Hi, I will be getting an 8800GT soon, but am worried about bottlenecking, all my components are great, except for my processor. It is a 2.8 ghhz dual core (not core 2 duo) at 800mhz, with a 2 mb cache. I only really play COD4 and TF2. Will the processor bottleneck my system? And if so, how badly?
I shouldn't be that bad. I currently still have a amd 3500+ @2.2ghz and can play bf2 all on high. Cod should be pretty much the same. And besides you have 2.8ghz which is a lot better. You can't get wrong if you get an 8800gt even with this proc.
Shouldn't be that bad. You should oc it a bit.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
wow BF2 on high???.Sup wrote:
I shouldn't be that bad. I currently still have a amd 3500+ @2.2ghz and can play bf2 all on high. Cod should be pretty much the same. And besides you have 2.8ghz which is a lot better. You can't get wrong if you get an 8800gt even with this proc.
/sarcasm
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
agree, but get a decent after market cooler. The pentuim Ds run hotFreezer7Pro wrote:
Shouldn't be that bad. You should oc it a bit.
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
bf2 is still a very demanding game. AA on 16 and a res of 1440x1050. Some people have even higher resolutions.FloppY_ wrote:
wow BF2 on high???.Sup wrote:
I shouldn't be that bad. I currently still have a amd 3500+ @2.2ghz and can play bf2 all on high. Cod should be pretty much the same. And besides you have 2.8ghz which is a lot better. You can't get wrong if you get an 8800gt even with this proc.
/sarcasm
Pff,, 19" @ 1280x1024 is plenty.Sup wrote:
bf2 is still a very demanding game. AA on 16 and a res of 1440x1050. Some people have even higher resolutions.FloppY_ wrote:
wow BF2 on high???.Sup wrote:
I shouldn't be that bad. I currently still have a amd 3500+ @2.2ghz and can play bf2 all on high. Cod should be pretty much the same. And besides you have 2.8ghz which is a lot better. You can't get wrong if you get an 8800gt even with this proc.
/sarcasm
Even my old 7900GTO can handle that all maxed out with ease...
Last edited by FloppY_ (2008-02-08 05:43:39)
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Well 30fps isn't enough for me.FloppY_ wrote:
Pff,, 19" @ 1280x1024 is plenty.Sup wrote:
bf2 is still a very demanding game. AA on 16 and a res of 1440x1050. Some people have even higher resolutions.FloppY_ wrote:
wow BF2 on high???
/sarcasm
Even my old 7900GTO can handle that all maxed out with ease...
I get way above 60 tbh.Sup wrote:
Well 30fps isn't enough for me.FloppY_ wrote:
Pff,, 19" @ 1280x1024 is plenty.Sup wrote:
bf2 is still a very demanding game. AA on 16 and a res of 1440x1050. Some people have even higher resolutions.
Even my old 7900GTO can handle that all maxed out with ease...
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Even 60 isn't exactly great.FloppY_ wrote:
I get way above 60 tbh.Sup wrote:
Well 30fps isn't enough for me.FloppY_ wrote:
Pff,, 19" @ 1280x1024 is plenty
Even my old 7900GTO can handle that all maxed out with ease...
60-100 is no visible difference tbh,,,.Sup wrote:
Even 60 isn't exactly great.FloppY_ wrote:
I get way above 60 tbh.Sup wrote:
Well 30fps isn't enough for me.
Don't get elitist and tell me that nothing below 150 is good enough, because that's just stupid..
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
80 and above is good. Sry below 80 just isn't acceptable for me. Elitist? Yes!FloppY_ wrote:
60-100 is no visible difference tbh,,,.Sup wrote:
Even 60 isn't exactly great.FloppY_ wrote:
I get way above 60 tbh
Don't get elitist and tell me that nothing below 150 is good enough, because that's just stupid..
The eye can barely spot any differance between 40 and 80FPS. No differance at all between 60 and 80..Sup wrote:
80 and above is good. Sry below 80 just isn't acceptable for me. Elitist? Yes!FloppY_ wrote:
60-100 is no visible difference tbh,,,.Sup wrote:
Even 60 isn't exactly great.
Don't get elitist and tell me that nothing below 150 is good enough, because that's just stupid..
And, if you run at 60Hz (Wich most TFTs do), you still won't get more than 20 skipped frames per second.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
What gfx card do you have? Ever had a good card? I compared my 7600gt and 8800gt and its a big difference. My eyes prevail.Freezer7Pro wrote:
The eye can barely spot any differance between 40 and 80FPS. No differance at all between 60 and 80..Sup wrote:
80 and above is good. Sry below 80 just isn't acceptable for me. Elitist? Yes!FloppY_ wrote:
60-100 is no visible difference tbh,,,
Don't get elitist and tell me that nothing below 150 is good enough, because that's just stupid..
And, if you run at 60Hz (Wich most TFTs do), you still won't get more than 20 skipped frames per second.
How many Hz are your display capable of .Sup... I am curious.Sup wrote:
What gfx card do you have? Ever had a good card? I compared my 7600gt and 8800gt and its a big difference. My eyes prevail.Freezer7Pro wrote:
The eye can barely spot any differance between 40 and 80FPS. No differance at all between 60 and 80..Sup wrote:
80 and above is good. Sry below 80 just isn't acceptable for me. Elitist? Yes!
And, if you run at 60Hz (Wich most TFTs do), you still won't get more than 20 skipped frames per second.
Last edited by FloppY_ (2008-02-08 06:21:22)
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
its an LCDFloppY_ wrote:
How many MHz are your display capable of .Sup... I am curious.Sup wrote:
What gfx card do you have? Ever had a good card? I compared my 7600gt and 8800gt and its a big difference. My eyes prevail.Freezer7Pro wrote:
The eye can barely spot any differance between 40 and 80FPS. No differance at all between 60 and 80.
And, if you run at 60Hz (Wich most TFTs do), you still won't get more than 20 skipped frames per second.
Yes, how many Hz ?.Sup wrote:
its an LCDFloppY_ wrote:
How many MHz are your display capable of .Sup... I am curious.Sup wrote:
What gfx card do you have? Ever had a good card? I compared my 7600gt and 8800gt and its a big difference. My eyes prevail.
(you can check in display settings!)
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
umm i thought you knew how many mhz an LCD supports.FloppY_ wrote:
Yes, how many Hz ?.Sup wrote:
its an LCDFloppY_ wrote:
How many MHz are your display capable of .Sup... I am curious
(you can check in display settings!)
.Sup wrote:
umm i thought you knew how many mhz an LCD supports.FloppY_ wrote:
Yes, how many Hz ?.Sup wrote:
its an LCD
(you can check in display settings!)
So 120 ?Wiki wrote:
LCD:
The number of times per second in which the monitor draws the data it is being given. A refresh rate that is too low can cause flickering and will be more noticeable on larger monitors. Many high-end LCD televisions now have a 120 Hz refresh rate (current and former NTSC countries only). This allows for less distortion when movies filmed at 24 frames per second (fps) are viewed due to the elimination of telecine (3:2 pulldown). The rate of 120 was chosen as the least common multiple of 24 fps (cinema) and 30 fps (TV).
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Yes I have a high end LCD TV for browsing the net and playing games.FloppY_ wrote:
.Sup wrote:
umm i thought you knew how many mhz an LCD supports.FloppY_ wrote:
Yes, how many Hz ?
(you can check in display settings!)So 120 ?Wiki wrote:
LCD:
The number of times per second in which the monitor draws the data it is being given. A refresh rate that is too low can cause flickering and will be more noticeable on larger monitors. Many high-end LCD televisions now have a 120 Hz refresh rate (current and former NTSC countries only). This allows for less distortion when movies filmed at 24 frames per second (fps) are viewed due to the elimination of telecine (3:2 pulldown). The rate of 120 was chosen as the least common multiple of 24 fps (cinema) and 30 fps (TV).
Then just tell me you *beep* instead of letting me guess ????.Sup wrote:
Yes I have a high end LCD TV for browsing the net and playing games.FloppY_ wrote:
.Sup wrote:
umm i thought you knew how many mhz an LCD supports.So 120 ?Wiki wrote:
LCD:
The number of times per second in which the monitor draws the data it is being given. A refresh rate that is too low can cause flickering and will be more noticeable on larger monitors. Many high-end LCD televisions now have a 120 Hz refresh rate (current and former NTSC countries only). This allows for less distortion when movies filmed at 24 frames per second (fps) are viewed due to the elimination of telecine (3:2 pulldown). The rate of 120 was chosen as the least common multiple of 24 fps (cinema) and 30 fps (TV).
My TFT-LCD runs 75 Hz max analogue and 60Hz digital !
Last edited by FloppY_ (2008-02-08 06:34:48)
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Lol noob. I took some of your life. Bow to me.FloppY_ wrote:
Then just tell me you *beep*instead of letting me guess ????.Sup wrote:
Yes I have a high end LCD TV for browsing the net and playing games.FloppY_ wrote:
So 120 ?
My TFT-LCD runs 75 Hz max analogue and 60Hz digital !
i saw what was before the "beep". We are not best friends anymore.
Last edited by .Sup (2008-02-08 06:36:21)
Noob?.Sup wrote:
Lol noob. I took some of your life. Bow to me.FloppY_ wrote:
Then just tell me you *beep*instead of letting me guess ????.Sup wrote:
Yes I have a high end LCD TV for browsing the net and playing games.
My TFT-LCD runs 75 Hz max analogue and 60Hz digital !
At least I'm not an elitist prick, unlike one of us....
We never where *beep*.Sup wrote:
i saw what was before the "beep". We are not best friends anymore.
Last edited by FloppY_ (2008-02-08 06:37:52)
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
.Sup you never make sense in your tech posts, and yes you are an elitist.. Go get some knowledge first.
We never were? Dissapointed. (not really) Knowledge is on my side. Still in grammar school? Yes/no?FloppY_ wrote:
Noob?.Sup wrote:
Lol noob. I took some of your life. Bow to me.FloppY_ wrote:
Then just tell me you *beep*instead of letting me guess ????
My TFT-LCD runs 75 Hz max analogue and 60Hz digital !
At least I'm not an elitist prick, unlike one of us....We never where *beep*.Sup wrote:
i saw what was before the "beep". We are not best friends anymore.