Support NeoGAF

[BravoSuperStar]

I have a question for PC GAF, recently my PC has been coming up with the following error message:

RAID Access Failure.
Access failure: Critical error on
disk WDC WD3200AAJS-00VWA0 (Port: SATA 1.0)

Anyway, my PC is basically totally fucked, keeps crashing, cant play audio/video properly, cant play games etc.

So I'm totally clueless about PCs and googling didn't help at all so I thought I'd ask GAF first before I phoned technical support. My extended warranty just ran out at Christmas so if it is something bad I will have to pay for a repair. Anyone got any ideas?

That's a problem with your HDD or RAID array. If it's in raid mode you can't just plug it into another PC and copy the data off it. Better contact whoever built it and find out exactly how the HDD's are setup.

 

[darkpaladinmfc]

A can of compressed air should do the trick. Its almost certainly what's causing the increased temperatures, I suggest you get it sorted out asap.

Thanks. While on the subject of cooling, what is a good CPU cooler for the Q6600 that I can get with a fan for £30 or under?

 

[Spy]

Alright everyone, I haven't updated the OP in a couple days, is there anything specific you would like to see there?

 

[brain_stew]

Is it normal for voltage in Windows to be lower than BIOS settings? Everest, CPU-Z and OCCT all show my oc'ed E5200 hovering around 1.39 to 1.4v. In the BIOS though, it is set at 1.4375 or somewhere thereabouts. This is the lowest I can get while still keeping it stable.

Also, is it safe to have the voltage this high? I remember seeing 1.4v as being close to the threshold for Core2/Pentium Dual-Core's. Wouldn't want to do any long term damage...

Yes, perfectly normally, its called Vdroop and will always happen to a varying degree. Maximum voltage depends on your chip, 1.3625v (so 1.4v as an absolute maximum in the BIOS) for 45nm chips and 1.5v for 65nm chips (you cna probably push this to 1.6v in the BIOS at a maximum).

If that's a 45nm chip you really ought to back away on the voltage, if its an old 65nm design it'll be fine.

Alright everyone, I haven't updated the OP in a couple days, is there anything specific you would like to see there?

Have a search for my posts in this thread, there's a few things that I' mentioned which may not be covered yet.

 

[shuyin_]

The Phenom is better (and is available on a platform with decent future upgrades) but it isn't the CPU to go for either.

An Athlon ii X3 435 is both cheaper and faster in the majority of applications.

Also consider an Athlon ii X4 620 (though only if you plan to OC as its stock single/dual thread performance isn't too great).

If you can stretch to it the Phenom ii X4 925 is well worth the extra $40 as well.

Dual core CPUs (that lack hyperthreading) are no longer smart buys.

Thank you for your suggestions. I'm considering buying an Athlon II X4 620.
Phenom II X4 is priced almost as an intel i5 750 so if i'll settle for a CPU @that price, it'll probably be the i5 (as i heard it's better). But i'm probably going to stick with my budget.

Now i'm torn between the Phenom II X2 550 and the Athlon II X4 620.
On the one hand, people are recommending me the X2 550 because, apparently it's better @OC (more stable), it's faster (coupled with DDR3 RAM and probably due to its superior clock freq. of 3.1 GHz) in applications than the X4 620 and according to some sites it is a lot better @multitasking (due to the L3 6MB cache, which is absent on the X4). I've also heard someone say that if you unlock the other 2 cores in a X2 550 you end up with four 3.1GHz cores and a 6 MB L3 cache quad-core CPU. Which sounds very tempting...

On the other hand, i found out that it's like a lottery to unlock the cores: i need to be careful what batch the CPU is (i don't even think they'll let me see the CPU before buying it), i need a special kind of MB with an older version of BIOS, and even then the 2 extra cores could be faulty. And i don't wanna be stuck with a dual core, especially as games and applications begin to need 4 cores.

In the end, i don't really like the fact that the X2 550 is faster in games and better @multitasking (and i'm used to running multiple applications at the same time) than the X4, but i think the two extra cores will be better (and i don't like gambling - which seems to be the case when trying to unlock the 2 extra cores in a X2 550, as it's all about luck).
So i guess i'll just get an X4 and OC it to about 3.3 or 3.4 GHz.


I have another question for PC GAF: i need a new PSU. Some friends suggested a Corsair CMPSU-550VX but i set my mind on a PSU from Antec: BasiqPower 500W (efficiency of ~80%) that is cheaper. Is the Corsair worth the price difference?

 

[str8-h4x]

The last computer I built was to play 2142 (that lasted about 3 weeks, lol pcgaming), Anyways, I'm needing a new machine. I'm trying to keep it around $700, what do the experts think?


Will I be able to emulate wii/ps2 on this thing?

PNY VCGGTS2501XPB GeForce GTS 250 1GB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card - Retail
$149.99

CORSAIR CMPSU-650TX 650W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 ... - Retail
$98.99


G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL9D-4GBRL - Retail
$93.99

MSI P55-GD65 LGA 1156 Intel P55 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
$159.99

Intel Core i5-750 Lynnfield 2.66GHz LGA 1156 95W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80605I5750 - Retail
$194.99


I apologize if these types of questions are frowned upon.

 

[MoFuzz]

Yes, perfectly normally, its called Vdroop and will always happen to a varying degree. Maximum voltage depends on your chip, 1.3625v (so 1.4v as an absolute maximum in the BIOS) for 45nm chips and 1.5v for 65nm chips (you cna probably push this to 1.6v in the BIOS at a maximum).

If that's a 45nm chip you really ought to back away on the voltage, if its an old 65nm design it'll be fine.

It's a 45nm Pentium Dual Core, so it sounds like I should, in fact, lower the voltage.

Damn, I was so happy having hit 3.6 GHz on this thing too. At what speed would the Wolfdale CPU no longer be bottlenecking performance on games you think? Something closer to 3.3GHz?

You are using the same chip as well right? What do you have your multiplier/FSB settings at? I used 12 x 300 to get 3.6GHz.

Thanks for the help.

 

[Minsc]

When did these GTS 220 230 250 etc cards start getting popular? I never saw a thing about them back when I was considering a 260/275 (not benchmarks, nothing). Unless I was just blind to them. I looked up a 220 and it seemed pretty crappy, are the rest much better?

 

[MoFuzz]

When did these GTS 220 230 250 etc cards start getting popular? I never saw a thing about them back when I was considering a 260/275 (not benchmarks, nothing). Unless I was just blind to them. I looked up a 220 and it seemed pretty crappy, are the rest much better?

My understanding was that they were basically a low budget substitute for on-board mobo graphics. I assume they are being marketed and pushed as such? I guess in that way, they would end up in a lot of basic/pre-built setups.

They were only recently introduced a month or two ago. You'll still get more for your gaming dollar with a GeForce 9600GSO or Radeon 4670 IMO.

 

[Ultimatum]

I have a Phenom X3 720, I was planning on upgrading this year, what's coming up?

 

[vocab]

The last computer I built was to play 2142 (that lasted about 3 weeks, lol pcgaming),

What do you mean, that lasted three weeks?

 

[blackMamba1187]

My 5870 just got delivered. Is there anything I should know about ATI cards? I have using nvidia for the past few years? Is there any prog similar to nhancer?

 

[DaveKap]

Got my new rig coming in today and I just wanted to make sure I'm still on track with my installation expectations.

I've got two formatted drives, 750GB and 1.5TB each. It's suggested that I install Win7 on the 750GB and then install my games (and generic storage) on the 1.5TB, right? Or would mixing up one of these variables be a better idea for optimal performance?

 

[darkpaladinmfc]

My 5870 just got delivered. Is there anything I should know about ATI cards? I have using nvidia for the past few years? Is there any prog similar to nhancer?

I think the Catalyst Control Panel does most of the stuff nHancer does, but I've never had an ATi card so I'm not sure.

 

[Diablohead]

My biggest problem that I need to fix this year is getting a much larger hdd, when I made my budget 3D pushing rig last april I went with a super low costing 160gig hdd, yeah real small but it was some great reduced price, and when I say budget rig I mean it, the most expensive parts to the pc were the c2d e7400 and the GTX260 (was going to be something like an 800GTX until brain_stew said how awesome the 260 is, adding £90 to the bill )

Other then that and the cheap PSU blowing twice this pc is still kicking ass hard and fast, just need more HDD space this year.

I tried to remake my computer piece by piece on dinopc.com where I originally brought my machine and got it built but they seem to have changed all the packages and items now, so I need to track down all my pc parts on amazon/aria/maplins at the best prices to see how much my machine would cost to make right now. I think with sales going on it could easily be £300 for a beast.

 

[lowlylowlycook]

When did these GTS 220 230 250 etc cards start getting popular? I never saw a thing about them back when I was considering a 260/275 (not benchmarks, nothing). Unless I was just blind to them. I looked up a 220 and it seemed pretty crappy, are the rest much better?

Those are all just renamed parts, right? The 250GTS is a 9800GTX+, I think.

 

[Diablohead]

Those are all just renamed parts, right? The 250GTS is a 9800GTX+, I think.

I believe so, it's like most of their nice and well selling cars are now part of the GTX/S series from now on.

 

[brain_stew]

Those are all just renamed parts, right? The 250GTS is a 9800GTX+, I think.

The GTS 250 is a rebranded 9800GTX+ but all the others are new parts and support DX 10.1. They're pretty damn terrible though.

 

[str8-h4x]

What do you mean, that lasted three weeks?

I couldn't get the kbm gameplay down. I'm just not a pc-fps guy, but I tried!

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

Alright everyone, I haven't updated the OP in a couple days, is there anything specific you would like to see there?

links to how-to basics? or is it something we should put up in a different post?

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

I couldn't get the kbm gameplay down. I'm just not a pc-fps guy, but I tried!

stay on topic please. this isn't about games only.

 

[gsarjeant]

I recently bought a laptop, which has a GeForce GTX 260M. I installed RivaTuner (Version 2.24) and when I launch it, it says that it hasn't been tested against my display driver. I thought I had the latest drivers installed. The Driver Version is reporting 186.40. Do I need to update my drivers, or has RivaTuner just not been tested against the most recent drivers?

If the latter, should I avoid using RivaTuner for now?

Thanks.

 

[darkpaladinmfc]

While on the subject of cooling, what is a good CPU cooler for the Q6600 that I can get with a fan for £30 or under?

Any recommendations? I've heard the Q6600 is really good for OCing.

 

[vocab]

stay on topic please. this isn't about games only.

I just asked him a question.

Anyway. Any real benefits of going LGA 1366 over LGA 1156? I'm looking at the benches, and the i5-750 Lynnfield looks like it keeps up with the I7's real well when it comes to gaming, and pretty much everything. I rather pay less to get a better value/performance, but what really worries me is an upgrade path in the future. I bought a 939 back when it first came out, and look what happened :lol LGA 775 lasted way longer.

Also what's the best ddr3 ram (not stupid expensive) for a LGA 1156 setup if I do indeed just stick with the i5-750 Lynnfield?

Thanks.

 

[Cru Jones]

I was toying with the idea of buying an SSD to install my OS to. Should I purchase a small one that I install the OS to and essential programs and then have games run off of the larger (non SSD) hard drive? Or should I get a larger SSD and run games off of it as well.

Also, does anyone know of a recent guide that shows how to use an SSD for your OS and another hard drive for everything else?

Lastly, if someone could point me to some good (recent) documentation on SSDs (pros, cons, etc.) it would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Minsc]

I just asked him a question.

Anyway. Any real benefits of going LGA 1366 over LGA 1156? I'm looking at the benches, and the i5-750 Lynnfield looks like it keeps up with the I7's real well when it comes to gaming, and pretty much everything. I rather pay less to get a better value/performance, but what really worries me is an upgrade path in the future. I bought a 939 back when it first came out, and look what happened :lol LGA 775 lasted way longer.

Also what's the best ddr3 ram (not stupid expensive) for a LGA 1156 setup if I do indeed just stick with the i5-750 Lynnfield?

Thanks.

It's a toss-up. The i5 750 will win some and lose some. Heavily threaded things like physics and complicated calculations will do better on the i7s.

But, if you're just looking at gaming fps, you're always better off with a cheaper quad core and more expensive graphics card, then expecting a more expensive CPU to deliver it's cost in fps, that just won't happen.

I was toying with the idea of buying an SSD to install my OS to. Should I purchase a small one that I install the OS to and essential programs and then have games run off of the larger (non SSD) hard drive? Or should I get a larger SSD and run games off of it as well.

Also, does anyone know of a recent guide that shows how to use an SSD for your OS and another hard drive for everything else?

Lastly, if someone could point me to some good (recent) documentation on SSDs (pros, cons, etc.) it would be greatly appreciated.

http://anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3631

Defintely get a SSD for the OS and a separate 1 or 2 TB drive for games. Make sure you get a faster drive, like the WD Black or better. Games can top 20GBs or so these days for a single game, a 80 or even 160 GB SSD would fill up with just a handful of games + OS. For the same money you could probably get a smaller SSD + 1 or 2 TB of space for your games, which really isn't much slower than an SSD anyway.

Not all SSDs are created equally (actually there's only a few worth buying now), so be sure to read everything you can about them, or just get an Intel X-25M G2 if you want the easy way out.

 

[dionysus]

It is completely dependant on how much you spend, I went with 80GB for $250. Much higher than that and things get really expensive.

It is not going to improve gaming performance noticably over a fast speed HDD, so I don't see much reason to get a big one to put your games on. What Minsc said.

 

[teacupcopter]

People have been requesting 3D support in ATI's drivers for over 10 years apparently, and they've done jack shit up until reportedly next month will be the first time ever they're adding in 3D support for videos, not games.

As 3D catches on more and more, there's no reason why ATI couldn't put support for it in their 4800 and 5800 series cards, but by the time they actually do it, it could be years from now, who knows.

nVidia's the way to go, you will need the package with the glasses, and a compatible screen, and probably at least a GTX 260 to get good frame-rates at higher resolutions without dropping a ton of options in newer games (even though in some you'll be hitting in the 20s).

There's a big thread here on it you can read for impressions, and is still currently carrying some discussion.

Awesome. Thank you. Looks like if I'm getting a PC down the line this year nvidia is the way to go.

I've heard that they are releasing some new cards soon. True/false? Would it be worth holding off until them, any info available?

 

[Dr. Zoidberg]

I recently bought a laptop, which has a GeForce GTX 260M. I installed RivaTuner (Version 2.24) and when I launch it, it says that it hasn't been tested against my display driver. I thought I had the latest drivers installed. The Driver Version is reporting 186.40. Do I need to update my drivers, or has RivaTuner just not been tested against the most recent drivers?

I'm not sure if this is relevant but I got a new laptop for Christmas that has an nvidia GT 230M. The driver wasn't the latest so I went to download the latest from Nvidia for that chip and was told upon running it that it found no compatible hardware despite the fact that it shows up as GT 230M in device manager.

What I found (this may be common knowledge, I've never had a laptop before) was that many laptop providers finagle with the hardware or something so that you can only get your video drivers from them. That way they can test the drivers for compatibility and such. This is to avoid phone calls from people who load the Nvidia provided drivers and start getting bluescreens and whatnot and then want to return their laptops. Problem is that these laptop companies only bother to update their drivers every six months or so, whereas most gamers update every month when Nvidia or ATI releases the new ones.

There's a site called laptopvideo2go.com that specializes in providing hacks to laptop owners who want to update to the latest drivers. IF this has something to do with your problem or you run into it then you might want to check it out.

EDIT - Latest NVidia driver is 195.62, you said yours is 186.40. Mine (from Toshiba) is 186.42 so it's a little better but not much. I haven't hacked around with mine yet (no real need) but I might if I ever hit a problem.

 

[brain_stew]

It's a 45nm Pentium Dual Core, so it sounds like I should, in fact, lower the voltage.

Damn, I was so happy having hit 3.6 GHz on this thing too. At what speed would the Wolfdale CPU no longer be bottlenecking performance on games you think? Something closer to 3.3GHz?

You are using the same chip as well right? What do you have your multiplier/FSB settings at? I used 12 x 300 to get 3.6GHz.

Thanks for the help.

Yes, definitely back away on that voltage, 1.4v is the absolute most you should be setting in the BIOS, and I wouldn't recommend that for 24/7 use either.


As long as you're hitting over 3ghz you should be good. With the current crop of quad targetted/optimised games, a dualie will never be enough to completely remove the bottleneck at certain points in some titles (I'm thinking Ghostbusters, Fuel, L4D2 and DA:O as examples that I'm aware of) , though no matter what its usually dimishing returns past around 3ghz.

My E5200 is actually running at the exact same speed as you were aiming for. 12x300mhz =3.6ghz. VID is set at 1.35V in the BIOS.

Sometimes you'll find chips will tend to "like" certain setups, no I don't know why, but that's just the way it seems to work sometimes. Maybe try 11x333mhz next, even though its a higher clockspeed it may give better stability. If you miss it 333x10 would give really good performance and the faster FSB will help make up for the loss in clock speed. That's still a good boost and past that you won't see much difference in the real world anyway.

Be sure to have slack RAM timings, and not to OC your RAM to start with.

Set EIST and C1E to off (they won't make much difference with manual voltage anyway, and just make things less stable)

Lock the PCIe frequency to 100mhz.

If you're using 4 RAM DIMMS set your MCH (memory controller) voltage to +0.1v

You can always try pumping +0.1v through your FSB as well if that's a bottleneck.

Nothing beats trial and error

Awesome. Thank you. Looks like if I'm getting a PC down the line this year nvidia is the way to go.

I've heard that they are releasing some new cards soon. True/false? Would it be worth holding off until them, any info available?

If you're interested in 3D then yes, wait for Fermi. You'll want the extra performance it'll offer.

 

[BravoSuperStar]

New Intel SSD arrival at newegg:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167025

40gb for $130. Specs:

Form Factor: 2.5"
Capacity: 40GB
Interface Type: SATA II
Features: Random 4 KB reads up to 25 K IOPS, random 4 KB writes up to 2.5 K IOPS
Read Latency: 65 microseconds, write Latency: 110 microseconds
Sequential Access - Read up to 170MB/s
Sequential Access - Write up to 35MB/s

No word on RAID support. For comparison a 30gb vertex drive is about the same price but faster. So I guess if you want more capacity go for Intel, but for speed go with OCZ. Kingstons 64gb SSD drive also has specs and a price close to the 40gb intel drive, but uses the inferior jmicron controller.

I may pick up the this Intel 40gb drive for a laptop and see how I like it. If I do I will compare it with my x-25m 80gb and post the results.

 

[gsarjeant]

I'm not sure if this is relevant but I got a new laptop for Christmas that has an nvidia GT 230M. The driver wasn't the latest so I went to download the latest from Nvidia for that chip and was told upon running it that it found no compatible hardware despite the fact that it shows up as GT 230M in device manager.

What I found (this may be common knowledge, I've never had a laptop before) was that many laptop providers finagle with the hardware or something so that you can only get your video drivers from them. That way they can test the drivers for compatibility and such. This is to avoid phone calls from people who load the Nvidia provided drivers and start getting bluescreens and whatnot and then want to return their laptops. Problem is that these laptop companies only bother to update their drivers every six months or so, whereas most gamers update every month when Nvidia or ATI releases the new ones.

There's a site called laptopvideo2go.com that specializes in providing hacks to laptop owners who want to update to the latest drivers. IF this has something to do with your problem or you run into it then you might want to check it out.

EDIT - Latest NVidia driver is 195.62, you said yours is 186.40. Mine (from Toshiba) is 186.42 so it's a little better but not much. I haven't hacked around with mine yet (no real need) but I might if I ever hit a problem.

Ah, thanks. That's interesting to know. I'm not looking to do too much tweaking now; I primarily installed RivaTuner so I could play with triple buffering via D3DOverride. I'll check out that laptopvideo2go site and read up a bit more on RivaTuner, but I'm definitely going to err on the side of not messing with stuff I don't know a whole lot about.

I did do a little poking around, and it looks like a lot of people have been waiting for RivaTuner v 2.25 to get some updated card support, so that might be my best option if I want to mess with it.

 

[Mr. Spinnington]

anybody want to buy a core i7 hackintosh?

two hdd's in it, one with snow leopard 10.6.2 and the other with xp. runs like a dream but i can't keep a desktop pc in my hands anymore. this offer is going into the buy/sell/trade thread, too

 

[Minsc]

New Intel SSD arrival at newegg:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167025

40gb for $130. Specs:

Form Factor: 2.5"
Capacity: 40GB
Interface Type: SATA II
Features: Random 4 KB reads up to 25 K IOPS, random 4 KB writes up to 2.5 K IOPS
Read Latency: 65 microseconds, write Latency: 110 microseconds
Sequential Access - Read up to 170MB/s
Sequential Access - Write up to 35MB/s

No word on RAID support. For comparison a 30gb vertex drive is about the same price but faster. So I guess if you want more capacity go for Intel, but for speed go with OCZ. Kingstons 64gb SSD drive also has specs and a price close to the 40gb intel drive, but uses the inferior jmicron controller.

I may pick up the this Intel 40gb drive for a laptop and see how I like it. If I do I will compare it with my x-25m 80gb and post the results.

FWIW, my Windows 7 install is pretty light imo, no big heavy hitting apps or suites over a few gigs, and I'm using ~30 gigs without counting a pagefile. That's pretty tight, I'd strongly advise not getting less than 60 gigs, and am glad I have 80 personally, leaving it about 1/2 empty will ensure the drive can make all the writes evenly distributed and max the life of the drive.

Sequential write access is less important than the smaller random write & read access speed for an OS drive, value the 4K or so tests way, way more than the max write/read speeds on huge files which you'll incur far less often w/ normal usage.

If you're interested in 3D then yes, wait for Fermi. You'll want the extra performance it'll offer.

If he's going to end up buying the parts before it's out, just get an XFX 260 or 275, and keep everything and you should be able to sell it for over $100 easily, lightening the blow a little.

After all, Fermi's performance improvements are a big ?, and so is the release date. It could not come out until October for all we know.

 

[Shambles]

New Intel SSD arrival at newegg:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167025

40gb for $130. Specs:

Form Factor: 2.5"
Capacity: 40GB
Interface Type: SATA II
Features: Random 4 KB reads up to 25 K IOPS, random 4 KB writes up to 2.5 K IOPS
Read Latency: 65 microseconds, write Latency: 110 microseconds
Sequential Access - Read up to 170MB/s
Sequential Access - Write up to 35MB/s

No word on RAID support. For comparison a 30gb vertex drive is about the same price but faster. So I guess if you want more capacity go for Intel, but for speed go with OCZ. Kingstons 64gb SSD drive also has specs and a price close to the 40gb intel drive, but uses the inferior jmicron controller.

I may pick up the this Intel 40gb drive for a laptop and see how I like it. If I do I will compare it with my x-25m 80gb and post the results.

They'd have to sell it for a lot less than 3$/GB for me to buy something that slow. I suppose with such a tiny drive you'd only have the OS and a few games on there and not do much writing besides that but even still saying "up to" 35 makes you wonder what the average sequential write is.

 

[Minsc]

They'd have to sell it for a lot less than 3$/GB for me to buy something that slow. I suppose with such a tiny drive you'd only have the OS and a few games on there and not do much writing besides that but even still saying "up to" 35 makes you wonder what the average sequential write is.

Sequential write speed isn't too important for an OS drive. See my previous post.

Edit: Actually to call that slow is basically a lie, it would make a blazingly fast OS drive. It's just too small imo, like you say. Then again, a 160 GB SSD would be too small as a OS & gaming drive, you really need to supplement the SSD with a fast TB+ HDD.

 

[BravoSuperStar]

FWIW, my Windows 7 install is pretty light imo, no big heavy hitting apps or suites over a few gigs, and I'm using ~30 gigs without counting a pagefile. That's pretty tight, I'd strongly advise not getting less than 60 gigs, and am glad I have 80 personally, leaving it about 1/2 empty will ensure the drive can make all the writes evenly distributed and max the life of the drive.

Sequential write access is less important than the smaller random write & read access speed for an OS drive, value the 4K or so tests way, way more than the max write/read speeds on huge files which you'll incur far less often w/ normal usage.

Very true. After a Win7 install you would have very limited space left, barely enough to keep it optimized as you point out. I can see the value in certain situations though, like the laptop I am considering is more or less just a terminal. All the media etc it accesses is on a network, so all it really needs is windows and a couple apps. USB drives can suffice while traveling. As far as "entry" level SSDs available at the moment it's certainly worth considering. The V stands for value, =).

They'd have to sell it for a lot less than 3$/GB for me to buy something that slow. I suppose with such a tiny drive you'd only have the OS and a few games on there and not do much writing besides that but even still saying "up to" 35 makes you wonder what the average sequential write is.

Absolutely, it's meant as a "value" priced SSD for a boot drive. And Intel has usually been pretty right on in their read/write estimates. The 4k read/writes look comparable with the 80gb, which is encouraging.

 

[Shambles]

Considering you are spending about 35X (35,000%) more/GB on this SSD than a traditional disk drive I would still expect it to have write speeds a lot better than "up to" half of what the disk drive will write at. I'm sure it has it's place somewhere and will fit a specific task for someone perfectly but I can't help but see this and shake my head.

 

[BravoSuperStar]

Considering you are spending about 35X (35,000%) more/GB on this SSD than a traditional disk drive I would still expect it to have write speeds a lot better than "up to" half of what the disk drive will write at. I'm sure it has it's place somewhere and will fit a specific task for someone perfectly but I can't help but see this and shake my head.

Well there are other benefits to an SSD aside from speed. Lower power consumption, no moving parts, doesn't generate heat, etc. Most of this is a benefit to laptops however. I expect this has lower write speeds because it only has one on-board controller? Anyway, I think we'll see prices drop dramatically this year on SSD drives overall.

 

[Mr. Spinnington]

nvm

 

[brain_stew]

After all, Fermi's performance improvements are a big ?, and so is the release date. It could not come out until October for all we know.

It'll at least outperform a 5870 of that I'm sure, so its going to be more than a 50% upgrade over a GTX 275 at the very least. If we're lucky we might be looking at more than that but either way, that extra performance won't half make a difference if you're trying to run games in 3D and high resolution.

 

[Nabster92]

Hey GAF, I need a new PC! My laptop is pretty lame and has a windows 7 performance index of 1.0 :/

So it's about time for me to finally build a good PC myself and I was hoping to get some GAF suggestions for what stuff I should get.

I have a budget of around like preferably $1100 to 1200 but can probably push that up a bit as long as it's under like $1400-1500ish I suppose. That also would need to include a good monitor and a keyboard too, but I do have a mouse and some Altec Lansing speakers at home if need be. Also shouldn't need to worry about getting windows 7 or office or anything like that.

Also I live in California for shipping and tax purposes.

Thanks in advance for any help!

 

[Minsc]

Considering you are spending about 35X (35,000%) more/GB on this SSD than a traditional disk drive I would still expect it to have write speeds a lot better than "up to" half of what the disk drive will write at. I'm sure it has it's place somewhere and will fit a specific task for someone perfectly but I can't help but see this and shake my head.

What do you figure the purpose of this drive is, if it's not a system drive?

I've already explained to you sequential write speed basically doesn't matter for a system drive, but you seem to ignore that quite well. Maybe you can answer a question, but probably not, since you seem incapable of reading. I'll ask anyway.

What is the point of having a system drive with more space, if it's going to be slower 20x slower at doing the read/writing cycles that matter?

It's not like you'd be buying a 40GB SSD to store mp3s or games on... so what exactly is your major gripe on a spec that is almost irrelevant to the drives purpose? If you were going to have any legitimate gripe against the drive, it would be the 40GB size being not up to the task.

 

[teacupcopter]

If you're interested in 3D then yes, wait for Fermi. You'll want the extra performance it'll offer.

And @ Mensc with the October comment

Thanks for the info again I googled Fermi and it seems like what I might be looking for, but it depends. It's not like I need need a new PC now, I've got a decent rig from about 2 years ago that's only starting to show age now (with newer games coming out I'm starting to tone down graphics a bit, but Borderlands I can still run at almost max settings at 1680 by 1050 with playable framerates for example)

So it's not like I'm itching for a new PC. I think if this really is a benefit I'll wait for more concrete info- who knows, even if it comes out in October it might be way above my budget or not. Even if I do wait, the worst that will happen is I'll simply get other parts cheaper! I'll be researching other stuff in the mean time though.

Is there a good website just for more cutting edge stuff like this? Googling fermi gives me some info (march 2010 eta at the moment, new gpu stuff etc) but I'd like to keep on top of things a bit more.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Well I took that 5870 that was giving me problems with artifacting back to the store and exchanged it for a Sapphire model. The card I originally brought was from some brand here in Japan that pretty much just sells bulk products for cheap and doesn't offer official support. I've gotten good products from them before, but I think the 5870 I got was busted.

I had to pay a difference of around $30 to get the Sapphire model, but so far it hasn't given me any problems. I also got a voucher for Dirt 2 on Steam out of it, so that's not bad. The temperature seems to run a little higher than the last 5870 according to GPU-Z and CCC, but it is still usually in the 50s (Celsius) so it shouldn't be a problem. Hopefully the artifacting problems I was experiencing were simply due to the card I originally bought and not something else on my system. So far so good at least.

 

[Fragamemnon]

In a rut, figured I could ask here to see if some of the upgrades I am considering are worth it.

First, the essentials-I'm running this box with a E6400 @ 3.2Ghz fully stable, with a 216 core GTX 260 that overclocked very well (close to GTX 275 performance). I game at 1650x1080 and am pretty happy at that resolution right now.

My CPU is getting old and I'm getting the itch for an upgrade, problem is that I'm just not sure if it's really needed right now. The only realistic upgrades for video are a 5870, but if I did that I'd be in a situation where A) my CPU would not be able to drive the GPU as well as it could, and B) I'd need a new case to fit the monster card into. A new case probably isn't a terrible idea but I was hoping to do that when I bit the bullet and went to an iX (where X= some number) later this year.

I could upgrade the CPU and see some good results-my testing showed a pretty nice increase in GPU output when I overclocked my processor more, and this article agrees with those findings. A Q9550 would be a drop-in replacement, and seems like a no-brainer save the fact that I really don't play, nor have a desire to play, the handful of games where a quad-core really seems to help-I've already played FC2, no intention on playing GTA4 or Saint's Row 2 PC, and have played through Crysis and Warhead as well. So the immediacy of the upgrade in terms of things I want to play now doesn't seem to be there.

I'm getting a SSD for Valentine's Day (wife got one for Christmas, btw, that thing totally ROCKS if you are a one-game player like a MMO monster is), so I'm set there.

I'm thinking I should either go for the new case+5870 now and then just get more frames again when I migrate to newer Intel arch later, or just sit on everything and hope the ATi supply situation alleviates and I can maybe score a 5870+newer game bundle for less than MSRP. Knowing how terribad Fermi turns out (not too hopeful there) before biting is an added bonus.

Thoughts? Would a 5870/3.2Ghz Core 2 Duo pairing suck as much as it sounds like it would?

 

[Firestorm]

There seems to be no reason at all to upgrade for you.

 

[TheExodu5]

Considering you are spending about 35X (35,000%) more/GB on this SSD than a traditional disk drive I would still expect it to have write speeds a lot better than "up to" half of what the disk drive will write at. I'm sure it has it's place somewhere and will fit a specific task for someone perfectly but I can't help but see this and shake my head.

Sequential write speed isn't important. You're barely ever writing sequentially to an OS drive. It will be a blazingly fast OS drive and put to shame any Velociraptor drive, not to mention a 7200rpm drive.

Those value SSDs are a great and cheap way into having a blazingly fast OS drive. Not everyone is willing to pay the $300 price tag that goes along with the 80GB Intel drive.

@Fragamemnon, my thoughts are that now is a really bad time to upgrade if you have CPU specs such as yours. Too much money, too little return. Wait for the next generation of CPUs and video cards and you'll get far better return on your investment.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

I have a Core 2 Duo 3.2ghz (E8500) and noticed a big difference in performance going from a 4870 to a 5870 when gaming at 1920x1200 resolution and am glad I went with the upgrade. I guess it really depends on the games you play, though. You will definitely see the largest benefit in stuff like Crysis. I can finally run it at max settings and 1920x1200 with very playable framerates.

With that said, I wouldn't have bought the 5870 if I couldn't have gotten a large discount on it at the store I bought it at. The standard asking price of around $400 - $500 is too much in my opinion.

 

[brain_stew]

In a rut, figured I could ask here to see if some of the upgrades I am considering are worth it.

First, the essentials-I'm running this box with a E6400 @ 3.2Ghz fully stable, with a 216 core GTX 260 that overclocked very well (close to GTX 275 performance). I game at 1650x1080 and am pretty happy at that resolution right now.

My CPU is getting old and I'm getting the itch for an upgrade, problem is that I'm just not sure if it's really needed right now. The only realistic upgrades for video are a 5870, but if I did that I'd be in a situation where A) my CPU would not be able to drive the GPU as well as it could, and B) I'd need a new case to fit the monster card into. A new case probably isn't a terrible idea but I was hoping to do that when I bit the bullet and went to an iX (where X= some number) later this year.

I could upgrade the CPU and see some good results-my testing showed a pretty nice increase in GPU output when I overclocked my processor more, and this article agrees with those findings. A Q9550 would be a drop-in replacement, and seems like a no-brainer save the fact that I really don't play, nor have a desire to play, the handful of games where a quad-core really seems to help-I've already played FC2, no intention on playing GTA4 or Saint's Row 2 PC, and have played through Crysis and Warhead as well. So the immediacy of the upgrade in terms of things I want to play now doesn't seem to be there.

I'm getting a SSD for Valentine's Day (wife got one for Christmas, btw, that thing totally ROCKS if you are a one-game player like a MMO monster is), so I'm set there.

I'm thinking I should either go for the new case+5870 now and then just get more frames again when I migrate to newer Intel arch later, or just sit on everything and hope the ATi supply situation alleviates and I can maybe score a 5870+newer game bundle for less than MSRP. Knowing how terribad Fermi turns out (not too hopeful there) before biting is an added bonus.

Thoughts? Would a 5870/3.2Ghz Core 2 Duo pairing suck as much as it sounds like it would?

I'm on a similar setup (E5200 @3.6ghz and a GTX 260) and have found used Q6600s are going super cheap on Ebay/forums over here and is the only real low cost CPU upgrade worth doing I've found. The 45nm quads that aren't insanely priced are all really terrible OCers and require fast RAM if you're to push them (which I, and probably you, don't have) but any G0 Q6600 will get at least 3ghz and most will get 3.4-3.6ghz even with bog standard 800mhz RAM. Buying a used CPU isn't ideal but for ~$125 you could have a major CPU upgrade to the point where anything extra isn't really worth it.

It'd sure lift that bottleneck for cheap and beats spending the best part of $500 to get a Core i5/i7 quad, where, in reality there'd be no difference in games anyway. I know you love Dragon Age, and in that, even without the GPU upgrade, you'd get a major boost in frames, probably passing the 60fps solid mark.


I don't feel the need to upgrade my GPU at this point but the amount of quad optimised games is creeping up (I've actually noticed it bottleneck me in L4D2, Fuel and GTA4 and I know it'll happen in Dragon Age once I get round to it) so I think ~£80 is a fair price to pay to not be left behind.

If you can hold out on the GPU upgrade for now, I would, with decent availability and some actual competition prices should at least fall to RRP, a "perfect storm" has driven 5870/5850 prces way higher than they ought to be.