You need to pick up a console and some games that are actually fun. That's what I did and now I game about 10 times more on my PS2 than my PC. PC has loads of "cool" FPS, RTS, sim type of games, but when you actually play them, they tend to bore you to death... :p
Yeah, and I'm just saying that there's no point in overclocking with one stick if you actually plan to use your overclocked computer for something. Sure you might get your one stick running at 280Mhz, and with two sticks be limited to 260Mhz (and I do not believe in that big a difference, at...
I don't really get this comment....what do you mean it's hard to oc 2 sticks? Do you mean that it's preferrable to run only 1 stick? Who would run their Intel without dual channel, that would be silly and more than negate the performance benefits of the overclocking?
'cause I'm greedy :D
Yeah I know, for some reason > 1GB seems to be some kind of taboo in this forum....come on guys, be a bit more open-minded! There's already games (WOW) that benefit from > 1GB, and there's also people who use their machine for something else than gaming. And, if you...
I'm considering 4x512MB sticks for my P4 Northwood. I plant to overclock, but only slightly, since processor is already 3.4Ghz and will reach it's limits somewhere between 3.7 - 3.8 Ghz.
What kind of sticks do you have, what timings and what overclocks? Did you upgrade from 2x512MB, what were...
Nope. I even changed cooler to NVSilencer5 but not much help. Autodetect gives something like 398/1.1, but already at those speeds I get some minor - medium artifacting on 3dmark05. Games are usually not that taxing so I could probably run in Ultra speeds, but I choose to run it conservatively...
There's not enough eDRAM on Xbox to support 1080p.
In any case, I think it is irrelevant....I bet 1080p will be impractically taxing to both consoles. Especially when a major portion of users (especially in Europe) will still be using 480i, so budgeting game content based on 1080p will be...
Damn this question gets asked repeatedly, and I would love to hear the answer too. Sadly no-one seems to have any comparisons or real facts. Good to hear "dude, definately go with 4x512, I have one and works great", but those kind of comments are not _really_ helpful unless you provide exact...
What are on about? That's already over Ultra stats on the core speed. Just be happy with that....or if that's not possible, get a NV silencer 5 or Zalman's whatthehellwasthenumber-cooler.
Sure, that number should be taken with a grain of salt. However, it's a fact that Cell is a processor that has been designed, from a clean sheet, to fulfill the requirements of modern gaming and media use. And x86 processors were not....in fact they were designed to run spreadsheets. I find it...
You are talking about AMD only, I presume. I'm positive nothing stops you from running 4 slots at ddr400 on Intel. Timings / overclockability can suffer, though.
A triangle in 1600x1200, 8xAA 16xAF is still that, a triangle.
I own two gaming machines, a ('99) PS2 and 3.4G P4C, 1GB, 6800 GT PC. With today's rates I think my PC gaming rig costs about 10x as much as a new PS2 would. Often times I am still left wondering, how on earth can the PC games be...
I don't think I am processor-limited since I am running a 3.4GHz P4C. 1GB memory. Besides, if I were processor-limited why would switching to lower resolution fix that?
"fine" is a different thing for different people.
No you can't, unless you prefer two years old games.
People who upgrade graphics cards enjoy the latest games, and the most graphically impressive (and demanding) games. Games like HL2, Doom3, Chronicles of Riddick, Richard Burns Rally. I have a 6800GT and with all those games I choose lower...
The tricks that D3 uses to create scary atmosphere are real CHEAP and irritating. Come on, any dumbass can make a scary game by putting those "a wall suddenly opens next to you and monster attacks" scares. You have no way of avoiding those, no matter how hard you try.....those are just cheap...
Holy fuck how some people can be stupid.
EDIT: ummm, sorry if I was offensive....but that was my HONEST reaction to the post...come on dude, time to do some homework!
Best match my ass.....you'll still get superior performance with the GT. Then upgrade processor later. You don't have to have each component "in sync" all the time. Sure your processor will be a bottleneck in some situations for a while, but so what?
Yes, it does not seem to be a big difference. My problem is, there's one review where 6800U is outperforming the XT-PE in one (quite old) game - that is not enough to convince me against numerous really credible reviews. I want to see more evidence before I change my mind about XT-PE being the...
Went back and rechecked, wasting 15 minutes of my precious time while at it, and it still seems to be the king :) Maybe you don't like the choice of words, but on 1600x1200 it performed the best in everything else than castle wolfenstein (which isn't exactly state of the art game graphics-wise...
X800XT in that review is just that, X800XT, not X800XT-PE (I believe). XT-PE should offer much better performance.
To the original poster's question: There's not a lot of good reviews having X800XT-PE, X800pro, 6800U and 6800GT using latest drivers. Lots of old ones with out-of-date drivers...