13.05.2008, 18:34
Excellent choice. Glad to help.
Video Card install question
13.05.2008, 22:35
BigSilverHotdog Wrote:Morbit Wrote:I don't know mates :o
9800's are cutting edge with pci express 2 (you'll need a new motherboard for that) and open gl 2.1
and they're getting great reviews over on Newegg, but they're already talking about a 9900 :roll:
In order to take advantage of the DX10 you're going to need vista
what I've done is I'm running a dual boot with XP pro and Vista32
right now I'm running a core dual 6600 OC, 8800gtx,and a 24in acer In 1920x1200
Works great for now, but what about BOB :wink:
This is the kind of hype-regurgitation I'm talking about. The 9800 is not cutting edge. It is 2 8800 cores sandwiched onto 1 card, running with SLI mode automatically enabled and set in nvidia drivers. How can you use the term "cutting edge" to describe technology that is well over 2 years old? (or older depending on what parts you count) Despite being on one card it is STILL a 2-GPU SLI solution. It was designed to lure 2 types of buyers: the gullible or ignorant with plenty of cash, and the single slot people (especially SFF) who want SLI but for whatever reason can only have 1 slot. I was once one of those people that talked up SLI like it was worthwhile, then I actually used it for a year. It isn't.
Dual booting is a possibility if you wish to use Vista for some reason. I can't think of any good reason, but if you can, it's much preferable to dual boot than to abandon XP right now. DX10 remains useless, only a few games look -slightly- better with DX10 effects enabled and the performance hit is awful. Plus compatibility is still rancid.
BOB is unlikely to take advantage of multiple GPUs. If you have information to suggest otherwise, please link us. I have a feeling people are expecting far too much from BOB, and will be very disappointed when it's not the jump that IL2 was over... well what did we have before... Jane's WWII Fighters perhaps?
PS: What's a "core dual 6600 oc" -- Do you mean core2quad Q6600?
Back to work...
Edit: Picture of my office assistant for s&g --
http://b.imagehost.org/0796/Picture_059.jpg
PCI express 2.0x16 is the latest technology allowing you to take advantage of the new
dual core graphics cards, and in SLI thats (4) cores.
the best card offered by nvidia right now is the 9800GX2 which has 256 (128 per core)stream processors compared to the 880GTX's 128 and even less in the GT (112)
I'm overclocking a core2duo E6600 which will smoke a Q6600 in both cost and performance
DX10 is a step up from DX9 and you can see It. You're right there isn't much out there to take
advantage of It yet ,but there will be.
The poor performance you're talking about must be referring to a game like Crysis. Now a couple patches later, and Its looking a lot better. For me the best game I've played In DXC10 was Bioshock
Just remember,what ever equipment you decide on Its going to be old technology In six months
Thats why Instead of calling It (Cutting edge) they call It (bleeding edge) technology :evil:
13.05.2008, 23:54
Morbit
You posting is interesting.
You might think about contributing more to this forums topic. There are many IL2 players that don't have a clue about building a competent system.
I can tell you this... I look to forums posters (real people) that are not trying to sell me something for information. There are so darn many liars and self-styled experts wagging their tongues to deceive or otherwise promote something.
The key thing about a system is just that... the system. Comments about a few components as they apply to a system, that is carefully explained... well for the most part isn't much help.
It's the complete package evaluated against some known benchmark is usually a best way to tell others about a competent system.
I'm not picking on you, please don't think of it that way. I'm just saying when people are buying components with their hard earned money you can't blame them for really wanting a good understanding about parts, costs and expected performance.
In my own case, I never even think about piecemeal changes in my system. I usually build a system and live with the hardware for a couple years. I do try to enhance performance with various tools, but rarely do I buy any new hardware until I'm ready to replace my system.
You posting is interesting.
You might think about contributing more to this forums topic. There are many IL2 players that don't have a clue about building a competent system.
I can tell you this... I look to forums posters (real people) that are not trying to sell me something for information. There are so darn many liars and self-styled experts wagging their tongues to deceive or otherwise promote something.
The key thing about a system is just that... the system. Comments about a few components as they apply to a system, that is carefully explained... well for the most part isn't much help.
It's the complete package evaluated against some known benchmark is usually a best way to tell others about a competent system.
I'm not picking on you, please don't think of it that way. I'm just saying when people are buying components with their hard earned money you can't blame them for really wanting a good understanding about parts, costs and expected performance.
In my own case, I never even think about piecemeal changes in my system. I usually build a system and live with the hardware for a couple years. I do try to enhance performance with various tools, but rarely do I buy any new hardware until I'm ready to replace my system.
14.05.2008, 10:27
Again, regurgitated talking points. You might try reading a few detailed tech articles and educating yourself, because while what you're saying might sound plausible to some people here... well, let's just delve into some details again, shall we? This time, try to argue with me on a level that displays technical knowledge of the subject material rather than things you've read at Gamespot.
The amount of stream processors is not relevant in approximately 95 percent of the PC games that exist in the world today, shader/stream processors are only ONE method of measuring speed and definitely not the best single one. The Radeon 3870 has 320 shader processors in a wholly different array architecture but it's not as fast as an 8800 with 112 or 128 (depending on variant, even the 64 stream 9600GT outperforms the 3870 in many games), so raw numbers are not all you need to look at. While it is of course possible games will be designed to take advantage of the greater stream processors available to a 9800GX2, it is unlikely this will matter because this "dual core via SLI" GPU solution is likely to be eclipsed by the upcoming Geforce 10 (which may or may not feature a multi-core GPU in its lineup).
If you'd read the actual specification sheet for the GX2 and regular 8800 cards you would notice a few important points, for example they always list "double" the 8800 spec for ROPs, fillrates, et al. This is a LIE, and represents completely theoretical performance if the 9800 could run both cores at full strength in a truly "load sharing" SLI solution. This doesn't exist right now. Even games that take proper advantage of SLI (the best way nvidia could design after over 5 years of R&D) do not do so efficiently. Not even SLIGHTLY efficiently! There have been a few tech articles recently about quad-SLI via 2 9800GX2s and they are often outperformed by two 8800 series cards.... fancy that! And of course, this is all based on games that actually gain some sort of benefit from SLI, which to date remains a pitifully small list. Nvidia's "official" list of games that support SLI is, again, a lie. The games that "support" it often merely show up as "SLI enabled" via the load sharing graph or give a 5-40 percent boost in performance only when load sharing is possible (i.e. areas that are not taxing the card's internal bandwidth too greatly, at least this is my understanding of it, on this point I may be incorrect).
In reference to PCIE 2.0 once again, you pay too much attention to marketing and hype. It is true that 2.0 doubles the theoretical throughput bandwidth, but remember AGP 8x hype days? If not, here is what happened: AGP 4x was the top, 8x was being pushed, and was slowly adopted due to the realization that cards might come out that would need the extra bandwidth of 8x (which is half the speed of PCIE 1.1 if I remember right, at 2.0gb/s). At the time, NO card, not a single one, needed even a single full 4x AGP lane, but they wanted to plan ahead. Today, to date, and to be the best of my knowledge, there is still not a single card that utilizes more bus throughput than AGP8X provides. Even today. There are a couple of very obscure articles about this that I can drag up if you want to read them, and if you do some research you will see that a couple of companies are doggedly still supporting AGP with the latest series of Radeon HD3000 series. Of course these are limited because the CPU support on older mobos with AGP just is not there. A 3850 with a P4 2.8 is stupid, but notice that bus throughput is not the limiting factor, it's the slow CPU. That was my point all along.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814102730
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=256030
AGP was phased out because the bus technology needed to keep ahead of graphics card technology and the best way to do that was to simply overengineer. Nothing wrong with that, but at this point in time PCIE is well more than enough for the next few years. Plus, 2.0 is backwards compatible, so a card designed for 2.0 will still work on 1.1, and the day when 1.1 is the limiting factor in your graphic speed is far, far away.
As for the core2duo comment -- this discussion has been done to death and the argument always ends the same. Video throughput is currently limited by the hardware available. The 8800GTX 768, still the single fastest card for high resolution gaming out there, does not see ANY increase in performance as the processor speed is raised past ~3.2 -- I will allow you that for a few, VERY SPECIFIC applications, a 9800GX2 with core2duo @ 3.8-4 will outperform a Q6600@3.2 with a 8800GT/GTS512 (triplehead2go with IL2, for example!) -- But these are not common and the benefit of having 4 cores is already, today, much greater than being restricted to two, and this technology is already taking off in a big way. I would estimate at least 4 out of every 5 big titles that come out in the next two years will fully support scaling cpu architecture, meaning the more you have, the better off you are. Do some math here: 4x3.2 = 12.8 -- 2x4 = 8 -- Even with a 4ghz overclock it will still be far inferior, and most Q6600s are actually capable of reaching speeds much higher than 3.2. Until we get the next generation of video hardware (and with ATI flailing things are not looking bright -- have you looked at the spec sheet for the 4870? ICK.) we have to work based on the 3.2ghz limit model. If you do a lot of non-game work that requires a fast processor AND you use software that doesn't take advantage of multiple cores, then C2D is a pretty smart choice. Don't get me wrong C2D is never a "bad" choice, but it isn't the "best" choice for the majority of people out there.
PS: Bioshock was a momumental disappointment. That is my opinion as a very dedicated, very long-suffering PC gamer who has played both prequels (and other TTLG games) many times. I don't suppose you played System Shock 2? Pity. And DX10 on an engine that didn't even properly utilize DX9 OR support widescreen.... pardon me I must have a good chuckle. MS sure knows propaganda, boy oh boy... and before you claim it was widescreen do some more research. Vert minus without a FOV change is not acceptable for any PC game trying to be "A list". Thank god for racer_s.
Loooong post sorry, but I've got to combat the spread of disinformation.
The amount of stream processors is not relevant in approximately 95 percent of the PC games that exist in the world today, shader/stream processors are only ONE method of measuring speed and definitely not the best single one. The Radeon 3870 has 320 shader processors in a wholly different array architecture but it's not as fast as an 8800 with 112 or 128 (depending on variant, even the 64 stream 9600GT outperforms the 3870 in many games), so raw numbers are not all you need to look at. While it is of course possible games will be designed to take advantage of the greater stream processors available to a 9800GX2, it is unlikely this will matter because this "dual core via SLI" GPU solution is likely to be eclipsed by the upcoming Geforce 10 (which may or may not feature a multi-core GPU in its lineup).
If you'd read the actual specification sheet for the GX2 and regular 8800 cards you would notice a few important points, for example they always list "double" the 8800 spec for ROPs, fillrates, et al. This is a LIE, and represents completely theoretical performance if the 9800 could run both cores at full strength in a truly "load sharing" SLI solution. This doesn't exist right now. Even games that take proper advantage of SLI (the best way nvidia could design after over 5 years of R&D) do not do so efficiently. Not even SLIGHTLY efficiently! There have been a few tech articles recently about quad-SLI via 2 9800GX2s and they are often outperformed by two 8800 series cards.... fancy that! And of course, this is all based on games that actually gain some sort of benefit from SLI, which to date remains a pitifully small list. Nvidia's "official" list of games that support SLI is, again, a lie. The games that "support" it often merely show up as "SLI enabled" via the load sharing graph or give a 5-40 percent boost in performance only when load sharing is possible (i.e. areas that are not taxing the card's internal bandwidth too greatly, at least this is my understanding of it, on this point I may be incorrect).
In reference to PCIE 2.0 once again, you pay too much attention to marketing and hype. It is true that 2.0 doubles the theoretical throughput bandwidth, but remember AGP 8x hype days? If not, here is what happened: AGP 4x was the top, 8x was being pushed, and was slowly adopted due to the realization that cards might come out that would need the extra bandwidth of 8x (which is half the speed of PCIE 1.1 if I remember right, at 2.0gb/s). At the time, NO card, not a single one, needed even a single full 4x AGP lane, but they wanted to plan ahead. Today, to date, and to be the best of my knowledge, there is still not a single card that utilizes more bus throughput than AGP8X provides. Even today. There are a couple of very obscure articles about this that I can drag up if you want to read them, and if you do some research you will see that a couple of companies are doggedly still supporting AGP with the latest series of Radeon HD3000 series. Of course these are limited because the CPU support on older mobos with AGP just is not there. A 3850 with a P4 2.8 is stupid, but notice that bus throughput is not the limiting factor, it's the slow CPU. That was my point all along.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814102730
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=256030
AGP was phased out because the bus technology needed to keep ahead of graphics card technology and the best way to do that was to simply overengineer. Nothing wrong with that, but at this point in time PCIE is well more than enough for the next few years. Plus, 2.0 is backwards compatible, so a card designed for 2.0 will still work on 1.1, and the day when 1.1 is the limiting factor in your graphic speed is far, far away.
As for the core2duo comment -- this discussion has been done to death and the argument always ends the same. Video throughput is currently limited by the hardware available. The 8800GTX 768, still the single fastest card for high resolution gaming out there, does not see ANY increase in performance as the processor speed is raised past ~3.2 -- I will allow you that for a few, VERY SPECIFIC applications, a 9800GX2 with core2duo @ 3.8-4 will outperform a Q6600@3.2 with a 8800GT/GTS512 (triplehead2go with IL2, for example!) -- But these are not common and the benefit of having 4 cores is already, today, much greater than being restricted to two, and this technology is already taking off in a big way. I would estimate at least 4 out of every 5 big titles that come out in the next two years will fully support scaling cpu architecture, meaning the more you have, the better off you are. Do some math here: 4x3.2 = 12.8 -- 2x4 = 8 -- Even with a 4ghz overclock it will still be far inferior, and most Q6600s are actually capable of reaching speeds much higher than 3.2. Until we get the next generation of video hardware (and with ATI flailing things are not looking bright -- have you looked at the spec sheet for the 4870? ICK.) we have to work based on the 3.2ghz limit model. If you do a lot of non-game work that requires a fast processor AND you use software that doesn't take advantage of multiple cores, then C2D is a pretty smart choice. Don't get me wrong C2D is never a "bad" choice, but it isn't the "best" choice for the majority of people out there.
PS: Bioshock was a momumental disappointment. That is my opinion as a very dedicated, very long-suffering PC gamer who has played both prequels (and other TTLG games) many times. I don't suppose you played System Shock 2? Pity. And DX10 on an engine that didn't even properly utilize DX9 OR support widescreen.... pardon me I must have a good chuckle. MS sure knows propaganda, boy oh boy... and before you claim it was widescreen do some more research. Vert minus without a FOV change is not acceptable for any PC game trying to be "A list". Thank god for racer_s.
Loooong post sorry, but I've got to combat the spread of disinformation.
14.05.2008, 11:23
Nearmiss
As you can see from the way your simple question about plugging In a new video card
turned out, Its hard to get people to agree on whats best. What works for one may not
work for others. Way too many variables.
When the cost of a good video card is the same as a console like x-box etc. etc. you can
see why PC gaming is on the skids. A store like EB Games used to have a wall of PC games,
now their down to one little rack. For most people Its a no brainer, take it home, plug it in,
and enjoy most of the same games as the PC's and then some.
You're lucky to have a Micro Center near you. My favored toy store
The one by me has some hard core gamers working for It, and They're very helpful.
Best advise I can give anyone is do your homework. If your going to do a build check the forums, sales people, and the personal reviews on Newegg. They're not all positive.
A Final thought :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8RuePu4 ... re=related
As you can see from the way your simple question about plugging In a new video card
turned out, Its hard to get people to agree on whats best. What works for one may not
work for others. Way too many variables.
When the cost of a good video card is the same as a console like x-box etc. etc. you can
see why PC gaming is on the skids. A store like EB Games used to have a wall of PC games,
now their down to one little rack. For most people Its a no brainer, take it home, plug it in,
and enjoy most of the same games as the PC's and then some.
You're lucky to have a Micro Center near you. My favored toy store
The one by me has some hard core gamers working for It, and They're very helpful.
Best advise I can give anyone is do your homework. If your going to do a build check the forums, sales people, and the personal reviews on Newegg. They're not all positive.
A Final thought :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8RuePu4 ... re=related
14.05.2008, 11:31
Damn Big Dog ,you like to type :lol: :lol:
Heres one for you :wink:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEfz9VfF ... re=related
Heres one for you :wink:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEfz9VfF ... re=related
14.05.2008, 12:55
Good argument. You certainly rose to the challenge and repudiated everything I said. Well done!
14.05.2008, 13:18
BigSilverHotdog Wrote:Good argument. You certainly rose to the challenge and repudiated everything I said. Well done!
ROFLMAO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4gK3RRtCHw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYooJ2BWRgE
15.05.2008, 08:30
"OMGZ, Vista sucks"....mantra of the OS illiterate!
It's unstable!.
Not from what I can tell, and with SP1 it is the most stable OS I've seen since Win 3.11.
Nothing uses DX10.
Oh really? Try FSX with DX10 and you will sing another song.
It uses a lot of memory.
With this they ARE correct, but said by people that are ignorant as to HOW Vista uses memory. I have 8GB of memory and my Vista Ultimate 64 install just sitting idle uses almost 4GB of that, and I couldn't be happier that it's doing that!
"WHY?", you ask?. Simple, it's called SUPERFETCH. Read up on it. Basically, it keeps track of what applications you run the most, and pre-loads them into memory. That way they load MUCH faster than going to the HDD, and bringing them into memory. Now, if you use an application the needs the memory that Vista is using for SUPERFETCH, no problem, it releases it instantly, and you never know that it happened.
If you don't have a lot of memory, and I'd recommend at least 4GB of memory for Vista, you can use a Flash Drive in READYBOOST to help out. I've tested that only using 2GB, and it works quite well.
Yeah, Vista has a few things that I didn't like, but I've managed to get around them.
UAC is the major one. However, you can disable that in about 1 minute. Just open up Help & Support, Type UAC in the search box, and follow the instructions on how to turn it off. That will allow you to edit files (conf.ini), if you want to without a problem.
Another gripe was that even as Administrator, I couldn't open some folders, as I didn't have 'Ownership". No problem, there is a Registry fix for that, which allows you to take ownership of any file/folder that you wish. Google is your friend for that.
I've been using/programming computers since the IBM 360 mod 20 (1968), so I'm not exactly "Computer illiterate".
I just can't understand why you would want to have a 64-bit processor, and then cripple it with a 32-bit OS. Hell, that's like buying a convertable, and then disabling the folding mechinism for the top.
Same thing with having a lot of memory, and then complaining because the OS uses it.
Oh, I do still have an XP 32 bit OS on my system, but that's only because the wife has a geneology program that won't run on 64-bit, and you have to keep the 'better half' happy, or nobody is happy, but my other ones are, 3 XP x64, 2 Vista 64, and 1 Server 2008 beta. I'll soon be changing the XP x64 ones over to Vista as I have the time. I manage all of those OSs with HyperOS.
Edit:
... "The 8800GTX 768, still the single fastest card for high resolution gaming out there" ...
I think you will find that there are a lot of 3870 X2 owners that will dispute that. Or, are you one of those folks that think only nVidia makes vid cards?
It's unstable!.
Not from what I can tell, and with SP1 it is the most stable OS I've seen since Win 3.11.
Nothing uses DX10.
Oh really? Try FSX with DX10 and you will sing another song.
It uses a lot of memory.
With this they ARE correct, but said by people that are ignorant as to HOW Vista uses memory. I have 8GB of memory and my Vista Ultimate 64 install just sitting idle uses almost 4GB of that, and I couldn't be happier that it's doing that!
"WHY?", you ask?. Simple, it's called SUPERFETCH. Read up on it. Basically, it keeps track of what applications you run the most, and pre-loads them into memory. That way they load MUCH faster than going to the HDD, and bringing them into memory. Now, if you use an application the needs the memory that Vista is using for SUPERFETCH, no problem, it releases it instantly, and you never know that it happened.
If you don't have a lot of memory, and I'd recommend at least 4GB of memory for Vista, you can use a Flash Drive in READYBOOST to help out. I've tested that only using 2GB, and it works quite well.
Yeah, Vista has a few things that I didn't like, but I've managed to get around them.
UAC is the major one. However, you can disable that in about 1 minute. Just open up Help & Support, Type UAC in the search box, and follow the instructions on how to turn it off. That will allow you to edit files (conf.ini), if you want to without a problem.
Another gripe was that even as Administrator, I couldn't open some folders, as I didn't have 'Ownership". No problem, there is a Registry fix for that, which allows you to take ownership of any file/folder that you wish. Google is your friend for that.
I've been using/programming computers since the IBM 360 mod 20 (1968), so I'm not exactly "Computer illiterate".
I just can't understand why you would want to have a 64-bit processor, and then cripple it with a 32-bit OS. Hell, that's like buying a convertable, and then disabling the folding mechinism for the top.
Same thing with having a lot of memory, and then complaining because the OS uses it.
Oh, I do still have an XP 32 bit OS on my system, but that's only because the wife has a geneology program that won't run on 64-bit, and you have to keep the 'better half' happy, or nobody is happy, but my other ones are, 3 XP x64, 2 Vista 64, and 1 Server 2008 beta. I'll soon be changing the XP x64 ones over to Vista as I have the time. I manage all of those OSs with HyperOS.
Edit:
... "The 8800GTX 768, still the single fastest card for high resolution gaming out there" ...
I think you will find that there are a lot of 3870 X2 owners that will dispute that. Or, are you one of those folks that think only nVidia makes vid cards?
15.05.2008, 09:44
Pretty silly of you to claim that "vista sucks is the mantra of the OS illiterate". OMGZ was a nice touch, but sorry, I don't type like that. Try reading my previous posts if you can, but I get the feeling you don't read very much. It looks like you just saw my snip post from page 1 where I commented on the poor purchasing choices and decided to respond to that, not realizing the person you are insulting might know a thing or two about computers and has already demonstrated as such in successive pages in this very thread.
1) I never once said Vista was unstable. Don't put words in my mouth, it is the tactic of forum trolls everywhere. I said it sucked, and I stand by that. It isn't a fact, it is an opinion. An opinion based upon personal experience, technical expertise, 2nd and 3rd hand reports, and an incredible amount of reading. I respect your right to have a differing opinion, but I don't respect your opinion itself when you don't back it up with evidence.
2) I own FSX and I have used it on Vista, the deplorable performance is somehow even worse and the game only looks slightly better. My point stands, there is almost no benefit for DX10 for this title and it, being MS designed, should give us some reason to use DX10. At this point in time it does not. Maybe in the future. I've also tested Crysis, World in Conflict, Bioshock, and Company of Heroes. None of those offer anything that is obvious outside of screenshot comparison.
3) Touting superfetch as a reason to use Vista, or even as one of it's good features, is like saying you bought a new SUV because the CD player had an alarm clock that automatically notified you to change the oil every 3000 miles. Yes, I know all about Superfetch. I disagree that it is the way we should be going, and although I know you can disable it, it should never have been included in the first place. The XP prefetcher was MORE than adequate! For basic users that know little about computers and who only use a handful of programs this might be somewhat useful, but we have a conundrum here: If you only use a few programs why not simply keep all your programs loaded into memory and never exit them? With XP 1gb would be enough for that. But no, Vista "pushes the envelope" to make people believe they NEED bigger, faster, and more, to get the same experience as XP. It was designed that way on purpose! Superfetch is pointless, and it will stay pointless. When Microsoft did R&D for Vista did they honestly say "Hey, lets take the XP pre-fetcher and make it bloated and cumbersome, but improving load performance for people that use sleep mode or virus scan every night." If I want a program's essentials to be pre-loaded into memory for quick loading I will set that up myself. I don't need a nanny OS to do it for me, poorly, and without asking.
4) I can't help but laugh at your mention of Readyboost. You don't have any concept of memory bandwidth, do you? Using computers since 68 and you believe that a USB flashdrive can supplement system memory to significantly improve performance! Amazing! USB2.0 is only 480mbit/sec throughput maximum, and the sustained rate is much lower. Even firewire, the fastest external peripheral device interface currently available, can only reach 3.2g/b, still only a fraction of system memory throughput (12.8gb/sec for DDR2 800, I believe). The future is supposed to bump up Firewire to 6.4 -- at that point Readyboost MIGHT be more helpful, if that throughput can be sustained (but firewire is notorious for bandwidth fluctuations). Like most of Vista, Readyboost is a feature that could be good if technology continues at the current rate, but right here, right now, it is near useless. I have heard that Readyboost can help in some applications where you use a lot of very small files (due to fast flash mem access time), but I have no experience with this and haven't seen any tech articles. If you know any, please let me know.
I was very specific to avoid insulting you in this post even though you insulted me first and then proceeded to post a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions. Please avoid this in the future (both the insults and the nonsense). Thanks.
PS: Putting technology names in all caps LIKE THIS does not mean they are good or that you know how they work. It makes you look like someone who reposts their favourite ad copy as fact. At least to me it does.
1) I never once said Vista was unstable. Don't put words in my mouth, it is the tactic of forum trolls everywhere. I said it sucked, and I stand by that. It isn't a fact, it is an opinion. An opinion based upon personal experience, technical expertise, 2nd and 3rd hand reports, and an incredible amount of reading. I respect your right to have a differing opinion, but I don't respect your opinion itself when you don't back it up with evidence.
2) I own FSX and I have used it on Vista, the deplorable performance is somehow even worse and the game only looks slightly better. My point stands, there is almost no benefit for DX10 for this title and it, being MS designed, should give us some reason to use DX10. At this point in time it does not. Maybe in the future. I've also tested Crysis, World in Conflict, Bioshock, and Company of Heroes. None of those offer anything that is obvious outside of screenshot comparison.
3) Touting superfetch as a reason to use Vista, or even as one of it's good features, is like saying you bought a new SUV because the CD player had an alarm clock that automatically notified you to change the oil every 3000 miles. Yes, I know all about Superfetch. I disagree that it is the way we should be going, and although I know you can disable it, it should never have been included in the first place. The XP prefetcher was MORE than adequate! For basic users that know little about computers and who only use a handful of programs this might be somewhat useful, but we have a conundrum here: If you only use a few programs why not simply keep all your programs loaded into memory and never exit them? With XP 1gb would be enough for that. But no, Vista "pushes the envelope" to make people believe they NEED bigger, faster, and more, to get the same experience as XP. It was designed that way on purpose! Superfetch is pointless, and it will stay pointless. When Microsoft did R&D for Vista did they honestly say "Hey, lets take the XP pre-fetcher and make it bloated and cumbersome, but improving load performance for people that use sleep mode or virus scan every night." If I want a program's essentials to be pre-loaded into memory for quick loading I will set that up myself. I don't need a nanny OS to do it for me, poorly, and without asking.
4) I can't help but laugh at your mention of Readyboost. You don't have any concept of memory bandwidth, do you? Using computers since 68 and you believe that a USB flashdrive can supplement system memory to significantly improve performance! Amazing! USB2.0 is only 480mbit/sec throughput maximum, and the sustained rate is much lower. Even firewire, the fastest external peripheral device interface currently available, can only reach 3.2g/b, still only a fraction of system memory throughput (12.8gb/sec for DDR2 800, I believe). The future is supposed to bump up Firewire to 6.4 -- at that point Readyboost MIGHT be more helpful, if that throughput can be sustained (but firewire is notorious for bandwidth fluctuations). Like most of Vista, Readyboost is a feature that could be good if technology continues at the current rate, but right here, right now, it is near useless. I have heard that Readyboost can help in some applications where you use a lot of very small files (due to fast flash mem access time), but I have no experience with this and haven't seen any tech articles. If you know any, please let me know.
I was very specific to avoid insulting you in this post even though you insulted me first and then proceeded to post a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions. Please avoid this in the future (both the insults and the nonsense). Thanks.
PS: Putting technology names in all caps LIKE THIS does not mean they are good or that you know how they work. It makes you look like someone who reposts their favourite ad copy as fact. At least to me it does.
15.05.2008, 09:46
And that edit comment about nvidia fanboy... read my tweak guide. Or don't. Think whatever you like. You're sounding more and more like a STANDARD_FORUM_TROLL_05. You realize the 3870X2 is Crossfire (two cores, two cards, ATI's version of SLI) rigged onto a single card, right? It's ATI's version of the 9800GX2, and it sucks such a copious amount of ass I'm surprised the universe has not imploded.
Double edit: Oh wow you ARE ignorant, that remark about crippling your processor with a 32 bit OS pretty much ends the argument on the spot. Read more, talk less. Goodbye.
Double edit: Oh wow you ARE ignorant, that remark about crippling your processor with a 32 bit OS pretty much ends the argument on the spot. Read more, talk less. Goodbye.
15.05.2008, 13:52
This is my last post in discussion with you OldBuzzard. This has already derailed poor Nearmiss's thread far too much. Feel free to have the last word if you like. I don't have the time or interest to continue attempting a serious discussion with someone like you.
15.05.2008, 14:52
Goodness...did I touch a nerve or something? 3 posts to reply to my one?
Bit eogtistical aren't we? Nothing in my post, other in my comment about the 3870 x2, was referring to, or directed to you personally. Nor, did I use the term Fanboi. All the rest was general in nature, and the OMGZ was to inject a bit of humor. But then you seem to be so full of yourself that humor is lost on you.
I'll also note, that quite contrary to your belief, the 3870 x2 is not 2 GPUs in crossfire. If it was then one wouldn't get the performance you do in non-crossfire applications. This isn't my "opinion", nor it it from a "2nd and 3rh hand reoprt". It's my actual experience, as I have, and am currently using a Sapphire 3870 x2 in my system.
Put your fingers in your ears and shout NAAAA, NAAAA, NAAAA, stick your head in the sand, or anything else you want to do to try to ignore it, but Vista and 64-bit Operating Systems are here, and here to stay. The advantages are there whether you choose to believe it or not.
Your attitude is nothing new. I saw it in the move from BPS to DOS and then to VMS back in my main-frame days, which were most likely before you were born.
Dump on Vista, and 64-bit OSs all you want to. They are here and they are the future. You can lead, or you can follow. Just don't get in the way of those that wish to move on to bigger and better things.
Bit eogtistical aren't we? Nothing in my post, other in my comment about the 3870 x2, was referring to, or directed to you personally. Nor, did I use the term Fanboi. All the rest was general in nature, and the OMGZ was to inject a bit of humor. But then you seem to be so full of yourself that humor is lost on you.
I'll also note, that quite contrary to your belief, the 3870 x2 is not 2 GPUs in crossfire. If it was then one wouldn't get the performance you do in non-crossfire applications. This isn't my "opinion", nor it it from a "2nd and 3rh hand reoprt". It's my actual experience, as I have, and am currently using a Sapphire 3870 x2 in my system.
Put your fingers in your ears and shout NAAAA, NAAAA, NAAAA, stick your head in the sand, or anything else you want to do to try to ignore it, but Vista and 64-bit Operating Systems are here, and here to stay. The advantages are there whether you choose to believe it or not.
Your attitude is nothing new. I saw it in the move from BPS to DOS and then to VMS back in my main-frame days, which were most likely before you were born.
Dump on Vista, and 64-bit OSs all you want to. They are here and they are the future. You can lead, or you can follow. Just don't get in the way of those that wish to move on to bigger and better things.
15.05.2008, 15:39
RAF_OldBuzzard Wrote:I'll also note, that quite contrary to your belief, the 3870 x2 is not 2 GPUs in crossfire. If it was then one wouldn't get the performance you do in non-crossfire applications. This isn't my "opinion", nor it it from a "2nd and 3rh hand reoprt". It's my actual experience, as I have, and am currently using a Sapphire 3870 x2 in my system.
You are wrong. Totally wrong. 3870X2 is a CF with internal bridge, but it's a CF with 2 GPU,s each one of them with its own dedicated VRAM bank.
The same with 9800GX2. It's a SLI, although you don't need a SLI mobo (uses one only PCIe slot) because there is a internal SLI bridge in the card.
Regards.
Willy.
15.05.2008, 17:20
RAF_OldBuzzard Wrote:Goodness...did I touch a nerve or something? 3 posts to reply to my one?
Bit eogtistical aren't we? Nothing in my post, other in my comment about the 3870 x2, was referring to, or directed to you personally. Nor, did I use the term Fanboi. All the rest was general in nature, and the OMGZ was to inject a bit of humor. But then you seem to be so full of yourself that humor is lost on you.
I'll also note, that quite contrary to your belief, the 3870 x2 is not 2 GPUs in crossfire. If it was then one wouldn't get the performance you do in non-crossfire applications. This isn't my "opinion", nor it it from a "2nd and 3rh hand reoprt". It's my actual experience, as I have, and am currently using a Sapphire 3870 x2 in my system.
Put your fingers in your ears and shout NAAAA, NAAAA, NAAAA, stick your head in the sand, or anything else you want to do to try to ignore it, but Vista and 64-bit Operating Systems are here, and here to stay. The advantages are there whether you choose to believe it or not.
Your attitude is nothing new. I saw it in the move from BPS to DOS and then to VMS back in my main-frame days, which were most likely before you were born.
Dump on Vista, and 64-bit OSs all you want to. They are here and they are the future. You can lead, or you can follow. Just don't get in the way of those that wish to move on to bigger and better things.
I have a friend that works for MSFT as a Technical Support engineer. One thing my friend mentioned was the huge number of world class experts (self appointed) we have in the world.
These people somehow manage to install a modem, a video card or may even somehow work through installing a software... from then on they are foremost computer system authotities and screw up more systems and cause more confusion than a cluster bomb.
It is within my knowledge to have experienced many encounters with self-appointed experts that flaunt the buzz words and pepper their verbiage with information. Information they read that may have been more mis-information than information.
I have been working with computers for 20+ years, programming and systems work. I don't profess to know or mislead others when it comes to a gamer system. My knowledge of the components and many of the finer parts of a competent gamer system are not among the areas I've worked or studied. I quit systems work after I got my MSFT credentials for NT, so you can tell that has been awhile. Regradless, I have enough experience with computers to know one very basic and important thing. If you know it, you know it, if you don't you don't. It can be harmful to others if you spout Ultra-knowledge and you really don't have it.
I'm not picking on any poster here. This is strictly an admonishment to share what you know and qualify it, but don't embellish the information or otherwise speculate. I've just spent over 1,000$ putting together a new system acting on competent advice. I look forwared to finishing the system up and knowing it will be a close to state of the art. I feel good about that. I wouldn't feel good about it, if I was getting smoke blown up my tailpipe by someones ego based informaiton.
I think it is relavent to share what you know and have experienced on forums like this, but I think that is where you draw then line. If you do have special competent knowledge to share that is even better. If you have found reference items to better explain or describe something, links and references should be described in your posts.
Personal attacks and profanity are troll talk and most of us know that. This forums has been a great help for me. Big Silver Hot Dog has been helpful beyond measure. Anyone going after him or defaming him, should do so much for this community as he has before throwing verbal stones.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)