The Ultimate Dream Computer

Nope, DVD drives are never used in the middle of games. The problem will almost certainly be with your graphics card.

 

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-056-GW&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=927

another bargain:

Gainward BLISS GeForce 8800 GTS 512MB GDDR3 HDTV/Dual DVI (PCI-Express)

Click image to enlarge


This Week Only Offer
was £197.99 ex vat
£184.99
£217.36 inc VAT

The latest graphics card from NVIDIA is a new re-vamped 8800 GTS with 512MB of GDDR3 memory and more shader pipelines along with increased clock speeds to a huge performance boost. The G92 core is the first chip nVidia has produced using a 65nm manufacturing process which allows the kernal to run at higher frequencies with reduced heat output. Along with 128 stream processors this card has enormous potential with performance close and sometimes matching the GTX in benchmarks.

- NVIDIA® GeForce® 8800 GTS Core running at 650MHz (G92 Low Power Consumption Edition)
- PCI Express® 2.0
- 512MB GDDR3 High Speed Memory running at 1940MHz
- Shader Clock Speed of 1625MHz
- Stream Processors: 128
- Texture Fill Rate: 41.6 Billion/sec.
- Memory Bandwidth: 62.1GB/sec.
- Shader Model: 4.0
- API Support: Microsoft® DirectX® 10 and lower, OpenGL® 2.0 and lower for Microsoft Windows®
- Connectors: (2) Dual-Link DVI-I, HDTV + TV Out
- RAMDACs: Dual 400MHz
- HDCP Capable: Yes*
- Supplied with Tomb Raider: Anniversary Full PC Game
- 2yr Warranty with OcUK/Gainward.

 

I spotted that, a very tasty offering, and I'd go for that over the GTX. Just as fast, £20 less, and a better made card.

 

yeah me too...oh Sam even over HD3870?

 

It kind of depends, really. If you upgrade regularly then go for the G92 8800GTS, because by the time DX10.1 and SM4.1 get used, you'll probably be upgrading again. If you don't though and want something to last, I'd still say go with the HD3870, so you can make full use of new graphics technologies when they arrive. For the average gamer, who runs 1280x1024 or 1680x1050 as their screen resolution, an HD3870 can play every current game except Crysis at absolute max settings with no issues whatsoever, and that situation's not going to change for quite some time.

 

well i gotta agree with that...that should last you for quite a long time until your next upgrade...the problem is getting a good CPU THAT can run all the games without upgrading in the next 10 years...

 

Not upgrading for 10 years? not likely! how many people do you know that are still using P2 333mhz CPUs with 64MB of SDRAM and 4MB Rage graphics?

 

lol...well...over exaggerated there...about 5 years...not 10 thats too long...my friend is still using P4 3.0Ghz, it was kicking ass 3 - 4 years ago...but now...still works pretty well...

 

No offense intended here, but the P4 never kicked ass. AMD had it beat from start to finish. A 3-4 year old PC will still be of moderate use, but 5 years you're pushing it. Any further and it's a strictly office work only job.

 

was it better than the top PIIIs?

 

The late Northwoods were, but not the others. The willamettes certainly weren't.

 

Sam
You need to be getting your history straight. The Willamette was the early P4 and some claimed it was brought to market before it was ready. The AMDs had no problem outperforming them and the P3s as mentioned did as well. In late 2001 the AMD Athlon was the clear leader. The story changed when the Northwood was released in January of 02. The Northwoods became the performance leader. Intel held the lead for a year or so with the Northwoods and Gallatin. In late 03 AMD released the Athlon 64 FX and in February of 04 Intel released their Presscott firebox. Intel officially shot themselves in the foot with that one. AMD took the lead with the Athlon 64 FX and held it until mid 06 when Intel switched from Netburst to the C2D Core microarchitecture.

AMD actually created the true performance category and held it for a couple of years. Intel's answer was C2D and they've held the lead for well over a year.

 

The Willamette was indeed the early P4, when did I say otherwise?
As I understand it, you had the P3, then the Willamette which was far slower. The Northwood superceded the Willamette and actually did turn out to be a decent speed. When the Prescott was released, things pretty much went back to the ways of the Willamette, only with more heat...
I'm sorry but I don't understand why what I've written is wrong.
You really think the Northwoods was a performance champ?

 

Willamette?Northwood?...??...huh?

 

Heh, learn your history man!
Willamette and Northwood were two different variants of the P4 that came before the Prescott you probably know.

 

lol..to tell the true history is my worst subject...luckily i get to choos my own subjects...

all i know is P1, P2, P3 so on...don't really know about the Willamette and Northwood

 

So how many of these names mean anything to you?
Mendocino
Coppermine
Tualatin
Willamette
Northwood
Prescott
Smithfield
Allendale
Conroe
Kentsfield
Yorkfield
Thunderbird
Palomino
Thoroughbred
Barton
Manila
Sparta
San Diego
Venice
Manchester
Toledo
Brisbane

I Think that's all the recent ones isn't it?

 

Sam
I'm not saying you can't list all the processors. I'm just saying you missed some of the particulars. There was no question about the Willamette being the first P4, or at least named as such. Here's what you said and reading my post in context with it shows where the disagreement lies.

There were some P4s that kicked serious ass. AMD didn't hold the performance lead over the P4s once they were improved until the Athlon 64 came along. The Prescott was hotter running, but could handle encoding better than the Northwoods (at least stock clocking), while the Northwoods had an advantage for gaming. The Prescott was somewhat faster, but the architecture took Intel down a dead end road. Luckily for Intel the Israel group perfected the Core micro architecture and pulled their bacon out of the fire with the C2D. So... the Willamette was weak, but the following Northwoods were performance leaders til the Athlon 64 came along. The Prescott was just the first of line of futile attempts at competing using the Netburst architecture. Intel didn't get it right til they changed the architectural design.

 

Willamette(today)
Northwood (today)
Prescott
Allendale
Conroe
Kentsfield
Yorkfield
Sparta
San Diego
Venice
Manchester
Toledo
Brisbane

these are the ones i know...

 

omgomgomg
http://www.engadget.com/photos/dell-3008wfp-hands-on/569047/
WANT