Official PC Gamers Topic V3

[Drunk Russian 9]

OMG I'm so mad this went out of stock during TG savings . . . . f*ck

 

Antec

[Abel.]

Well...

 

@Ronnyboy - ???????!!??????

If find it very amusing that even on you're first post you said "well".

 

OnTopic:Yeah I'm buying IV, if they make it run on an 8500gt.

Freak, please buy a new card, it causes me physical pain to hear: 'AMD Phenom, 4 gigs of RAM and...sh*tty old 8500GT

in the same sentence...

 

By the way, I used Riva Tuner and the good ol' BIOS for the RAM OC (667 to 800).

I can't, I don't have the money to even buy an 8600gt.And I have an Intel Core 2 Quad not AMD Phenom, this is the second time I'm saying this.

Oh, I heard you had the Phenom, sorry. Damn, with a new GPU you'd have an awesome PC.

[mkey82]

 

Indeed so, listen to us instead 

I second that. We know everything

 

 

Yeah, I was told I could overclock my laptop's CPU, but I even knew you couldn't do that without melting the laptop.

Laptops in general case (those cheaper ones) are just not suited for gaming purposes. I'm not sure how will it react to overclocking as you can't do anything to improve the cooling capabilities of your machine (apart from playing in a freezer ).

[kingvercetti]

 

I've preordered on Steam.

Ditto. Free Vice City ftw. It's gonna be bloody painful to download though, even if they do compress it. Shame it doesn't come with a pre-load option.

 

@Ronnyboy: Chances are you can't overclock your laptop, being limited upgrade wise they tend to have locked BIOSes, saves them the trouble of people whinging about massive overheating because they don't know what they're doing.

 

I tried overclocking my 4870 but what CCC considered stable kinda wasn't, and the fan detection whatsit seems perfectly happy to just let the card cook itself, so I don't bother. When I get round to it though I do want to get a custom cooler with two 92mm fans on, see how far I can push it. My Q6600 is happily running along at 3GHz though which I'm glad about, I reckon if I'd have spent a bit extra on a better cooler I could probably get 3.5 on air.

Anyway, I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that I can run IV maxed out with 4xAA, if I can it'll keep me happy, I hate having to disable AA, makes everything look nasty. But looking at the requirements, it seems pretty CPU intensive rather than GPU, so regardless I should be fine.

Edited November 29, 2008 by kingvercetti

[007 RoadRunner]

I'm thinking of buying a new video card for my PC, and maybe add 1 gig of RAM.

Specs:

OS: Vista SP1 32 bit

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 @2.66 GHz

RAM: 2.00 GB

GPU: Nvidia Geforce 8600 GS 256 MB

 

What card would you recommend which isn't too expensive but can run new games like GTA IV on at least high at 1440*900 resolution ?

I've been lokking at the 8800 GTX, 9600 GT and 9800 GT. the 9800 is a little over my budget and I don't know if the 9600 GT is better or worse than the 8800 GTX.

[3niX]

Well...

 

Go for the 8800GTX if you can... another stick of RAM cant hurt either.

[Brad]

What PC games could I get?

 

PC Specs:

 

OS: Vista SP1 32 Bit

CPU: Intel Quad Core i7 CPU

RAM: 4.00GB

GPU: Nvidia GTX 280 1GB

[Abel.]

What PC games could I get?

 

PC Specs:

 

OS: Vista SP1 32 Bit

CPU: Intel Quad Core i7 CPU

RAM: 4.00GB

GPU: Nvidia GTX 280 1GB

Maybe Doom?

 

 

 

Awesome PC, you lucky bas-

[JostVice]

What PC games could I get?

 

PC Specs:

 

OS: Vista SP1 32 Bit

CPU: Intel Quad Core i7 CPU

RAM: 4.00GB

GPU: Nvidia GTX 280 1GB

The i7 CPU is a new gen of quadcores, right? I heard about it, but couldn't rmember.

 

Anyway, your pc is hot

[jelly]

 

What PC games could I get?

 

PC Specs:

 

OS: Vista SP1 32 Bit

CPU: Intel Quad Core i7 CPU

RAM: 4.00GB

GPU: Nvidia GTX 280 1GB

[Abel.]

What PC games could I get?

 

PC Specs:

 

OS: Vista SP1 32 Bit

CPU: Intel Quad Core i7 CPU

RAM: 4.00GB

GPU: Nvidia GTX 280 1GB

Hahaha, how is the new I7 anyway?

[Mike Tequeli]

I'd kill for a game of pong on my computer. I'm serious.

 

I can't even get any new games until I get a new hard drive, f*cking 160gb is puny. Does anybody know if the difference between 7200rpm and 10k is worth noting?

[kingvercetti]

 

What PC games could I get?

 

PC Specs:

 

OS: Vista SP1 32 Bit

CPU: Intel Quad Core i7 CPU

RAM: 4.00GB

GPU: Nvidia GTX 280 1GB

Just to mention, unless that was a typo, using 32-bit Vista you're losing usage of a huge chunk of your RAM and VRAM, you should really consider 64-bit. Nice machine though, bet it cost a tidy sum.

[Neon25]

I'm thinking about upgrading my CPU.

 

Should I pick Q6600 or Q8200? The latter is surprisingly cheaper (around 27 USD less than Q6600).

 

I heard Q6600 overclocks more, but I'm not that much into overclocking.

 

The 8200 is known to be quiet, cool and it has bigger FSB, but on the other hand it has half the cache of Q6600.

 

As I said, I'm not into overclocking that much, so which one would you recommend?

[jelly]

The biggest drawback of the Q8200 is the low multiplier, but if you're not going to overclock it means diddly squat. It's got a bit less cache as you mentioned but it also has SSE4 instructions and lower power consumption+heat..

 

http://en.hardspell.com/doc/showcont.asp?n...817&pageid=3124

 

[Neon25]

I asked the same question on a different forum, and they advised Core2Duo if I use computer mainly for gaming. I looked through some Core2Duos. Which one you would recommend? Judging by the prices and my current money available, I'm thinking about either Core2Duo 8500 or Core2Duo 8400.

 

And jallar, thanks a lot for reply.

[TheSamurai Hobo]

E8400

 

the 8500 is only a .16ghz difference

[Neon25]

I noticed you have E8400, are you satisfied by its performance?

[TheSamurai Hobo]

Very

[Drunk Russian 9]

E8400

 

the 8500 is only a .16ghz difference

I got the E8500 in a box, Its only about 15 dollars more.

[jelly]

45nm Core 2 Duos are very good. You could also save some by getting an E7200, they still overclock past 3GHz consistently according to reports.

[mkey82]

All in all, a good c2d is better for gaming then the c2q. However, I have the C2Q9300 and I'm very happy with it as I often have loads of task running in the background while gaming and this puppy handles it perfectly.

 

One thing I don't understand. I read at Tom's hardware that this CPU should run on 4GHz without breaking a sweat, but the low multiplier is killing that option as MBO just can't support that high FSB speed.. So I want to know why did Intel choose to go that way?

[Otter]

Still running my e6600 at 3.6 Ghtz, a year later. Given me no problems.

[Democrab]

I have a Core 2 DUo E8300 at 3.55Ghz, Plenty fast.

[jelly]

One thing I don't understand. I read at Tom's hardware that this CPU should run on 4GHz without breaking a sweat, but the low multiplier is killing that option as MBO just can't support that high FSB speed.. So I want to know why did Intel choose to go that way?

Haha, you think Intel cares about overclocking? In their eyes (and most consumers' eyes) the CPU is going to run at the frequency it was delivered at. If anything good overclocking cannibalizes the sales of their higher priced CPUs.

[mkey82]

One thing I don't understand. I read at Tom's hardware that this CPU should run on 4GHz without breaking a sweat, but the low multiplier is killing that option as MBO just can't support that high FSB speed.. So I want to know why did Intel choose to go that way?

Haha, you think Intel cares about overclocking? In their eyes (and most consumers' eyes) the CPU is going to run at the frequency it was delivered at. If anything good overclocking cannibalizes the sales of their higher priced CPUs.

I expressed myself poorly.

 

I don't think Intel wants to create good overclockable CPU's (even though those that do overclock well are bound to be sold down to the last unit; for example in my country you can't find any Q6600 CPU's on stock). My question regarded the reason they went down the path of a lower multiplier. Any technical reason? Or it was done intentionally to kill the OC abilities of that CPU?

[Democrab]

One thing I don't understand. I read at Tom's hardware that this CPU should run on 4GHz without breaking a sweat, but the low multiplier is killing that option as MBO just can't support that high FSB speed.. So I want to know why did Intel choose to go that way?

Haha, you think Intel cares about overclocking? In their eyes (and most consumers' eyes) the CPU is going to run at the frequency it was delivered at. If anything good overclocking cannibalizes the sales of their higher priced CPUs.

I expressed myself poorly.

 

I don't think Intel wants to create good overclockable CPU's (even though those that do overclock well are bound to be sold down to the last unit; for example in my country you can't find any Q6600 CPU's on stock). My question regarded the reason they went down the path of a lower multiplier. Any technical reason? Or it was done intentionally to kill the OC abilities of that CPU?

To lower the speed, for those who don't know about Overclocking, getting a 2.8Ghz chip is way better than getting a 2.5Ghz chip.

[Ronnyboy]

So, GTA IV is now out, and I hope that the guys who were posting there specs can run it without a hitch, and I am unfortunately un-able to play it (like an 8200M could play GTA IV), so now I have to wait half a year to get a new gaming PC, and lord knows what I will get then.

[Picolini]

You mean GTA IV for the PC is out now? Isn't that in like 2 days still?

[Democrab]

Yeah, its out today for some countries, tomorrow for Aussies and Steam.

 

 

There's already an iso on The Pirate Bay.