Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

Low-Mid range gaming build

Tags:
  • New Build
  • Gaming
  • Systems
  • Product
Last response: in Systems
October 11, 2007 10:26:01 PM

Lookin to upgrade my rig, used primarily for FPS gaming. ATM I play UT2004 and might switch to ut3 if its good or 04 dies completely. I do some video conversion on occasion and might get into some light to mid video/photo editing, but the systems primary use is gaming.

$155 ASUS P5K-E/WIFI-AP
$195 Intel Core 2 Duo E6750
$100 CORSAIR XMS2 (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 800
I already have a Thermanright SI-128
Video card is still up in the air, I'll decide on that later, might even hold off for the next gen if my x1600xt does well enough.

I'm still not sure if I should spring for a Quad 6600, On the one hand newer titles (such as ut3) are being "designed" for that kind of multi-threading, but from what I hear even ut3 will only use a 3rd core for audio/physics. I plan on overclocking and im not sure how well the Quad 6600's do compared to the E6750's.

My main concern is will the DDR800 limit me much? I figure if they certify it at those lower timings I might be able to relax them a little and raise the clocks to where an overclock needs them. Will I run into serious problems here with the supposed 1:1 ratio demand of this motherboard? I cant justify spending much more on RAM so don't go recommending $150+ stuff unless there is a very compelling reason.

Thoughts? Glaring problems/pitfalls?

More about : low mid range gaming build

October 11, 2007 11:32:14 PM

If you overclock, swap that ram out for:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

To decide on the video card, just post your native monitor resolution.

If money is no object, get the quad & be done with it. Especially if your hsf install requires the removal of the mobo.
October 11, 2007 11:59:34 PM

By the looks he is buying a mobo so im guessing he'll have to take the old one out?

Get the q6600 if you have the cash, 800mhz will not limit a medium-high OC.

and yes monitor res would be handy ;) 
Related resources
October 12, 2007 12:01:54 AM

Why that RAM over the Corsair? Same timings and speed. Is it known to OC better? If its personal preference please state so.

Why would native monitor resolution dictate video card choice unless I used an LCD? I still use a CRT thank you. When I do upgrade I'll probably get something like the LG L1970HR 19%u201D or the Soyo 24%u201D Wide TFT LCD Monitor - DYLM24D6

Also why would my processor choice be influenced by whether or not I'd need to remove the mobo for my HSF? That makes no sense.

chookman said:
Get the q6600 if you have the cash, 800mhz will not limit a medium-high OC.

Sure? Remember this is a P35 mobo, I read this article earlier and :ouch:  'd http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/08/01/taking_the_e6750...

"A second concern that most FSB1333 overclockers are likely to face is that Intel's latest chipsets support a minimum 1:1 DRAM to FSB clock speed. This limitation assures that systems receive adequate memory bandwidth, but it also means that the minimum memory specification that will work with FSB2000 (500 MHz clock) is DDR2-1000 (500 MHz clock)."

Money is definitely an object there'd have to be VERY real performance increases for me to spend $50 more on anything here.
October 12, 2007 4:43:39 AM

The CPU in that article is a e6750 which has a stock FSB of 1333. yes.
However the Q6600 has a stock of 1066 significantly lower.

medium-high overclock of the Q6600 on air would be 2.8-3.2ghz even at 3.2ghz (8x400 for example)

3200/8 = 400
400x4 = 1600 total FSB
1600/2 = 800mhz DDR2 (double rate)

with the e6750 that they tested with here they got it to about 4.3ghz on WATER cooling so you wont go near that with air. It runs 1333FSB at 8 multiplier compared to 9 of q6600. The e6750 uses 667mhz RAM by stock so there is still room for an OC just a smaller jump than the Q6600. Also your getting 4 cores for future gaming.

At 500 FSB like they suggest for a Q6600 the highest OC you could get is 4.5ghz which is INSANE. That comment you quote is only really related to people that have crazy water cooling, phase change, liquid nitrogen or something.

EDIT: Someone correct me if im wrong
October 12, 2007 5:00:22 AM

oops forgot the monitor bit

Even if you are using a CRT it will still have a resolution limit (the one where you increase it and the monitor says "out of range"). Resolution you are running games at determines the video power nessecary and hence giving you your answer.

For instance if you had a 19" LCD native res is 1280x1024 which even new release games you wont need anything higher than say an 8800GTS 320MB to run nice at good eye candy levels. If you got the 24" LCD it is at 1920x1200 which needs significatly more power, youll be looking at an 8800GTX. Some say with a 24" SLI might even be a consideration.
October 12, 2007 6:58:31 AM

regarding the ram. Corsair is switching out mostly to promo IC chips. They've been losing a lot of loyal customers because of this. Not very good chips in terms of overclocking. Quality wise D9 Microns are the way to go. those Crucial Ballistix modules contain D9 Micron chips which are fantastic.
October 12, 2007 8:18:01 AM

I did the same thing only I bought a Quad core for about 300 retail and I used Cruciall Balsitic DDR-2 800 pc6400 ram that will OC to around 1000 I have mine clocked up to over 900 so far. I also used a ASUS P5K vanilla but go on and use better ASUS MB if you want it's the same P35 chipset. The only thing I used that I regret was a 8800GTS I should have used a GTX for the crysis game but they were like 500 buck's. Good luck O yeha Im doing 3.3 on air
October 12, 2007 12:36:59 PM

So you're saying that you buy a computer before you know the needs? I do the opposite. I know the needs first before I buy a computer.

Ok, the quad is a bad idea. I was saying if you got the quad, you wouldn't have to remove the mobo to install a quad cpu when you upgrade to one.

Yes, Ballistix is a personal preference because I'm an overclocker. Get the Corsair.

I'll take back everything I said. Good luck with your build.
October 12, 2007 1:21:30 PM

Quote:
So you're saying that you buy a computer before you know the needs? I do the opposite. I know the needs first before I buy a computer.

Who are you replying to?

Quote:
Ok, the quad is a bad idea. I was saying if you got the quad, you wouldn't have to remove the mobo to install a quad cpu when you upgrade to one.

I never mind cracking open the case to upgrade or swap out a part. The only thing that irks me is doing it to fix a chronically loose part or something like that. I have this obsessive compulsive need to have my music and internet access available to me at all times.

As for the RAM I plan on OC'ing here, I don't mind if you recommend something based on personal preference, I just hope you include your reasons for the preference. Examples would include a superior manufacturing process resulting in more highly OC-able chips, or stellar customer service record compared to a patchy one from other brands.

I selected the Corsair for the price and because they've almost always been top shelf stuff (I remember a few compatibility problems years ago). I know Corsair, OCZ and Crucial have been going back and forth taking the crown from each other in performance for years and frankly I don't care which one can OC 2 mhz more resulting in a ~.00002% difference in performance. If people ever bothered to actually look at the numbers in RAM comparisons they'd realize its largely a commodity part that either works or doesn't, the differences between brands at the same settings is never significant. And as for the super OC'ing stuff Paying 60-100% more for AT BEST a 2-3 FPS increase makes no sense to me. As long as there isn't another brand thats much more likely to OC much better than this at the same price point, I'm indifferent as to which one.

chookman said:
Even if you are using a CRT it will still have a resolution limit (the one where you increase it and the monitor says "out of range"). Resolution you are running games at determines the video power nessecary and hence giving you your answer.

For instance if you had a 19" LCD native res is 1280x1024 which even new release games you wont need anything higher than say an 8800GTS 320MB to run nice at good eye candy levels. If you got the 24" LCD it is at 1920x1200 which needs significatly more power, youll be looking at an 8800GTX. Some say with a 24" SLI might even be a consideration.


I have so many problems with this response I don't know where to begin.

First off I've never been able to afford the kind of equipment that would allow me to game at over 1600X1200 - so I've never had "out of range" issues. Secondly I'm not asking for video card advice, I can handle that just fine. The reason I posted this here was to get my base system screened to see if there were any glaring faults with it, such as maybe the Q6600 will OC to within 100mhz of the E6750, or someone linking me to an article stating that FPS engines (specifically ut3) have now become truly multi threaded and can scale to 4-8 cores no problem.

As for the supposition that buying the 8800GTS or any video card with the the expectation that it will be able to game at a given resolution for games that haven't even been released yet is just foolishness. Sure you can be *fairly* certain that overkill (say SLI 8800GTX's) will allow you to game at medium resolutions with all eye candy enabled etc. But expecing a midrange part like the 8800GTS to be able to handle 1280x1024 to be able to fulfill such a subjective thing as a satisfactory gaming expirience is ludicrous for many reasons, only a few of which are listed below

1 - You don't know what range of FPS a person considers agreeable, 30 fps might be fine for you but for some any dips below 60 is unacceptable.
2 - You don't know how much AA and AS a person likes or how it will effect the FPS on a given card.
3 - Maxing all quality settings WILL affect the FPS for any recent game on any card.
October 13, 2007 7:02:04 AM