Jump to content

Welcome to Geeks to Go - Register now for FREE

Geeks To Go is a helpful hub, where thousands of volunteer geeks quickly serve friendly answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts. Register now to gain access to all of our features, it's FREE and only takes one minute. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more.

Create Account How it Works
Photo

Need some advice on this.


  • Please log in to reply

#1
p-zero

p-zero

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 276 posts
So after "experimenting" with my old comp, I was thinkin of building a true gaming rig. Heres what I had in mind- ASUS A8N32SLI, 2.0 GHz dual core AMD 64, 2 x BFG geforce 7800GToc, seagate 300Gb 16mb cache, G5 style case with 550 power supply.
Now, I've been doing some research and I heard that AMD is going to replace the 939 socket with something called an M2 socket. So my question is this - Should I get this rig OR should I wait and see if they really do come out with that M2 socket.
And another thing which is kinda confusing, as I was looking at the different 64 cpu's available, I noticed that the dual core chips have only 1000 fsb, where as some of the regular 64 cpu's have 2000? Is there a difference, and for gaming which would be a better cpu, dual core or regular?
-Pete.

Edited by p-zero, 17 February 2006 - 08:26 AM.

  • 0

Advertisements


#2
afg34

afg34

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 220 posts
Socket M2 is comming soon but it will probably be expensive when it comes out. Instead of 2x7800gt, i think you will be better off with an ati X1900xtx and its way cheaper too.
  • 0

#3
p-zero

p-zero

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 276 posts
I'll have to check that aTi card out, thanks for the suggestion.
-Pete.
  • 0

#4
Hammm

Hammm

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 203 posts
the M2 only offers DDR2. New cores will follow and new nVidia chipsets, the C51XE i think. If you don't plan to upgrade a lot the Skt939 is fine, just be aware AMD will only suppport Skt939 until 2007 for Athlon 64s. I'd suggest you get the 2.2GHz AMD 4400+ which has a bigger cache.
  • 0

#5
p-zero

p-zero

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 276 posts

Socket M2 is comming soon but it will probably be expensive when it comes out. Instead of 2x7800gt, i think you will be better off with an ati X1900xtx and its way cheaper too.


Well I checked out that card, its very nice but...its horribly expensive A LOT more so than the 7800. I found the 7800's for about $374 a piece. That aTi card is anywhere from $500-600. Granted it IS a better card by far. But that ups the price an additional $450. I was trying to stay under 2K for everything, and mind you that set-up I listed above was around the $1600 range JUST for the parts listed. But, thanx Ill keep that card in mind.
-Pete.
  • 0

#6
Hammm

Hammm

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 203 posts
yeah, in NZ it's really expensive as well. Mind you, nVidia have begun testing the 8000s GPUs with DX10. i suggest you wait until those come out or you'll be stuck with DX9 in Vista. If you really can't wait then get a 6800GS and use it for the moment, it still can play games well, then when DX10 cards come, buy one or two. Not only that, be aware of a new PhyXs Card used to calculate physics, it should be out in june. And also the proposal by nVidia to try GPU sockets which means we buy the GPU, we stick our own cooling and RAM
  • 0

#7
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Physx cards wont come in to practical usage for well over a year, at the moment only one game has even rumours of supporting it and its probably not going to be supported until later patches. Also ATI was the first to announce development of GPU sockets but its still just a developemnt proposal from both companies rather than a definate statement of where they are going, it is dependant of multiple factors on the development of other systems by other technology companies.
  • 0

#8
Hammm

Hammm

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 203 posts
I think it's stupid, if we have GPUs then we can't defect lol
  • 0

#9
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Thats one of the factors they are considering, it would just depend they could both for example use different sot standards at the moment, there isnt a legal requirement to use PCI-E its just practical to do so as it maximises motherboard sales as well as gfx cards sales, if they moved over to GPU chips for going straight into the mobo they would most likely have a single development standard for both, there are advantages and disadvantages, a GPU can theoretically run faster witha proper HSF and larger chips size and better power availability, but it would need to have its own ram slots or share system ram and all that eats into board real estate and there is also airflow issues with having two full sized HSFs right next to each other in a system.

If they ever did it it would probably be for more advanced users and require the use of an extended BTX mobo.
  • 0

#10
p-zero

p-zero

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 276 posts
Yeah, I think im gonna hold off for a bit. Wait till the new technology comes out.
As for the GPu's, I think its not a bad idea, as long as it has its own RAM independent from the rest of the system. And besides if it has its own RAM then you could put as much as you wanted, lets say 2GB, for a lot cheaper overall, especially if you look at the really high end cards ($1000+), and youd have 4 times as much memory dedicated specifically for graphics. Also DDR is pretty darn cheap, I saw a 1GB stick on sale for under $100.
I'm actually kind of suprised they didnt think of this stuff sooner.
-Pete.
  • 0

#11
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
They did think of it earlier it just want practical/possible and its still at the limits of practicality RAM for gfx cards is very expensive in itself you wouldnt want to use DDR they need DDR3 or the new DDR4 both of which are very expensive to produce most of the money on a gfx card goes on the ram itself.
  • 0

#12
p-zero

p-zero

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 276 posts

They did think of it earlier it just want practical/possible and its still at the limits of practicality RAM for gfx cards is very expensive in itself you wouldnt want to use DDR they need DDR3 or the new DDR4 both of which are very expensive to produce most of the money on a gfx card goes on the ram itself.


Its at the RDRAM prices :tazz: .
  • 0

#13
afg34

afg34

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 220 posts
At the moment, games don't really need more than 512mb ram. It would be better if the clock speeds were higher. Also i hear that X1800GTO is comming with same core as x1900 series. It should be a good overclocker. looking forward to it.
  • 0

#14
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Well no game yet technically needs 512Mb when games are made they optimise them to a certain amount so they run best on what most people have so that is 256 at the moment as thats the most common amount of video memory so the extra 512 isnt used to its full potential on most cards.
  • 0

#15
Hammm

Hammm

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 203 posts
yer, except the ultra detail mode in Doom 3 which needs 512Mb, other than that, the RAM just sits there
  • 0






Similar Topics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

As Featured On:

Microsoft Yahoo BBC MSN PC Magazine Washington Post HP