How to buy a gaming box!! - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-16-2005, 10:11 PM   #21 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,247
Default

oh, and when I say sound card, I mean a good concrete card. as far as saying you dont have to buy games that are too demanding then why bother with the prev post??? It kind of goes against what you stated... that it will be good for 2 or 2 1/2 years. Well, it probably wont be going by your recommendations because the unreal3 engine is just the FIRST in a slew of new engines based on upcoming technologies. DX 9 has just now started showing its full potential, and will still be vamping up for a few more years. DX next (code is Avalon, I think) is still in testing phase and the Longhorn is supposedly based off of DX10 (3D desktop).
__________________

__________________
If you argue with an idiot he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

I am not a fast writer.
I am not a slow writer.
I am a half-fast writer.

-Robert Asprin
killians45 is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 10:24 PM   #22 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Jeff Lawson
No it won't be obsolete, you don't have to buy a game that is too demanding
exactly, you don't have to play Doom 3 or HL2 every time you go on your computer. I am running on a Pentium 3 933 overclocked to 1050 (which I bought for $25 aus) and a TNT2 Pro (which I got with a complete system for $100 aus), and it does almost everything I want it to do. I would like to have all the latest and greatest hardware, but I don't have an infinite amount of money.

the 9600 plays HL2 and Doom 3 on fairly high settings at fairly high framerates, and is by far not obsolete. I would say in the next year it would be like the GF4 Ti's are today (which are still descent enough to run HL2 and Doom 3)
__________________

__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 10:27 PM   #23 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,247
Default

agreed apok... also, dont misunderstand me, I'm not bashing you or anything or trying to be hateful, just dont agree. However, the smaller memory modules do run faster than the larger ones, thats just a technical fact. Not saying if its significant, because I dont remember the exact boost, but it is there. I would STILL suggest getting just one mem module for later upgrades, I didn't because... well... I'm just a cheap s.o.b.
__________________
If you argue with an idiot he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

I am not a fast writer.
I am not a slow writer.
I am a half-fast writer.

-Robert Asprin
killians45 is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 10:29 PM   #24 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,446
Send a message via AIM to Alex81388
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by apokalipse
nowadays 1GB is plenty of RAM, with 2GB being a bit much (I can just see someone years from now laughing at this) and so far offers slight if any performance increase over 1GB
Hahha, yeah. Theres a quote on the wall of one of our tech-rooms in school, says:

"640K ought to be enough for any consumer in the industry" - Bill Gates
__________________
Sig removed due to foul language. Please read the rules regarding the allowable content of sigs before reposting your COMPLIANT sig.
~Trotter
4/21/06
Alex81388 is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 10:35 PM   #25 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,247
Default

well, where talking in short time terms here, not long term. Until Longhorn comes out in 2006, 1GB is useless (for MOST normal use, this excludes SQL servers, 2003 server/AD, and the like). Even after longhorn comes out it will be awhile before developers start embracing the more powerful systems, with the exception of chipsets (vid).
__________________
If you argue with an idiot he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

I am not a fast writer.
I am not a slow writer.
I am a half-fast writer.

-Robert Asprin
killians45 is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 12:44 AM   #26 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

What exactly is an AMD 4400+? What about dual cores?

Dude, Longhorn is an operating system, it will not eat away 512mb of RAM, and if it does, I honestly don't think it will sell very well.

You don't need a top of the line system to play games at settings that can satisfy us. It's unusual you've decided to generalize gamers, I myself am an avid gamer and don't agree with all of your concepts.

I also find your theories a bit hypocritical. On one hand, you seem to think the 800XL/XT and 6800GT/Ultra will last for three years. But on the other hand, you claim that cards that aren't even three years old, such as the 9800 Pro, are obsolete. In three years, the cards you've listed won't be the best of the best, like the 9800 Pro, so what exactly is different?

I think you are just trying to impress a few people by spewing your opinions and trying to manipulate them into facts. You may be fooling some of the misinformed, but the rest of us enthusiats know better.
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 06:57 AM   #27 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by gaara
]What exactly is an AMD 4400+? What about dual cores?
A 939 at 2600ghz with 1 mb cache, probably the end point of the 939 line.


Quote:
Dude, Longhorn is an operating system, it will not eat away 512mb of RAM, and if it does, I honestly don't think it will sell very well.
Ram is rather cheap these days, and Longhorn may not be out till late 06, that's nearly 2 yrs away.

Quote:
I also find your theories a bit hypocritical. On one hand, you seem to think the 800XL/XT and 6800GT/Ultra will last for three years. But on the other hand, you claim that cards that aren't even three years old, such as the 9800 Pro, are obsolete. In three years, the cards you've listed won't be the best of the best, like the 9800 Pro, so what exactly is different?
You need to read the whole thread before bursting in here.
The 9800pro was made obsolete by the 6600GT, not by it's age....who in their right mind would buy a 9800pro over a 6600GT today??

Quote:
I think you are just trying to impress a few people by spewing your opinions and trying to manipulate them into facts. You may be fooling some of the misinformed, but the rest of us enthusiats know better. ]
An enthusiast is usually classified as someone with a higher than average interest and would almost always have higher tech specs than the average person.

A person with the intention of buying a 9600/512 ram gaming box is not a hardcore gamer and not my target audience.
Jeff Lawson is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 07:00 AM   #28 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by killians45
[B]like I stated, the latest and greatest vid card @ $500 will only be able to play the latest unreal3 engine at most subpar fps, and at low detail... so its best to wait for the newer GPU chipsets to come out, ]
Firstly, I've said that going for the 6600GT/X800 is ok, I've also stated that 6800GT/X800XL is worth the money, and if a demanding game comes out, well just wait it out, I'd never advise anyone to buy on the strength of one game/program.....you probably want 5-7 good games out.
Jeff Lawson is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 07:04 AM   #29 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by 4W4K3
[ dunno actual specs, but not too many people burn DVD's and record the TV on there gaming computer. that is usually a multimedia center or something. ]
Perhaps you're a very narrow minded individual, but PC's are very versatile these days, you can play games and create a media ctr, but the media ctr still wants reasonably high specs{not as high as a proper gaming box}.....so the one box does it all, the major difference is the GPU, but being that a 6600GT is acceptable for both gaming and TV capture, why would you settle for less?
Jeff Lawson is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 07:06 AM   #30 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by apokalipse
[
the 9600 plays HL2 and Doom 3 on fairly high settings at fairly high framerates, and is by far not obsolete. I would say in the next year it would be like the GF4 Ti's are today (which are still descent enough to run HL2 and Doom 3) []
I'm pointing out how superior and versatile a I gig, 6600GT box is compared to buying a 9600, 512 box.
__________________

Jeff Lawson is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.