Question about graphic card & about directx

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by bkdamon

Every bench test I've seen, notably Tom's Hardware lists the i5 2500 as the best performer ATM in regard to gaming and Sandy Bridge is by all accounts the recommended path for top shelf performance. What do you base your recommendation on?

The fact that my hardware post was used by Creative assembly and pinned at the top of their forums for the guide on pc hardware? The fact that I compete in EVGA rig competitions. Also I have about 5-6 computers running atm of various ages for work, so I am familiar with a range of setups.
Sandybridge is not worth the extra $, you are paying for an integrated gpu on a cpu thats not needed. Above that sandybridge is the same as gulftown except the architecture was shrunk and they slaped on that integrated gpu then marked up the price. If you get a 40nm i7/i5 you can overclock it to 4.25+ghz on air stable, and 4.5-4.75 with a good water cooling system. Also buying an i5 is retarded if you want to keep the pc for any amount of time, how long are those 4 threads going to last you when BF3 comes out later this year and uses 8? For now its ok but it has no lasting ability as more companies come out with heavily threaded engines.

In addition the fact that you picked the 15 2500 is lol worthy. You do realise for like $20 more you could of got the K which has the better integrated GPU, and has a unlocked multiplier for overclocking? If you bought it, dumb decision you should of read more.

@Codex - no they are not really comparable, the 980 wins out, and those tests were favourable to the i5, so keep your thinking cap on ok? If a program only uses 4 threads then of course there will not be a large performance differance, some of those programs were from 2007... Now on the otherhand I have 12 threads and 6 cores, which means an immediate 33% boost due to the cores and up to (but unlikely) 3x more performance with heavily threaded programs (graphics design etc).

As for my CPU I needed it for rendering for Autodesk/Maya cgi, I also intend this pc to last for a bit so will be eventually adding another 12g of ram, and 2 more 580s with a nice raptor raid setup or even better SSDs. So to be bottlenecked by the CPU would suck, which wont happen when I overclock the 980x to 4ghz+...

Originally Posted by Heliocon

As for my CPU I needed it for rendering for Autodesk/Maya cgi, I also intend this pc to last for a bit so will be eventually adding another 12g of ram, and 2 more 580s with a nice raptor raid setup or even better SSDs. So to be bottlenecked by the CPU would suck, which wont happen when I overclock the 980x to 4ghz+...

Who cares if you are using professional software that takes advantage of the i7's hyperthreading! That has nothing to do with gaming or Cliffs of Dover. All you're doing is trying to get people to throw away hundreds of dollars on something they don't need. When people ask, "What's a good system for Cliffs of Dover?" they're not asking," what's a good system for Cliffs of Dover and running professional video editing software?". Understand?

They don't want to throw away thousands of dollars on a system that's going to be spanked by an $800 one a year from now. They don't care if the i7 will allow them to render their CGI nerd fantasies 40 seconds faster. Nobody cares about that!

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by speculum jockey

Who cares if you are using professional software that takes advantage of the i7's hyperthreading! That has nothing to do with gaming or Cliffs of Dover. All you're doing is trying to get people to throw away hundreds of dollars on something they don't need. When people ask, "What's a good system for Cliffs of Dover?" they're not asking," what's a good system for Cliffs of Dover and running professional video editing software?". Understand?

They don't want to throw away thousands of dollars on a system that's going to be spanked by an $800 one a year from now. They don't care if the i7 will allow them to render their CGI nerd fantasies 40 seconds faster. Nobody cares about that!

Dude, are you blind? I told them to buy a cheaper cpu then others suggested. Seriously you need to read... They are saying to buy sandybridgre 32nm cpus, I said to buy the older, cheaper but currently comaparable Nehalem range which is gen 1 i7. I also never suggested to by a gulftown cpu. Now next time read the post before you respond, or atleast try to know what the differance is between cpus. Kthx

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Dude, are you blind? I told them to buy a cheaper cpu then others suggested. Seriously you need to read...

Hmmm... first reply you made.

Originally Posted by Heliocon

You want to aim at a 4 core CPU, preferably a i7 which are the best atm...

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Get an i7...

I eagerly await your huge copy and paste reply from Wikipedia/Tom's Hardware/wherever.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by speculum jockey

Hmmm... first reply you made.





I eagerly await your huge copy and paste reply from Wikipedia/Tom's Hardware/wherever.

Why? Whats your argument? I said buy a gen 1 i-7, they said buy a gen 2 i-7 or gen 2 i-5 which are both more expensive than the gen 1 i-7 I believe. If you are too lazy to read/think, its not worth the time to try and educate you. Its easy information to find and it is pretty clear what I stated and that you are either playing dumb or trolling.

So what hardware would you suggest? Do you think for $800 you can play COD on good settings? I would say definitly not.

[jf1981]

Hi,

Question turned another way, would the game look nicer (recent amazing visual effects) when changing from (for example) Nvidia 260 to 5xx serie which - as far as I understand - does support a further feature rich set of visual effects on top of older cards ?

Thanks

[Bobb4]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

The fact that my hardware post was used by Creative assembly and pinned at the top of their forums for the guide on pc hardware? The fact that I compete in EVGA rig competitions. Also I have about 5-6 computers running atm of various ages for work, so I am familiar with a range of setups.
Sandybridge is not worth the extra $, you are paying for an integrated gpu on a cpu thats not needed. Above that sandybridge is the same as gulftown except the architecture was shrunk and they slaped on that integrated gpu then marked up the price. If you get a 40nm i7/i5 you can overclock it to 4.25+ghz on air stable, and 4.5-4.75 with a good water cooling system. Also buying an i5 is retarded if you want to keep the pc for any amount of time, how long are those 4 threads going to last you when BF3 comes out later this year and uses 8? For now its ok but it has no lasting ability as more companies come out with heavily threaded engines.

In addition the fact that you picked the 15 2500 is lol worthy. You do realise for like $20 more you could of got the K which has the better integrated GPU, and has a unlocked multiplier for overclocking? If you bought it, dumb decision you should of read more.

@Codex - no they are not really comparable, the 980 wins out, and those tests were favourable to the i5, so keep your thinking cap on ok? If a program only uses 4 threads then of course there will not be a large performance differance, some of those programs were from 2007... Now on the otherhand I have 12 threads and 6 cores, which means an immediate 33% boost due to the cores and up to (but unlikely) 3x more performance with heavily threaded programs (graphics design etc).

As for my CPU I needed it for rendering for Autodesk/Maya cgi, I also intend this pc to last for a bit so will be eventually adding another 12g of ram, and 2 more 580s with a nice raptor raid setup or even better SSDs. So to be bottlenecked by the CPU would suck, which wont happen when I overclock the 980x to 4ghz+...

I bought the i5 2500k - But I am not going to argue with your logic, as money does not appear to be a deciding factor for you.
For me it was and the i5 2500k serves me well. I am however interested in your statement that battlefield 3 will utilise 8 cores.
I have not played any game yet that has come even close to using even 3 cores effectively let alone 4 properly.
For what you do for a living 8 cores may be the way to go.
But the i5 2500k is a good cpud that overclocks well and if you want to blow most of your budget on a graphic's card which is what clod demands then the small performance boost an i7 gives is not worth the money


Just realised you also suggested cheaper options than mine in the i7 line. Have to agree with you on that.

[kendo65]

Just like to point out that in the two UK-based retailers that I usually use for PC components (Scan and OCUK) there are currently NO socket 1366 or 1156 i7s cheaper than the i5-2500K.

Closest was the quad core i7-950 at 188 (pounds) compared to the 2500K at 166.

Cheapest 6-core was i7-970 at 440 pounds.

And the i7-8xx's start at 206, and are considered inferior to the SBs.

Basically to get any better performance than Sandy Bridge you need to spend a huge amount more. And even then it may not be worth it if you don't run highly threaded applications.

[jf1981]

Hi,

Better graphical effects with newer card ?
e.g. gtx 260 --> serie 5 ?

Or just smoother & faster ?

Regards

[sg1221]

Originally Posted by jf1981

Hi,

Better graphical effects with newer card ?
e.g. gtx 260 --> serie 5 ?

Or just smoother & faster ?

Regards

Sheesh jf........I don't think your microphone is working ....lets just go get a beer

sg