Curse

Kaida the Heartless · Jun 22, 2007, 09:07 PM // 21:07

Putting about 2k into a new custom compy from NewEgg and I would like some opinions from some of you comp gurus out there. I've done a few of these before but I am a bit unsure about the motherboard, the vid card, and the water cooling (never used before). Any advice would be appriciated. Thx!

Case (already have):
NZXT TRINITY Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case
Motherboard:
XFX NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI Intel Quad Core Ready Motherboard

Water Cooling:
KINGWIN AS-3000 AquaStar Liquid Cooler System

RAM (4 gigs total):
mushkin eXtreme Performance 240-Pin DDR2 800 SDRAM

Processor:
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz 2 x 4MB L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor

The video cards are my biggest concern. I have used Radeon in the past, and they have served me well, but I hear that they dont support dual video cards very well, which is what I would like to run. So, instead, I am switching to Nvidia. I read in another recent post here that the "GTS" version of their line is the weakest, which was actually the cards I was looking at:

Vid Card 1 (256 Meg):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814143101

Vid Card 2 (320 Meg, Seems Weaker than the Above):
(Asus Version) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814121061
What video cards would you guys suggest (under 300$ a piece) in a dual system? I am running in 1280 x 1024 resolution (fits my current monitor the best) so RAM that fits this should be adequate, though, it wouldn't hurt to snag more in a deal. Also, some of the 7 series cards actually look stronger than the 8 series. Is this true? I'm so lost. Help!

Can't wait to run GW at max FPS! *gigglefit*

Thx in advance!

eggrolls · Jun 22, 2007, 11:06 PM // 23:06

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...MBM-680I-Q6600

Same motherboard and OEM Q6600 for $200 less. I know it's not Newegg, but that is the best price you can get now. If you wait till the price drop around July 22, you can buy from Newegg at a similar price.

Quad-core probably won't be necessary for now, but with these prices, it's really tempting to get one. However, Intel's new E6850 (dual core, 3 GHz) will cost the same as the Q6600 (quad, 2.4 GHz) after the price drop (about $266). The E6850 will be faster in games until games take advantage of quad cores, whenever that may be.

You can get 4GB of memory, but keep in mind that 32-bit versions of Windows will only see about 3GB.

For the video cards, 8800GTS is better than 8600GTS. There are 7 series cards better than the 8600GTS (probably something like the 7900GTX or 7950GT, I don't remember), so you are better off getting a 8800GTS.

Now, if you want SLI, I think it's a waste of money getting two 8800GTS 320MB. Your 1280x1024 resolution isn't high enough to need SLI. If you want to spend $600 on your video card(s), I'd get a 8800GTX, although a single 8800GTS (640 or 320MB) will suffice. Another way to go would be the Radeon 2900XT, which comes with free TF2 and HL Episode 2, if you want those. Yet another possibility is to buy a cheap card like the x1950pro or x1950xt, wait till more DX10 games come out, and then upgrade to whichever card(s) perform best.

Kaida the Heartless · Jun 23, 2007, 03:46 AM // 03:46

Thx for the reply. I wasn't aware that my quad core would be semi-useless since only part of the processors would be used. Time to do some more research!

Also, I hear Windows Vista is having problems with Nvidia right now. Should I just wait until they get some more compatable drivers/Service Packs?

scrinner · Jun 23, 2007, 05:07 AM // 05:07

Sli support for Vista JUST came out with beta drivers so running an Sli right now isn't the best idea. I would wait another month or two before Nvidia gets some serious stable drivers out there.

Besides that, Eggrolls post is pretty much perfect. Id personally get a 8800 GTX (New ATI card is still rather new, driver support is low at the moment) and a larger monitor but thats just me.

easyg · Jun 23, 2007, 08:20 AM // 08:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by eggrolls

You can get 4GB of memory, but keep in mind that 32-bit versions of Windows will only see about 3GB.

Is that true? Actually, my understanding is that 32bit operating systems support a maximum of 4GB addressable memory. VRAM (in video cards) counts towards that total, as do a few other hardware resources.

What does this mean? In essence:

32bit Windows w/ 4GB RAM - 8800GTX (640MB VRAM) - other stuff (110MB) = ~ 3.25GB RAM recognized by system

32bit Windows w/ 4GB RAM - 2 x 8800GTX in SLI (1.28GB VRAM) - other stuff (110MB) = ~ 2.61GB RAM recognized by system

32bit Windows w/ 4GB RAM - 8800GTS 320MB (320MB VRAM) - other stuff (110MB) = ~ 3.57GB recognized by system

And so on and so on.....

Is there any point to having the extra memory? Obviously, there is going to be very little point in buying a total of 4 x 1GB modules for your 32bit system if you intend to install GTXs or GTS 640s in SLI. Or for that matter HD2900XTs in Crossfire.

Otherwise, the user just has to decide if he thinks an additional 1GB to 1.5GB of addressable memory is worth it when he essentially has to pay for 2GB. Given the cheapness of RAM these days, I think it might be worth it.

Brother Andicus · Jun 23, 2007, 09:51 AM // 09:51

I wouldn't go anywhere near Vista until there is a service pack for it.

As far as Gfx card is concerned, i'd go for the 8800GTX rather than 2 weaker cards in SLI.

Lonesamurai · Jun 23, 2007, 10:55 AM // 10:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother Andicus

I wouldn't go anywhere near Vista until there is a service pack for it.

Why?

i keep hearing people say that until they actually try it, then when they've tried it, they want it now...

(ok do i make Vista sound like Crack?)

scrinner · Jun 23, 2007, 03:47 PM // 15:47

Wait wait what?

Ill ignore Andicus for now and go straight to Easyg.

I have read this in quite a few places that in 32 bit mode, 2 Gigs is put aside for the Os and 2 gigs is put aside for Games/Applications and such. Though i'm not a computer expert but that is what i have read in a few places. Shame Guildwars isn't 64 bit compatible

easyg · Jun 23, 2007, 07:56 PM // 19:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrinner

Wait wait what?

Ill ignore Andicus for now and go straight to Easyg.

I have read this in quite a few places that in 32 bit mode, 2 Gigs is put aside for the Os and 2 gigs is put aside for Games/Applications and such. Though i'm not a computer expert but that is what i have read in a few places. Shame Guildwars isn't 64 bit compatible

Yeah, there's a lot of misunderstanding about this on the internet. But what I wrote above is what's really happening.

The theoretical limit is a hard 4GB with any 32bit OS. It doesn't matter if you have 2GB RAM or 4GB RAM, start at 4GB and work your way down.

First, BIOS (CMOS) grabs a slice as the top address. Then all the rest of the devices take a slice. Finally, whatever is left over is the maximum amount of RAM your system can theoretically recognize.

The reason I stress this is because a lot of people assume that if you install 2GB of RAM, it's for certain 2GB are going to available at the OS level.

This is not true. With Radeon HD2900 cards set to release with 1GB VRAM, people are going to find this out. A Crossfire system with 2 such cards won't even have 2GB RAM available at the OS level.

But anyways, from a HP mini white-paper:

Quote:

The PCI memory addresses starting down from 4 GB are used for things like the BIOS, IO cards, networking, PCI hubs, bus bridges, PCI-Express, and video/graphics cards. The BIOS takes up about 512 KB starting from the very top address. Then each of the other items mentioned are allocated address ranges below the BIOS range. The largest block of addresses is allocated for today’s high performance graphics cards which need addresses for at least the amount of memory on the graphics card. The net result is that a high performance x86-based computer may allocate 512 MB to more than 1 GB for the PCI memory address range before any RAM (physical user memory) addresses are allocated.

http://h20331.www2.hp.com/Hpsub/down...%2003Nov05.doc

Kaida the Heartless · Jun 23, 2007, 08:35 PM // 20:35

I found a good deal on Tiger (thanks egg!) Direct that includes an 8800 GTX with my processor, but now I wonder... how much stronger will the quad be than a dual?

Suppose I get a dual at 3 Ghtz. Thats "6 Ghz" technically, right? Would a Quad 2.4 equal "9.6 Ghz"? I do tend to multitask alot (music, games, surfing the net in multiple windows, at a minimum usually), so the quad appears better. But, how much of the processor would be used if I was only running a single game/program? Do these programs require specific parameters to be able to use the full quad?

lordpwn · Jun 23, 2007, 11:40 PM // 23:40

Dual core at 3 GHz is NOT the same as a 6 GHz single core, and a quad at 2.4 GHz is certainly not the same as a single 9.6 GHz core. Unless a program is specifically made to use multiple processors/cores it will not do so, and most programs are not. Any program that does support them should do so without any parameters, unless the feature is so buggy it's not worth having on by default

Having more than one core to work with will make the operating system a bit smoother and less prone to momentary "hitches" since it can have different processes running on their own cores, for example let GW run on one core and some CPU-spiking background process on the other. This doesn't need support from the programs themselves as the operating system controls their use of the processor(s) anyway.

With dual-and quad core processors becoming more common I think we'll see more applications and games with support for multiple processors in the future, but right now I don't think a quad core is worth the money if you can get a dual core that runs those single-core games faster for the same or a lower price.

scrinner · Jun 24, 2007, 01:26 AM // 01:26

EasyG, a question.

By Vram do you mean virtual ram (Feeding off of the ram) or the video cards own ram? If its the former, then i'd understand that and if its the latter, Then your saying Alot of ram is useless since we have a 4 gig limit and the video card gets priority. In a crossfire setup with one gig per, two gigs would be recognizable for the Os?

Interesting really since i thought it was the 2 gig per thing. I myself have both 64 and 32 bit os's installed.

Kaida the Heartless · Jun 24, 2007, 02:42 AM // 02:42

You guys are too smart with this stuff!

What about water cooling? I hear it is much more quiet than having a series of fans, but how much stronger is the cooling performance? If I plan on overclocking, would it be a good idea to run it across the processor?

easyg · Jun 24, 2007, 03:09 AM // 03:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrinner

EasyG, a question.

By Vram do you mean virtual ram (Feeding off of the ram) or the video cards own ram? If its the former, then i'd understand that and if its the latter, Then your saying Alot of ram is useless since we have a 4 gig limit and the video card gets priority. In a crossfire setup with one gig per, two gigs would be recognizable for the Os?

Interesting really since i thought it was the 2 gig per thing. I myself have both 64 and 32 bit os's installed.

VRAM is video RAM, as in the physical RAM in your video cards. Yes, it gets priority, and counts towards the hard limit of 4GB physical address memory.

As to your second point, yes, exactly right. If you have a 32bit OS, and you go out and buy two Radeon HD 2900XT's with 1GB VRAM each, your system will recognize at the very most 1.8-1.9GB RAM. It won't have quite 2GB because the network controller, NB, and so so on, will also have priority when system resources are allocated.

Malice Black · Jun 24, 2007, 03:12 AM // 03:12

I personally would drop 1GB RAM and the water cooling and get a better PSU and the 8800 Ultra.

scrinner · Jun 24, 2007, 03:51 AM // 03:51

Water cooling is for the Very serious over clockers.

Kaida the Heartless · Jun 24, 2007, 08:16 AM // 08:16

Well, the RAM comes in 2 gig quantities. So its 2 gigs or 4.

I'm thinking about just overclocking this quad instead of getting a Dual Core. I don't plan on buying another computer for a while (4ish years) so I think there will definitally be uses for the multiprocessor by then.

Since I only run with a single montior at a relatively low res, and because there is a deal on Tiger, I think I am going to go with the 8800 GTX 768 Meg card. If I decide to get a few more monitors or run at higher resses, I'll just pick up another one of those cards!

As far as the water cooling goes, I'm more concerned about the noise. Id rather run some water cooling to cut down the noise of my current 3 fans. Plus, my computer sits in my cuby where my feet are (I have a very simple desk!), which heats up very quickly. So, I kind of want the water cooling for compensation as well.

Thanks for all the help guys! I'll still be checking this thread but I have a stronger idea of what I need to get now. Your help is most appriciated!

Malice Black · Jun 24, 2007, 05:43 PM // 17:43

If you are going to over clock and running the 8800 you'd be better off with 50O-600watt PSU