Author Topic: graphics cards (Read 80895 times)

chimera15 · « **Reply #100 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:08:36 »

Quote from: EverythingIBM;203911

So chimera, when's the PSU coming? I want to see how well it all goes.

Shipping within 3 days. lol We'll see. The seller seemed responsive, even if english isn't his first language.

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #101 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:11:00 »

The X7 should do fine for him, assuming the ebay seller isn't diddling him.

Anyway, another place cheap power supplies skimp is the transient filter.

Transient filter filters noise and surges on the AC line before it hits the rectifiers. There are several important components.

Fuse - Doesn't do any filtering, but is designed to blow in the event of a catastrophic overvoltage situation, like a lightning strike, to prevent complete destruction of the unit.

MOV (metal oxide varistor) - Filters minor to moderate surges, does the same thing as most surge protectors. This is a critical component and must be present to prevent surges on the AC line interfering with equipment connected to the PSU.

X and Y capacitors - Used for noise filtering. Y caps are found in pairs and the connection between them must be grounded. X caps are solitary. They filter different frequencies and magnitudes of noise.

Ferrite chokes/coils - Used for noise filtering, remove high frequency noise that could interfere with switching.

The "bad" transient filter in that diagram is modeled after the Linkworld 430W, which had just the fuse and a pair of Y-caps. That is precisely enough filtering capacitor to do... diddly squat. And if there's a lightning strike a mile away that causes a surge in the AC line, that surge is hitting your components dead on because of the lack of a MOV.

EverythingIBM · « **Reply #102 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:20:13 »

Quote from: Phaedrus2129;203914

that surge is hitting your components dead on because of the lack of a MOV.

I find lack of .MOV to be very good!

Means I don't have to install bloatware to play videos.

chimera15 · « **Reply #103 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:25:00 »

Alright, good site finally:

http://service.futuremark.com/hardware/graphics_cards/nvidia_geforce_9800_gt

No gtx 460 that I could find, but interesting that the gtx lines are so much better. It seems like the 3dmarks correlate roughly to the direct draw crystalmark scores.

It looks like the gtx 285 is almost 3 times as good as the 9800gt, at $200...so hopefully the 460 will be in that range or better.

gr1m · « **Reply #104 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:28:10 »

The most typical fanboy justification: "I had so much problems with Company X 47 years ago so it must mean their products are horrible." You know what, my Pentium 4 rig sucked **** and that doesn't mean i7 sucks ****.

Also, like I said, for gaming purposes, a Phenom II system is no worse than i7. There was a review, if I can find it, that showed a Phenom II actually edging out an i7 in games because of some funky architecture. Buying a 9800GT is a foolproof way of sacrificing gaming capability though. And if the whole shebang fries, even better. I'm sure a working Phenom II system is more capable in games than a dead i7 system.

ch_123 · « **Reply #105 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:31:14 »

Quote from: chimera15;203920

No gtx 460 that I could find, but interesting that the gtx lines are so much better. It seems like the 3dmarks correlate roughly to the direct draw crystalmark scores.

It would probably come somewhere between the 4870X2 and the GTX 295.

chimera15 · « **Reply #106 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:37:06 »

Quote from: gr1m;203921

The most typical fanboy justification: "I had so much problems with Company X 47 years ago so it must mean their products are horrible." You know what, my Pentium 4 rig sucked **** and that doesn't mean i7 sucks ****.

Also, like I said, for gaming purposes, a Phenom II system is no worse than i7. There was a review, if I can find it, that showed a Phenom II actually edging out an i7 in games because of some funky architecture. Buying a 9800GT is a foolproof way of sacrificing gaming capability though. And if the whole shebang fries, even better. I'm sure a working Phenom II system is more capable in games than a dead i7 system.

Well like I said I'm a year or two back on graphics cards. That's the whole point of this thread... It looks to me like the 9800gt was succeeded by the gtx 285, as standard, which is something I missed.

http://cgi.ebay.com/BFG-GeForce-GTX-285-2GB-video-card-/300447631137?cmd=ViewItem&pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item45f4130721

lol

Obviously what you said is true, but at this point I know intel desktop systems, I like them, and I'm sticking to them. The main problems I had with amd's were temperature related problems, and nothing to do with the power supply. The early amd's had no safety, and would boil themselves to death if not properly cooled. The i7 is the top right now, so until you can show me an amd system in crystalmarks or something that isn't risking blowing its hardware to keep up, I'm sticking with plans to build an i7.

This is one of my main problems with AMD:

That's not some random test on some crappy powersupply someone found somewhere, that's all amd's, they were designed like that.

ch_123 · « **Reply #107 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:39:49 »

No, the 9800GT was succeeded by the GTS250. Which was a rebranded 9800GTX+

The GTX 285 was quite expensive for what you got. The cards to get back then were either the GTX 275 or HD 4890.

Also, people wore onions on their belts because it was the style back then.

Quote

Obviously what you said is true, but at this point I know intel systems, I like them, and I'm sticking to them. The i7 is the top right now, so until you can show me an amd system in crystalmarks or something that isn't risking blowing its hardware to keep up, I'm sticking with plans to build an i7.

In many cases, the AMD chips represent much better value for money compared with Intel ones. They also don't go changing the socket every few months, or require new chipsets every time a new chip comes out on an old socket... Like all those LGA775 chips.

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #108 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:51:14 »

He speaks truth. Only reason I'm on a Core 2 Quad is because I started out upgrading from an HP Pavilion with an E2200 and I got the Q9550 for $170, vs. $260 usual price (thank god for Microcenter).

AMD chips don't cook themselves... period. Except when overclocked with insufficient cooling, and Intel will suffer the same fate there anyway. And any modern CPU will overheat without cooling these days, anything but some of the very low-end Atoms need active cooling.

chimera15 · « **Reply #109 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:54:11 »

Quote from: Phaedrus2129;203926

He speaks truth. Only reason I'm on a Core 2 Quad is because I started out upgrading from an HP Pavilion with an E2200 and I got the Q9550 for $170, vs. $260 usual price (thank god for Microcenter).

AMD chips don't cook themselves... period. Except when overclocked with insufficient cooling, and Intel will suffer the same fate there anyway. And any modern CPU will overheat without cooling these days, anything but some of the very low-end Atoms need active cooling.

No, intel chips start sending 0's if they overheat. The amd can't tell heat from anything, so it just keeps on going. I don't believe those were overclocked at all. They were just normal settings playing a game.

whininggit · « **Reply #110 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 15:54:15 »

Quote from: ch_123;203925

They also don't go changing the socket every few months, or require new chipsets every time a new chip comes out on an old socket... Like all those LGA775 chips.

This. My Socket AM2 (not even AM2+) MSI board which I purchased at the end of 2007 supports all the way up to the AM3 Phenom II X4 and Athlon II X4 CPUs, as long as you use a processor with maximum 95W TDP.

As for those Athlon chips without thermal diodes, that was years ago. And these days even if the thermal diode fails, there is likely to be a second diode in the motherboard socket. Besides, it is unlikely that you can burn up a modern CPU unless you are completely clueless as to how to mount a heatsink, and in that case it might be worth being taught a lesson.

ch_123 · « **Reply #111 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:02:00 »

Quote from: chimera15;203927

No, intel chips start sending 0's if they overheat.

Binary processors often send 0s during normal operating conditions too.

chimera15 · « **Reply #112 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:02:38 »

Quote from: ch_123;203925

No, the 9800GT was succeeded by the GTS250. Which was a rebranded 9800GTX+

The GTX 285 was quite expensive for what you got. The cards to get back then were either the GTX 275 or HD 4890.

Also, people wore onions on their belts because it was the style back then.

In many cases, the AMD chips represent much better value for money compared with Intel ones. They also don't go changing the socket every few months, or require new chipsets every time a new chip comes out on an old socket... Like all those LGA775 chips.

http://service.futuremark.com/hardware/graphics_cards/nvidia_geforce_gtx_275

It looks to me like they were about the same in popularity except for that one month or two when they spiked. Neither of them is anywhere near the 8800/9800 popularity...

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #113 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:05:41 »

Quote from: chimera15;203927

No, intel chips start sending 0's if they overheat.

... I.... I have nothing to say to this. It's like you're in a long discussion with someone, then you look up and it's a five year old. Of course they aren't going to change their opinion.

ch_123 · « **Reply #114 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:05:46 »

I hear Intel chips divide by zero during floating point operations.

chimera15 · « **Reply #115 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:08:49 »

Quote from: ch_123;203929

Binary processors often send 0s during normal operating conditions too.

Yeah, this is a real old argument:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mm1TUOYg_B8J:www.tomshardware.com/forum/65831-28-7ghz-there+intel+vs+amd+overheat+protection+throttle&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

I really don't care about amd. Like I said, show me a system that isn't blowing its hardware trying to keep up with a modestly clocked i7 and is cheaper for parts and I'll consider it. You can't use nvidia sli on amd boards either though right? I'd have to switch to ati crossfire? That's really the issue I have right now probably more than anything. I'd rather not switch over to ati graphics cards, as I'm relatively used to nvidia as well. I'd have no clue even where to start with ati desktop cards, haven't used them since the late 90s.

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #116 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:08:50 »

One final comment on the 9800GT nonsense...

The 9800GT performs similarly to the GT240. The GTX460 performs similarly to the GTX275. Big performance gap. The 9800GT is by no means a bad card, but you can usually get a Radeon 4850 for around the same price (performs like the GTS25), and the GTX460 is far superior overall.

ch_123 · « **Reply #117 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:10:26 »

Quote from: chimera15;203933

Yeah, this is a real old argument:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mm1TUOYg_B8J:www.tomshardware.com/forum/65831-28-7ghz-there+intel+vs+amd+overheat+protection+throttle&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

I really don't care about amd. Like I said, show me a system that isn't blowing its hardware trying to keep up with a modestly clocked i7 and is cheaper for parts and I'll consider it.

Ah, because clearly, if an old AMD chip had failings, so do modern ones too, amirite?

And why would you want SLI or Crossfire? I'd rather just set wads of cash on fire with a lighter. Same result, except I wouldnt turn my hair grey trying to get it to work in the process...

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #118 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:14:27 »

SLI and Crossfire have actually improved a lot. If you're going to do it the 5770 or GTX460 are the cards to use, they scale excellently as long as you have a large resolution (>1440x900)

ch_123 · « **Reply #119 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:15:49 »

The demanding games I play do not scale to multi-GPU setups properly.

Unless you have a 30" screen, I do not see why you'd need it anyway.

ch_123 · « **Reply #120 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:18:53 »

Quote from: chimera15;203933

Yeah, this is a real old argument:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mm1TUOYg_B8J:www.tomshardware.com/forum/65831-28-7ghz-there+intel+vs+amd+overheat+protection+throttle&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

I really don't care about amd. Like I said, show me a system that isn't blowing its hardware trying to keep up with a modestly clocked i7 and is cheaper for parts and I'll consider it. You can't use nvidia sli on amd boards either though right? I'd have to switch to ati crossfire? That's really the issue I have right now probably more than anything. I'd rather not switch over to ati graphics cards, as I'm relatively used to nvidia as well. I'd have no clue even where to start with ati desktop cards, haven't used them since the late 90s.

You should read that article properly. It isn't very pro-Intel...

chimera15 · « **Reply #121 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:22:06 »

Quote from: ch_123;203937

The demanding games I play do not scale to multi-GPU setups properly.

Unless you have a 30" screen, I do not see why you'd need it anyway.

I used sli for future proofing. For instance. Right now I have two 8600gt's in sli on one of my c2d's, and while it's nowhere near the futuremarks of my 8800 or 9800, systems it does let it keep up for most things that I do on it, and it is significantly better than one crappy 8600. It also gives me 4 monitors to play with, which I do use on this one(although not in sli then obviously).

When the prices drop or if I can get another deal on a 9800 or 8800 I'll put them in my current machines assuming the fit in the case, which they may not, I had to shoehorn the one in one case. lol

ch_123 · « **Reply #122 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:24:50 »

By the time a single graphics card is obsolete, the second hand price for a second one has usually reached a stage that it's cheaper to replace the single card with one that is about twice as fast as it. Sell your original for bonus lulz.

It also doesn't put too much load on your Chingchongic PSUs.

whininggit · « **Reply #123 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:29:14 »

Quote from: chimera15;203933

You can't use nvidia sli on amd boards either though right? I'd have to switch to ati crossfire? That's really the issue I have right now probably more than anything.

You can use an nVidia SLI on a motherboard with an nVidia nForce chipset and an AMD processor.

Having said that, I would not want to run any kind of high-end system like that on a crap PSU. I don't even run my 10 year old P3 servers with crap PSUs. Maybe that is why they have lasted 10 years.

chimera15 · « **Reply #124 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 16:38:35 »

God, I don't have crappy psu's on my c2d systems. Almost all of them are 500+ and have had good reviews. I'm just not obsessive about knowing every stat of them. Just like the one I picked here, pretty much at random, I've been pretty good at picking out ones that are reasonable quality for decent prices.

3 pages about psu's that in my mind aren't worth giving that much thought to at this point.

I have 3 desktops that I use on a daily basis. I like one to have a lot of video cards to drive the cacoon of lcds that I sit in. lol It's my media pc that I watch shows on, and comment to you guys on. That unit doesn't have to have a lot of power, but I like to switch sometimes to a single screen to play a game on it sometimes which is when the sli comes in. xfx overclocked 7600gt's and 8600's dropped below $30 a long time ago, and they work fine for the majority of apps and games in sli.

Sides they're black:

Then I have a gaming system that I have a 1080p larger lcd on, it's no 30" but it's still a decent size, and then I have a productivity unit that I do most of my schoolwork/apps on, then I have tablet pcs also driving external lcds. They're all in various stages of obsolesce and upgrade, so as one thing becomes obsolete I might switch it to another unit, and so forth. So sli just gives me another option within that framework.

gr1m · « **Reply #125 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 17:19:48 »

Wattage has nothing to do with quality. Case in point: you just bought a 900W PSU for $50. Heck, I can't find an attractive 400W unit for that cheap (for me).

chimera15 · « **Reply #126 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 17:21:21 »

Quote from: ch_123;203940

By the time a single graphics card is obsolete, the second hand price for a second one has usually reached a stage that it's cheaper to replace the single card with one that is about twice as fast as it. Sell your original for bonus lulz.

It also doesn't put too much load on your Chingchongic PSUs.

Right now for my 9800gt system I can pay 90-$100 for a second 9800gt, and probably get a decent performance. Whether they'd beat a 460 is still a question..

This thread:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/254359-33-9800gt

Suggest that two 8800gt's will beat a gtx285.

It comes down to a push really. I can sell the 9800/8800 I have, and buy a single 285, which is a lot more hassle than just buying a single 9800/8800.

The only difference would be power consumption of course, but I'd almost rather do that than try to sell the 9800's.

This thread gives a clue then, when referenced against the orb site:

http://www.tbreak.com/reviews/article.php?cat=grfx&id=636&pagenumber=2

gtx 260 on the orb site is rated at 10k marks by itself, which is different from what their scale gives...

Strange, but it should correlate to roughly the same as a single gtx260.

Now I just need a 3dmark test for the 460.

aha!

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-460-gf104-fermi,2684-7.html

So it's at about 14k for a 1gb.

Alright, so there it is in plain black and white, and colors.

9800gt in sli 10k 3dmark vantage.

gtx460 768mb 11k
gtx460 1gig 14k

The review doesn't say which 9800gt he was using though, it might be the 500mb card in which case it might be very much closer.

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #127 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 17:49:09 »

Two 8800GTs won't beat a GTX280. I've seen 9800GTs (same thing as the 8800GT; really) in SLI bench similarly to a GTX260 at best.

And memory size doesn't make much difference except at high resolutions with lots of AA.

ch_123 · « **Reply #128 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 17:58:30 »

Too bad that games have a funny habit of not getting the same performance kick from SLI that benchmarks do.

chimera15 · « **Reply #129 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 17:58:59 »

Yes, from what I'm reading most places agree the 9800sli will slightly outperform a single 260.

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1174767

That gives me a better idea where to classify a modern card at least.

I might consider just getting a gtx260. lol

http://cgi.ebay.com/invidia-GTX-260-Video-Card-/280535577552?cmd=ViewItem&pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item41513933d0

Or maybe even a 260 sli, since it looks like they're not too bad used, about $30 more than the average 9800.

The thing is I think I got my last 9800gt for like $50...so if I can get 2 9800gts for $100, it might be the only real option for me.

That would bring the cost down significantly.

Yeah see:

http://cgi.ebay.com/PNY-Nvidia-9800GT-512MB-Graphic-Card-/230499648625?cmd=ViewItem&pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item35aad98471

I'd still get over 10k 3dmarks, and be in the competitive realm for half the price of a modern retail card.

I think it's really starting to look like a push.

2 9800gts that get around 10k 3dmarks, and I get 4 video ports, but more power consumption for around $110.
1 gtx 260 for around $110 with the same 3dmarks.
or a Gtx 460 for double that price, and only about 1.5x performance.

ch_123 · « **Reply #130 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 18:07:44 »

Damn. Sounds just like what I need for that machine I have in the corner that runs benchmarking software all day.

chimera15 · « **Reply #131 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 18:17:26 »

Quote from: ch_123;203960

Damn. Sounds just like what I need for that machine I have in the corner that runs benchmarking software all day.

Yeah I know, it was clear from the first 9800sli benchmark site I gave that the games performance of the sli was very low for most of the games, although some it was clearly on spec. But that's why I was seriously considering the 260.

gr1m · « **Reply #132 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 18:20:24 »

2 9800s don't use much power. I would definitely not get a 260 though. What games do you play and what resolution?

chimera15 · « **Reply #133 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 18:22:42 »

Right now I'm just playing warrock at 1080p cause I don't have time for much else. I plan to play Fallout: New Vegas in a couple months of course which I assume uses the same old Fallout engine. Shouldn't be too intensive.

But I played crysis and medal of honor, and all the fps's that come out. I should have played bad company, but never got around to it.

Right now warrock gives me a bit of problems on the highest setting at 1080p, off and on. Might actually just be a heat issue or something with my 9800 in actuality there though, been meaning to check that, cause warrock is fairly low poly.

In warrock though I think extra framerate really helps fight lag. I really got a boost when I upgraded from the 7600's to 8800's and 9800s there, but that was prior to the season 2 upgrades coming out in that game as well, and now everything seems relatively laggy again.

Interesting:

Fallout: New Vegas
PREDICTED System Requirements*
Intel Processor   -    Core 2 Duo E6700 2.66GHz
AMD Processor   -    Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 6000+
Nvidia Graphics Card   -    Geforce 9800 GT
ATI Graphics Card   -    Radeon HD 3870
RAM Memory   -    2 GB
Hard Disk Space   -    10 GB
Direct X   -    9

Ah, this sounds more like it:

http://www.vgrequirements.info/fallout-new-vegas/

So still pretty low, I'm within specs with my current systems...

Even bad company doesn't require more than a 7800 which as I recall is a really crappy card..

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #134 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 18:35:39 »

You'll need a GTX275/GTX460/HD4890/HD5830 to max Fallout 3/New Vegas at 1080p. My HD4870 1GB (comparable to GTX260) wheezes a bit during more intensive scenes at 1680x1050, though is good for the most part.

gr1m · « **Reply #135 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 18:38:52 »

I can play Fallout 3 at 1080p with 8xAA and 15xAF on my 985MHz core 4890.

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #136 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 18:39:54 »

Sounds about right.

gr1m · « **Reply #137 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 18:43:27 »

4870s shouldn't have problems with Fallout 3 at 1080p as per Dopamin3.

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #138 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 19:10:08 »

I get about 45-55fps with my 4870 and Q9550 @3.4GHz at 1680x1050. Max framerate is GPU-limited, busy scenes it's probably the processor struggling with the physics calcs bringing it down to 30fps for a couple seconds at a time.

1680x1050 is 85% the number of pixels as 1920x1080. So assuming performance is linear, maybe 38-45fps instead of 45-55. On a 4870. Still playable, certainly, but it could certainly be a lot better. I need a framerate of at least 45 or the jerkiness becomes noticeable enough to throw me off. 30 is the minimum playable for me.

gr1m · « **Reply #139 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 19:18:47 »

3.4? On a Yorkfield? Weak.

chimera15 · « **Reply #140 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 19:20:13 »

I think a good indication that my system is too slow in Warrock or there's something majorly wrong, I'm not exactly sure what, is that I always lose in collisions, and I'll get killed even when I'm around a corner from the person shooting me, and out of their line of sight. So for instance it's like there's a shadow of my character running 2 seconds or so behind me for actual combat. It makes the game really hard to play.

I don't think it's my connection, but it may be as simple as that. I'm on high speed cable 10mbit which has always been perfectly fine, but warrock did change their servers around as well, and right now the most popular server is in Europe, so that might be the problem as well.

So perhaps the Europeans win the collisions 100% of the time because they're closer to the server? That might be an explanation that wouldn't relate to my computer.

The problem I have right now is that all my systems, even my laptops are pretty close in spec, that are capable of running that game at all, so it's not like I can fire up an older system and see if it's the same or not.

hehe

Interesting, that's when they still had the apache still on that map, and it was chapter 2...I thought they took it off before chapter 2...

elbowglue · « **Reply #141 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 19:23:44 »

Agreed. I usually run my q9550 at 4ghz, backed it off to 3.8ghz cause of some mild instability issues.

gr1m · « **Reply #142 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 19:25:45 »

3.8? On a Yorkfield? Weak!

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #143 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 20:44:31 »

Quote from: gr1m;203974

3.4? On a Yorkfield? Weak.

3.7GHz in winter. In summer it gets too warm. I can give you my validation for 4GHz... At 82C.

(Thermaltake V1 suuuuuuucks)

EverythingIBM · « **Reply #144 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 21:30:04 »

Quote from: ch_123;203932

I hear Intel chips divide by zero during floating point operations.

My pentium 2 does that when I run castlevania for MS DOS.

Quote from: chimera15;203927

No, intel chips start sending 0's if they overheat. The amd can't tell heat from anything, so it just keeps on going. I don't believe those were overclocked at all. They were just normal settings playing a game.

Intel chips (as tom's hardware demonstrated) usually do slow things down when heat gets too intensive.

Quote from: gr1m;203921

The most typical fanboy justification: "I had so much problems with Company X 47 years ago so it must mean their products are horrible." You know what, my Pentium 4 rig sucked **** and that doesn't mean i7 sucks ****.

Also, like I said, for gaming purposes, a Phenom II system is no worse than i7. There was a review, if I can find it, that showed a Phenom II actually edging out an i7 in games because of some funky architecture. Buying a 9800GT is a foolproof way of sacrificing gaming capability though. And if the whole shebang fries, even better. I'm sure a working Phenom II system is more capable in games than a dead i7 system.

I'm running on my pentium 4 right now. It runs starcraft 2 perfectly fine, the only problem is my NVIDIA quadro... but I'll replace that piece of rubbish some day.

Quote from: kishy;203919

VLC Media Player.

Buggy as all hell - don't listen to anyone who says otherwise - but the format support is awesome.

I like media player classic better. I hate .MOV format period, very horrible codec. I don't hate it for the sake of being apple, it's just annoying and so hungry file-size wise.

Quote from: chimera15;203945

God, I don't have crappy psu's on my c2d systems. Almost all of them are 500+ and have had good reviews. I'm just not obsessive about knowing every stat of them. Just like the one I picked here, pretty much at random, I've been pretty good at picking out ones that are reasonable quality for decent prices.

3 pages about psu's that in my mind aren't worth giving that much thought to at this point.

I have 3 desktops that I use on a daily basis. I like one to have a lot of video cards to drive the cacoon of lcds that I sit in. lol It's my media pc that I watch shows on, and comment to you guys on. That unit doesn't have to have a lot of power, but I like to switch sometimes to a single screen to play a game on it sometimes which is when the sli comes in. xfx overclocked 7600gt's and 8600's dropped below $30 a long time ago, and they work fine for the majority of apps and games in sli.

Sides they're black:
Show Image

Then I have a gaming system that I have a 1080p larger lcd on, it's no 30" but it's still a decent size, and then I have a productivity unit that I do most of my schoolwork/apps on, then I have tablet pcs also driving external lcds. They're all in various stages of obsolesce and upgrade, so as one thing becomes obsolete I might switch it to another unit, and so forth. So sli just gives me another option within that framework.

The new quadro I have has a little dinky fan like that, it sucks and is noisy cause it's so damn small.

Yeah, after reading all of this, I think people get way too crazy about PSUs. It's ironic since people get mad at me when I use old equipment and I haven't "upgraded," well what's the point of buying quality parts when you're going to chuck them in 2 - 5 years?

Quote from: gr1m;203952

Wattage has nothing to do with quality. Case in point: you just bought a 900W PSU for $50. Heck, I can't find an attractive 400W unit for that cheap (for me).

The more watts you're dealing with, the more components you need to control the higher current.
If you can't find a 400 Watt power supply for $50 or under, there's a real problem. Phaedrus even posted a link to some zippy PSUs which were under $50 if my memory serves.

So... the real problem you have is psychological. You think by paying more money you get something better quality... not always so. I got a lot of quality things for free even.

Quote from: Phaedrus2129;203985

3.7GHz in winter. In summer it gets too warm. I can give you my validation for 4GHz... At 82C.

Go run your computer in the basement.
And I never find it particularly too warm, it's actually very cold right now and raining every day this week.

Phaedrus2129 · « **Reply #145 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 21:45:43 »

I don't get crazy about PSUs... I get smart about PSUs, and then have to correct both the crazy people and the dumb people. It sucks, it's like negotiating a peace treaty between the Israelis and Palestinians while simultaneously plotting to take over the region, only with insults and ignorance instead of bombs and guns.

You mentioned the Zippy 300W for Pentium 3/Athlon XP systems?
https://www.jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&productId=2077482&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&ddkey=https:CookieLogon
Twenty five buckeroonies. Plus a couple dollars shipping, it was $31 for me.

gr1m · « **Reply #146 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 22:08:01 »

Quote from: EverythingIBM;203991

So... the real problem you have is psychological.

So quite possibly the craziest person (not in a good way) I've ever seen in the world has deemed that I have a psychological problem.

This is not good.

hyperlinked · « **Reply #147 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 22:16:47 »

Quote from: gr1m;203999

So quite possibly the craziest person (not in a good way) I've ever seen in the world has deemed that I have a psychological problem.

This is not good.

In a world that's gone crazy, the only sane people are the ones who are crazy. You might be ok.

EverythingIBM · « **Reply #148 on:** Sun, 18 July 2010, 22:18:08 »

Quote from: hyperlinked;204002

In a world that's gone crazy, the only sane people are the ones who are crazy. You might be ok.

Crazy people use these:

williamjoseph · « **Reply #149 on:** Mon, 19 July 2010, 01:03:26 »

"shutters" I reformatted one of those to xp

News:

Author Topic: graphics cards (Read 80895 times)