Staredit Network

Staredit Network -> Computers and Technical -> New PC, Finally

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Felagund on 2006-12-11 at 20:08:24

I clicked Submit Order mere minutes ago. Merci beaucoup ma mère for making my Christmas worth it this year (I'll be paying her back though in January, but it's worth it. I just can't wait anymore).

eVGA nForce 680i motherboard
Thermaltake 750 watt Toughpower PSU
Cool: Intel E6700 CPU

2x1 GB Corsair XMS DDR2 800 @ 4-4-4-12
The GOOD PART: eVGA 768mb GeForce 8800GTX

Sound Blaster X-Fi Platinum
2x 320GB Seagate Hard Drives
DVD-Burner/DVD-Rom Drive
Sony Floppy Drive (woohoo!

)

Ah... woohoo.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-12-11 at 20:25:51

All that crap and you don't double the GPU?

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Felagund on 2006-12-11 at 20:32:31

Because the 8800GTX is so powerful it can do Oblivion on full settings at 1680x1050, which is my resolution, at like 45 fps. Besides, the limit was $2500.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-12-11 at 21:34:27

Oh, that little? I'd forgotten how fast stuff depreciates

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Cole on 2006-12-11 at 21:42:27

QUOTE

Because the 8800GTX is so powerful it can do Oblivion on full settings at 1680x1050, which is my resolution, at like 45 fps. Besides, the limit was $2500.

Oblivion, like morrowind, has a pretty crapty engine. Gamebyro I believe it's called. Horrible compared to other engines in how the rendering is actually done. I wish Bethesda would write there own engine built for an RPG rather than one that seems to be fit more for RTS standards. They used it with Morrowind, then took it and upgraded it then I believe they called it an in-house engine after that. Still renders the same way though. Horrible horrible horrible. Morrowind can still make my computer run like crap in certain parts...while I can run BF2 on almost all high settings.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by TerminaterCE on 2006-12-11 at 21:47:13

I just got a new comp too with an nVidia e_GeForce FX5500 which runs Diablo 2 at 48-50 something fps which is nice, and it only cost me 90$ C =D. Congrats on the 8800, i looked in my store i went to, and the one i got was the best

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-12-11 at 21:52:29

QUOTE(Felagund @ Dec 11 2006, 09:08 PM)

2x1 GB Corsair XMS DDR2 800 @ 4-4-4-12
The GOOD PART: eVGA 768mb GeForce 8800GTX

Sound Blaster X-Fi Platinum
2x 320GB Seagate Hard Drives
DVD-Burner/DVD-Rom Drive
Sony Floppy Drive (woohoo!

)

Ah... woohoo.
[right][snapback]602532[/snapback][/right]

I wouldn't have gotten a e6700, personally. You can easilly get an e6600 up to it's speeds and more (through overclocking), and, it's only 300 dollars. I would have spent the 200 dollars(That's the difference between e6600 and e6700, right..) on something like watercooling, then OC more

Still, lucky!!!

For Christmas... I think I'm going to get a Biostar TForce 6100 Socket AM2 MicroATX motherboard with intergrated GPU, AMD Athlon x2 3800+, and 2x512mb XMS2 DDR2 800.. Why I'm getting something so...outdated? Well, I can't afford anything else

But once I get some more money, I might get a x1900GT or 7900GT. If I volt mod the 7900GT, I can definately get 700mhz core clock with an aftermarket cooler.... and the stock is like 450mhz..

But I gotta wait till Christmas

Andy yeah, Oblivion's engine isn't very good... The grass lags it up a bunch, too

just get mods to fix it up.

LOL, FX5500

What a powerhouse

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Felagund on 2006-12-11 at 22:02:10

You can't deny that this is going to be a beast.

I'll come back in five years and be like, "Wow, what a piece of sh*t!"

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Cole on 2006-12-12 at 01:19:38

QUOTE

Theres only one store around here where I can buy low-end computer parts....there nothing for mid-end or high-end. It's called www.NewEgg.com.

The Fx5500....the Fx lineup was so god damn crapty. ATI dominated Nvidia back then.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Felagund on 2006-12-13 at 16:23:40

Everything is here. Afk for building new PC. Lol!

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-12-13 at 19:00:07

3DMarks after plx

And do you plan on overclocking?

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Nintendo_Confed on 2006-12-14 at 18:19:10

Wow, wat a hell of a comp. I wish i had one like that. I cant even see the water in RTC3 with my crappy-ass 64 mb video card

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-12-15 at 19:36:34

It's awesome, but... why?

I do anything I want on my good ole' $1000 computer + $250 monitor. I'd love to have everything run on a huge resolution, though

. Or have that much less problems with lag. I can keep up a healthy 30-60 FPS in WoW, though, and the eye can't notice much past 30. Max settings. Sadly, that's not saying much as it's not very graphics intensive.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by ShadowFlare on 2006-12-16 at 03:46:31

QUOTE(Centreri @ Dec 15 2006, 06:36 PM)

It's awesome, but... why?

I do anything I want on my good ole' $1000 computer + $250 monitor. I'd love to have everything run on a huge resolution, though

The eye can't notice much past 30? Mine can notice at least between 2 to 3 times that. lol

Report, edit, etc...Posted by dumbducky on 2006-12-16 at 09:34:53

You can tell the difference between 30 and 60 or 90, but not between 30 and 35. The difference is just to small.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-12-16 at 09:44:10

I'm saying that it hardly matters beyond 30. Sure, a tad more noticable smoothness between 30 and 90, but 30 is about all you need for 95% smoothness.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-12-16 at 10:23:53

Unless he runs his monitor at 90hz, he wont ever actually get 90 FPS anyway..

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-12-16 at 10:34:51

Yeah. 60 is the absolute maximum I'd run anything on. Maybe 70. But nothing beyond that; it's completely useless.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Felagund on 2006-12-16 at 10:34:53

Alright, here are some stats (for some reason I can't view my 3dmarks 06 score, but average fps in the graphics tests were high, and the cpu tests were pretty good too). For F.E.A.R., I averaged 67 fps with full (everything set to maximum) settings on at the highest fullscreen resolution I can play it at (no widescreen support

). Call of Duty 2 is smooth as silk at 1680x1050 with full settings on, as is Oblivion (can you imagine no lag at 8x AA in that game and full distance sliders/shadows?!) and Dark Messiah of Might & Magic (which is awesome in a whole new sense. Physics = god ).

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-12-16 at 12:12:23

You still won't be able to max Oblivion

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-12-16 at 12:53:24

Waste of money! Buy Wii, PS3, and Xbox 360 instead. And a ton o' games.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-12-16 at 13:38:54

This is for college, I think ;p

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-12-16 at 14:30:29

Laptops better. You can't bring a desktop to a lecture or anything like that.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by ShadowFlare on 2006-12-16 at 14:45:50

QUOTE(Deathawk @ Dec 16 2006, 09:23 AM)

Unless he runs his monitor at 90hz, he wont ever actually get 90 FPS anyway..
[right][snapback]604356[/snapback][/right]

If you have v-sync off, then frame rates higher than the refresh rate actually do look different. Try playing a game at 150+ FPS with v-sync off at 75 Hz refresh rate compared with the frame rate limited to 75; there is a difference in smoothness.

BTW, I'm talking about a CRT monitor here. If you are using an LCD, there's likely no way you would be able to see a difference, because of the limitations of LCD displays.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-12-16 at 14:54:10

Ehh.. What limitations are those?

Next Page (1)