Hello,
I'm thinking about upgrading computer wise. Not sure I going to yet, but definately considering it.
Problem is, I'm a little confused by what's out there at the moment. I'm a little out of touch with the latest processors, graphics cards etc etc. I've not really been following things at all.
I know there are people here that do though.
I'm going to be looking at getting a gaming machine that will last for a couple or more years and if I go for it, I will be willing to invest a bit of cash into the venture.
Any chance of knowing who the major players in each of the bits needed and maybe what sort of things you could recommend? I'm not talking loads of info here (not yet). I'm thinking;
Processor: Intel XYZ1234 chips 3.2 Ghz vs AMD ABC987 5.2 Ghz
Intel are better...
Actually, this is seeming like quite a bit of work for someone.
Anything that would help be get an overview of the scene so i can look stuff up myself would help.
Cheers
Baron
Intel are currently the best
Intel are currently the best option processor wise they offer best bang per buck if you will with their core2 duo and quad lines
for Graphics nvidia's are basically leading the 8800gt line are pretty good from a price performance point of view but they have some new stuff on the horizon that might reduce prices on the current bits and bobs (see byrn's predictions ;) )
motherboards from what I've seen intels chipsets are pretty good these days but much of that depends on exactly which processor you go for and what features you want ie if you want SLI or some such.
can't think of anything else right now
^ what he said. On the
^ what he said.
On the (intel) motherboards, if you want SLI then it might be best to wait. Nvidia's current 780 chipset is a mildly dodgy rehash of the 680. The 790 is due out soonish.
If you're not after SLI then something that's reviewed well with either the X35 or X38 chipsets would do the job well.
Memory wise, its tricky. DDR3 has better overall speed but DDR2 is hugely cheaper. At the moment, unless you're heading for near the cutting edge, I'd lean DDR2 and spend the difference on the graphics card.
Cheers guys, that's a nice
Cheers guys, that's a nice start to getting me back up to speed.
SLI?
Scalable Link Interface?
I'll only be looking to do this after bonus time. So after March payday. Hang on. That's next month! w00t! Well any way there's no huge rush.
I'll start looking into things a bit and work out my budget, if I decide I have one.
Yep, that's the one. Lets
Yep, that's the one. Lets you run more than one nvidia graphics card working (mostly) in concert. Not quite as decadent as it sounds these days, it used to be the domain of the unneccesarily expensive machine, now its moderately affordable.
ATi has something functionally identical, Crossfire. In both cases you (in all but a few special cases) need a motherboard with a chipset from the same company to run that company's multiple graphics cards
I'll smile and nod a bit.
I'll smile and nod a bit. It's not quite clicks and whistles....
No, I think I know what you're on about. :)
Is even something worth considering?
Lets say we're looking at £2k ish. What would you stick in a machine to get a decent gaming rig that will still happily play stuff released in a couple of years (hopefully)?
**EDIT** and be good at LW.... I'm thinking that'll not be too much of an issue though***
It's worth considering last
It's worth considering last time I was looking, SLI with two reasonably powerful but not cutting edge cards (7900gt's) was significantly cheaper than buying the mega expensive card (7900gtx) and gave about the same performance in most instances.
It can make a real difference if you're more looking at the low end and support for it is much better these days.
Anything you get for gaming
Anything you get for gaming is going to be fine for LW. I agree with Byrn and EMW. The GeForce 9600 has been released now with an overclocked version at £125, which is what I would buy had I not stumped up a load of cash recently.
I'd be careful here - the
I'd be careful here - the 9600 is the "next generation" (not really) nvidia "midrange" card. Its a lot less fast than the 8800GT. Don't trust that first digit - it lies to us.
HTML first breaketh the
HTML first breaketh the site... (Pete)
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/syscon_class.php?groupid=43&ca...
If it was me I'd just buy a machine from here based on budget.
I customised. OK by
I customised.
OK by customising I actually mean "I clicked all the nice looking options."
Not sure if half the stuff is neccesary or if it's at a vaguely reasonable price.
Subtotal £1,808.83
£2,125.38 inc VAT
Ready to Ship in 2 Days.
Specification
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.40GHz Processor
Tuniq Tower 120 CPU Cooler
Asus P5N-T Deluxe nForce 780 SLi Motherboard
OCZ SLi Approved 4GB 1000MHz (2x2GB)
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB GDDR3 768MB
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB GDDR3 (SLI Configured)
Western Digital 500GB 7200rpm 16MB Cache Hard Drive
Western Digital 500GB 7200rpm 16MB Cache Hard Drive
Pioneer Blu-Ray Reader/DVD ReWriter
Antec Nine Hundred Case
Sony Black Floppy Drive
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Elite Pro 7.1 Sound Card
OCZ GameXstream 850W Power Supply
Netgear 300Mbps Wireless Adapter
Logitech G15 rev.2 Gaming Keyboard
Razer Lachesis Gaming Mouse
Samsung 245B 24
That's a fucking monster!
That's a fucking monster!
Just had a play with the
Just had a play with the alienware site.
That could turn expensive very quickly.
alienware are a bit of a rip
alienware are a bit of a rip off, they give you a nice box but what's inside it is pretty overpriced.
After all all alienware are is dell these days and the sorts of corners they cut to make a profit are well known
Yeah I figured I could get
Yeah I figured I could get most of what they were offering for a lot cheaper, minus a funky box
Can someone please explain
Can someone please explain the nomenclature around Intel's chips?
Core 2 Duo, quad etc etc.
And what sort of speeds to be looking for.
Cheers
(Please correct me if I am
(Please correct me if I am wrong).
Core 2 is the new generation of chip.
Quad means that there are 4 processors on one chip. That's like have four PCs in your box. Duo has two. For AMD, X2 means two processors.
The speed at the end is the speed of each processor. That's less important than the number of cores these days.
phenom is the amd quad and
phenom is the amd quad and tri core processor.
With intel and AMD the number after the processor type is a pseudo performance index a rough guide to how fast it is. So a 6750 is faster than a 6550, only bench marks and real world tests will tell you by how much.
Speed is still important since a lot of apps are still not multi-threaded so you get little or no performance benefits from multi cores. Even with support a 4 core machine is not 4 times as powerful as a single core version.
As a note, LW is not (by
As a note, LW is not (by default) going to make use of your multi-cores. There's a fair amount of fiddling to get it to do so. However, it does mean that while LW is rendering, you can still do things on your machine. I've found this really useful recently when doing the Icar equipment index as I could render while writing up descriptions.
So going for quad is not
So going for quad is not that great an idea?
Especially with the price difference?
*EDIT*
ATI 3800 series ok? How do they compare to the nvidia in terms of "slightly dodgy old chipsets" and SLI/Crossfire?
Quad depends on your budget.
Quad depends on your budget. If you can afford it then games in the future will make use of it for Physics and AI, so you might be doing yourself a favour now by getting the better processor. You're looking for a machine that's going to last a couple of years, after all. Always buy what you can afford. I don't appear to need more than dual core running the apps I do but then I've not tried rendering LW using quad. It certainly was faster doing high AA rendering with radiosity using both processors but then I don't need to do that often.
The GeForce 8800 GT is the current winner for price/performance. The ATI 3800 series / Geforce 9650 are much the same. If you're going to go two cards, I'd think about the 8800.
Cheers for the comments BTW
Cheers for the comments BTW guys. Appreciate them.
I see your point with the Quads vs Duos.
It's just
Intel Core 2 Quad Extreme Edition QX9650 "LGA775 Yorkfield" 3.00GHz - £660
and the similar "speed" Duo
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 LGA775 'Wolfdale' 3.16GHz - £240
have a big price difference.
I'm not complaining at the price difference per se, more just trying to figure out what sort of a difference there will be between the two that warrants the £400 hike in price.
Because on the one hand speed seems to factor, but then how do you compare a 2.8Ghz quad at £400 to the 3Ghz Duo. Can you see why i'm a touch confused?
I would say in every day use
I would say in every day use you would see little or no appreciable difference in performance between the two
The quad core might even seem slower than the duo since it's got a lower clock speed.
Direct megahertz comparisons are tricky since some processor lines are more efficient than others in this case since it is the exact same hardware architecture, (the yorkdale is basically two wolfdales on the same chip) it is directly comparable. You have two cores running at a slightly higher speed so in single threaded tasks it will out perform the quad core. If you are using multi threaded apps or games (ray tracing or something like UT3 which has multi threaded support) you might notice some difference in performance between the two (assuming the app is cpu limited if it is limited by the graphics card then it will make no difference).
If it were me I'd go for the duo but pick a motherboard that will take a quad core and then you can look at upgrading to that when and if the price comes down. I mean it's getting on for three times the price for something that will in most cases make no difference.
^ what they said. Intel
^ what they said.
Intel chips overclock a chunky amount. I'm not sure if you're into that sort of thing, but the Q6600 (quad, 2.4Ghz) usually goes well over 3ghz and doesn't cost that much...
As for the Ati 3800 series, they're a little worse performing than the 8800GT for a little less price. If you wanted the option of adding more later, you'd need an AMD chipset board. Personally I'd lean towards the 8800GT.
A couple of things on your list:
Nvidia NForce 780i mobo - some people have had issues with this chipset. Might be worth waiting for the (soon to be released) 790i.
Creative soundblaster Ultra X-bling 4000 - I've not bought a sound card for many years now. Generally the onboard audio is pretty damn good. Opionions differ however.
Razer Lachesis - while Razer produce excellent mice, they don't tend to test them nearly enough. For a few months after release there are often bugs, which is currently the case with the Lachesis (last I looked). The Copperhead has been out long enough to knock the bugs out, is 3200dpi (vs 4000) and is a bit cheaper too.
Cheers, the above list was
Cheers, the above list was just me clicking through options available on OCUK for one of their builds.
I used it to give myself a benchmark to work from as a system advertised as a gaming machine.
I'll take your advice on the 790i stuff Byrn. Which will mean a delay in purchase, but i don't want to get stuck with something flaky. Any update on 3Q08 for their release?
Overclocking. Never done it. Not averse to it, but have zero experience. Would be concerned over doing it properly and the subsequent increase in heat and the requirement to sort that out and flakiness of system after doing it.
I'll also take onboard the 8800GT leaning, but then if I'm waiting for the 790i I'm already tying myself into nvidia.
Sound card wise. Not sure what to do here. I have my old one from my old desktop and a set of 5.1 speakers. To be honest they sounded nice enough to me. It's more a case of me not knowing if new games require new sound cards to run properly. That said. A fair proportion of my gaming will probably be done wearing headphones.
There are a couple of other mice that seem to review as fairly good for gaming namely the logitech G9, but still I think that's a consideration that can be made fairly late in the process.
Once again thanks for answering my stupid questions.
Not supid Qs, mate. I am
Not supid Qs, mate. I am watching this avidly too... I might be getting a 8800 GT towards the end of the year, so am looking at what's sensible now.
I'd rather spend the money on a 500W bass amplifier, though... ;)
Spousal approval is usually
Spousal approval is usually easier to get for a card that sits quietly in a box ;)
Reasonable overclocking is quite easy to achieve these days. Its not fiddling with switches on the motherboard any more.... well worth a dabble. At worst you can always go back to default settings. Its practically impossible to destroy things these days given thermal cutouts, as long as you stay away from the voltage options...
Not sure about the 790 release... things are fairly quiet. If it looks like it'll take too long at least it gives them more time to splat the bugs in 780.
In all probability your old sound card is more than up to the job mate.
Samsung 245B 24 sounds like
Samsung 245B 24 sounds like a monitor to me... :P
Edit: too slow your edit was, hmm?
OK, edit sometimes reorders posts. This was my reply to dwain... o_O
Ignore me.
Ignore me.
Toms hardware had a fairly
Toms hardware had a fairly interesting review of the phenom 9900 looking at the benefits for dual, triple, and quad core variants
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-triple-phenom,review-30406...
dual core makes the most impact after that in the majority of apps you gain very little with tri or quad cores
Anyone know much about the
Anyone know much about the 9800GX2 gfx cards? Are they a bad buy like the 9600? The benchmark studies I have seen, seem to show they are considerably quicker than the 8800GTX.
Just curious to gather more info around the area.
Cheers
Baron