Curse

Arlian · May 05, 2008, 04:32 AM // 04:32

Planning on getting this PC :

AMD Athlon64 X2 6400+, Dual Core 3.2Ghz, 1024KB L2 Cache, (125W Version) Box

Gigabyte Socket AM2/AM2+, GA-MA790X-DS4, 790X Chipset, FSB4000, DDR2, 2xPCIex16, RAID, GbLAN, 1394

Corsair Value Select, PC-5300 (667MHz) DDR2, 4GB Kit (2x 2GB) 240-pin, non-ECC, VS4GBKIT667D2

Asus Radeon HD3870, 512MB, GDDR4, PCIe2.0, VGA, DVI, HDMI, HDTV, HDCP

Antec 'Sonata III' MiniTower ATX Case, Piano Black, 500W PSU, 80Plus, Front eSATA Port

DVD-ROM drive Sony 16x DDU1615, Beige, OEM

ASUS DVD Burner DRW-1814BL, LightScribe, Black, 18X DVD±R/14X DVD-RAM

HDD SATA, Seagate Barracuda, 500GB, 32MB 7200.11, ST3500320AS

LCD 22", AOC 2216VW, Widescreen, 1680x1050, 5ms, DVI, Black Colour

How well do you think it would run GW with full graphics settings ?

(Ordering from www.eyo.com.au)

I know i put stuff like disc drives and such but oh well

Arlian · May 05, 2008, 04:46 AM // 04:46

Oh, just read up on the AOC Monitor, scratch that off the list, their dead pixel policy is bad.

Brianna · May 05, 2008, 05:44 AM // 05:44

Looks good over-all. But it says that it uses 1066 RAM, so something like: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820145179? (for example).

I'd also recommend Samsung monitors, they seem to just simply not get dead pixels in the first place, most reviews I've read for Samsung never have dead pixels, where as Acer for example: 9/10 reviews have dead pixels.

Tamuril elansar · May 05, 2008, 10:08 AM // 10:08

acer is cheap, a 24 inch acer monitor only costs around 290 euro, whereas samsung 24inch monitors cost at least 360 euro.

KZaske · May 05, 2008, 02:41 PM // 14:41

I too would like to entend a warning about Acer monitors. Of the twenty people that have Acer monitors, only three have monitors without dead pixels. With Samsung, of the fifteen people I know of only one has ever had a dead pixel, that was replaced quickly by Samsung, it may cost you more but it is worth it.

Kattar · May 05, 2008, 02:47 PM // 14:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arlian

How well do you think it would run GW with full graphics settings ?

Are ya kidding? Lol, it's run GW fine. GW doesn't need the graphical horses that some/most games do. It'll use them, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't take that much to make it look good.

You'll be fine.

Wenspire · May 05, 2008, 04:30 PM // 16:30

Regarding the Radeon 3870.... runs GW nicely for me at 1920x1200 (I own three of them). But a word of caution: many of them have issues with the fan speed controller not increasing the speed as the temperature increases. Be prepared. You can do a search on Google or Yahoo regarding it (as well as a possible fix) if needed.

Brianna · May 05, 2008, 06:18 PM // 18:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tamuril elansar

acer is cheap, a 24 inch acer monitor only costs around 290 euro, whereas samsung 24inch monitors cost at least 360 euro.

That is because Samsung makes quality monitors, Acer is cheap.

In the world of electronics, ''You get what you pay for'' generally goes a long way.

And this computer should run Guild Wars flawlessly, even at high resolution.

Snograt · May 05, 2008, 07:34 PM // 19:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

In the world of electronics, ''You get what you pay for'' generally goes a long way.

Quoted for absolute truth.

Exceptions? MacBook Air and any other style-over-substance equipment.

whiteyboy · May 05, 2008, 08:34 PM // 20:34

Nice i like it

but you should get an AMD phenom if you're thinking of sticking with AMD otherwise just get an INTEL ^_^

Admael · May 05, 2008, 09:30 PM // 21:30

Everything looks fine, except for your RAM--there are two problems.

"Value Select"? That's a no-no.
PC5300 is too slow for that machine, you'll need something faster.

You need PC8500 (or as the manufactures have you believe, sometimes they're really just overclocked PC6400s)
The ones Brianna have posted is actually quite expensive (and no one knows why!). Here are the same RAM at half the price.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820145197

Lania Elderfire · May 05, 2008, 09:56 PM // 21:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by whiteyboy

Nice i like it

but you should get an AMD phenom if you're thinking of sticking with AMD otherwise just get an INTEL ^_^

AMD processors just isn't really worth it anymore... They have horrible performance/watt ratio... and also lose on the performance/price. The new intel wolfdale processors, and yorkfeild processors are much faster and consume a lot less power.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admael

Everything looks fine, except for your RAM--there are two problems.

"Value Select"? That's a no-no.
PC5300 is too slow for that machine, you'll need something faster.

You need PC8500 (or as the manufactures have you believe, sometimes they're really just overclocked PC6400s)
The ones Brianna have posted is actually quite expensive (and no one knows why!). Here are the same RAM at half the price.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820145197

You guys and your over clocker RAM... Though I agree the value-select is a very bad idea, that doesn't mean you need get ultra expensive RAM for it.

G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) is more than fast enough for this system. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231122

The 1066 MHZ is just how fast you can clock your memory up to comfortably if you overclock your system with this mobo.

Brianna · May 05, 2008, 10:35 PM // 22:35

It was just an example of what type of RAM to get, I saw the price and said ''wtf'' too.

And I agree that Intel processors are more worth it, but I'm stuck with my AMD for now, it's fine. My next build will have Intel.

cebalrai · May 05, 2008, 10:58 PM // 22:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lania Elderfire

AMD processors just isn't really worth it anymore... They have horrible performance/watt ratio... and also lose on the performance/price. The new intel wolfdale processors, and yorkfeild processors are much faster and consume a lot less power.

PC World, Maximum PC, and Firing Squad all say that AMD processors currently have a very good performance/price ratio. Especially the Tri-Core Phenoms.

And nobody cares about power consumption. How many folks are chiming in asking if a certain processor will eat up an extra $1.25 on their electric bill? Never heard of such a thing.

Arlian · May 06, 2008, 07:43 AM // 07:43

How does this look for a replacement for the RAM ?

Corsair TWIN2X4096-6400C5 4GB (2x XMS2 2GB) PC-6400 (800MHz) DDR2 RAM, 2x240-pin DIMMs, Non ECC

I would get some PC8500 RAM but as far as i can see www.eyo.com.au doesnt have any of it

PC6400 should do fine though right ?

Also, thanks for the advice on monitors, going to get a samsung monitor

Afterall, who wants dead pixels ?

nebuchanezzar · May 06, 2008, 12:30 PM // 12:30

That system is more than adequate to run GW just fine. Don't take the Intel>AMD argument to heart though. It is true that right now Intels have about a 5-6% performance margin over comparable AMD's but, is that anything you can notice AND is it worth the extra price. Personally that is a "no" for me but I do have 1 Intel machine(compared to my 4 AMD's =]) just to tweak it and play with it. My gaming machine is old by computer standards and when I decide to move it to my son and build another it will very likely be AMD again unless I can be shown a better price/performance by people(not advertising/biased tests) from sites like Xtreme Systems or Overclockers forums.
Also, with monitors you get what you pay for usually. Don't worry too much about the price. Your monitor, like a good PSU, should last for at least 2 systems. When you look at it that way, you are spending your money now to save money in the future. At worst that means 1/2 now to save that much later. Granted, it sucks coming up with an extra 100-200 bucks now but quality is worth it imo.

Snograt · May 06, 2008, 01:33 PM // 13:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admael

The ones Brianna have posted (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820145179)is actually quite expensive (and no one knows why!). Here are the same RAM at half the price.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820145197

Just had a look at both those. What's really odd is that Brianna's set is 4x1GB, whareas Admaels are 2x2GB.

1GB sticks come at a premium? I suspect pricing error ^^

(Heh, did I ever tell you about my expensive Ballistix "Tracer" RAM? With the lovely rows of flashing LEDs down the side?

...in my NON-windowed case?

><)