new computer, opinions?

[exessity]

Originally Posted by SilvaWarrior

^^

seems like we are talking with someone who doesn't know sh1t about computers, and is either troll or just stupid.

[Aztec]

^ No, that's Angelic.

Angelic, it's so smart how you ignore the countless articles that review whether DDR3 is worth it.

[AngelicXx]

Most of them say that the 5-7% increase in overall performance isn't worth it.
But since I have the budget, why not.

[jappeX]

That 10,000:1 sure is a high contrast ratio for a normal monitor.. What model is that? How much is it?

By the way, why do people insist on going nVidia.. 4870 and 9800GTX+ are both excactly 228€ (yes, literally the same price) here, is there some price difference in U.S then? 4870 is still a little faster which makes it worth it imo.

[AngelicXx]

Monitor is LG and costed me 289.99

[SilvaWarrior]

Originally Posted by exessity

seems like we are talking with someone who doesn't know sh1t about computers, and is either troll or just stupid.

How so? please if you don't want to commentate on something usefull then don't commentate, for all I know who the heck are you? Here I was talking about duo core vs quad and you come here trying to get a forum cool boy boost.

[Aztec]

I actually wouldn't buy anything listed in this thread, assuming you have a large budget.

Wait for Core i7/Nehalem in October, which clock for clock gives a 30% boost over Penryn. It's also 45nm, probably will overclock very easily. And the front side bus is finally leaving so you'll need to buy a new motherboard.

And there's supposed to be a nice LCD monitor with a 120hz refresh rate that should be released soon. Assuming you haven't bought yours of course, too lazy to read if you did.

[exessity]

Originally Posted by AngelicXx

Monitor is LG and costed me 289.99

lg measures contrast differently, so they they can avertise higher contrast ratios than measuring with standards. So stupid people buy them and think they are specially good. So yeah as i said, your monitor sucks.

[exessity]

Originally Posted by SilvaWarrior

How so? please if you don't want to commentate on something usefull then don't commentate, for all I know who the heck are you? Here I was talking about duo core vs quad and you come here trying to get a forum cool boy boost.

First of all, he doen't have a clue that how lg measures these and these sh1ts, he insists buying those, he acutally doesn't have a clue about any of hes parts, he really thinks he needs higher mem speed for higher overclock or something. He is just. stupid.

[Mr.Lucifer]

Originally Posted by Kustomize

I lol'ed super hard when I read Angelic's post arguing why DDR3 is better, because it has better timings, LOL.


DDR3 timings start at like 9-9-9-24 @ lets say 1333 MHZ
Put that against DDR2 - where you could get 5-5-5-15 @ 1005 MHZ (that's my memory, stock at 4-4-4-15 @ 800 MHZ).
And yes, the lower the timings, the better, so you comparing timings, was worthless, roflmfao gave me a pro laugh.

If you just wanted to waste cash, waste it on something that the cash would be worth it even a little.

Like, get some cool sht for your case, or just spend more on the Video Card, will give you a much better performance in gaming, if your not into any sort of programing, you don't even need to worry about Memory, as it doesn't do much at all when gaming, it's mostly always the Video card, memory does help, not a lot. But since you are, that is completely upto you, I don't see why you need to waste 100 bucks so you don't have to wait 4 more seconds rofl.

Get a good mobo, waste cash on that, but pls, dont waste 100+ on DDR3, i will literally feel sorry for you and cry to death my friend.


And the post above me, you bought a 1000 watt power supply for better overclocking? LOL.

Nice build btw, could of gotten way better Video Cards, still not bad.

Memory is important for games. My 2 GBs is a bottleneck in new games like AoC.

If his Mobo is DDR3 only, then paying a little bit more for DDR3 is perfectly OK. DDR3 is the future so if he is going to upgrade later it is a good investment.

My PSU limits my CPU overclock.

Originally Posted by jappeX

That 10,000:1 sure is a high contrast ratio for a normal monitor.. What model is that? How much is it?

Possibly dynamic contrast. I have it on my monitor.

[exessity]

Originally Posted by AngelicXx

Nope not planning on SLI, don't have a real budget at the moment.

But you still insist getting worthless ddr3 memory.

Originally Posted by AngelicXx

DDR3 is incredibly worth it, going from 800 to 1600 is a huge boost.

no theres no boost, theres just that u just dont get this. no huge boost or anything.

Originally Posted by AngelicXx

The CPU is running faster and at a higher base GHz than the Q6600.

base ghz olololol. cpu frequency consists from bus speed multiplied by multiplier. and what u just called "base ghz" is called FSB. (FSB is 4x times bus speed aka quad pumped)

Originally Posted by AngelicXx

The Q6600 only runs at 1033Mhz, while the Q9550 runs at 1333Mhz

No, actually Q6600 runs at 266(=bus speed) multiplied by 9 (=its multiplier) =2394 MHz. While Q9550 runs at 333 multiplied by 8,5 = 2830,5 MHz.

Originally Posted by AngelicXx

The base of course also at 2.83 vs 2.4 Ghz respectively. Reviewing the motherboard the Q6600 is just not fit, it runs to slow. The FSB is just too slow.

base, its like bunker?

Originally Posted by AngelicXx

Honestly, I think I could push it that much. The Case has dual 12mm fans and I have a special heatsink designed to keep quad cores extremely chill.

desinged for quad core huh, you have read too much marketing sh1t.

Originally Posted by AngelicXx

Two of my friends have both had BAD BAD experiences with EVGA, so honestly I couldn't bring myself to get one. I am trying Zoltec, which has incredibly good rep, selling overclocked video cards. The price jump from the 9800GTX and the 9800GTX+ is just insane. Like 200+ dollars more. I could just buy another 9800GTX and SLI it, though I don't want to since no game could really take advantage of all of that graphics.

if you would know things, you would go with hd4850 over 9800gtx(+)

Originally Posted by AngelicXx

The monitor is a monster:

10,000:1 Contrast
2MS
22 inch
1680x1050 native resolution
65~75 Refresh rate

again that markiting bullsh1t jesus. let me say it again: You don't know anything about computers. ahh thanks

[Captain_Cool]

virus scan

[Akatsuki_Ichigo]

Only one piece of advice for you...

USE XP
USE XP
USE XP
USE XP
USE XP

Like I just said in another thread, Vista will suck your RAM dry, no matter how much you have, so you'll have worse gameplay than XP, unless you have a rediculously strong Video Card.

[raeon]

I have Vista and I never lagged > After using Vista, thinking back on XP, yeah...XP was ugly. LOL.

Vista Interface > XP

[Aztec]

I prefer the good old windows 98 classic theme.