PC geeks - ultimate gaming rig help

[milo hobgoblin]

Well they're stupid. They probably oogle over naked Lara Croft images all day (like I don't).

4 processors > 2 processors. This is a no brainer.

While it may run AoC fine today. It won't run tomorrow's high quality processor intensive games tomorrow. And we all know how those asshole game developers just love to push the envelope more and more every year.

So get the expensive ram heavy card. And if your computer isn't up to speed one day - buy a new computer and transfer over the card.

And don't forget the big ass monitor. For games, and viewing lara croft images.

r

Razor is forgetting Amdahls law and when it comes to applications not specifically optimized for multiple processors going from two to four will yield little gain.. and beleive me NONE of these games are highly optimized for multiple procs.. they WILL use them but they have so many thread dependencies that throwing tons of processors at them doesn yield proportional gain.

Razor

I was only offering a "cheap" solution as his processor really isnt that bad .. he said his box was a few years old... so Im guessing its AGP. That dual core can be OCd pretty high as its a first gen core and completely unlocked.

The HD3850 is comparable to a 8 series card and that coupled with a little more RAM and some OC will run these games just fine..




Razor is right.. if you want to spend some cash 12-1500 dollars will buy you a ncie box and you should go top of the line on vid card (although IM a big beleiver in N-1 due to insignificant performance gains vs. cost)



wanted to add.. is yourr box is PCI-E ABSOULTELY do what Razor says and buy a high end card.. but its probably AGP and the HD3850 is the BEST AGP card there is.. bar none (I hear they make an OCd verion called the 3870..but I havnt seen it)

 

[gjohnson5]

The name of the game is processor to PCI-E throughput...
The more bus speed , the better the performance.

Having said the above , the AMD X2 processors are the best bang for the buck. They don't have the highest Ghz rating , but they have much higher bus speed (up to 4000 MHZ) due to multi channel hypertransport

*edit*
Actually AMD's new line of shit is their Phenom processors which are quad core
*edit*

Thanks fellas for the additional feedback, though the more threads I read on the AoC forum coupled with milo's suggestion the more inclined I am to believe that I can boost my PC simply by upgrading my video card rather than buying an entirely new PC.

2GB RAM and 3.2GHz dual-core processor (that I can apparently overclock to 3.4/3.6 if I bother to figure how to) are apparently "reasonable", though the message I'm getting is that my 6800 will mean having to run the game at low graphics settings:



Ok, considering 60min ago I was looking to buy a whole new rig, budget isn't a problem with regards to upgrading my graphics card, but can I seriously slap any new graphics card I want in to my PC? How on Earth does one remove their old card and put in a new one?

The following are what's available / am looking at (from AoC forum):

Class 1 Cards

With these your will probably be able to run the game on max, or at least very high sittings.

Geforce 8800 Series (All Versions) DX10

Radeon HD 2900 Series (All versions) DX10

Radeon HD 3800 Series (All version) DX10

Radeon X1950 Series (All versions) DX9

Geforce 7800/7900 Series (All versions) DX9
------------------
Class 2 Cards

With these you will probably be able to run the game in upper medium range sittings.

S3 Chrome 460 - (only one version) DX10 (expected to release this december)

Radeon X1900 Series (All Versions) DX9

Geforce 8600 Series (All Versions) DX10

Radeon HD 2600 Series (All Versions) DX10

Geforce 7600 Series (All versions) DX9

Radeon X1600 - 1650 Series (All versions) DX9

Radeon X800 Series (All versions) DX9

 

[needtogetarmy]

What GJohnson said

AMD > Intel (and less expensive)

 

[Razorguns]

What GJohnson said

AMD > Intel (and less expensive)

According to every benchmark and pcmag shootout test

Intel > AMD by a long shot.

r

 

[gjohnson5]

What vs what?

Any Intel processesor is faster then and AMD?
And name your source since you say ANY benchmark...

I disagree that Intel machines will be faster due to the processor alone.

According to every benchmark and pcmag shootout test

Intel > AMD by a long shot.

r

 

[Raptorex]

My AMD kicks ass in gaming, I play BF2, America's Army, COD...

 

[gjohnson5]

I'm looking for some Oracle Benchmarks. I know they used to have single and cluster benchmarks for loading data into a database. Last I looked AMD machine were crushing Intel machines in data loading, because it shows that processor speed isn't everything. The throughput to and from peripherals is more important then the speed of the processor.

 

[Raptorex]

and the winner is:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-9.html

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

What vs what?

Any Intel processesor is faster then and AMD?
And name your source since you say ANY benchmark...

I disagree that Intel machines will be faster due to the processor alone.

Intel has the best processors to date, AMD is scrambling to produce something comparable as of yet. The only thing they have Intel beat on so far is power consumption, and that's not by much. Their new motherboards were supposed to be the king shit but have so far gotten mixed reviews, and there is limited ATX support, most of them are still mini.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

and the winner is:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-9.html

Nice try, that was back in fall of '05-

http://reviews.cnet.com/5416-10442_7-0.html?start=320&assetID=6389077&orderBy=creationDate+desc