and buy a real video card when the 5800's come out. Unsupported no source rumor said they'll have $200 and 300 versions, both of which will be twice as fast as the current equally priced cards ATI.
If that's even half true for $200 you get 50% better speed than the 4890 with a huge screen for temporary hit in performance that'll still make most games look great.
looks good, but for $10 more you can get a WDC black 640GB which will be faster.
I like both of the mentioned drives, but the Barracuda 7200.12 actually beats out the Caviar Black in about half the benchmarks, uses less power, and has a surface temp 13 degrees C cooler. If you look strictly at PCmark gaming performance, the Caviar gets 15 over the 7200.12's 13.
Benchmarks don't really tell the whole story about the 7200.12 drives. The Tech Report did a good review of a 7200.12 drive and wasn't all that impressed. I, personally, don't trust Seagate's reliability after the disaster that was the 7200.11 series. It's going to be a while before they earn my business back.
"Seagate's high-density 500GB platters deliver on much of their performance potential, at least when it comes to peak sustained throughput. However, the drive's transfer rates in real-world file operations are mixed. The 7200.12 is very fast when it comes to real-world reads, but it's much slower than the competition when writing and copying files.
Flashes of brilliance followed by otherwise dismal performance is sort of a theme for the new 'cuda. The drive fared better than any other in our iPEAK multitasking tests, but it stumbled spectacularly when faced with multi-user IOMeter loads. And at more than 17ms, the 7200.12's random access time is slower than, well, any other desktop drive we've tested. Ever. What's worse, there's no way for users to defy Seagate's factory programming and shift the drive out of its noise-optimized "quiet" seek mode.
With its performance all over the map, the Barracuda 7200.12 is difficult to recommend to enthusiasts looking for a speedy system drive. However, near-silent noise levels and low power consumption do make it an attractive option for quiet desktops and home theater PCs.
Of course, given Seagate's recent firmware fiasco, some may be wary of the new 'cuda's reliability. And there's reason for concern: one of the two 7200.12s Seagate sent us for testing consistently failed mid-way through HD Tach's "full" disk benchmark, rendering the drive unusable until the next reboot. The second drive ran through our entire benchmark suite without a hitch, though."
im in college so im living in a basement of a friend's house...his router is on 2nd floor in his room that's why...
n thanks hello
thats not going to work out too well with two floors in between you and the router, just buy 1000ft of network cable, cat 5e ends and a network crimper and run a cable
Everything seems fine, but I heard some peoples having problems with OCZ blade and reaper modules. Get yourself some OCZ platinum instead or check if the modules are compatible with your motherboard.
Get yourself two 4850 in crossfire, you will get more performance for the money with new games. The only game not using crossfire that I run into lately was Ghostbuster I think.
If you are lucky, you could find two 4850 for 160$ after MIR.
Benchmarks don't really tell the whole story about the 7200.12 drives. The Tech Report did a good review of a 7200.12 drive and wasn't all that impressed. I, personally, don't trust Seagate's reliability after the disaster that was the 7200.11 series. It's going to be a while before they earn my business back.
"Seagate's high-density 500GB platters deliver on much of their performance potential, at least when it comes to peak sustained throughput. However, the drive's transfer rates in real-world file operations are mixed. The 7200.12 is very fast when it comes to real-world reads, but it's much slower than the competition when writing and copying files.
Flashes of brilliance followed by otherwise dismal performance is sort of a theme for the new 'cuda. The drive fared better than any other in our iPEAK multitasking tests, but it stumbled spectacularly when faced with multi-user IOMeter loads. And at more than 17ms, the 7200.12's random access time is slower than, well, any other desktop drive we've tested. Ever. What's worse, there's no way for users to defy Seagate's factory programming and shift the drive out of its noise-optimized "quiet" seek mode.
With its performance all over the map, the Barracuda 7200.12 is difficult to recommend to enthusiasts looking for a speedy system drive. However, near-silent noise levels and low power consumption do make it an attractive option for quiet desktops and home theater PCs.
Of course, given Seagate's recent firmware fiasco, some may be wary of the new 'cuda's reliability. And there's reason for concern: one of the two 7200.12s Seagate sent us for testing consistently failed mid-way through HD Tach's "full" disk benchmark, rendering the drive unusable until the next reboot. The second drive ran through our entire benchmark suite without a hitch, though."
that is true with Seagate's current track record. I've used Seagate drives for a while and fortunately didn't buy any of those 7200.11s. My 500 GB 7200.10s are running fine so hopefully Seagate will redeem itself with the 12s. The WD Caviar Blacks have a proven record, and I wouldn't have considered anything else until the 7200.12s came out. I really like seeing the better thermal properties on newer drives, my home office is already an oven when my desktop is on.
The fact that the drives began to be built in China at the same time the warranty was reduced from 5 years to 3 doesn't make me hold my breath. I won't recommend a Seagate drive until they prove themselves again. That will probably take quite a while if it ever happens. It's pretty hard to dig yourself out of a hole as deep as they're currently in.
Message edited by shortstuff_mt on 08-05-2009 at 10:21:47 PM
Most of the peoples with DOA stick are using G.Skill... >
I know Asus were having problems with OCZ reaper and blade module, but OCZ platinum is the most compatible brand I know. They are cheap, great performer and reliable... I only buy this for the last 4 years.
I'm not sure where you're getting your info from, but it's not correct. G.Skill RAM is excellent and should never be looked down on. I've been using G.Skill RAM in recent builds and have yet to be disappointed. I build my fair share of systems and have never had a DOA G.Skill kit. The 78% 5 egg rating and only 5% 1 egg rating on Newegg seem to agree with me.
Fast RAM that doesn't require high voltage to get tight timings is a better indication of quality RAM. You'll notice that G.Skill RAM normally requires less voltage to get the same speed and CAS rating as OCZ RAM.
I did get a bad stick in a G.Skill kit a few years back, but with NewEgg's return policy, it's not a big issue. Keep sending them back till you get good ones. The performance you get at the price is usually well worth it. All you lose is a little bit of time with shipping.