You've been given $2000...build the best computer you can

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Topic closed

Index »
Community »
Tech »
You've been given $2000...build the best computer you can

2008-02-21 10:20:44

02fxnmaurer: Member; +75|6760|Birmingham UK

i couldnt disagree more tbh ...not only does the sound card reduce load of the cpu with its own procesor....but it also sounds amazin ...onboard is awful in comparison and if your really looking for immersive gaming it is a must.

3gb of ram is just terrible tbh (and 32 bit vista will only read the 2gb...so COMPLETELI pointless) ....all tht varying memory size and speed etc would probably slow the performance of the pc down ...memory is dirt cheap atm ..get 4gb of pc-6400 which tbh is good enough for anything.

64bit vista is great ..ive used both os's on similar systems an tbh the 64bit version is much faster despite its compatibility....plus it will recognize up to 8gb ...which is much more benefical to any gamer.

An 8800gtx may be the best card going ...but if omni is looking for a complete set up its probably not worth it ...as a well overclocked 8800gt will nigh on touch gtx speeds...im running a gt an its power is impressive.

02

2008-02-21 10:25:45

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6692|Finland

creative card isn't waste of money... I would cry if I lost my Audigy.... and 64bit vista rocks with 4GB ram. Don't start waiting for Dx 11, it is still years away.

edit: ye. GTX is fast *wink wink*

Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2008-02-21 10:27:14)

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2008-02-21 10:26:42

topal63: . . .; +533|6996

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
creative card isn't waste of money... I would cry if I lost my Audigy.... and 64bit vista rocks with 4GB ram. Don't start waiting for Dx 11, it is still years away.

edit: ye. GTX is fast *wink wink*

That's the point, DX10 is a transition framework he can probably ignore. The visual quality is not a big enough of an imrpovement to justify the OS upgrade - as it's just for gamming (vs DX9). And DX11 is a pipe-dream so far off even MS might not included it in Windows 7.

I have an 8GB Vista 64bit System and it does not run as fast as my other machine with Windows XP @ 3GB.

The games work faster in XP SP2 (Most games are DX9, and any DX10 optionable games have a lower FPS).
The file transfer/copying is faster in XP SP2.
The on-board audio is NOT a CPU burden. I have High-Def on-board audio (Realtek) and don't miss my X-Fi card lying on a shelf in my office.
32 bit OS with a video card can only address 3.2 - 3.5 GB.
Vista 64bit with 4GB, will eat about 1GB in system resources leaving 3GB usable for apps. and will be a slower performing game rig than a 3GB XP machine.

Last edited by topal63 (2008-02-21 10:39:17)

2008-02-21 10:40:26

02fxnmaurer: Member; +75|6760|Birmingham UK

02fxnmaurer wrote:
i couldnt disagree more tbh ...not only does the sound card reduce load of the cpu with its own procesor....but it also sounds amazin ...onboard is awful in comparison and if your really looking for immersive gaming it is a must.

3gb of ram is just terrible tbh (and 32 bit vista will only read the 2gb...so COMPLETELI pointless) ....all tht varying memory size and speed etc would probably slow the performance of the pc down ...memory is dirt cheap atm ..get 4gb of pc-6400 which tbh is good enough for anything.

64bit vista is great ..ive used both os's on similar systems an tbh the 64bit version is much faster despite its compatibility....plus it will recognize up to 8gb ...which is much more benefical to any gamer.

An 8800gtx may be the best card going ...but if omni is looking for a complete set up its probably not worth it ...as a well overclocked 8800gt will nigh on touch gtx speeds...im running a gt an its power is impressive.

02

did you not read ^^^^

service pack 1 will reduce any speed issues...and tbh ...with a system that i have built for omni ..he wont notice the difference as fps will be mega high anyways. On board audio is definitely a burden ...i have tested it with my pc ...and my onboard when active has caused a huge drop in fps of around 20-30.

Recognition of the gfx card makes no difference wether within 32bit of 64 bit....both have the same GPU...which is dedicated to screen display ..and games an app's etc ...with either os GPU power will still function as well.

4gb of ram is overkill on vista tbh .. my friend runs 2gb and has never had any speed problems....surely the fact tht a user can install up to 8gb in 4 dimm slots is much better ..thn cramming the mobo with shitty pieces of 512 ddr2. With talk of future games been available only on the vista platform...its going to become a must.

dx11 and windows 7 ..are miles off ....the fact tht dx10 has only just been released is surely a sign tht its going to be a few years before compaitbily hardware and software is available to run it. Any worrying about component purchase now...in anticipation of better hardware ...is just stupid at this time ...simply because its not going to happen....by the time the new platforms are released....newer systems/pieces of hardware will available...as well as games which will look amazing on newer gfx cards...something which omni surely cba to wait for.

Last edited by 02fxnmaurer (2008-02-21 10:41:28)

2008-02-21 10:43:50

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6692|Finland

I gotta point out that you really don't notice the difference with these rigs around here in xp vs vista.

edit: just like said ^^

Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2008-02-21 10:47:48)

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2008-02-21 10:47:54

topal63: . . .; +533|6996

Can you not read... I am stating FACTS.

1.) Service Pack 1 for Vista and Vista-64 does not address anything much... I have the OEM SP1 final release-build installed already. The file transfer/copying improvements are marginal at best.
2.) XP SP2 outperforms Vista 64bit Service pack 1 (or Vista 32bit) in DX9 and in general system use (copying files etc - what an OS does, ya know). The difference in XP vs Vista frame-rates in DX9 are about 10-15% (in XP's favor).
3.) I am assuming he wants the best performing gaming computer, and not simply an unnecessary Vista installation.

PS: I can afford anything I want. I have an 8GB Vista 64bit with 3-way SLI (3x8800 ultras) and RAID 0 machine, so what... this machine graphically outperforms the other because of the GFX setup and not the OS. 3-way SLI and DX10 is not available in XP. And I wanted the best GFX available and that is the only reason I have it. Not because I am a Vista fanboy.

Last edited by topal63 (2008-02-21 10:53:21)

2008-02-21 10:50:46

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6692|Finland

topal63 wrote:
Can you not read... I am stating FACTS.

1.) Service Pack 1 for Vista and Vista-64 does not address anything... I have the OEM SP1 final release-build installed already. The file transfer/copying improvements are marginal at best.
2.) XP SP2 outperforms Vista 64bit Service pack 1 (or Vista 32bit) in DX9 and in general system use (copying files etc - what an OS does, ya know).
3.) I am assuming he wants the best performing gaming computer, and not simply an unnecessary Vista installation.

It is less than 5% difference... Vista is the future... of course new OS is a bit slower than old one. just like going from 98 to xp.

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2008-02-21 10:57:40

topal63: . . .; +533|6996

LOL @ Vista is the future, it's more like what I said 10-15%. You'll find numerous tech articles demonstrating real-world in-game performance tests of DX9 of XP vs Vista.

Plus how is slower better, please explain?

PS: To the SUPREME-IDIOT who karma-ed the above poster. It's 3GB on XP (32 bit) that I am recommending because that is close to the maximum amount available, that is addressable, after the PCI-E bus with a GFX-card eats some of the memory map.

Last edited by topal63 (2008-02-21 12:56:04)

2008-02-21 11:01:03

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6692|Finland

topal63 wrote:
LOL @ Vista is the future, it's more like what I said 10-15%. You'll find numerous tech articles demonstrating real-world in-game performance tests of DX9 of XP vs Vista.

Plus how is slower better, please explain?

use your xp then and lets stop offtopic. And how come vista isn't future? It most certainly is. Don't expect your xp to last till end of the world...

Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2008-02-21 11:02:03)

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2008-02-21 11:04:56

02fxnmaurer: Member; +75|6760|Birmingham UK

dx10 is stunning compared to dx9 ...i know which route i'd follow

2008-02-21 11:07:40

topal63: . . .; +533|6996

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
topal63 wrote:
LOL @ Vista is the future, it's more like what I said 10-15%. You'll find numerous tech articles demonstrating real-world in-game performance tests of DX9 of XP vs Vista.

Plus how is slower better, please explain?
use your xp then and lets stop offtopic. And how come vista isn't future? It most certainly is. Don't expect your xp to last till end of the world...

How is recommending an OS off topic.
How is recommending a memory config for that OS off-topic.
Your commenting, opinions on Vista and thinking in general when considering a best-buy @ $2000 budget machine (NOW), makes little or no sense to me (I am not a XP fanboy nor am I a Vista fanboy, which you apparently are).

1.) DX9 games dominate.
2.) All tech purchase have built in obsolescence. This is a play-NOW best performance-NOW rig - K.

The thread starter can get what ever he wants. I don't really care. He'll read through the lines, through the BS, through the discussions and in the end do whatever he wants.

Last edited by topal63 (2008-02-21 11:49:03)

2008-02-21 11:15:34

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6692|Finland

Ok I have really had enough of this... EVERY time I recommend Vista for a rig the thread goes nuts... same thing with AMD vs Intel, Nvidia vs AMD,.....
and about ot... I ment the ram, dx and other stuff.
Damn... sorry that I tried helping OP. Sure, there is no stopping you from using xp but how do you know he doesn't want to...

And doh... I'll go play play Bioshock in DX10 mode now. And the first one to say it looks the same as DX9 mode gets a slap on the face since it doesn't....

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2008-02-21 11:19:35

topal63: . . .; +533|6996

You keep assuming things - please stop.

The thread starter can get what ever he wants. I don't really care. He'll read through the lines, through the BS, through the discussions and in the end do whatever he wants.

I am recommending a memory config for Windows-XP (32 bit) if he goes that route and decides DX9 is all he needs (as it dominates the game industry now). And that would be 3GB of Dual Channel DDR2, 2x1GB and 2x512MB.

If the thread starter decides Vista is a must have. I would recommend Vista 64bit with a minimum of 4GB.

Here are few other ideas, maybe he wants an upgradable machine, and...
1.) XP can't do DX10
2.) XP doesn't do 3-Way SLI.
3.) Chipsets, motherboards, other than Nvidia 680i and 780i don't do 3-Way SLI.
4.) Anything lower than the GTX or Ultra can't do 3-Way SLI.
5.) 3-Way SLI blocks the use of the other PCI slots, 2-way SLI leaves 1 or 2 PCI slots open for use.
6.) With dual-core, 8400 or 6850, games don't really use quad-cores, and are not CPU bound. The Graphics setup provides the greatest improvement of system game performance. I recommend nothing less than a GFX. An extra $150-250 spent here is the best spent money IMO.
Etc...

There are always trade-offs to consider.

Last edited by topal63 (2008-02-21 11:36:48)

2008-02-21 11:35:55

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6692|Finland

I would suggest forgetting 3GB and going straight to 4GB since it is always better to have identical ram sticks. and the cost of ram is rock low now. And that would help if he wanted to go Vista now/later.

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2008-02-21 11:38:34

topal63: . . .; +533|6996

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
I would suggest forgetting 3GB and going straight to 4GB since it is always better to have identical ram sticks. and the cost of ram is rock low now. And that would help if he wanted to go Vista now/later.

I'd agree with that, more or less. If he thinks about upgrading, to a 64bit OS, 4GB is there waiting.

And DOH(!), I forgot how cheap it is now!

PS: The memory config explanation is more of why all of it won't be available in a 32bit OS more so than a rock-solid hardware setup recommendation.

Last edited by topal63 (2008-02-21 11:45:45)

2008-02-21 20:25:21

-101-InvaderZim: Member; +42|7122|Waikato, Aotearoa

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
-101-InvaderZim wrote:
GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

It does NOT outperform a E6550. did you even bother checking the CPU charts?
duh - Of course I did......
blind then?
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/1792/26442323ri3.jpg

Not so much blind as unobservant...... and what benchmark test is that panzer? I used the CPU Benchmark 3DMark06

2008-02-21 23:20:29

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6922

As fun as it is watching you all debate, I'll be going with Vista for sure, If I decide I don't like it, I still have the XP disc from my current build, but I'm set on trying Vista.

2008-02-22 01:06:00

Canterwood: Member; +4|6798|Canada

Get a sound card, Realtek audio is poor and EAX doesn't function properly.

2008-02-26 23:47:47

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6922

Ok, here is my current pick:

https://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5173/wipbuildfr8.jpg

Still deciding between these two processors:
E8400
and
Q6600

So, a few things... would it be worth it to get two video cards if I can swing it, or is the one fine? Also, does anyone know of a desktop keyboard that is like a laptop's? I spend most of my time on my laptop now, and I can't stand regular keyboards anymore.

Opinions and such?

Last edited by OmniDeath (2008-02-27 02:04:58)

2008-02-27 00:24:38

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6692|Finland

OmniDeath wrote:
Ok, here is my current pick:

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5173/wipbuildfr8.jpg

Still deciding between these two processors:
E8400
and
Q6600

So, a few things... would it be worth it to get two video cards if I can swing it, or is the one fine? Also, does anyone know of a desktop keyboard that is like a laptop's? I spend most of my time on my laptop now, and I can't stand regular keyboards anymore.

Opinions and such?

get the 64bit Vista. Everything else is good. If you can afford SLi, go for it.

Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2008-02-27 00:31:11)

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2008-02-27 01:41:23

^*AlphA*^: F*ckers; +3,135|7016|The Hague, Netherlands

OmniDeath wrote:
Ok, here is my current pick:

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5173/wipbuildfr8.jpg

Still deciding between these two processors:
E8400
and
Q6600

So, a few things... would it be worth it to get two video cards if I can swing it, or is the one fine? Also, does anyone know of a desktop keyboard that is like a laptop's? I spend most of my time on my laptop now, and I can't stand regular keyboards anymore.

Opinions and such?

E8500 maybe? (if you got the cash)

https://bf3s.com/sigs/36eac2cb6af70a43508fd8d1c93d3201f4e23435.png

2008-02-27 02:04:10

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6922

^*AlphA*^ wrote:
OmniDeath wrote:
Ok, here is my current pick:

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5173/wipbuildfr8.jpg

Still deciding between these two processors:
E8400
and
Q6600

So, a few things... would it be worth it to get two video cards if I can swing it, or is the one fine? Also, does anyone know of a desktop keyboard that is like a laptop's? I spend most of my time on my laptop now, and I can't stand regular keyboards anymore.

Opinions and such?
E8500 maybe? (if you got the cash)

Link? Can't find such a thing... on newegg at least.

2008-02-27 02:05:55

^*AlphA*^: F*ckers; +3,135|7016|The Hague, Netherlands

found it on my PC Store

http://www.informatique.nl/componenten

> Processoren > Core 2 Duo > 131456 Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16GHz, 1333MHz, S775, Box 36 265,00 euros

not many left tho

dunno for US

2008-02-27 02:20:21

xGj: Official lame Crysis fanboy.; +84|6650|Netherlands tbh

Nah Core 2 Duo E8500 isn't worth it compared to the E8400, only .16 GHz increase.. Not worth it for the price.
The rest of the stuff seems fine OmniDeath, wouldn't you want a bigger harddrive than 250GB though?
And yea, as Panzer said, 64-bit OS is recommended. Else you won't be using that 4GB fully.

2008-02-27 06:10:52

OmniDeath: ~; +726|6922

xGj wrote:
Nah Core 2 Duo E8500 isn't worth it compared to the E8400, only .16 GHz increase.. Not worth it for the price.
The rest of the stuff seems fine OmniDeath, wouldn't you want a bigger harddrive than 250GB though?
And yea, as Panzer said, 64-bit OS is recommended. Else you won't be using that 4GB fully.

But is the quad core worth it? Reading some of the reviews makes me want to lean in that direction... If you have a better hard drive in mind, post away!

Hmm... would this video card be better than my current pick? Or is it not worth the added price...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6814130072

Last edited by OmniDeath (2008-02-27 06:25:53)

Topic closed

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Index »
Community »
Tech »
You've been given $2000...build the best computer you can

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums You've been given $2000...build the best computer you can

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

02fxnmaurer wrote:

topal63 wrote:

topal63 wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

topal63 wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

-101-InvaderZim wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

OmniDeath wrote:

OmniDeath wrote:

^AlphA^ wrote:

OmniDeath wrote:

xGj wrote:

Board footer