Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Please help me put together this puzzle

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 9, 2009 3:02:52 AM

Hey guys, to let you know the picture is a gaming rig.

I have a good idea on a rig to buy.I would like opinions on what you guys think.Here is the catch I will only use this rig for blue-ray movies and gaming (gothic series,l4d,medieval series) on a res of 1920*1200.Also I will not overclock and I will only use one powerful graphics card don't like sli,xfire,dual gpu.With a budget not being a factor.Knowing this what kind of system would you buy.

Please give details on the components you would use.

One last thing is it worth it on watching blue-ray and gaming on a res of 2560*1600?

More about : put puzzle

April 9, 2009 3:25:37 AM

If you can afford a 30" screen with 2560 x 1600, yes its worth it to watch Blu-Ray and game on it.

With that being said, I think you're looking at something like this:

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Motherboard: ASUS P5Q Pro
RAM: 8GB OCZ DDR2-800 CL4
GPU: ASUS HD4870X2 2GB

If you're not looking for 2560 x 1600 operation, you can get a slightly lower spec.

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Motherboard: ASUS P5Q Pro
RAM: 8GB OCZ DDR2-800
GPU: ASUS HD4870X2 1GB
April 9, 2009 3:38:37 AM

Thanks for the quik reply.What would you suggest on a single gpu card for that res both 19*12 and 25*16?
Related resources
April 9, 2009 4:10:33 AM

If its single GPU you're looking for, GTX285 will be the best choice.
April 9, 2009 4:18:49 AM

Thx for the reply.So going quad on that motherboard would not be more future proof for games that might support it?
April 9, 2009 6:00:01 AM

It definitely will. However it will be years down the road before we see the kind of quad core support like we see on dual cores. But having a quad is definitely more beneficial in the long run.
a c 126 à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
April 9, 2009 6:20:05 AM

Actually for at least L4D a quad would be the ebst. It does utilize 80% of all 4 of my Q6600 @ 3GHz.

If its the older Gothic games (Gothic 1/2) then it wont matter but it may help with Gothic 3, although I never got to play it.

As for Blu-Ray, with a Blu-Ray 6x Super Multi with Light Scribe from LG @ about $100 bucks its well worth it. Most decent players are still around $299 and the only other Blu-Ray drive I see is from Sony and its only 2x and is $145+/-.

I have that LG drive BTW and Blu-Ray is awesome. But unfortunately Windows Media Center does not have Blu-Ray support yet so you have to use the included Power DVD to play them. I hear it may come in Vista SP2. Hopefully.
April 9, 2009 4:15:34 PM

yomamafor1 said:
It definitely will. However it will be years down the road before we see the kind of quad core support like we see on dual cores. But having a quad is definitely more beneficial in the long run.



That's actually quite debatable. The Quad CPU's we see today don't nearly get utilized the way they should by most apps and games. By the time they are widely supported the old quad CPU's won't nearly hold their own against the new CPU's that will be priced around the same amount you bought your old Quad for that never really got its chance to shine. By this time I am sure at least Octo's will be out as well and they will more than likely not be widely supported for quite sometime just like the Quad's today. The only reason to get a Quad today is if you make use out of the programs that utilize it quite often.

This is why someone like Jasonx should just get a dual core. Not only do the dual's averagely perform better for games but they also if he went with a quad (even more so if he didn't get a i7) by the time he would actually start making use of it his computer would be in need of major upgrades and may as well get a CPU to go with it.
April 9, 2009 4:34:00 PM

maybe a year ago but most popular PC games are coming out with quad support nowadays.

Also anyone who still recommends an e8xxx series to new builders should really look at P2 720 benches.
April 9, 2009 4:42:28 PM

NuclearShadow said:
That's actually quite debatable. The Quad CPU's we see today don't nearly get utilized the way they should by most apps and games. By the time they are widely supported the old quad CPU's won't nearly hold their own against the new CPU's that will be priced around the same amount you bought your old Quad for that never really got its chance to shine. By this time I am sure at least Octo's will be out as well and they will more than likely not be widely supported for quite sometime just like the Quad's today. The only reason to get a Quad today is if you make use out of the programs that utilize it quite often.

This is why someone like Jasonx should just get a dual core. Not only do the dual's averagely perform better for games but they also if he went with a quad (even more so if he didn't get a i7) by the time he would actually start making use of it his computer would be in need of major upgrades and may as well get a CPU to go with it.


But according to the OP, he will also be using the computer for high definition video playback. Having a quad core would ensure him to have lag-free playbacks. Especially if he gets into video encoding / decoding, then quad core is a must.


But of course, if gaming is all that OP wants, then a dual core would make more sense.
!