What's my PC spec Harjun? Have I ever overclocked before? Do I overclocked my processors? What processor do I use? You now nothing at all about me to make any sort of statement.
..so how about you realise why people flame you and start to post more useful information/stop posting about how many FPS, your pc spec or what overclock you currently have and giving out advice when you don't have the knowledge to back it up because unless you've noticed it pisses people off.
no....i dont know anything of yours, its just obvious you don't know much about it...whereas i've built my own pc, and 3.2Ghz successfull overclock, because 2Ghz was a bit too low for my liking, and i have a boost of 50fps, before, my max fps was around...300, then it went to 500, and 170 on full grid...so just and think if it is usefull to just say anything negative against any comment i make...ok?
Has anybody asatained yet whether it's a Turbocache 6200, if it is a graphics upgrade would free up the processor to do more LFS calculations even if the processor is the current limiting factor.
Harjun please sod off we don't want your advice on overclocking, regardless of what you may have learnt people are not going to suddenly forget your posts from the recent past when you showed the bad side of your character, it's got nothing to do with your knowledge more your maturity and ability to apply common sense.
i'm just posting here so i can subscribe to this "comedy hour" by harjun.
have you asked garph who built his pc? have you asked him the spec of his pc? how do you even know if he hasn't overclocked? if you were as good at overclocking as you say, please tell me how you got on with that laptop you overclocked?
also, didn't you say that you were not going to overclock your new pc? if so. why buy a cpu that is not what your looking for?
i think you have no clue how to overclock, but you are an expert in forgetting that others gave you advice. please don't make me find the threads in the multiple forums of you asking for help.
did you go with your first choice of parts for your new pc? or did you get advice on which parts work better together?
did you overclock on your own or did you ask advice on this subject too? even tho you ignored it and went ahead and overclocked(blew up) your laptop.
you see harjun my little fury friend, you actually know very little about what it is your talking about.
Hadn't been paying much attention to this topic, But questions i need to answer: The 6200 isnt a Le/Turbocache its just a standard 6200 cheapo from down the stoor
Harjun come back and tell us that you have overclocked a pc all by yourself without help at all.
In my opinon AMD are more harder to overclock and get better speed then stock since they don't have that better overclocking potential then a Intel cpu.
Harjun just for the record the AMD 6400+ has set a new AMD wr @ 4.22ghz from 3.2ghz so if that does not mean AMD can overclock go and clean some bunson burners then.
Just a quick question, if i get some of my software sorted out and stick some AA on is my pc going to handle it or will i lag crazy? Just interested becuase LFS sure loooks sexy with it
Actually (and I may be wrong here) there is no reason to suspect that a bit of AA would adversely affect your performance right now. So far, we've established that your PROCESSOR is the bottleneck in your system. That being the case, adding a bit of AA (which is purely a GPU intensive feature) shouldn't reduce overall frame rate that much. Unless of course your processor is the bottleneck BUT your graphics card is RIGHT behind. The only way to know is to try, but considering I can get 8xAA and 16xAS on my 6800GT, I don't see any reason why you couldn't do at least 2x...
This however, also has a lot to do with the resolution you are running at, but again, my 6800GT is running those settings with 2560x1024 res, so I really doubt you'll have much of an issue. I just don't know how big difference is between your card and mine - that would be for someone else to answer...
Not having Turbocache is good, it's a system that integrates graphics memory with your system to artificially increase the performance of the graphics card at the expense of processor/system RAM performance, if the graphics aren't holding you back you don't want Turbocache
You may be able to get away with it, I can run a bit with no real drop in LFS on my card (9600 Pro) but leave it off so I don't have to fiddle when I launch more demanding games. I have found that there was actually no real world performance drop switching from 1280x960 to 1600x1200 in HL2 and none in LFS (except for single car offline), which rather surprised me and should give you a bit of hope that cranking the graphics up might not make a difference, just don't increase the number of physics objects (by not changing car draw distance) and you may not even see a drop in FPS.
1) I bet my dad knows more about overclocking than you do, and he's only used a freaking PPC G4 iBook.
2) The whole "Don't listen to harjun" is probably the best tip we can offer to people, particularly when you offer overclocking advice.
3) I dare you to go on and overclock a PPC, find the BIOS and do it. Heck, go grab a Mac Pro, boot into the BIOS, and give me a 3.4 GHz Octo-Core Xeon machine, and when you tell me you've done both of that, your prize awaits.
I think I know where this thread is going ***looks at flames** oh boy.. **hears mods coming with keys to lock the thread** DAMN another thread completely ruined
Funny thing is, he could build the worlds greatest supercomputer, and have it plastered on every major news and tech website around the world, hailed as the greatest achievement ever by a 13 year old (and receive a special Presidential award of some sort,) and he'd STILL have trouble convincing most of the people here (myself included) that he'd really done it, lol.
Anyway, I'd like to suggest that the mods NOT lock the threads that turn into flame wars over this guy. It's not like people are shouting curse-words back and forth and making death threats. In fact, it doesn't even seem to bother him, since he keeps on posting. If anything, it provides a very entertaining read during my boring chemistry lectures... and sometimes actually becomes pretty informative as people argue over whether or not certain facts or statements are true or not.
Well, to be fair, the 3.4 GHz Octo-Core ain't hard, it's only OCing by .4 GHz off of the default for that Mac Pro, the problem is the fact that you can't overclock any of the current Mac's yet, outside of direct replacement of the Processor.
On to the point i have managed to make a configuration thats on a budget but still can play anything at semi-high configuration only the main parts covered you can just put the old hdd and other stuff back in there can't decide on psu though too much choices
If I were you, I'd look into OCZ or Corsair for the RAM. I run Corsair right now, and I'm very happy with it, but I've also built desktops for others using OCZ and that works like a charm too.
The rest seems good. You can't go wrong with an Asus board, and I see you're not skimping out on that either.
The processor is good too, it's EXACTLY what I had before I got this one. It's plenty fast. The only time I really had much trouble with it was when they increased the game to the 30+ players. That's the only reason I got this one, lol. But for everything else it will suit you just fine - at least it'll be a lot faster than what you had.
As for the graphics... I've no idea about ATi, I'm an nVidia guy!
And about the PSU, I don't have much background in the area either. I only know that the Corsair 520 Watt one that I have now is fantastic. It's built well, it's very heavy, has no power fluctuations, and just runs like a top. I do know however, that there are cheaper solutions, as the Corsair models are a bit expensive (at least the modular ones.)
Give me a G0, a decent mobo and a nice Tuniq Tower and i'll give it a damn good try.
EDIT - You needed my help...
Corsair PSU's are good, but tbh they are quite expensive, and i'm still not convinced with Modular systems, although i must confess i'm not really "up" on PSU's at all.
That mobo is a high quality AM2 one (i think it is at least - never bothered to read up on AM2 mobo naming schemes), the CPU is ok, however the x1950GT aint that good, it's a crippled Pro, and doesn't overclock that well - a few more $ gets you this, http://www.newegg.com/Product/ ... aspx?Item=N82E16814102061 - which is what i'd get.
If you were going to overclock, then i might suggest you look towards to Intel, as i'm sure for £55 you could get a P35 board in the US.
anik360 - Bear in mind that when Jakg recommends a 1.6 Ghz Intel vs a 2.2 Ghz Athlon, he's actually recommending an upgrade! I don't know how much you know, but the easiest way to explain it is to compare my desktop to my Tablet PC:
Gaming Desktop Monster Rig: 2.8 Ghz AMD - Calculates Pi to 2 million in 1:13.
Battery-Life Friendly Tablet: 2.0 Ghz Intel - Calculates Pi to 2 million in 1:00 flat.
As you can see, my desktop is almost a full Ghz faster, but the tablet is still almost 20% faster on a purely processor-intensive task due to the Core 2 Duo's superior architecture. AMDs are cheaper, but Intels are FASTER
Oh, and that OCZ ram that Jakg linked you to - GET IT. It looks so cool you'll probably want to just leave it on your desk and never put it in - I've used that stuff before for other builds.
How much graphics differnce is my resoultion going to make with lfs? when i get home tonight im going to stick some AA after getting some software sorted, but i believe part of my problem with lfs not looking as nice maybe caused by my 15" screen with a max resoulotion of 1024x800
As a comparison, the 2 GHz T7200 in this laptop does 1 M SuperPi in 26 seconds, so your time seems a little slow.
My AMD Athlon 3700 at 3.07 GHz did Pi in 27 seconds, now SuperPi only uses one core, but even then theres still quite a large difference for only a few MHz...
To give you a quick comparison of architecture...
3 GHz AMD - 27 seconds SuperPi 1 M
3 GHz Core 2 - 16 Seconds SuperPi 1 M
Lol, you're right. I ran the test again on my Tablet and got 26 seconds for 1M, but for 2M I still can't get lower than 1:00... odd.
As for the desktop, I can't try that now, cause it'll probably wake up my roommate, lol. But maybe the slow times there also have something to do with the temp issue I've been having? I had to burn a DVD yesterday, and while it was rendering it, the temp got up to 61 - for about 10 minutes... very scary.
Hmmmm, yea - IDK then. This FX is really starting to aggravate me. There is no reason for it being so hot, and it's not even running that fast!
Well, you may not have a high resolution, but you also don't have that large of a screen, so it's still probably somewhat sharp. I'm assuming you have a 15" widescreen based on that resolution? LFS will probably look a bit better on a higher density screen, but that really is not important. The only difference a higher resolution will have (other than lowering your framerate) will be to produce a sharper image with cleaner, thinner lines (like around objects and such.) I'm one to notice those kinds of details, but I think most people don't seem to recognize tiny changes like that. With proper AA though, a high-res screen is a beauty to look at - much less pixellation.
Ignoring games for a second though, I myself hate working with anything lower than 1280 x 1024, because today's modern programs tend to have so many toolbars that lower resolutions leave very little actual workspace. I think you'll find that you'd benefit from a higher resolution simply in ease of use. If you are at all looking into a new monitor, look for something in the range of 19". Acer, for example has some very nice, inexpensive products.
and think if it is usefull to just say anything negative against any comment i make...ok?
DAMN another thread completely ruined
?