Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

A Modest Gaming Desktop

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 6, 2009 9:05:01 AM

Hey everyone, it's my first time posting; love the site, seems to have a nice and friendly community as well.

As I type away on my 3-year-old semi-gaming laptop I bought while I was still in college, I feel somewhat restless and impatient, and I was hoping you guys could help me out.

It's been about 3 years since I did any research in shopping for a computer; this laptop still performs everyday tasks extraordinarily well (a Compal Hel80 with a Geforce Go 7600 and Core Duo 2.00 GHz, 2 GB DDR2 RAM), but if I just wanted to perform everyday tasks, I wouldn't be on this site restlessly searching charts and forums, now would I? :p 

As you guys may know, Dragon Age: Origins just came out, and while I'm not regretting my impulse-purchase on Steam, I am now faced with a situation.

While it is pretty impressive that this computer can run a modern game on high settings, the fact of the matter is that I get painfully low frame rates.

I understand that Dragon Age is not a very demanding game, but it would be a waste our time and my money if I bought a computer just for that one game. There have been some games that I've been "waiting to play/pick up again" until I got a new computer, such as BioShock and Oblivion (the latter of which runs moderately on this computer on mid-high settings), and while these are even less demanding than Dragon Age, I want to eventually play Mass Effects 1 and 2, BioShock 2, Diablo 3 and so forth. And just like most everyone else, I like my computers to last as long as they can without upgrading.

Pardon my already-too-long post, but if you've kept up with me thus far, maybe you could read on just a bit further.

I have a pretty specific taste in games and in graphics settings: I do NOT like first-person shooters (so no Crysis for me... I really tried hard to like the genre. BioShock is a hybrid that works for me), nor do I like real time strategy (I'm told I'm a terrible Korean for hating StarCraft), and if you couldn't figure out from my previous list of games, I like mostly RPGs and Action-Adventure type games (Tomb Raider, Prince of Persia, that sort). I don't really mind if my games run at a lower resolution, as long as it runs smoothly with all flashy effects on (depth of field, high dynamic range lighting, particles, shadows, reflections and whatnot). And yes, I know that these genres can be found much easier on consoles. But with distribution services like Steam and PC-style RPGs and mods and whatnot, I'd rather go with the PC. Besides, maybe I'll try some FPSs in the future (I've been easing my way into Far Cry).

So the last time I was shopping for computers, NVidia cards were neatly organized by thousands: 7000, 8000, 9000, etc. I never kept up with ATI cards, and now with the GTs and GTXs, 280, HD whatevers and numbering schemes, I'm a little lost. To tell you the truth, I never researched GPUs that extensively 3 years ago, either.

It seems to me that at least for a while, for my gaming tastes I won't need anything much better than 3-4 GB RAM and a modest dual core CPU (am I wrong in this? It seems like games will constantly need better GPUs, but the other two won't need to be changed as frequently). I'm not in college anymore, so I don't need to move my computer around so much, so I decided to invest in a modest gaming (there's my post title! :p ) desktop.

A quick browse at a local Fry's I see gaming rigs with 8 GB RAM and a Quad-core processor... with a GeForce GT 220. Wouldn't it be more efficient for me to just buy a cheaper "all-purpose" rig with a decent power supply and just swap out the GPU?

Now here's my big question (and the reason that my post is in the "Graphics & Displays" category): it seems like at any given moment, there seem to be the "cutting-edge, best of the best" GPUs that cost entirely too much, and then there are those that hit the "sweet spot" of price-to-performance ratio. So my question is, which ones are they, at this point in time? I could sort of guess by retail value how well they perform, but something tells me that's a bad idea (and that you guys are a lot smarter than me).

I don't really trust stuff to be shipped to my current address (I'm renting out a room in someone else's home), nor can I really wait for it. Rather than custom-ordering from sites like iBuyPower or building it myself, I'd rather shell out an extra 100 bucks or so for the time, security and convenience factors.

So I'm sorry I dragged on really long, but here's a quick recap of my two central questions:
1. Based on my gaming tastes and current/future gaming trends, is there something wrong with my current plan of getting a cheaper, "all-purpose" computer and swapping out the GPU? Would there be a better, more cost-efficient way?
2. What are the "sweet spot" price-to-performance GPUs of today?

Thank you so much if you've read through this whole mess, and if you're just now joining me, it would help me out a lot if you could refer to the parts about my gaming tastes.

Well, guys, I'm honestly open to all suggestions. I'd rather not wait too long, but maybe I should wait 'till Black Friday? It's funny, I've never really shopped on Black Friday before. Do things like gaming desktops usually go on big sales? I know electronics in general do... well anyway, that's enough of my rambling for today.

Thanks again, everyone! I apologize if my question isn't entirely graphics card-related and if it needs to be moved to another board.

Cheers,
Chan

More about : modest gaming desktop

November 6, 2009 9:34:29 AM

apologies accepted but what are you asking..i got lost in this longggg post :kaola:  ..be specific..evry1 wants 2 help in this community..i agree this is a very nice community.. :hello: 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 6, 2009 11:03:14 AM

The only danger with buying a mid grade prebuilt and swapping the card with a better one is that often the prebuilts are supplied with the minimum PSU required to run the computer in its factory form. If you find one with a 500-600W+ PSU already, then you are okay on the front.

As for the cards, ATI just came out with their new DX11 cards (5770, 5850, 5870) which would be nice, but are a little pricey and rare right now. Definitely look into them, but you best bet may be the best of last gen. Which would be 4870/4890 for ATI and GTX260/280. Though for what you play, you may be better off down one more tier, in the ATI 4770/4850 (which is what I have, and it is great) range. What budget are you looking at? You could also try posting in the homebuilt section if you are considering building the entire rig yourself.
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

a c 130 U Graphics card
November 6, 2009 11:12:48 AM

Can chu give us a budget? Otherwise, here's what I'd go with.

Athlon II 240/250 -$65
785G Mobo -$70
Corsair 550W PSU -$50
Some decent case -$50
500GB HDD -$55
Windows 7 -$110
Radeon HD 4870 -$125 (Or Radeon HD4670, and you won't need a PSU as your case most likely comes with one!)
2GB DDR2-Dual-channel RAM -$45
+2 Fans -$20
Did I miss something? I feel like I did..
Share
a b U Graphics card
November 6, 2009 5:16:28 PM

DVD drive, but that is minor.
m
0
l
November 6, 2009 11:23:51 PM

Wow, thanks guys; I didn't realize how sleep-deprived and unfocused I was (and how long-winded my first post was), yet I find myself getting off work to lots of great advice without any (perhaps a little deserved) hostility/annoyance. A great start to the weekend :) 

As for budget I was thinking around $500-700 for everything, maybe give $100 more if it made that huge of a difference (I'd rather spend the money on a monitor, though).

And kind of a stupid question, but since I've been out of the loop for so long, could someone give me a quick update on the present state of NVidia vs. ATI? And Intel vs. AMD for that matter..

My coworker claims that the premium for Intel processors is definitely worth it, and I've been trying to avoid AMD (although I had great experience with their stuff.. around 6 years ago. Things have changed since then).

I really do appreciate the help you guys have already given me. I don't think I want to build the whole thing just yet, unless the cost efficiency factor is unusually appealing.
m
0
l
November 7, 2009 1:13:24 AM

If factor is appealing to you then I would recommend an AMD/ATI system as they often have the best price/performance ratio
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2009 2:59:36 AM

Well, for your budget, an AMD system may be the better choice. However, to try to give a little update:

Intel has been ruling the high end for years now. Their fairly recent i7 processors have solidified that lead even more.

AMD has a solid line of mid and low end chips and a very solid platform for mid/low end as well.

In pure gaming, Intel's lead is much reduced, such that AMD systems aren't unreasonable in mid-upper systems. However, if you are looking at mixed tasks, Intel is the clear winner.

However, I think a reasonable i5 (I'll explain the chips in a second) build is more in the $700+ range, so the upper end of your budget. If you'd like to see some examples, check out the homebuilt section, there are many good ones there.

The Chips:
Intel: i7 Socket 1366: these are some serious processors, Triple channel DDR3, quad core with hyperthreading, turboboost (OCes the processor whenever it can and stay below the rated power limit). Unfortunately, way out of you price range.
Intel: i7 Socket 1156: main difference here is these are on a cheaper platform, dual channel ram, max of 16 PCI-E lanes, still somewhat pricey.
Intel: i5 Socket 1156: same platform (and limitations) at the i7 on 1156, but now without hyperthreading. Still a serious processor, and the best bet from Intel to stay in your price range. I plan on building a system with one soon.

AMD Phenom II: X4 955: Still an excellent chip, and a little cheaper too, definitely worth considering. Very nice and affordable platform. There are also many derivatives (Athlons, etc) that cover the full range of budgets down to the low end. I have a Phenom II and Athlon II. and they are excellent chips for the money.

NVidia vs ATI:
This is a much closer race, and much more fun in my opinion. Before the 5800 series from ATI, I would say most would agree that NVidia had the top of the line cards, but ATI was very close and was a better value if you didn't need the very best. With the new 5800 series, and no response from NVidia yet (hopefully around the new year they'll have their new stuff out), ATI has a fairly commanding lead. The only NVidia card that still is in its lead is the dual card GTX295, but that is expensive (though, the ATI 5800 cards are rare). If you don't need/care about DX11 though, there are plenty of last gen's 4800s and GTX275s around to be had for reasonable prices.

Keep the questions coming. Glad to help.
m
0
l
November 7, 2009 3:16:46 AM

Oh but one thing about the intel processors and the mobo's is that the am3 socket will be alive for much longer then the socket 1156 and he socket 1366 with intel changing sockets for every single new processor it seems
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2009 3:25:49 AM

That is possible, but predicting the future of computer parts is about like predicting the weather. Sometimes the forecast is right, sometimes it isn't. Thanks for bringing that up, as the more info the better (trying to sum up the entire AMD/Intel/NVidia/ATI platforms in one post is impossible).
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2009 5:18:42 AM

ChanTheMan said:
Hey everyone, it's my first time posting; love the site, seems to have a nice and friendly community as well.

As I type away on my 3-year-old semi-gaming laptop I bought while I was still in college, I feel somewhat restless and impatient, and I was hoping you guys could help me out.

It's been about 3 years since I did any research in shopping for a computer; this laptop still performs everyday tasks extraordinarily well (a Compal Hel80 with a Geforce Go 7600 and Core Duo 2.00 GHz, 2 GB DDR2 RAM), but if I just wanted to perform everyday tasks, I wouldn't be on this site restlessly searching charts and forums, now would I? :p 

As you guys may know, Dragon Age: Origins just came out, and while I'm not regretting my impulse-purchase on Steam, I am now faced with a situation.


Todd? Is that you?
m
0
l
November 7, 2009 3:45:51 PM

EXT64 said:
That is possible, but predicting the future of computer parts is about like predicting the weather. Sometimes the forecast is right, sometimes it isn't. Thanks for bringing that up, as the more info the better (trying to sum up the entire AMD/Intel/NVidia/ATI platforms in one post is impossible).


Haha, very true, and for that very reason I'm seeking you guys' advice; I do realize I asked VERY broad questions, and frankly, this community continues to amaze me with its politeness. Thank you, EXT64, Wsupduck, shadow187, FTG (I wish there was a "thanks" button for each post.. 'cause I would hit all of them!)

Quote:
Todd? Is that you?

Haha, no? I'm guessing I talk/write like one of your friends. Maybe Todd and I would get along! I'm Chan, always been; my rather seemingly boastful nick is what a kid used to call me in middle school. Heh, he was very pleased with himself when he came up with it.

Okay, then a little more specific question about processors (Umm.. I hope I'm not veering too far from "graphics cards," I did post in this board, after all); I did hear from people around me that multitasking is clearly better on Intel processors, and it makes me wonder how much of a difference it makes. I'm a one-task-at-a-time kind of dude, whether I'm browsing the web (albeit with multiple tabs.. but who doesn't?), playing a game or writing a document, I seldom have more than 2-3 windows open (I like things simple and organized.. my desktop never had more than 5-6 icons). How much of a difference does it make in raw processing power, if any?

Also, more specific to GPUs (yes! Back on topic!), does the AMD's acquisition of ATI mean anything at all about compatibility or performance? In other words, would an AMD processor "play nicer" with an ATI GPU? :p 

Thanks again, everyone!
- Chan
m
0
l
November 7, 2009 3:57:57 PM

Not as far as I know.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2009 4:05:06 PM

No, there is no serious benefit from using ATI on AMD and likewise there is not reduction by using NVidia on AMD (or either on Intel). However, if you are at all interested in dual cards, AMD boards only support crossfire, while the new Intel P55 and X58 support SLI and Crossfire. However, except under certain circumstances, I would not recommend dual cards.

As for multitasking, my guess is that your friend was referring to the Hyperthreading on Intel Processors, which i think is only a big help for >4 threads, though I am not sure. For the tasks you mention though, either would be fine and I doubt you would notice much difference. However, if you don't overclock, that is where the intel powerboost is cool. If you are using a program that is only one or two threads (like a game, for example) it will auto overclock two CPU cores while monitoring power and heat (to keep it safe) thus giving you even more performance.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2009 5:30:20 PM

ChanTheMan said:
H
Quote:
Todd? Is that you?

Haha, no? I'm guessing I talk/write like one of your friends. Maybe Todd and I would get along! I'm Chan, always been; my rather seemingly boastful nick is what a kid used to call me in middle school. Heh, he was very pleased with himself when he came up with it.



lol, the funny thing is, a friend of mine named Todd has the exact same laptop specifications you have, and he's trying to play Dragon Age as well. And he knows someone named "Chan" as well.

lol


But anyways, you should go to your local Frys/Microcenter and buy the parts yourself. Don't buy a prebuilt rig since they usually use the cheapest quality parts, and the difference will be more than $100
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 7, 2009 5:55:18 PM

This is getting pretty intense and I don't have the time to read all these posts and think about everything, but the "sweet spot" for GPUs right now is the ATi HD 4870.
m
0
l
November 8, 2009 7:28:14 AM

Quote:
lol, the funny thing is, a friend of mine named Todd has the exact same laptop specifications you have, and he's trying to play Dragon Age as well. And he knows someone named "Chan" as well.

Dude, that's crazy! What are the odds? What, does he live in the Bay Area too? :p  Haha, I do love Dragon Age, I'm already a good 15 hours in, at pretty much the lowest graphics settings. Sometimes I turn up the settings to see how sweet it looks, and get angry at all the people jaded and spoiled by Crysis with their uber-computers complaining that Dragon Age looks like crap and their computer hasn't broken a sweat in X months/years :( 
Quote:
But anyways, you should go to your local Frys/Microcenter and buy the parts yourself. Don't buy a prebuilt rig since they usually use the cheapest quality parts, and the difference will be more than $100

*sigh*... this is my concern as well. The truth is I've never built a whole computer before. The task itself isn't very daunting as the research that would go into it (look at how long it takes me to decide on a graphics card!). Or I could just go with shadow187's list :) 
Quote:
However, if you don't overclock, that is where the intel powerboost is cool. If you are using a program that is only one or two threads (like a game, for example) it will auto overclock two CPU cores while monitoring power and heat (to keep it safe) thus giving you even more performance.

Wow, that IS pretty cool. Maybe I'll wait for the next paycheck and up my budget a little.. now that you guys have gotten me excited, I might overkill for a Dragon Age rig!

I do think that around $1,000 for a gaming rig at any point in time is a reasonable investment.. it's just that my gaming pattern is just as unpredictable as a technological forecast.
Quote:
This is getting pretty intense and I don't have the time to read all these posts and think about everything, but the "sweet spot" for GPUs right now is the ATi HD 4870.

Wow, straight to the point, thanks, man!

Another quick question then: how good/terrible are the GeForce 210/220 for my games?

You guys are making all this very fun for me; thank you :) 
m
0
l
a c 271 U Graphics card
November 8, 2009 8:01:24 AM

wsupduck said:
Oh but one thing about the intel processors and the mobo's is that the am3 socket will be alive for much longer then the socket 1156 and he socket 1366 with intel changing sockets for every single new processor it seems

So Socket A > 754 >939 > AM2 > AM2+ > AM3 in the same timeframe as 775 > 1366 & 1156 is less changes?

EXT64 said:
No, there is no serious benefit from using ATI on AMD and likewise there is not reduction by using NVidia on AMD (or either on Intel). However, if you are at all interested in dual cards, AMD boards only support crossfire, while the new Intel P55 and X58 support SLI and Crossfire. However, except under certain circumstances, I would not recommend dual cards.

Other than AMD's Fusion and Overdrive which require/prefer/favour an AMD/ATi only platform [:mousemonkey] . I would always try and leave the option open, and as I run a pair of 8800GT's at 19 x 10 and can still run everything at high settings I feel that I have a point.

ChanTheMan said:
Another quick question then: how good/terrible are the GeForce 210/220 for my games?

Hello and welcome to our little corner of the Interwibble, at this point in time anything less than a GTX260 216 or a GTX275 is not worth considering, the GT220 is equivalent to a 9500GT which can run 2005/6 era games @ 19 x 10 but would struggle with anything too intensive at that resolution.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 8, 2009 1:30:56 PM

Very true mm. I had thought of the overdrive & fusion, but as I have 4 ATI/AMD computers and never really saw a need for it, I put it in the non-serious benefit category, but obviously some may find benefit in it.

And for the dual cards, yes, there were some dual card sets that were a great value, great performance, and not too bad on power (like yours) but in general, I always recommend getting the best single card you can afford, as it is easier to cool, power, and is less headaches (in most cases, of course). I will say though i have had dual cards before and they worked flawlessly, but for the OP, a single mid/high would probably be sufficient.
m
0
l
November 8, 2009 3:31:42 PM

Once again, I really appreciate every bit of help and every effort went into each keystroke :) 
EXT64 said:
The only danger with buying a mid grade prebuilt and swapping the card with a better one is that often the prebuilts are supplied with the minimum PSU required to run the computer in its factory form. If you find one with a 500-600W+ PSU already, then you are okay on the front.

1. I saw on custom-build sites like ibuypower and cyberpowerpc (the latter being recommended to me by another coworker of mine) that the "minimum" options for PSU are around 420-450W. is that the BARE minimum? How disadvantageous would it be for me to get 420-450W? I'm asking because at my local Fry's I saw that cases that come with 500W PSUs cost at least $100, which seems a little high to me.

2. Speaking of custom-build sites...

Quote:
But anyways, you should go to your local Frys/Microcenter and buy the parts yourself. Don't buy a prebuilt rig since they usually use the cheapest quality parts, and the difference will be more than $100.


How much of BlueScreenDeath's comment applies there? Is that what it means when parts are labeled as "powered by a major brand" instead of Kingston, etc.?

Haha, contrary to what I first thought, you guys are helping me consider things carefully and make smart decisions (I thought all this talking would make me impatient and get something cheap quickly). Maybe I'm open to building it myself. Maybe all this talking would hold me over until Black Friday. In all, thank you guys for everything.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 8, 2009 4:55:00 PM

Well, PSUs are a very delicate thing, and the most often overlooked component in a build. A good (Corsair, PC P&C, Antec to name a few) 450W PSU would probably do ok withall but top of the line components. A mediocre/poor one probably couldn't even power a 4770. With prebuilts, they often don't get the best, or they get one that is just enough for the system. A 'good' PSU in the 500W range typically runs $50-60 or so, and a nice case is in the same range.
m
0
l
November 9, 2009 3:35:50 PM

shadow187 said:
Can chu give us a budget? Otherwise, here's what I'd go with.

Athlon II 240/250 -$65
785G Mobo -$70
Corsair 550W PSU -$50
Some decent case -$50
500GB HDD -$55
Windows 7 -$110
Radeon HD 4870 -$125 (Or Radeon HD4670, and you won't need a PSU as your case most likely comes with one!)
2GB DDR2-Dual-channel RAM -$45
+2 Fans -$20
Did I miss something? I feel like I did..


Hey all,
Okay, a couple more questions then; what constitutes a "decent" case? The cheapest one I could find was around $40, and then $60 and up (to over $100); of course, I wouldn't just judge quality by price, which is why I'm asking you guys :)  Am I looking for general build quality, material, that kind of stuff?

Also, what do the "+2 Fans" at the bottom mean? Don't CPUs and cases come with fans? You can tell I've never done this :p 

Thanks as always!
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 9, 2009 5:28:52 PM

Well, a case really does two things, it protects and facilitates cooling and it looks good while doing so (obviously of secondary importance, but still a factor).

So, a case I would recommend for build quality, price, and cooling (and looks, in my option of course) is the Antec 300 Illusion. You only need the fans if the case does not come with fans, which is why the 300 is so nice (it comes with 3 120mm fans and one 140mm). I'm using this case in my next build, but I haven't used it yet, however I have gotten it and it looks nice (and many others suggest it). Here it is off of Newegg:

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

Cooler Master cases are also excellent in the low budget (but still very good) range.
m
0
l
November 10, 2009 3:29:07 PM

EXT64 said:
The only danger with buying a mid grade prebuilt and swapping the card with a better one is that often the prebuilts are supplied with the minimum PSU required to run the computer in its factory form. If you find one with a 500-600W+ PSU already, then you are okay on the front.

As for the cards, ATI just came out with their new DX11 cards (5770, 5850, 5870) which would be nice, but are a little pricey and rare right now. Definitely look into them, but you best bet may be the best of last gen. Which would be 4870/4890 for ATI and GTX260/280. Though for what you play, you may be better off down one more tier, in the ATI 4770/4850 (which is what I have, and it is great) range. What budget are you looking at? You could also try posting in the homebuilt section if you are considering building the entire rig yourself.


Alright so here's where the discussion gets juicy :p 
How does the HD 4870 directly compare to a GTX 260, from people's experiences so far (this is where it helps a lot to have a great community)? For example, which one has better driver support and general in-game performance? (for my kind of games, this might not matter as much, but still!) The 4890 and 280 were a little harder to find, and the 4870 does seem to be the "sweet spot," as you guys mentioned.

I took shadow187's list and tried to see how much I would need to spend altogether. Some parts were a bit pricier than listed, but overall I had a feeling I was getting a good, sturdy, long-lasting build for a better price than a pre-built by a fair bit (by around $100, as my new friend BlueScreenDeath pointed out). Plus, the learning experience of building the computer would be nice.

And then I took the same list and went on cyberpowerpc.com, and found out that it was yet another $100 cheaper than building it myself. Now, this probably also means they use cheaper parts (do you guys have any experience with them?). They also give away a free copy of Street Fighter IV (one of those games I wouldn't go out and buy on my own, but would be nice to have) for getting a higher-end NVidia GPU (hence the small extra incentive for the 260).

So what do you guys think? 4870 or 260? Build it myself or cyberpowerpc?

Alright, well I'm off to work! Thanks again, guys.

- Chan "Todd" the Man

Edit: Hmm, thinking ahead, it would make sense to get a 4870, so I could go dual in the future (would a 550W PSU hold with 4870 Crossfire?), but I haven't ruled out the GTX 260 either. What do you guys think?
m
0
l
November 11, 2009 12:00:55 AM

Well when i was looking to get my pc going, i looked at cyberpowerpc.com the systems and prices were great, but if you take a minute and rread what other people say about them it isnt pretty. Peoples heatsinks would be installed incorectly, video cards not fully plugged in, minimum standoffs used, psu wasnt plugged in correctly, os wasnt installed correctly

really bad customer service on top of that

so no i would build it your self and i personally have a 4870 and it works great for me, not sure if you would need that much power though
m
0
l
November 11, 2009 3:37:40 AM

Hello all who have helped me,

Let me just start by saying thank you for everything you've done for me.
I just finished ordering everything for a frys.com in-store pickup, with the exception of the GPU, which I ordered on newegg for free shipping.

In all it cost me around $600-700, including a monitor. To think that a week ago, I almost thought about buying an Acer pre-built with a GeForce 210 for $650, without a monitor!

I am going with the Radeon HD 4870 and the Antec 300 case (not Illusion.. the blue LED fans turned me off :p ) Everything else is pretty much taken straight from shadow187's list, which is why I'm choosing his answer as the best.

Overall I am extremely satisfied, and I owe it all to you. Thank you!

- Chan
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2009 3:51:52 AM

BTW, most of the 785G Mobos, don't have 2 PCI 16x 2.0, unless your going with the Asus EVO 785G. Also, I wouldn't suggest Crossfire(ing) with a 785g since the best mobo with that chipset runs any Crossfire at 16 by 4. Meaning one card is running at full PCI 16, but one running PCI 16 at, 4.... So essentially, its useless. Just notifying ya if you ever Crossfire. And Please correct me if I'm wrong someone.
m
0
l
November 11, 2009 5:07:04 PM

Hmm, okay, the one I ordered isn't the Asus EVO. What mobo would you suggest instead (luckily they didn't have all the parts I ordered so I can cancel)?

Better yet, based on previously observed and ongoing trends, would you recommend going crossfire with two 4870s in the future or swapping one out for another single GPU? I know it's never easy to tell, but what would you say, off the top of your head?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2009 10:25:06 PM

It depends, if your going need it for hardcore games like crysis sure, but I just gave the suggestion because you said you were going to Crossfire. Sorry if I gave you a hassle, but ummm if you were going to crossfire, I'd look into the 790X Asus EVO mobo, not the best but its 16x by 8x crossfire. Which is much better than 16x by 4x.
m
0
l
!