New COmputer Critique! - Page 2 - 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 10-31-2004, 07:15 PM   #11 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

I would get a Seagate or Western Digital hard drive - my personal preference is Seagate for quality, silence and speed all in one

as for the video card, the X800 XT is a damn good card, and so is the 6800 GT or Ultra
IMO I think the 6800 GT is better for value, and you can softmod it to the ultra's BIOS, plus the 6800's have Smartshader 3.0 for better picture quality

I would get a Pioneer 108 DVD±R/RW which is 16x and burns dual layer

I woulds also reccomend against getting an Intel CPU ATM, as AMD have 64-bit CPU's which perform the same if not beter than Intel's, and because they process 64-bit they are more future-proof. when they actualy get to processing 64-bit applications, they should theoretically double in performance too
one thing you should know: socket 939 supports dual channel memory and a 2GHZ FSB, but socket 754 doesn't support DC memory and only has a 1.6GHZ FSB, so socket 939 is the way to go with Athlon 64's
the 3500+ is probbably the best one for price, the 3800+ is double the price

DDR2 isn't that great now, it barely performs better than DDR1 because of the higher latencies
if you want high frequency memory, Transcend make good PC4000 memory, which actually performs better then Corsair's PC4000 memory, and it doesn't cost as much, and its latencies are relatively low
__________________

__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 07:31 PM   #12 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6
Default

ok, thanks for the tip on the cd-dvd-rom, I was looking at that one on newegg but decided to go with a company I heard of :P Glad someone told me that pioneer is better.

but I still dont think the AMD 64s are that great. I just dont see many companies making good 64 bit apps with the new 32 bit inovations that are comming out. Like the PCI-express. Unless a big company like Dell picks up the 64bit CPUs to sell with regular computers, I dont think software companies will bother creating special 64bit versions.

And, dont shoot me for saying this, but I also dont see FSB as a major restriction, or even a factor today. I think 800mhz is just fine to run all the mobo's components for a desktop PC. Maybe servers today need 2ghz, but I dont think I would get much of a performance gain. Data would travel through those lines just fine on 800mhz. I mean really, working with a desktop PC with 2ghz FSB would be like riding a surfboard down the mississippi The data I need to transfer is miniscul compared to what a 2ghz fsb could transport.


And i looked on newegg for that transend PC4000 you were talking about and I guess newegg doesnt sell it. I know what you mean about the slim gain on ddr2 thou, I sort of want to try something new, but I will look some more for good ddr pc4000 ram

I am changing my ram to one stick of ddr2 512mbs, and 1 stick of ddr 512. That way its a little cheaper, and I still get to use the power of my motherboard.
Are they any kinds of negetive conflits that can happen with that setup? I wouldnt think it would be a problem, but its always good to ask
__________________

RedComet87 is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 07:55 PM   #13 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6
Default

well I was going to do 2 diff drr types, but looking at the mobo i selected, I found out that it doesnt even support pc4000. The highest it goes is ddr400. So need help deciding, should I get 1 gb of ddr400, 1gb of ddr2 533, or get a new motherboard that supports pc4000 and get 512mb of each?
RedComet87 is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 08:39 PM   #14 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5,280
Send a message via AIM to beedubaya
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nubius

Got anything to back up that source? I don't even consider the Ultra most of the Time as you can get the eVGA 6800GT PAST ultra speeds so WHAT THEN HUH!?!
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/gra...004/index.html

The X800XT Platinum Edition blows away the competition in D3D9 games, and even delivers solid performance in OGL games such as Doom 3, although not as well as Nvidia. Surprisingly, the X800XT suffers most in Call of Duty, which is once again an OpenGL game. Lets just stop the fanboyism and look at what's really the better technology. The X800XT is the best, followed by the 6800 Ultra, then the 6800GT. All three of those cards are excelent buys and run so solid that you wont be able to even tell a difference in modern games. Then you have the X800 Pro, 6800NU, and 6600GT very close, with the X800Pro slightly better than the NU, and the NU slightly better than the 6600GT.
beedubaya is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 09:13 PM   #15 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

well looking at that chart beedub I can see why the X800PRO sucks compared to the XT. It has a much lower core/memory speed...and I noticed the core/memory speed of the XTPE was faster than the Ultras...BUT the fact that the ATI hardware is only using DX9.0b is probably one hinderance of it. Nvidia Fan boy has his GT Overclocked past the speeds that of the XTPE I believe so I'm sure his will bench near or outperform the XTPE...look how much the XTPE suffered in the Unreal Tournament benchmarks!! Good god! That alone just shows it's not superior...when 2 cards each win benchmarks it means they perform EQUALLY so technically the XTPE is NOT superior to the 6800, it just depends on the environment. ALSO they are running it on an Intel based machine, which personally I wouldn't do if I were running the benchmarks. They always run it on an Intel machine, I want to see some benches with AMD machines like a lot of us have.

Not only that, but ATI couldn't even compete in some of the benches due to driver issues. Beyond THAT, they LOST most of the benchmarks! They beat out Nvidia on the 3dmark and Aquamark but when it came down to the games they used Nvidia won overall although nvidia took a dump on that driving game...also what was surprising is how well the 9800 PRO and XT seems to perform huh?
Nubius is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 09:30 PM   #16 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5,280
Send a message via AIM to beedubaya
Default

The X800 Pro really does suck, I will agree with you there, but nobody can say that the X800XT P.E. isn't one kick-a$$ card. You said that the X800XT suffers in UT2004, I see it winning by a long shot at 1600x1200, 4xAA, 8xAF. Call of Duty is the only one I saw where the XTPE really suffered. You say Nvidia wins in most benchmarks, well I see ATI winning in most of those. Now if you are talking about X800Pro vs. 6800GT, which most people will argue, there is no comparison between the two, the 6800GT is worlds better. But we are talking about the highest of the high. And as bad as the X800 Pro is, the XT actually does win most of the time.
beedubaya is offline  
Old 10-31-2004, 11:35 PM   #17 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

It did suffer in Unreal tournament. It for whatever reason lost on every benchmark except the completely maxed out one...so it lost 2 out of 3 there.....

BTW: I just counted all the graphs....ATI Wins only ONE more benchmark than Nvidia making it a total of 13 benches won for Nvidia and 14 won for the ATI's XTPE......and that's because nvidia took a dive in that DTM Race Driver....so again it depends on your system because if you built a strong AMD system who's to say it wouldn't sway the other way?

Basically my statement holds true in that either way you go, you'll get an awesome card..but being that Nvidia only loses by 1 benchmark I'd say they are practically equal because every system is different and wouldn't necessarily bench the same way.

But what I'm also saying is that the 6800GT can be clocked FASTER than the Ultra is stock speed...SO....That would probably come out on top..but who knows....

Besides beedub, I like ya's We don't want to start another Nvidia vs ATI , all it does is lead people to hate each other lol
Nubius is offline  
Old 11-01-2004, 12:54 AM   #18 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5,280
Send a message via AIM to beedubaya
Default

Lol, I can't believe this has turned into an Nvidia vs. ATI myself. All I was doing is telling him that he was making a good choice by getting the X800XT Platinum Edition. Either the X800XT Platinum or the 6800U/GT are all really good cards. Stay away from the X800 Pro and X600 on the ATI side though.
beedubaya is offline  
Old 11-01-2004, 01:34 AM   #19 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

Quote:
Either the X800XT Platinum or the 6800U/GT are all really good cards. Stay away from the X800 Pro and X600 on the ATI side though.
THAT my friend was the whole point I'm preaching the entire time. Who gives a sh!t what the articles say, unless you buy one of each card and test all those benches in YOUR system you'll never really know. Experience is the key to knowledge....but yes I read an article (the ones I said to stay away from ) and it said the x600 was basically worthless and can't come close to the 6600 and as we know the X800PRO isn't cracked up to what it should be either =/
__________________

Nubius 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 11:01 PM.


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