Curse

Aman · Oct 01, 2006, 09:31 PM // 21:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by awesome sauce

When are physx cards gonna be cheap?

Those things acutally work or a another way to spend money?

I mean like they make a big difference?

Aman · Oct 03, 2006, 01:30 PM // 13:30

anyone?

Mushroom · Oct 03, 2006, 02:50 PM // 14:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sentao Nugra

a) Any mainstream (even Dell) machine will be able to "run" Vista.
b) NOTHING, as of now (on the retail market) will be able to run Dx10

A. Not True. In fact, there are a lot of Dell systems that are not Vista compatible at all. And I should know, because I work on them all the time. About half of your OptiPlex models will not even load Vista. And most of the Dimensions also will not run it.

The reasons vary, from not enough Video RAM, to BIOS incompatibilities. In fact, go to Dell and check for "Vista Compatibility", and you will find nothing under $1100 that is "Vista Ready". Their $300-800 Dimension models clearly state "Not Vista Capable".

b. That is true, but also expect DirectX 10 to run fine on older hardware. You simply will not get all the "Bells & Whistles" that you would get with the "approved" cards. And this is normal, we saw it with DirectX 9, 8, etc etc etc, An older Radeon 7000 is not a "DirectX 9" card, but it still works just fine, if a bit slow.

Stemnin · Oct 03, 2006, 03:47 PM // 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aman

You guys think this is a good pc to handle all the next gen stuff?

directx10 and everything?

Processor: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Extreme X6800 2.93GHz 4MB Cache 1066MHz FSB
Operating System (Office software not included): Genuine Windows® XP Media Center Edition 2005 with Service Pack 2
Chassis: Alienware® P2 Chassis - Space Black
Chassis Upgrades: Alienware® AlienIce™ 3.0 Video Cooling + AlienFX™ System Lighting + High-Performance Liquid Cooling - Astral Blue
Power Supply: Alienware® 700 Watt Multi-GPU Approved Power Supply
Motherboard: Alienware® Approved NVIDIA nForce 4 SLI Motherboard
Memory: 4GB DDR2 Performance SDRAM at 800MHz - 4 x 1024MB
System Drive: Extreme Performance (RAID 0) - 500GB (2 x 250GB) Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7,200 RPM w/ 2 x 8MB Cache
Storage Drive: Additional Storage Drive - 250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7,200 RPM w/ 8MB Cache
Primary CD ROM/DVD ROM: 16x Dual Layer DVD±R/W Drive
Secondary CD ROM/DVD ROM: 16x Dual Layer DVD±R/W Drive w/LightScribe Technology
Graphics Processor: Dual 512MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ 7950 GT - SLI Enabled
Monitor: Samsung SyncMaster 204B 20.1" 5ms Flat Panel - Black
Sound Card: High Performance 7.1 Audio - Standard
Speakers: Logitech® X-530 5.1 70-Watt Speakers
Keyboard: Alienware® USB Full-Size Keyboard
Mouse: Alienware® Optical 3-Button Mouse with Scroll Wheel

You don't need that for Guild Wars.. go play Crysis on max when it's released lol

TreeDude · Oct 03, 2006, 06:10 PM // 18:10

Physics cards may or may not be around in the future. They can only be used on games that support them. So unless there are a lot of games (which there are not) supporting them there is no point. GW has no physics so you won't see a difference in performance for GW.

Besides ATI and Nvidia are working on drivers to let you add a mid to low end GFX card to your current setup and dedicate it to physics. ATI already showed a demo of it using an X1600. Pretty impressive considering you can get an X1600 for around $150 and the current physics cards are above $200. There were no performance comparisons though. But I've heard that the Agia cards have performed less than stellar in GRAW. Sometimes even causeing a loss in performance when the physics are turned on high.

Mushroom · Oct 03, 2006, 07:39 PM // 19:39

PhyX will probably never enter the mainstream for computers. It has a great many things working against it.

One of the largest is the cost. A PhysX card will set you back around $400. That is quite a bit much, considering it is nothing more then an "accellerator card", that only has 128 MB. In addition, very few games have ever been programmed that will take advantage of it.

And as TreeDude mentioned, both ATI and NVidia have been working on their own version based on the Havok engine. Programs written with this are able to perform comperable to PhysX, but on contemporary hardware.

The history of graphics (and other computer accessories) are littered with things like this. Those of us that were around 10-15 years ago remember the "VGA Accelerator Cards". Millions of cards were sold with "Accelerator Capability", but very few of the accelerators themselves. Because in a DOS/Win 3.1 world, there was no need/use for them. By the time Win95 came out, graphics technology had passed them all by.

I actually have one in my shop though (Matrox VGA Accelerator card). It sits next to my Creative Labs CT3980. That was the sound card with 2 DIMM slots, so you could add up to 8 MB more RAM to your sound card. Yet another antique curiosity.

TreeDude · Oct 04, 2006, 05:34 PM // 17:34

Actually a physics card will set you back around $200. They have come down in price since launch. But still games must support it. At least with ATI and Nvidias solution you could use the card for an extra monitor at least. Or maybe more as the drivers get better. Plus ATI was boasting it performed far better. But we won't know that for sure till we can get our hands on an actual product.

UT2007 is suppost to support physics acceleration, by then we should have all our options on the table. i'll wait till then to decide weither it's worth it.

B Ephekt · Oct 04, 2006, 07:31 PM // 19:31

The point is that physics cards are mostly just gimmicks targeted at the same people who buy Alienware and Fatality111 crap. With multicore technology becoming more prevalent there's really no need for them.

Also, 99% of all video cards out there already have multi-monitor support, so that's hardly a plus.

Aman · Oct 04, 2006, 11:38 PM // 23:38

* The world's first GDDR4 graphics card with a memory clock of 1.0GHz!
* Available with ATI Crossfire™ dual GPU support for maximum output!
* Operates faster at maximum in-game settings and resolutions
* Supports the latest high definition video formats.
* 512MB of onboard graphics memory.
* High Dynamic Range + AA with Super AA, giving you the sharpest texture detail possible

X1950 XTX with Crossfire

The ATI X1950 XTX with Crossfire combines dual graphics processing units on a single motherboard providing you with the ultimate dual graphics card solution. 1GB of combined graphics memory makes sure that you never experience a single slowdown while pushing your next-gen games to the limit. With dual 650MHz core clock speeds and high dynamic range lighting with anti aliasing your PC will be propelled to a new pinnacle of performance.
Divide and Conquer

ATI’s CrossFire offers high-performance GPU sharing that evenly divides the processing and graphics rendering workload. Options include “supertiling”, “scissor” and “AFR” (alternate frame-rate) and an exclusive a superior visual quality mode called “Super AA”.
Powerful Single Slot Gaming Graph
ATI X1950XTX specs:

* Engine Clock- 650 MHz
* Memory Clock- 1000 MHz
* Memory Configuration- 512MB 16Mx32 GDDR4
* Display Connectors- DVI-I + DVI-I + VIVO
* Dual Link DVI- Yes
* HDCP- Yes
* System Interface- PCI-Express x16

Does this mean ATI currently has the best graphic card out there? Beating the Nvidia Dual cards?

TreeDude · Oct 05, 2006, 05:03 AM // 05:03

Depends on the game Aman. In HL2 and other Source based games, hell yes. In Quake 4, Doom, and other OpenGL games, hell no. A 7950GTX will beat out a x1950xtx in some games and vice versa.

Computer parts are not as black and white as you seem to think. Don't just look at advertising. Everyone tries to look like they are the best.

I currently have a 6800NU. But that's not because I love Nvidia, it was just at a good price when I bought it. my next card will probably be ATI though, I like their drivers better now that I have used both (I had a 9600pro way back).

BTW ATI can do dual cards too, it's called Crossfire. Unless you mean the 7950x2s. Which I think are a complete waste as many games make no use of the extra card at all.

TESAmadeus · Oct 05, 2006, 07:15 AM // 07:15

Microsoft are wanting to release vista as 64 bit only, which would put AMD back in the lead if they did that because the AMD processors are 64 bit, whereas the intel including the conroe chip are not true 64 bit they have 64 bit memory extensions but that is it.

Recommened specs for vista are:
2gb Ram
fully 3d directx 9 gfx card
dual core/amd 64 bit processor
hard drive size not important as long as it is above 40gb

Aman · Oct 05, 2006, 01:25 PM // 13:25

wait what kind of 2 games are there?

what kind of guid wars of those two?

and i also noticed Nvidia is like 800 bucks less.

TreeDude · Oct 05, 2006, 01:56 PM // 13:56

First off I've never seen a graphics card go above $700 even when first released (not including workstation cards). Cards of similar performance are usually around the same price point. That x1950xtx is only $480 on NewEgg.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814195024

Similarly you can get the 7950gx2 for $495.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130023

So wheres the $800 price diff?

Mushroom · Oct 05, 2006, 09:08 PM // 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by TreeDude

My next card will probably be ATI though, I like their drivers better now that I have used both (I had a 9600pro way back).

BTW ATI can do dual cards too, it's called Crossfire. Unless you mean the 7950x2s. Which I think are a complete waste as many games make no use of the extra card at all.

I have used almost exclusively ATI cards for over 6 years now, and can't see that changing in the near future. They have long put in features that NVidia does not (DVD encoder, TV Tuner, stable all-in-one drivers). And they have an impressive line of cards going back for 15 years.

NVidia simply seems to have far to many bugs for me to ever consider them. Who cares if they have the "current best" card on the market, if they can't consistantly make stable drivers? It seems that every-other weak I read or hear about the newest NVidia driver being buggy, and causing lock-ups and crashes.

Many times I have downloaded a GeForce driver from the NVidia website, only to discover that for some reason it does not work. I then have to hunt around for the driver that really will work for that card. I have never had that problem with any Radeon that I have ever installed.

And I agree about the single-card SLI cards. The "one card SLI" simply has not performed as promised. And in every review of the X1950 I have ever read, it gives better performance then any single-card SLI card made (and even better then a lot of dual-card SLI systems).

Quote:

Originally Posted by TESAmadeus

Microsoft are wanting to release vista as 64 bit only, which would put AMD back in the lead if they did that because the AMD processors are 64 bit, whereas the intel including the conroe chip are not true 64 bit they have 64 bit memory extensions but that is it.

Vista is going to come in both 32 and 64 bit versions. In fact, both versions will be on the same install DVD. The key number you enter during install will determine which version of Vista is installed on your system.

In fact, even the next versions (Vienna) is going to support 32 bit systems. However, that will more then likely be the last version (althought that is always subject to change).

The major reason why Intel does not use the "true" 64 bit chipset is that it would mean they have to pay AMD royalties to do so. Needless to say, Intel is very reluctant to do so.

AMD has been trumping Intel for the last 6 years, and this is simply another example. Intel had the chance to be the "64 bit standard" 4 years ago, and they blew it. They released the "Itanium", and MicroSoft made a special version of XP (XP for IA-64) just for it. However, the chip was so expensive that it never saw wide-spread use, and MS lost millions of dollars on the project.

At the same time, AMD released a much lower cost 64 bit chip (AMD64), and agreed to allow other chip makers to license it (Intel refused to allow licensing of Itanium). Because of this, when MS made their next versions of 64 bit Windows (XP for 64 Bit and Vista), they decided to use the AMD instruction set instead of the Intel set.

After being the only maker of 64 bit chips for the home market for 3 years, Intel finally decided to enter the field in the middle of this year with the Intel EM64T. But for a large segment of the market, it was seen as "to little - to late". After all, for the last 3 years they have been trying to tell us that 64 bit computers were only for businesses, and the homeowner would never need them. And while every chip AMD now makes is 64 bit, Intel is still selling both 32 bit desktop processors (P4) and almost all of their laptop chips are 32 bit.

Overall, Intel no longer impresses me. I build and repair over 20 systems a week, and still prefer AMD over Intel. And I can't see that changing in the next 3 years. And with AMD now buying ATI and Intel wanting to enter the market with their own video card again, it makes me even more resistant to buying Intel. I remember their last entries into the graphics market, and frankly they all sucked.

B Ephekt · Oct 05, 2006, 09:30 PM // 21:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mushroom

I have used almost exclusively ATI cards for over 6 years now, and can't see that changing in the near future. They have long put in features that NVidia does not (DVD encoder, TV Tuner, stable all-in-one drivers). And they have an impressive line of cards going back for 15 years.

Actually, Nvidia has one of the best quality DVD decoders on the market and supports hardware decoding of MPEG. Yeah ,ATI might have build in tuners but they're pretty horrible compared to the Hauppage cards, and ATI's drivers and software have sucked for a while now.

Quote:

NVidia simply seems to have far to many bugs for me to ever consider them. Who cares if they have the "current best" card on the market, if they can't consistantly make stable drivers? It seems that every-other weak I read or hear about the newest NVidia driver being buggy, and causing lock-ups and crashes.

What sites do you read? Tom's Hardware or some other trumped up garbage site? Everything I've been hearing or reading is the exact opposite - recent ATI drivers are instable and their control panel is bloated, while Nvidia's drivers are stable and their software is minimal and unintrusive. I've been using Nividia for probably the past 5 years, and I haven't had any driver issues unless it was a beta driver. I've also had a few people tell me that they've switched over to Nvidia due to ATI's recent software issues.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm not a fanboy of either, I think all that stuff is pretty silly. I just don't like to see obviously false information posted about a solid product.

Frankly, the choice between ATI and Nvidia is based upon what games you play and price per performance at the time. The gap between performance is negligible in most cases these days, unless you only play one game or something.

However, I do completely agree with you on the Intel vs. AMD part of your post. I can definitely see AMD's next line moving back to the top and being there for a while.

Tijger · Oct 05, 2006, 11:25 PM // 23:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by TESAmadeus

Microsoft are wanting to release vista as 64 bit only, which would put AMD back in the lead if they did that because the AMD processors are 64 bit, whereas the intel including the conroe chip are not true 64 bit they have 64 bit memory extensions but that is it.

I'm sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about. Only Intel has a true 64 bit cpu at the moment, the IA-64. Other 64 bit cpu's are made by IBM and SUN, AMD does NOT make a pure 64 bit cpu. Period. They make an IA 32/AMD64 which is the same basic instruction set as Intel's IA32/EM64T.

Intel uses the same 64 bit instructions as AMD does because they were forced to do so by Microsoft who laid down the law and said they would only support one 64 bit instruction set and since AMD was first, that was the one they went for. Let me repeat, both the AMD 64 line and Intel's CPU's with 64 bit instructions are pretty much the same with regards to 64 bit capability, Intel even pays AMD royalties (like AMD pays Intel for other tech) for their instruction set.

There never was any plan by Microsoft to release Vista s 64 bit only, I dont know where you got that nonsense but its just that, nonsense.

Aman · Oct 06, 2006, 01:44 AM // 01:44

Can you guys rate my new comp

Changed specs again

[1] Area-51® 7500

Processor: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E6700 2.66GHz 4MB Cache 1066MHz FSB
Operating System (Office software not included): Genuine Windows® XP Media Center Edition 2005 with Service Pack 2
Chassis: Alienware® P2 Chassis - Space Black
Chassis Upgrades: Alienware® AlienIce™ 3.0 Video Cooling + AlienFX™ System Lighting + High-Performance Liquid Cooling - Astral Blue
Power Supply: Alienware® 700 Watt Multi-GPU Approved Power Supply
Motherboard: Alienware® Approved NVIDIA nForce 4 SLI Motherboard
Memory: 4GB DDR2 Performance SDRAM at 800MHz - 4 x 1024MB
System Drive: Extreme Performance (RAID 0) - 500GB (2 x 250GB) Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7,200 RPM w/ 2 x 8MB Cache
Storage Drive: Additional Storage Drive - 250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7,200 RPM w/ 8MB Cache
Primary CD ROM/DVD ROM: 16x Dual Layer DVD±R/W Drive
Secondary CD ROM/DVD ROM: 16x Dual Layer DVD±R/W Drive w/LightScribe Technology
Graphics Processor: Dual 512MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ 7950 GT - SLI Enabled
Monitor: Dell 24" 1920 x 1200 UltraSharp Widescreen Flat Panel /w HDCP
Sound Card: High Performance 7.1 Audio - Standard
Speakers: Logitech® X-530 5.1 70-Watt Speakers
Keyboard: Logitech® G15 Gaming Keyboard
Mouse: Razer Copperhead™ High Precision Gaming Mouse - Tempest Blue
Warranty: 4-Year AlienCare Toll-Free 24/7 Phone Support w/ Onsite Service / AlienAutopsy / Respawn
Alienware Exclusive Offers: 10% off your next EB Games online purchase - Offer Valid Online Only
Alienware Exclusive Offers: GameFly - Unlimited Game Rentals for 15 days - FREE TRIAL
Alienware Extras: AlienInspection - Exclusive Integration and Inspection - $100 Value - FREE!
Alienware Extras: AlienWiring - Exclusive Internal Wire Management - $100 Value - FREE!
Alienware Extras: Exclusive AlienGUIse Theme Manager

[1] Surge Protector - Opti-UPS SS1200 Automatic Voltage Regulator 6 outlets Surge Protector
[1] Sennheiser PC150 Multimedia Headset
[1] $100 Instant Savings!; On Select Systems
[1] Special Financing Offer; No Interest for 6 Months! - Valid only with the Alienware Credit Card

SubTotal: $5,107.90
Shipping: $107.85
Discount: $100.00
Tax: $0.00
Order Total: $5,115.75

B Ephekt · Oct 06, 2006, 02:15 AM // 02:15

4GB of RAM? You'll only ever use maybe 1.5-2GB of that...

Don't use RAID 0 ffs, if one drive dies you lose everything on both drives and the speeds are crap compared to 10K RPM of Perpendicular drives.

SLI is a waste, even on that monitor. I run the same monitors off a 7900GTX and play most games at the highest settings. Just go for a single card and you'll be good for a while.

Water cooling is a waste in most cases, unless you're doing some major overclocking - which I doubt since you're posting this for a critique.

And you just wasted about 2k going with Alienware.

TreeDude · Oct 06, 2006, 05:31 AM // 05:31

ATI actually gives away their DVD decoder. Nvidia makes you pay an extra $30. Also I have never had a problem with ATIs drivers. I remember people bashing them like crazy when I had my 9600pro. I never had an issue, I always kept up-to-date. Every release was better than the last. Unlike Nvidia who seems to release a new beta every day. Nvidias drivers have been very spotty for me. But oh well.

Also you can get the driver without the bloated control panel you speak of. Which I will agree was never very good. Though I hear it has gotten better.

Aman · Oct 06, 2006, 01:39 PM // 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by B Ephekt

4GB of RAM? You'll only ever use maybe 1.5-2GB of that...

Don't use RAID 0 ffs, if one drive dies you lose everything on both drives and the speeds are crap compared to 10K RPM of Perpendicular drives.

SLI is a waste, even on that monitor. I run the same monitors off a 7900GTX and play most games at the highest settings. Just go for a single card and you'll be good for a while.

Water cooling is a waste in most cases, unless you're doing some major overclocking - which I doubt since you're posting this for a critique.

And you just wasted about 2k going with Alienware.

Im not takin down the ram i need it for lot of things i do

imsure lot of people wouuld disagree with you on raid 0