HELP 24 hours b4 BIG BUILD!!!

[qazwsx]

Originally Posted by Bokranator

p.s. does anybody know where i could get a black gigabyte gz-m3 in the uk? and is in stock?

only place I can find that even sells them in the UK is aria but its unstocked. even google products cant find 1. Looks like you'll have to wait or find an alternitive.

[Dr. V]

Well my P5B Deluxe auto detected my new Crucial Ballistix RAM (which runs at 2.2v) when I switched out a Corsair Value set (which ran at 1.8v) without me having to do anything.

Most motherboards will detect and adjust automatically with new RAM. It's simple: the first boot up, just go into the BIOS and make sure the voltage is the right value corresponding with the RAM you put into it.

If you have any problem, just post back

[Bokranator]

okie dokie well it seems the builds in 7 days now kmt my bro wants to go hd first short q a gigabyte 8400 gs is enough to handle hd veiwing on hd tv right or even handle just displaying the comp screen on a hd tv?

[Yellowhello]

I don't know if you got around to it yet, but what cooler did you end up going with?

I believe ATI's stuff it better for HD stuff. Check this out: Sapphire HD 2400XT Videocard Review

[Dr. V]

ATI's stuff is DEFINITELY better for HD. If you plan on strictly doing HD-related things, go for an ATI. If you wanna throw some gaming and other stuff into the mix, I'd highly consider nothing less than a 8500GT.

[gvblake22]

Originally Posted by ST!X

ATI's stuff is DEFINITELY better for HD. If you plan on strictly doing HD-related things, go for an ATI. If you wanna throw some gaming and other stuff into the mix, I'd highly consider nothing less than a 8500GT.

I've come to realize the 8500 is very misleading. We are all used to the 6200 and 7300 cards as being the bottom of the barrel. Now that nVidia upped the naming scheme to 8500 (which seems just barely under the 8600) it seems like it should be a great performer; but that couldn't be farther from the truth. If you want a basic, entry level DX10 capable video card, the 8500 would fit the bill, but not if you want to actually play DX10 games. All the preliminary DX10 benchmarks around the web show these games bringing even an 8800GTS 320MB to its knees at moderate resolutions. Long story short, the 8500 is not a gamer card, it is in the same class as the 7300. If you want something you can play games on, go with a GeForce 7600, 8600, or 8800 (or X1950, HD2600, HD2900 for the AMD/ATI camp).

[Yellowhello]

The 8600GT is equivalent to a 7800GS in DX9 games, I believe. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

If you is doing any sort of DX10 gaming, a 8800GTS at the very least.

[Telexen]

We suddenly find ourself in a computer-hardware era where the price of graphics cards is absolutely ridiculous, and to top it off it's becoming standard practice two have TWO of those ridiculously overpriced cards to do serious gaming.

I know not all of you will believe this - but not everyone who wants to play a game can afford the 8800 series of cards. I think 8600GTs are perfectly capable of gaming - it's game coders' fault if they can't make GPUs this powerful play decently.

[PrOLifIC_onE]

Originally Posted by Telexen

We suddenly find ourself in a computer-hardware era where the price of graphics cards is absolutely ridiculous, and to top it off it's becoming standard practice two have TWO of those ridiculously overpriced cards to do serious gaming.

I know not all of you will believe this - but not everyone who wants to play a game can afford the 8800 series of cards. I think 8600GTs are perfectly capable of gaming - it's game coders' fault if they can't make GPUs this powerful play decently.

I agree that prices are quite ridiculous but the newest vid cards have always been ridiculously expensive. Just a few years back, Nvidia had a few different levels of 'gaming' cards and the TI4800 was the top $500 card ($300 for a TI4600 and $125-150 for the TI4200). Then those that just wanted a non-gaming card could pick up the MX series card (MX440 for a cheap $40).

Not a whole lot has changed except that some people do find it hard to fork over the dough for cards that are essentially ahead of the gaming world (DX10 games still have a while before they hit their stride). Another important thing to note is that many 7000 series cards (7600,7800,7900 etc) are performing just as well for nearly all current games. The way that PC hardware typically advances, by the time DX10 really does hit it's stride, those 8600's and 8800's are likely to be much more reasonably priced.

While we were slightly off on a tangent, I think the orignal conversation regarding vid cards dealt with how cards are going to handle HD TV. I have used MANY cards (mostly Nvidia) in my HTPC for the past couple years. Granted, I am recording standard video, not HD, there was not really a noticable differnce as I upgraded through all those cards from a FX5400(very low end) to a 7900GT. So, IMHO, I would go with a 7600GT and call it good.

[Telexen]

Originally Posted by PrOLifIC_onE

I agree that prices are quite ridiculous but the newest vid cards have always been ridiculously expensive. Just a few years back, Nvidia had a few different levels of 'gaming' cards and the TI4800 was the top $500 card ($300 for a TI4600 and $125-150 for the TI4200). Then those that just wanted a non-gaming card could pick up the MX series card (MX440 for a cheap $40).

And now, the top cards are easily over $750 at release, sometimes approaching $1000. You're also not able to get a card that's labeled by the scene as capable for any kind of 'serious' gaming in the current generation (for DirectX capabilities) for much less than $300. Back in those days a Ti4200 did just fine - most people bought them because a lot of them would OC to Ti4600 speeds.

I remember reading somewhere that nVidia (maybe ATi too, but they're Canadian, so maybe not) was going to be investigated for price gouging ... I wonder what ever became of it. They seem to be just as bad as U.S. oil companies.