• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Official 2008 "I Need A New PC" Thread

dLMN8R

Member
Blizzard said:
I'm aware my M.S. means nothing, I just got it, and I feel douche-y mentioning it. =P My point is just that I'm not TOTALLY unfamiliar, and I thought it was a little insulting for you to claim everything I'd seen was wrong, especially since a lot of that was from the early days of Vista. I think you admit that with the "incompatibilities are a thing of the past", though...since that implies there were incompatibilities. I expect to comment in this thread if I -do- find any, though. ;)

I'll have to read the rest of the article later (past bedtime), and I'm especially interested in their and your take on the details of the high-memory caching. You even apparently know how I think it works (psychic?) since you know I misunderstand it, so please feel free to enlighten me how it actually works. I tend to be a little wary of trusting blog articles when they throw phrases like "the FUDsters" around, however. I think that's a reasonable approach.
TweakGuides is the antithesis of a blog. It's an extremely informative web site that depends and cares very little for advertising revenue. They've been putting together high-quality guides for tweaking anything and everything for years, and if you read the entire thing when you get the chance, including the introductory paragraphs, you'll understand where it's coming from.

In the meantime - caching. In short, Vista uses the majority of your unused memory to pre-cache your most frequently used programs. It allows programs to load nearly instantly, especially those you use very often. At the same time, the second that you need that memory for something else - a game, a major Photoshop work, or anything else - that cache is instantly dumped to make room.

The article explains it in more detail, with specific examples to back up everything he says.


Just do yourself a favor, make time to read it, and read it. Like I said, it addresses every single fear you brought up and more.


Blizzard said:
*edit* Networking comment noted. I believe I did hear that Vista's networking stack was reworked, and specifically a lot of the (early?) complaints were about strange wireless networking behavior rather than general networking behavior. Wireless isn't likely to be an issue for me except with a Wii (and I may end up with a wireless router for that regardless)

Wireless networking used to be a problem but that was fixed even long before SP1 came out. My notebook running Vista has had no problem at all switching between my home network, apartment network, multiple school networks, coffee shop networks, airport networks, and more. It's all very streamlined, fast, and automatic with no need to manually set up security profiles or other settings, and no use for third party applications either.
 
I like vista in general now (using 64-bit version on my new build, also have involuntarily had on a laptop for over a year), but it still has plenty of compatibility issues with games that XP ran fine. Dungeon Keeper is my most recent problem.
 

SRG01

Member
Open Source said:
I like vista in general now (using 64-bit version on my new build, also have involuntarily had on a laptop for over a year), but it still has plenty of compatibility issues with games that XP ran fine. Dungeon Keeper is my most recent problem.

Are you... running them in compatibility mode?
 

SRG01

Member
zoku88 said:
Businesses aren't the fastest upgraders. I still know places that use Windows 2000...

And having an M.S. in computer engineering doesn't get you very far if you haven't tried it yourself... (nvm it not being CS.)


EDIT: Oh, I'm the least qualified person talking right now when it comes to computer engineer (3rd year student, lol.)

Enterprise/IT usually don't migrate until 3-4 years after an OS has been released because supporting more OSes is a pain.

Some departments may try to support OSX either on their own systems or not, but that's a whole other ballgame altogether. Apple Enterprise is for another topic.
 
SRG01 said:
Are you... running them in compatibility mode?

Yep. I have been dealing with windows compatibility issues since Windows 95 wouldn't run the original DOS version of Tie Fighter. I'm thinking about putting together a couple machines just for running old games--one with MS-DOS 6.22, and one with Windows 98 SE.
 

Vorador

Banned
Open Source said:
Yep. I have been dealing with windows compatibility issues since Windows 95 wouldn't run the original DOS version of Tie Fighter. I'm thinking about putting together a couple machines just for running old games--one with MS-DOS 6.22, and one with Windows 98 SE.

It would be easier to create Virtual Machines rather than put together some old hardware.
 

rod

Banned
ugh, ok guys, problem here. i just got my 4870x2. hooked it up. installed latest drivers (8.8) and performance, given my pc, is crap!!


crysis runs WORSE than when i had my 4850

cod4 drops frames all the time when theres intensive lighting/particle effects

and bioshock runs in 1080i!!


help!!!!
 
rod said:
ugh, ok guys, problem here. i just got my 4870x2. hooked it up. installed latest drivers (8.8) and performance, given my pc, is crap!!


crysis runs WORSE than when i had my 4850

cod4 drops frames all the time when theres intensive lighting/particle effects

and bioshock runs in 1080i!!


help!!!!

Power supply is adequate? How's your 3dmark score? What mobo? CPU?
 

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
rod said:
ugh, ok guys, problem here. i just got my 4870x2. hooked it up. installed latest drivers (8.8) and performance, given my pc, is crap!!


crysis runs WORSE than when i had my 4850

cod4 drops frames all the time when theres intensive lighting/particle effects

and bioshock runs in 1080i!!


help!!!!

playing on a hdtv?

You have to use the tv as a normal pc monitor.... no 1080p 1080i 720p modes.
In mine I set the tv to "PC-mode" and in the good old windows screen resolution I choose the 1920x1080.

I cant go into the catalyst options and choose 1080p and stuff.
Besides, crysis in 1920x1080 is overkill...
Either way, people say the 64bit vista and 64bit 8.8 catalyst are amazing with crysis. You have to try different combos of O.S and drivers.

I play on my Sammy LE40M87BD with the hd4870, cod4 all maxed out 4x FSAA no problem. Winxp 32bit + 8.7
 

Kadey

Mrs. Harvey
rod said:
ugh, ok guys, problem here. i just got my 4870x2. hooked it up. installed latest drivers (8.8) and performance, given my pc, is crap!!


crysis runs WORSE than when i had my 4850

cod4 drops frames all the time when theres intensive lighting/particle effects

and bioshock runs in 1080i!!


help!!!!

Most say latest official drivers are crap. It actually takes a step backwards in some cases. IT guy at work is scratching his head over it. Use the beta or 852.2.

http://www.toomanydownloads.com/index.php?option=com_mtree&task=viewlink&link_id=162&Itemid=54
 

Danj

Member
BTW, if anyone's noticed any issues with Remote Desktop lately, apparently it might be due to NVIDIA drivers screwing it up.
 

otake

Doesn't know that "You" is used in both the singular and plural
dLMN8R said:
Just......read it. Do yourself a favor. Incompatibilities are a thing of the past. The operating system has been out for a year and a half. Businesses never adopt new OSs since they personally don't need them. Hell, it took them 2-3 years at least to install XP.

Aero is not a system hog. Hell, it makes the system run faster. Yeah, you can turn it off, but with a good video card it's completely useless and in fact slower to do. High-memory caching is a beneficial feature, you just misunderstand how it works. Plenty more there too.


Seriously, just read the article. It directly addresses every single issue you specifically brought up and a lot more that you were probably itching to type. I'm sorry, but dude, you're wrong here. Your M.S. in computer engineering means nothing when compared to real-world experience using the OS for a year and a half, and I'm a guy with an undergrad degree in Computer Engineering telling you this :D

It seems to me that most of vista's issues are actually hardware manufacturer issues. I support vista where I work because some people are important enough to get away with running the latest, the OS isn't terrible from the end user experience but OEMs..... I had a brand new acer laptop that shipped with the nic card not working. it was physically fine since when you loaded linux on it you could use it but the vista drivers just wouldn't work. the real culprit in the example is nvidia since it was an nforce chipset but the point still stands. MS is not doing quality control on these drivers.


from a corporate perspective Vista is terrible. The combination of vista and outlook 2007 alone are enough to make you want to kill yourself. The problem is that vista implements new hashing methods when it's sending login information to the mail server. These new processes are incompatible with stable versions of postfix. Fucking corporate vista users forced me to upgrade my mailserver. no small task.
 

rod

Banned
oh shit i fixed it!! i changed PCI slots, had it in #2 moved it to number 1, and it..>WOW


crysis fuck on very high with 4-8aa runs SO well im stoked what a card :D
 

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
rod said:
the thing is crysis on even 720p runs like rubbish! nearly IDENTICAL to the performance in 1920x1080


what do you mean, 720p?
You still haven't answered the questions I made...
 

spyshagg

Should not be allowed to breed
rod said:
1280x720, and i fixed my problem anyway :D

well thats not a standard resolution, besides, if you have your tv setup as hdtv in catalyst with the modes 720p and 1080p selected, windows will output crappy Hz like 720p 50hz or even 25hz 30hz.
Instant crappy framerate.


But now is fixed, so what was the problem afterall?
 

rod

Banned
spyshagg said:
well thats not a standard resolution, besides, if you have your tv setup as hdtv in catalyst with the modes 720p and 1080p selected, windows will output crappy Hz like 720p 50hz or even 25hz 30hz.
Instant crappy framerate.


But now is fixed, so what was the problem afterall?


i put my card in the top pci slot on my pc, it was on the second slot previously
 
MisterAnderson said:
Can the gigabyte motherboard everyone has been posting (from the combo deal with the core duo processor) Sli or Crossfire? I didn't see anything that said it supported it or not.

The X48 or X38 series both do crossfire and at better speeds. Also do the job if you want to overclock.

Just fixed an annoying issue I had with my front audio port. If I plugged in through my front panel I would get this buzzing sound when I moved a window around on my desktop or scrolled down a page. I picked up a xonar sound card to try and fix the issue but that did nothing.
So I then picked up a pair of ferrite cores and moved that cable on the otherside of the case away from all my PSU cables and now its sweet.

Just noting as my mate has a similar issue on his new rig. These higher PSU must put out some chronic electromagnetic fields.
 

otake

Doesn't know that "You" is used in both the singular and plural
I overclocked my core 2 duo to 2.6 ghz. a conservative overclock but I'm on stock cooling. Is my cpu still bottlenecking my 4870?

averaging 40 fps on crysis demo with 2xAA at 1680x1050?
 
Well I seem to have gotten my Q6600 stable at 3.6, only thing holding it back was the heat, ordered a Xignatek HDT-S1283 with the bolt kit. Hopefully it does my q6600 good, mybe ill hit 3.8 on air with it.
 

garath

Member
So thinking of a new video card to upgrade the 7900gt. It's done its job but time to move on. Having trouble finding some direct comparison benchmarks for a range of current cards though. Interested in the $200-$300 price point (I am a very "performance for the price" oriented).

Anyone have any links to good benchmarks?
 

Cheeto

Member
garath said:
So thinking of a new video card to upgrade the 7900gt. It's done its job but time to move on. Having trouble finding some direct comparison benchmarks for a range of current cards though. Interested in the $200-$300 price point (I am a very "performance for the price" oriented).

Anyone have any links to good benchmarks?
You should choose between the 4850 for $175 or the 4870 for $270.
 

Wallach

Member
garath said:
So thinking of a new video card to upgrade the 7900gt. It's done its job but time to move on. Having trouble finding some direct comparison benchmarks for a range of current cards though. Interested in the $200-$300 price point (I am a very "performance for the price" oriented).

Anyone have any links to good benchmarks?

There's a few options in that price range.

A - ATI HD 4870

B - nVidia GTX 260

C - nVidia 9800 GX2

I would take a look around on the internet and decide for yourself which card you'd be most comfortable with. The 9800 GX2 is a high-power card, but still delivers some of the best performance on the market and should still be taken into consideration (one look at a few benchmarks will tell you that).

While you will see me often recommend the 4850 to folks looking in the $150-200 price range, I am not as crazy about the 4870. I think if I was going to spend that much, I would probably lean towards the 260 or the 9800 GX2 (in that order).

Edit - ATI 9800 GX2? Need more coffee.
 
Total newbie when it comes to PC gaming and upgrades. Im in the market for a decent GPU. Currently I have a fairly modest Packard Bell which seems to be held back by the Graphics card (Nvida 8400 GS 256MB). I can run Source games fairly well but im not confident I could play anything beyond BioShock/CoD4 on Low.

I was looking at either the 4850 or the 8800GT. I've heard good things about both and they're both around my budget of ~£100.

Question time: Are there any compatability issues I'd need to think about?

Is it worth getting either of these cards with my setup? Will there be any bottleneck issues with the Processor or anything?

Would I need to upgrade anything else? Power supply? Cooling?

Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. :D
 

Blackface

Banned
BladedExpert said:
Total newbie when it comes to PC gaming and upgrades. Im in the market for a decent GPU. Currently I have a fairly modest Packard Bell which seems to be held back by the Graphics card (Nvida 8400 GS 256MB). I can run Source games fairly well but im not confident I could play anything beyond BioShock/CoD4 on Low.

I was looking at either the 4850 or the 8800GT. I've heard good things about both and they're both around my budget of ~£100.

Question time: Are there any compatability issues I'd need to think about?

Is it worth getting either of these cards with my setup? Will there be any bottleneck issues with the Processor or anything?

Would I need to upgrade anything else? Power supply? Cooling?

Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. :D

Do you have any links mentioning the specs of your motherboard/PSU. Thats the only way we can really tell you. The link you provided doesn't have any info.
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
The 7600GT is 100 bucks where I live, you told me it wasn't worth buying bee :/?

By the way, the weirdest thing just happened to me. I just started Crysis demo and it ran at (what seemed to be) 100 fps (probably 60, but it was SUPER SMOOTH) on the lowest settings.

Now how come Episode two runs and looks like ass on my computer while Crysis looks and runs AMAZING?
 
otake said:
I overclocked my core 2 duo to 2.6 ghz. a conservative overclock but I'm on stock cooling. Is my cpu still bottlenecking my 4870?

averaging 40 fps on crysis demo with 2xAA at 1680x1050?

No. Your processor is not bottlenecking the card.
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
Agent Ironside said:
Because Crysis scales well at low settings but looks worse than the original FC on low settings? :lol
I guess :lol But it's so fucking smooth I don't care! And the gameplay rocks in Crysis IMO :p
 
Trax416 said:
Do you have any links mentioning the specs of your motherboard/PSU. Thats the only way we can really tell you. The link you provided doesn't have any info.

I'll have to check when I get home in a short while :/
 

bee

Member
Seiken said:
The 7600GT is 100 bucks where I live, you told me it wasn't worth buying bee :/?

By the way, the weirdest thing just happened to me. I just started Crysis demo and it ran at (what seemed to be) 100 fps (probably 60, but it was SUPER SMOOTH) on the lowest settings.

Now how come Episode two runs and looks like ass on my computer while Crysis looks and runs AMAZING?

for a second hand one on ebay for £15 i'd recommend a 7600gt for sure but for $100 no way

not very good at swedish but look for prices on ati 3850 or 8600gt, that is of course if your power supply definitely can't handle a 8800gt, take the side off and look at the sticker on the power supply and get max wattage and see what it says for 12v, i.e +12v 22A
 

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
bee said:
for a second hand one on ebay for £15 i'd recommend a 7600gt for sure but for $100 no way

not very good at swedish but look for prices on ati 3850 or 8600gt, that is of course if your power supply definitely can't handle a 8800gt, take the side off and look at the sticker on the power supply and get max wattage and see what it says for 12v, i.e +12v 22A
It says "250W", do we need more info >_<?

EDIT: Apparently I have around 200 bucks to spend (my parents are willing to help me), so I want the absolute best that my power supply can handle.

EDIT 2:

Sapphire Radeon HD3850 Dual-DVI 256MB = 100 bucks
MSI GeForce NX8600GT-MTD256E/D2 256MB = 80 bucks
 

Wallach

Member
Seiken said:
It says "250W", do we need more info >_<?

EDIT: Apparently I have around 200 bucks to spend (my parents are willing to help me), so I want the absolute best that my power supply can handle.

EDIT 2:

Sapphire Radeon HD3850 Dual-DVI 256MB = 100 bucks
MSI GeForce NX8600GT-MTD256E/D2 256MB = 80 bucks

That power supply is unlikely to handle much in terms of a GPU upgrade.

Provided the PSU in your Packard-Bell is a standard size PSU and can be changed out easily, my suggestion would be the following (assuming a $200 budget):

Antec 500w Earthwatts PSU - $54.99
PNY 8800 GT w/ Frontlines: FoW - $119.99

Edit - You should also double-check to make sure you have a PCI-E x16 slot before doing anything.
 

otake

Doesn't know that "You" is used in both the singular and plural
Seiken said:
It says "250W", do we need more info >_<?

EDIT: Apparently I have around 200 bucks to spend (my parents are willing to help me), so I want the absolute best that my power supply can handle.

EDIT 2:

Sapphire Radeon HD3850 Dual-DVI 256MB = 100 bucks
MSI GeForce NX8600GT-MTD256E/D2 256MB = 80 bucks


should really get the 4850 instead.
 
otake said:
I hate crysis. it's the mountain that cannot be climbed!
Honestly I just picked it up and got to the "Paradise Lost" section where it becomes all icy and shit and I was playing just fine on Very High...... on my 8800GT---- Then Crysis decided to flex it's muscle member towards me and make me crank it down to "High" settings. :lol

I'm looking forward to Warhead more now as I'm just about finished with Crysis and the game will run a lot better since it's optimized code.
 

poweld

Member
So this month I got oodles of fun things (yay job!). 24" Samsung monitor + 8800GT to provide for it.
Running at 1920x1200, I get good framerates on most games (haven't tried Crysis yet), but
I was wondering just how worthwhile it would be to pick up a second 8800GT, since with the mail-in
rebate it comes to about $130 (pretty reasonable). Would I get enough of a performance boost
to warrant it, and would I have to invest in alternative cooling solutions (duorbs or otherwise) to handle
it?

Thanks!
 

bee

Member
Seiken said:
It says "250W", do we need more info >_<?

EDIT: Apparently I have around 200 bucks to spend (my parents are willing to help me), so I want the absolute best that my power supply can handle.

EDIT 2:

Sapphire Radeon HD3850 Dual-DVI 256MB = 100 bucks
MSI GeForce NX8600GT-MTD256E/D2 256MB = 80 bucks

upgrading both power supply and graphics card is definitely your best option and could be easily done on that budget, if you don't want to change power supply then thats a little more problematic.

i really have no idea what's the best card that could run on a 250w psu, had 400w+ for like 5 years now, i'm not at all convinced that could support 3850 or 8600, i'd actually be surprised it could run your 6800gt, has it run it before?
 
VictimOfGrief said:
Honestly I just picked it up and got to the "Paradise Lost" section where it becomes all icy and shit and I was playing just fine on Very High...... on my 8800GT---- Then Crysis decided to flex it's muscle member towards me and make me crank it down to "High" settings. :lol

I'm looking forward to Warhead more now as I'm just about finished with Crysis and the game will run a lot better since it's optimized code.

Im running an 8800gt and Crysis hates me, it keeps setting me to medium settings. I tried High once and the game crashed. oh woe is me.
 
Crysis is playable ALL the way through as long as you keep objects and shadows on medium, put shaders on high, most everything else can be on high, crank down textures if all else fails.
 

Guled

Member
hi, I got a quick question. If I get a laptop that can run crysis on med with an alright frame rate, how do you think it will handle

Left4Dead
Spore
SC2
Diablo 3
and Fallout 3

I don't want to play it on very high, but will I be able to run those games on high or at least med with a frame rate of at least 30?
 

poweld

Member
Guled said:
hi, I got a quick question. If I get a laptop that can run crysis on med with an alright frame rate, how do you think it will handle

Left4Dead
Spore
SC2
Diablo 3
and Fallout 3

I don't want to play it on very high, but will I be able to run those games on high or at least med with a frame rate of at least 30?

Seems like you're looking for a fairly specific response for stuff that isn't released yet.
However, I don't think that the requirements to run the following games well will be very high: Spore, SC2, Diablo3.
If your machine can handle Crysis alright, I imagine Left4Dead and Fallout3 can be handled as well.
 

Hazaro

relies on auto-aim
poweld said:
Seems like you're looking for a fairly specific response for stuff that isn't released yet.
However, I don't think that the requirements to run the following games well will be very high: Spore, SC2, Diablo3.
If your machine can handle Crysis alright, I imagine Left4Dead and Fallout3 can be handled as well.

Except Fallout 3 is probably going to be like Oblivion... OH WAIT :lol

I'm sure you'll be fine.
 
Top Bottom