Q&A for you "I've been out of PCs so long, I don't know where to start" people
I know there are a lot of people who have been away from enthusiast PCs for so long that it seems daunting to get back into the game, but the game has never been better!
So I'm creating this thread to answer any and all questions you have about the current state of building PCs, HTPCs, SFF PCs and more.
I know you have some, so lay it on.
So I'm creating this thread to answer any and all questions you have about the current state of building PCs, HTPCs, SFF PCs and more.
I know you have some, so lay it on.
0
Comments
2. If the answer to question one is no then how are programs affected by reinstalling an OS?
3. Where can I download a car?
No, they do not. You can install virtually any game and app to whatever partition or hard drive you want.
Despite the fact that apps/games can be installed anywhere, sometimes they put critical files or registry settings on your Windows partition, which means they're wiped out after a reformat. If those files are toast, apps get cranky. Learning which apps do this is trial and error, but today I only have one app that won't run after a reformat w/o reinstall: Office.
Steam, however, and every game it installs, will happily survive a reformat. Just make sure to back these folders up before reformatting (seriously, just type them as you see them into the my computer address bar):
1. %userprofile%\documents
2. %appdata%
3. %localappdata%
Put the data from these folders right back into those directories after reformat.
ThePirateBay.
Why must it be optical digital audio, when HDMI is sufficient to carry 7.1 digital audio? Riddle me that and I will have answers.
The closest thing will be the AMD E-350 version of this product. It won't have optical (pretty much nothing does with HDMI these days), but it will do VC-1/H.264/H.264-MVC/Xvid/DivX/MPEG-2 @ 1080p/30 with certified bitrates up to 25Mbps, perhaps as high as 40Mbps. The form factor will be the same, and it has a small external power brick, roughly the size of one you'd find on a netbook.
In other words, you probably don't have any HD content that the E-350 version of that product won't be able to decode. It'll be out very shortly, afaik.
You'll be able to get it with or Without windows preinstalled, and the MSRP I'm told is around $400.
What??? I had to try.....
I thought I read somewhere only HDMI 1.3 does 5.1, HDMI 1.2 and lower downmix to stereo
Cliff,
No (sorry)
Given that I do need to do something about that aging Celeron, what is the most future-ready platform to go with based on what we think will be available in October? My only requirement is a chipset/board that supports two x16 PCIe for Crossfire. "Suck it up and wait until Q1 2012" is probably an acceptable answer.
Garg, I got a E7200 I'll sell ya dirt cheap if you want
AM3+ and Bulldozer will be the only platform that fits your description for being the most "future-ready." All other sockets that will be available at the same time are slated to be replace in < 12 months. That said, a little waiting to let the landscape play out never hurt anyone.
//EDIT: The prevailing rumor is also that X79 has been pulled back into 2011 at the expense of USB3 and PCIe Gen 3, neither of which are a big deal in any regard.
Between June 30 and September 30.
BACK TO THE FUTURE!!!.... wait
Are the Fusion board/CPU/GPU combination plates essentially Intel Atom on crack? Would these be best served for everything the internet/Netflix could possibly throw at you with minimal gaming? (aka the parent/girlfriend build)
There are video cards every $15-20 from AMD and NV because the market demands it. It is price sensitive beyond belief, at every step of the chain. Even $5 will literally make or break sales on GPUs, and everyone has a different idea of the "right price." Both companies would actually sell less by "simplifying."
That said, AMD's basic formula is simple:
1. Within a product family (e.g. 6000 Series), higher number ALWAYS = faster.
2. For gamers, the formula has gone unchanged for nearly two years: #700 = good, #800 = better, #900 = best, #990 = dual GPU.
And for NVIDIA, it's pretty similar. For gamers: #60 = good, #70 = better, #80 = best, #90 = dual GPU.
1. Joe Consumer. The Best Buy people.
2. Your average Icrontian. A geek, but not an enthusiast.
3. The enthusiast.
The studies bear out that only #2 is grumpy over the model numbers. Enthusiasts are so inside that they just know it, and Joe Consumer understands that higher = better, but it's that #2 that's a stick in the mud.
There have always been model numbers, and there will always be model numbers. So what is it about this group that causes the ruckus?
I've always wondered if it isn't a little bit of resentment for "glory days lost." A lot of group 2 used to be enthusiasts that let their hobby slip away. They think it used to be simpler, but really it never was.
Just go back and look at any product family as far back as the Radeon 8500. That was the heyday of Icrontic's technical prowess, right? You'll see there are just as many products (if not more) than there are now. Same for every generation that came after. Same for NVIDIA, too. So what actually changed? Nothing but the buyer who gave up a hobby, stop keeping up, and stopped understanding.
I'll leave you to hypothesize.
//EDIT: Added some details.
Nice try, makeshift marketing panel starter.
(sits in grumpy #2 corner)
especially intel
i5-2300, i7-980X, i3-2120
Joe sixpack says bigger number is better...
I won't even try to figure out AMD
I'm starting to look at bang for my buck with heavy gaming, currently BF:BC2 and GTAIV tax my 2GB/6320/5850 C2D setup.
I'm under the impression, though, that there are few upgrades that are really worth the money. Since I'm so budget conscious, I hard time bringing myself to purchase new equipment when 98% of games are supported by my hardware. Halp! Gaming on 1 24'' monitor.
I always recommend 6950 CrossfireX though
wait, are you like using ONBOARD and a dedicated GPU NIGHTS?
also, GET MORE RAM FFS
...that's nearly the exact opposite of budget conscious.
No, 5850 as stated above.
From what I can tell, hardly anything utilizes enough RAM to warrant the purchase. Plus, since this chipset is already end of life'd, it find it hard to shell out the cash for another stick of RAM when I know it's ultimately not worth the trouble.
To be fair, the games you cited were designed for the Xbox 360 (a 5+ year-old custom Radeon card), and then ported to the PC with little modification. It's no surprise that your system can handle them: the games were built for hardware of your era.
I think if you tried to play some newer DX11 titles with reasonable detail settings, you'd feel the pain very quickly.
As for upgrades:
Intel: Core i5 2500k + Gigabyte motherboard based on the Intel z67 (preferred) or P67 chipset.
AMD: Phenom II X6 1090T + Gigabyte motherboard based on the AMD 990X (preferred) or 890X chipset.
Upgrades being "worth the money" is extremely subjective. Modern DX11, and many DX9 games, are punishing on older hardware with all but low detail settings. I personally buy hardware that will let me crank everything up, because I get grumpy when it doesn't look the best that it can. Others are happy with muddy textures and jagged edges, and bewilderingly think it looks okay. Whatever, to each their own, right?
There is a prevailing belief (which you implied) that a Core 2 Duo or a Core 2 Quad is still a fine CPU choice. It is, if you're happy with console ports or low detail levels. If you're not, you'll find newer generations of CPUs are considerably faster, on the order of 2-3x when paired with a modern DX11 GPU.
For example, a game like Metro 2033 @ 1920x1080 (24" monitor) with medium detail settings and 4xAA/8xAF is murderous on GPUs.
Graphics and games have come a long way since 2006, even from one generation to the next. As an example of that, the $300 Core i7 2600k is 15-30 FPS faster than the $1000 Core i7 980X, which has more cache, 2 more CPU cores, and a higher base frequency. Seriously. Pick any game, and that bears out. A product that's 1/5th the price of its predecessor, with "inferior" specs, beats it to a pulp, and absolutely shames everything else Intel has previously made, to boot.
It all depends on what you're looking for.
//EDIT: And Greg is right. 4GB is the barrier to entry these days. 2GB is not enough for a Vista/7 OS, and still had tangible, significant benefits on Windows XP. It tapers off around 6GB, but even 8 can be beneficial for very high-texture games.