AMD X2 Gaming Build.

[t3h l337 n3wb]

The CoolerMaster Stacker and Thermaltake Armor are nice and cheap cases to hold all your SCSI drives in.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Originally posted by: Agnostos Insania

Originally posted by: bob4432
the catch is it is a crt that weighs probably >120#'s and will take up all of your desk

Cool. I've never entirely understood the weight issue that people have for stuff. I guess maybe if you move a lot or something, but my monitor and computer case haven't left their initial positions in years. Give me a solid steel computer case and CRT monitor any day.

I have a Dell 2405fpw (24inch widescreen LCD) (it is actually 24inches viewable diagonal) and don't observe any ghosting and it only weighs about 35 pounds with the stand. 1900 X 1220 and I looooooooooooooooooooove it myself.

Edit: I have a desk now as well, LOL

 

[Some1ne]

What is VapoChill LightSpeed, and what are you talking about DDR500? To my understanding the motherboard only supports DDR memory running at DDR400 (PC3200).

A VapoChill LightSpeed is a high-end CPU cooler that uses phase-change tech to keep the CPU at something like -30 degrees under load. Basically, it's like an AC for your CPU. They run about $600 apeice I think, and are worthwhile (when you have a budget that extends to several thousand dollars anyways) because they let you overclock like almost nothing else out there, and if you're dropping ~$4K on a top of the line system, you might as well overclock it like crazy, and get a top of the line system that goes above and beyond every other top of the line system out there.

DDR500 RAM is for overclocking. Your board will support it just fine, although you will only be able to run it at full speed if you either overclock your CPU, or raise your FSB setting while dropping the multiplier to keep the CPU speed at spec. Like I said there's really not much reason to buy a system like that and not overclock it at least a little, and DDR500 RAM will give you better performance if you overclock. I also agree with the suggestions of getting a 4400+ and overclocking it. It'll perform just as well as the 4800+ and cost several hundred less.

Dropped the OS down to XP Home, XP Professional isn't necessary for me (I don't do fancy networking or anything), to save around $50

I really don't think that's a worthwhile way to save $50. XP Pro is a much better OS than XP Home, even if you don't do "fancy networking". In my opinion it's just silly to drop ~$4K on a system and then try to save $50 by skimping on the OS.

 

[Skott]

The problems with CRT monitors as I see them is
1)Heavy
2)Realestate hogs


Benefits of LCD
1)Lighter
2)Take up less space

There is one other thing I like about LCD screens that really attracts me to them nowadays is that since they take up less space you can place them farther back away from you on your desk. Having a huge screen just inches away from your face is not good on the eyes no matter what your age is. There are good reasons why your parents told you not to sit so close to the tv as a child (those of us that are in our 40s will remember this more than the younger folks I'm thinking). LCDs can be placed back farther where it wont hurt the eyes so much but still get a great view.

LCD technology is good enough now where we dont have to buy them big bulky CRTs anymore. I didnt mention that LCDs are athestically better as well but beauty is in the eyes of the beholder so its a personal choice on that score.


Also I'd say if you want a 4800 X2 and overclock it go ahead and do so. I can see the merit of getting a 4400 X2 and overclocking it as well. As far as SLI goes I wouldnt say necessarily its a waste. IMO its not yet taken to its full potential. Its still in its infacy IMO. incomplete. Two video cards should beat a single video card in my view of logic but thats not the way it is in computer technology. SLI & Crossfire is new and pricey and not yet where it should be. It is getting better though it seems.

Just my 2 coppers on the subject. Some good info and advice in this thread though.

 

[Some1ne]

As far as SLI goes I wouldnt say necessarily its a waste. IMO its not yet taken to its full potential. Its still in its infacy IMO. incomplete.

As someone who's just quite old enough to remember the "good old days" of Quake 1 and the original Team Fortress, it's been interesting for me to see how SLI has been welcomed as a "new technological innovation". It's like almost everyone has forgotten (or just isn't old enough to remember) that SLI was tried once before, years ago, back in the days of the first PCI 3d-graphics accelerators. Back then, the technology had much of the same features that it does today...it was costly, demanding of the underlying system (power, heat, etc.), and although it offered better performance than any single card available at the time, the next generation of cards would consistently blow away the performance of any previous generation SLI setup. Very little has changed since then in terms of SLI, except that the cost of a top of the line SLI card today is almost double what it was back in the PCI days at times.

I really don't see why SLI won't just fade away into obscurity now like it did several years ago, other than possibly the fact that now there is a larger base of enthusiast users, willing to pay obscene amounts of money for top of the line performance, and ready to embrace SLI as the "next big thing" even though it was tried and failed quite awhile ago.

 

[Stangs55]

excellent

 

[deptrai]

Dude you'll go blind after a month with that 24 inch monitor?

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: Some1ne
If you're shooting for high-end, that'll do it, although I've said it before and I'll say it again, SLI is a waste.

Yes it is, some games run faster with out SLI than with it. And in other games the Performance gained is only 10FPS. You would be better off populating that 16x slot with a Nice PCI-e SCSI Controller and 3-4 small scsi hard drives set up in RAID 0+1 or RAID 0.

Fastest in town 36gb x 4
PCI-express Controller x1
fastest with a little extra storage


SLI is such a waste.

 

[Skott]

Dual video cards is not a new idea, true. The current SLI technology is a bit different though and the performance is far superior compared to the original attempt at running two cards. Back in the 90s when they tried two cards there was no extra performance gain at all. At least with this latest attempt they are showing some better performance. Also the industry and the consumer is showing more interest in it working than the first go around. Is SLI here to stay? If they can continue to improve upon it most assuredly. Time will tell though.

 

[t0mn8r]

Dude,
I would seriously consider http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822144160 as your boot drive. It makes a big difference especially in a system such as yours.

Data drive is variable dependent on your budget (I went all out for 4 x 250 GB RAID 0).

I partitioned C to be 32 GB (FAT32 for imaging), a 4 GB restore partition and the rest for scratch and paging file.

Hope this helps.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: t0mn8r
Dude,
I would seriously consider http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822144160 as your boot drive. It makes a big difference especially in a system such as yours.

Data drive is variable dependent on your budget (I went all out for 4 x 250 GB RAID 0).

I partitioned C to be 32 GB (FAT32 for imaging), a 4 GB restore partition and the rest for scratch and paging file.

Hope this helps.

i agree with using the faster drive, but the op may as well get a 15krpm u320 scsi hdd for his os/apps drive. it would be ~$200 total including drive, card and cable (card/cable used).

what does fat32 have to do with imaging?

 

[Vallybally]

To OP. As others have suggested, unless you are rich where price is no matter, you are much better off getting a PC for half the price which is 80% as fast (or 90%+ with some OCing). Generally speaking, living on the bleeding edge for non-millionares is foolhardy because a $3-4k PC today will be worth half that every year. (ie $1.5-2k next year, $750-1k two years from now). In addition, there is no difference that the human eye can perceive from 70fps to 90fps is there? Far as I know, about 30FPS is 'life-like' motion. Today's games run basically as well on a $2k PC as a $4k PC. And they'll run nearly as well on even a $1k PC if you shop smart (not counting monitor).

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: Vallybally
To OP. As others have suggested, unless you are rich where price is no matter, you are much better off getting a PC for half the price which is 80% as fast (or 90%+ with some OCing). Generally speaking, living on the bleeding edge for non-millionares is foolhardy because a $3-4k PC today will be worth half that every year. (ie $1.5-2k next year, $750-1k two years from now). In addition, there is no difference that the human eye can perceive from 70fps to 90fps is there? Far as I know, about 30FPS is 'life-like' motion. Today's games run basically as well on a $2k PC as a $4k PC. And they'll run nearly as well on even a $1k PC if you shop smart (not counting monitor).

from what i have read, 30fps is for directly what you are looking at. your eye can usually pic up a blur or see a scan line @ ~60fps with your peripheral vision.

but all people are different and some are more sensitive than others. imo, if your pc will do a low of about 45+fps all looks good to me

 

[Looney]

So what did the OP go with?

 

[Bushman5]

 

[Bushman5]

That sli is a waste but. and that x2 4800 isnt the top of the line