We were hacked. Several times over the past two weeks, in fact.
While all passwords are encrypted and salted, it's recommended that you change your password here when you can.
Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
Re: Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
Originally posted by Dethred
I see exactly where you're going... but you could spend the money elsewhere, or give it to charity and save a starving baby. Getting an E46 M3 is better than getting a tuned E36 because its faster right out of the box. The comparison has some credence but in practical terms it'd be like upgrading from an E36 to an E46 M3 for the sole reason that you want to make sure you beat a stock Honda Civic. Both will do the job fine, one is cheaper and more practical.
I see where just knowing you can tackle anything is good, but your system can do what you need now. Why not wait until the prices on the hardware that will keep your system afloat for 2 more years is 50% less than it is now. In the interim your system will handle everything. Heck, buy a new TV or something if the cash burning holes in your pockets.
well after 2 years, FX-62 (the one with ddr2) won't be as good as it is now. It will be the same CPU of course, but you won't feel the way you feel now when you buy it.
Re: Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
just some quotes from anandtech review final words .
Granted, the performance advantage over the X2 4800+ is generally in the 5% - 9% range, so it's up to you to decide whether or not the advantage is worth it.
So, our recommendation would be to stay away from the FX-60 unless you absolutely have to build the world's fastest system today.
look marenello, it's your money, but paying 1000$ for a CPU is just plane stupid, when you have alternatives who cost half the price and with a tiny bit OC'ing they perform the same .
also, the small performance gane you have with the FX-60 , you won't even notice it in games, unless you are planning to game at 1024*768 resolution everything low , then and only then your CPU will start bottlenecking your system .
But when you play on 1600*1200 everything high and some AA and AF, your CPU will in every case havemore then enough power and the vid card will be the bottleneck .
For example , they test at 1024*768, everything low, they get like 200 FPS , this is pure FPS the CPU can deliver to you, so unless you have a videocard who will deliver 200 FPS in high resolution everything high aa and af on, then the cpu is the bottleneck again .
But offcourse vid cards like this do not excist, even not dual or quatro won't deliver the power for this .
At the other hand, your pc's seem like magic, you get 60-70FPS with a 7800GT on 1600*1200 everything high 32AA and 16AF , you have broken a world record there
Re: Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
Originally posted by rombaft
just some quotes from anandtech review final words .
look marenello, it's your money, but paying 1000$ for a CPU is just plane stupid, when you have alternatives who cost half the price and with a tiny bit OC'ing they perform the same .
also, the small performance gane you have with the FX-60 , you won't even notice it in games, unless you are planning to game at 1024*768 resolution everything low , then and only then your CPU will start bottlenecking your system .
But when you play on 1600*1200 everything high and some AA and AF, your CPU will in every case havemore then enough power and the vid card will be the bottleneck .
For example , they test at 1024*768, everything low, they get like 200 FPS , this is pure FPS the CPU can deliver to you, so unless you have a videocard who will deliver 200 FPS in high resolution everything high aa and af on, then the cpu is the bottleneck again .
But offcourse vid cards like this do not excist, even not dual or quatro won't deliver the power for this .
At the other hand, your pc's seem like magic, you get 60-70FPS with a 7800GT on 1600*1200 everything high 32AA and 16AF , you have broken a world record there
I said it before and i will say it again, this is what "renderer.drawfps 1" shows. It of course goes down to 50s or 45s or goes up to 75s but this is what i get when i usually don't do anything in the map or turn my head around.
When i have time this weekend, i ll take some screenshots. Why would i lie? Did you see what i said right after that? I said even though my fps is good, since my monitor's refresh rate is only 72hz, it doesn't look very good.
I can even play bf2 on 2048 x 1536 and i get like 25-30 fps (i even got 35fps right after a clean format).
I am not using fraps (should i?) to get the fps. This is the number that BF2 displays on the screen.
Also consider the fact that the fps on the benchmarks are average. They run those tests at least 3-4 minutes and take the average. What i am saying is what i see on the screen when i play. Do you have any idea how many samples the CPU collects to average the fps within 3-4 minutes? At least 2 or 3 million times. Now tell me is there any way for me to count my fps and average it 2-3 million times in 3-4 minutes? No!
It's not a big deal. Who cares if it is 65 or 105 or 45. I can't get the same refresh rate i get with 1280 x 1024 (100 hz) and because of that no matter how good my fps is, my eyes hurt after 2-3 hours of play.
Re: Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
Originally posted by maranello
I said it before and i will say it again, this is what "renderer.drawfps 1" shows. It of course goes down to 50s or 45s or goes up to 75s but this is what i get when i usually don't do anything in the map or turn my head around.
When i have time this weekend, i ll take some screenshots. Why would i lie? Did you see what i said right after that? I said even though my fps is good, since my monitor's refresh rate is only 72hz, it doesn't look very good.
I can even play bf2 on 2048 x 1536 and i get like 25-30 fps (i even got 35fps right after a clean format).
I am not using fraps (should i?) to get the fps. This is the number that BF2 displays on the screen.
Also consider the fact that the fps on the benchmarks are average. They run those tests at least 3-4 minutes and take the average. What i am saying is what i see on the screen when i play. Do you have any idea how many samples the CPU collects to average the fps within 3-4 minutes? At least 2 or 3 million times. Now tell me is there any way for me to count my fps and average it 2-3 million times in 3-4 minutes? No!
It's not a big deal. Who cares if it is 65 or 105 or 45. I can't get the same refresh rate i get with 1280 x 1024 (100 hz) and because of that no matter how good my fps is, my eyes hurt after 2-3 hours of play.
guess you won't lie about it, but it remains a world record, look at folowing link
there BF2 1600*1200 , everything high , AA 8x AF 16x
an ATI 1900XTX in crossfire (2x) gets an average of 45 Fps .
I guess, maybe your settings are AA32x and AF16x , but there is an overrule over these settings, this way you actualy don't have AA and AF enabled at all, or minimal
there BF2 1600*1200 , everything high , AA 8x AF 16x
an ATI 1900XTX in crossfire (2x) gets an average of 45 Fps .
I guess, maybe your settings are AA32x and AF16x , but there is an overrule over these settings, this way you actualy don't have AA and AF enabled at all, or minimal
I have ingame AA set to max which is 4x, and in windows i have AA set to 8x and AF set to 16AF.
I thought that if you have AA settings both in game and in windows, you basically multiply the number (as long as "determined by application" is unchecked).
But i do get amazing graphics. I used to have x600xt 256 mb pci-e and between the two cards there is an extraordinary difference.
my 3dmark05 score when my harddrive was full of bunch of crap and with no defrag within 2 months was around 7000 if i remember correctly. After a clean format (when i got 30 fps on 2048 x 1536) i got around 7300 or 7200 but i m not sure.
I need to format my PC anyways its been too long. Once i do that, i will post my 3dmark scores and bf2 in game fps.
Re: Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
No, you don't multiply at all, it is or 4x or 8x , never some multiplier .
you also , when you make a profile in your nvidia driver have to select that the Nvidia driver must overrule, so the ingame settings haven't got any effect ,
Re: Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
Originally posted by Sir. MatDef
I'm going to ask one more question: Are you actually considering my proposal?
I do consider it but i have no information or knowledge about that CPU. I know sempron is kinda celeron and athlon is like regular pentium, but i don't know where opteron fits in that scale. I dont know how 2 opterons would perform compared to an FX CPU or a X2 cpu, i dont know if they will support DDR2 or how they work and so on.
Re: Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
Originally posted by maranello
I do consider it but i have no information or knowledge about that CPU. I know sempron is kinda celeron and athlon is like regular pentium, but i don't know where opteron fits in that scale. I dont know how 2 opterons would perform compared to an FX CPU or a X2 cpu, i dont know if they will support DDR2 or how they work and so on.
2 opterons will rock your world, this is for shure, opterons are actualy ment for servers, these have suberb memory controlers, an OC'd opteron well punish the FX , but opterons cost money, actualy tons of money .
Re: Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
Opterons are amd's server class chip so I'd say they'd be equivalent (ha!) to intel's xeon proc, and they are better binned and tested much more thoroughly tested before they are shipped out. The 265 is a dual core proc, so 2 of them=quad core (4 real cpu's). They use ddr ram (either ecc or reg). They would be considered the highest quality chip amd makes.
Re: Planning on building a new computer and selling the old one
Originally posted by Sir. MatDef
Opterons are amd's server class chip so I'd say they'd be equivalent (ha!) to intel's xeon proc, and they are better binned and tested much more thoroughly tested before they are shipped out. The 265 is a dual core proc, so 2 of them=quad core (4 real cpu's). They use ddr ram (either ecc or reg). They would be considered the highest quality chip amd makes.
I see. Well i talked to one of my computer geek friends and he says cooling and the power will be an issue for the opterons. He says i ll be paying so much electricity (which really doesnt bother me) and for the cooling i might have to pay as much as $400-500 (water cooling). is that right?
He also knows a lot about the FX vs. X2 and he said what you guys said: X2 and FX is the same thing except FX (60 in this case) is a lot faster and can be overclocked a lot more.
Well i don't know. Maybe i should just buy a x2 4800+ and not wait for the AM2s. AM2s will be so expensive. But on the other hand, i don't want to buy a CPU that AMD will discontinue to produce in 6 months.
I'm confused
Also i think i ll sell my 7800 Gt and buy 1 GTX or 7900 if i can afford, and i ll save some money around 3-4 months and try to get another one.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment