Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

About to buy a QX6700 anyone care to stop me??

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 14, 2007 9:53:24 AM

Hi all.

I am on the verge of buying a Quad QX6700 Extreme processor.
Are there any people out there who DONT recommend this processor??
Im a pure gamer through and through and have recently read that the likes of CRYSIS, ALAN WAKE etc will be Quad Core compatable hence my wanting to buy a quad!!
Its quite expensive at £600 but because of certain games allegedly being able to take advantage of the quad core set-up I feel compelled to buy it!!

Anybody got any suggestions or reasons for me not buying this cpu??

This is a one-off purchase as I am not made of money and I am going to basically build a new rig and I want it to be the best.

My current system (see sig) is up for sale at the moment so want a kick-ass rig to replace it!!

More about : buy qx6700 care stop

March 14, 2007 9:56:57 AM

STOP !!!

wait for the processor price cutz . see the thread in this section .

It would be crazy to upgrade now .

Otherwise if you have the money , go for it .
March 14, 2007 9:59:27 AM

Yeah.

Have just this second read that post!!!

Its going to be a fresh upgrade so what do I wait for???

The new 1333Mhz cpu's??? Apparently intel are releasing a new board (P-35 chipset to accomodate the new line of 1333Mhz cpu's) is this true???
Related resources
March 14, 2007 10:02:57 AM

i would suggest hold on a few months as this looks like the worst time to upgrade in the computer industry .

I mean R600 , Cheaper intel , New amd processors ..see where i am going :wink:
March 14, 2007 10:07:15 AM

I know mate.

I get itchy credit card illness if I dont upgrade every now and then!!!

I suffered for my sins last time though buying an FX-60!! God that was a bad choice!! £800 of my hard earned english pounds gone to waste!!

I want my new upgrade to be the best possible so dont want make a huge mistake now!!!

Thanks pal.

P.S if you were going to wait, what exactly would you wait for?? (cpu, mobo etc) I kind of know my stuff but obviously not as much as you!!!

Here is the P-35 by the way.

http://www.tech2.com/india/news/motherboards/intels-p35...
March 14, 2007 10:17:49 AM

Hey first of all welcome to the forum :) 

Secondly i am only learning and i am sure that in time i would be asking you and other fellow poster for some suggestions as well . :) 

Well i would really wait for the following

The 680i chipset motherboards to be cheaper and more stable.

The R600 to released before buying any other card . The other option is to go for a Evga card which you can then step up . Go to evga.com to read about their program.

The r600 will lead to reduction in current G80 cards.

Also wait for the intel processor reduced prices.

Ram i already getting cheaper , by that time i would imagine that ddr2 800 and above is going to be much cheaper.

So basically in a few months you should be able to buy a powerful system at half the price , that you would pay today . :) 
March 14, 2007 10:23:13 AM

Thanks for the welcome!!

You make a lot of sense to be honest.

Im going to wait it out and keep an eye on the price changes and, like you say, the R600 (ive heard rumours that nvidia have a 8900 GTX ready to roll out on the release of the R600 to maybe spoil ATI's fun)??

Sorry to keep asking questions mate but what do you personally think of the quad core cpu's?? Do you honestly think that any advantage can be seen over core2duo in gaming apps??
March 14, 2007 11:06:58 AM

Quote:
what do you personally think of the quad core cpu's?? Do you honestly think that any advantage can be seen over core2duo in gaming apps??


I posted this in another thread but I'll repeat it here:

Quad core better for gaming as of this post? Not really.

In 6 months to a year after everything is multi-core compliant? Definitely.

Once the Q6600 drops to $266 I don't think there will be a good reason to buy a dual core processor again.
March 14, 2007 11:15:07 AM

So basically as slashzapper says, just wait and see??!!

I agree with what you are saying though. In time, everything will be multicore compliant.
Ive read that many reviews now and they all point to what you are saying as far as waiting is concered and everything becoming multicore!!

Im going to see if and when the prices drop and then check the prices of the 1333Mhz cpu's that are due to be released.

Thanks for your input!!
March 14, 2007 11:31:35 AM

Well,

You say you are going to use it for gaming. Even games that claim to be dual core optimized see very little gain from single to dual core. So, I would waste the cash on the quad for gaming. Just my opinion though.

wes
March 14, 2007 11:36:36 AM

Quote:
what do you personally think of the quad core cpu's?? Do you honestly think that any advantage can be seen over core2duo in gaming apps??


I posted this in another thread but I'll repeat it here:

Quad core better for gaming as of this post? Not really.

In 6 months to a year after everything is multi-core compliant? Definitely.

Once the Q6600 drops to $266 I don't think there will be a good reason to buy a dual core processor again.

I generally agree with you train of thought, just I think that it will be closer to a year or more for games to start significantly taking advantage of quad core CPU's. Of course if you are multi-tasking and performing any Photochop or other 3D graphics programs like CAD, then they will today benifit by quad core chips...

But if we really do start getting Quad Q6600's in a couple of months in the $300 range, WTF!!! Who in their right mind would buy the dual and single core chips!?!
March 14, 2007 12:23:30 PM

Yeah ure right.

If the prices do go down as suggested then who wouldnt buy one???!!!
At least you would know it would be futureproof (to a certain extent)!
March 14, 2007 12:42:14 PM

to be honest i think that august is going to be the best time to buy a new computer mid Q3 should see

r600
8900
Barcelona/agena
1333mhz Conroe

and last but certainly not least

the price war that goes with it!

however i have a feeling that Ram Prices will be hiked up (as they where when everyone bought new C2D rigs) in line with all the pricereductions elsewhere so it may be a good idea to buy Ram in june/july but thats just my opinion
March 14, 2007 12:45:44 PM

Do you think that the 1333Mhz cpu's will be a major leap forward over the current 1066Mhz (think i got that right) cpu's??

Do you really think it will be worth the wait???

The chipsets have to be able to produce the goods at the same time though of course!!
March 14, 2007 1:14:25 PM

Definitely wait for the CPU pricedrops at this point. Once that happens you need to ask yourself are you futureproofing for the next couple years? You mention you get itchy illness when you don't upgrade for a while. If you can't help but upgrade on a relatively short cycle (less than 2-3yrs) I would recommend getting a good dual-core like the e6650 or whatever its going to be called when the price drops occur. IF however you are content to leave the CPU alone for a couple years and want more futureproofing since "some" games "might" gain you better multi-thread performance in the next year or two then go with the quad-core.

As for mobo, the current crop will likely drop in price some with the release of the new chipsets. It remains to be seen if the new chipsets really are much improved over current. The only comparo I've seen so far showed very tiny gains. This might improve however and I'd weigh the importance of that to you when the "bearlake" is about to release and we have more finalized hardware info.
March 14, 2007 1:40:57 PM

OK Talon,

I will wait for the price drops as you and many others have mentioned.

If though, for example, I get a good price for my current set-up (im selling it you see) and I had the cash to spend now, what would your suggestion of cpu and mobo be??

It has to be able to cope with future games for the next say, 2 years!!

PS I would be pairing your suggestion with a 8800GTX (maybe SLI maybe not).
March 14, 2007 1:52:30 PM

Quote:
OK Talon,

I will wait for the price drops as you and many others have mentioned.

If though, for example, I get a good price for my current set-up (im selling it you see) and I had the cash to spend now, what would your suggestion of cpu and mobo be??

It has to be able to cope with future games for the next say, 2 years!!

PS I would be pairing your suggestion with a 8800GTX (maybe SLI maybe not).


You probably want to snatch up your memory shortly as the price drop in Core2Duo next month and Barcelona in August are going to push up demand for ram and the prices accordingly.

Forget the SLI you only get a 10-20% improvement for double the money.
March 14, 2007 2:06:03 PM

Hi BaldEagle

What high performance memory do you suggest??
I was thinking of the corsir dominator series (PC2-8888) but it rather expensive!! £400 for a pair of 1Gb sticks!!

Any suggestions??
March 14, 2007 2:19:12 PM

Quote:
Do you think that the 1333Mhz cpu's will be a major leap forward over the current 1066Mhz (think i got that right) cpu's??


Personally i think no not really wait for this time next year for Intels next large leap forward

however i do think AMDs new chips will be (they better had be!)

Quote:
Do you really think it will be worth the wait???


i'm still running a A64 3500 with a 1950pro and desperatly want to upgrade but im waiting so yes i do think its worth the wait.


Quote:
The chipsets have to be able to produce the goods at the same time though of course!!


Thats a good Point
whilst Barcelona/Agena are meant to use AM2/AM2+ AM2 historically are pretty bad OC'ers (incomparison to the 775's) whilst it could be just the chips and not the boards. when i buy my rig in August i will buy whatever performs best when Overclocked to a degree i feel comfortable running it at
March 14, 2007 2:20:15 PM

go with the OCZ 8500 sli edition Ram should be able to get 4gb for £400
March 14, 2007 2:29:57 PM

Yeah. just looked them up. they seem ok.

You can buy that memory cooler as a separate add-on aswell (the one from corsair)

Reviews suggest it is an excellent RAM cooler!!
March 14, 2007 2:47:29 PM

Quote:
what do you personally think of the quad core cpu's?? Do you honestly think that any advantage can be seen over core2duo in gaming apps??


I posted this in another thread but I'll repeat it here:

Quad core better for gaming as of this post? Not really.

In 6 months to a year after everything is multi-core compliant? Definitely.

Once the Q6600 drops to $266 I don't think there will be a good reason to buy a dual core processor again.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the bottleneck for nearly all games is the GFX card, especially as the resolutions go up.

Dual-core just about helps gaming performance because it frees up one core to dedicate itself to the game, leaving the other core to do all the other background processes you've got running.

So how is having more cores going to help, exactly? Even if they're multi-threaded, they're still going to waiting for the GFX to do its thang.

If you're a gamer, you should be spending your dough on the GFX, and then working out how fast your processor and memory need to be in order to keep it running as fast as it can. On resolutions above 1280x1024, this isn't going to take anything more than an e4300.

Have I got this wrong? Please tell me if so.
March 14, 2007 3:01:51 PM

I dont really know enough about bottlenecks (what causes a bottleneck).

I always thought it was the CPU/northbridge/memory that caused the bottleneck but I dont know enough to back it up!!

You may very well be right!

I hope somebody can clarify this????????
March 14, 2007 3:25:41 PM

Quote:
Do you think that the 1333Mhz cpu's will be a major leap forward over the current 1066Mhz (think i got that right) cpu's??

Do you really think it will be worth the wait???

The chipsets have to be able to produce the goods at the same time though of course!!

The 1333 fsb will be a minor leap, but still a step. There will be a small gain in some benchmarks, but I don't think "normal" apps, like office and games will improve much.
Anyway, most "good" p965s and i680s will support 1333 now.
In over a year, there will be a 1600 fsb, this is part of a major overhaul that will improve many things (as well as remove the south-bridge bottleneck)
So, basically, a 2.4 Ghz chip on 1066 is not much different than a 2.4 Ghz chip on 1333.
March 14, 2007 3:43:01 PM

Quote:
I dont really know enough about bottlenecks (what causes a bottleneck).

I always thought it was the CPU/northbridge/memory that caused the bottleneck but I dont know enough to back it up!!

You may very well be right!

I hope somebody can clarify this????????

I don't think you need to worry much about bottlenecks. The C2D will destroy any P4. Get enough RAM (1 gig for XP, 2 gigs for Vista). Only get good RAM (DDR2 800 ) if you want to overclock, if you play 3-D games, get a good video card.
March 14, 2007 3:49:04 PM

Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the bottleneck for nearly all games is the GFX card, especially as the resolutions go up.

Dual-core just about helps gaming performance because it frees up one core to dedicate itself to the game, leaving the other core to do all the other background processes you've got running.

So how is having more cores going to help, exactly? Even if they're multi-threaded, they're still going to waiting for the GFX to do its thang.

If you're a gamer, you should be spending your dough on the GFX, and then working out how fast your processor and memory need to be in order to keep it running as fast as it can. On resolutions above 1280x1024, this isn't going to take anything more than an e4300.


I won't pretend to know the details here but I know Supreme Commander is capable of 'using' all four cores in a quad. I assume by using the cores it is helping performance.

Is that load off the GPU? I do not know. At $266 though it's hard to say no either way.
March 14, 2007 3:55:46 PM

Quote:
I dont really know enough about bottlenecks (what causes a bottleneck).

I always thought it was the CPU/northbridge/memory that caused the bottleneck but I dont know enough to back it up!!

You may very well be right!

I hope somebody can clarify this????????


A bottleneck is just whatever is limiting the relevant performance indicator (so in this case what limits FPS). It's a pretty good way of identifying where you should spend money, and is obviously application-relative. The bottleneck on a CAD application would be very different to the bottleneck playing Crysis say.

This is a combination of what others have told me and my own ramblings:

The northbridge and/or the southbridge doesn't limit graphics cards. They don't use that much bandwidth anyway, so that won't limit performance.

The memory controller does limit things somewhat. There is an unavoidable physical delay between when the CPU asks for something and the memory responding. This is why we have cache and pre-fetching.

I guess if the game was multi-threaded, you could utilise more cache, and this would lessen the slowdown from going to memory. (Is this correct?)

But again, most of the time we'll just be waiting for the GFX to render the 3d world before taking a photo (my lame way of understanding graphics).

I would appreciate any major/minor corrections, anyone?
March 14, 2007 3:57:11 PM

Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the bottleneck for nearly all games is the GFX card, especially as the resolutions go up.

Dual-core just about helps gaming performance because it frees up one core to dedicate itself to the game, leaving the other core to do all the other background processes you've got running.

So how is having more cores going to help, exactly? Even if they're multi-threaded, they're still going to waiting for the GFX to do its thang.

If you're a gamer, you should be spending your dough on the GFX, and then working out how fast your processor and memory need to be in order to keep it running as fast as it can. On resolutions above 1280x1024, this isn't going to take anything more than an e4300.


I won't pretend to know the details here but I know Supreme Commander is capable of 'using' all four cores in a quad. I assume by using the cores it is helping performance.

Is that load off the GPU? I do not know. At $266 though it's hard to say no either way.

Aren't CPUs terrible at 3d work? Think of the CPU bit in 3DMark06.
March 14, 2007 11:58:23 PM

Quote:
Hi BaldEagle

What high performance memory do you suggest??
I was thinking of the corsir dominator series (PC2-8888) but it rather expensive!! £400 for a pair of 1Gb sticks!!

Any suggestions??


Thats a delicate question which leads to what motherboard you are going to get. The Corsair dominator series (PC2-8888) are great in some motherboards with high enough voltages but the price is sky high OUCH... The Corsair XMS (PC2-6400) CAS-4 is a fairly good alternative at about 1/3 the price.
March 15, 2007 12:30:49 AM

Quote:
Hi BaldEagle

What high performance memory do you suggest??
I was thinking of the corsir dominator series (PC2-8888) but it rather expensive!! £400 for a pair of 1Gb sticks!!

Any suggestions??


Look up Team Group RAM, and the xtreem series. Its what i have, take a look at my sig. They are very cheap and have micron chips so perform better than most RAM out there. :wink:
March 15, 2007 1:33:50 AM

Quote:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the bottleneck for nearly all games is the GFX card, especially as the resolutions go up.


Many games are, but not all. A significant number of games are quite CPU bound, predominantly online FPS/RPGs, RTS and simulation games where a lot of AI is involved.

Quote:
Dual-core just about helps gaming performance because it frees up one core to dedicate itself to the game, leaving the other core to do all the other background processes you've got running.


On a multithreaded game, that is not the only benefit. Basically, the concept is to split the game up into smaller parts (threads) that can be divided amongst the cores of the CPU. So you could have one thread doing the AI + sound, and the other doing the physics and wireframes, just as a crude example.

Traditionally on single core CPUs everything is on the one thread, so inevitably things had to be much simpler as there is only so much a single core can compute. Multi-core gaming allows upcoming games to have a much more immersive and responsive environment, as all the game functions don't have to be crammed into one thread.

Quote:

So how is having more cores going to help, exactly? Even if they're multi-threaded, they're still going to waiting for the GFX to do its thang.


See above. :)  Specifically, the main benefits of multi-core gaming should be smarter AI, more realistic physics effects and longer view distances in-game (ever notice in games with large maps the effect of distant things 'popping' into view as you get closer? well, that should be a thing of the past.

Essentially, multicore gaming is more about making games smarter and more immersive rather than eeking out twice the amount of framerates while keeping the AI as stupid and environment as static as previous games. :lol: 

Quote:

If you're a gamer, you should be spending your dough on the GFX, and then working out how fast your processor and memory need to be in order to keep it running as fast as it can. On resolutions above 1280x1024, this isn't going to take anything more than an e4300.


That is true, but not necessarily for that reason only. I always tell a serious gamer to allocate more towards the GPU budget than the CPU budget. You can always overclock a low end CPU to high end specs (or beyond!), using your very example of the E4300, it can easily be overclocked to 3GHz+, instantly giving it the performance of a $1000 X6800 for a mere $160.

However, no amount of overclocking a lowish end GPU (7600GT perhaps?) will allow it to get anywhere NEAR the levels of a high end 8800 series GPU.

Unlike low end CPUs, which are only differentiated by clockspeeds and cache size compared to higher end CPUs (but can generally be easily overclocked to achieve parity), the difference between low and high end GPUs are far greater. Low end GPUs may only have 1/2 to 1/4 the amount of pixel/vertex shaders, and also vastly reduced memory bandwith. This drastically affects performance. A high end GPU may yield framerates 5x the framerates of a low end GPU, but a high end CPU is at most 2x as fast as a low end CPU (without taking overclocking into account, of course ;)  ).

Thus, it makes much more sense to invest more money into the GPU. A $100 - $200 dual core CPU is more than enough to run the vast majority of games on the market at reasonable framerates, but the same cannot be said of $100 - $200 GPUs, unless you are content with less eye candy or low res gaming. :wink:
March 15, 2007 2:14:19 AM

Hi Exponent

i can understand your urge and willingness to upgrade , but i would really suggest that hold on.

You might really regret it cause the difference could be really high like 300 pounds for a processor.

I would say that if you want to then you can get a new Graphics Card 8800 gtx or Gts.

Any other upgrade and i am sorry pal but you may get burnt . 8)
March 15, 2007 5:47:20 AM

Interesting thread as I'm in the same boat as exponent and itching to buy/build a new system. Even more so for me in that nVidia will be answering the ATi R600 with an 8900 GTX that is faster then the 8800 GTX and will cost less...

But I'm even more conflicted in examining the value of building a 'balls-to-the-walls' system, or looking more to parts that fit the 80:20 solution (80% of the performance at 20% of the cost) as 680i chip sets and the new multi-core Intel processors are so over-clock-able.

Summarily, if you can get game performance that's absurdly close to what the most expensive parts offer with lower cost parts via over-clocking; were does one practically draw the line?

Of course even the most expensive parts are over-clock-able as well, but, there is a point of diminishing return, and surprisingly it seems same generation parts in the mid and high end of the cost spectrum date themselves and return inadequate performance and user satisfaction in roughly the same amount of time...

To me it looks like the bottom line with regard to value is where you run out of performance head-room and need to upgrade with the value system approach vs. BTTW approach -- which ends up costing more over roughly the same term, and offers more gratifying game performance at higher opportunity cost...

I'm also looking to scale CPU/GPU performance (with maximum render candy settings) for the ubiquitous 20" LCD resolution of 1280·1024 -- so I'm looking to balance that against everything else, which is definitely a more forgiving approach then if I were looking to satisfy a wide-screen or HD rez requirement.

More opinions and input appreciated!

=O)
March 15, 2007 7:11:45 AM

Quote:
games are not really CPU bound as the resolution goes up they are GPU bound.

games are only CPU bound if you are using a crappy proc and a good video card
so it depends on what you are using

how can you not know this and use the word "immersive"?

Good lord, who are you patronizing/talking at? This thread sure went down hill in a hurry...

:roll:
March 15, 2007 7:40:56 AM

Personally I would wait until the P-38 Performance mother board comes out in Q3 of this year if not sooner. DDR3 and 1333 and i know that P-35 can use DDR3 also or DDR2 but from what i have read the P-38 Chipset is suppose to be able to overclock better than the P-35. I also like the quad core because to me it is should last you longer than the dual cores.
March 15, 2007 7:42:20 AM

WOW.

Theres been some really great input from you guys!! Thanks!

Have just read this though http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=6484

The article has made me re-think my plan to build my gaming rig! Everything seems to happening around Q3 of this year.
Thats not to say that I dont wanna just run out now and buy a load of new stuff!! (thats half the fun, having it all in your car on the way home knowing you are going to build it when you get back)!!! *am I sad or what*??!! hahaha
I am going to wait fot the new P-35 intel boards, the new 1333Mhz cpu's, DDR3 memory (possibly), the new nvidia 8900series (unless ATI's R600 GPU is something major)!

If, when the new cpu's are released and it turns out that they aren't that much better in performance than the current crop then I will save my money and go for the Q6600 or QX6700 which by then will have had a significant price cut!!
Thanks for the RAM advice corvetteguy
I think that everyone has been trying to tell me that anyway so I reckon thats what i'm gonna do?? Notice I said "reckon" I dont even trust myself not to leg it out and buy something!!!
March 15, 2007 7:51:56 AM

I totally agree with you pcnut
I wasnt aware of a P-38?? but if what you say is true (and i'm inclined to believe you) then thats the board for me!!!!
I am a big fan of the quads because, like you say, you are futureproofing yourself to a great degree.
The next level up will be octo core but i dont think they could fit 8 cores onto one socket. it would have to be two processors on one board (very much like AMD's attempt at quad core recently) AMD Quad FX-74! :lol:  :roll:
March 15, 2007 8:08:10 AM

Hey exponent lose the credit card , like tell your friend to hide it or something :lol: 

I CAN SEE YOU ARE itching to buy the comp :D  Noooo..not yet :) 

I can understand although i just on the edge myself of building a new computer :( 
March 15, 2007 8:14:05 AM

HAHAHAHAHA

your a funny guy slashzapper

My missus said last night "your going to do it arent you??, im gonna come home from work and find a monster of a machine in the house that you have just bought"
I just dipped my head in shame and said "yes".
While I was asleep last night she hid my credit card because she knew I would be waiting outside the shop at 9am!!! hahaha

Im glad she did it now to be honest!!!

The only problem is, GETTING IT BACK!!!! :( 
March 15, 2007 8:20:03 AM

Well done for the research PCnut

That was exactly what I was looking for!!!!!!

"bearlake" looks to be a real winner!!! I will definately wait for the p-38!!
March 15, 2007 9:05:38 AM

I think you're thinking of the P-35 are you not? This is the new bearlake chipset, and it's being discussed elsewhere. The real reason to hold back is for the upcoming Barcelona, I would say, and a couple of new procs from Intel (including the e6420, which will be a dream, I would think). And then you might want to hang around for Penryn... Argh.

Back to the need for quadcore issue. I still don't buy it. The reason stuff 'pops in' is because there is a limit to the amount of objects in the 3d world that get rasterised by the GFX. So they just pick an arbitrary point on the horizon and stop rendering it (or a more subtle approach). It backs up my point precisely! Having a quad won't do jack to improve this scenario.

I'm sure it will allow developers to make more complicated game engines, so I can well see that in-game physics will improve, more sophisticated AI etc., but I think that this is more a case of the programming. It's not always the case in computing that if you buy the technology, they will write for it. (one big problem is that the game engine can only really go as fast as the standard computer can handle at the time). I guess we'll have to see, but it's a fair enough point, esp. on RPGs and whatnot. (I think it is clearly not the case in Oblivion, though, which is horrendously GFX bound.) Multi-threaded games could make a real difference here, but probably not for at least a year.

Like others have said, fair enough, why not have 4 cores for a little bit more? But let's not kid ourselves. It's not going to make that much difference for quite a while, especially in games.
March 15, 2007 9:11:22 AM

You are correct Jamiepotter

The game or application has to writen or coded to support quad core! there is 1 game out there at the moment that supports quad and that is "Supreme Commander"

But if the games havent been programmed to take advantage of quad then it is pointless having one!

I do agree with you mate!!

BUT........It still doesnt stop me from wanting one because the way I see it is, if it is at the top of the tree then I want it!!
I do see your point though but its just the way I am when it comes to the latest technology!!! I HAVE TO HAVE IT!!! :D 
March 15, 2007 10:26:12 AM

no, I dont care to stop you, feed the machine!!
March 15, 2007 11:24:08 AM

Believe me djmerlin I do want to feed the machine!!!!
But with the upcoming price drops and new P-38 chipsets I would be a fool to do a full system build right now!!!

But I am the sort to feed the machine without a doubt mate!!!!!
March 15, 2007 11:31:48 AM

8) :lol: 
March 15, 2007 11:46:48 AM

You're system is still great man, it will play games silky smooth so no need for you to upgrade for now.
March 15, 2007 12:36:06 PM

You are right Chuckshissle it is a sick-ass machine as it is and only requires a nice 8800GTX (or two) :lol:  to get the full potential out of it!!!

Yesterday I nearly went out and bought a new set-up up but today I have seen the light and am going to stick with my machine until Q3/4 of this year then have a big blow-out on a totally new build!! cant wait!!!

I soooo gratefull for everybody's input!! you lot have saved me from spending a fortune on gear that would be outdated in a mere 3-6 months so thanks guys!!!
March 15, 2007 12:42:29 PM

They way I see it when I want a good game I want to play with good performance. When I start to see lagging and frame rates with high quality setting then that's my sign to upgrade. You're not going to see a difference in 60fps to 200fps. I'm good with 30fps and above.
March 15, 2007 12:45:20 PM

WOWZER!!!! Chuckshissle you are a true master mate!!!!
Just watched your vid!! That is one helluva machine!!! Cool soundtrack too :wink:
That is EXACTLY the kind of rig im looking to create when I upgrade in the near future!!!

RESPECT TO YOU MATE!!!!
!