Well it's more like the mechanic saying "well, the base part cost $50, and I'm unsure how many hours of work and the amount of money the other parts are going to cost, so don't worry about it for now, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it." Then the person underestimates to the extreme, and when asked for more than he thought he would have to pay, isn't willing to negotiate.
Yeah i was looking at that. I've always liked XFX's quality, plus their double lifetime warranty. I'll be looking for something of similar performance come June
I think he meant the gts 250. I don't understand how anyone can say that card is shit, when many gamers are still using old cards like the 7600gt (:shy. I do plan on using a bunch of AA, though, so I might spend the extra $ for the GTX 260 216.
I put in the details in the PSUcalculator (http://www.extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp) and it came out to about 390. And thats with 15% aging. So considering it has a 30a +12v single rail, and it's a corsair, it should be good to go.
I didn't think I needed to get 1gb for the resolution I'm using, but I might spend the extra couple of bucks.
@nadeo gts 250 is a 9800 gtx+, which is a 8800gts. A decent amount better than 8800 gt. The gts 240 is the 8800gt. But like I said, the graphics card WILL change come June when prices have gone down on better performance cards and new ones that come out in the ~$130 area.
Ordered the case (antec three hundred) today, to take advantage of the free shipping, even if they did increase the price $5. Also updated the list with a few different parts.
It was my understanding that the 9800gtx+ was manufactured with 65nm tech, but the gts 250 was the one with 55nm. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty certain. (btw, would it be worth getting 1gb version instead of 512mb if I run 1440x900?)
It's a 9800gtx+, but it's chip is manufactured with 55nm tech instead of 65nm, which means less power and less heat. Also the 1gb version's board is about 1.5 inches shorter. It also performs better.
250 watt is pushing it a bit. It's anyones guess wether it would work or not 14a on the 12v line is pretty decent though, so might as well worth a shot and if it doesn't work return it since you're buying it in person.
Yeah the 4th core is usually very unstable, and would probably need to be underclocked. I don't do enough multitasking for there to be a need to lower game performance to get a fourth core.
Thanks for the input. Didn't think twice about the onboard graphics, but that mobo is $5 cheaper (woo 8 usb ports), but has quite a few useless pci x1 slots... I've been debating w/ myself whether to go 64 bit or 32 bit O/S, so unsure about the ram for now. And my money is already being stretched to get to the 720, probably as far as I can go, plus some got the 4th core unlocked so, who knows.
Is the $60 investment for a phenom II x3 720 in the same mobo worth it?
edit: er, actually realized that PII's only come in am3, and those mobos cost quite a bit more. So, any oher alternatives?
edit2: agh, wait. So AM3 CPUs work in am2+, but am2+ cpus dont work in am3 mobo. Right. So, Should would upgrade from 7750 to II 720 be worth it?
Right, so my current computer is getting quite old since I got it in ~2003. It's starting to get slow just doing simple tasks like opening video files (100% cpu, doesn't respond). So, I'll get a "loan" and get a new computer in June and work it off over the summer. Budget is still pretty low (~$500), so CPU did suffer a bit. Would have gone with Phenom II 720, but I figured if I went with that, I might as well have gotten an am3 board with ddr3, and then as I do that something else bottlenecks it and the price ends up skyrocketing. I've settled on this, so far. Just wanted to have it checked over by others to see if anything else would work better. I'm mostly getting it because there are finally some good games coming out on the PC: Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, Cities XL, among others. Don't want to have to run it in 800x600 res with very low graphics :P