EPTUpgrading Computer Specs - Page 2
| Blogs > FabledIntegral |
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
| ||
|
blabber
United States4450 Posts
| ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
I just did a scan at some other website different than crucial.com, and it gave me different results! Thanks both VorcePA and FragKrag for helping me in this topic, and it's interesting hearing two different perspectives. I just downloaded a program called System Information so it should tell you everything... VorcePA why would I buy "4 GB of fresh sticks?" Don't I already have two functional ones? What's the advantage of replacing them with newer ones? And can't my computer only process 3.5 GB? Here are the specs... + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i49.tinypic.com/24awps1.jpg) EDIT: What is SSD? | ||
|
blabber
United States4450 Posts
SSD = solid state drive. | ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
Also, Windows reserves half or a full gig (can't remember) of "virtual" address space to deal with I/O with external devices. Then, you can't use more than 3-3.5gb of ram. Also, having identical sticks of RAM will ensure that they can run on the same clock speed and otherwise display "good" behavior. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
SC2 won't take a lot to run. Your 7900GTX should do fine at medium on any resolution. RAM has no affect on the performance of a single program unless you do not have enough RAM for that single program, and no normal user needs more than 2-3GB. It is not cost efficient to upgrade your RAM because you are using the older DDR2 which is already in the process of being phased out. If you buy a SSD, you get great performance, and something that will meld easily into a new build along with VERY noticeable performance benefits. + Show Spoiler [SSD Performance] + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhYYx9ckR4Y http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3631&p=20 here you can see the difference between a SSD and a traditional HDD. That velociraptor is currently among the top 2 or top 3 traditional hard drives on the market. It takes it 31 seconds to open all of those programs, but even a relatively low end SSD (the Summit) can open those same programs in just 7 seconds. | ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
Consider that they move at an upper limit of around 10,000 rpm. This means that the period is around 2ms. We can see that memory access is on the order of milliseconds, or thousanths of a second. Now, look at solid (purely transistor) memory. It has a response time on the order of nanoseconds, or millionths of a second. Thus, SSDs are much much faster than HDDs. Also, much more expensive. | ||
|
VorcePA
United States1102 Posts
On March 04 2010 17:02 FabledIntegral wrote: So RAM is more so enabling me to multitask than run a single task efficiently? I like the idea of being able to do both well. Btw, although SC2 is a main concern, I still use my computer for other up-to-date games. I'm going to be getting Mass Effect 2, etc. I just used SC2 as an example as I was under the impression it would take a lot to run it seeing as everyone seems to be upgrading their systems. I just did a scan at some other website different than crucial.com, and it gave me different results! Thanks both VorcePA and FragKrag for helping me in this topic, and it's interesting hearing two different perspectives. I just downloaded a program called System Information so it should tell you everything... VorcePA why would I buy "4 GB of fresh sticks?" Don't I already have two functional ones? What's the advantage of replacing them with newer ones? And can't my computer only process 3.5 GB? Here are the specs... + Show Spoiler + EDIT: What is SSD? Fresh sticks could be faster and with better technology. You say you have a Dell, and most computer companies will get the cheapest parts they can possibly get and sell it to you at an inflated cost. It's how they make money. Not only that, if you have 4 sticks, all the same company, speed, size, and are designed to work with each other, chances are you'll get better performance out of them. On March 04 2010 17:05 blabber wrote: tbh in your case the best thing to do is just try playing the games you want to play. See how it performs THEN decide if you really need to upgrade... SSD = solid state drive. Also, QFT. Hell, the only thing prices can do is go down. By the time SC2 gets released, the hardware you're looking to buy could drop anywhere between $5 and $30, and gives you more time to save more money to buy better products (But you also run the small risk of them being discontinued) or to upgrade other items, for instance your CPU/mobo. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
just get 2x2GB sticks if you really want phased out-unsupported-soon to be useless memory. the problem with waiting is that you will wait forever tbh | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
Now it looks like that's what I want to get... but I still have little info on it. Will watch the youtube vids. PS. Once again, I'm NOT only worried about SC2, I want a better performance overall. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
Though what operating system do you have? | ||
|
VorcePA
United States1102 Posts
On March 04 2010 17:17 FabledIntegral wrote: This SSD... is it a replacement for a hard drive then? If I have room for a second hard drive, could I put an SSD there and keep my existing hard drive with all my data, or would I have to replace it completely? Now it looks like that's what I want to get... but I still have little info on it. Will watch the youtube vids. PS. Once again, I'm NOT only worried about SC2, I want a better performance overall. And SSD would be an additional hard drive. You'd keep your current 250 GB and have a SSD. I don't know much about them, except that they're faster and that they degrade over time. If you're not only worried about SC2, I would recommend either maxing out on memory (3gb) or saving up some more money so you can upgrade everything at once. Get yourself a better mobo/cpu, video card, additional hard drive, a 64-bit operating system, and 6gb of RAM. <--- that last remark will see FragKrag herniating all over this thread, I imagine. I have 12gb of RAM, and while it's overkill, once you have a good dual or quad core processor, extra RAM allows you to multitask without delay. It's awesome. And good lord, FragKrag, there's no reason to be hostile. | ||
|
blabber
United States4450 Posts
On March 04 2010 17:17 FabledIntegral wrote: This SSD... is it a replacement for a hard drive then? If I have room for a second hard drive, could I put an SSD there and keep my existing hard drive with all my data, or would I have to replace it completely? Now it looks like that's what I want to get... but I still have little info on it. Will watch the youtube vids. PS. Once again, I'm NOT only worried about SC2, I want a better performance overall. well if by "performance" you mean gaming performance, then upgrade your video card, duh!  | ||
|
haduken
Australia8267 Posts
| ||
|
FragKrag
United States11567 Posts
| ||
|
KOFgokuon
United States14912 Posts
On March 04 2010 17:23 VorcePA wrote: And SSD would be an additional hard drive. You'd keep your current 250 GB and have a SSD. I don't know much about them, except that they're faster and that they degrade over time. If you're not only worried about SC2, I would recommend either maxing out on memory (3gb) or saving up some more money so you can upgrade everything at once. Get yourself a better mobo/cpu, video card, additional hard drive, a 64-bit operating system, and 6gb of RAM. <--- that last remark will see FragKrag herniating all over this thread, I imagine. I have 12gb of RAM, and while it's overkill, once you have a good dual or quad core processor, extra RAM allows you to multitask without delay. It's awesome. And good lord, FragKrag, there's no reason to be hostile. so basically you're telling him to build himself a new computer that's not really an upgrade at that point | ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
Obviously, there are some caveats: There have been several models or even lines of SSDs that have had faulty controllers or fab QC problems. Considering that SSDs are a relatively new technology, this is to be expected. However, the current generation SSDs appear to be pretty good in terms of reliability, with further improvements in speed: Intel's latest line, for example, has improved vastly on the write speed (which has traditionally been several times slower than the amazing read speed). In short, SSDs are not at all unusable, and the main drawback is the relatively poor capacity to cost ratio. Another possibility for you to consider are the hybrid SSDs. These have both a platter component and a (very) small SSD built into the same unit. These have onboard controllers that decide what data is read very often, and loads it into the SSD, so you can read it very quickly, and have a high capacity to boot. | ||
|
EtherealDeath
United States8366 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
What's the best "bang for your buck" gfx card out there? Strong deal, and *somewhat* economical. I have a job now making around $750 a month after taxes. So I CAN pay like $250 IF it's some godly gfx card + good deal because the card wlil last forever or whatever (although I'm fully aware all cards are outdated fast). Thanks bundles and undles. | ||
| ||
