Poll: Your computer
- Thread starter MrTub
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I find my Duo is fast enough for me (Vaio laptop) for surfing. I think a Quad is only needed for people that play the newest games on a PC rather than a console...and it's too much hassle for me to tune a desktop to get a better experience as against using a machine specifically designed for the games I'll play on it.
Er... my computer is full HD (1920x1200) using one of these:Tubez said:
Apple 23" Cinema HD Display.
Obviously, you can go to larger resolutions, but I think 'productivity-wise' you are better off spending the money on a second monitor.
A 50" HD TV won't look any better as you will be seated further away (also the TV could be interlaced). That said, I have nothing against PC owners plugging their computers into their televisions. I just think it is the most expensive way to run a game, when the console alternative usually looks just as good.
The reason why I made my post was to say that screen size and resolution and broadband speed and availability mattered far more in terms of overall everyday office productivity than the average system with limited download and 19" monitor (or a laptop).
Uhm. What? 2.4 is pretty standard. I can't think of ANY combination more balanced than a 2.2-2.6 dual cored and a 9800/4830 or whatever Radeon equivalent is.Tubez said:
Or maybe I just can't understand your gibberish. Use Firefox or something with spell-checker...
Yea I know that =) but I was just intressed what ppl got in their computers. Im currently using 1x 22" full hd screen and 1x 19" full hd ( for msn and stuff) and 100mb/s internet with unlimited download and using a Tvix/Xbox360 (Depending on codec) for watching it on the tv.Uncompetative said:Er... my computer is full HD (1920x1200) using one of these:Tubez said:
Apple 23" Cinema HD Display.
Obviously, you can go to larger resolutions, but I think 'productivity-wise' you are better off spending the money on a second monitor.
A 50" HD TV won't look any better as you will be seated further away (also the TV could be interlaced). That said, I have nothing against PC owners plugging their computers into their televisions. I just think it is the most expensive way to run a game, when the console alternative usually looks just as good.
The reason why I made my post was to say that screen size and resolution and broadband speed and availability mattered far more in terms of overall everyday office productivity than the average system with limited download and 19" monitor (or a laptop).
If you got stuff that cant play hd in your computer.. then how does a full hd screen improve the experience more then a non hd screen?
I'm looking forward to upgrading to a low level dual core soon as I can afford it.
Partly being held back by my fear of fitting a CPU, I've built everything else about PCs, but the whole 'brain transplant' bit gives me the fear, I'm sure it's just gonna go pop and there goes my cash.
Novatech fortunately do mobo/CPU bundles, so I'll probably buy one of those and a new PSU and drag the rest outta my old machine.
Partly being held back by my fear of fitting a CPU, I've built everything else about PCs, but the whole 'brain transplant' bit gives me the fear, I'm sure it's just gonna go pop and there goes my cash.
Novatech fortunately do mobo/CPU bundles, so I'll probably buy one of those and a new PSU and drag the rest outta my old machine.
I have a dell 4600c (compact) got it in 04. It has a old nvidia card, 80g hd, p4 ht processor, and 256k ram ROFL. Its laggy, I'll be moving into the mac world soon.
It sounds like you've got a very nice system.Tubez said:Yea I know that =) but I was just intressed what ppl got in their computers. Im currently using 1x 22" full hd screen and 1x 19" full hd ( for msn and stuff) and 100mb/s internet with unlimited download and using a Tvix/Xbox360 (Depending on codec) for watching it on the tv.Uncompetative said:Er... my computer is full HD (1920x1200) using one of these:Tubez said:
Apple 23" Cinema HD Display.
Obviously, you can go to larger resolutions, but I think 'productivity-wise' you are better off spending the money on a second monitor.
A 50" HD TV won't look any better as you will be seated further away (also the TV could be interlaced). That said, I have nothing against PC owners plugging their computers into their televisions. I just think it is the most expensive way to run a game, when the console alternative usually looks just as good.
The reason why I made my post was to say that screen size and resolution and broadband speed and availability mattered far more in terms of overall everyday office productivity than the average system with limited download and 19" monitor (or a laptop).
If you got stuff that cant play hd in your computer.. then how does a full hd screen improve the experience more then a non hd screen?
1920x1200 resolution at greater than say 20" (which we both have) just means that you can comfortably read the text in more windows that are positioned side-by-side - or see the details in a photo you are editing, etc. This means less shuffling and reordering of windows. A normal size/resolution monitor is like trying to work on those little back-of-seat fold-down tables you get on airplanes. It isn't enough to have size alone as one could just hook up a projector and make the screen as big as you like - the resolution has to be crisp as well.
So, even without nice stuff like Blu-ray and Radeon graphics cards to do interesting things with all those pixels I find a use for them all.
Actually, you can have HD games that look a bit like Geometry Wars with a slow processor, people tend to assume that HD means Crysis quality textures (and hence a separate graphics card with a lot of memory on it). If everything is plain lines, or procedurally generated textures you don't have such a burden on the integrated graphics. It is surprising what can be done with so little.
I'd go duo, unless you're rich or running Crysis and STALKER duo would be just fine. Quad is too expensive. Duo does its job just fine.
I've got a dual core 2.6Ghz AMD Athlon64x2.Cooled by a Thermaltake K8 CPU cooler using Arctic Ceramique.Tubez said:
It's on a MSI motherboard with 4GB of Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800.
Video cards are a pair of EVGA 9800GTs with 512MB DDR3 each.
Power is supplied by a OCZ 600Watt 80% efficient PSU.
I have 4 hard drives,3 of them are Western Digitals and 1 is a Seagate.
Im running Vista Home Premium X64 and I built it at the beginning of this year.
I have a pioneer DVD burner with Dual Layer capability.
All of that is tucked in a Thermaltake tower
My monitor is a 24" Dell Ultrasharp 2408WFP.I'm running DVI-D cables from my computer to the monitor.The native resolution is 1920x1200.
I also use the monitor for my 360 which is next to my computer. I run the 360 in 1080P using Component cables.
I do have a "old" Panasonic bookshelf stereo that was too loud for the upstairs computer room,so I use headphones. Currently on the PC side it's a pair of Panasonic HT355s and for gaming on my 360 it's Turtle Beach X1s
They sell my board,it's a revision and it has support for AMD Phenom quad core and I would like to upgrade my motherboard next year to it.
There's a big box on the floor on which there are buttons i press occasionally, and a glowy box that I don't touch. And a flat button-box, that i press alot.
It's been four years since I bought my laptop, and nearly seven since our family computer was bought.
I'm getting a new laptop in ten days, I'll let you know then.
And to answer the other question, it used to e great for gaming, now not so much.
I'm getting a new laptop in ten days, I'll let you know then.
And to answer the other question, it used to e great for gaming, now not so much.