42" LCD Widescreen TV as Monitor......
- Status
701 - 720 of 1121 Posts
with a Q9400, yes I could believe you were on government assistance....
The Q9550 is like the minimum for a "serious" rig....
Yeah, I know, Q9550 is kind of like overkill...when you already got 3+ GHZ...
Personally I thing the QX9770 and the it 975 @ 3.33 GHZ should be the lowest of any Quads......anything under 2.5 GHZ is just small time... (Q6600) etc....
Yours ir right at the 2.5 mark at stock right????
Personally I thing the QX9770 and the it 975 @ 3.33 GHZ should be the lowest of any Quads......anything under 2.5 GHZ is just small time... (Q6600) etc....
Yours ir right at the 2.5 mark at stock right????
Joined
·
8,978 Posts
You live solely on a government pension?? Were you in the Army?
HA!!!!!! either that or he's like me.....Chemically Unstable.........:rotflmao::rotflmao::bow::bow::angry::angry:
Hey, don't call the white coats, I'm just kidding...
Daddy here does odd jobs and contracts for artwork etc...
Hey, don't call the white coats, I'm just kidding...
Daddy here does odd jobs and contracts for artwork etc...
Joined
·
12,998 Posts
2.66 stock!
One was $900 in December!
Plus I got a second one of $1850 last week too!
Also my MB, CPU and case are all on hire-purchase!
No, but I have been on the receiving end of 2 government EXTRA payments so far to help the economy and I know how to save!!
One was $900 in December!
Plus I got a second one of $1850 last week too!
Also my MB, CPU and case are all on hire-purchase!
yeah, you're definitely serious, could probably get to 4 with thte right board or other.....what I'm referring to are these clowns with like a 1.83 or a 2.21 and are wondering "WHY pcsx 2 performs poorly on their all so poweerful rig"...
That's all.. The closer to 3 GHZ stock obviously the better....
:angry::angry:....ass-kicking chips.....:angry::angry:
That's all.. The closer to 3 GHZ stock obviously the better....
you should get the QX9770 @ 3.2GHZ.....Now THAT would be serious....or even the i7 975 @3.33 GHZ....
:angry::angry:....ass-kicking chips.....:angry::angry:
Joined
·
38,506 Posts
I highly doubt that most people are having their browsers read your posts out to them...so none of us can hear you and you can't hear any of us....
Also Shadow why the hell did you buy an SSD? If you absolutely had to get a fast HDD you should have gotten yourself a Raptor.
Gameman once again stop rating PCs solely by clock speed. Your E8600 (when overclocked to 4.4Ghz) coupled with your old 2600XT would be slower at PC gaming than than a Shadow's Q9400 stock with his 9800GTX...heck it would be slower than a stock Q8200...
PCSX2 is almost all clock speed.
PC Gaming is almost all graphics card power.
The real world rates systems in terms of PC gaming, not PCSX2.
Shadow has an awesome gaming system, could perhaps do with a little more power in the graphics department, but otherwise it's awesome.
It was an Sapphire Radeon X1650 Pro BTW....
Naw, Q9400 at 2.66 is good, but I firmly believe even 2 cores is more than you'll ever need for basic desktop computing, let alone gaming... I just said that the closer a Quad is to 3.0 GHZ the better cause then it can meet ALL demands and not just rely on "accumulated " power....
....which seems to be the big "bragging point" for many of the latest Corei7 owners.... They're oblivious to the fact that it's mediocre clock speed, but attempt to atone for this shortcoming with the many real and both imaginary virtual threads that the Bloomfield offers....even though it may in reality be no faster, just more powerful....
Jeez, of course Quad will have more power....no kidding, but quicker...????? that day has yet to come....(except of course for the i7 975 @3.33 - a step in the right direction))....
And I don't just mean pcsx2 - I mean every application that demands a high clock rate....including Crysis, video encoding, and archiving etc.....
Naw, Q9400 at 2.66 is good, but I firmly believe even 2 cores is more than you'll ever need for basic desktop computing, let alone gaming... I just said that the closer a Quad is to 3.0 GHZ the better cause then it can meet ALL demands and not just rely on "accumulated " power....
....which seems to be the big "bragging point" for many of the latest Corei7 owners.... They're oblivious to the fact that it's mediocre clock speed, but attempt to atone for this shortcoming with the many real and both imaginary virtual threads that the Bloomfield offers....even though it may in reality be no faster, just more powerful....
Jeez, of course Quad will have more power....no kidding, but quicker...????? that day has yet to come....(except of course for the i7 975 @3.33 - a step in the right direction))....
And I don't just mean pcsx2 - I mean every application that demands a high clock rate....including Crysis, video encoding, and archiving etc.....
Gameman. In june they won't be selling the lg lcd you are looking for en mass. You'll have to look around for leftover clearance/floor model ones scattered around the city. The deals certainly won't be the same. The 2009 models are coming in a month or so. Your looking at a 2008 model.
Thanks for the heads up.... I may have to put this together by the end of April....I'll look into it.....
I'll check with Futureshop/Bestbuy tomorrow when I get up....
Crap... In the whole city of Winnipeg there must be one or two 42" TV's for 700.00 or so...
There better be if they expect to SELL em.......
I'll check with Futureshop/Bestbuy tomorrow when I get up....
Crap... In the whole city of Winnipeg there must be one or two 42" TV's for 700.00 or so...
There better be if they expect to SELL em.......
Joined
·
1,704 Posts
*Writing*
G-a-m-e-m-a-n... good.
Now you're on my ****-list.
Which now slates you as one of the many cavemen that believe that games will forever-be optimized for dual-core systems. I'm sure they never intended on making quad-optimized games in the future...
Joined
·
38,506 Posts
More Power = Quicker most of the time.
Also I told you before but perhaps you need to spend a bit of dough and see it visually....go buy yourself a P4 3.4Ghz and then pit it against a 1.8Ghz C2D and you will see hopefully once and for all that clock speed is not everything and I will finally be able to stop telling you that.
It is possible for architectural improvements to improve efficiency to such a degree that it surpasses the older higher clocked processor.
Just take a look at the Athlon VS P4 era.
Want to know why my processor was called a 3700+? that's because it was equivalent to a 3.7Ghz Pentium4 yet it itself was only a 2.2Ghz processor. That naming convention by AMD worked all the way up to the C2D, but there the tables swung and it was Intel now producing lower clocked processors which obliterated the higher clocked AMD ones.
Archiving and Videon Encoding are two things which have been able to take full advantage of multi-core processors for a long time so that was a bad example...
As for Crysis yes it cares about strong CPU, but anything 2.4 or above should be fine, after that's it's how much GPU power you are packing...unless of course you have one of the CPU offloading Radeons
I just told you PC games care more about graphics power than CPU clocks and then you bring up a PC game...seriously...how the hell could you think that would be a good example?
So that means we end up where? O yeah PCSX2 being the main thing which requires higher clocks with the real world measuring by other criteria....
Newer is not always better my friend. Never heard the expression they don't make em like they used to?I know I could have bought a rapter Schumi, I just felt like going SSD for $4 less then a 300GB rapter cause its NEW!
Joined
·
12,998 Posts
I know
If it breaks down outside its 2 year warranty I won't care as I will prob be looking to change by then anyway!
It was one of the reasons I went with it! I know I am backed for as long as I need and i keep VERY little on my OS drive!
701 - 720 of 1121 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
