Hardware choice!?

  • Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!

    Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.

Ba]V[sE

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2002
2,333
63
Sweden
I´m on my way order some new stuff, a little upgrade so to speak!

Motherboard: Asus P5K, P35, Socket-775, DDR2, ATX, GbLAN, PCI-Ex16, 105 euro
Mem: Crucial DDR2 BallistiX PC6400 2048MB CL4 ,Kit w/two BallistiX 1024MB's, 65 euro
GFX: Gainward GeForce 8800GT 512MB GDDR3, PCI-Express 2.0, 2xDVI/HDCP, 256bit, 220 euro
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz Socket LGA775, 8MB OR Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 3.0GHz 1333Mhz Socket LGA775, 4MB, 230 euro both
Midi Tower: Cooler Master Centurion 534 Svart, 65 euro

From my computer that I move over:
PSU I have a Seasonic 500w, (380w on 12v)
HD I use my old sata disk 500gb 7200rpm

Questions:
1: I cant choose CPU, duo core or quad core.. its almost exactly same price also
2: Is my PSU enuff?
3: What soundcard is money worthy, I only use headspeakers!
 
Go for a Quad.
If you'll have a good cooler (e.g. scythe), it'll be possible to overclock such a cpu up to 3 GHz.
But new processors (Penryns) will be launched within the next 2 months, i would wait for them.

About your soundcard:
If you use only headspeakers, a full HD soundcard would be overpowered imo.
Onboard-sound will do a fine job for your purposes.
If you are still using XP the Audigy series is still enough, with EAX5 support und handy new features.
If you've Vista as OS, then a Creative X-FI card is the nonplusultra.

About your PSU:
Should be enough, although for a quad+8800 system it's adviceable to have more power.
What's the Amperevalue on the 12V line?

8800GT:
Hmm a 8800GT gets very hot, meaning that your case-temp will increase. If you've some bucks left, go for the new GTS. It's faster than the GT and an "old" GTX, plus a new GTS doesn't get as hot as a 8800GT.
 
Last edited:
gfx: XFX GeForce 8800GTS 600M 640MB XT GDDR3, PCI-Express, 2xDVI/HDTV/HDCP, 112-SP, 320 euro
sound: Creative SB Audigy SE PCI, 7.1 Surround, 24-bit/96KHz, Retail, 35 euro
cooler: Scythe Mugen CPU Kylare, 120mm fläkt, Socket 478/775/754/939/940/AM2, 43 euro

What about that? ^

But does quad actually needs to OC? not really keen on OC computers they tend to not play well with some games.. :satan:
 
Personally I would get an 8800 GT with one of these and one of these because I don't want my gfx card sounding like a boeing 747 taking off.
 
well im about to buy some new comp stuff as well. i am going for the e6750 2x2,67 ghz, 2gig ram, also a p35 board and a 8800gt. dunno yet if i will get a cooler for the gfx as well.
as far as i know there are no/less games and apps that can play well with a quad core, so i'll wait till they are way cheaper and i could replace the c2d anytime.
think about to get a 550w psu. i think that is recommended nowadays and its also a standard.
 
Ba]V[sE;1437205 said:
gfx: XFX GeForce 8800GTS 600M 640MB XT GDDR3, PCI-Express, 2xDVI/HDTV/HDCP, 112-SP, 320 euro
Don't get fooled mate.
The old GTS are based on teh G80-chip, has a bigger energy consumption and got 96 SP.
Available versions: 320MB and 640MB.
The card you posted is just a variation of the "old" GTS, with the amount of Steamprocessors of a 8800GT.
(tbh didn't know that this is possible tho)

Don't get me wrong, my "old" GTS is a fine card, silent and fast, but i would never buy me a new "old" GTS when the new ones will be launched soon anyway.

The new GTS is based on teh new G92-chip (meaning less heat and less power consumption) and has 128 SP.
Available versions: 512MB (and rumours speak about a 1024MB version soon aswell)

Take a look here, for an Nvidia overview of the 8er-family
Although the bandwith is the same, the texture fillrate, the clocks and the amount of steamprocessors indicates, that this will be the next top-card.

One negative point has the new GTS: It ain't available much yet and it costs about 120 euros more than a GT.
But in my opinion it's worth to spent 120 euro more compared to a GT.
The GT is hot, more noisy and not as fast as the new GTS will be.

Ba]V[sE;1437205 said:
sound: Creative SB Audigy SE PCI, 7.1 Surround, 24-bit/96KHz, Retail, 35 euro
Well, if you like to hear advanced EAX-effects (everything above EAX2.0), this is a good & cheap choice imo.

If you just wanna hear sound, go for Onboard.
Ba]V[sE;1437205 said:
cooler: Scythe Mugen CPU Kylare, 120mm fläkt, Socket 478/775/754/939/940/AM2, 43 euro
the Mugen is a famous and good cooler.

Ba]V[sE;1437205 said:
But does quad actually needs to OC? not really keen on OC computers they tend to not play well with some games.. :satan:
Well, depend how you overclock the CPU.
If you overclock it "primestable" (meaning that you run Prime95 for some hours without interrupting and without having errors) no games will have troubles with overclocking.
 
640mb on this GTS must mean its the old one yes, the new one has 512mb :satan:
 
Last edited:
lol nice pick! :) :satan:

well im about to buy some new comp stuff as well. i am going for the e6750 2x2,67 ghz, 2gig ram, also a p35 board and a 8800gt. dunno yet if i will get a cooler for the gfx as well.
as far as i know there are no/less games and apps that can play well with a quad core, so i'll wait till they are way cheaper and i could replace the c2d anytime.
think about to get a 550w psu. i think that is recommended nowadays and its also a standard.
 
Im confused, admittedly im not fully up to date with allt he new cores but here goes, the 8800GT is G92, the new 8800GTS is G92, they both have 512MB except the clock speeds are slightly higher on the GTS although usually its still lower than the multitude of OC GT cards on the market atm.

The GT uses less power than the newer GTS (due to clock speeds) which is why they put on a smaller heatsink for reference design, ok that may be noisier.the GT should cost a lot less, again ok the prices are being ramped up due to demand and supply issues. What other differences are there to warrant the price difference?

The difference in performance isnt much, in fact if I was to guess nvidias marketting plans I would say they just realised how popular the new GT card is so they are backtracking, theyll release the 512MB and maybe a 1024MB GTS cards on the G92 core and downgrade the GT so its only available in 256MB versions.
When the prices fall back to what they should be for GT cards Id be hard pushed to recommend a new GTS over a GT, and as the GTS isnt available yet that would be a deal breaker for me
 
Ba]V[sE;1437227 said:
edited too :P


Im confused, admittedly im not fully up to date with allt he new cores but here goes, the 8800GT is G92, the new 8800GTS is G92, they both have 512MB except the clock speeds are slightly higher on the GTS although usually its still lower than the multitude of OC GT cards on the market atm.

The GT uses less power than the newer GTS (due to clock speeds) which is why they put on a smaller heatsink for reference design, ok that may be noisier.the GT should cost a lot less, again ok the prices are being ramped up due to demand and supply issues. What other differences are there to warrant the price difference?

The difference in performance isnt much, in fact if I was to guess nvidias marketting plans I would say they just realised how popular the new GT card is so they are backtracking, theyll release the 512MB and maybe a 1024MB GTS cards on the G92 core and downgrade the GT so its only available in 256MB versions.
When the prices fall back to what they should be for GT cards Id be hard pushed to recommend a new GTS over a GT, and as the GTS isnt available yet that would be a deal breaker for me
Well, nvidias product policy is insane.
No idea why they didn't publish the new 8800gts as 8900gts. Anyway i don't agree with you that there ain't big performance differences between a GT and a new GTS.

The new GTS has more Steamprocessors, and higher clocks (especially the Shaderclock!) by default.
Due this two facts the new GTS will be much faster in shader intensiv games (like Crysis) compared to a GT.
According to several comments a GT were up to 95°C hot in stresstests. No room for overclocking there, unlike the new GTS with a bigger cooling block.
 
Last edited:
rt bamze :P

well im about to buy some new comp stuff as well. i am going for the e6750 2x2,67 ghz, 2gig ram, also a p35 board and a 8800gt. dunno yet if i will get a cooler for the gfx as well.
as far as i know there are no/less games and apps that can play well with a quad core, so i'll wait till they are way cheaper and i could replace the c2d anytime.
think about to get a 550w psu. i think that is recommended nowadays and its also a standard.

Many video-, picture and even some music-apps already benefit from quadcores.
Not much games yet. Only Crysis pops into my mind atm.

Coz of the fact that the Q6600 becomes so famous, maybe this will change during the next half year.
 
The new GTS has more Steamprocessors, and higher clocks (especially the Shaderclock!) by default.
Due this two facts the new GTS will be much faster in shader intensiv games (like Crysis) compared to a GT.
According to several comments a GT were up to 95°C hot in stresstests. No room for overclocking there, unlike the new GTS with a bigger cooling block.

Have you got some links for these stress tests? I've seen load tests in shuttles with GT's that have lower temps than that. I admit the stock coolers on the GT are wank but you can buy a better cooler for much less than buying a GTS.

If I was gonna pay that much for a GTS I might as well spent the bit extra and get a GTX.
 
Have you got some links for these stress tests? I've seen load tests in shuttles with GT's that have lower temps than that. I admit the stock coolers on the GT are wank but you can buy a better cooler for much less than buying a GTS.
was in some user posts (at computerbase.de and pcgames.de). cba searching this posts.

Therefore i found a test at Tomshardware.de
http://www.tomshardware.com/de/Geforce-8800GT-Dauertest,testberichte-239870.html
An overclocked model 670/975 (default: 600/900) reaches up to 95 degrees.
(sry just in german)

If I was gonna pay that much for a GTS I might as well spent the bit extra and get a GTX.
Buying a GTX ain't adviceable.
First of all, the core is made in G80-architecture and a normal 8800GT alrdy reaches the performance of such a card in most resolutions.
The upcoming new GTS will be faster and will outperform a GTX.


edit:

found a nice test:
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1234/nvidia_geforce_8800gts_512mb_g92_tested/index.html
 
Last edited:
tweaktown's review compares cards from different manufacturers .... hardly a valid test.

the tomshardware one - did they overclock the GT or was it bought as OC'd. I would be surprised if a manufacturer would sell a card that would run at 95 degrees without putting a better cooler on it.

If you're going to go the whole G92 route they why not just wait until a 1024MB 8800 GTX comes out, sure it will cost more but if ur buying a GTS ur not saving money anyway.

The best bang per buck is on the GT and I can't find anyone that has the g92 gts in stock so if ur gonna wait then wait for a significant improvement, not just a few more stream processors. Also it doesn't take up 2 pci-e slots ;)

IMO,

it's your money in the end though you gotta make the decision :).
 
im getting a new computer soon aswell but the thing i wanna do is keep the same computer for at least 4 years.

I've asked some advice to Squirrel since im not really into checking what technology is being developped and whats better then what etc...

So basically after reading this thread i'd like to know if buying these would be sorta stupid...

CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 Kentsfield 2.66GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80562Q6700
535$ (prices in CAD)
I want to get my computer this month and not in february so I guess I wont wait for penryn.
I also don't plan on overclocking it and want to keep that CPU for 4 years so is this a good choice?

vid card: EVGA 768-P2-N831-AR GeForce 8800GTX Superclocked 768MB 384-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card
550$
many talk about GT and GTS, but surely GTX must have something for it since it costs more, what are the advantages? :/

RAM: Crucial Ballistix 4GB (4 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)
190$
I just thought of getting 4 gig cuz the ram is "so cheap" atm..... and i plan on running xp (even if it doesnt support 4 gb of ram) untill they either tweak vista to make it non shitty or release a new windows. Is it really a waste to get 4 gb of ram if i plan on keeping my computer for a long time?

rest of specs arent really important, maybe just wondering on the LCD monitors, are they really as good as CRT for games? Im thinking of getting like this one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001096

So should I spend more on a better LCD monitor to have better image quality and less on the CPU/RAM/GPU or does this system look ok, im ready to pay that much but not more, and if paying less for the same performance durability etc is possible well its always nice to know :)
 
Last edited:
Aslong we keep it constructive, argueing aint that bad ;)

tweaktown's review compares cards from different manufacturers .... hardly a valid test.
Nvidia gives the reference-model and most manufacturers just paint their logo on the heatsink.
So afterall you won't find huge differences among manufacturers.
Ofc there are few manufacturers with individual versions (e.g. XFX). :rolleyes:

Overall i would say that this test is (or atleast: could be ;)) valid

why not just wait until a 1024MB 8800 GTX comes out
There won't be any new GTX with G92-architecture, that's why ;)

it's your money in the end though you gotta make the decision :).
Aslong he aint that crazy and buys an Ultra, i agree :)

Anyhow, guess we gave Bamze and others alot of uneccessary text with even more unecessary information. ;)



im getting a new computer soon aswell but the thing i wanna do is keep the same computer for at least 4 years.

I've asked some advice to Squirrel since im not really into checking what technology is being developped and whats better then what etc...

So basically after reading this thread i'd like to know if buying these would be sorta stupid...

CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 Kentsfield 2.66GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80562Q6700
535$ (prices in CAD)
I want to get my computer this month and not in february so I guess I wont wait for penryn.
I also don't plan on overclocking it and want to keep that CPU for 4 years so is this a good choice?
If you want to use your CPU for 4 years, a quad is a must buy.
The next years games and application will support quads for sure.

But i wouldn't buy a Q6700.
A Q6600 is up to 30% cheaper and can be overclocked to 2.66 GHz very safe and easy.

vid card: EVGA 768-P2-N831-AR GeForce 8800GTX Superclocked 768MB 384-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card
550$
many talk about GT and GTS, but surely GTX must have something for it since it costs more, what are the advantages? :/
550$ for a GTX is way too expensive.

To Show you the difference:
Prices from Amazon:
GTX: about $535.99
GT: about $299.99

You prolly see the difference. 1 GTX is slightly faster than a GT-card (check benchmarks), but is almost 50% more expensiv.
So in ur case i would go whether for 1 GT.........or wait for a new GTS, that is even faster and still cheaper than a GTX (;))

RAM: Crucial Ballistix 4GB (4 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)
190$
I just thought of getting 4 gig cuz the ram is "so cheap" atm..... and i plan on running xp (even if it doesnt support 4 gb of ram) untill they either tweak vista to make it non shitty or release a new windows. Is it really a waste to get 4 gb of ram if i plan on keeping my computer for a long time?

Well, the answer depending what you planning to do with your PC.

Let's use a timemachine:
It's december 2011 now.
You are still using WinXP, just write letters and surf the net.
You are happy with 2GB.

You changed to Vista or Windows 7, you do video editing or run different virtual machine at the same time.
2 GB aint enough

Get 4GB, like you said, RAM is very cheap atm.
Even if you've a 32bit Operating-system, many mainboards have the possibility to set 4 GB to 3.2 GB, so you lose only 800 MB.

rest of specs arent really important, maybe just wondering on the LCD monitors, are they really as good as CRT for games? Im thinking of getting like this one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001096

So should I spend more on a better LCD monitor to have better image quality and less on the CPU/RAM/GPU or does this system look ok, im ready to pay that much but not more, and if paying less for the same performance durability etc is possible well its always nice to know :)
We use only Samsung monitors (TFT and CRTs) at work. They have a good quality.
Well ofc when you run TFTs not in the native resolution they get blurry, but guess you alrdy knew that.

If you rly wanna (or have to) work with your PC, i can recommend a 2nd TFT. Really Really handy.
 
thx bart

i do plan on making some video editing when i get this computer.....a new ut movie with online shots i got quite a few funny moments demoed up and for my last movie 50 min rendering time for a 3 minutes sequence was like :mad: especially when i realised i hadnt checked in the sound track in premiere and had to re-render the whole thing again :bang:

3 questions still
1) What are the advantages of GTX over current GT or GTS, is it more silent, more durable? or only gives a few more points on the benchmark thingy..

2) When is that new faster yet cheaper GTS coming out?

3) why 2 TFT LCD ?????

edit: for question 1 and 2
i found that on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_8_Series
i suppose your talking about the GeForce 8800 GTS rev 2....coming out the 11th of december, if so, I can wait 5 days then :D especially is it is cheaper like you said..
question 1 sorta still stands though since I dont know what most of the numbers mean on that wikipedia tabloid thingy or is benchmarks the only thing your looking for in a vid card since durability noise reliability etc is mostly the same for all?
 
Last edited:
1) What are the advantages of GTX over current GT or GTS, is it more silent, more durable? or only gives a few more points on the benchmark thingy..
The GTX has more VRAM. More VRAM pays off when you play in higher resolutions (1600x1200 and above)
Now a list with keyfeatures:

GTX
  • 128 Steamprocessors (= Universal Shader) @ 1350 MHz = 172,800
  • 575MHz / 900MHz
  • G80-technology
  • Memory just 768 MB
  • Memory Bus: 384bit
  • Texture Fillrate: 36.8
  • cooling method: 2 slot
GTS new
  • 128 Steamprocessors (= Universal Shader) @ 1625 MHz = 208,000
  • 600MHz / 1000MHz
  • G92-technology
  • Memory 512MB (prolly 1024 MB version soon)
  • Memory Bus: 256bit
  • Texture Fillrate: 41.6
  • cooling method: 2 slot
GT
  • 112 Steamprocessors (= Universal Shader) @ 1500 MHz = 168,000
  • 600MHz / 900MHz
  • G92-technology
  • Memory 256MB or 512MB
  • Memory Bus: 256bit
  • Texture Fillrate: 33.6
  • cooling method: 1 slot
GTS old
  • 96 Steamprocessors (= Universal Shader) @ 1188 MHz = 114,000
  • 500MHz / 800MHz
  • G80-technology
  • Memory 320MB or 640MB
  • Memory Bus: 320bit
  • Texture Fillrate: 24
  • cooling method: 2 slot

You see that the GTX has just more Ram und a higher Memory Bus (= bigger Bandwidth).
Seeing how the difference between the old GTS with 320MB and 640MB in Crysis is (only 1 to 2 fps difference in benchmarks), the memory
advantage of 256MB ain't that worth.

The low Shaderclock of the GTX is the real bottleneck. Even a GT almost reaches this Shader-performance.
Due the fact that shader will grow in importance, the GTX ain't worth the money.

The GT has a small cooler, that means that it has to be more noisy to cool the heat down or get's hotter as a new GTS.
I can say that Nvidias 2 Slot - "Geforce8 cooling system" is very silent.

Didn't hear the GT-cooling myself, i just read about it. It should be a little bit louder and the graphic card should get hotter than previous Geforce8800.

Comparing graphiccards that are based on different technologies is always difficult.
Benchmarks are mostly the only real reliable answer to the well known question: "Which card is faster?".
There are so many ways to boost a card (memory bus, shader amount, clocks, etc), that's it's hard to say which one is really better.
But in my opinion the shader performance will be the key-thing in the future (like Crysis).

2) When is that new faster yet cheaper GTS coming out?
According to some RSS-news, it'll be December 11.

Unluckily i've the fear that NVIDIA will have the same troubles as they had with the 8800GT launch.
Even after the official launch, 8800GT cards weren't available for weeks.

3) why 2 TFT LCD ?????
For Dual-Monitoring.
i don't mean it for gaming, i mean for working purposes.

Modern GFX-cards have 2 VGA / DVI connectors, where you can plugin two monitors.
-> One computer -> you see 2 desktops at the same time.

For example:
I use my first monitor for creating programs, the second for have the setting of tasks.

Or i use Monitor 2 for reading a PDF und Monitor 1 for writing about the things i see in the PDF without minimizing / maximizing anything.

In the past i used Monitor 1 often for surfing the net, on monitor 2 on the other hand i had instant messenger and irc-chat.

Maybe you don't need a 2nd one, because a 22inch widescreen has enough space for all the things i listed above or you just don't need it.
Personally i don't wanna miss my 2nd monitor. =)
 
Last edited: