Components for a Gaming Machine

The magic smoke.

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Amnesiasoft » Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:52 pm UTC

I'm pretty sure my 600W PSU supplies up to 35A on the 12V rail. Ok, so I went and grabbed the box: +5V - 32A, +3.3V - 26A, +12V - 35A. It's an Ultra X Connect VS, it's modular, and it was $100. Haven't had any problems with it.

User avatar
Axman
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:51 pm UTC
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Axman » Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:16 am UTC

Musmatte wrote:So I was reading some info on eVGA's site, and noticed something: Minimum of a 400 Watt power supply. (Minimum recommended power supply with +12 Volt current rating of 22 Amp Amps.)
--8<--
Do I really need to go that high, or is there a lower end unit that fits my need?


They're covering their butts. Try it; if it doesn't work, then replace.

User avatar
enk
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:20 am UTC
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby enk » Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:56 am UTC

Just a rant: Why don't those companies list the current rating instead of the power rating? Who can seriouly spend 1000W?? Or 400W for that matter?
phlip wrote:Ha HA! Recycled emacs jokes.

User avatar
Axman
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:51 pm UTC
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Axman » Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:08 am UTC

Well, I broke 500W once, and it took crossfired 2900XTs on a P35 board with a quad-core processor, running a synthetic load. No crazy cooling or ridiculous numbers of hard drives, though. With Skulltrail, quad-SLI and CrossFireX, it'll be "reasonable", but the main reason is that a power supply is only very efficient when it's between 60-80% of its full load, so 400-600W PSUs are wise for machines that draw 250-350W, which is not uncommon at the high end.

1kW PSUs are pushing it. There have been 2kW power supplies for a year or more now, and that's re tar ded. You can't pull more than 1540W from a single American circuit! Can you imagine having to run an extension cord from a second circuit in your house to run your computer? Re. Tar. Ded.

User avatar
enk
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:20 am UTC
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby enk » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:08 am UTC

Axman wrote:You can't pull more than 1540W from a single American circuit! Can you imagine having to run an extension cord from a second circuit in your house to run your computer? Re. Tar. Ded.


Puny American power. European power gives you 2300W :) (I think)

The load-percentage-efficiency-thing is the explains it. Thanks!

And imagine me using 100/155W during idle/stress on a 400W stock PSU. Not very efficient, it seems :)
phlip wrote:Ha HA! Recycled emacs jokes.

User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Toeofdoom » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:44 pm UTC

If anyone was still looking for gaming components the new 45nm dual cores (particularly the E8400) are a nice deal now, but they dont appear to be available on newegg yet, which is odd, because we have some at my work in Australia of all places. EDIT: Apparently they aren't being released for another week yet... and the NDA isnt even lifted yet O.o

Oh well, somehow we have some, although we didnt sell any yet.

And the stock heatsink is like, half as big.
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website

User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Toeofdoom » Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:37 pm UTC

So I'll be getting a new computer in the next month or two, but I might as well post in advance. I'm planning on doing lots of gaming, 3D modelling, image editing, programming and modding on it, so I'm getting something fairly high end.

Anyway, the current plan is this:
Case: Antec Nine-Hundred ($149)
PSU: Antec Neopower 550W or 650W ($124 or $146)
Motherboard: Gigabyte X38-DS4 ($225.50)
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 (2.66GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 12MB L2 Cache, 45nm) (~$400?)
Ram: 2x2GB corsair DDR2-800 C5 ($172)
HD: 500GB WD caviar SATA ($129)
DVD: Asus 18x lightscribe IDE ($40)
Graphics: Sapphire? ATI Radeon 3870 X2 ($549)

This adds up to about $1400 without a CPU or OS, but should total under $2000 with them. I already have a keyboard, mouse, monitor and speakers to use.

Anyway, the main issues are that I dont know which power supply to get (I may upgrade to up to 5 or 6 hard drives later on, not sure.) and the graphics card may not be fully utilised in some games. Also the graphics card is rather loud. Not too sure about the motherboard either, I've had someone reccomend not paying any more than $150 australian for an intel board, so yeah, not sure.

Alternative graphics cards are the Nvidia 8800 GT ($351 [ASUS]) or new GTS ($432 [XFX?]), but they dont have quite the same performance...

These prices are australian dollars, but they're very competitive due to the fact that I work at a computer store and get stuff at cost price. What brands I can get are slightly more limited than they would be in the US though.
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website

User avatar
Larson
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:26 am UTC
Location: The Nerd Cave

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Larson » Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:09 pm UTC

Toeofdoom wrote:DVD: Asus 18x lightscribe IDE ($40)

Might you go with a SATA DVD drive instead of and IDE one? They are just as cheap, and it's an easy way to eliminate the last IDE cable in your system. 20x drives cheap/common as well, just for good measure. 8)

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby EvanED » Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:41 pm UTC

What OS are you looking at? If you have a Linux interest, I would try to steer you towards nVidia rather than ATi for your video card.

The motherboard you chose seems a little expensive (though does that include sales tax?), but $150 seems pretty cheap for an upper limit, especially if that includes tax. I think I paid about that, and I didn't get a particularly high end board, although it wasn't a cheap one either. (E.g. you could do I could have done better if you I wanted to overclock, but if not, it's pretty good.)

Also, I second Larson's suggestion to get a SATA optical drive if you are buying a new one.

[Edit for clarification]
Last edited by EvanED on Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:46 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
FACM
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 6:40 pm UTC

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby FACM » Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:13 pm UTC

I'd go with one of your alternate video cards. the review on HardOCP says that the 3870 X2 is on par (roughly) with one 8800. [citation needed]

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby b.i.o » Wed Jan 30, 2008 8:06 pm UTC

FACM wrote:I'd go with one of your alternate video cards. the review on HardOCP says that the 3870 X2 is on par (roughly) with one 8800. [citation needed]


I've seen benchmarks that say the same thing.

User avatar
Axman
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:51 pm UTC
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Axman » Wed Jan 30, 2008 8:31 pm UTC

That's an 8800 Ultra, not the slower, weaker G92 512MB parts.

But I'd stick with an AMD card on an X38 board just for CFX.

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby b.i.o » Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:26 pm UTC

Yeah, AMD finally has a card to rival the Ultra. And it's only about a year late...

User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Toeofdoom » Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:32 am UTC

and 40% cheaper.

But I think I will get a sata 20x optical drive, as today a bunch arrived at the store for the same price anyway, heh. THe main issue was that board only has 6 sata connectors.

Also, the board is the cheapest X38 board we stock. Might overclock it a bit later, but all I was ever planning to do overclock wise would be maybe match the fsb with the ram speed, at 3.2GHz overall speed, and maybe a bit for the graphics too and I think it should handle that easily? The prices all include GST. If anyone has any other motherboards they would like to reccomend, go ahead.

Also, I mentioned, gaming and modding as major interests, so no linux for me. Vista Home Premium 64bit was most likely, as I already use vista on my laptop, and my friend uses that OS on his gaming PC, as does someone at work. If you want to convince me otherwise, you better have a good reason.

As for the graphics card, is it fair to assume that the drivers should be sorted out fairly soon, and work consistently in most games? Theres another thing I'm wondering about the graphics card, but I'll make another thread for that. Also the 9800GX2 is out in 2 weeks, so that will give me another choice, but probably be even more expensive so I dunno about that.
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website

User avatar
FACM
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 6:40 pm UTC

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby FACM » Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:12 pm UTC

Axman wrote:That's an 8800 Ultra, not the slower, weaker G92 512MB parts.


I knew there was something I was missing, hence why I didn't take a stronger stance. However, the 8800 Ultra is not a great deal faster than a 8800 GTX. It's a noticeable improvement, but for the price it's a little weak. As I'm running on a 7800, I don't know a great deal more about the 8000 line than what i've read online.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Endless Mike » Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:25 pm UTC

Toeofdoom wrote:Also, I mentioned, gaming and modding as major interests, so no linux for me. Vista Home Premium 64bit was most likely, as I already use vista on my laptop, and my friend uses that OS on his gaming PC, as does someone at work. If you want to convince me otherwise, you better have a good reason.

Vista 64's driver compatibility is worse than Vista 32's. Unless you REALLY need the extra RAM or can name several programs with genuine speed increases (rather than running in 32 bit compatibility mode), there's little reason for 64-bit.

User avatar
Axman
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:51 pm UTC
Location: Denver, Colorado

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Axman » Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:32 pm UTC

I haven't run into driver problems with x64; then again, I'm probably not your regular user. Power Pack 1 made it work with Windows Home Server... I'd say they're equal. Not like you'll see a real performance boost most of the time, anyway.

User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Toeofdoom » Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:56 am UTC

The only thing my friend had a problem with was a partitioning program he downloaded that didnt work on 64 bit. But then vista has partitioning tools built in that did what he needed anyway.

Also, 3DS max has a 64bit version with significant upgrades, and UnrealEd now uses 650MB of ram with nothing loaded. Basically the programs I use are some of the most likely to be optimized for 64-bit use, in future if not already, and quite good at sucking up ram. Everything I will be using has 64-bit drivers too.

Unless you can name several programs with genuine speed decreases, I think I'll go with 64-bit. Ability to play really old games isnt an issue, thats what that pentium 2 is for...
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby b.i.o » Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:05 pm UTC

Toeofdoom wrote:The only thing my friend had a problem with was a partitioning program he downloaded that didnt work on 64 bit. But then vista has partitioning tools built in that did what he needed anyway.

Also, 3DS max has a 64bit version with significant upgrades, and UnrealEd now uses 650MB of ram with nothing loaded. Basically the programs I use are some of the most likely to be optimized for 64-bit use, in future if not already, and quite good at sucking up ram. Everything I will be using has 64-bit drivers too.

Unless you can name several programs with genuine speed decreases, I think I'll go with 64-bit. Ability to play really old games isnt an issue, thats what that pentium 2 is for...


I don't have a 64-bit OS, but honestly pretty much everything I download these days has 64 bit versions anyway. In fact, I can't think of the last new program I used that didn't have a 64 bit version. Same with all of the driver's I've used recently. I'd say go with it.

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby EvanED » Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:47 am UTC

Endless Mike wrote:Vista 64's driver compatibility is worse than Vista 32's. Unless you REALLY need the extra RAM or can name several programs with genuine speed increases (rather than running in 32 bit compatibility mode), there's little reason for 64-bit.

While true, most HW released since Vista came out should be fine. You could check first of course.

Also, I may be wrong about this, but Vista removes the WOW16 subsystem, so you may not be able to play old DOS games without DOS Box. FWIW. Maybe someone can confirm/refute this?

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby b.i.o » Sun Feb 03, 2008 7:31 am UTC

EvanED wrote:
Endless Mike wrote:Vista 64's driver compatibility is worse than Vista 32's. Unless you REALLY need the extra RAM or can name several programs with genuine speed increases (rather than running in 32 bit compatibility mode), there's little reason for 64-bit.

While true, most HW released since Vista came out should be fine. You could check first of course.

Also, I may be wrong about this, but Vista removes the WOW16 subsystem, so you may not be able to play old DOS games without DOS Box. FWIW. Maybe someone can confirm/refute this?


I've had no more trouble playing older non-DOS games in Vista than in XP. However, I think that this may be true.

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Amnesiasoft » Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:52 pm UTC

both XP x64 and Vista x64 have WOW16 removed. It can also be a problem because some older games, even though they were 32 bit, have a 16 bit installer (I'm looking at you Grim Fandango >_>)

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby b.i.o » Sun Feb 03, 2008 3:45 pm UTC

Ah ok. Then as an addendum to my previous post I'd like to state that I have the 32 bit version of Vista, and so my experience is not at all relevent. :P

innoby...
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:43 am UTC

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby innoby... » Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:53 am UTC

Ok Ok Ok, Hehe....here's the lowdown

If you are going to buy a 680i for Cost/Performance Don't it has stability issues, buy a 650i.
Or if you have money buy a 780i
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813188024

Intel C2D e8400
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115037

Performance HDD Too much cost for the benefit, go with a Seagate, you can't go wrong with seagate (DO NOT EVER BUY A MAXTOR)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6822148278

Trust me You get more bang for the buck that way. and only $320 :-p

If you can afford it buy 2 GFX cards if not go with one of these.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814130072

Now when you get that mobo you should get offered a "combo deal" with it and 2gigs of OCZ SLI-Ready ram Get it, it's worth it.

Vista works fine on 2gigs but you must remember Vista will ALWAYS eat half your ram. If you want 2 gigs for gaming and such buy 4, vista is so bloated and pointless you have to have your PC work triple time to keep from being bogged down just by background processes. I hate Vista, If I buy Vista for a DX10 gaming rig, It will be dual booting after Ubuntu I refuse to use Vista for my media and surfing...</rant>

that set up right there will put you (even with only 2 gigs of ram and running vista) at pretty high up on Crysis FPS (which is the best game benchmark there is since hardware can now run Doom 3 as a background process)

User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Toeofdoom » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:45 am UTC

Do you mind if I say that post seemed... relatively useless? You failed to take into account what people might want for the hard drive, and the one where you were right(-ish) (the dual core) had no explanation whatsoever.

And if you can afford an 8800GTX, you can afford 2 graphics cards. Or a 3870 X2, which is generally better and has more potential.
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website

innoby...
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:43 am UTC

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby innoby... » Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:21 pm UTC

Toeofdoom wrote:Do you mind if I say that post seemed... relatively useless? You failed to take into account what people might want for the hard drive, and the one where you were right(-ish) (the dual core) had no explanation whatsoever.

And if you can afford an 8800GTX, you can afford 2 graphics cards. Or a 3870 X2, which is generally better and has more potential.


I was winding down for bed. And THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A 64 BIT WINDOWS. Vista doesn't qualify the only true 64bit OS's out there are Unix and Linux builds. Under which AMD infact performs better. But that's neither here nor there.

The C2D outperforms the Quads for gaming. Full stop. No arguments nothing, there is nothing out there that threads for 4 cores, and very little for two cores, BUT two cores allows your system to "prefer" one core when executing the game process and allows the other to take care of background processes, giving what ever game you're playing more clock time.

But if you want to go Radeon for that one card though you can run it with said Motherboard / processor, but you'll have to excuse me because I have been out of the loop hardware wise, all I know is that AMD owns ATI and they are looking and developing cards with their processors in mind....Same with the motherboards if you get an nVidia Mobo, you'll probably want an nVidia card.

Since Intel is currently the best bang for the buck your options are better going with Intel/nVidia (yes it has divided into two and only two camps as far as I can tell) and AMD/ATI but feel free to mix and match at your own risk. (Last time I mixed northbridge and video card makes I had minor instability and LOW fps)

AND since games eat ALOT MORE from processors these days than the video cards, with physics calculations among other things, you'll get more for your money if you go with the better processor. The AMD phenom just doesn't have what it takes.

User avatar
FACM
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 6:40 pm UTC

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby FACM » Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:20 pm UTC

innoby... wrote: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A 64 BIT WINDOWS.


That's fine. There's no real 64-bit CPU it would run on anyways.

[x64 and amd-64 is just x86 with a minor extension to handle 64-bit stuff. It's still a 32-bit processor at heart]

The C2D outperforms the Quads for gaming. Full stop. No arguments nothing, there is nothing out there that threads for 4 cores, and very little for two cores, BUT two cores allows your system to "prefer" one core when executing the game process and allows the other to take care of background processes, giving what ever game you're playing more clock time.


Wrong. Threading is not done with the number of cores in mind, more cores with a non-threaded application still allows for more background processes, and there are significantly more games now that support multiple cores than there used to be, the big ones being WoW and most newer Source engine games.

AND since games eat ALOT MORE from processors these days than the video cards, with physics calculations among other things, you'll get more for your money if you go with the better processor. The AMD phenom just doesn't have what it takes.


Also wrong. The video card is the limiting factor in most commercial games. Very few games are CPU-limited unless you've got some ridiculous money invested in video cards.

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby EvanED » Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:06 pm UTC

innoby... wrote:And THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A 64 BIT WINDOWS. Vista doesn't qualify the only true 64bit OS's out there are Unix and Linux builds.

[citation needed]

What about the x64 editions of XP, Server 2003, Vista, and Server 2008? Why don't they qualify as 64-bit Windows? (And that's ignoring the long-defunct Alpha version, which may or may not have been 64 bit, and the Itanium version.)

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby b.i.o » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:32 pm UTC

innoby... wrote:AND since games eat ALOT MORE from processors these days than the video cards, with physics calculations among other things, you'll get more for your money if you go with the better processor. The AMD phenom just doesn't have what it takes.


That is completely, totally, and utterly false. If I could think of more adjectives to put there, I would.

The bottleneck in the vast majority of gaming systems is the graphics card. If you've got enough money to spend on graphics cards where they won't be a significant bottleneck then you have plenty to spend on a decent processor that can match them.


The C2D outperforms the Quads for gaming. Full stop. No arguments nothing, there is nothing out there that threads for 4 cores, and very little for two cores, BUT two cores allows your system to "prefer" one core when executing the game process and allows the other to take care of background processes, giving what ever game you're playing more clock time.


The Source engine is multithreaded as of Episode 2. So is Bioshock. And Supreme Commander. And some others whose names currently escape me. While multithreaded games aren't necessarily the norm now they are becoming it. Getting a c2d instead of a c2q because a duo outperforms a quad on some current games is idiotic unless you have enough money to replace your computer every 6 months.

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Amnesiasoft » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:26 pm UTC

You're really only going to get CPU bound when you are doing massive amounts of physics. And I mean massive, Cell Factor is GPU bound on my system (C2Q, GTS320), and that game has more physics interactions than you will see in any other game for quite a long time. I'd love to try running the extreme levels, but your are locked out of them if you don't have a PhysX card installed, and I'm too lazy to find a workaround (I'm sure one exists).

User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Toeofdoom » Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:43 am UTC

First thing: There are 2 versions of vista home premium, named 32 bit and 64 bit. There is a significant difference between the 2 in some cases. Whether it's a "true" 64 bit thing or not is not the damn point. If I recall, intels "true" 64 bit processors (itanium series was it?) really didnt sell much.

Also, unreal engine 3 games generally support up to 3 cores, or atleast UT3 itself does. Any recent game that uses lots of CPU physics should separate them onto various cores. There are plenty of arguments. Also as was said, with any quad core it should be fast enough not to bottleneck games too easily anyway.

because I have been out of the loop hardware wise


Well that explains why you dont seem to recognise the existence of the new 8800 GT and GTS (512MB). ATI graphics cards still work fine with intel cores, as otherwise they really wouldn't sell much until AMD picked up with their CPUs.

And as for hard drives, Western Digital are usually alright, and are often significantly cheaper although the drives are noticably heavier. You fail to explain why not to buy a maxtor, although I do think they're lower quality, but I dont have any experience with them.

I'd just prefer it if what you said made sense and was explained, and you didn't have an overwhelming conviction that you are right when you admit to not really knowing what the hell you're on about. If you read the rest of the posts in the thread, you'll notice a large difference between them and your posts.
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website

innoby...
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:43 am UTC

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby innoby... » Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:46 pm UTC

Don't buy a maxtor is just a good rule of thumb. I've had 3 go out on me with in days of the warranty expiring. Longest one has lasted is a year. Seagate on the other hand (yes I know seagate MAKES MAXTOR, but there is a quality difference) I've had 2 seagate HDD's shipped across the atlantic twice (once out and once back) unsecured in a case. Yes I'm an idiot for doing that but still it's a good illustration, those HDD's were from 2k1 and they still work. That's why you don't buy Maxtor.

And "rebuild the pc every 6 months" No, Why bother with that? Just buy a C2Q when the price finially drops below "feeding the hungry in africa" you can get a BETTER PROCESSOR FOR LESS MONEY IF YOU BUY A C2D. And it performs better. The CPU isn't soldered onto the mobo for a reason...

And as far as games being more intensive on the GFX card than the CPU...........
Source.
That's all I have to say on that.

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Endless Mike » Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:57 pm UTC

The only hard drive I've ever had die was a Seagate.

To be fair, it was because the power went out in the middle of a format.

I usually just buy whatever's cheapest at a given time and cycle out the oldest, smallest drive I have in use.

User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Toeofdoom » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:49 pm UTC

Okay, so according to toms hardware, crossfireX would allow me to use a 3870 X2 and a 3870 as basically 3 3870s.

The problem is, it looks like the power supplies I was thinking of only have 2 PCI-E connectors (not totally sure about the 650W)

Anyway, given that its a modular power supply, would it be possible to just add another PCIE connector? Would that much graphics kinda kill a 550W PSU? Would a 650W even be enough?

Just wondering, because if such an upgrade seems too difficult I might go with a lower board like the P35-DS3P or something. And maybe an nvidia card.
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby b.i.o » Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:43 pm UTC

innoby... wrote:Don't buy a maxtor is just a good rule of thumb. I've had 3 go out on me with in days of the warranty expiring. Longest one has lasted is a year. Seagate on the other hand (yes I know seagate MAKES MAXTOR, but there is a quality difference) I've had 2 seagate HDD's shipped across the atlantic twice (once out and once back) unsecured in a case. Yes I'm an idiot for doing that but still it's a good illustration, those HDD's were from 2k1 and they still work. That's why you don't buy Maxtor.



We've had this discussion already. There is no longer any real difference between Seagate and Maxtor, excepting the name that's written on the label.


And "rebuild the pc every 6 months" No, Why bother with that? Just buy a C2Q when the price finially drops below "feeding the hungry in africa" you can get a BETTER PROCESSOR FOR LESS MONEY IF YOU BUY A C2D. And it performs better. The CPU isn't soldered onto the mobo for a reason...


Go back and read what I wrote about 7 or 8 times. When you finally get it and decide to stop making the same arguments over and over I'll continue the discussion.

And as far as games being more intensive on the GFX card than the CPU...........
Source.
That's all I have to say on that.


The Source engine isn't exactly intensive on much of anything. I play Source games on a laptop at 1680x1050 with full everything except AA/AF and easily playable framerates with an 8600M GT and a c2d E6600--and it almost never ends up using more than one core of the CPU anyway.

Actually intensive games--like Crysis--are massively GPU bound. This is why buying a gaming machine right now is really a matter of getting the best GPU you can afford, and I certainly don't think you should buy a c2q over a c2d if the $30 price difference means you're missing out on a better graphics card. However, because games really don't demand much CPU power right now, the 0.60GHz difference between the c2d and the c2q has very little difference even if the game isn't multithreaded, and so the difference in performance is negligible, if any. As more games become multithreaded though, the c2q will be able to scale up to newer games, while the c2d quite possibly won't, or won't be able to as well. Sure, you could replace your c2d with a c2q then, but you could also put that money--which is very likely to be at least 2-300--towards a new graphics card and get much more tangible performance gains overall if you had started with a c2q and gotten a new graphics card than if you had started with a c2d and gotten a c2q.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

If I were to scale some of these components down and aim more for the 800-1000 dollar range, would I be able to build a pretty solid gaming machine still? Not Crysis on high solid, but maybe Crysis on medium?

In fact, thats my question for you guys, for less then 1000 bucks, what would I need to make a machine that can run Crysis on medium with almost no choppiness?
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5402
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby mosc » Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:48 pm UTC

easily.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby b.i.o » Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:12 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:If I were to scale some of these components down and aim more for the 800-1000 dollar range, would I be able to build a pretty solid gaming machine still? Not Crysis on high solid, but maybe Crysis on medium?

In fact, thats my question for you guys, for less then 1000 bucks, what would I need to make a machine that can run Crysis on medium with almost no choppiness?


It should be possible--I think an 8800 GT or equivalent can do fine on medium settings, at least on mid-range resolutions. That with an E8400 or a Q6600 and 2-4GB of RAM will probably run you $5-600, which should make it easy enough to get in under your limit of $1000. Just a question, are you looking to buy a new monitor too, and is that included in the $1000?

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Amnesiasoft » Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:21 pm UTC

Silver2Falcon wrote:I think an 8800 GT or equivalent can do fine on medium settings

Should be able to do more than that if it's the 512MB version. I'm pretty sure they tend to benchmark above the 320MB GTS, and I'm able to run fine on high settings. (Though ice kills my framerate on all settings for some reason).

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Components for a Gaming Machine

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:36 pm UTC

Well i've already got a monitor, so I guess thats not included. I also have a really large TV, certainly theres a card or some such that'll let me connect to it?
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.


Return to “Hardware”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests