The computer and electronics super geek thread

[light]

Why would you buy Intel over AMD if your a gammer? lol

[azrael]

Why would you buy Intel over AMD if your a gammer? lol

Performance. Intel generally performs better than AMD. In some cases, however, the performance gains from using an Intel setup are more costly than using an AMD setup. In some setups and with some games, going with an Intel setup could cost up to $200 USD more and only produce about a 5 fps gain over an equivalent AMD setup. Sometimes paying more for only so little gain doesn't add up.

[shiroikaze]

Why would you buy Intel over AMD if your a gammer? lol

Well, depends if the store is offering a decent price . An Intel Core i7 860 at $200 is not bad.

http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_...duct_id=0317378

Unfortunately, I don't live near any Microcenter .

Edited February 18, 2010 by shiroikaze

[myk]

Why would you buy Intel over AMD if your a gammer? lol

True, I could've gotten a faster setup with AMD, but I'm about as casual with gaming as you can get; I want the best performance on a casual level, if that makes any sense. I didn't really care which cpu-maker I went with, it was more like a coin toss really...

[light]

True, I could've gotten a faster setup with AMD, but I'm about as casual with gaming as you can get; I want the best performance on a casual level, if that makes any sense. I didn't really care which cpu-maker I went with, it was more like a coin toss really...

A honest person you are;

I am speaking to all the hardcore gamers out there they know what I was truely asking and why I put "lol" at the end.

Because generally gamers dont have a ton of money, therefore, making us focus, using our scrupples instead of money to make machines. And true gamers know that when building, AMD is the ultimate; giving you specs for cheaper price. AMD generally have the market on bus speads and compatibility with gpu especially sli.

Its funny that some will still try to throw out a possible reason to buy a intel, as shown above but they know the truth. lol

And for a general gamer it doesnt matter what you buy as long as you get the general specs you want. Your category is different from some of the others.

But your on you way it seems to becoming a gamer; just ignore your girlfriend, and become obsessed with worthless specifications that most people care nothing about.

And know one thing that tickkkks all of us gamers offf right know!!!!!

WE ARE IN A GAME DROUGHT

OR GAME RECESSION

[mikeszekely]

A honest person you are;

I am speaking to all the hardcore gamers out there they know what I was truely asking and why I put "lol" at the end.

Because generally gamers dont have a ton of money, therefore, making us focus, using our scrupples instead of money to make machines. And true gamers know that when building, AMD is the ultimate; giving you specs for cheaper price. AMD generally have the market on bus speads and compatibility with gpu especially sli.

Its funny that some will still try to throw out a possible reason to buy a intel, as shown above but they know the truth. lol

You know it's not 2004 anymore, right? AMD's been behind on the high-end chips since the Core 2 Duo's started coming out. Granted, AMD enthusiasts have always had an easier time overclocking, but since the debut of the Core i7 AMD's been left in the dust.

Don't get me wrong, AMD still has some great chips, and they tend to give you a lot of bang for your buck, but if you want the best in performance, you go Intel.

In either case, if it's games you're after, the video card matters more than the CPU.

And know one thing that tickkkks all of us gamers offf right know!!!!!

WE ARE IN A GAME DROUGHT

OR GAME RECESSION

Are you living in a hole? Mass Effect 2, Aliens Vs. Predator, Bioshock 2 and the new STALKER have all come out in the last month. If you count console games (which you should, because a gamer shouldn't limit himself to one system), by the end of March we'll also have Mega Man 10, Dragon Age: Awakening, Final Fantasy XIII, and God of War III.

There are more games coming out now that I want than at Christmas.

[mikeszekely]

The Samsung lappy's still out of stock. Went to the store to actually look at the Asus G60, and I think it's kinda tacky looking... which has me looking at a G72 now. Looks a bit nicer, and the specs are pretty good for the price. On the downside, I can afford the G60, but it'll be another two or three weeks before I could afford the G72.

[light]

You know it's not 2004 anymore, right? AMD's been behind on the high-end chips since the Core 2 Duo's started coming out. Granted, AMD enthusiasts have always had an easier time overclocking, but since the debut of the Core i7 AMD's been left in the dust.

Don't get me wrong, AMD still has some great chips, and they tend to give you a lot of bang for your buck, but if you want the best in performance, you go Intel.

In either case, if it's games you're after, the video card matters more than the CPU.

Are you living in a hole? Mass Effect 2, Aliens Vs. Predator, Bioshock 2 and the new STALKER have all come out in the last month. If you count console games (which you should, because a gamer shouldn't limit himself to one system), by the end of March we'll also have Mega Man 10, Dragon Age: Awakening, Final Fantasy XIII, and God of War III.

There are more games coming out now that I want than at Christmas.

Look at alll those titles what do they all have in common THEY ARE ALL REMAKES OR HAVE BEEN DONE BEFORE Meh yahwn yahwn

Edited February 19, 2010 by light

[mikeszekely]

Look at alll those titles what do they all have in common THEY ARE ALL REMAKES OR HAVE BEEN DONE BEFORE Meh yahwn yahwn

Your point? I don't think a lot of people sat around and said, "Empire Strikes Back? Screw that, it's just a sequel." A good game is a good game, and in Mass Effect 2's case a good game that's a lot better than the already incredible original.

You wanna skip good games just because they're sequels, be my guest. But don't complain about the self-imposed perpetual "drought" you'll always be in.

[light]

Your point? I don't think a lot of people sat around and said, "Empire Strikes Back? Screw that, it's just a sequel." A good game is a good game, and in Mass Effect 2's case a good game that's a lot better than the already incredible original.

You wanna skip good games just because they're sequels, be my guest. But don't complain about the self-imposed perpetual "drought" you'll always be in.

hey hey calm down calm down;

This is a not push and pull

You are right I have studied Effects for a while and it is a good game and better than the first one, I was thinking the same thing before I wrote the last post, but you have to admit some of the other titles are definately not of the same caliber as Mass Effects two.

In fact it is not fair to put the other titles in the same line as mass effects two. The engine for mass effects two is far superior to some of the other titles.

[mikeszekely]

hey hey calm down calm down;

This is a not push and pull

You are right I have studied Effects for a while and it is a good game and better than the first one, I was thinking the same thing before I wrote the last post, but you have to admit some of the other titles are definately not of the same caliber as Mass Effects two.

In fact it is not fair to put the other titles in the same line as mass effects two. The engine for mass effects two is far superior to some of the other titles.

Sure... STALKER is showing it's age, Final Fantasy XIII seems like it's going to be a love it or hate it affair, and for all the hype Alien Vs. Predator is getting lousy reviews. Oh, and Mega Man 10 is 8-bit.

Of course, as a Mega Man fan, it's actually my most-anticipated game for March. God of War III would be my second. Bioshock 2 is getting great reviews (although not as good as the first, perhaps). And Dragon Age: Awakening is an expansion pack for what was easily my favorite game of 2009.

I also left off plenty of other games. Like Dante's Inferno, which got mediocre reviews, but which I'd actually really like to play, or Torchlight, which has been available on Steam for awhile but recently came out on disc. There's also some other titles that looked good but might be more "niche", like Yakuza 3, Command and Conquer 4, and Blur.

Not only is there plenty of stuff to play, but this assumes that you played all of the good holiday games like Batman: Arkham Asylum, Assassin's Creed II, Borderlands, Ghostbusters, Modern Warfare 2, Uncharted 2, Dragon Age: Origins, Ratchet and Clank, Forza 3, etc. Or early (and non-sequel) standouts this year like Bayonetta and Darksiders.

In short, there's a ton of stuff to be playing.

[light]

Sure... STALKER is showing it's age, Final Fantasy XIII seems like it's going to be a love it or hate it affair, and for all the hype Alien Vs. Predator is getting lousy reviews. Oh, and Mega Man 10 is 8-bit.

Of course, as a Mega Man fan, it's actually my most-anticipated game for March. God of War III would be my second. Bioshock 2 is getting great reviews (although not as good as the first, perhaps). And Dragon Age: Awakening is an expansion pack for what was easily my favorite game of 2009.

I also left off plenty of other games. Like Dante's Inferno, which got mediocre reviews, but which I'd actually really like to play, or Torchlight, which has been available on Steam for awhile but recently came out on disc. There's also some other titles that looked good but might be more "niche", like Yakuza 3, Command and Conquer 4, and Blur.

Not only is there plenty of stuff to play, but this assumes that you played all of the good holiday games like Batman: Arkham Asylum, Assassin's Creed II, Borderlands, Ghostbusters, Modern Warfare 2, Uncharted 2, Dragon Age: Origins, Ratchet and Clank, Forza 3, etc. Or early (and non-sequel) standouts this year like Bayonetta and Darksiders.

In short, there's a ton of stuff to be playing.

I guess after playing some many games in the past I am more a judge of their engine before I actually touch them. I read reviews watch some vids of the game and past knowledge of remade games and their engine types tell me what I am getting for the buck or rom down load which I actually havent done for whill hummmm.

I played god of war the second one reminded me of God of Mario; picking up coins... hoping and skipping...

I did extensive research on the underwater doom... you can guess which one I speak of...

Ratchet and Clank were kids now they are teens so I will leave it for them...

Dragon Age okay I give you a point on the engine and system.

I dont do batman... Some of the movies were okay... and just to cover the gaming in the past for batman has not been impressive hence no major sequels.

Basically what I am getting at is the market is getting smaller of course we alll know that.

There used to be much more variety; strategy games, rpg's, mmorpg's such Aion and farther, more space like Eve Online.

Oh and watch the new Star Wars carefully I have heard and seen that it was not put together as well as the trailer showed. I know every one is looking forward to it another reason to have a good vpu that naturally works well with AMD.

lol

It seems like when we dont put down our toys the world starts slapping our hands with "rulers." Pun very intended!!!

[myk]

Well, if anyone's thinking about playing the new AvP I'd recommend renting it for a console before possibly buying it for your PC. The game's beautiful, I'll give it that much, especially with my new setup, but there really isn't anything so compelling about the story or the gameplay that would make me recommend it as an absolute buy. I love the way they designed the smartgun and its tracking ability by the way, they put it on a separate HUD that highlights targets and allows you to sight them perfectly-and you can hear the servos of the gun working as you aim and fire it, lol. I have yet to complete the Predator and Alien campaigns and they may hold more promise than the marine campaign, so I might revise my opinion of the game later.

Finally, this EVGA GTS 250 is great. I wish I coiuld've gotten a 260 or 280 but I also wish for alot of other things. With my E6500 dual-core, Asus P5ND MB and new RAM I'm pretty content, although I just realized that dual-core and "core 2 duo" are two different things, lol. Anyway, thanks to all of you guys that provided input for my upgrade...

[azrael]

although I just realized that dual-core and "core 2 duo" are two different things, lol.

Well....terminology-wise, yes, that's true. Technically...no. A Core 2 Duo is a dual-core CPU. That's just Intel's name for their dual-core CPU.

[mikeszekely]

Well....terminology-wise, yes, that's true. Technically...no. A Core 2 Duo is a dual-core CPU. That's just Intel's name for their dual-core CPU.

Unless you bought a computer with a Pentium dual-core.

Speaking of, I got tired of waiting for the Samsung to restock online, so I dropped the extra $100 on an Asus G60. Currently setting it up right now (man, I love ninite.com).

[David Hingtgen]

I think what really messes up people are the non-dual-core "Core 2" processors. Or the fact that "non-2" Core processors can be dual-core (so long as they're a duo).

Frankly, it was stupid to have "2" as the successor model name in the prime era where dual-core came to prominence. It screwed up people's perception/name-recognition.

[shiroikaze]

Hmm, running into trouble trying to use eSATA (first time trying to use it)... I tried two of my hard drive enclosures and Windows 7 detected neither of them. Went into Device Manager and tried scanning for hardware changes--Nothing. I also tried booting with one of them connected and powered on; I already set bios to have Windows configure plug-and-play devices too.

Is there anything else that I need to do?

[light]

Hmm, running into trouble trying to use eSATA (first time trying to use it)... I tried two of my hard drive enclosures and Windows 7 detected neither of them. Went into Device Manager and tried scanning for hardware changes--Nothing. I also tried booting with one of them connected and powered on; I already set bios to have Windows configure plug-and-play devices too.

Is there anything else that I need to do?

Check to make sure your bios is recognizing the hard drives that is one good place to play around and get them working.

You might have to plug your sata cables in different ways to get the hard drives recognized by the bios.

Also you can try and manually plug the information into the new hardware screen since plug and play is not finding them.

But first I would try to see if the bios is recognizing them.

Also you can check the jumpers on the actual hard drive, most of the time they are set correct and work without any help, so I would leave them to far far last, i mean last past calling the company.

Of course this is all coming from my head and I am a little rusty so listen to the other folks first.

[light]

Well....terminology-wise, yes, that's true. Technically...no. A Core 2 Duo is a dual-core CPU. That's just Intel's name for their dual-core CPU.

Yep infringment laws and such

[azrael]

Hmm, running into trouble trying to use eSATA (first time trying to use it)... I tried two of my hard drive enclosures and Windows 7 detected neither of them. Went into Device Manager and tried scanning for hardware changes--Nothing. I also tried booting with one of them connected and powered on; I already set bios to have Windows configure plug-and-play devices too.

Do the enclosures have USB or Firewire connections? I would try those. That would rule out the enclosures. Be sure that the eSATA plug is also plugged into the motherboard.

[shiroikaze]

Check to make sure your bios is recognizing the hard drives that is one good place to play around and get them working.

You might have to plug your sata cables in different ways to get the hard drives recognized by the bios.

Also you can try and manually plug the information into the new hardware screen since plug and play is not finding them.

But first I would try to see if the bios is recognizing them.

Also you can check the jumpers on the actual hard drive, most of the time they are set correct and work without any help, so I would leave them to far far last, i mean last past calling the company.

Of course this is all coming from my head and I am a little rusty so listen to the other folks first.

Thanks, I'll play with the bios later after my brothers gets off it . Bios should be able to autodetect the hard drives, but it didn't. The thought of plugging in the information manually crossed my mind, but I wanted to know if I have any alternatives.

Also, I thought SATA hard drives don't need any jumper configuration?

Do the enclosures have USB or Firewire connections? I would try those. That would rule out the enclosures. Be sure that the eSATA plug is also plugged into the motherboard.

USB works fine, I've been using my Antec MX-1 and Thermaltake BlacX for a long time. And yes, the front eSATA port is connected to the motherboard. I also tried the built-in eSATA port on the motherboard too, no luck there.

Light is probably right about the bios giving me a hard time...

[uPDATE]

That's weird, booted the hard drives and the computer the same way this morning and they're detected now. Front port still doesn't work but the back port does thankfully. Unfortunately, Win7 can't read my 750GB hard drive (in the Antec MX-1) saying its corrupted while WinXP reads it fine. The 1TB (in the Thermaltake) reads fine on both sides though...

I guess maybe my 750GB can't take it anymore or something... Which reminds me, I've been using that same hard drive as a download drive for my torrents since forever. Recently, some of the files I downloaded were hidden. uTorrent sees the files but Windows XP doesn't, unless I move it to recycle bin or a different folder. I can access the files but it's getting annoying...

Edited February 21, 2010 by shiroikaze

[akt_m]

Anyone have problems with firefox here too?? Can only reply using fastreply, don't know why...

[mikeszekely]

Anyone have problems with firefox here too?? Can only reply using fastreply, don't know why...

Version? I've been using 3.6, and I'm not having any issues.

[light]

Its funny I think the entire internet has been having problems lately,... I know I know it sounds funny but I have had problemes with many other accounts and websites all around the same time.

[mikeszekely]

About how long would you expect a router to last if it's been on more or less 24/7? I kinda forget how long I've had mine, but I think it's starting to go. My wife, who uses a laptop, mentioned the other day that she wasn't getting any internet. All the lights on our modem were fine, but I did the ol' unplug it all and re-plug it (henceforth referred to as "the Procedure"). A day or two later, she casually mentioned that it wasn't working for her again, but she did the Procedure and it was fine. I was kind of starting to wonder if the problem wasn't her laptop, though, since internet problems usually will cause one of the lights that should be solid on the modem to start blinking.

Just tonight, though, I was playing Star Trek Online on my desktop, but I had my own brand new laptop set up so I could surf the net during some of the longer trips through sector space. And wouldn't you know it, I try to open a page and I get a "not connected to the internet" message. I didn't drop the game on my desktop, though, so I know it's not an internet problem, and since it's happened on two laptops the culprit seems to be the router.

Under other circumstances, my router going might not be a big deal. I mean, the thing is 802.11b, and it dying would be a good excuse to upgrade. Problem is, my wife just dumped a ton of money into an IRA to lower our taxable income, so our budget's kinda tight for the next couple of weeks. And it seems like you have to pay a premium if you want a router that's both 802.11n WAN and gigabit LAN.

[shiroikaze]

Mine's still holding up since circa 2005. It's a shitty Netgear router, but it does its job respectably.

Maybe there's something new interfering with the signal?

Edited February 27, 2010 by shiroikaze

[myk]

Got a few questions, guys.

I've got 2 G's of DDR2-800 RAM at the moment, but seeing how alot of systems and programs are talking about 4, I was wondering if I should go ahead and increase my RAM to 4 G's. If so, is it better to have 2, 2G sticks of RAM, or would I be alright with 4, 1G sticks of RAM?

Also, since I've now discovered the difference between Dual-core and Core-2-Duo, do you guys think it would be worth it to get the Core-2-Duo processor? I could always hawk my E6500 dual-core to someone to help offset the cost of a 'Core-2, but I just want to know if it would be worth the effort. I'm told a 'Core-2 based system would scream compare to what I have right now.

On another note, I might just SLI the system after all. Obviously I'll get a twin for my EVGA 250 GTS, but at the same time I'm tempted just to get a 260 or 280 and leave it at that; I can't help but listen to those who cry SLI as being just a gimmick.

Thanks in advance!

[mikeszekely]

Got a few questions, guys.

I've got 2 G's of DDR2-800 RAM at the moment, but seeing how alot of systems and programs are talking about 4, I was wondering if I should go ahead and increase my RAM to 4 G's. If so, is it better to have 2, 2G sticks of RAM, or would I be alright with 4, 1G sticks of RAM?

Also, since I've now discovered the difference between Dual-core and Core-2-Duo, do you guys think it would be worth it to get the Core-2-Duo processor? I could always hawk my E6500 dual-core to someone to help offset the cost of a 'Core-2, but I just want to know if it would be worth the effort. I'm told a 'Core-2 based system would scream compare to what I have right now.

On another note, I might just SLI the system after all. Obviously I'll get a twin for my EVGA 250 GTS, but at the same time I'm tempted just to get a 260 or 280 and leave it at that; I can't help but listen to those who cry SLI as being just a gimmick.

Thanks in advance!

If you've got two sticks already, it's cheaper to simply add another pair of sticks. I don't think there's a big difference in performance having 2 2GB sticks vs. 4 1GB sticks. Just remember that to take advantage of that much RAM, you need a 64-bit version of Windows (don't remember if you mentioned having one or not). The most RAM a 32-bit version can address is 4GB, and that includes any RAM on your graphics card.

As for your processors, I suppose it would depend a lot on which Core 2 Duo you were thinking about getting. The E6500, IIRC, was pretty good for the Pentium Dual Core series, but if you can afford it an E8400 would definitely be a boost.

Finally, while I wouldn't say that SLI is "just a gimmick," I'm not convinced that it's necessary. A single GTX 260 should be able to play most games at the highest settings possible. A GTS 250 is around $130, and a GTX 260 can be had for under $200. If you buy a single 260 and save the difference, by the time the 260 isn't cutting it anymore you could always just buy a new graphics card. If you haven't bought a motherboard, another plus is that non-SLI compatible motherboards are usually cheaper than SLI compatible ones.

Mine's still holding up since circa 2005. It's a shitty Netgear router, but it does its job respectably.

Maybe there's something new interfering with the signal?

Mine's gotta be older than that. I got this router back when I first got cable internet. 802.11g wasn't even an option at the time. As for interference, it seems unlikely. It's been in the same spot for all those years, and the newest item to go anywhere near it was the Wii I put there two years ago. Last time I unplugged it, it seemed on of the lights that I think should be green was orange. I don't know. Like I said, I don't mind if I have to replace it, but I hope it can hang in there a few more weeks.

[azrael]

If you've got two sticks already, it's cheaper to simply add another pair of sticks. I don't think there's a big difference in performance having 2 2GB sticks vs. 4 1GB sticks. Just remember that to take advantage of that much RAM, you need a 64-bit version of Windows (don't remember if you mentioned having one or not). The most RAM a 32-bit version can address is 4GB, and that includes any RAM on your graphics card.

There shouldn't be a difference in performance.

Finally, while I wouldn't say that SLI is "just a gimmick," I'm not convinced that it's necessary. A single GTX 260 should be able to play most games at the highest settings possible. A GTS 250 is around $130, and a GTX 260 can be had for under $200. If you buy a single 260 and save the difference, by the time the 260 isn't cutting it anymore you could always just buy a new graphics card. If you haven't bought a motherboard, another plus is that non-SLI compatible motherboards are usually cheaper than SLI compatible ones.

Agreed.

Mine's gotta be older than that. I got this router back when I first got cable internet. 802.11g wasn't even an option at the time. As for interference, it seems unlikely. It's been in the same spot for all those years, and the newest item to go anywhere near it was the Wii I put there two years ago. Last time I unplugged it, it seemed on of the lights that I think should be green was orange. I don't know. Like I said, I don't mind if I have to replace it, but I hope it can hang in there a few more weeks.

An current G-router might be prudent if you don't have the funds. I still see a few draft-N routers on the shelves that should really go away since the N-spec was ratified in Oct. 2009. But it may be a while before those products make it to market.

[ntsan]

Time to get Quad Core, Dual core is showing its age... lots of programs and games utilizing multie-cores

Q6600 @ 2.4Ghz easily beat E8400 @ 3.6Ghz, Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz trashes any Dual Core period..

Edited February 27, 2010 by ntsan

[David Hingtgen]

Eh, from how often I get exactly 50% CPU usage, a lot of my programs can't take advantage of 2 cores...

[mikeszekely]

Eh, from how often I get exactly 50% CPU usage, a lot of my programs can't take advantage of 2 cores...

Yeah, I mean, I ran Dragon Age with a Core 2 Duo E8400 and a GeForce 9800GTX+, 1680x1050 resolution, everything turned up to the highest settings, and three GB of slower RAM. Since a Radeon 5870 should handily beat my graphics card, you think I'd have an experience worse than their average of 37.1fps/24fps minimum. I can safely say that my actual performance never went below 30fps.

[myk]

Yeah, like you guys were saying it's the graphics card that becomes the issue, not nearly as much the CPU...

[ntsan]

DAO is quite optimised unlike some other games which use much more resource and still doesn't look too great.

For me I gained a lot of boost from E2140 @ 3.2Ghz to Q9300, especially encoding videos and rendering which cut by more than half. Some games run more better (GTAIV) though others may felt the same. (probably need FRAPS to show fps difference)

Any current games take advantage of having more cores

[myk]

Quad core cpu's, GTX 280's, etc. Waaaaaay out of my price range, lol.

So, was that a yay on going up to 4G's of RAM, or am I ok on keeping it at 2? Mike did say that 32 bit OS's can only use up to 4 including video cards-my 250 GTS has 1G of RAM so getting any more RAM is pointless, right?

Edited February 28, 2010 by myk