Hey... what's a recommended nvidia card for this system...
amd x2 4000 am2 mboard + 22" 1680*1050 monitor?
Printable View
Hey... what's a recommended nvidia card for this system...
amd x2 4000 am2 mboard + 22" 1680*1050 monitor?
Which board you are use.
its got regular pci and pcie slots eranga...but drivers have been an issue for me ;) from a few sites seems like the 8300,8400 and 8600 including the GTS FX 1600M, FX 570M, FX 360M, FX 4600, FX 5600 are supported.... only issue is i am not sure what is too slow (given my pc), what is suitable and what is overkill and a waste of money.
wow, i've never had a direct request in the forums. My hardware Leetness must be apparent. Let me look your board up and i will get back to you.
well you didn't actually post your motherboard model number, but i can tell you that with that monitor's native resolution, the better the card you get, the happier you will be. Of course it only really makes a difference for games, but if you play them, you will benefit greatly from the best card you can afford that has ddr3 memory on it. Weak video cards with DDR3 are outperforming more expensive ones with DDR2. And since i don't know if your system supports SLI or not (since you never posted your motherboard model number), i can't say anything about that. But in general, the same amount of money spent on two low-end SLI cards will outperform one single-slot solution every time.
I simply don't have enough information for a comprehensive analysis better than this. For a more informed answer, i need the following information:
1. Motherboard model number
2. Amount of cash you want to spend
3. Preferred use of computer
4. Ram you have in computer
yes have been w/-\ch!ng your 1337ne55 with regard to many topics ;)
well actually i have had to go back to the start regarding hardware... its amazing how getting the hardware and software inc drivers synced is so important... and due to losing quite a bit of cash on the wrong hardware (3 times over!) i am now on a budget :mad: so it is time to get some advice :D
i'll keep the monitor tho... which is this
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/review.aspx?CIaRID=4834
so next addition that i am currently looking @ is that
http://www.myshopping.com.au/PR--875...sor_Socket_AM2
and that
http://www.extremepc.com.au/product_...2b36d05554236b
but i don't know if they'll perform well and if the gfx is strong enough for 1680*1050
mboard + ram... i have no idea at the moment...
that card is plenty strong. Good card choice. My issue is with the processor you picked out. That is a server processor. You need a dual-core amd64 or you will be REQUIRED to run a 64-bit os. You will also be required to purchase a server board to use it, and they are more expensive and it is rare to find one that has sli capability, although they do exist. You need to go with a dual-core Athalon or athalon 64 system if you are going AMD.
After a quick price look-up, i see you can buy the fastest dual core athalon available for less than $200, and it is actually faster than the server chip you picked out.
ok i started on the mboards today... and i can't find a dual cpu am2 board anywhere... i was thinking along the same lines as the gfx suggestion... go for a more expensive mboard and add get say 2*1212 opterons, but couldn't find any am2 dual cpu mboards :rolleyes:
is that true that the opterons can't run 32 bit mode? if so i might have to keep one of the boxes (4000) i was going to sell just for windows. the older opterons can run 32 bit http://www.computerworld.com/hardwar...,93330,00.html, are you saying its a problem with the new chips? btw found the problem with hdd, i opened the hdd counted the cylinders and then realised the the os was getting the number of cylinders wrong :D
now i found this tho:
http://www.pcsforeveryone.com/produc...ucts_id=422110
budget price... has sli (although prolly only operates @*8 not *16 mode) + space for 2 pcie*16 gfx cards. it doesn't seem to have onboard video making it less expensive meaning you can load up on gfx cards instead :D
also
is two of those
http://www.shopbot.com.au/r.asp?url=...6&refshop=1792
gonna wh!p a single gts card?
why are you so set on an opteron? Like i said, they are SERVER chips. They cost more and the only real difference in them is you can have more than two opterons on one motherboard, and it supports 8 gb ram instead of 4. But in either case, this is 4 gb of ram PER PROCESSOR. I have seen nice boards with two sets of ram banks.
Check this Bad Boy out: http://www.provantage.com/asus-kfn5-d-sli~7ASUS1MC.htm
and here's an image of it:http://usa.asus.com/100/images/products/1271/1271_l.jpg
it doesn't offer many expansion slots, but it has all the essentials on the back already, including DUAL gigabit ethernet.
is that an am2 socket for the latest am2 opterons? i think they are getting ready to unleash the phenom range hence only single cpu opteron boards at the moment.... but i can't wait 6 months for the realease and i am on a budget, so it suits me just fine :
a review of the 1216 opteron said this:
Pros: What can I say! This processor is amazing. Right out of the box it gives incredible performance. I see no need to OC it, I am sure it would easily hit 3.0 Ghz but what for?
Cons: Nothing
Other Thoughts: I built a core2Duo E6700 for a client recently and I have to tell you, this Opteron smokes it.
well i can tell you this: That guy was Smoking. The core2duo 6700 is faster out of the box. And he also says "i had no need to overclock it but i bet it would hit 3ghz". Well he's only guessing if he hasn't tried. While it is true the opterons are more overclockable than the x64s, it is simply because they are UNDER-clocked from the factory. They contain the exact same core as a dual-core x-64. AMD's own website states this. There's no reason to go for a more expensive opteron unless you plan on putting stupid amounts of ram on your computer. Also most Opterons require the more expensive Error-Checking ram. MUCH more expensive.
here's a benchmark list:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_20...=882&chart=419
note that opterons aren't in this list because they are server processors(but like i said athalon 64x2 uses same core), but you can also find a comparison between opterons and xeons
This link is a comparison with plenty of benchmarks between Opteron and Xeon (click backarrow). You should pay attention to the fact that a standard pentium 4 wins over Opteron in a bunch of the tests.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2003/04/...ns/page29.html
that seems like a strange analysis... where a pentium 4@3ghz beats a xeon@3ghz :eek::confused:
nice colour for the dual opteron option tho, wonder how dual 3ghz opterons would compare :D
it's pretty obvious why. They are optimized for certain types of code execution. A server chip is pretty much optimized for memory access. Plus i can gaurantee you that the dual-cores would launch in the lead if you were multi-tasking. You will NOT see a performance increase in single-thread programs. You will see a quad-core appear on one of the charts, and it is NOT in first place.
lol.... the reason why i am looking at the opterons is becos my 4000/4800 systems had a nasty taste to them... played with one for a week until i realised they were windows only systems (due to a lack of non windows gfx drivers)... the guys selling them on ebay made it seem like they were selling great systems for a bargain (because they were selling so many i assumed it was a bulk deal)... turns out they were bogus... now i have advertised them with a note explaining they are windows only systems and why and those guy are now gonna lose lots of cash... I noticed that they have already had to drop the price by $100 for their systems :D on 30 units that's $3000 heh heh
that doesn't make sense. The processor has nothing to do with graphics drivers.
its just frustrating trying to set up a system and then realising at the end there was no way to get it to run anything other than windows xp or vista... particularly when they make it seem like its an awesome beast capable of running any os in the add.:eek:
now that i have xp on it, it runs like a dream... but i really wanted to sink my fangs into something more adult.... and my my windsor experience has been lame to say the least. ;)
the only issues you should have are with graphics drivers, which aren't always updated as fast on linux. but they are available. Both Nvidia and ATI now offer .rpm downloads for linux drivers for their video cards. And it isn't just newer cards this is an issue for you are having. I have one system that Redhat 8 install disk crashes on, and the other system i have that Redhat 8 will run on refuses to let me install XP on it, although 2000 works fine.
yep, checked them the gfx drivers should be great... however until they are installed and working nothing is certain :lol:
sure the opterons may not have as much power as 6 or 7 other processors available... but i don't think you'd be able to find another chip mboard combo for less than $300 with as much attitude and performance at the moment. :D
of course i can, but will that board have SLI? That's what kicks the price up there. And i didn't look too closely so you need to make sure that if you use an nvidia card, your motherboard uses an nvidia nforce chipset, or you are just asking for trouble.
the supplier i contacted was out of stock... found some more tho
i haven't been able to find out if that board's sli is *8 or *16... looking now
its chipset is NVIDIA nForce®4 SLI™ MCP (capable of 2 cards @ x8 mode)
so is it better to go with 2 7800 gt cards or 1 7800 gts... seems like a no brainer but i don't know enough about graphics architecture at this stage to say one way or the other???
2 cheap cards in SLI are almost always faster than one expensive card. Why?
It's the equivalent (in pixel count) of running one cheap card at half the resolution because SLI literally splits the screen down the middle and gives half of it to each card. And if you manage to afford a board that supports x16 in both slots, you have the added benefit of double data rate.
to me the gpus handle data processing essentially taking a load of the cpu....so a gpu is just another cpu... so really the only issue is speed is it not? the f/-\ster the better its a s!mple as that.
so what then is the difference between a gt and a gts? is it speed... must be... so the key is getting sli acceleration... 2 cards @x16 would be B35t
also what if you had one card at x16 or 2 cards @ x8?
you have improved processing at 2 cards x 8 because you have more factors in video processing besides data transfer speed. Memory access on the card, maximum texture memory, refraction processing, mipmapping, z-order filtering, etc. Two cards can basically do this twice as fast as one in theory. The bottleneck in this is rarely the data transfer. It is usually the host pc processor with two cards, and the graphics processor with one card.
ok... now i am having to look at the mboard again...
it seems like the 939 and the am2 are similar
while the 940 and socket F are similar (and superior) with socket F having the most pins 1207 (much more than 939 or 940) and nforce 600 seems like the best gfx option. although nvidia seem to be linked only with intel and amd... what about gfx on other architectures?
and are there any other options for a reasonable price such as ibm or sun taking into account graphics; are the alphas out of production now or have they been reintroduced?
i wouldn't worry too much about pin count. That's kind of like comparing MHZ.
I believe the 900 series sockets are on the way out, and i can't remember for sure, but i don't think they are even making 939 chips anymore. might be a different #...
ok.. do you know about the other architectures?
nvidia isn't only intel. I run a athalon 64 with an nforce chipset. My wife runs an athalon xp2000 with an nforce chipset. I don't think any ati chipsets are on intel though. And don't expect them ever to be since ATI is now owned by AMD. I believe the AM2 is a new socket design. But if you are concerned about sockets, look at the socket the latest release of processor uses, and that one will probably be good for a while.
no... do you know anything at all about ibm, alpha or sun architectures?
ibm doesn't make home computers anymore. They sold out ot Lenovo. They are starting to put ps3 cell processors in their servers.
i haven't kept up on the others, but the last version of windows that ran on SUN (that i know of ) was windows 2000.
what are they gonna do with the powerpc now that apple have gone intel? or are they gonna release a new chip altogether? then there is the same with HP who seems to be ending their cpus at the moment, probably to release new technology next year too.
i am not quite that knowledgable about it. All i know for sure is the development platform for the ps3 is a desktop computer running SLI but containing a cell processor. They have already built servers with this chip and it is only a matter of time before 8-core chips take over.
As for apple going to Intel. They were using motorola processors in most of their systems.
There is always going to be somethign better over the horizon. It is the major updates you have to keep an eye out for (ddr2, ddr3, SLI, multi-core are examples)
hmmmm
seems like all the major players are set to release a whole new set of technologies architectures and chips in the next 12 months... it could be a mistake to spend too much at the moment....
so i am prolly back where i started... altho the asus mboard was a bit of a dud in terms of *8 and a lower quality chipset... not sure i could get games to work properly on it...
so now i have found this board.... could be a better match with the first video card i mentioned ;)
http://www.nextag.com/EVGA-nForce-59...F7848F36DCDCF1
i have a question with a supplier regarding its ability to handle opteron am2 chips...
chipset has nothing to do with game compatibility. Unless you are worried it won't have drivers. But older chipsets normally have more stable drivers.
here is a pic btw
a pic of the bottom is not very useful.
well i'm hoping that it'll keep me in trouble for a few months... my last two setups lasted a day and a week respectively :rolleyes:
i still run 4x agp and i have yet to find a game i can't play, although admittedly i can't run some of the newer ones at full settings. I don't think you will have any problem.
yup... will start getting my next system tommorrow now that i have found a list of hardware that I think may suit me for at least a month :D, I don't really know about setting up games on nix but i am sure i'll have a few questions about it... not that i ve played a game since 360 was such a cold shower.
btw i have the asus monitor for sale on ebay as the widescreen was making me go crosseyed:D got a 20.5 inch 4:3 instead
i use a 21" trinitron
the crts based on the television technology or an actual television?
IT is a Sony Trinitron Multiscan 500PS 21" monitor (with dual inputs) and it weighs over 100 pounds.
Max Resolution 1600-1200
Dot Pich 0.25 mm
Color Depth 24-bit(16.7 M Colors)
weight:68.36 lb
Depth:18.68 in
widith.19.6 in
height 19.86 in
that's taking heavyweight monitors to extreme isn't it?
from memory its the same tube they were using in the ibm crts too. what's the response (ms) like and is it suitable for games or can it be a bottleneck?
i can set the refresh rate as high as 200. At max resolution it still can refresh at 120mhz. Very nice monitor. Also has two inputs, although the 2nd one is non-standard.
interesting...
so there is the response time and the refresh rate...
if the response time is too slow it doesn't matter how fast the refresh the images would still be blurred but i wonder what the max response and refresh rates are for a human eye?
not as high as you think. A movie shows 24 frames a second in the theater.
so really a monitor just has to display a certain number of pixels each with its own colour x times every second. you would expect that the higher the resolution the greater the number of pixels and so the slower the time taken to colour and display every pixel... so a monitor really should just tell you the fps in different resolutions rather than response and refresh rates.
with movies only at 24fps it makes me wonder what the max resolution and speed for the human eye really are and if the monitor manufacturers have to create the illusion of progress rather than just focusing on differences in brand, quality and durability of components, and of course styling and display ratios.
refresh rate = fps
The problem is that the monitor is ALWAYS going at the refresh rate you set, while a program doesn't have to be synchronized to it.
sure, so the cpu can sometimes not produce the images @ 24 fps + causing problems, hence the gpus to take the pressure off the cpu, but how does the refresh rate affect anything?
no. I am saying that it is possible for the program to not be able to keep up with the refresh rate. Your program might only be putting out 5 fps because it is bogging the system down, or you might be putting out 300. Framerates faster than the monitor refresh rate are wasted because they are still shown at the refresh rate. But programs can also be locked to the refresh rate and put out the frame rate of the monitor (this stops the ugly tearing you see caused by quick motion). However if the cpu can't keep up this can still drop BELOW the refresh rate. It will wait until the monitor is at the top of the screen before drawing again. This can make the framerate even worse, which is why most programs don't sync to it.
but what is the refresh for?
if you think of the monitor with every pixel coloured why does it need to be refreshed? aren't the pixels just recoloured when the application sends new information to the monitor? Of course a smart monitor would just recolour those pixels different from the previous frame.
about the other issue that you mentioned... if the application sends information too fast for the monitor there are frames lost meaning that the picture gets all choppy... although you would imagine that the code to manage those problems would be really easy to implement... eg if app is *2 the speed of the monitor then take every second frame.... although slowing graphic output to an agreed upon standard of say 30fps would be best as anything faster would be a waste of resources and would allow for scaling up in size and resolution instead... although managing the fps is a software not a monitor issue as long as the monitor is capable of 30fps in its stated resolutions.
you are confusing technology. A crt monitor contains phosphorous and it has to be refreshed. If not, it goes black. 3 emitters shine an electron beam on the back of the phosphorous coating and it glows through the glass. This is why a crt is much better at switching resolutions than a lcd is. It doesn't actually have a set amount of pixels. The capability is dependent on the hardware. It takes an extremely strong magnetic field to create a refresh rate of 200. The emitter doesn't move. The beam is moved with magnetic fields.
youre correct... 200 times per second seems a bit of an overkill don't you think?
btw i have moved on from my am2 fetish ;):D... beard's still a growing...