FAO Computer Genius-tards

Sojiro

Formerly MST3K
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
4,242
Location
"Sometimes you're not sure about a player,&qu
MST3K said:
Saw an Ad last night while driving that its being released on July 27th :drool: my mate signed up to test the beta version, so i'll have to inquire about it.

I'll need to get a new computer though. The one i'm currently using can barely run FM10 (choppy, slow loading) so $500 will get me this:

AMD PHENOM II x 4 955 QUAD CORE 3.2G ASUS M4A77TD Motherboard
46 DDR3 memory
1T hard drive
22x DVDRW +/- dual layer drive
HD 4350 512M PCI E Video Card
GIGABIT Lan onboard
8 channel HD audio onboard
INWIN ATX case and Power Supply
Keyboard/mouse
Speakers

is it worth $500 canadian Dollars?
Click to expand...

I posted this in the Starcraft 2 thread but I know there are some clued up posters on computer so I would humbly like to ask their opinion. games like Football Manager are crashing and with games like FM11, Starcraft 2 and others coming out, I figure its close to time for a new computer.

The one i'm using has DDR1 memory, 2.3 single core motherboard. I would have to order it from a small store that would build it for me so I'd rather have a better sense of what I'm buying. I know probably anything is better than what i'm using but if this is not a good deal then i'll walk away from it.

thanks everyone.
 
MST3K said:
I posted this in the Starcraft 2 thread but I know there are some clued up posters on computer so I would humbly like to ask their opinion. games like Football Manager are crashing and with games like FM11, Starcraft 2 and others coming out, I figure its close to time for a new computer.

The one i'm using has DDR1 memory, 2.3 single core motherboard. I would have to order it from a small store that would build it for me so I'd rather have a better sense of what I'm buying. I know probably anything is better than what i'm using but if this is not a good deal then i'll walk away from it.

thanks everyone.
Click to expand...


Sounds like a great deal to me. You should be able to run FM easily actually you can run FM simultaneously with other games and still not experience much lag.
 
fanutd said:
Sounds like a great deal to me. You should be able to run FM easily actually you can run FM simultaneously with other games and still not experience much lag.
Click to expand...

thanks alot for that fanutd. are you using Windows 7? With them building the computer you have to purchase windows 7 and wondering how big a jump it will be, since this one has XP on it
 
I'd pay a bit extra for a 4850, far better for the long term.

Also, if it's for gaming then Dual Core is actually better than Quad Core, because most games don't use more than 2, and a lot still just use 1, so it's better to have 2 very powerful with dual core instead of 4 pretty powerful with quad core. I'd also go Intel over AMD at the moment.

Basically, go a bit cheaper on the processor and a bit more expensive on the GFX card.

Oh, and make sure that PSU is at least 500W, PSU's that come pre-installed in cases can be very dodgy.

Other than that, looks a good deal.
 
MST3K said:
thanks alot for that fanutd. are you using Windows 7? With them building the computer you have to purchase windows 7 and wondering how big a jump it will be, since this one has XP on it
Click to expand...

I am using windows 7 and so should you with that system.

I am sure you can pass on buying Win 7 since there are special means to get it ;)
 
cina said:
I'd pay a bit extra for a 4850, far better for the long term.

Also, if it's for gaming then Dual Core is actually better than Quad Core, because most games don't use more than 2, and a lot still just use 1, so it's better to have 2 very powerful with dual core instead of 4 pretty powerful with quad core. I'd also go Intel over AMD at the moment.

Basically, go a bit cheaper on the processor and a bit more expensive on the GFX card.

Oh, and make sure that PSU is at least 500W, PSU's that come pre-installed in cases can be very dodgy.

Other than that, looks a good deal.
Click to expand...

cheers for that cina, thats some real helpful advice there. There is another offer with a Dual Core processor, but is only has the DDR2 memory. Is it possible to find a dual core with the DDR3 ram?

I'm sure a dual core is cheaper so any monies saved can be invested into a better graphics card. I will definately check the PSU, cheers.
 
MST3K said:
thanks alot for that fanutd. are you using Windows 7? With them building the computer you have to purchase windows 7 and wondering how big a jump it will be, since this one has XP on it
Click to expand...

You don't really need too much for Windows 7.

I just set up my PC some months back.

The processor you chose is great. The Phenom x 4 is quite a good proccy.

Go for a better GPU though. HD 4350 is already outdated and won't play any of the newer games on a good resolution. It's ok for FM 11 but not for most other games.

And make sure you don't compromise on PSU. People ended up saving money on that even though that's probably more important than anything. A bad PSU can ruin your graphic card faster.

The Intel i3 core is a great dual core and cheap processor too. And with Hyper threading it behaves as 4 cores only.

2 GB DDR3 RAM is more than enough to run WIndows 7 64 bit too.
 
MST3K said:
cheers for that cina, thats some real helpful advice there. There is another offer with a Dual Core processor, but is only has the DDR2 memory. Is it possible to find a dual core with the DDR3 ram?

I'm sure a dual core is cheaper so any monies saved can be invested into a better graphics card. I will definately check the PSU, cheers.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think if your motherboard supports DDR3 then you can use DDR3.

The i3 Intel processor definitely uses DDR3.

Infact it only uses DDR3 and not DDR2
 
wr8_utd said:
You don't really need too much for Windows 7.

I just set up my PC some months back.

The processor you chose is great. The Phenom x 4 is quite a good proccy.

Go for a better GPU though. HD 4350 is already outdated and won't play any of the newer games on a good resolution. It's ok for FM 11 but not for most other games.

And make sure you don't compromise on PSU. People ended up saving money on that even though that's probably more important than anything. A bad PSU can ruin your graphic card faster.

The Intel i3 core is a great dual core and cheap processor too. And with Hyper threading it behaves as 4 cores only.

2 GB DDR3 RAM is more than enough to run WIndows 7 64 bit too.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, it's a good bit of info and. Advice.... Is the 4850 gpu that china suggested better then?

As far as the processor is, if it's good then I do t Ming paying for it, it will be good to have and make things quick. Do you agree that an intel is better than an amd?

I will definitely make sure I get a decent gpu and psu.
 
MST3K said:
Thanks for that, it's a good bit of info and. Advice.... Is the 4850 gpu that china suggested better then?

As far as the processor is, if it's good then I do t Ming paying for it, it will be good to have and make things quick. Do you agree that an intel is better than an amd?

I will definitely make sure I get a decent gpu and psu.
Click to expand...

I strongly regret giving you advice now :D

The 4850 runs just about everything well, it's fine as a graphics card, especially on a budget. Something like this would be fine, but if you want to pay more for longevity you could get one of the these newer cards. Fact is though that PC gaming just isn't increasing in terms of graphics like it used to. It used to generally be light years ahead of consoles but because of illegal downloading it's restricted now, and most games that come out, bar very few, are on the same level graphically as the 360 and the PS3. Both those cards will run anything you throw at them well though.

Oh and wr8 is right, the i3 are excellent.
 
cina said:
I strongly regret giving you advice now :D

The 4850 runs just about everything well, it's fine as a graphics card, especially on a budget. Something like this would be fine, but if you want to pay more for longevity you could get one of the these newer cards. Fact is though that PC gaming just isn't increasing in terms of graphics like it used to. It used to generally be light years ahead of consoles but because of illegal downloading it's restricted now, and most games that come out, bar very few, are on the same level graphically as the 360 and the PS3. Both those cards will run anything you throw at them well though.

Oh and wr8 is right, the i3 are excellent.
Click to expand...

:lol: My apologies cina, my iPhone does the autofill word and i didn't even look at my post. I'll be more careful i swear!

Cheers for the gpu advice and the CPU in general, makes me feel much more comfortable with this up coming purchase
 
IF you want something cheap and good and a bit future proof too then try the 5670. It's got Direct X 11 support too.

If your willing to go to around $150 for a good enough graphic card I think you could get the 5770 on that. And if your resolution is not too high then this card plays any game in the world perfectly. I have it :D
 
MST3K said:
Thanks for that, it's a good bit of info and. Advice.... Is the 4850 gpu that china suggested better then?

As far as the processor is, if it's good then I do t Ming paying for it, it will be good to have and make things quick. Do you agree that an intel is better than an amd?

I will definitely make sure I get a decent gpu and psu.
Click to expand...

Well AMD and Intel are both good but Intel is more trusted. However if you like tweaking around and overclocking your Processor then the AMD's are quite good, however the overclocking of the i3,i5 and i7 are amazing too.
I've always used Intel so I'm a bit biased towards Intel over AMD :D

AMD does have good cheap solutions with some of their Athlon processors though
 
wr8_utd said:
IF you want something cheap and good and a bit future proof too then try the 5670. It's got Direct X 11 support too.

If your willing to go to around $150 for a good enough graphic card I think you could get the 5770 on that. And if your resolution is not too high then this card plays any game in the world perfectly. I have it :D
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input on the graphics card wr8_utd, as you and cina point out the 4350 GPU is an old card and newer games will require a better one. Obviously better is more pricey but if you getting something made i might aswell invest so it will last longer. THe 5770 should be fine, as you said if the resolution is kept in check.

This website, PC Perspective - StarCraft II Performance Review - Even your mom can play, says that the Nvidia card that can use Anti-Aliasing is best but i imagine it hits the high end of the price range. They showed the GeForce GTX 460 to handle the new games and its a bit more reasonable in price.
 
Oh, speaking of overclocking, processors nowadays can be massively tweaked, some can go to insane levels with the right cooling. If you don't want to take the risk and overclock yourself, there are sites which do it for you before they send you the product. Here's an excellent (and well valued) little bundle which I reckon would be right up your alley.

Argon Intel Core i3 2.93GHz @ 4.00GHz Overclocked Bundle [] Overclocked Bundles Gamer - Argon

Might make things a bit more expensive than what you post though, but the processor is better than what you posted, it's DD3 and has a mobo with plenty of slots for HDs etc. I've just realized you're in Canada though so ... now this is useless!

Have you considered a PSU btw? I can't stress their importance enough. They're the 1 thing you need to go with a tried and tested brand on. Don't get anything less than 500W. Antec are always a good shout. Something like this:

Antec Basiq Plus 550W Modular Power Supply [] Power Supplies Antec
 
cina said:
Oh, speaking of overclocking, processors nowadays can be massively tweaked, some can go to insane levels with the right cooling. If you don't want to take the risk and overclock yourself, there are sites which do it for you before they send you the product. Here's an excellent (and well valued) little bundle which I reckon would be right up your alley.

Argon Intel Core i3 2.93GHz @ 4.00GHz Overclocked Bundle [] Overclocked Bundles Gamer - Argon

Might make things a bit more expensive than what you post though, but the processor is better than what you posted, it's DD3 and has a mobo with plenty of slots for HDs etc. I've just realized you're in Canada though so ... now this is useless!

Have you considered a PSU btw? I can't stress their importance enough. They're the 1 thing you need to go with a tried and tested brand on. Don't get anything less than 500W. Antec are always a good shout. Something like this:

Antec Basiq Plus 550W Modular Power Supply [] Power Supplies Antec
Click to expand...

I will definately make sure the PSW is up to snuff. As for the deal, its good but I'm now wondering with all this new knowledge i might look around and see if I can find a i3 or i5 thats prebuilt for around the same.

the same company has two other offers, more expensive with a better CPU, the second has 8G DDR3 memory aswell though everything else (PSW, GPU, hard drive) stays the same.

for $749 an INTEL CORE i5 QUAD I5-750 2.66 G
for $999 an Intel Core i7 QUAD I7-860 2.8 G

all these built ones require windows 7 at 100 bucks :o

better CPUS now costing much more money and if i want a better PSW and GPU its pushing the price real high.
 
They're both quad though. I can't see why you'd need quad for gaming really. dual core is perfectly fine, and as I said before, the processors in dual core are generally more powerful. Quad core is really for PCs where you run umpteen things at once. I'd get rid of the quad and spend the money on a better gfx card instead.
 
Only go for super high end processors with Quad core if your into 3D and Video rendering and the likes. FOr Gaming a i3 is more than enough :D
 
cina said:
They're both quad though. I can't see why you'd need quad for gaming really. dual core is perfectly fine, and as I said before, the processors in dual core are generally more powerful. Quad core is really for PCs where you run umpteen things at once. I'd get rid of the quad and spend the money on a better gfx card instead.
Click to expand...

do the i3/i5 come in quad? they are offering a few core 2 duo:

E5400 2.7G
E7500 2.93G
both on DDR2 memory.

feck, just when i thought i was getting the hang of it.

edit - thanks for your patience guys, i know it can be tedious when someone isnt understanding. Looking at wikipedia, it seems the intel core 2 duo was retired and replaced with the i3/i5/i7 lines.
 
Yeah the i3 has 2 physical cores and 2 virtual cores.

The i5 is obviously better and if it's not too much more expensive then go for it no problem.

And defintely do not go for the E series dual core DDR2 processors.

The i3/i5/i7 work ONLY on DDR3 RAM
 
wr8_utd said:
Yeah the i3 has 2 physical cores and 2 virtual cores.

The i5 is obviously better and if it's not too much more expensive then go for it no problem.

And defintely do not go for the E series dual core DDR2 processors.

The i3/i5/i7 work ONLY on DDR3 RAM
Click to expand...

so quad is a bit of an overkill? its odd to think the dual core can be faster than the quad core, like cina was saying.
 
MST3K said:
so quad is a bit of an overkill? its odd to think the dual core can be faster than the quad core, like cina was saying.
Click to expand...

Well look at it this way. Quad cores are likely to have less processing power per CPU, because it's more expensive to make them obviously, and risker. If a game only uses 1 of the CPUs (which believe it or not, a lot of modern games still do) then a Dual Core with say ... 2.9GHz CPUs will run the game faster than a Quad Core with 2.6 GHz CPUs, because the CPU the game is running on is faster.

Basically, the Quad Cores only really become better when you run multiple programs that use a lot of processing power - video rendering etc.
 
MST3K said:
so quad is a bit of an overkill? its odd to think the dual core can be faster than the quad core, like cina was saying.
Click to expand...

Yeah he's right. Quad would be over kill. Unless your into 3D and Video encoding or your using it for a lot of intensive stuff a Quad is not really needed. the i7's are way too expensive.

i3/i5 are easily good enough for gaming. Infact I use an i3 on a 21 inch TV and I have a HD 5770 graphic card and everything works great on the highest settings in a high resolution.

What's your pc going to be used for? If it's casual use and gaming stick to a cheaper processor and spend more money on the Graphic Card.

Even the Phenom II X4 range of processors and good at reasonable rates.

What's your screen size?
 
Yeah exactly. None of the games today really use all 4 cores so it's definitely an over kill for just a gaming pc.
 
cina said:
Well look at it this way. Quad cores are likely to have less processing power per CPU, because it's more expensive to make them obviously, and risker. If a game only uses 1 of the CPUs (which believe it or not, a lot of modern games still do) then a Dual Core with say ... 2.9GHz CPUs will run the game faster than a Quad Core with 2.6 GHz CPUs, because the CPU the game is running on is faster.

Basically, the Quad Cores only really become better when you run multiple programs that use a lot of processing power - video rendering etc.
Click to expand...

makes sense what you said there, what about the phenom? why is it II x 4, does it act as 2 dual cores rather than a quad? or am i completely out to lunch there. I'll have to enquire on the i3 because they seem to offer core 2, the phenom and the i5/i7's.

wr8_utd said:
Yeah he's right. Quad would be over kill. Unless your into 3D and Video encoding or your using it for a lot of intensive stuff a Quad is not really needed. the i7's are way too expensive.

i3/i5 are easily good enough for gaming. Infact I use an i3 on a 21 inch TV and I have a HD 5770 graphic card and everything works great on the highest settings in a high resolution.

What's your pc going to be used for? If it's casual use and gaming stick to a cheaper processor and spend more money on the Graphic Card.

Even the Phenom II X4 range of processors and good at reasonable rates.

What's your screen size?
Click to expand...

defaintely makes sense to find an i3 and just improve the GPU , memory and harddrive really. Just casual plus some casual game, like FM and older/newer games on single player. I usually have an hour or so here and there to play some games, not the serious online stuff that goes on these days.
 
Yeah then your use is very much similar to mine and I'm using the i3 and I used the cash I saved on the Proccy to get a better GPU and RAM and HD :D

For those requirements you really don't need to splash out more than needed on the i5/i7/X6
 
cina said:
Fact is though that PC gaming just isn't increasing in terms of graphics like it used to. It used to generally be light years ahead of consoles but because of illegal downloading it's restricted now, and most games that come out, bar very few, are on the same level graphically as the 360 and the PS3. Both those cards will run anything you throw at them well though.
Click to expand...

Although this is true, it does come in fits and spurts and hopefully the next Doom, Morrowind, Deus Ex, Crysis is round the corner. Once upon a time, PC gaming was all about technical mastery there was absolutely no regard for who's playing and why. I.e you didn't have to make games easier for the American market, or restrict gore for the European market.

Now it's a big mess, since games like Thief 3 effectively led the way for dumbed down games for the console market you get very little innovation on any front.

My big fear is Crysis 2. Anyone who played the original will tell you what an awesome package that was. Now they are all sold out and the game is coming out on the consoles to look the same (which will limit my bloody PC to looking like something from a couple of years ago no doubt).


The ultimate problem isn't piracy, it's the metrosexual lifestyle :lol: People would now rather sit infront of the idiot box and use something quick and simple. For example, back in the day if a PC went down, people had the brains to at least try to fix them. Now a little red light on the front of a brick and it's panic!
 
Well online gaming on consoles pretty much changed everything. Before that if you wanted to play FPS online you had to go PC, and for the record, FPS's are just so much fecking better on PC, and always will be. I still think nothing has come close to rivaling how awesome Counter Strike was.
 
Redlambs said:
Although this is true, it does come in fits and spurts and hopefully the next Doom, Morrowind, Deus Ex, Crysis is round the corner. Once upon a time, PC gaming was all about technical mastery there was absolutely no regard for who's playing and why. I.e you didn't have to make games easier for the American market, or restrict gore for the European market.

Now it's a big mess, since games like Thief 3 effectively led the way for dumbed down games for the console market you get very little innovation on any front.

My big fear is Crysis 2. Anyone who played the original will tell you what an awesome package that was. Now they are all sold out and the game is coming out on the consoles to look the same (which will limit my bloody PC to looking like something from a couple of years ago no doubt).


The ultimate problem isn't piracy, it's the metrosexual lifestyle :lol: People would now rather sit infront of the idiot box and use something quick and simple. For example, back in the day if a PC went down, people had the brains to at least try to fix them. Now a little red light on the front of a brick and it's panic!
Click to expand...

This is just me going on a thought but I wonder if apple comes into play with the bolded bit. It seems to be the new fad, shiny sleek easy to use and again, easy and simple to show off to friends. Now the iphone, ipad its all about easy games that people can pick up quickly.

also a major cripe about the gaming industry, again fairly random, is the games coming out are visual spectacular yet playably short. All visual impact and in less than 10 hours gameplay your done. Gears of War 2, the halo series come to mind. perhaps i'm off the mark a bit.
 
MST3K said:
All visual impact and in less than 10 hours gameplay your done. Gears of War 2, the halo series come to mind. perhaps i'm off the mark a bit.
Click to expand...

One of the major reasons for this is that as audio and video processing power has increased, so has the amount of time, number of people, and effort required to produce the audio/visual assets in the game, driving costs through the roof, thus your shorter games - many using multiplayer to hide the deficiencies in the single player experience. The only way this is going to get better is with tools.

That said however, arcade games from the late 70s on were never that long, they simply made the game very hard with no save points. You had a number of lives, you lost them, you went to the very beginning. So, blame it on save points to appeal to the masses with not enough skill or patience to acquire the skill necessary.

You can probably complete a game such as say R-Type, which is a classic, in less than 40 minutes.
 
WeasteDevil said:
One of the major reasons for this is that as audio and video processing power has increased, so has the amount of time, number of people, and effort required to produce the audio/visual assets in the game, driving costs through the roof, thus your shorter games - many using multiplayer to hide the deficiencies in the single player experience. The only way this is going to get better is with tools.

That said however, arcade games from the late 70s on were never that long, they simply made the game very hard with no save points. You had a number of lives, you lost them, you went to the very beginning. So, blame it on save points to appeal to the masses with not enough skill or patience to acquire the skill necessary.

You can probably complete a game such as say R-Type, which is a classic, in less than 40 minutes.
Click to expand...

Thats a good point weaste, save points, always an abundance of ammunition and being able to make a number of simple mistakes has really cause a downturn in skill, but an upturn in profits.

I've also heard big companies like microsoft set a deadline, a hard deadline and the gaming crew working 80+ hours a week just to hit the deadline. would explain also for the lack of plot and gameplay.

btw, what do you think about the OP CPU system and the suggestion I go with an i3 dual core rather than a quad i5/i7/phenom
 
Well, yeah, look at what Activision do with COD, you have set release dates, and that led party to the break up of Infinity Ward, then you get Sony that tell the team making GT to do whatever they want to do ($60 million plus to make - crazy), take your time chaps. The difference is that one is selling hardware and a platform, the former isn't, it's putting money in the shareholder's pockets even though both sell on a similar level.

If you are going to buy a new computer, my advice is to go for the highest specification that you can get, as it will last you.
 
WeasteDevil said:
Well, yeah, look at what Activision do with COD, you have set release dates, and that led party to the break up of Infinity Ward, then you get Sony that tell the team making GT to do whatever they want to do ($60 million plus to make - crazy), take your time chaps. The difference is that one is selling hardware and a platform, the former isn't, it's putting money in the shareholder's pockets even though both sell on a similar level.

If you are going to buy a new computer, my advice is to go for the highest specification that you can get, as it will last you.
Click to expand...

Yeah but for a PC for casual gaming going ahead and getting a i7 and a huge GPU makes no sense even if it's future proof.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.