The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition

Reminds me somewhat of my PS1/PS2 days! LOL!! I loved games where you could actually set up the Steering Geometry on the cars because I had been to both Bear and Weaver schools and knew a thing or three about racing setups! Short of being stuffed through a fence, I usually won!

Russ

 

Jeff: Maybe not terrible, but the image quality of most 22" monitors is lacking.
Shaff: I was never too impressed with the CRVDs, the vertical pixel count is even lower than that of a 20" monitor.

 

Oh for sure. I'm not arguing that the image quality is better, but that it's not terrible. I whole heartedly agree that your 20" will have better image quality. No contest. Also agreed on the 21.5" monitors at 1920 x 1080. Fantastic image quality

Never been to any racing school but my dad was a race car pit crew foreman for many years and he has personally built several cars. Much of his knowledge has passed on to me. I can definitely appreciate a racing game with fine levels of control. I can also appreciate the arcadeyness of something like Grid as well though.

I've also seen those multi-monitor setups, and on a capable PC they are a blast to play

You won't find any arguement from me though I will say they can be used quite decently as a main monitor. I've been back and forth between my two monitors and the difference has never really bothered me. Of course I can TELL the difference instantly, but the image quality is really just fine for 90% of the things I do. Lacking in image quality or not, they are cheap, well sized, and still beat the crap out of a CRT or any lesser LCD.

I was actually surprised my 22" monitor looked as good as it did considering all the bad rep they get. Quite pleased with it for LAN gaming and video. The biggest difference for me though was playing 1080p. On my 2407wfp it looks absolutely crystal clear and perfect. On the x223wbd it looks slightly "not as sharp". Though with the 22" you can still easily tell the difference between 1080p and 720p.

 

I sincerely hope you're not surprised that 1080p looks much worse on a screen that doesn't actually have enough pixels.... :S

 

Sam you know me better

I wouldn't say much worse though. Too harsh. Maybe lacking in clarity?

 

i really wouldnt call any TN pannel good in terms of image quatily though, pixeldensity being good or not.

 

As an owner of what I would consider one of the best TNs, I would go as far as to say that the panel type isn't the only major factor. However, you will always be limited to what TN can achieve.

 

Which is exactly why I got my Sceptre re-built rather than get a new TN panel monitor. I knew that whatever I bought, it wouldn't look as good! I was completely taken by surprise by how much better everything looks with a decent video card and 512MB of GDDR3 running things. Like someone here said, it looks so alive. Your eyes see colors as familiar to your everyday life, and you see what you would expect to see if you were in the scene, live! With a lesser video card and only 128MB of GDDR2 with my old 7600GT it looked very good, but the difference with the better card and more and faster memory still stuns me. You see shades and hues of colors and color depth, that you normally only see in real life! The shame of it for me is that I've had the monitor for a number of years, and never before realized it's true potential for picture quality! I'm sure that the new panel helped as it was built in Jan 09, and incorporates some changes in the technology, since it was first made. Whatever it is, the picture is Magnificent. I would still take the 21.6" Asus HDMI over it though! LOL!! Some day! LOL!!

Russ

 

I'm assuming you do realise there's a massive step up in Image Quality from the 7 series to the 9 series? I'm willing to bet it's that, and only that, contributing to the better image quality. As far as I'm aware, no video playback will consume more than 128MB or so of video memory. Just because the extra memory is there doesn't mean it gets used.

 

Yes OMG the GeForce 9 has vastly improved image quality over the GeForce 7s. Though you are aware that ATi is much better if you want image quality. The video and picture quality are superb even on the cheaper cards. You could jump to a 4670 and I know you'd see the difference.

 

well fellows...I got 2 packages that showed up today at once 1 beat the other getting here 1st Fedex=denny hamlin = Biostar I45 and 2nd UPS=david ragan= Gigabyte UD3P ( a little humor from a Nascar Fan as I am lol).I was surprised when...i came in my bedroom after work today and both boxs was on the bed my wife told me that fedex showed up 1st with the I45.I read the comment note Replaced the board i'm glad they replaced.I had a problem awhile back with the Fan 1 connection did'nt supply any power.I did'nt care at time cause...i had other ways getting the fans power like a (fan controller)and what recently happen was the (led) on the board was starting to show
crazy codes not cpu temp but still ran ok so.I finally got tired and shipped it back to Biostar and they replaced with a new 1 under the 1 year warrenty clause(Free). Now with the UD3P board .I sold a Hp system for a $125 and flip it to buy this puppy.I think...i'm just gonna slap it in the Centurion 590 instead and see how it does and pickup a mid case for the I45 instead like haf 922 and another Quad...i must admit...i like the built on audio chip better on
the gigabyte better it sounds more clear a few pics below of the New Boys they double boxed the I45 and fliped the outside box inside out what a way to recycle.lol

first pic


new I45



UD3P



passed IBT so far gonna some Prime95 & LinX






side by side



aight i'm back on the Gigabyte Bus for the moment just to see how it treats my Quad in Cooling and Oc'ing part.I'll post some finding later once.I get it up and running gotta make up my mind which os.I'm gonna use first.i got them all the new win 7 home,pro,ultmate 32bit & 64bit flip of the coin...

Happy Building
Ya'll

 

I went from the 6200 to the 8600Gt, and noticed only a marginal difference in video quality. Now I run the 260 Gtx, and still only that marginal gain. Perhaps my software upscalers are not good enough. I don't like gom player because dvd navigation seems to be impossible... Nero Showtime is so far the best. But windows media player 12 is ok.

 

Haha, I enjoy courier races when I'm ordering from sites that use different couriers. Fact is though, so many courier companies have pissed me off, I tend to try and avoid ordering from anyone who doesn't use a select few. Kind of tricky when the #1 choice of delivery service for electronic components in the UK is on my bad list.
As for the return, while I don't disagree, it's stuff like that where most of Biostar and Gigabyte's bad press comes from. Little maybe slightly annoying faults. With the lesser manufacturers (you all know who I mean) you wouldn't spot such issues for the bigger issues, the not POSTing, the not overclocking, the randomly not working USB ports, etc. etc.
Omega: Likewise, I've seen DVDs run from a laptop's integrated graphics with scarcely any memory, on the same monitor (2407FPW) as my 512MB X1900XT and didn't notice the difference, and considering I still use my X1900XT and didn't spot any difference between it and an HD4830 in HD video playback (apart from the fact that the HD4830 supports DXVA and the X1900 doesn't) on a big 42" TV, I'm pretty sure there isn't much of a difference. What you might spot is that generally the mage output of Geforces prior to the GTX200 series was weaker by comparison, as it was one of nvidia's old shortcuts to getting higher frames, to produce a much rougher output - not disastrous to the viewer obviously, but unsubtle enough for most to spot. Thankfully, that's one bad business tactic nvidia finally abandoned with the GTX280, GTX260 and everything that followed.
Nero Showtime is a handy player as it has bootloads of integrated codecs, but I still found the interface very unfriendly. Quite frankly, if you get past the looks Media Player Classic (with the new HomeCinema 64-bit release) is a good player for damn near anything, it's the only player I've got satisfactory surround sound on (after an age of trying to figure it out LOL) and it's also the only player I've got DXVA working on. Rather sadly, the system with the weakest CPU is the one with the X1900, so I can't make up for where the CPU lacks there. I don't have the heart to throw the X1900 away. I can't sell it, it's not worth anything.
As far as video playback goes, MPC as Primary, VLC as a fallback.

 

For me it's Media Player Classic(non home cinema due to video scaling issues) with the K-Lite codec pack. Dx9 video rendering turned on with a few other effects(basically enabled video acceleration otherwise MPC is mostly CPU). WinAmp with a few codecs for music. VLC used to be my fallback for video due to its standalone approach to decoding, but after the K-Lite codec pack MPC can play everything and properly does everything from dual audio to multi-language subs. As an added bonus the K-Lite pack makes WMP able to play most stuff but it still doesn't handle subs or dual audio(plays both streams at once) worth a crap.

I personally would keep the X1900XT. It's worth far more to you in use than it is sold. You've had it for a few years now so why not a few more? If it does its job well then you have no reason to chuck it. Not only that but it still probably plays some new games just fine so it might be a good fall back should the main PC suffer a catastrophic meltdown or something. Don't forget it's still miles faster than a LOT of the low-mid range cards out barring 4670+.

 

After rendering my PC unable to play any video files until a reformat in the past, I avoid codec packs like K-Lite.

 

I have no clue why it happens but I've heard of it before. Never personally seen it though. And I've installed it on several PCs including my slim Athlon XP laptop(Radeon 7500 32MB) and multiple times on my AMD and Nvidia rigs. I figure it has to do with how you configure it originally. Don't let it change your file associations that's the only thing I can recommend.

Conversely, the CCCP codec pack is terrible and has forced a reformat in the past.

My only reasoning for using a codec pack is that MPC is powerful, but has pitiful support for more uncommon formats. Several of my movies don't render on it at all without proper codecs. After using K-Lite though it has become my sole video player for everything barring random mpegs.

Winamp has had somewhat of a renaissance for me though. Not for video hell no, but for music. After jumping around, Core Media Player, Gom Player(excellent, but no FLAC support to speak of), VLC, etc. Winamp stands the test of time with the best music library management, sound quality, and sheer usability. I've tried others that are supposed to be better, FooBar being the last notable one, but Winamp is so slim and easy to use I find myself drawn back after a year or so without it.

@Creaky,

You are aware that VLC doesn't use codecs at all right? VLC plays everything internally with no codecs. It doesn't even support GPU video acceleration. Not to mention the image quality is terrible. MPC is easily better.

 

To all my Yanks, Happy Thanksgiving, to my Brits, Oh Well, Have A Nice Day

 

Happy Thanksgiving to you as well

FooBar is retardedly complex though which keeps me to Winamp. I see you feel the same way

Scary, we think alike XD

In contrast I feel that Linux is too much manual configuration and fooling around to get working. I like being able to easily do everything I need without searching out an OS specific or open source program to do it. Call me spoiled. I know better but I don't care XD

Whether or not you think you should get one, you would see a nice improvement from a discrete video card. Even $30 will get you an improvement in everything from picture quality to to video acceleration. x264 is a good example of where this can benefit. The motion in the video is actually smoother and more consistent to a small extent. A video card + MPC would blow your mind.