The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition

Haha. Media player classic uses 10MB. That seems pretty reasonable to me. I've not set up WMP on this PC so I can't measure it. Playing a 1080p film using MPC uses 65MB, which is still pretty small.

 

hehe, id choose a better program but im too lazy lol, but you see vista 64 really doesnt use that much, and near 2GB when im loading it up with "bloat" haha


also they use what ever came with the system so in its case just the tower, plus a monitor and kb/m.

5 mins is no way possbile, unless you have full HDD (ahem ) and the HDD, was it defragged?

how about trying vista on a formated hdd?

my WMP is using 13MBs, and xfire is using 21, as is MSN.

 

Given how ridiculously long Vista takes to install, I really can't be bothered to waste that much time on it. Once I get back to York I'm sending off the dud Raptor I bought for a fiver for RMA, so when that comes back, I'll test it out on that.

The Vista HDD is fragmented (and obviously can't be defragged due to the free space) but not to such an extent that XP says it should be defragmented. The XP HDD tested is also fragmented and also has a low amount of free space (7.6%) though not as low as the vista drive (currently 1.8%, was 3.9% when tested)

I note, you are using the task manager to measure commit charge, not memory usage. The two are vastly different. a program using 150MB in task manager can be using up to 1GB of real memory.

 

kinda off topic here but we are talking about it.
i'll ask you sam since you mentioned it... why would these games(Crysis warhead) be made to play if you had to have a top of the line high dollar CPU to play it? i understand you sadi to play it at its best peek performance but if you cant play it at that high standard why are these games being bought and played if they look so crappy at lower settings?i really doubt someone is gonna buy a $50 game and then go buy a $569 cpu just to play it??? am i makeing any sence here...from what you have said about the game i wont bother buying it if i cant play it and look half way decent, cause i dont have a Q9650(unless Soph wants to loan his out..lol)

 

Crysis always was a bit of a weird game in that department, it's the only game where the CPU limit is really a problem for a high-end CPU owner.

 

cheers loco let me try

 

So How do I use this? lol - as you can see I don't use Vista much.

 

you make a notepad file

and then name it bootspeed.vbs


me with cold boot, got 77, and with a restart 84, from button press till xfire logs on (which is when i can start using my vista, and HDD activity stops)

 

Hello ppl

Ive to several guys here who have so generously helped me with my computer specs etc. However there are just a few things thant bother me.I was looking to buy a mid range card like a xfx9600gt xxx alpha dog ed. However the thing thats thrown a spanner in the works is this whole SLI thing sammorris kindly recomended several components to me one of which is the EP35-DS3L mobo which im not sure is SLI compatible. Now as im a casual gamer who'd probably never (if im brutally honest) play a pc game would it be worth me paying extra for the sli mobo and would it be worth buying the above mentioned GFX card. I am however someone who spends a helluva lot of time ripping videos converting etc and i do eventually want to add a blueray drive. I do want crystal clear video quality.

 

SLI requires an SLI motherboard, which are universally bad, and is not only slower than using one more powerful card like a GTX260 (or a radeon HD4870 for example), it's also more expensive. It can also only boost games performance, not video rendering etc. A single card is a much better bet.

 

dude you know what? Your brilliant this is the second time you saved me racking my brains

so shall i stick to the mobo you recomended? ala http://www.ebuyer.com/product/148800

rather than something like

http://www.kikatek.com/product_info.php?products_id=33978&source=froogle

with one of these

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/148472

Because to be honest i doubt i can keep up with the games aspect but really want somethinmg that can do blueray justice on a hd tv. Since im puttinmg together a pc i thought i'd choose the best one i can afford.

 

You don't need a complex card for HD at all, an HD3450 for 25 quid would suffice, you only need the powerful GPU for gaming. I'd stay away from the XFX motherboard, as it's a 680i chipset board, which are painfully problematic. You can use an nvidia card with an Intel chipset board like the EP35-DS3L no trouble at all. Likewise, you could even use an ATI card with an nvidia motherboard if you really wanted, I've done it in the past.
Rather than get that 9600GT, here's a better card that costs very little more:
http://www.ebuyer.com/product/135024
Or alternatively, if you're not going to be gaming much, you could go with something more basic and cheaper like this:
http://www.ebuyer.com/product/140617
That can still play games to a reasonable extent, though I wouldn't recommend it for playing Crysis it can do pretty much anything else.

If you want something powerful for games and HD, then it doesn't get much better than this:
http://www.ebuyer.com/product/148468

 

gaming isn't a biggie for me...ideally im willing to dump the graphics for the multimedia aspect ie crystal clear picture and sound and a fast machine that can convert videos pronto. The HD aspect is important for me hence why i initially wanted to go midrange on the gfx card.

would a cheaper gfx card effect the quality of a video/ blueray dvd etc?

 

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/149184

recomend this for lightgaming, much better than the 3650 and not much less than the 9600GSO

also i wouldnt call the GTX280 a little better than the 4870, that liek when u said the 8800GT was a little better then the 3870. btu this time the gap is wider.

this gfx cad has 8 chanel sound out of the HDMI aswell.


oh and choose nvidia for photoshopping, as CS4 utilises nvidia cards through CUDA to speed it up

 

It was 15-20% then, it's 15-20% now. back then it was a case of £120 for one, £140 for the other. Now it's a case of £170 for one, £300 for the other, the GTX280 started to look viable before the price increase, now it's a complete waste of time.



Agreed on the HD4670 card, it's a very good balance of games performance and crystal clear image quality for both games and HD video.

 

basically ppl im willing to dump the gfx aslong as i can go all out on the hdtv aspect i want a card that has absolutely no issues playing a hddvd or blueray on maximum quality. Oh and is the gfx card responsible for video editing or is it the ram cpu etc?

 

HD4670 then.

 

id agree completely sam, the pricing is WAY to far off.

if it was £250, it would be worth the extra price over the 4870, at £300 its a complete joke. and anyone who buys one, with a decent budget just lost £120 to spend on a better mobo, or sound, or a case or PSU, or to more future proof it etc.

for the price 4870 anyday.

tbh the 4870 isnt worth the £60 on top of the 4850 either, but, its as good as if not better then the GTX260, and the 260 is prices about £170, so alls good