..I cant update Vista or windows defender.!
Have you made sure that you date and time are about right? As I had the same problem, and my date was set to July 2006I cant update Vista or windows defender.!
[QUOTE=''big_al123'']Have you made sure that you date and time are about right? As I had the same problem, and my date was set to July 2006[/QUOTE]Wow thanks dude!!That worked, for some reason i was set at july 18 2009.... lol werid.thanks again.
Have you made sure that you date and time are about right? As I had the same problem, and my date was set to July 2006I cant update Vista or windows defender.!
[QUOTE=''big_al123'']Have you made sure that you date and time are about right? As I had the same problem, and my date was set to July 2006[/QUOTE]Wow thanks dude!!That worked, for some reason i was set at july 18 2009.... lol werid.thanks again.
Nvda 8500 gt good???
I have been thinking about getting a new computer with direct X 10. So can anyone tell how good is an Nvidia 8500 GT??Nvda 8500 gt good???
[QUOTE=''EZTARGET'']I have been thinking about getting a new computer with direct X 10. So can anyone tell how good is an Nvidia 8500 GT??[/QUOTE]Please don't get the 8500GT...Please..What graphics card do you have now?Nvda 8500 gt good???
It's a good card, but not for gaming.
it's just good for media center PC, not gaming, but, if you want a media PC, get a 8400gs or a HD2400pro, they are cheaper and do the same for movies, if you want to game, save a little more and get the 8600gt(I'm getting one of this)and about that poll, it makes no sense (except for measuring how many fanboys do we have here:D) each price range there is a winner, this gen, looks like NV won, the 7 / x1k gen was tied, the 6 / Xxxx series, was NV, and the FX / 9xxx series was ATI
dont even get the 8600 gt, get the 8600 gts. For maybe 20-30 bucks more you get more then your moneys worth for the performance. Thats if you are going to be gaming, otherwise get the 8400gt
People are going to tell you left and right that the 8500GT sucks. ALL i can say is that it plays Supream comander on high settings and BF2 on med-high as of now. It may not be the best card but it really depends what games you going to play and what you PSU(power supply unit) is in terms of watts as well. If you wana play the new DX10 games, your better off with an 8600 or better. But if you wana play games like HL2, BF2, Fear, SC, GW, WoW, AAect... Than the 8500GT should do the job pretty well. Hell the 8500GT is way better than my intergrated crap I had before :)
[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]
I agree with aaron ^ the 8600 is like 2-3 times more powerful than the 8500gt.
Alright, thanks for the advice. 8600 GTS it is then.
[QUOTE=''Marine152'']People are going to tell you left and right that the 8500GT sucks. ALL i can say is that it plays Supream comander on high settings and BF2 on med-high as of now.[/QUOTE]Sure it does nub. You keep thinking that. :D
Get teh GT,much cheaper and there's a nominal performance hit,plus you can OC it near GTS speeds.
first thing ima say is dont get from this gen of cards,very soonly we'll seenew cards and just like beforethe second genmid range card is a must buy
[QUOTE=''EZTARGET'']I have been thinking about getting a new computer with direct X 10. So can anyone tell how good is an Nvidia 8500 GT??[/QUOTE]Please don't get the 8500GT...Please..What graphics card do you have now?Nvda 8500 gt good???
It's a good card, but not for gaming.
it's just good for media center PC, not gaming, but, if you want a media PC, get a 8400gs or a HD2400pro, they are cheaper and do the same for movies, if you want to game, save a little more and get the 8600gt(I'm getting one of this)and about that poll, it makes no sense (except for measuring how many fanboys do we have here:D) each price range there is a winner, this gen, looks like NV won, the 7 / x1k gen was tied, the 6 / Xxxx series, was NV, and the FX / 9xxx series was ATI
dont even get the 8600 gt, get the 8600 gts. For maybe 20-30 bucks more you get more then your moneys worth for the performance. Thats if you are going to be gaming, otherwise get the 8400gt
People are going to tell you left and right that the 8500GT sucks. ALL i can say is that it plays Supream comander on high settings and BF2 on med-high as of now. It may not be the best card but it really depends what games you going to play and what you PSU(power supply unit) is in terms of watts as well. If you wana play the new DX10 games, your better off with an 8600 or better. But if you wana play games like HL2, BF2, Fear, SC, GW, WoW, AAect... Than the 8500GT should do the job pretty well. Hell the 8500GT is way better than my intergrated crap I had before :)
[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]
I agree with aaron ^ the 8600 is like 2-3 times more powerful than the 8500gt.
Alright, thanks for the advice. 8600 GTS it is then.
[QUOTE=''Marine152'']People are going to tell you left and right that the 8500GT sucks. ALL i can say is that it plays Supream comander on high settings and BF2 on med-high as of now.[/QUOTE]Sure it does nub. You keep thinking that. :D
Get teh GT,much cheaper and there's a nominal performance hit,plus you can OC it near GTS speeds.
first thing ima say is dont get from this gen of cards,very soonly we'll seenew cards and just like beforethe second genmid range card is a must buy
Paradox to uninstall oblivion
So, here I was installing oblivion, I installed the newest patch, then I went ahead and went to install the shiver isles, it said something about mine not being the same version... So I thought of reinstalling iwthout the patch add or remove programs bam an error [img]http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/5936/errorez0.jpg[/img] ok, so I went ahead and deleted the bethesda directry, I put the disc in, and goesnt give me the option to install it tells me you can play... with no directory... I hit play and of course its going to tell me the file is not found... How can I uninstall oblivion succesfully?Paradox to uninstall oblivion
Ouch, you have to delete the info that remains from the system registry. Paradox to uninstall oblivion
[QUOTE=''wklzip''] Ouch, you have to delete the info that remains from the system registry. [/QUOTE] doesn't sound very fun
Yeah you did the worste thing you could have done in that situation either you can edit you registry files to fix it but if you have no skill with that you need to reformat.
[QUOTE=''renger6002''][QUOTE=''wklzip''] Ouch, you have to delete the info that remains from the system registry. [/QUOTE] doesn't sound very fun[/QUOTE]Its very dangerous if you delete an incorrect file ... better not to try.
I already thought about the registry, but its better to do the easier things first of course, I fixed it :) I just went into safe mode, and reinstalled it quite simple....
[QUOTE=''MondoCool'']I already thought about the registry, but its better to do the easier things first of course, I fixed it :) I just went into safe mode, and reinstalled it quite simple.... [/QUOTE]nice way :o i will remember it xD
I dont see how deleting the registry files of the game can be dangerouse, its easy, I've done it before to a couple of games and programs and no probs, its easy just go RUN: Regedit.exe/HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SOFTWARE/....all the stuff is usually in there, if its anything to do with oblivion, delete it! bethesta or whatever the company is
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
I see something about microsoft In my registry!:o should go ahead and delete that ;)
[QUOTE=''MondoCool'']I see something about microsoft In my registry!:o should go ahead and delete that ;)[/QUOTE]umm... duh obviously, everything that says microsoft must be deleted if you use their OS, thats the best way to save yourself from viruses ;)[spoiler] DONT DO IT!! XD [/spoiler]
Ouch, you have to delete the info that remains from the system registry. Paradox to uninstall oblivion
[QUOTE=''wklzip''] Ouch, you have to delete the info that remains from the system registry. [/QUOTE] doesn't sound very fun
Yeah you did the worste thing you could have done in that situation either you can edit you registry files to fix it but if you have no skill with that you need to reformat.
[QUOTE=''renger6002''][QUOTE=''wklzip''] Ouch, you have to delete the info that remains from the system registry. [/QUOTE] doesn't sound very fun[/QUOTE]Its very dangerous if you delete an incorrect file ... better not to try.
I already thought about the registry, but its better to do the easier things first of course, I fixed it :) I just went into safe mode, and reinstalled it quite simple....
[QUOTE=''MondoCool'']I already thought about the registry, but its better to do the easier things first of course, I fixed it :) I just went into safe mode, and reinstalled it quite simple.... [/QUOTE]nice way :o i will remember it xD
I dont see how deleting the registry files of the game can be dangerouse, its easy, I've done it before to a couple of games and programs and no probs, its easy just go RUN: Regedit.exe/HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SOFTWARE/....all the stuff is usually in there, if its anything to do with oblivion, delete it! bethesta or whatever the company is
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
I see something about microsoft In my registry!:o should go ahead and delete that ;)
[QUOTE=''MondoCool'']I see something about microsoft In my registry!:o should go ahead and delete that ;)[/QUOTE]umm... duh obviously, everything that says microsoft must be deleted if you use their OS, thats the best way to save yourself from viruses ;)[spoiler] DONT DO IT!! XD [/spoiler]
monitor size and graphcs card
what i want to know is,what is the best high end pci-e graphics card for a 19'' monitor (resolution 1280*1024),and will run crysis and gears of war maxed out.thx.monitor size and graphcs card
bumpmonitor size and graphcs card
i don't think anything below an 8800gtx 768mb will cut it...:roll:
for that res, i think a 8800GTS 320mb should be good
If you are going for the best then the 8800gtx and you can overclock it to ultra levels.If you want to still have the best but cheaper then go with the 8800 gts 640mb because it costs maybe 50 dollars more but if you look at the recent gamespot dx10 card shootout you will see it is much better then the 320mb version.
yeah im probably gonna go with an 8800 gts 640 mb,cause i also need a new power supply,anyways thx for the input guys,appreciate it.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
[QUOTE=''splintercell989'']If you are going for the best then the 8800gtx and you can overclock it to ultra levels.If you want to still have the best but cheaper then go with the 8800 gts 640mb because it costs maybe 50 dollars more but if you look at the recent gamespot dx10 card shootout you will see it is much better then the 320mb version. [/QUOTE]it's just in a dif price range, for a res like 1280x1024 it's great(unless you like 8x AA)
[QUOTE=''marlonsm''][QUOTE=''splintercell989'']If you are going for the best then the 8800gtx and you can overclock it to ultra levels.If you want to still have the best but cheaper then go with the 8800 gts 640mb because it costs maybe 50 dollars more but if you look at the recent gamespot dx10 card shootout you will see it is much better then the 320mb version. [/QUOTE]it's just in a dif price range, for a res like 1280x1024 it's great(unless you like 8x AA)[/QUOTE]
for me 4X AA is good enough ,heck even 2X will do.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
also i see nfs pro street in your sig and i wanna play this game without lag will the880 gts suffice(just guess),thx again,sorry for all the questions.
[QUOTE=''junaid15'']also i see nfs pro street in your sig and i wanna play this game without lag will the880 gts suffice(just guess),thx again,sorry for all the questions.[/QUOTE]I'll be playing NFSPS with a 8600gt, so you may have no problems with a 8800gts 320mb
[QUOTE=''marlonsm''][QUOTE=''junaid15'']also i see nfs pro street in your sig and i wanna play this game without lag will the880 gts suffice(just guess),thx again,sorry for all the questions.[/QUOTE]I'll be playing NFSPS with a 8600gt, so you may have no problems with a 8800gts 320mb[/QUOTE]
cool,thank you very much.dermatologist
bumpmonitor size and graphcs card
i don't think anything below an 8800gtx 768mb will cut it...:roll:
for that res, i think a 8800GTS 320mb should be good
If you are going for the best then the 8800gtx and you can overclock it to ultra levels.If you want to still have the best but cheaper then go with the 8800 gts 640mb because it costs maybe 50 dollars more but if you look at the recent gamespot dx10 card shootout you will see it is much better then the 320mb version.
yeah im probably gonna go with an 8800 gts 640 mb,cause i also need a new power supply,anyways thx for the input guys,appreciate it.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
[QUOTE=''splintercell989'']If you are going for the best then the 8800gtx and you can overclock it to ultra levels.If you want to still have the best but cheaper then go with the 8800 gts 640mb because it costs maybe 50 dollars more but if you look at the recent gamespot dx10 card shootout you will see it is much better then the 320mb version. [/QUOTE]it's just in a dif price range, for a res like 1280x1024 it's great(unless you like 8x AA)
[QUOTE=''marlonsm''][QUOTE=''splintercell989'']If you are going for the best then the 8800gtx and you can overclock it to ultra levels.If you want to still have the best but cheaper then go with the 8800 gts 640mb because it costs maybe 50 dollars more but if you look at the recent gamespot dx10 card shootout you will see it is much better then the 320mb version. [/QUOTE]it's just in a dif price range, for a res like 1280x1024 it's great(unless you like 8x AA)[/QUOTE]
for me 4X AA is good enough ,heck even 2X will do.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
also i see nfs pro street in your sig and i wanna play this game without lag will the880 gts suffice(just guess),thx again,sorry for all the questions.
[QUOTE=''junaid15'']also i see nfs pro street in your sig and i wanna play this game without lag will the880 gts suffice(just guess),thx again,sorry for all the questions.[/QUOTE]I'll be playing NFSPS with a 8600gt, so you may have no problems with a 8800gts 320mb
[QUOTE=''marlonsm''][QUOTE=''junaid15'']also i see nfs pro street in your sig and i wanna play this game without lag will the880 gts suffice(just guess),thx again,sorry for all the questions.[/QUOTE]I'll be playing NFSPS with a 8600gt, so you may have no problems with a 8800gts 320mb[/QUOTE]
cool,thank you very much.
What's the best desktop set-up you can make yourself for under $1,5000 (w/o LCD)
Lately, I've become interested in building my own computer as apparently its a much better deal than pre-made set-ups, IF you know what you're doing. Since I have a friend which knows what to do though, that isn't much of a problem. So now, the problem is finding the right parts for my budget. I did some research on Newegg and I think I've found a pretty decent set of parts for the amount I'm spending, but I want to know if any of you know any better deals available. So... here's the set-up I'm thinking about:Memory: OCZ Platinum 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2
8500) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory - $149.99
Motherboard: EVGA 122-CK-NF67-A1 LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i LT SLI
ATX Intel Motherboard - $194.99
GPU: EVGA 320-P2-N811-AR GeForce 8800GTS 320MB 320-bit GDDR3 PCI
Express x16 HDCP Video Card - $279.99
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz 4M shared L2 Cache LGA 775
Processor - $222.90
Case: Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - $139.99
Hard-drive: (2) Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3320620AS (Perpendicular
Recording Technology) 320GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard
Drive - $70
Power Supply: OCZ GameXStream OCZ700GXSSLI ATX12V 700W Power Supply
100 - 240 V - $139.99
Cooling: GIGABYTE GH-WIU02 3D Galaxy II Liquid Cooling - $139.99
Sound Card: Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer 7.1 Channels
24-bit 96KHz PCI Interface Sound Card - $90.99All of this for $1,492. I think that's a pretty good deal for what I'm getting, but... again, if you have something better for that price or lower please do tell. Oh, and obviously I'm not including the cost of the Monitor or taxes. Those can wait...What's the best desktop set-up you can make yourself for under $1,5000 (w/o LCD)
*sigh* I guess there are too many of these threads for anybody to really care about this one? That kind of sucks...What's the best desktop set-up you can make yourself for under $1,5000 (w/o LCD)
I say scrap the SLI motherboard unless your thinking of adding another 8800GTS.
OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE]
Wow another ''wait for july 22nd'' message... anyways I would wait for Phenom FX and Crossfire AMD HD 2900XT 1024mbs with 4gb of DDR3 ram with 4 10,000RPM HDD's and the ThermalTake 1200w psu. MAn 15,000 is alot tho lol
[QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE] Wow another ''wait for july 22nd'' message... anyways I would wait for Phenom FX and Crossfire AMD HD 2900XT 1024mbs with 4gb of DDR3 ram with 4 10,000RPM HDD's and the ThermalTake 1200w psu. MAn 15,000 is alot tho lol[/QUOTE]:|1. I tell people to wait for July 22nd because I want people to get the best bang for the buck. Also, July 22nd is only 5 days away.
2. The guy is asking for a $1500 rig, not $15000.
3. You're complaining about waiting until July 22nd, yet you're telling him to wait for Phenom in Nov/Dec? :
|[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE]I want to leave myself the option of adding another GPU (preferably 8800 GTXs or even Ultras). As for the cooling... I think I'll need it when I finally get my SLI set-up. And besides, better safe than sorry, right? ;)What's happening on July the 22nd?
Wait, its $1 500 or 15 000?
[QUOTE=''a_ratchet_fan''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE]I want to leave myself the option of adding another GPU (preferably 8800 GTXs or even Ultras). As for the cooling... I think I'll need it when I finally get my SLI set-up. And besides, better safe than sorry, right? ;)What's happening on July the 22nd? [/QUOTE]The water cooling will be overkill unless you're going to be doing some serious overclocks (like over 3.8Ghz for the CPU alone), in which case a custom water cooler would be better suited anyway.Just stick to air cooling, IMO.July 22nd is the day when Intel will drop prices on the current Core 2 line up, as well as release some new Core 2s.
[QUOTE=''Wesker776''][QUOTE=''a_ratchet_fan''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE]I want to leave myself the option of adding another GPU (preferably 8800 GTXs or even Ultras). As for the cooling... I think I'll need it when I finally get my SLI set-up. And besides, better safe than sorry, right? ;)What's happening on July the 22nd? [/QUOTE]The water cooling will be overkill unless you're going to be doing some serious overclocks (like over 3.8Ghz for the CPU alone), in which case a custom water cooler would be better suited anyway.Just stick to air cooling, IMO.July 22nd is the day when Intel will drop prices on the current Core 2 line up, as well as release some new Core 2s.[/QUOTE]I did plan on overclocking, but goddamn... are you serious? You can overclock it that much? I knew about overclocking the GPU a lot, but damn... But I think I'll follow your advice and not buy a water-cooling kit... that is, until I have something that warrants it (like 2 8800 Ultras in SLI).And PS THANK YOU for telling me about July 22nd. If you hadn't, I may have already purchased the CPU. Again, thank you.Edit: Hey... you know what? If I don't get the water-cooling kit and the price of the CPU comes down considerably ($50+) then I'll be able to upgrade to a 8800 GTS 640 or even a GTX! Thank you!
No problems.Also, if you don't need SLi, but want to upgrade to the 45nm Intel Penryn CPUs, then you should look at a P35 board.Alternatively, you could wait a bit more for the X38 chipset boards which support both Penryn and x16/x16 CrossFire, or wait for NVIDIA to verify boards that will work with Penryn (some say that EVGA's latest revision to its 680i SLi motherboard support Penryn, but need a BIOS).Also, some people have gotten a lot higher than 3.8GHz on water lol (custom build water cooling with large radiators might be able to yeild 4.2GHz or so).
8500) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory - $149.99
Motherboard: EVGA 122-CK-NF67-A1 LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i LT SLI
ATX Intel Motherboard - $194.99
GPU: EVGA 320-P2-N811-AR GeForce 8800GTS 320MB 320-bit GDDR3 PCI
Express x16 HDCP Video Card - $279.99
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz 4M shared L2 Cache LGA 775
Processor - $222.90
Case: Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - $139.99
Hard-drive: (2) Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 ST3320620AS (Perpendicular
Recording Technology) 320GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard
Drive - $70
Power Supply: OCZ GameXStream OCZ700GXSSLI ATX12V 700W Power Supply
100 - 240 V - $139.99
Cooling: GIGABYTE GH-WIU02 3D Galaxy II Liquid Cooling - $139.99
Sound Card: Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer 7.1 Channels
24-bit 96KHz PCI Interface Sound Card - $90.99All of this for $1,492. I think that's a pretty good deal for what I'm getting, but... again, if you have something better for that price or lower please do tell. Oh, and obviously I'm not including the cost of the Monitor or taxes. Those can wait...What's the best desktop set-up you can make yourself for under $1,5000 (w/o LCD)
*sigh* I guess there are too many of these threads for anybody to really care about this one? That kind of sucks...What's the best desktop set-up you can make yourself for under $1,5000 (w/o LCD)
I say scrap the SLI motherboard unless your thinking of adding another 8800GTS.
OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE]
Wow another ''wait for july 22nd'' message... anyways I would wait for Phenom FX and Crossfire AMD HD 2900XT 1024mbs with 4gb of DDR3 ram with 4 10,000RPM HDD's and the ThermalTake 1200w psu. MAn 15,000 is alot tho lol
[QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE] Wow another ''wait for july 22nd'' message... anyways I would wait for Phenom FX and Crossfire AMD HD 2900XT 1024mbs with 4gb of DDR3 ram with 4 10,000RPM HDD's and the ThermalTake 1200w psu. MAn 15,000 is alot tho lol[/QUOTE]:|1. I tell people to wait for July 22nd because I want people to get the best bang for the buck. Also, July 22nd is only 5 days away.
2. The guy is asking for a $1500 rig, not $15000.
3. You're complaining about waiting until July 22nd, yet you're telling him to wait for Phenom in Nov/Dec? :
|[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE]I want to leave myself the option of adding another GPU (preferably 8800 GTXs or even Ultras). As for the cooling... I think I'll need it when I finally get my SLI set-up. And besides, better safe than sorry, right? ;)What's happening on July the 22nd?
Wait, its $1 500 or 15 000?
[QUOTE=''a_ratchet_fan''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE]I want to leave myself the option of adding another GPU (preferably 8800 GTXs or even Ultras). As for the cooling... I think I'll need it when I finally get my SLI set-up. And besides, better safe than sorry, right? ;)What's happening on July the 22nd? [/QUOTE]The water cooling will be overkill unless you're going to be doing some serious overclocks (like over 3.8Ghz for the CPU alone), in which case a custom water cooler would be better suited anyway.Just stick to air cooling, IMO.July 22nd is the day when Intel will drop prices on the current Core 2 line up, as well as release some new Core 2s.
[QUOTE=''Wesker776''][QUOTE=''a_ratchet_fan''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']OK, do you really need the SLi and water cooling set up?Also, can you wait for July the 22nd?[/QUOTE]I want to leave myself the option of adding another GPU (preferably 8800 GTXs or even Ultras). As for the cooling... I think I'll need it when I finally get my SLI set-up. And besides, better safe than sorry, right? ;)What's happening on July the 22nd? [/QUOTE]The water cooling will be overkill unless you're going to be doing some serious overclocks (like over 3.8Ghz for the CPU alone), in which case a custom water cooler would be better suited anyway.Just stick to air cooling, IMO.July 22nd is the day when Intel will drop prices on the current Core 2 line up, as well as release some new Core 2s.[/QUOTE]I did plan on overclocking, but goddamn... are you serious? You can overclock it that much? I knew about overclocking the GPU a lot, but damn... But I think I'll follow your advice and not buy a water-cooling kit... that is, until I have something that warrants it (like 2 8800 Ultras in SLI).And PS THANK YOU for telling me about July 22nd. If you hadn't, I may have already purchased the CPU. Again, thank you.Edit: Hey... you know what? If I don't get the water-cooling kit and the price of the CPU comes down considerably ($50+) then I'll be able to upgrade to a 8800 GTS 640 or even a GTX! Thank you!
No problems.Also, if you don't need SLi, but want to upgrade to the 45nm Intel Penryn CPUs, then you should look at a P35 board.Alternatively, you could wait a bit more for the X38 chipset boards which support both Penryn and x16/x16 CrossFire, or wait for NVIDIA to verify boards that will work with Penryn (some say that EVGA's latest revision to its 680i SLi motherboard support Penryn, but need a BIOS).Also, some people have gotten a lot higher than 3.8GHz on water lol (custom build water cooling with large radiators might be able to yeild 4.2GHz or so).
Trashing my trash xps410 for a Quad HP d4990y; what is best Video card in Vista?
2+ Blue screens a day(usually in Media center). 640x480 with all settings turned down with fear. Test Drive unlimited just keeping up and Flight Sim X slightly ahead?? I'm done! Returned my XPS 410 for HP but I need to know what is the best video card to get AND what you think I should expect from new system compared to the old one...Current:XPS 410Core 2 Duo 1.86GHz2 GB RAMNVIDIA GeForce 8600GTSVista UltimateRaptor driveFutureHP d4990y
Core 2 Quad 2.4GHz(i think)2G B RAMATI Radeon 1950Pro 512MB maybe??? What you think? Heard NVIDIA sucks in Vista and with MCEVista PremiumRaptor DiveWill the new computer blow away the old? What Video card should I get?Am I right to go ATI instead of NVIDIA? If it were XP I would care so much about ATI/NVIDIA, but I heard NVIDIA/VISTA=BAD or atleast not AS good as ATI. Talk to me!!Thanks!!!Trashing my trash xps410 for a Quad HP d4990y; what is best Video card in Vista?
YES...I have all teh latest drivers...for EVERYTHING! Video/HD/BIOS...Trashing my trash xps410 for a Quad HP d4990y; what is best Video card in Vista?
:lol:You won't custom build, will you?
Last pre-built machine for me!![QUOTE=''Wesker776'']:lol:You won't custom build, will you?[/QUOTE]
Hm...The problem with prebuilds are the ridiculous PSUs they put in their rigs, which often force users to spend extra on a replacement/sub PSU. There's also the problem of questionable motherboards which may have compatability problems.That HP does look good, but make sure you do add a good video card (X1950 PRO/2900 XT/8800 GTS/8800 GTX) as well as a good PSU (500w) or Thermaltake's GPU PSU (go on newegg and you'll see what I mean).Also, NVIDIA's drivers for SLi are dodgy. The drivers should be fine for a single card set up though.
Core 2 Quad 2.4GHz(i think)2G B RAMATI Radeon 1950Pro 512MB maybe??? What you think? Heard NVIDIA sucks in Vista and with MCEVista PremiumRaptor DiveWill the new computer blow away the old? What Video card should I get?Am I right to go ATI instead of NVIDIA? If it were XP I would care so much about ATI/NVIDIA, but I heard NVIDIA/VISTA=BAD or atleast not AS good as ATI. Talk to me!!Thanks!!!Trashing my trash xps410 for a Quad HP d4990y; what is best Video card in Vista?
YES...I have all teh latest drivers...for EVERYTHING! Video/HD/BIOS...Trashing my trash xps410 for a Quad HP d4990y; what is best Video card in Vista?
:lol:You won't custom build, will you?
Last pre-built machine for me!![QUOTE=''Wesker776'']:lol:You won't custom build, will you?[/QUOTE]
Hm...The problem with prebuilds are the ridiculous PSUs they put in their rigs, which often force users to spend extra on a replacement/sub PSU. There's also the problem of questionable motherboards which may have compatability problems.That HP does look good, but make sure you do add a good video card (X1950 PRO/2900 XT/8800 GTS/8800 GTX) as well as a good PSU (500w) or Thermaltake's GPU PSU (go on newegg and you'll see what I mean).Also, NVIDIA's drivers for SLi are dodgy. The drivers should be fine for a single card set up though.
Does under-powering a vid card have large effect on performance?
Hey guys,I have an ATI HD 2900 1gb vid card. im running it off my 600w PSU, with 2x6-pin pci-e connectors going into it. its recommended you need 1x8-pin and 1x6-pin. 600w it still fine to have it working, but is underpowering it that much going to make a large impact on performance. in other words, if i go get me the larger PSU i have my eyes on, 850w, will my performance in games increase?CheersDoes under-powering a vid card have large effect on performance?
I think those other pins are just for overclockingDoes under-powering a vid card have large effect on performance?
[QUOTE=''Random__Guy'']I think those other pins are just for overclocking[/QUOTE]Correct - the 8 pin is needed to unlock the overclocking features on the 2900XTs
I think those other pins are just for overclockingDoes under-powering a vid card have large effect on performance?
[QUOTE=''Random__Guy'']I think those other pins are just for overclocking[/QUOTE]Correct - the 8 pin is needed to unlock the overclocking features on the 2900XTs
Surround sound on HQ-2300D headphones isn't working....
I bought Creative's HQ-2300D heapdhones that supposedly emulate 5.1 surround sound. The sound quality is better than that of generic headphones, but the surround sound is missing. I tried playing around with my Xi-Fi Platinum's settings a bit, all to no avail. Be it movies or games - I just can't feel surround. Any ideas why it could be so?Surround sound on HQ-2300D headphones isn't working....
have you got your speakers set to 5.1 in the Windows SOund Configuration section? If they are true surround then you don't set them as headphones. Surround sound on HQ-2300D headphones isn't working....
I tried as you suggested, but the ''rear speakers'' become silent, i.e. sound behind me becomes just barely audible. :/
have you got your speakers set to 5.1 in the Windows SOund Configuration section? If they are true surround then you don't set them as headphones. Surround sound on HQ-2300D headphones isn't working....
I tried as you suggested, but the ''rear speakers'' become silent, i.e. sound behind me becomes just barely audible. :/
8600GT or 7900GS
They are both around $100 and I was wondering which one would be better.8600GT or 7900GS
8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.8600GT or 7900GS
[QUOTE=''Greyhound222'']8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.[/QUOTE]I don't think so.8600GT is only a little faster than 7600GT and it has dx10 but it sucks in dx10 games, less than 20fps7900Gs is better
[QUOTE=''dayaccus007''][QUOTE=''Greyhound222'']8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.[/QUOTE]I don't think so.8600GT is only a little faster than 7600GT and it has dx10 but it sucks in dx10 games, less than 20fps7900Gs is better[/QUOTE]Have you seen the 8600 perform in oblivion?
[QUOTE=''achilles614''][QUOTE=''dayaccus007''] [QUOTE=''Greyhound222'']8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.[/QUOTE]I don't think so.8600GT is only a little faster than 7600GT and it has dx10 but it sucks in dx10 games, less than 20fps7900Gs is better[/QUOTE]Have you seen the 8600 perform in oblivion?
[/QUOTE]Are you saying that it was bad or good?
[QUOTE=''stormtrooper32''][QUOTE=''achilles614''][QUOTE=''dayaccus007''] [QUOTE=''Greyhound222'']8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.[/QUOTE]I don't think so.8600GT is only a little faster than 7600GT and it has dx10 but it sucks in dx10 games, less than 20fps7900Gs is better[/QUOTE]Have you seen the 8600 perform in oblivion?
[/QUOTE]Are you saying that it was bad or good?[/QUOTE]better than the 7900gs
It was good in the Oblivion performance, and in the BF 2142 performance guide. I`m looking at the 8600GT as well...or the X1650XT...its tough to decide. Or the 7900GS, its on sale at newegg for 100$....huuuu............
8600GT performs much better than 7900gs in oblivion8600GT performs ranging from much better to moderately better than 7900GS(depending on which review site) in Stalker and Rainbow Six Las Vegas7900GS performs much better than 8600GT on Prey7900GS performs moderately better than 8600GT in HL2, BF2, BF2142. But pretty pointless, not like anyone going to tell the different between 80fps or 60 something fps.
I'm getting a 8600GT on monday, it performs about in pair (better in some cases) with the 7900/x1950, but the drivers can get better as it's a very new card, it uses less power, supports DX10... what else do you want?
I've posted a couple times on this but I have the XFX 8600 GT XXX GPU, and I'm happy with it so far, I game on a 19'' standard LCD at 1280 x 1024, plays all my DX9 games, C%26C3, Fear, HL2, CoH, Oblivion...etc. on all hight settings if not maxed out, lil tweaking here and there to get good framerates. Has minimal power requirements so it works with my low stock Dell PSU. Will hold me over for a bit once DX10 games start rolling out, not to mention it's gettin cheaper and cheaper.
[QUOTE=''CatmanJJ'']I've posted a couple times on this but I have the XFX 8600 GT XXX GPU, and I'm happy with it so far, I game on a 19'' standard LCD at 1280 x 1024, plays all my DX9 games, C%26C3, Fear, HL2, CoH, Oblivion...etc. on all hight settings if not maxed out, lil tweaking here and there to get good framerates. Has minimal power requirements so it works with my low stock Dell PSU. Will hold me over for a bit once DX10 games start rolling out, not to mention it's gettin cheaper and cheaper.[/QUOTE]
I used to have one I maxed EVERYTHING at 1024x768
8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.8600GT or 7900GS
[QUOTE=''Greyhound222'']8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.[/QUOTE]I don't think so.8600GT is only a little faster than 7600GT and it has dx10 but it sucks in dx10 games, less than 20fps7900Gs is better
[QUOTE=''dayaccus007''][QUOTE=''Greyhound222'']8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.[/QUOTE]I don't think so.8600GT is only a little faster than 7600GT and it has dx10 but it sucks in dx10 games, less than 20fps7900Gs is better[/QUOTE]Have you seen the 8600 perform in oblivion?
[QUOTE=''achilles614''][QUOTE=''dayaccus007''] [QUOTE=''Greyhound222'']8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.[/QUOTE]I don't think so.8600GT is only a little faster than 7600GT and it has dx10 but it sucks in dx10 games, less than 20fps7900Gs is better[/QUOTE]Have you seen the 8600 perform in oblivion?
[/QUOTE]Are you saying that it was bad or good?
[QUOTE=''stormtrooper32''][QUOTE=''achilles614''][QUOTE=''dayaccus007''] [QUOTE=''Greyhound222'']8600GT as it has DX10 and performs better in new games.[/QUOTE]I don't think so.8600GT is only a little faster than 7600GT and it has dx10 but it sucks in dx10 games, less than 20fps7900Gs is better[/QUOTE]Have you seen the 8600 perform in oblivion?
[/QUOTE]Are you saying that it was bad or good?[/QUOTE]better than the 7900gs
It was good in the Oblivion performance, and in the BF 2142 performance guide. I`m looking at the 8600GT as well...or the X1650XT...its tough to decide. Or the 7900GS, its on sale at newegg for 100$....huuuu............
8600GT performs much better than 7900gs in oblivion8600GT performs ranging from much better to moderately better than 7900GS(depending on which review site) in Stalker and Rainbow Six Las Vegas7900GS performs much better than 8600GT on Prey7900GS performs moderately better than 8600GT in HL2, BF2, BF2142. But pretty pointless, not like anyone going to tell the different between 80fps or 60 something fps.
I'm getting a 8600GT on monday, it performs about in pair (better in some cases) with the 7900/x1950, but the drivers can get better as it's a very new card, it uses less power, supports DX10... what else do you want?
I've posted a couple times on this but I have the XFX 8600 GT XXX GPU, and I'm happy with it so far, I game on a 19'' standard LCD at 1280 x 1024, plays all my DX9 games, C%26C3, Fear, HL2, CoH, Oblivion...etc. on all hight settings if not maxed out, lil tweaking here and there to get good framerates. Has minimal power requirements so it works with my low stock Dell PSU. Will hold me over for a bit once DX10 games start rolling out, not to mention it's gettin cheaper and cheaper.
[QUOTE=''CatmanJJ'']I've posted a couple times on this but I have the XFX 8600 GT XXX GPU, and I'm happy with it so far, I game on a 19'' standard LCD at 1280 x 1024, plays all my DX9 games, C%26C3, Fear, HL2, CoH, Oblivion...etc. on all hight settings if not maxed out, lil tweaking here and there to get good framerates. Has minimal power requirements so it works with my low stock Dell PSU. Will hold me over for a bit once DX10 games start rolling out, not to mention it's gettin cheaper and cheaper.[/QUOTE]
I used to have one I maxed EVERYTHING at 1024x768
maximum grafix card RAM question
i was wondering, our old dell (again) can only support 768 mb of ram, when i am upgdrading the grafix card is that the max ram it can support for grafix card ram?thxmaximum grafix card RAM question
[QUOTE=''queenfan66'']i was wondering, our old dell (again) can only support 768 mb of ram, when i am upgdrading the grafix card is that the max ram it can support for grafix card ram?[/QUOTE]The two are entirely separate and have no direct inter-relationship. Indirectly, however, it makes for poor logic to add a very powerful and expensive video card to a system that has less market value than the video card does. The only time that a video card with more than 256 MBs of VRAM is usable for gaming is at resolutions in the 1900 by 1200 region and upward, on expensive displays, and even then if the video card isn't powerful enough, it won't be able to make its VRAM available for the game to use. The computers that have the speed and power to match to a video card like that will have a minimum system memory capability of 2 GBs, not 768 like the antique Dell that you have referred to. From my point of view, you will be far better off to either save the money now for a more thorough upgrade later, or set most of it aside for that, and only invest a rather small amount in an incremental video improvement, while realizing that it's going to be money thrown away anyway, because you will soon be well rid of the old PC, new video in it and all.(In Edit) P. S. Here in these forums you will see a great deal of exaggeration about a situation that can arise with the name ''bottle necking'', but it is just not usually anything at all as bad as the forum folks here want to make it out to be. However, there is exactly one PC here at my place with that kind of RAM restriction, and it is an eight or nine year old K6-2 PC that has only a 500 MHz CPU. It also has only an AGP1 slot, so a 4X or 8X card won't fit. But if one would do so, the CPU is so slow by comparison to the potential of a high zoot video card, that a lot of that fancy card's capability would be lost, squeezed through the narrow ''bottle neck'' of low CPU performance. FYI, I put it back together to play some old Tie Fighter and Wing Commander Space Flying (Arcade style simulator) Games, and had the very devil of a time finding a hard drive it would work compatibly with (no new parts, all stuff from the discard pile in the shop). maximum grafix card RAM question
768 may not be your max memmory, 512's might work if there low density.
[QUOTE=''queenfan66'']i was wondering, our old dell (again) can only support 768 mb of ram, when i am upgdrading the grafix card is that the max ram it can support for grafix card ram?[/QUOTE]The two are entirely separate and have no direct inter-relationship. Indirectly, however, it makes for poor logic to add a very powerful and expensive video card to a system that has less market value than the video card does. The only time that a video card with more than 256 MBs of VRAM is usable for gaming is at resolutions in the 1900 by 1200 region and upward, on expensive displays, and even then if the video card isn't powerful enough, it won't be able to make its VRAM available for the game to use. The computers that have the speed and power to match to a video card like that will have a minimum system memory capability of 2 GBs, not 768 like the antique Dell that you have referred to. From my point of view, you will be far better off to either save the money now for a more thorough upgrade later, or set most of it aside for that, and only invest a rather small amount in an incremental video improvement, while realizing that it's going to be money thrown away anyway, because you will soon be well rid of the old PC, new video in it and all.(In Edit) P. S. Here in these forums you will see a great deal of exaggeration about a situation that can arise with the name ''bottle necking'', but it is just not usually anything at all as bad as the forum folks here want to make it out to be. However, there is exactly one PC here at my place with that kind of RAM restriction, and it is an eight or nine year old K6-2 PC that has only a 500 MHz CPU. It also has only an AGP1 slot, so a 4X or 8X card won't fit. But if one would do so, the CPU is so slow by comparison to the potential of a high zoot video card, that a lot of that fancy card's capability would be lost, squeezed through the narrow ''bottle neck'' of low CPU performance. FYI, I put it back together to play some old Tie Fighter and Wing Commander Space Flying (Arcade style simulator) Games, and had the very devil of a time finding a hard drive it would work compatibly with (no new parts, all stuff from the discard pile in the shop). maximum grafix card RAM question
768 may not be your max memmory, 512's might work if there low density.
dx10 card: which one, when should i buy
im definitely debating one of the high range cards, but which model? i know the 2900 drivers are crap right now, but i expect a steep increasein performancewhen dx10 games come out. bioshock will be dx10 right?either way, my 7600gts probably wont do so good with it.so should i wait until mid august to buy the card or would you suspect they will jack up the prices, as that IS when most people will make the switch, after all.dx10 card: which one, when should i buy
If you need Ultra settings and have $280 to spend,8800GTS 320MB.If you will be satsified with medium-high settings and have less than $150 to spend,8600GT.
If you need Ultra settings and have $280 to spend,8800GTS 320MB.If you will be satsified with medium-high settings and have less than $150 to spend,8600GT.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
tight 800 bugdet PC
(the topic) from scratch. wouldnt mind DX10 on lowtight 800 bugdet PC
is that in dollars or pounds..... if your going to go DX10 then i think you'll have to settle for an 8600 GTS (if in pounds) if its in dollars then there reallly is no hope.tight 800 bugdet PC
Country? USD CND pounds we need that too lol Well I would a wait a bit longer for better cpu's to be released
[QUOTE=''yoyo462001'']is that in dollars or pounds..... if your going to go DX10 then i think you'll have to settle for an 8600 GTS (if in pounds) if its in dollars then there reallly is no hope.[/QUOTE]
Pffft I can build a 800$ comp with a 8800GTS lol
yea you probably could but you would have to comprimise other hardware.
[QUOTE=''yoyo462001'']yea you probably could but you would have to comprimise other hardware.[/QUOTE]
Naw not really
is that in dollars or pounds..... if your going to go DX10 then i think you'll have to settle for an 8600 GTS (if in pounds) if its in dollars then there reallly is no hope.tight 800 bugdet PC
Country? USD CND pounds we need that too lol Well I would a wait a bit longer for better cpu's to be released
[QUOTE=''yoyo462001'']is that in dollars or pounds..... if your going to go DX10 then i think you'll have to settle for an 8600 GTS (if in pounds) if its in dollars then there reallly is no hope.[/QUOTE]
Pffft I can build a 800$ comp with a 8800GTS lol
yea you probably could but you would have to comprimise other hardware.
[QUOTE=''yoyo462001'']yea you probably could but you would have to comprimise other hardware.[/QUOTE]
Naw not really
switching from 2200+ to 3800+
Awhile back I made the switch from a Athlon XP 2200+ to a Athlon 64 3800+. The problem is that I kept the same PC2100 memory. Is this why I see very little difference between the two?switching from 2200+ to 3800+
Yea that memory needs to go.switching from 2200+ to 3800+
Yeah, your system is probably bottlenecking. You might also want to take a long hard look at your motherboard and consider upgrading. If the motherboard only supports your current RAM, you will need to replace it to see any change. PC3200 is pretty cheap these days.
DDr2-800 ftw
[QUOTE=''LouieV13'']DDr2-800 ftw[/QUOTE]He doesn't need that for his rig. I second the PC3200/mobo suggestion.
[QUOTE=''jazztrumpet5''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']DDr2-800 ftw[/QUOTE]He doesn't need that for his rig. I second the PC3200/mobo suggestion.
[/QUOTE]
Yea I know just saying lol most games dont even use duel core yet so why would you see an increase?
Yea that memory needs to go.switching from 2200+ to 3800+
Yeah, your system is probably bottlenecking. You might also want to take a long hard look at your motherboard and consider upgrading. If the motherboard only supports your current RAM, you will need to replace it to see any change. PC3200 is pretty cheap these days.
DDr2-800 ftw
[QUOTE=''LouieV13'']DDr2-800 ftw[/QUOTE]He doesn't need that for his rig. I second the PC3200/mobo suggestion.
[QUOTE=''jazztrumpet5''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']DDr2-800 ftw[/QUOTE]He doesn't need that for his rig. I second the PC3200/mobo suggestion.
[/QUOTE]
Yea I know just saying lol most games dont even use duel core yet so why would you see an increase?
Club 3d nvidia 8800gts 320 mb
Anyone heard of Club 3d manufacturer(of graphic cards.it's european i think,i'm from europe too.i have an opportunity to buy it.i want to know is it good quality.Thanks for any help!Club 3d nvidia 8800gts 320 mb
Here. I have it. Nice to see someone from Europe :P. Its nice manufacturer. Its cheaper than most, cause you dont get any game in it and stuff like that. I say go for it. :)Club 3d nvidia 8800gts 320 mb
hi there.nice to see someone with that card.yes it's cheaper and i heard about good performance of that card.i'm pretty suspicious about quality,couse it's not a big and''famous''manufacturer.so you said it's ok?are you from europe too?where did you bought it?
I live in Slovenia. If anything goes wrong whit card you have waranty. DOnt worry about that. I also heard that Club 3D uses faster memory chips than manufacturers like XFX. Bought my card in Slovenia. Where are you from?? EDIT: Club 3D is Holland manufacturer, just for information.
mostar,bosnia %26 herzegovina hey we're pretty close!
[QUOTE=''fisherGangsta'']mostar,bosnia %26 herzegovina hey we're pretty close![/QUOTE]Nice. Never been in bosnia. Our countrys were in same country few years ago. Yugoslavia. My dad is often in bosnia. I say go for Club 3D. You have warranty if anything goes wrong, so you have nothing to lose. Besides its not bad brand. I know that guys who set world record in overclocking GPUs some time ago were using Club 3D card. Its also very popular brand in Germany.
Hvala prijatelju!
ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia
[QUOTE=''fisherGangsta'']Hvala prijatelju![/QUOTE]Nema problema.
[QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''fisherGangsta'']Hvala prijatelju![/QUOTE]Nema problema.[/QUOTE]
dfgkdj8 he95 kfkuig
[QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one.
[QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE]
It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.
I've heard Club 3D are looking to extend their warrenty to something similar to EVGA'... and thats the main reason for buying a EVGA card. This extenended warrenty would more than likly extened to cards still warrenty
[QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE] It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.[/QUOTE]what happend with your XFX?
[QUOTE=''fisherGangsta''][QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE] It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.[/QUOTE]what happend with your XFX?[/QUOTE]
I sent a card to them because the fan broke and I did not even get a reply or my card back
[QUOTE=''big_al123'']I've heard Club 3D are looking to extend their warrenty to something similar to EVGA'... and thats the main reason for buying a EVGA card. This extenended warrenty would more than likly extened to cards still warrenty [/QUOTE]
Any 2+ year is fine I mean who keeps a card for more than 2 years?
[QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''fisherGangsta''][QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE] It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.[/QUOTE]what happend with your XFX?[/QUOTE] I sent a card to them because the fan broke and I did not even get a reply or my card back[/QUman,that sucks
[QUOTE=''fisherGangsta''][QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''fisherGangsta''][QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE] It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.[/QUOTE]what happend with your XFX?[/QUOTE] I sent a card to them because the fan broke and I did not even get a reply or my card back[/QUman,that sucks[/QUOTE]
I dont care really was just a 8600GT pretty good but not as good as HD 2900XT CrossFire :)dermatologist
Here. I have it. Nice to see someone from Europe :P. Its nice manufacturer. Its cheaper than most, cause you dont get any game in it and stuff like that. I say go for it. :)Club 3d nvidia 8800gts 320 mb
hi there.nice to see someone with that card.yes it's cheaper and i heard about good performance of that card.i'm pretty suspicious about quality,couse it's not a big and''famous''manufacturer.so you said it's ok?are you from europe too?where did you bought it?
I live in Slovenia. If anything goes wrong whit card you have waranty. DOnt worry about that. I also heard that Club 3D uses faster memory chips than manufacturers like XFX. Bought my card in Slovenia. Where are you from?? EDIT: Club 3D is Holland manufacturer, just for information.
mostar,bosnia %26 herzegovina hey we're pretty close!
[QUOTE=''fisherGangsta'']mostar,bosnia %26 herzegovina hey we're pretty close![/QUOTE]Nice. Never been in bosnia. Our countrys were in same country few years ago. Yugoslavia. My dad is often in bosnia. I say go for Club 3D. You have warranty if anything goes wrong, so you have nothing to lose. Besides its not bad brand. I know that guys who set world record in overclocking GPUs some time ago were using Club 3D card. Its also very popular brand in Germany.
Hvala prijatelju!
ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia
[QUOTE=''fisherGangsta'']Hvala prijatelju![/QUOTE]Nema problema.
[QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''fisherGangsta'']Hvala prijatelju![/QUOTE]Nema problema.[/QUOTE]
dfgkdj8 he95 kfkuig
[QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one.
[QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE]
It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.
I've heard Club 3D are looking to extend their warrenty to something similar to EVGA'... and thats the main reason for buying a EVGA card. This extenended warrenty would more than likly extened to cards still warrenty
[QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE] It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.[/QUOTE]what happend with your XFX?
[QUOTE=''fisherGangsta''][QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE] It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.[/QUOTE]what happend with your XFX?[/QUOTE]
I sent a card to them because the fan broke and I did not even get a reply or my card back
[QUOTE=''big_al123'']I've heard Club 3D are looking to extend their warrenty to something similar to EVGA'... and thats the main reason for buying a EVGA card. This extenended warrenty would more than likly extened to cards still warrenty [/QUOTE]
Any 2+ year is fine I mean who keeps a card for more than 2 years?
[QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''fisherGangsta''][QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE] It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.[/QUOTE]what happend with your XFX?[/QUOTE] I sent a card to them because the fan broke and I did not even get a reply or my card back[/QUman,that sucks
[QUOTE=''fisherGangsta''][QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''fisherGangsta''][QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''domke13''][QUOTE=''LouieV13'']ASUS EVGA BFG are the only brands id buy for nvidia[/QUOTE]Man. It really doesnt matter. All manufacturers have warranty so you just take the cheapest one. [/QUOTE] It does kinda... like I would never get another XFX after my craptastic experiance with them... Kinda opinion but somtimes they put cheap HS/fans on and they ruin the card.[/QUOTE]what happend with your XFX?[/QUOTE] I sent a card to them because the fan broke and I did not even get a reply or my card back[/QUman,that sucks[/QUOTE]
I dont care really was just a 8600GT pretty good but not as good as HD 2900XT CrossFire :)
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Massive Price Cuts
http://www.anandtech.com/ We finally have it! After well over a year of asking nicely, rudely and creatively - we know when AMD's next generation microarchitecture is being launched.
Well, sort of.
Barcelona, as you maybe remember, is the code name for AMD's next-generation server processors. AMD recently announced that in August, it will unleash Barcelona unto the world at clock speeds of ''up to 2.0GHz.'' But Barcelona only applies to the server world, and today we're reviewing a desktop microprocessor, so when do we get to see AMD's brand new Phenom processors on the desktop?
We'd expect Phenom in our hands 30 days after Barcelona's launch, making it approximately September/October by the time you'd see a preview/review and widespread availability about 30 days from that. If all goes perfectly, AMD's Phenom chips should be in customers' hands by November or December at the latest.
Penryn, Intel's 45nm update to its current Core 2 processors, will also make its debut at the end of this year, potentially spoiling AMD's launch party. A few possibilities exist with Penryn:
1) Penryn could launch across the board at all clock speeds and at competitive prices, quite possibly the worst case scenario for AMD, or
2) Penryn could launch strictly at upper clock speeds/price points, allowing AMD to have an easier time competing at lower speeds, or finally
3) Penryn could launch at lower clock speeds and price points, giving AMD an equally hard time as in the first scenario
It's important to recap AMD's impending launch as we've had yet another round of price cuts, making buying a new CPU today very attractive.
Today is supposed to mark the introduction of the first 1333MHz FSB quad-core Core 2 Extreme processor, the QX6850 (mouthful anyone?), as well as the official launch of the entire 1333MHz FSB lineup. But this is the second Core 2 Extreme launch that coincides with a ridiculous (in a good way) price drop, so we can't help but shift our focus for this story, at least for starters...
CPU Clock Speed FSB L2 Cache Pricing Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 3.00GHz 1333 4MBx2 $999 Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.00GHz 1333 4MB $266 Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 2.66GHz 1333 4MB $183 Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 2.33GHz 1333 4MB $163 What's launching todayIntel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Massive Price Cuts
hmmmm, very informative. Thankyou.Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Massive Price Cuts
Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)
Did you wrote all that? O.OGood info BTW :)
Nothing at all, just expectations, that in my opinion intel vs. amd will resolve as nVidia vs AMD DX10 GFX did.
all of this info came from http://www.anandtech.com/read there for more information. i will be getting my core 2 e6850 soon enough
You should've given credit to Anandtech in the first post. :P
[QUOTE=''JAMullins'']all of this info came from http://www.anandtech.com/read there for more information. i will be getting my core 2 e6850 soon enough[/QUOTE]Might want to put that in your original post...
[QUOTE=''frost_mourne13'']Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)[/QUOTE]They did what no silicon manafacturing company should do; Develop a new architecture (K10) on a new fabrication process (65nm). Further more, they're not like Intel--AMD can't afford to throw money at a problem and launch products aggressively. AMD are probably facing nightmares with low clock speeds and most likely low yeilds.Personally, I'm not expecting a show stopper from AMD. Something just feels different this time around for a company who says they have a superior product to launch. They haven't released much demos, haven't allowed the press to benchmark and have been too tight lipped.Whatever happens, they can't make any foolish mistakes from here on out. They aren't facing the same Intel that pushed a piss poor architecture onto consumers, they're facing an Intel who have their sights set on efficiency and innovation (e.g. Larrabee aka Teraflop Computing).
[QUOTE=''Wesker776''][QUOTE=''frost_mourne13'']Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)[/QUOTE]They did what no silicon manafacturing company should do; Develop a new architecture (K10) on a new fabrication process (65nm). Further more, they're not like Intel--AMD can't afford to throw money at a problem and launch products aggressively. AMD are probably facing nightmares with low clock speeds and most likely low yeilds.Personally, I'm not expecting a show stopper from AMD. Something just feels different this time around for a company who says they have a superior product to launch. They haven't released much demos, haven't allowed the press to benchmark and have been too tight lipped.Whatever happens, they can't make any foolish mistakes from here on out. They aren't facing the same Intel that pushed a piss poor architecture onto consumers, they're facing an Intel who have their sights set on efficiency and innovation (e.g. Larrabee aka Teraflop Computing).[/QUOTE]wow, thats a very nice and non biased opinion.
[QUOTE=''Wesker776''][QUOTE=''frost_mourne13'']Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)[/QUOTE]They did what no silicon manafacturing company should do; Develop a new architecture (K10) on a new fabrication process (65nm). Further more, they're not like Intel--AMD can't afford to throw money at a problem and launch products aggressively. AMD are probably facing nightmares with low clock speeds and most likely low yeilds.Personally, I'm not expecting a show stopper from AMD. Something just feels different this time around for a company who says they have a superior product to launch. They haven't released much demos, haven't allowed the press to benchmark and have been too tight lipped.Whatever happens, they can't make any foolish mistakes from here on out. They aren't facing the same Intel that pushed a piss poor architecture onto consumers, they're facing an Intel who have their sights set on efficiency and innovation (e.g. Larrabee aka Teraflop Computing).[/QUOTE]Sorry, that is a bit bias.
Core is Netburst Part II if you haven't noticed...
Where you in the tech world when K8 was launched Wesker?
AMD did the exact samething with K8 Opterons as they are doing now with K10.
[QUOTE=''LordEC911''][QUOTE=''Wesker776''][QUOTE=''frost_mourne13'']Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)[/QUOTE]They did what no silicon manafacturing company should do; Develop a new architecture (K10) on a new fabrication process (65nm). Further more, they're not like Intel--AMD can't afford to throw money at a problem and launch products aggressively. AMD are probably facing nightmares with low clock speeds and most likely low yeilds.Personally, I'm not expecting a show stopper from AMD. Something just feels different this time around for a company who says they have a superior product to launch. They haven't released much demos, haven't allowed the press to benchmark and have been too tight lipped.Whatever happens, they can't make any foolish mistakes from here on out. They aren't facing the same Intel that pushed a piss poor architecture onto consumers, they're facing an Intel who have their sights set on efficiency and innovation (e.g. Larrabee aka Teraflop Computing).[/QUOTE]Sorry, that is a bit bias.
Core is Netburst Part II if you haven't noticed...
Where you in the tech world when K8 was launched Wesker?
AMD did the exact samething with K8 Opterons as they are doing now with K10.[/QUOTE]O rly? How am I biased?Core is anything BUT NetBurst, dude. I'd also like to know how you think it's NetBurst 2.Also, AMD was A LOT more vocal with K8, through its launch and its lifecycle.
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']O rly? How am I biased?Core is anything BUT NetBurst, dude. I'd also like to know how you think it's NetBurst 2.Also, AMD was A LOT more vocal with K8, through its launch and its lifecycle.[/QUOTE]How is it different?
Minimum tweaking to the marchitecture, pushing it down to a smaller PP as fast as possible to push speeds higher. Intel has never had any elegance in this recent battle. It is about raw speed, raw transistor count(i.e. L2 cache) and raw profit.AMD was showing a 1.4ghz K8 Opty a MONTH before launch...
As for being vocal, not really...
[QUOTE=''LordEC911''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']O rly? How am I biased?Core is anything BUT NetBurst, dude. I'd also like to know how you think it's NetBurst 2.Also, AMD was A LOT more vocal with K8, through its launch and its lifecycle.[/QUOTE]How is it different?
Minimum tweaking to the marchitecture, pushing it down to a smaller PP as fast as possible to push speeds higher. Intel has never had any elegance in this recent battle. It is about raw speed, raw transistor count(i.e. L2 cache) and raw profit.AMD was showing a 1.6ghz K8 Opty a MONTH before launch...
As for being vocal, not really... [/QUOTE]http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/core.arshttp://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=2748%26p=1Erm, I suggest you have a good read of those two articles. Yes you are right about Core having more cache, but putting more cache to a dead weight architecture (NetBurst) does nothing. You need to make use of that extra cache, whether it be execute more instructions at once, reduce cache access latency or the ability to keep instruction registers full, you can't deny that Core isn't like NetBurst.Following that logic, one could say that AMD's Barcelona is nothing but a 65nm quad core variant of K8, in which everyone can expect no increase in performance...which we all know is wrong. Also, are you saying that AMD doesn't care about raw profit? Is AMD a charity now?[QUOTE] AMD was showing a 1.6ghz K8 Opty a MONTH before launch... As for being vocal, not really...[/QUOTE]Things were different. The fastest Pentium 4 was floating around was around 2.4GHz (IIRC) and we all know how efficient the Pentium 4 core was! Hell, the Athlon XP flogged Pentium 4 Willamette and was still competing quite well with the Nortwood. Then came Prescott...Then AMD stepped out if its territory by releasing the FX CPU line. For a company taking on Goliath, that is very vocal IMO.
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']Also, are you saying that AMD doesn't care about raw profit? Is AMD a charity now?[/QUOTE]I didn't realize they took the easy way out...
Where are the AMD quadcores with 2 dualcore die in a single package?Sorry, I was comparing Core to Netburst due to the fact that Intel just throws all it's resources into taking the easy way out. What did they do with Netburst? Speed it up and shrink it. What are they doing with Core? Speed it up, shrink it and give it more cache.I'm just saying, I did all the calculations in a diff post, that AMD will be competing against Core with at least 25% less transistors. I personally have a feeling that they will do very well.BTW- you can't make any comments about K10 being K8 while they are slightly similar they are very, very different, unlike Netburst and Core.
[QUOTE=''LordEC911''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']Also, are you saying that AMD doesn't care about raw profit? Is AMD a charity now?[/QUOTE]I didn't realize they took the easy way out...
Where are the AMD quadcores with 2 dualcore die in a single package? [/QUOTE]:lol: Just had to revive this topic, didn't ya?AMD can't make a dual die quad core because the memory controllers on each of the die would clash with eachother and create a massive bog overhead. AMD even said this a while ago in a Dailytech/TD Daily interview.Also, what was QuadFX? ;)
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']:lol: Just had to revive this topic, didn't ya?AMD can't make a dual die quad core because the memory controllers on each of the die would clash with eachother and create a massive bog overhead. AMD even said this a while ago in a Dailytech/TD Daily interview.Also, what was QuadFX? ;)[/QUOTE]I didn't realize they mass produced QuadFX chips... Where are those numbers?
They took a completely different path and you know it... I just don't understand why you won't admit it.Technically they could have done a dual die chip, it would have just taken a little more work then Intel, though a heck of a lot less then native quadcore.
[QUOTE=''LordEC911''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']:lol: Just had to revive this topic, didn't ya?AMD can't make a dual die quad core because the memory controllers on each of the die would clash with eachother and create a massive bog overhead. AMD even said this a while ago in a Dailytech/TD Daily interview.Also, what was QuadFX? ;)[/QUOTE]I didn't realize they mass produced QuadFX chips... Where are those numbers?
They took a completely different path and you know it... I just don't understand why you won't admit it.Technically they could have done a dual die chip, it would have just taken a little more work then Intel, though a heck of a lot less then native quadcore.[/QUOTE]Intel doesn't even mass produce quad cores either (at least not for desktop). Something like only 10-20% of all processor shipments consist of quad cores. But that's all beside the point. A product launch is a product launch. Also, what do I have to admit to? That Intel made a smarter choice (*ding* AMD slogan) in how it approached a new product? Please don't tell me that you think that the MCM approach of Intel's is lame like the other AMDroids on this forum. Sure it might be ''lazy'', but it works absolutely fine and should tide them over until they make their native octo/quad core design for Nehalem. [QUOTE] Technically they could have done a dual die chip, it would have just taken a little more work then Intel, though a heck of a lot less then native quadcore. [/QUOTE]Yes, and as you said, it would've been quite tricky. All cores (at least in the K8 architecture) need to be in contact with a memory controller. If you shut off one memory controller in one of the dies, how is that die supposed to access the memory? You would need the other die to send/receive data to the other die, and that would add huge latency.
[QUOTE=''LordEC911'']they are very, very different, unlike Netburst and Core.[/QUOTE]
Core's more based on the Pentium M processors, which are themselves loosely based on the Pentium 3. Very different from the P4/Netburst stuff.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
Well, sort of.
Barcelona, as you maybe remember, is the code name for AMD's next-generation server processors. AMD recently announced that in August, it will unleash Barcelona unto the world at clock speeds of ''up to 2.0GHz.'' But Barcelona only applies to the server world, and today we're reviewing a desktop microprocessor, so when do we get to see AMD's brand new Phenom processors on the desktop?
We'd expect Phenom in our hands 30 days after Barcelona's launch, making it approximately September/October by the time you'd see a preview/review and widespread availability about 30 days from that. If all goes perfectly, AMD's Phenom chips should be in customers' hands by November or December at the latest.
Penryn, Intel's 45nm update to its current Core 2 processors, will also make its debut at the end of this year, potentially spoiling AMD's launch party. A few possibilities exist with Penryn:
1) Penryn could launch across the board at all clock speeds and at competitive prices, quite possibly the worst case scenario for AMD, or
2) Penryn could launch strictly at upper clock speeds/price points, allowing AMD to have an easier time competing at lower speeds, or finally
3) Penryn could launch at lower clock speeds and price points, giving AMD an equally hard time as in the first scenario
It's important to recap AMD's impending launch as we've had yet another round of price cuts, making buying a new CPU today very attractive.
Today is supposed to mark the introduction of the first 1333MHz FSB quad-core Core 2 Extreme processor, the QX6850 (mouthful anyone?), as well as the official launch of the entire 1333MHz FSB lineup. But this is the second Core 2 Extreme launch that coincides with a ridiculous (in a good way) price drop, so we can't help but shift our focus for this story, at least for starters...
CPU Clock Speed FSB L2 Cache Pricing Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 3.00GHz 1333 4MBx2 $999 Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.00GHz 1333 4MB $266 Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 2.66GHz 1333 4MB $183 Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 2.33GHz 1333 4MB $163 What's launching todayIntel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Massive Price Cuts
hmmmm, very informative. Thankyou.Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 and Massive Price Cuts
Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)
Did you wrote all that? O.OGood info BTW :)
Nothing at all, just expectations, that in my opinion intel vs. amd will resolve as nVidia vs AMD DX10 GFX did.
all of this info came from http://www.anandtech.com/read there for more information. i will be getting my core 2 e6850 soon enough
You should've given credit to Anandtech in the first post. :P
[QUOTE=''JAMullins'']all of this info came from http://www.anandtech.com/read there for more information. i will be getting my core 2 e6850 soon enough[/QUOTE]Might want to put that in your original post...
[QUOTE=''frost_mourne13'']Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)[/QUOTE]They did what no silicon manafacturing company should do; Develop a new architecture (K10) on a new fabrication process (65nm). Further more, they're not like Intel--AMD can't afford to throw money at a problem and launch products aggressively. AMD are probably facing nightmares with low clock speeds and most likely low yeilds.Personally, I'm not expecting a show stopper from AMD. Something just feels different this time around for a company who says they have a superior product to launch. They haven't released much demos, haven't allowed the press to benchmark and have been too tight lipped.Whatever happens, they can't make any foolish mistakes from here on out. They aren't facing the same Intel that pushed a piss poor architecture onto consumers, they're facing an Intel who have their sights set on efficiency and innovation (e.g. Larrabee aka Teraflop Computing).
[QUOTE=''Wesker776''][QUOTE=''frost_mourne13'']Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)[/QUOTE]They did what no silicon manafacturing company should do; Develop a new architecture (K10) on a new fabrication process (65nm). Further more, they're not like Intel--AMD can't afford to throw money at a problem and launch products aggressively. AMD are probably facing nightmares with low clock speeds and most likely low yeilds.Personally, I'm not expecting a show stopper from AMD. Something just feels different this time around for a company who says they have a superior product to launch. They haven't released much demos, haven't allowed the press to benchmark and have been too tight lipped.Whatever happens, they can't make any foolish mistakes from here on out. They aren't facing the same Intel that pushed a piss poor architecture onto consumers, they're facing an Intel who have their sights set on efficiency and innovation (e.g. Larrabee aka Teraflop Computing).[/QUOTE]wow, thats a very nice and non biased opinion.
[QUOTE=''Wesker776''][QUOTE=''frost_mourne13'']Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)[/QUOTE]They did what no silicon manafacturing company should do; Develop a new architecture (K10) on a new fabrication process (65nm). Further more, they're not like Intel--AMD can't afford to throw money at a problem and launch products aggressively. AMD are probably facing nightmares with low clock speeds and most likely low yeilds.Personally, I'm not expecting a show stopper from AMD. Something just feels different this time around for a company who says they have a superior product to launch. They haven't released much demos, haven't allowed the press to benchmark and have been too tight lipped.Whatever happens, they can't make any foolish mistakes from here on out. They aren't facing the same Intel that pushed a piss poor architecture onto consumers, they're facing an Intel who have their sights set on efficiency and innovation (e.g. Larrabee aka Teraflop Computing).[/QUOTE]Sorry, that is a bit bias.
Core is Netburst Part II if you haven't noticed...
Where you in the tech world when K8 was launched Wesker?
AMD did the exact samething with K8 Opterons as they are doing now with K10.
[QUOTE=''LordEC911''][QUOTE=''Wesker776''][QUOTE=''frost_mourne13'']Great job.WTH is AMD thinking? Are they trying to get beaten on 2 generations of CPU ''competitions''? From what I hear, the new Barcelona X4's will be clocked under 2.5 GHz, while Penryn's will be clocked at 3 GHz and above.Well, I like how the Q6600 is only going to be 299. =)[/QUOTE]They did what no silicon manafacturing company should do; Develop a new architecture (K10) on a new fabrication process (65nm). Further more, they're not like Intel--AMD can't afford to throw money at a problem and launch products aggressively. AMD are probably facing nightmares with low clock speeds and most likely low yeilds.Personally, I'm not expecting a show stopper from AMD. Something just feels different this time around for a company who says they have a superior product to launch. They haven't released much demos, haven't allowed the press to benchmark and have been too tight lipped.Whatever happens, they can't make any foolish mistakes from here on out. They aren't facing the same Intel that pushed a piss poor architecture onto consumers, they're facing an Intel who have their sights set on efficiency and innovation (e.g. Larrabee aka Teraflop Computing).[/QUOTE]Sorry, that is a bit bias.
Core is Netburst Part II if you haven't noticed...
Where you in the tech world when K8 was launched Wesker?
AMD did the exact samething with K8 Opterons as they are doing now with K10.[/QUOTE]O rly? How am I biased?Core is anything BUT NetBurst, dude. I'd also like to know how you think it's NetBurst 2.Also, AMD was A LOT more vocal with K8, through its launch and its lifecycle.
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']O rly? How am I biased?Core is anything BUT NetBurst, dude. I'd also like to know how you think it's NetBurst 2.Also, AMD was A LOT more vocal with K8, through its launch and its lifecycle.[/QUOTE]How is it different?
Minimum tweaking to the marchitecture, pushing it down to a smaller PP as fast as possible to push speeds higher. Intel has never had any elegance in this recent battle. It is about raw speed, raw transistor count(i.e. L2 cache) and raw profit.AMD was showing a 1.4ghz K8 Opty a MONTH before launch...
As for being vocal, not really...
[QUOTE=''LordEC911''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']O rly? How am I biased?Core is anything BUT NetBurst, dude. I'd also like to know how you think it's NetBurst 2.Also, AMD was A LOT more vocal with K8, through its launch and its lifecycle.[/QUOTE]How is it different?
Minimum tweaking to the marchitecture, pushing it down to a smaller PP as fast as possible to push speeds higher. Intel has never had any elegance in this recent battle. It is about raw speed, raw transistor count(i.e. L2 cache) and raw profit.AMD was showing a 1.6ghz K8 Opty a MONTH before launch...
As for being vocal, not really... [/QUOTE]http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/core.arshttp://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=2748%26p=1Erm, I suggest you have a good read of those two articles. Yes you are right about Core having more cache, but putting more cache to a dead weight architecture (NetBurst) does nothing. You need to make use of that extra cache, whether it be execute more instructions at once, reduce cache access latency or the ability to keep instruction registers full, you can't deny that Core isn't like NetBurst.Following that logic, one could say that AMD's Barcelona is nothing but a 65nm quad core variant of K8, in which everyone can expect no increase in performance...which we all know is wrong. Also, are you saying that AMD doesn't care about raw profit? Is AMD a charity now?[QUOTE] AMD was showing a 1.6ghz K8 Opty a MONTH before launch... As for being vocal, not really...[/QUOTE]Things were different. The fastest Pentium 4 was floating around was around 2.4GHz (IIRC) and we all know how efficient the Pentium 4 core was! Hell, the Athlon XP flogged Pentium 4 Willamette and was still competing quite well with the Nortwood. Then came Prescott...Then AMD stepped out if its territory by releasing the FX CPU line. For a company taking on Goliath, that is very vocal IMO.
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']Also, are you saying that AMD doesn't care about raw profit? Is AMD a charity now?[/QUOTE]I didn't realize they took the easy way out...
Where are the AMD quadcores with 2 dualcore die in a single package?Sorry, I was comparing Core to Netburst due to the fact that Intel just throws all it's resources into taking the easy way out. What did they do with Netburst? Speed it up and shrink it. What are they doing with Core? Speed it up, shrink it and give it more cache.I'm just saying, I did all the calculations in a diff post, that AMD will be competing against Core with at least 25% less transistors. I personally have a feeling that they will do very well.BTW- you can't make any comments about K10 being K8 while they are slightly similar they are very, very different, unlike Netburst and Core.
[QUOTE=''LordEC911''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']Also, are you saying that AMD doesn't care about raw profit? Is AMD a charity now?[/QUOTE]I didn't realize they took the easy way out...
Where are the AMD quadcores with 2 dualcore die in a single package? [/QUOTE]:lol: Just had to revive this topic, didn't ya?AMD can't make a dual die quad core because the memory controllers on each of the die would clash with eachother and create a massive bog overhead. AMD even said this a while ago in a Dailytech/TD Daily interview.Also, what was QuadFX? ;)
[QUOTE=''Wesker776'']:lol: Just had to revive this topic, didn't ya?AMD can't make a dual die quad core because the memory controllers on each of the die would clash with eachother and create a massive bog overhead. AMD even said this a while ago in a Dailytech/TD Daily interview.Also, what was QuadFX? ;)[/QUOTE]I didn't realize they mass produced QuadFX chips... Where are those numbers?
They took a completely different path and you know it... I just don't understand why you won't admit it.Technically they could have done a dual die chip, it would have just taken a little more work then Intel, though a heck of a lot less then native quadcore.
[QUOTE=''LordEC911''][QUOTE=''Wesker776'']:lol: Just had to revive this topic, didn't ya?AMD can't make a dual die quad core because the memory controllers on each of the die would clash with eachother and create a massive bog overhead. AMD even said this a while ago in a Dailytech/TD Daily interview.Also, what was QuadFX? ;)[/QUOTE]I didn't realize they mass produced QuadFX chips... Where are those numbers?
They took a completely different path and you know it... I just don't understand why you won't admit it.Technically they could have done a dual die chip, it would have just taken a little more work then Intel, though a heck of a lot less then native quadcore.[/QUOTE]Intel doesn't even mass produce quad cores either (at least not for desktop). Something like only 10-20% of all processor shipments consist of quad cores. But that's all beside the point. A product launch is a product launch. Also, what do I have to admit to? That Intel made a smarter choice (*ding* AMD slogan) in how it approached a new product? Please don't tell me that you think that the MCM approach of Intel's is lame like the other AMDroids on this forum. Sure it might be ''lazy'', but it works absolutely fine and should tide them over until they make their native octo/quad core design for Nehalem. [QUOTE] Technically they could have done a dual die chip, it would have just taken a little more work then Intel, though a heck of a lot less then native quadcore. [/QUOTE]Yes, and as you said, it would've been quite tricky. All cores (at least in the K8 architecture) need to be in contact with a memory controller. If you shut off one memory controller in one of the dies, how is that die supposed to access the memory? You would need the other die to send/receive data to the other die, and that would add huge latency.
[QUOTE=''LordEC911'']they are very, very different, unlike Netburst and Core.[/QUOTE]
Core's more based on the Pentium M processors, which are themselves loosely based on the Pentium 3. Very different from the P4/Netburst stuff.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
Projector or Flat screen TV?
I heard about new Epson projectors going for about $3000. I know LCDs are like around $2,000, and if I were to get a 1080p screen, which one should I go for? I don't think I have enough space for a projection on a screen, the size wouldn't be like most people have it on entire walls. LCD on the other hand would still be good. So is a projector(Epson 1080p)at around 50-70'', or possibly even 100, better than a 42'' LCD(best quality)? Does the projector have to be at full screen to be at best quality? How exactly do projectors work?
Magnetic screwdriver O.K. to use???
is a magnetic O.K. to use while working on a computer, i.e. screwing in power supply or motherboard, etc.Magnetic screwdriver O.K. to use???
Yea it's fine. As long as you don't put a strong magnet near the electronics it'll be okay.Magnetic screwdriver O.K. to use???
thanks man :)
Yea it's fine. As long as you don't put a strong magnet near the electronics it'll be okay.Magnetic screwdriver O.K. to use???
thanks man :)
Need some help building a PC buds...
Well since Im tired of console gaming for a bit I went and save $2,000 hoping to build a high end pc to game on.Can you guys help me on building one at dell.com heres a link:http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us%26cs=19%26l=en%26oc=DXCWSK5%26s=dhsMy budget is $2,000 and I really appreciate the help buds.Need some help building a PC buds...
Do you mind building it yourself?? Its cheaper. Or you can also go to your local store and ask them to build PC by your choose for you. I recommend not going whit Dell. Their cases uses some non-standard PSU so you will be very limited in terms of upgrading. BTW. What you need??? Monitor, keyboard, mouse and PC????Need some help building a PC buds...
[QUOTE=''domke13'']Do you mind building it yourself?? Its cheaper. Or you can also go to your local store and ask them to build PC by your choose for you. I recommend not going whit Dell. Their cases uses some non-standard PSU so you will be very limited in terms of upgrading. BTW. What you need??? Monitor, keyboard, mouse and PC????[/QUOTE]I go with Dell cause I trust them quite a bit and feel safe.Just need a pc bud and thanks.
Ok. Ill try to do something in that page you posted.
I left default configuration on page you posted, but i did change GPU from 8600 to 8800 GTX. It comes 100$ over 2,000, but if you can add those 100$ you will have a killer machine.
[QUOTE=''domke13'']I left default configuration on page you posted, but i did change GPU from 8600 to 8800 GTX. It comes 100$ over 2,000, but if you can add those 100$ you will have a killer machine.[/QUOTE]Nice, are there any links to how it would perform on games today?
One error bud I dont need a monitor so you can subtract some from the price I believe.
Yeah. Sorry. So you can get better processor than if you dont need monitor. Ill fix it. And that rig whit 8800 GTX would perform fantastic in all games today. Its the second best card in the world for now.
When i say i dont want monitor on that website, it says that Dell configuration requiers Analog flat panel monitor.
[QUOTE=''domke13'']When i say i dont want monitor on that website, it says that Dell configuration requiers Analog flat panel monitor.[/QUOTE]weird
[QUOTE=''domke13'']When i say i dont want monitor on that website, it says that Dell configuration requiers Analog flat panel monitor.[/QUOTE]
Thats dell for ya. I would build it its REALLY easy im 15 I just got done putting mine together! Check out the specs in the rig its a monstro
Do you mind building it yourself?? Its cheaper. Or you can also go to your local store and ask them to build PC by your choose for you. I recommend not going whit Dell. Their cases uses some non-standard PSU so you will be very limited in terms of upgrading. BTW. What you need??? Monitor, keyboard, mouse and PC????Need some help building a PC buds...
[QUOTE=''domke13'']Do you mind building it yourself?? Its cheaper. Or you can also go to your local store and ask them to build PC by your choose for you. I recommend not going whit Dell. Their cases uses some non-standard PSU so you will be very limited in terms of upgrading. BTW. What you need??? Monitor, keyboard, mouse and PC????[/QUOTE]I go with Dell cause I trust them quite a bit and feel safe.Just need a pc bud and thanks.
Ok. Ill try to do something in that page you posted.
I left default configuration on page you posted, but i did change GPU from 8600 to 8800 GTX. It comes 100$ over 2,000, but if you can add those 100$ you will have a killer machine.
[QUOTE=''domke13'']I left default configuration on page you posted, but i did change GPU from 8600 to 8800 GTX. It comes 100$ over 2,000, but if you can add those 100$ you will have a killer machine.[/QUOTE]Nice, are there any links to how it would perform on games today?
One error bud I dont need a monitor so you can subtract some from the price I believe.
Yeah. Sorry. So you can get better processor than if you dont need monitor. Ill fix it. And that rig whit 8800 GTX would perform fantastic in all games today. Its the second best card in the world for now.
When i say i dont want monitor on that website, it says that Dell configuration requiers Analog flat panel monitor.
[QUOTE=''domke13'']When i say i dont want monitor on that website, it says that Dell configuration requiers Analog flat panel monitor.[/QUOTE]weird
[QUOTE=''domke13'']When i say i dont want monitor on that website, it says that Dell configuration requiers Analog flat panel monitor.[/QUOTE]
Thats dell for ya. I would build it its REALLY easy im 15 I just got done putting mine together! Check out the specs in the rig its a monstro
Micro ATX with 1950pro..
Do you it would have enough room to cool?? I would be getting OCZ 600W supply w/ 1950 pro card.My micro tower is 14 inches in height.Micro ATX with 1950pro..
My old M-ATX case held a 8600GT fine idk how long the X1950PRO is but it should fit. And cooling is fine my 8600GT was always at 30-50cdermatologist
My old M-ATX case held a 8600GT fine idk how long the X1950PRO is but it should fit. And cooling is fine my 8600GT was always at 30-50c
One of my video cards isn't displaying anything...
I havetwo geforce 7800 GTX 256s and one them isn't displaying anything on the monitor when I unplug the monitor from the good card into the other.Is it possible to fix? or am I going to have to replace it?One of my video cards isn't displaying anything...
Call the manufacturer hopfully your warrentie is still good lolOne of my video cards isn't displaying anything...
[QUOTE=''LouieV13'']Call the manufacturer hopfully your warrentie is still good lol[/QUOTE]Nah, it isn't :/. Got the cards about 1 1/2-2 years ago.
have you overclocked your video card or done something out of the usual...sometimes if the core has been clocked to much...then entire card fails...i had mine replaced for free....and is the fan on the video card spinning? perhaps try connecting your monitor to your good video card and check the device manager for any conflicts....good luck...and see if you have the latest drivers
[QUOTE=''thushanth11'']have you overclocked your video card or done something out of the usual...sometimes if the core has been clocked to much...then entire card fails...i had mine replaced for free....and is the fan on the video card spinning? perhaps try connecting your monitor to your good video card and check the device manager for any conflicts....good luck...and see if you have the latest drivers[/QUOTE]Nah, I haven't overclocked. The fan is running fine and if I connect my ''broken'' video card along with my good one, it'll recognize the video card with SLI and all that. But when I connect the monitor to the broken card, nothing on the monitor shows up.
Call the manufacturer hopfully your warrentie is still good lolOne of my video cards isn't displaying anything...
[QUOTE=''LouieV13'']Call the manufacturer hopfully your warrentie is still good lol[/QUOTE]Nah, it isn't :/. Got the cards about 1 1/2-2 years ago.
have you overclocked your video card or done something out of the usual...sometimes if the core has been clocked to much...then entire card fails...i had mine replaced for free....and is the fan on the video card spinning? perhaps try connecting your monitor to your good video card and check the device manager for any conflicts....good luck...and see if you have the latest drivers
[QUOTE=''thushanth11'']have you overclocked your video card or done something out of the usual...sometimes if the core has been clocked to much...then entire card fails...i had mine replaced for free....and is the fan on the video card spinning? perhaps try connecting your monitor to your good video card and check the device manager for any conflicts....good luck...and see if you have the latest drivers[/QUOTE]Nah, I haven't overclocked. The fan is running fine and if I connect my ''broken'' video card along with my good one, it'll recognize the video card with SLI and all that. But when I connect the monitor to the broken card, nothing on the monitor shows up.
Need a good PSU to run a Q6600 and 8800gts 340
Need a little help on a PSU to run this rig. Oh the mobo I got does not do SLI or anything, but does support ddr3 1066 for the future ( just going to do 2gb 800 ddr2 for now). Is this solution possible in the $75 range? Thanks in advance.Need a good PSU to run a Q6600 and 8800gts 340
bumpNeed a good PSU to run a Q6600 and 8800gts 340
Bump
Bump :D
[QUOTE=''moo111'']Bump :D[/QUOTE]Nevermind I answered my own ? u suck
BUMP =.=
So many bumps @.@http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817104034That PSU is the most rock solid budget PSU out there. Normally there'd be a $10 rebate on that PSU, but oh well.
[QUOTE=''neogeo419''][QUOTE=''moo111'']Bump :D[/QUOTE]Nevermind I answered my own ? u suck[/QUOTE]:lol::lol: xDD
I recommend the Corsair 520 Watt, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139001%26Tpk=corsair%2b520, especially with the $20 Mail in rebate
[QUOTE=''big_al123'']I recommend the Corsair 520 Watt, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139001%26Tpk=corsair%2b520, especially with the $20 Mail in rebate [/QUOTE]
FSP FTW
http://www.buy.com/prod/corsair-520w-sli-certified-modular-atx-power-supply/q/loc/101/203270716.html
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817104034Very good PSU, just look at the customer reviews. This is a good review also:http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/02/28/strong_showing/page10.html
[QUOTE=''Wesker776''] So many bumps @.@http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817104034That PSU is the most rock solid budget PSU out there. Normally there'd be a $10 rebate on that PSU, but oh well. [/QUOTE]this one im getting just for the heck of it:Phttp://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817153054
bumpNeed a good PSU to run a Q6600 and 8800gts 340
Bump
Bump :D
[QUOTE=''moo111'']Bump :D[/QUOTE]Nevermind I answered my own ? u suck
BUMP =.=
So many bumps @.@http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817104034That PSU is the most rock solid budget PSU out there. Normally there'd be a $10 rebate on that PSU, but oh well.
[QUOTE=''neogeo419''][QUOTE=''moo111'']Bump :D[/QUOTE]Nevermind I answered my own ? u suck[/QUOTE]:lol::lol: xDD
I recommend the Corsair 520 Watt, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139001%26Tpk=corsair%2b520, especially with the $20 Mail in rebate
[QUOTE=''big_al123'']I recommend the Corsair 520 Watt, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139001%26Tpk=corsair%2b520, especially with the $20 Mail in rebate [/QUOTE]
FSP FTW
http://www.buy.com/prod/corsair-520w-sli-certified-modular-atx-power-supply/q/loc/101/203270716.html
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817104034Very good PSU, just look at the customer reviews. This is a good review also:http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/02/28/strong_showing/page10.html
[QUOTE=''Wesker776''] So many bumps @.@http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817104034That PSU is the most rock solid budget PSU out there. Normally there'd be a $10 rebate on that PSU, but oh well. [/QUOTE]this one im getting just for the heck of it:Phttp://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817153054
Is this OK to do? ( I know stupid question )
Is it ok if I take one of my HD 2900XT's out and put it in my friends computer to see how he likes it? I wont have mine on with only one btwIs this OK to do? ( I know stupid question )
Sure, just make sure he returns it, those things are expensive.Is this OK to do? ( I know stupid question )
[QUOTE=''kmusky'']Sure, just make sure he returns it, those things are expensive.[/QUOTE]
He lives next to me lol hes getting one in the mail and cant wait
[QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''kmusky'']Sure, just make sure he returns it, those things are expensive.[/QUOTE] He lives next to me lol hes getting one in the mail and cant wait [/QUOTE]It would be a nice thing to do. :)
Sure, just make sure he returns it, those things are expensive.Is this OK to do? ( I know stupid question )
[QUOTE=''kmusky'']Sure, just make sure he returns it, those things are expensive.[/QUOTE]
He lives next to me lol hes getting one in the mail and cant wait
[QUOTE=''LouieV13''][QUOTE=''kmusky'']Sure, just make sure he returns it, those things are expensive.[/QUOTE] He lives next to me lol hes getting one in the mail and cant wait [/QUOTE]It would be a nice thing to do. :)
When Overclocking
When Overclocking do I have to increase the fsb slowly. Like my 5 or 10mhz than restart. Or can I just increase it say by 100 without any problems.When Overclocking
The goal of overclocking is not only to increase speed but find a stable speed as well.You're not going to do anything to your computer by doing a huge increase but you will be guessing for a long time what speed is best for stability and speed.Increasing in small increments allows you to determine the ''breaking point'' of your system's stability. Once you get to that point you can back it off ever so slightly and you should be crash free. When Overclocking
so lets say I want a specific goal 3ghz for example. How do I calculate the FSB needed, and can I just make a 2.4 to 3 ghz jump?
I think the real fsb is the cpu's fsb divided by 4. so like a core 2 duo with 1066 fsb is really 266.5. I think.
The goal of overclocking is not only to increase speed but find a stable speed as well.You're not going to do anything to your computer by doing a huge increase but you will be guessing for a long time what speed is best for stability and speed.Increasing in small increments allows you to determine the ''breaking point'' of your system's stability. Once you get to that point you can back it off ever so slightly and you should be crash free. When Overclocking
so lets say I want a specific goal 3ghz for example. How do I calculate the FSB needed, and can I just make a 2.4 to 3 ghz jump?
I think the real fsb is the cpu's fsb divided by 4. so like a core 2 duo with 1066 fsb is really 266.5. I think.
didnt get vista disks??
I bought my new vista pc about two or three months ago and have been loving it (for the most part). Lately though I have been having problems with it and I am wanting to do a full sweep and reinstall everything. So, I went looking through my disks and Iwas suprised to find an UPGRADE DISK instead of an OS install disk...Im hoping bestbuy didnt seriously sit here and give me an upgrade disk instead fo the vista OS disks....so my question is, is this disk what I'm looking for or did I get screwed? didnt get vista disks??
dont know what brand PC it is, but, i know HP started doing this last year, they dont give you OS disks with new PCs anymore, i belive the only way to get ahold of them is to order the recovery disks from whatever company your PC is. you should be able to find some info on the company web site.didnt get vista disks??
you know the trick to do a clean install with the upgrade right?
[QUOTE=''blazethe1'']you know the trick to do a clean install with the upgrade right?[/QUOTE]If he did, he wouldn't sound worried would he?
well he could still be freakin out cus he thought they would give him one of those repair cds
no what trick?and ya lucky me i got an hp...they usually hook me up with really good computers (such as my laptop and previous desktop i got from them) so i figured id get this one as an HP.
http://www.windowssecrets.com/comp/070201#story1
dont know what brand PC it is, but, i know HP started doing this last year, they dont give you OS disks with new PCs anymore, i belive the only way to get ahold of them is to order the recovery disks from whatever company your PC is. you should be able to find some info on the company web site.didnt get vista disks??
you know the trick to do a clean install with the upgrade right?
[QUOTE=''blazethe1'']you know the trick to do a clean install with the upgrade right?[/QUOTE]If he did, he wouldn't sound worried would he?
well he could still be freakin out cus he thought they would give him one of those repair cds
no what trick?and ya lucky me i got an hp...they usually hook me up with really good computers (such as my laptop and previous desktop i got from them) so i figured id get this one as an HP.
http://www.windowssecrets.com/comp/070201#story1
Question about ram mhz
I just bought THIS ram and im confused it says ddr2 800 (pc2 6400) my compuer says its running at 400 mhz is that right? isnt it supose to run at 800 mhz? i have never replaced ram before just wondering if its right. My motherboard is a P5nsliQuestion about ram mhz
well the board says it supports 667mhz ram, but im not an expert so i can't tell you why it is running at 400mhz.Question about ram mhz
bump
DDR = DOUBLE data rate. So 400MHz (actual) x 2 = 800MHz (effective) It is perfectly normal.
[QUOTE=''ch5richards'']DDR = DOUBLE data rate. So 400MHz (actual) x 2 = 800MHz (effective) It is perfectly normal.[/QUOTE]
qft DDR means its dedicated to NOTHING as well
[QUOTE=''ch5richards'']DDR = DOUBLE data rate. So 400MHz (actual) x 2 = 800MHz (effective) It is perfectly normal.[/QUOTE]Its more like DDR2 that is 400Mhz x 2.
Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ
[QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]WHAT???
Its double data rate. 400 x 2 = 800.
[QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.
[QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE] Then is there a reason to use DDR2 1066MHz memory if only DDR2 533MHz memory is needed on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system?
[QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''][QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]I have better performance with 800mhz then 533mhz.
[QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]RAM DOES HAVE A FSB SPEED U TW*T, DO U EVEN STUDY I.T AT COLLEGE.
[QUOTE=''Chris_53''][QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]RAM DOES HAVE A FSB SPEED U TW*T, DO U EVEN STUDY I.T AT COLLEGE. [/QUOTE]
:
|[QUOTE=''Bebi_vegeta''][QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]I have better performance with 800mhz then 533mhz.[/QUOTE]Not unless you're overclocking the CPU. High speed RAM is only needed for overclocking. PC4200 is all that's needed for a Core 2 Duo with a 1066MHz FSB. And PC5300 (667MHz effective) is all that's needed for FSB 1333 C2D chips. For optimal performance, RAM speed and bus speed should be at a 1:1 ratio.
[QUOTE=''Utsusemi''] [QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE] Then is there a reason to use DDR2 1066MHz memory if only DDR2 533MHz memory is needed on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system?[/QUOTE]No, unless you're overclocking. DRAM speed and bus speed should always be equally matched for optimal performance, and in the case of a non-overclocked1066MHz FSB cpu, that would be PC4200 memory
[QUOTE=''Chris_53''][QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]RAM DOES HAVE A FSB SPEED U TW*T, DO U EVEN STUDY I.T AT COLLEGE. [/QUOTE]lawl. That 800MHz number you were referring to is the memory's effective speed. The RAM communicates through the processor's front side bus at 266MHz (on the typical 1066MHz FSB C2D chips). btw, processor's also used to have a backside bus through which L2 cache communication took place. I'm not sure about how that all works on today's CPUs.
[QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''][QUOTE=''Bebi_vegeta''][QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]I have better performance with 800mhz then 533mhz.[/QUOTE]Not unless you're overclocking the CPU. High speed RAM is only needed for overclocking. PC4200 is all that's needed for a Core 2 Duo with a 1066MHz FSB. And PC5300 (667MHz effective) is all that's needed for FSB 1333 C2D chips. For optimal performance, RAM speed and bus speed should be at a 1:1 ratio.[/QUOTE]You have bigger bandwidth when you have 800Mhz vs 533Mhz at the same timings.dermatologist
well the board says it supports 667mhz ram, but im not an expert so i can't tell you why it is running at 400mhz.Question about ram mhz
bump
DDR = DOUBLE data rate. So 400MHz (actual) x 2 = 800MHz (effective) It is perfectly normal.
[QUOTE=''ch5richards'']DDR = DOUBLE data rate. So 400MHz (actual) x 2 = 800MHz (effective) It is perfectly normal.[/QUOTE]
qft DDR means its dedicated to NOTHING as well
[QUOTE=''ch5richards'']DDR = DOUBLE data rate. So 400MHz (actual) x 2 = 800MHz (effective) It is perfectly normal.[/QUOTE]Its more like DDR2 that is 400Mhz x 2.
Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ
[QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]WHAT???
Its double data rate. 400 x 2 = 800.
[QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.
[QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE] Then is there a reason to use DDR2 1066MHz memory if only DDR2 533MHz memory is needed on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system?
[QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''][QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]I have better performance with 800mhz then 533mhz.
[QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]RAM DOES HAVE A FSB SPEED U TW*T, DO U EVEN STUDY I.T AT COLLEGE.
[QUOTE=''Chris_53''][QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]RAM DOES HAVE A FSB SPEED U TW*T, DO U EVEN STUDY I.T AT COLLEGE. [/QUOTE]
:
|[QUOTE=''Bebi_vegeta''][QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]I have better performance with 800mhz then 533mhz.[/QUOTE]Not unless you're overclocking the CPU. High speed RAM is only needed for overclocking. PC4200 is all that's needed for a Core 2 Duo with a 1066MHz FSB. And PC5300 (667MHz effective) is all that's needed for FSB 1333 C2D chips. For optimal performance, RAM speed and bus speed should be at a 1:1 ratio.
[QUOTE=''Utsusemi''] [QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE] Then is there a reason to use DDR2 1066MHz memory if only DDR2 533MHz memory is needed on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system?[/QUOTE]No, unless you're overclocking. DRAM speed and bus speed should always be equally matched for optimal performance, and in the case of a non-overclocked1066MHz FSB cpu, that would be PC4200 memory
[QUOTE=''Chris_53''][QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]RAM DOES HAVE A FSB SPEED U TW*T, DO U EVEN STUDY I.T AT COLLEGE. [/QUOTE]lawl. That 800MHz number you were referring to is the memory's effective speed. The RAM communicates through the processor's front side bus at 266MHz (on the typical 1066MHz FSB C2D chips). btw, processor's also used to have a backside bus through which L2 cache communication took place. I'm not sure about how that all works on today's CPUs.
[QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''][QUOTE=''Bebi_vegeta''][QUOTE=''My_name_a_Borat''] [QUOTE=''Chris_53'']Its perfectly normal for your memory to run at that speed. PC2 6400 memory has a CLOCK SPEED of 400MHZ and a FSB (front side bus) speed of 800MHZ[/QUOTE]RAMs don't have no Front Side Bus, u dig? :P Processors communicate with RAM through a front side bus, but NOT at the memory's effective speed. A C2D processor with a Front Side Bus of 1066MHz (which is 266MHz, quad-pumped), would communicate with the memory at 266MHz (533MHz PC-4200 RAM is all that's really needed for 1066MHz FSB cpus). This has nothing to do with what the person I quoted wrote, but I'll say it anyway.Contrary to popular belief, running DDR2 800MHz (400MHz) memory on a 1066MHz FSB C2D system DOES NOT boost performance over plain old DDR2 533MHz memory, since the CPU's actual bus speed is only 266MHz.[/QUOTE]I have better performance with 800mhz then 533mhz.[/QUOTE]Not unless you're overclocking the CPU. High speed RAM is only needed for overclocking. PC4200 is all that's needed for a Core 2 Duo with a 1066MHz FSB. And PC5300 (667MHz effective) is all that's needed for FSB 1333 C2D chips. For optimal performance, RAM speed and bus speed should be at a 1:1 ratio.[/QUOTE]You have bigger bandwidth when you have 800Mhz vs 533Mhz at the same timings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)