|
The Official PC building thread!
|
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. July 2004 @ 08:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
hwats up with people spending $100's buying a 256mb GPU??? i know it looks good and all but i believe its all a marketing scheme. most games out right now barely use the 128mb cards...and the newer games coming out will probably not NEED 256mb of space...correct me if im wrong when i say they are making it look like RAM...the bigger the better. but with a GPU once you have the games requirememnts you cannot use any of the extra mb's...they just cahrge you $100 more for a 256mb card.
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
8. July 2004 @ 09:29 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
and the newer games coming out will probably not NEED 256mb of space...correct me if im wrong when I say they are making it look like RAM...the bigger the better
Newer games will definitely need the 256MB and 512MB (although I think they might have a 384MB step in there too). Hell dude, like ive said, Doom3 will easily choke out 800MB of system memory before getting to the main menu. Heehee, I would also think games like FarCry and UT2004 will benifit (although not so much because the texel count isnt as high) frm the increased memory.
Quote:
all but I believe its all a marketing
Possibly and to a degree, most likely however if you consider a card like the GFX5200 -- purely budget and damn near no performance. RAM is cheap ... so why not try and milk as much performance as possible from the GFX5200 by giving it as much memory as you can? Then we goto the opposite end of the spectrum, say tghe 9800XT ... its leading edge and to give it absolutely every ounce of performance (at a premium), one doubles the memory count.
For mainstream cards however you are dead on -- there isnt a use for 128MB of video memory yet.
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. July 2004 @ 09:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
yet...keyword. i was a little wrong annd a lil' right lol. thnx for clearing that up...ive been confused about video MB space for a while and always was a lil in the dark.
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
8. July 2004 @ 09:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah the biggie with video memory is the amount of texture a given frame is going to have (i.e., texel count, texel fill rate etc) ... with 128MB of memory, ideally 64MB will be set aside for general pixel operations and the other 64MB for texture -- which suddenly doesnt seem so "big" anymore ... consider UT2004 .... i've got no clue whatsoever but I would think its a fair estimate that any given "busy" (i.e., lots of action) frame may have upwards of 10MB of texture? (dunno the numbers just trying to convey an idea) -- this means that the video card can only hold up to ~5 more frames "in advance" and thus put a cap on the video performance.
Now things get really messy when you also have "light textures", "shadow textures" in addition to the regular "bump"- and "normal"-mapping... and then when you consider the implications of FSAA and multiple overlapping textures etc. It's not so bad now.... but it can and will get pretty bad later on :)
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. July 2004 @ 10:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
light texturing kills my card in Thief game...it cant take it when i shoot out a light and it just goes dark..cuz then it has to load the moonlight effect back on the wall and all the different areas of light source...it skips for about 2 sec b4 it all appears lol. shadows are hard on it too...so im stuck playing chicken invaders:) great game
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. July 2004 @ 18:08
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
8. July 2004 @ 19:17 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
HP a650e series PC
Now that's a much fairer spec and argueably a damn good one for that price range however you should note that they havnt told you the make of the mobo.... for a reason probably :)
Quote:
Early 2006 at Wal-mart
Anything outside of 18months is damn near impossible to speculate on ... especially when it comes to retail stores :)
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
9. July 2004 @ 08:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
That is probably the best deal I have found on a factory built system with those stats. I won't argue you could probably build the same system for maybe a few hundred less with a few extras maybe, depends where you shop and what kind of deals they are throwing. You are right about the Motherboard, they didn't state what kind it was or anything like that, it does support the AMD 64 however which is good. I am guessing it is probably buttom of the barrel (mobo), but still probably a decent enough Mobo. That HP system could have came with a little better video card though, the video card I believe is the Nvidia 5500 which for just hanging out in Nvidia vs Ati post isn't a very good card. Either way $1400 bucks is still alot of money, and I would expect you getting a pretty good PC for that amount. What I have been doing in the Computer game is, buying a budget system that is up to date with todays technology's on a low scale of course, put a few simple upgrades in it (Memory) maybe even a modest video card and I'm good for a couple of years. I do pretty basic stuff on the internet, Email, Chat, Look up information, Maybe play a game or two from now and again, and that is about it. But for People who do things on a higher level then that, will probably need a Computer with alot more balls and have to continue to upgrade more often. You take some guys they probably consider there Computer Dinosaurs and ready to upgrade , and other guys might think there system is the bomb and way better then what they currently use. It's all what you use your computer for and how hardcore you really are in the Computer game, If you have the money makes a difference also. I plan on selling my Computer to a buddy of mine when I do get a new one, right now he currently has two computers and both are junk, I can even get away with saying that one. He has an Old Compaq (1999) model, this is back when Compaq was Compaq no HP in the picture at this time, he has a 500Mhz Celeron Processor, 10 Gig HD, system came with 64mb Sdram memory which he did upgrade to 384mb, which isn't much. And his HP system is from around the same time, it may be a year newer(2000) with bassically the same stats, I think it may have a 20 gig HD, oh boy....LOL...I could probably sell him my current computer for $200 easy and he would have a big woody buying it from me. I told him what my stats are on my machine and he was like WOW...LOL...
Jason Rife
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
9. July 2004 @ 08:32 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I won't argue you could probably build the same system for maybe a few hundred less with a few extras maybe, depends where you shop and what kind of deals they are throwing.
Yeah the system does seem to be quite impressive for it's spec however note that three very important things are left out:
- Brand of the mobo
- How much L2 the proc has
- Brand of the burner
And knowing HP the burning will probably be HP (which is just an outfit for Phillips -- which is crap).
Quote:
I am guessing it is probably buttom of the barrel (mobo), but still probably a decent enough Mobo
Yeah it's probably the ECS board I spec'd earlier .... "good" when it works ... it's just a question of how long it stays "working"
Quote:
That HP system could have came with a little better video card though, the video card I believe is the Nvidia 5500 which for just hanging out in Nvidia vs Ati post isn't a very good card
It's a decent card for an OEM built computer and a decent card for that kind of price (especially when considering its an OEM).. but yeah it could be improved
Quote:
What I have been doing in the Computer game is, buying a budget system that is up to date with todays technology's on a low scale of course, put a few simple upgrades in it (Memory) maybe even a modest video card and I'm good for a couple of years
Yep; cheaper and easier to do when you've built your own computer rather than get an OEM (because OEM BIOS's limit you so much)
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
9. July 2004 @ 10:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
I wish I had the money I think I'd kinda like to have. I would probably get the best home built Computer possible with all the top hardware to go with it, or pick up a Dell XPS, those are sweet as hell for factory built. I checked em out, pretty expensive, but damn what an impressive case it has, lol. The only complaint I have with the XPS is, it uses a Pentium 4, don't see an XPS that has the AMD 64 in it, which totally sucks. It seems the market and the People consider the highest Pentium 4 chip (excluding Xeon) up with the AMD 64 Chip. I see Computer systems like the XPS DEll with a damn Pentium chip in it, you would think they would just go all the way with it and throw in an AMD 64, hell they went all the way with everything else, why not get the best current processor? Anyone know when Pentium is going to put out a 64 bit processor? or are they just researching really well and putting together a chip to blow away the AMD 64? that is what I am thinking..You know the newest Pentium 64 will be slapping AMD in the face, just a matter of time. But I don't think the AMD 64 can be compared to the Pentium 4, the AMD is bitch slapping it right now. Right now is what matters.
Jason Rife
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
9. July 2004 @ 10:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
I know Praetor off the subject some....But I did mention Processors, which you need in order to build a Computer :) And also, did mention If I had tons of money to spend, I would be getting the best home built you can buy. I was thinking on these lines also, which might make sense now, What if you changed out the Pentium 4 in the XPS and put in new AMD 64 Chip, you would have to change the MOBO too right? already spending that kind of money, not really worth doing all that, you might as well build your own. But the thing of it is, I don't understand why the XPS has a Pentium chip in it to start with, being a big bad machine it is overall.
Jason Rife
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
9. July 2004 @ 10:42 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The only complaint I have with the XPS is, it uses a Pentium 4, don't see an XPS that has the AMD 64 in it, which totally sucks.
Yeah but that's just corporate politics for ya. I emailed them about that and their commercial where they say "You design the system you want, we'll built it" and they've just ignored me. Bastards.
Quote:
hell they went all the way with everything else, why not get the best current processor?
Corporate politics. Dont forget the majority of sales OEMs make are not for individuals but rather for companies, schools and organizations.
Quote:
Anyone know when Pentium is going to put out a 64 bit processor?
They've had one since ... .2000? 1999? something like that. But is been a corporate piece of hardware only.
Quote:
What if you changed out the Pentium 4 in the XPS and put in new AMD 64 Chip, you would have to change the MOBO too right? already spending that kind of money, not really worth doing all that, you might as well build your own.
You would have to change the mobo indeed.
Quote:
But the thing of it is, I don't understand why the XPS has a Pentium chip in it to start with, being a big bad machine it is overall.
That XPS machine doesnt have a Pentium4C in it. It's running the newer Pentium 560 series of chips (whatever that means :P)
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
10. July 2004 @ 07:25 |
Link to this message
|
Intel has decided to make a new naming scheme. go to http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17069 to figure out the number of the intel and what speed and all it is...i personaly think the naming is stupid..but i run AMd...so im not really affected by it lol.
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
|
Moderator
|
10. July 2004 @ 08:40 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
hell they went all the way with everything else, why not get the best current processor?
You can get the P4 3.2 GHz Extreme Edition which betters anything you can get from AMD. Sheer clock speed and a 2MB L2 cache can't be denied folks. It's not all politics.
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33 This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. July 2004 @ 08:42
|
Moderator
|
10. July 2004 @ 08:48 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
But I don't think the AMD 64 can be compared to the Pentium 4, the AMD is bitch slapping it right now
Fanboyism. No chip in the same class is bitch slapping the other.
Quote:
Right now is what matters
The big selling point of the A64 is its 64 bit support but do you see Windows 64 on the shelves right now?
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
10. July 2004 @ 08:54 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The big selling point of the A64 is its 64 bit support but do you see Windows 64 on the shelves right now?
Yes.
Quote:
You can get the P4 3.2 GHz Extreme Edition which betters anything you can get from AMD
Id like to see the P4EE outdo an A64 in Mathematica 5 benchmarks.
Quote:
It's not all politics.
Most of it is. Dell/HP/Gateway have had "ties" to Intel since "back in the day" when AMD wasnt such a big player. Those ties done just dissappear
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
11. July 2004 @ 07:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
The AMD64 bit seems like a better bet to buy to me than any current Pentium 4. I'm not saying I'm buying a AMD 64 anytime soon it's to costly right now for my poor ass and so is a Pentium EE. I went to a few web-sites and compared bench marks, I don't know jack about benchmarks, but the AMD 64FX seemed to take the lead in in every benchmark comparing to the P4EE, there were a few wimpier AMD 64 Chips the P4EE took the lead in a few spots, but overall the weaker of the AMD 64 chips was still a little higher than the P4EE, it was really close on all of them, in some catogorys, but overall all of the AMD 64 chips were ahead, and even more so with the FX....
Jason Rife
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
11. July 2004 @ 09:31 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The AMD64 bit seems like a better bet to buy to me than any current Pentium 4
Performance to cost, the P4C is probably a much better buy than anything from the A64 platform ... that'll change if and when the A64s drop at least $100 of the chip cost.
Quote:
the AMD 64FX seemed to take the lead in in every benchmark comparing to the P4EE
Although I'm an AMD fan and I'd like to believe that you'll notice the FX53 (which is on average $400 more per chip than the baseline A64 but still cheaper than the P4EE) doesnt often beat (if at all, I'm going from memory) the P4EE by a significant margin. Although one can argue "a win in a win" .... benchmarks can (and are) "tweaked" (which is why I also dont pay much attention to ATI/nVidia benchmarks unless there is a massive discrepency -- which there rarely is. Becuase if you goto the "Intel-crowd" I'm sure they could find the same benchmarks where the P4EE just ekes out the FX53. All in all I'd argue the FX53 is a better chip but I wouldnt base my arguments on benchmarks.
Quote:
there were a few wimpier AMD 64 Chips the P4EE took the lead in a few spots, but overall the weaker of the AMD 64 chips was still a little higher than the P4EE
If by wimpier chip you mean the baseline A64, not likey. Consider for instance the Athlon64-3200 @ 512K (939) versus the P4EE3.2 .... the Intel will give the the A64 a lickin in everything except sheer floating point benchmarks.
Quote:
it was really close on all of them, in some catogorys, but overall all of the AMD 64 chips were ahead, and even more so with the FX....
Yep! And that should be expected as the FX is really the "big brother" of the baseline A64 .... or is it that the A64 is just a crippled FX? Dunno
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
15. July 2004 @ 16:46 |
Link to this message
|
|
The bottom line is the AMD 64 is the best chip out.
Jason Rife
|
Moderator
|
15. July 2004 @ 18:31 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The bottom line is the AMD 64 is the best chip out.
I love blanket statements.
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
15. July 2004 @ 20:57 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The bottom line is the AMD 64 is the best chip out.
Are you .... um.... ok? That isnt even remotely accurate and certainly not as a blanket statement (oh btw, there is not "AMD 64" chip)
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
16. July 2004 @ 07:07 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The bottom line is the AMD 64 is the best chip out.
how brave...please enlighten us as to how you figured this out???
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
16. July 2004 @ 07:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's sad many People are still convinced the current Pentium chip is the more advanced Processor over the AMD64. Yeah it's not rocket science to know which one is the better of the two.
Jason Rife
|
|
4W4K3
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
16. July 2004 @ 07:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
and yet we still have hundreds of thousands of debates all across the world/internet arguing which is "better"...it sure sounds like rocket sience ot me if there isnt one definite answer that thousands of people cant see. but who knows...maybe you've figured it out all on your own?
[COLOR=Green]AMD[/COLOR] Athlon XP-M 2600+ (2535MHz) 1.74V IQYHA
ABIT NF7-S Rev 2.0 (241*10.5) 1.8V - Pencil Mod
[COLOR=DimGray]OCZ[/COLOR]-EL 512MB PC-3200 DC-Platinum (483MHz) 2.85V 2.5-2-2-11
[B][COLOR=Red]RADEON[/CO
|
|
JSRife
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
16. July 2004 @ 09:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
32-bit technology goes back 10 years ago or more. The new technology is 64-bit....Now go figure it out? In the Computer world new = better, if you haven't noticed it keeps getting better.
Jason Rife
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Praetor
Moderator
|
16. July 2004 @ 10:59 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
It's sad many People are still convinced the current Pentium chip is the more advanced Processor over the AMD64
And it's sad when people comment beyond their scope. In case you didnt know it, the current flagship Intel chip is more advanced than the AMD chip -- now its no debate that its not faster but is is certainly much more advanced. Same dealy with the 9800 vs 5800 --- the 5800 was far more advanced -- just not faster.
Quote:
Yeah it's not rocket science to know which one is the better of the two.
Ok. You think the AMD one is more advanced. Why? As much as I love AMD, I cant legitmately make a comment like that without being able to back it up.
Quote:
32-bit technology goes back 10 years ago or more. The new technology is 64-bit
Pleeeeeeeeeeease dont tell me thats your line of reasoning. Because sorry to say it 64bit chips have been around for a veeeeeeeeery long time too.
Quote:
In the Computer world new = better, if you haven't noticed it keeps getting better
WindowsME vs Windows98
P4E vs P4EE
5800 vs 9800
X600 vs 9800
GF4MX vs GF3Ti
GFX5200 vs GF4
9000 vs 8500
Blanket statements like that are invariably wrong simply due to their blanket nature.
|
