Pages: 1 2 3

 

2007-07-22 12:53:43
joker8baller
Member
+68|6668
Needless to say that was funny.

Oh well

What I'm my friend and I are looking at:

Western Digital Raptor X WD1500AHFD 150GB 10,000 RPM Serial ATA150 Hard Drive - OEM   - $205
Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD7500AAKS 750GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM   - $200
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer 7.1 Channels PCI Interface Sound Card - Retail   - $84
Patriot eXtreme Performance 1GB (2 x 512MB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model PDC21G8500ELK - Retail   - $150

GIGABYTE GA-P35T-DQ6 LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail   - $240
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80562Q6600 - Retail   - $300 (Decided since we both listen to a lot of music at the same time, run multiple chats, and would like to game at the same time...

And an Antec case, complete with 1k power supply and cooling. - $300
2007-07-22 12:54:50
Mong0ose
Will it blend?
+24|6487|UK

buLLet_t00th wrote:

JaMrulezass wrote:

Bullet Tooth just hates the Quads rite now
I just don't see the point for people who just play games on their PC.

mafropetee wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:


But the E6600 is not hitting max at 3.4, if both had the best coolers and the best components to go alongside it, the E6600 would still beat it hands down. Thats at clock speed, not in multitask performance.
in real-time, actual experience, the Q6600 will give you more satisfaction with A: its ability to multitask like crazy and B: the future of multithreaded aplications.

point made. thank you.
You're really showing that you don't know what you're talking about now....I suggest you don't embarrass yourself further.

Multi-tasking only plays a part when you have got tonnes and tonnes of complex programmes running. The C2D's have shown that they can handle immense amounts of information being proccessed through it, I doubt you'd have enough programmes running to stop dead the E6850. So this part of your argument fails.

Next we have the multi-thread argument. Yes four is better than two, but how many games now and in the future are going to have four cores as something you must have to run a game? Whats that you're saying.....none? One core of each of the CPU's will be used much more than that of the others available (and this is putting it as simply as it can get) and obviously the one with the higher clock speed is better!

This all comes down to whether the OP wants to use video render software, Photoshop software etc. etc.

Now please be quiet.
joking aside, some people are seriously up their own ass on here

i didnt realise you were privy to all the game developers future plans

oh right........of course......you're not
2007-07-22 12:57:06
buLLet_t00th
Mr. Boombastic
+178|6443|Stealth City, UK
Thats a great argument you've got there.

I see you haven't actually explained why you would reccommend one CPU over another....I wonder why?

Last edited by buLLet_t00th (2007-07-22 12:58:18)

2007-07-22 12:57:30
JaMrulezass
Member
+47|6466|Hong Kong

buLLet_t00th wrote:

JaMrulezass wrote:

Bullet Tooth just hates the Quads rite now ;)
I just don't see the point for people who just play games on their PC.

mafropetee wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:


But the E6600 is not hitting max at 3.4, if both had the best coolers and the best components to go alongside it, the E6600 would still beat it hands down. Thats at clock speed, not in multitask performance.
in real-time, actual experience, the Q6600 will give you more satisfaction with A: its ability to multitask like crazy and B: the future of multithreaded aplications.

point made. thank you.
You're really showing that you don't know what you're talking about now....I suggest you don't embarrass yourself further.

Multi-tasking only plays a part when you have got tonnes and tonnes of complex programmes running. The C2D's have shown that they can handle immense amounts of information being proccessed through it, I doubt you'd have enough programmes running to stop dead the E6850. So this part of your argument fails.

Next we have the multi-thread argument. Yes four is better than two, but how many games now and in the future are going to have four cores as something you must have to run a game? Whats that you're saying.....none? One core of each of the CPU's will be used much more than that of the others available (and this is putting it as simply as it can get) and obviously the one with the higher clock speed is better!

This all comes down to whether the OP wants to use video render software, Photoshop software etc. etc.

Now please be quiet.
I dont tink hes embarrased and I agree with quads.

Firstly, check out encoding and converting times on the net, the quds are almost twice as fast as the duals.

Secondly, there are games like Supreme Commander, Crysis, Alan Wake and the newest Intel developed Ice storm fighter, check it out if you havent already.

Most importantly, its future-proof, Duals are gonna be out of date sooner or later.

And Valave is also moving towards quads: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1 … 558,00.asp

So all your Half life 3's and stuff wont run very well on duals, atlesat not as good on quads.

------------------------------------

"Yesterday, Valve announced it was integrating full support for multithreading, including the Source game engine and developer tools. In a presentation on Valve's approach to multicore technology, Valve developer Tom Leonard noted that "Four cores are more than twice as interesting as two cores."

In fact, Valve is very bullish about multicore, calling it "the most significant development since 3D cards."

But developing for multiple CPU cores is fraught with challenges, especially in an industry that has millions of lines of code heavily optimized for single core. "
2007-07-22 12:57:55
ReDevilJR
Member
+106|6352

joker8baller wrote:

Needless to say that was funny.

Oh well

What I'm my friend and I are looking at:

Western Digital Raptor X WD1500AHFD 150GB 10,000 RPM Serial ATA150 Hard Drive - OEM   - $205
Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD7500AAKS 750GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM   - $200
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer 7.1 Channels PCI Interface Sound Card - Retail   - $84
Patriot eXtreme Performance 1GB (2 x 512MB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model PDC21G8500ELK - Retail   - $150

GIGABYTE GA-P35T-DQ6 LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail   - $240
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80562Q6600 - Retail   - $300 (Decided since we both listen to a lot of music at the same time, run multiple chats, and would like to game at the same time...

And an Antec case, complete with 1k power supply and cooling. - $300
You do NOT need a 1k power supply! Even with SLI you won't need it.
2007-07-22 12:58:21
mafropetee
Member
+18|6145|Altamonte Springs, FL

buLLet_t00th wrote:

JaMrulezass wrote:

Bullet Tooth just hates the Quads rite now
I just don't see the point for people who just play games on their PC.

mafropetee wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:


But the E6600 is not hitting max at 3.4, if both had the best coolers and the best components to go alongside it, the E6600 would still beat it hands down. Thats at clock speed, not in multitask performance.
in real-time, actual experience, the Q6600 will give you more satisfaction with A: its ability to multitask like crazy and B: the future of multithreaded aplications.

point made. thank you.
You're really showing that you don't know what you're talking about now....I suggest you don't embarrass yourself further.

Multi-tasking only plays a part when you have got tonnes and tonnes of complex programmes running. The C2D's have shown that they can handle immense amounts of information being proccessed through it, I doubt you'd have enough programmes running to stop dead the E6850. So this part of your argument fails.

Next we have the multi-thread argument. Yes four is better than two, but how many games now and in the future are going to have four cores as something you must have to run a game? Whats that you're saying.....none? One core of each of the CPU's will be used much more than that of the others available (and this is putting it as simply as it can get) and obviously the one with the higher clock speed is better!

This all comes down to whether the OP wants to use video render software, Photoshop software etc. etc.

Now please be quiet.

Edit: And the fact that if you do buy a E6850 you need to have a P35, enables you to be truely futureproof. Seriously, most people on here read a few tech reports on other sites and think they know what they're talking about.....I find that quite pathetic.
...
2007-07-22 12:59:44
buLLet_t00th
Mr. Boombastic
+178|6443|Stealth City, UK

JaMrulezass wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

JaMrulezass wrote:

Bullet Tooth just hates the Quads rite now
I just don't see the point for people who just play games on their PC.

mafropetee wrote:


in real-time, actual experience, the Q6600 will give you more satisfaction with A: its ability to multitask like crazy and B: the future of multithreaded aplications.

point made. thank you.
You're really showing that you don't know what you're talking about now....I suggest you don't embarrass yourself further.

Multi-tasking only plays a part when you have got tonnes and tonnes of complex programmes running. The C2D's have shown that they can handle immense amounts of information being proccessed through it, I doubt you'd have enough programmes running to stop dead the E6850. So this part of your argument fails.

Next we have the multi-thread argument. Yes four is better than two, but how many games now and in the future are going to have four cores as something you must have to run a game? Whats that you're saying.....none? One core of each of the CPU's will be used much more than that of the others available (and this is putting it as simply as it can get) and obviously the one with the higher clock speed is better!

This all comes down to whether the OP wants to use video render software, Photoshop software etc. etc.

Now please be quiet.
I dont tink hes embarrased and I agree with quads.

Firstly, check out encoding and converting times on the net, the quds are almost twice as fast as the duals.

Secondly, there are games like Supreme Commander, Crysis, Alan Wake and the newest Intel developed Ice storm fighter, check it out if you havent already.
Which is exactly why I put at the bottom of my post:

'This all comes down to whether the OP wants to use video render software, Photoshop software etc. etc.'
2007-07-22 13:00:00
Mong0ose
Will it blend?
+24|6487|UK

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Thats a great argument you've got there.

I see you haven't actually explained why you would reccommend one CPU over another....I wonder why?
thats because, unlike you, i am happy to admit i dont know much about it

unfortunatly, unlike u again, i have a life and dont spend my hours searching the net for the latest geek reprt to read

and finaly, unlike you, i am not that arrogant
2007-07-22 13:00:18
ReDevilJR
Member
+106|6352

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Edit: And the fact that if you do buy a E6850 you need to have a P35, enables you to be truely futureproof. Seriously, most people on here read a few tech reports on other sites and think they know what they're talking about.....I find that quite pathetic.
680i's are compatible with E6850. (From my understanding)
2007-07-22 13:01:52
buLLet_t00th
Mr. Boombastic
+178|6443|Stealth City, UK

ReDevilJR wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Edit: And the fact that if you do buy a E6850 you need to have a P35, enables you to be truely futureproof. Seriously, most people on here read a few tech reports on other sites and think they know what they're talking about.....I find that quite pathetic.
680i's are compatible with E6850. (From my understanding)
But the 680i wont be compatible with 45nm CPU's though.
2007-07-22 13:02:10
joker8baller
Member
+68|6668
Problem: Newegg doesn't have the e6850... lol.
2007-07-22 13:02:12
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6650

ReDevilJR wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Edit: And the fact that if you do buy a E6850 you need to have a P35, enables you to be truely futureproof. Seriously, most people on here read a few tech reports on other sites and think they know what they're talking about.....I find that quite pathetic.
680i's are compatible with E6850. (From my understanding)
Yup.
2007-07-22 13:03:43
ReDevilJR
Member
+106|6352

buLLet_t00th wrote:

ReDevilJR wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Edit: And the fact that if you do buy a E6850 you need to have a P35.
680i's are compatible with E6850. (From my understanding)
But the 680i wont be compatible with 45nm CPU's though.
You simply said you needed a P35 to run an E6850. But yes, P35 does do 45nm CPU's (Starting at $999 for 45nm processors upon release) depends how far in the future you're looking at. That is if you want to enjoy what you've got.

Last edited by ReDevilJR (2007-07-22 13:21:16)

2007-07-22 13:03:51
buLLet_t00th
Mr. Boombastic
+178|6443|Stealth City, UK

Mong0ose wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Thats a great argument you've got there.

I see you haven't actually explained why you would reccommend one CPU over another....I wonder why?
thats because, unlike you, i am happy to admit i dont know much about it

unfortunatly, unlike u again, i have a life and dont spend my hours searching the net for the latest geek reprt to read

and finaly, unlike you, i am not that arrogant
Arrogant? I'm just stating the facts!

But you're happy playing hours and hours of BF2?

Thats fine if you dont know much about stuff like this, but posting in a thread where someone is about to spend a lot of money on something, and reccommending something isn't very helpful.

Edit: At the end of the day its two people putting accross two different points of view on two different products. One of us gives facts about their opinion, the other doesn't.

I know which one I'd go with.

Last edited by buLLet_t00th (2007-07-22 13:07:34)

2007-07-22 13:04:57
buLLet_t00th
Mr. Boombastic
+178|6443|Stealth City, UK

ReDevilJR wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

ReDevilJR wrote:


680i's are compatible with E6850. (From my understanding)
But the 680i wont be compatible with 45nm CPU's though.
You simply said you needed a P35 to run an E6850. But yes, P35 does do 45mm CPU's (Starting at $999 for 45mm processors upon release) depends how far in the future you're looking at. That is if you want to enjoy what you've got.
The 'truely future proof' kind of gave it away.
2007-07-22 13:06:57
joker8baller
Member
+68|6668
Heh... So... *confused* Quad or Dual...

I mean I do prefer to multi-task... but I want fast load times, as well as smooth gameplay...
2007-07-22 13:07:14
Kurazoo
Pheasant Plucker
+440|6685|West Yorkshire, U.K

buLLet_t00th wrote:

First of all you need an Intel P35 or NV680 chipset on your MOBO for the E6850. If you've got that, then definetly go for that over the Quad. The generic CPU speed is more, the potential to OC is more, its runs a LOT cooler and it has the 1333 FSB support.

For multi-tasking, a Q6600 is better. But if you will compare the two cpus on a single application such as gaming, the X6850 > Q6600. Simply because a clock speed of 3.0GHz is much faster than a clock speed of 2.4GHz.

Here is a suggestion, if you are getting a P35 board (which you definetly should be, if you aren't looking to SLI), get a cheap CPU now, and get the high-end next-gen penryn CPU when they get released since your motherboard can run it.

Next-gen quad-cores will be:
1) super efficient @ 45nm meaning they will be MUCH cooler and therefore very easy to overclock (todays C2Q are abit harder)
2) 1333 FSB (good for quad core)
3) slightly higher clock speeds with maximum reaching 3.33 GHz
4) MASSIVE L2 cache @ 12MB

To sum up:

If you're just gaming get the E6850, but if you're running video render software or Photoshop get the Q6600.
how...how do you know so much... lol
2007-07-22 13:07:15
Mong0ose
Will it blend?
+24|6487|UK

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Mong0ose wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Thats a great argument you've got there.

I see you haven't actually explained why you would reccommend one CPU over another....I wonder why?
thats because, unlike you, i am happy to admit i dont know much about it

unfortunatly, unlike u again, i have a life and dont spend my hours searching the net for the latest geek reprt to read

and finaly, unlike you, i am not that arrogant
Arrogant? I'm just stating the facts!

But you're happy playing hours and hours of BF2?

Thats fine if you dont know much about stuff like this, but posting in a thread where someone is about to spend a lot of money on something, and reccommending something isn't very helpful.
400hrs over 2yrs is hardly a lot

however, i do take your point about recommending something to someone when i dont know what im talking about, maybe u shld take ur own advice
2007-07-22 13:08:55
buLLet_t00th
Mr. Boombastic
+178|6443|Stealth City, UK

Kurazoo wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

First of all you need an Intel P35 or NV680 chipset on your MOBO for the E6850. If you've got that, then definetly go for that over the Quad. The generic CPU speed is more, the potential to OC is more, its runs a LOT cooler and it has the 1333 FSB support.

For multi-tasking, a Q6600 is better. But if you will compare the two cpus on a single application such as gaming, the X6850 > Q6600. Simply because a clock speed of 3.0GHz is much faster than a clock speed of 2.4GHz.

Here is a suggestion, if you are getting a P35 board (which you definetly should be, if you aren't looking to SLI), get a cheap CPU now, and get the high-end next-gen penryn CPU when they get released since your motherboard can run it.

Next-gen quad-cores will be:
1) super efficient @ 45nm meaning they will be MUCH cooler and therefore very easy to overclock (todays C2Q are abit harder)
2) 1333 FSB (good for quad core)
3) slightly higher clock speeds with maximum reaching 3.33 GHz
4) MASSIVE L2 cache @ 12MB

To sum up:

If you're just gaming get the E6850, but if you're running video render software or Photoshop get the Q6600.
how...how do you know so much... lol
Making computer's for eBay kind of helps.
2007-07-22 13:11:21
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6650

Mong0ose wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

Mong0ose wrote:


thats because, unlike you, i am happy to admit i dont know much about it

unfortunatly, unlike u again, i have a life and dont spend my hours searching the net for the latest geek reprt to read

and finaly, unlike you, i am not that arrogant
Arrogant? I'm just stating the facts!

But you're happy playing hours and hours of BF2?

Thats fine if you dont know much about stuff like this, but posting in a thread where someone is about to spend a lot of money on something, and reccommending something isn't very helpful.
400hrs over 2yrs is hardly a lot

however, i do take your point about recommending something to someone when i dont know what im talking about, maybe u shld take ur own advice
If you don't know what you're talking about, kindly STFU and let the people that do know what they are talking about help the person with the questions.
2007-07-22 13:12:20
buLLet_t00th
Mr. Boombastic
+178|6443|Stealth City, UK
I think this thread shows why Leet came up with the idea of 'Tech people'.
2007-07-22 13:17:43
joker8baller
Member
+68|6668
How hard to overclock?
2007-07-22 13:18:47
Mong0ose
Will it blend?
+24|6487|UK

buLLet_t00th wrote:

I think this thread shows why Leet came up with the idea of 'Tech people'.
lmao
2007-07-22 13:21:15
buLLet_t00th
Mr. Boombastic
+178|6443|Stealth City, UK

Mong0ose wrote:

buLLet_t00th wrote:

I think this thread shows why Leet came up with the idea of 'Tech people'.
lmao
Its becasue of you and your fucking lame knowledge.

Does it make you sad that somebody knows something that you don't? Are you going to go cry to your mummy?

Kids on the internet!

joker8baller wrote:

How hard to overclock?
Its easy to OC. You can get an easy high OC on the E6850, but harder to do it on the Quad without decent cooling.

Last edited by buLLet_t00th (2007-07-22 13:23:45)

2007-07-22 13:23:15
ReDevilJR
Member
+106|6352
Even if you get a P35 Board http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6813128048 that supports DDR2/3 and 45nm processors. It does NOT support SLI if you have future plans in that. And they do not appear to be as good as the 680i's for OC'ing Graphics, memory, processor. (From what I've heard)

Last edited by ReDevilJR (2007-07-22 13:24:25)

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard