|
Monitor and harddrive
|
|
|
gera229
Member
|
16. December 2008 @ 19:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 16. December 2008 @ 19:53
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
gera229
Member
|
17. December 2008 @ 02:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Anything? Thanks.
|
|
JaguarGod
Senior Member
|
17. December 2008 @ 05:08 |
Link to this message
|
With the HDDs, they are both very good. I think the Green Power Drives from WD use less power and operate quieter. Usually, this means there is some type of performance sacrifice. Maybe it will have to do with seek times. Overall performance should be pretty close though and maybe there would only be benchmark differences.
With Western Digital, I believe the way it goes is, Green Power Drives are for energy savings and silent PCs, SE16 Drives are for everyday use, Caviar Black Drives are for Performance/Gaming, and RE2/RE3 drives are for servers/RAID. There are also the Velociraptors which would be the best performance from WD, but also the most expensive (about 6x more $$$ per GB). Other than the Velociraptor drives, there should be no noticeable difference in speed. Maybe 10 MB/s difference between the slowest and the fastest.
I would not know about monitors. I use my HDTV as a monitor and that works for me. I would assume to go with a reliable brand. My Samsung LCD is not that much worse than the Pioneer Elite. Also, it is leagues better than the Westinghouse LCD :P I have seen Samsung LCD Monitors in your price range. I would recommend Samsung based on their LCD TV quality.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
17. December 2008 @ 09:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
gera229
Member
|
17. December 2008 @ 10:08 |
Link to this message
|
Is this a better monitor? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001268 than the link you posted? Cuz this one has 2ms (GTG). The green powered have energy efficiency but what is the point of energy efficiency? BTW this was stated " SE16 Drives are for everyday use, Caviar Black Drives are for Performance/Gaming, " Are the caviar black drives better? Are the carviar black for everyday use?
What's faster IDE ULTRA ATA or SATA ?
What the difference between 8mb, 16mb, and 32mb catche? Which one is best? If you say one of the lower mb is best then why is it best? Isn't the higher mb supposed to be better since it's higher cache (When I say better I mean even just a little better counts.? Which interface would be better? Thanks. Peace.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 17. December 2008 @ 10:23
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
17. December 2008 @ 10:48 |
Link to this message
|
You will never see the difference between 2ms and 5ms.
Energy efficiency means the drives don't get as hot, and use less power (better for the environment and your electricity bill) - the Greenpowers are also quieter.
IDE = UDMA, or P-ATA.
S-ATA is the newer, faster technology, which uses smaller cables and is less confusing to set up.
The more cache, the faster the drive is up to a point, but no gains have been seen from going from 16MB to 32MB.
|
|
gera229
Member
|
17. December 2008 @ 20:32 |
Link to this message
|
Your's was 2ms response time too. I mean mines included GTG. But since you told me you will never see the difference between 2ms and 5ms that means between these 2 latencies none of them are best for gaming their both the best. Well if there is a cheaper 5ms samsung monitor for high gaming can you show me it? Thanks. Peace. So is it better to get caviar black or the SE? Cuz can the black stay on 24/7? Does heat matter in them? Do they overheat? Thanks. Peace.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
17. December 2008 @ 21:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
GTG is the latency that is always stated, just some manufacturers assume it and others actually state that it's GTG. BTW is the more accurate figure, but manufacturers don't include it usually. With latencies, you want them to be lower, but you will never notice anything below 12ms anyway.
Hard drives never overheat (especially not WDs) unless you put them in a really bad case.
|
|
gera229
Member
|
17. December 2008 @ 22:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 17. December 2008 @ 22:17
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
18. December 2008 @ 11:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
GTG is not a 'thing to have'. It's not a specification. Refresh time is a measurement of how long it takes a monitor to completely change from one image to another. Grey to Grey Refresh time is the one that is usually measured, as it is quicker, and varies more between different monitors. Black to White Refresh time is the higher figure, and is probably ultimately more important but is never considered. All monitors are measured using both grey-to-grey and black-to-white refresh times, but usually only the grey to grey is stated, and sometimes it is assumed, so they don't even write GTG.
This is all academic though, as refresh rates now are always low enough to never disturb the picture. I know of no monitor you can still buy where this isn't the case.
The Caviar Black is more expensive, and will hardly be any faster than the normal WD5000AAKS. Buy it if you like, but the normal drive (I think they call it a Caviar Blue now) will do fine.
|
|
gera229
Member
|
18. December 2008 @ 20:59 |
Link to this message
|
K Ill get that samsung then I guess.
|
|
gera229
Member
|
20. December 2008 @ 00:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
gera229
Member
|
20. December 2008 @ 04:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
anything?
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
20. December 2008 @ 10:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
Patience man, for god's sake. I don't spend every single hour at aD.
The two monitors are basically identical. Go with whichever one you prefer the look of :P
|
|
gera229
Member
|
27. December 2008 @ 17:19 |
Link to this message
|
Sammoris someone told me that this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009157 is much better than the samsungs. Would the gtx 260 black edition run crysis warhead on it on the highest settings or at least pretty high settings smoothly and great image quality on this monitor? Well it has more pixels than the samsungs. I know that for this resolution the xfx gtx 260 216 black edition would be the win between the sapphire hd 4870 1gb and the xfx gtx 260 216 core black edition. Thanks. Peace.
|
|
JaguarGod
Senior Member
|
28. December 2008 @ 01:34 |
Link to this message
|
Here are some benches with both the 512MB and 1GB versions of the 4870:
http://www.overclock.net/ati/401321-4870...comparison.html
The only thing I have seen on the GTX 260 was 1900x1200 at medium with 0xAA and that was 45FPS, which tied the HD 4850 1GB and HD 4870 512MB. Odds are the 4870 1GB is a better all around card and should perform equal or better on crysis at 1900x1200.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
4. January 2009 @ 08:37 |
Link to this message
|
I don't really recommend Acer stuff as it is usually poorly made and poorly supported.
|
|
gera229
Member
|
4. January 2009 @ 12:00 |
Link to this message
|
Well for 1680x1050 resolution the gtx 260 260 216 will do better.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
4. January 2009 @ 12:00 |
Link to this message
|
But at that low resolution, you may as well buy an HD4850 for half the cost.
|
|
gera229
Member
|
4. January 2009 @ 16:55 |
Link to this message
|
1680x1050 Ide go with black edition after looking at benchmarks. For 1900x1200 the hd 48701gb will do but for even higher than that the gtx 260 216 black edition.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
4. January 2009 @ 17:51 |
Link to this message
|
Try again, at 2560x1600 (the only resolution really used above 1920x1200) the GT260 is woefully insufficient, you need an HD4870X2 for that.
|
|
gera229
Member
|
4. January 2009 @ 19:00 |
Link to this message
|
Ok thanks sam, But all I want is so that the gtx 260 216 black edition would be great for a 1680x1050 resolution and a 21.6" monitor I have the Samsung 2253LW.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
4. January 2009 @ 19:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
The GTX260 Black will be fine, but as I said before, you needn't spend that much, an HD4850 would do for 1680x1050.
|
|
gera229
Member
|
4. January 2009 @ 19:31 |
Link to this message
|
I know but I just want to run crysis warhead at almost the highest settings at smooth fps and it will be almost the same image quality and xAA settings. And basically all I need is the best card between the hd 4870 1gb and the black edition for my resolution in which the black edition would be the best card in between those two for my resolution. How much fps is considered smooth running? Thanks.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 4. January 2009 @ 19:32
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
4. January 2009 @ 20:11 |
Link to this message
|
Agreed, but the difference between the two is so small you wouldn't actually notice it in real life playing Crysis Warhead.
Bear in mind you will need a fast CPU to run Warhead at enthusiast properly(at least 3.6Ghz Core 2 45nm, no 65nm Core or AMD is fast enough)
|
