Jump to content

Rofltroll

Members
  • Content Count

    435
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rofltroll

  1. Can you 2 argue somewhere else and then just give us the conclusion to your argument? I forgot what the original topic was
  2. You really seem to have made yourself an awesome build there. Since you seem like the enthusiast, why not get a WC case and then later get some awesome water cooling action edit: if you get a HX 850 you will be able to easily SLI another 680 in the far future.
  3. sanjesh, when are you planning on buying your computer?
  4. The most common configuration is this one: A big fan or 2 normal fans push air in from the front bottom of the case. Fans on the top back of the case that push out hot air, reason being that hot air is lighter than cold air and thus rises above colder air. From what I read, unless you use premier pro you won't need more than 2 cores for photoshop. Just a lot of ram. I say stick to i5. Here's a discussion thread: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/283745-10-photoshop-cores They suggest that a good nVidia card,however, does account to serious performance gains.
  5. Sanjesh, do you already have a monitor? If not, then you'll have to cut back on some stuff to get one. This is the one I have and also the one I suggested to a good friend of mine. We're both quite happy with it and it isn't too expensive. Benq has some really great price performance monitors. Edit edit: wait a week and you'll be able to get a 7950 for the price of a 570. AMD just started to slice prices on their 7000 series.
  6. Sanjesh, if you plan on using it for games the i5 2500k will last you for a very long time. The main difference between an i5 and an i7 is the fact that i7 has hyper threading thus simulating 8 cores. They both have 4 cores but the i7 can process 8 threads at a time. Games do not need that kind of performance since they only use 2-4 threads. The i7 is great for programs that use multi-threading (I really can't think of any right now because qutie frankly I'm not using any) and the other good thing about the i7 is that you can have a lot of stuff open at the same time but again: for gaming, you will not see absolutely any difference between an i7 and an i5. Imagine it like this, sanjesh: The game(software) communicates with the hardware; the software is saying: I need this computation done now and this computation done now etc. Some are passed to the CPU and some are passed to the video card. At this point both video card and CPU start working but they have to hand in their work at the same time. Games that have high end graphics and are played at 1080p resolution will give more homework to the video card than they will the CPU. The CPU will finish first and then wait for the video card to finish its homework. When both are done they send the info back and are given new instructions and so on so forth. That's why you need a good card for gaming and the CPU is not that important. An i5 will do it's "homework" faster than any card right now with the exception of insane builds such as quad SLI 680 for example. If you have 4x680 or even 3x680 you might see the difference between an i5 and an i7. But the differences will be that on the i5 you will have like 200 fps and with the i7 you will have 215 fps for example. Those frames are insignificant, really and anything above 60 (let's say even 80-90) is simply invisible to the human eye.
  7. You people seem to be confusing the 560 with the 560 Ti. And 560 SLI beats one 580 with the minor exception of games that do not support SLI (which after last nVidia driver update I doubt there are any games that do not support SLI) http://www.guru3d.com/article/evga-geforce-gtx-560-ti-2win-review/21 Get your facts straight before you decide on arguing with someone. I've noticed that you have something against pretty much everyone, DrDeath, not just in this thread.
  8. you really like this smiley --->
  9. An i5-i7 will last longer than a 550Ti. Even though I'm a video card man I'd have to go with the CPU/mobo. The 550Ti isn't that amazing and the 4870x2 is hot PSU demanding and doesn't support DX11.
  10. If you don't play games I suggest you just buy a nice Radeon HD 6450. It's discreet, it's cheap, you can play older games on it plus you can connect more monitors to it if need be.
  11. Somehow I doubt that but I do agree that a 680 is better than 2 x 660 in the sense that a 680 will carry anything you need and you can SLI another one in the future if need be. It will also be cheaper and much less power demanding. If you really want to go SLI now or in the future then i suggest you get an 850 watt PSU. A corsair TX 850 or maybe a corsair 950 TX if you plan on also getting an SSD and overclocking your rig.
  12. I like having an i7 personally . If you can get a full refund on that i7 and you can get a much better video card in the process then I guess it would be worth it. How much money would you save by making such a switch anyway and what GPU do you own in that rig.
  13. Pretty darn bad configuration if you ask me as far as gaming is concerned. You are spending way too much on a CPU and much to less on a vide ocard. And going with 2 x 450 gts is a very bad choice, really. A big monitor will also make gaming a better experience. How much are you willing to spend for this gaming rig of yours? Do you already have a monitor or are you planning on buying one from this aforementioned budget? Also (and this is in case you are not from America) link us some stores from your country where you can buy these parts. I sincerely believe that if you go from that i7 you picked downto to an i5 2500k you won't see absolutely no difference in games at 1920x1080 resolution but with the money leftover you can buy an adequate video card - or two- which is the part of the computer that is most important when gaming. With the money you save on the CPU and mobo you might even get away with an SSD which, again, will show some real world difference.) Hope to hear from you soon.
  14. Well concerning the PSU: wtf is a GTX 460v2? What video card are you planning on putting in your computer?
  15. I read the oven thing and here's my advice OP: don't do it. Try to clean the heatsink. Get it off your video card and just clean the gunk off of it. After that clean the thermal paste on the GPU and ram. Reapply thermal paste (I suggest arctic silver 5) and then put the VGA heatsink back.
  16. Tell me more of this ... oven magic. I've a big fat shedding cat at home and it's starting to show on my video card's temps.
  17. Where are you from and what's your budget? If you're not from Amurica then also link some sites from where you wish to buy you video cards. What you need to know about shader clock core clock and memory clock is that they need to be as high as possible . However, frequency on radeon cards might be higher than on nVidia cards but that doesn't mean that the radeon cards are faster. It also depends on hardware architecture. A 607 mhz nVidia card may be faster than another card with 800 MHz but with different architecture. What's important in the nVidia cards are the CUDA cores and their amount. These CUDA cores are highly efficient since they are able to compute all kinds of shaders. Before CUDA cores you had specialized cores for each type of shader (so if a program needed physics shading done, specialized shader cores would start working while other shader cores -geometry shader cores for example - would just sit there doing nothing since the program didn't need any of those computations to be done at that time. CUDA cores are like the jack of all trades since they are able to compute any type of shaders you give them. One CUDA core will compute one type of shader while another CUDA core would compute another type of shader at the same time. This is why nVidia gets more efficiency out of each clock.
  18. You don't need more than 4 GB for gaming really. 8 GB is fine if you just want a lot of RAM but it's still fairly overkill for gaming and use the rest of the money to buy a better video card. Here's how i like to explain dual channel memory to my friends: Imagine that instead of 4GB of ram you have 4 liters of water. Single channel mode means you have it in one 4L bottle while dual channel mode means you have it in 2 2L bottles. All these bottles have the same bottleneck size so when you want to get water out you will be able to do so faster through 2 bottlenecks (dual channel) rather than 1 (single channel) and same goes for getting water in. Basically you should have higher bandwidth but as I explained to you in another post (you sure started a lot of these in a lot of places ) DDR3 has quite the large bandwidth anyway and will never really be able to use all of it even in Single Channel mode. Someone correct me if I'm wrong
  19. RAM has 2 important performance numbers: the frequency and the timings(CL). Let me briefly explain what all those crazy numbers in RAM are; take for example the ones you chose: G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 4GB 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL9S-4GBRL G-Skill - manufacturer (good choice there) 4 GB - amount 240 - Pin - number of pins on the DIMM(the ram PCB - the green thingy where the memory chips are) DDR3 - double data rate 3 - 3rd generation of DDR - faster than DDR2 though not by much (higher frequency at the cost higher CL) and consumes less power (1.5v) SDRAM - synchronous DRAM -currently the most widely used type of RAM memory. 1600 - frequency PC3 12800 - maximum amount of data transfer (12.8 GB/s - this is the maximum amount of bandwidth of the memory albeit it will most likely never use that amount of bandwidth) F3-12800CL9 - 12800 is the max bandwidth and CL9 are the timings - these timings are the number of clock cycles it needs between data getting in the RAM and data getting out of the RAM - put bluntly - so the lower the better. So even if you have high frequency RAM if the CL is too high you won't see much performance gain say 1600 CL7 vs 2000 CL10. Now if a manufacturer slaps 1600 CL9 on their RAM that means that they guarantee that it will run at 1600 frequency and 9 CL. However that doesn't mean you can't get lucky and manage to get higher results than that - say 1600 CL7(for example i got unlucky and couldn't manage to get higher than manufacturer freq+CL) Here's a noob- friendly guide: http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/152
  20. The 295 is somewhere near a 470 performance wise but he won't have all that DX11 goodness. At 2560 DX9 BF3 should run really smoothly on a GTX 295 though.
  21. Well if you want the card now and you want to stay under 350$ then I suggest you get the 6950 2 GB. It will give you better performance at 2560 rez over a 560 Ti. The 570 runs at about 400$ but it will run 10-20% faster. Again, though, at ultra you won't be able to play it smoothly but at medium to high you will have over 40 fps easy. If you manage to find a 7870 or a 7850 anywhere in your country at a decent price let us know. I think those might give you some more fps for less $$.
  22. Right. I have a GeForce 4 MX 440 (and that's not exactly 440 CUDA cores if you know what I mean )
  23. Looking at that site you linked the best one might be the 570 or the 580.Do you have any other sites? this one has a pretty poor selection, really. And also tell us how much you want to spend.
  24. Either that or he's confusing celsius with fahrenheit and he's actually from alaska
×
×
  • Create New...