Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: chrish483 on June 25, 2013, 06:00:17 AM
-
the pc i had used even on this game was 12 yrs old and got this new pc a few months ago,
Spartan i5 Quad-Core Gaming PC
http://www.cybertronpc.com/customkititems~kc~gm2102b~group~home~cat~gamers.htm
(http://imageshack.us/a/img689/7185/newpci.png)
there a good bunch to deal with and they care about there products they sell,
i love the eye candy looks of there cases :aok
-
thats a nice place indeed where you can pay up to 4000$ for a "gaming" PC whats completely incapable of running games newer than 3-4 years :aok
-
Really weird that they label them 'gaming pcs' and then offer low-mid level graphics card as the highest option.
-
Really weird that they label them 'gaming pcs' and then offer low-mid level graphics card as the highest option.
they cnsider bedazzled a hard core game...i'm sure it will play solitaire without having to adjust the graphics.
-
Ooooooooo, shiny things.
-
Please tell that you didn't take it with the ticked option from the link you posted: "Intel HD4000 Video Graphics" :uhoh :cry
If you did, calling the rig a "Gaming PC" is highly exaggerated and should be punished by law by misleading a gullible customer. :furious
-
Please tell that you didn't take it with the ticked option from the link you posted: "Intel HD4000 Video Graphics" :uhoh :cry
If you did, calling the rig a "Gaming PC" is highly exaggerated and should be punished by law by misleading a gullible customer. :furious
I think, the (otherwise more expensive) 5450 is even, if not very much, worse whan the hd4000 :lol
My rig was about 700-750$ 2 years ago, with monitor, headphones, etc, in a place where the general tax rate is 27% on every transfer. True, it isnt shiny, it isnt "gaming", isnt high end, its CPU is slower, has no neon lights, but its quiet, eats that machine alive in any game and is going to serve me for a good couple of years.
-
Poor sap. How much did you spend?
-
Below are the 4 most important parts for a dream computer:
1. Graphic Card : 2 x ATI Radeon 7970 for crossfire configuration
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/7000/7970/Pages/radeon-7970.aspx#1
2. 2 x AMD Radeon™ RG2133 16Gb Ram total 32Gb
http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/DESKTOP/RADEON-MEMORY/Pages/system-memory.aspx#5
3. CPU : AMD FX 8-Core Processor Black Edition
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/amdfx/Pages/amdfx.aspx
Main Board: Asus : SABERTOOTH 990FX/GEN3 R2.0
https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/SABERTOOTH_990FXGEN3_R20/
rest is a good power supply , if you have budget a Solid State Harddisk and a good cooling system.
-
Below are the 4 most important parts for a dream computer:
1. Graphic Card : 2 x ATI Radeon 7970 for crossfire configuration
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/7000/7970/Pages/radeon-7970.aspx#1
2. 2 x AMD Radeon™ RG2133 16Gb Ram total 32Gb
http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/DESKTOP/RADEON-MEMORY/Pages/system-memory.aspx#5
3. CPU : AMD FX 8-Core Processor Black Edition
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/amdfx/Pages/amdfx.aspx
Main Board: Asus : SABERTOOTH 990FX/GEN3 R2.0
https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/SABERTOOTH_990FXGEN3_R20/
rest is a good power supply , if you have budget a Solid State Harddisk and a good cooling system.
sorry bud, but that just screams too much money and not enough performance to justify it.
-
sorry bud, but that just screams too much money and not enough performance to justify it.
actaully its around 1300$ if your planing long term thats a good price.
about the performance I suggest you to go check the benchmark results ...
-
actaully its around 1300$ if your planing long term thats a good price.
about the performance I suggest you to go check the benchmark results ...
benchmark performance is ok to reference when trying to decide what to purchase, you have to look at more than 1 and take care that the tests are the same. i have long term for about $900. even low end dual 7970s cost as much as my system without the video card, and i have absolute zero need for dual video cards. until there is a real need for 2 graphics processing units running in tandem and 6 gigabytes of graphics memory, i'd rather pocket the money for bills.
i've looked at the performance benchmarks since the fx cpu's were released. decent but not competitive against intel. phenom2's performed better per clock cycle until the latest gen of fx cpu's. they are still not competitive vs intel on a per core, per clock cycle basis. and i'm running an amd phenom2 black.
the radeon memory performance is about the same as the kingston hyperx xmp memory. the timings and voltages stink for what is supposed to be "high performance" memory. better memory can be purchased from corsair, crucial and even gskill at this point.
that asus mobo you linked won't support the memory you also linked at the advertised speed. if you want to run 2133 memory you will have to step down a couple of models or go higher end, like to an rog crosshair v formula-z.
-
benchmark performance is ok to reference when trying to decide what to purchase, you have to look at more than 1 and take care that the tests are the same. i have long term for about $900. even low end dual 7970s cost as much as my system without the video card, and i have absolute zero need for dual video cards. until there is a real need for 2 graphics processing units running in tandem and 6 gigabytes of graphics memory, i'd rather pocket the money for bills.
i've looked at the performance benchmarks since the fx cpu's were released. decent but not competitive against intel. phenom2's performed better per clock cycle until the latest gen of fx cpu's. they are still not competitive vs intel on a per core, per clock cycle basis. and i'm running an amd phenom2 black.
the radeon memory performance is about the same as the kingston hyperx xmp memory. the timings and voltages stink for what is supposed to be "high performance" memory. better memory can be purchased from corsair, crucial and even gskill at this point.
that asus mobo you linked won't support the memory you also linked at the advertised speed. if you want to run 2133 memory you will have to step down a couple of models or go higher end, like to an rog crosshair v formula-z.
well i put all those together in about 3mins... so did not really look into detail.
about comparing AMD with Intel on clock cycle bases is comparing oranges with apples...
http://www.geek.com/chips/why-amd-mhz-dont-equal-intel-mhz-557914/
about the Ram Corsair its option... I dont see big differnce only Corsair is like %20 expensive.
-
(http://i1217.photobucket.com/albums/dd391/zack12310/IMG_0063_zps1c6819f9.jpg) (http://s1217.photobucket.com/user/zack12310/media/IMG_0063_zps1c6819f9.jpg.html)
(http://i1217.photobucket.com/albums/dd391/zack12310/IMG_0005_zpsa0dd8d01.jpg) (http://s1217.photobucket.com/user/zack12310/media/IMG_0005_zpsa0dd8d01.jpg.html)
It nearly as awesome as me :)
-
well i put all those together in about 3mins... so did not really look into detail.
about comparing AMD with Intel on clock cycle bases is comparing oranges with apples...
http://www.geek.com/chips/why-amd-mhz-dont-equal-intel-mhz-557914/
about the Ram Corsair its option... I dont see big differnce only Corsair is like %20 expensive.
Hmm so you went from 'dream setup' to 'put together without checking in 3 mins'. Allrighty then.
-
well i put all those together in about 3mins... so did not really look into detail.
you should, especially if you're going to make such bold statements. i like the amd's personally. i've had good performance for what i do, but i'm not looking for extreme performance either. if i were looking for extreme performance, right now amd is not the way to go.
about comparing AMD with Intel on clock cycle bases is comparing oranges with apples...
http://www.geek.com/chips/why-amd-mhz-dont-equal-intel-mhz-557914/
no, it's not. i've seen that argument pulled out every time amd eff's up on what is supposed to be flagship performing cpu's over the past 15 years. when amd does hit the mark with a good performing cpu, that argument gets shelved, when it fails like it did with the k7 an now the fx cpu's, that argument is tossed on the table. a clock cycle is a clock cycle, where amd usually fails (when it fails) is at the cache level and bus speed.
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i7/Intel-Core%20i7-3770K.html (http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_i7/Intel-Core%20i7-3770K.html)
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series%20FX-8350.html (http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series%20FX-8350.html)
about the Ram Corsair its option... I dont see big differnce only Corsair is like %20 expensive.
you would be surprised at how much performance is really gained/lost by something as simple as 2ns and .5v...i know i was.
-
well i put all those together in about 3mins... so did not really look into detail.
about comparing AMD with Intel on clock cycle bases is comparing oranges with apples...
http://www.geek.com/chips/why-amd-mhz-dont-equal-intel-mhz-557914/
Looks like you didn't really look into detail in that comparison link, either. Both AMD and Intel have done lots of improvements since 2005 when the article was written. Back then I would definitely rather choose a Barton 3200+ than the 3.2 Pentium. Nothing against either brand, though, but as said, Intel is the way to go for now.
-
Really weird that they label them 'gaming pcs' and then offer low-mid level graphics card as the highest option.
you hit the nail on the head on that one, the i5 cpu is right on but a 500 GB HD, i put in a 1 TB for a 2nd HD for games.Please tell that you didn't take it with the ticked option from the link you posted: "Intel HD4000 Video Graphics" :uhoh :cry
If you did, calling the rig a "Gaming PC" is highly exaggerated and should be punished by law by misleading a gullible customer. :furious
wish i did have a choice in the video card but i didnt, reason why
i got this from tiger direct as is,
the cost of this one was just alittle over $800, the same one on cybertron starts out at $800,
SWrokit sent me a alittle older card NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GT, working pretty good, finding some limitations of the card tho.
it does have that modern gaming look about it, got it at a good price, its not limited in making mods to it.
made more mods to it and past those later here
-
I'm going to assume you have a crap power supply as well so upgrading your graphics card means you're going to have to upgrade the PSU as well. Would've been cheaper in terms of cost vs performance to build yourself a PC.
-
I'm going to assume you have a crap power supply as well so upgrading your graphics card means you're going to have to upgrade the PSU as well. Would've been cheaper in terms of cost vs performance to build yourself a PC.
400W power supply you could probably say that, but i bet its better then the 500W in the 12 yr old PC i just replaced, im not in danger of being under power as of yet but a 700W power supply is next on my list to get,
SWrokit sent me a little older NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GT, and im seeing some limitations to it.
i added a corsair.com H70 liquid CPU cooler that im not seeing any improvement on CPU temps over the stock heat sink that came with it.
the intel i5 cpu at idol the temp is the same 85 to 90 deg with both stock and liquid cooled, slowing down the pump speed helps some
also a NZXT touch screen fan controler thats really nice, you can put the heat probes where ever you want to monitor the heat,
(http://imageshack.us/a/img811/4194/6pb8.jpg)
-
heres what he sent me that im using at the moment, sooner or later ill switch back to the intel card and see if there's any difference
(http://imageshack.us/a/img7/8572/img0021wh.jpg)
-
400W power supply you could probably say that, but i bet its better then the 500W in the 12 yr old PC i just replaced, im not in danger of being under power as of yet but a 700W power supply is next on my list to get,
SWrokit sent me a little older NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GT, and im seeing some limitations to it.
i added a corsair.com H70 liquid CPU cooler that im not seeing any improvement on CPU temps over the stock heat sink that came with it.
the intel i5 cpu at idol the temp is the same 85 to 90 deg with both stock and liquid cooled, slowing down the pump speed helps some
also a NZXT touch screen fan controler thats really nice, you can put the heat probes where ever you want to monitor the heat,
(http://imageshack.us/a/img811/4194/6pb8.jpg)
something is wrong, at idle your cpu should be in the low 30's at most. at full speed it should be below 60. I have my 2500k oc to 4.9 , wait, you posting Celsius or Fahrenheit? temps are normally posted in c degrees. at idle in F my temp is in the low 80's.
you will see the drop in temps when you oc or have cpu at full speed, that's when it makes a difference as that is when the cpu produces the highest temp.
semp