|
On January 19 2010 04:35 FragKrag wrote:
The 5770 is pretty expensive :p
I would suggest waiting for the 5670 or 5650 when they come out. The laptop versions should be coming out soon, and I would assume the desktop versions would be out before them.
If you are on a budget, the new Nvidia fermis are the one line of cards you should avoid. They will cost too much.
I don't know why you guys are talking about Fermi cards even being something that it would be possible for him to buy, remember when the first batch of 5870's and 5850's were released? They were all snapped up within 12 hours and we had to wait a month for more of them. As it is right now there aren't enough 5 series cards to go around and they have a much more successful manufacturing process than fermi. Fermi cards are going to be in exactly as short of supply. From what i've seen leaked through preliminary benchmarks though, the gtx3xx series is basically going to compete the same way it did last generation, with the gtx360 being tied with the 5870 and outclassed by the 5890, and the gtx380 or whatever being about 15-20% ahead of the competition.
However, while plans haven't been announced yet, it seems therer is a gaping hole in Nvidia's fermi lineup, where the old 9800gtx aka gts250 used to go, and i wonder if they'll be rebranding a gts350 and 340 or if they will just let ATI win that price segment for now.
|
nobody is suggesting that he gets a fermi
|
On January 19 2010 04:51 FragKrag wrote:
nobody is suggesting that he gets a fermi
Obviously, but i mean, Fermi cards are out of the picture for at least 4 months. They're not going to be available for quite a while after their release. I was saying there is no point in even talking about not buying them because they won't materialize in any numbers for a while... sorry if that makes no sense, i'm quite hung-over
|
lol Ghermi you must be probably high. What have you taken today ?
I said at least march + 1-2 months to get decent prices 
|
|
|
On January 19 2010 05:00 Boblion wrote:lol Ghermi you must be probably high. What have you taken today ? I said at least march + 1-2 months to get decent prices
I took a gram of DXM last night + 1/4oz in a couple firecrackers (marijuana...) and a LOT of cocaine. It was a gnice party but i feel sooo messed up i can't even think straight.
Also to make this related to the topic, i'm going to link to some benchmarks for the 5670. They're extremely promising and i think this card is going to own up the low-mid price market segment
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-5670-review-test-crossfire/2
Although i'm sure most of you have seen this anyway.
|
On January 19 2010 04:48 ghermination wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2010 04:35 FragKrag wrote:
The 5770 is pretty expensive :p
I would suggest waiting for the 5670 or 5650 when they come out. The laptop versions should be coming out soon, and I would assume the desktop versions would be out before them.
If you are on a budget, the new Nvidia fermis are the one line of cards you should avoid. They will cost too much. However, while plans haven't been announced yet, it seems therer is a gaping hole in Nvidia's fermi lineup, where the old 9800gtx aka gts250 used to go, and i wonder if they'll be rebranding a gts350 and 340 or if they will just let ATI win that price segment for now.
GFxxx line up for nvidia doesn't really have a gaping hole with their new arch they can totally ditch the G92 which they were hanging on to because of better scaling then the GT200, GF line is totally scalable more or less entirely modular if you read the 100 articles now out there you should know that, it shouldn't take nvidia long to make a full price range of cards this was intentional so they don't have to keep using an old design over and over because their new design doesn't scale down well.
You should also stop calling it the fermi, it's geforce fermi, the fermi line up is to replace the tesla line up and are really different purpose card. GF100 is more appropriate. Granted a bit confusing naming scheme but it's the GPU code name which never really makes much sense for every vendor.
You shouldn't really put the 5670 5770 up on a pedistle their DX11 performance so far is proven to be shit. if nvidia can put up a card around the same pricing with better DX11 performance esp at the 5770 and 5850 they win a lot of market share back at least until AMD can respond.
|
I call it Fermi because its the best name they've given it yet.
GF100 is just the gtx380 or whatever.
The 5670 and 5770 are probably cheap enough to be higher end OEM cards anyway, people buying OEM computers don't need more than the performance these cards offer, and i doubt they'll be playing the latest DX11 games and even know how to turn the settings up if they are.
Because of that, they will proably drop from $90 to more like $70, and be a huge bang for buck card for people who don't really care about DX11 (it's not that amazing, exactly like dx10.)
|
DX11 brings quite a bit more to the table then dx10 did... anyways it is quite amazing graphically if done correctly (which in the case of dirt 2 lol it was done shitty esp considering it droped fps in a 5xxx series by like 40% and the game was taylored for the 5xxx series. and we saw little difference in picture quality)
|
Just built this one. I think it'll do just fine, but if it doesn't it runs really cold and would be easy to overclock.
OS: Windows 7 64bit
Cpu: AMD Phenom II X4 965
Mobo: ASUS M4A79XTD
Memory: 4GB 1600mhz DDR3 G.SKILL
Graphics: ATI Radeon 5770
Hard Drive: WD Caviar Black 1TB (7200rpm, 32mb cache)
PSU: OCZ ModXStream Pro 600Watt
|
yeah it's more than enough
I think mahnini told me that the 965/955 could OC to like 4.0GHz on like normal volt/stock cooling (one or the other) if the mobo is decent.
|
On January 19 2010 10:16 FragKrag wrote:
yeah it's more than enough
I think mahnini told me that the 965/955 could OC to like 4.0GHz on like normal volt/stock cooling (one or the other) if the mobo is decent.
Those processors are really OC friendly and easily reach massive speeds (7 ghz was done on liquid nitrogen), however rather like the old Pentium 4's, they've fallen a bit into the megahertz myth. Even at 7ghz, the Phenom II was outperformed by the i7 965, and even the 920.
|
yeah that's true, but OCing to 4ghz should show a performance increase.
|
On January 19 2010 10:16 FragKrag wrote:
yeah it's more than enough
I think mahnini told me that the 965/955 could OC to like 4.0GHz on like normal volt/stock cooling (one or the other) if the mobo is decent.
I heard the same thing as well. I'm enjoying the quiet fans right now and will probably just OC it once it starts losing performance to newer games. I would rather not listen to loud fans at the moment. :p
|
I just OCd my Q6600 2.4GHz stock to 3GHz. It was my first OC, I followed a guide on another forum. Are these temperatures and voltages OK?
Min temp is idle and max is stress (100% CPU usage for 30minutes).
http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/1281/13743291.jpg
I'm using stock CPU cooling.
My RAM is 800MHz 5-5-5-18. I first set FSB to 400 and RAM speed to 800 but I got an error when I restarted my computer saying "Over clocking failed..." Why's that?
|
40C is a good idle temperature. It's fine. Voltages look fine as well
|
I tried lowing my Vcore to 1.275 and it made my system unstable. I also tried increase FSB to 380 and it became unstable. I'm happy with 3GHz 
|
|
|
On January 19 2010 15:55 SearingShadow wrote:I just OCd my Q6600 2.4GHz stock to 3GHz. It was my first OC, I followed a guide on another forum. Are these temperatures and voltages OK? Min temp is idle and max is stress (100% CPU usage for 30minutes). http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/1281/13743291.jpgI'm using stock CPU cooling. My RAM is 800MHz 5-5-5-18. I first set FSB to 400 and RAM speed to 800 but I got an error when I restarted my computer saying "Over clocking failed..." Why's that?
70C seems a bit high for only 30 mins you should go for an hour at least. what program are you using to stress test?
|
On January 19 2010 19:27 mahnini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2010 15:55 SearingShadow wrote:I just OCd my Q6600 2.4GHz stock to 3GHz. It was my first OC, I followed a guide on another forum. Are these temperatures and voltages OK? Min temp is idle and max is stress (100% CPU usage for 30minutes). http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/1281/13743291.jpgI'm using stock CPU cooling. My RAM is 800MHz 5-5-5-18. I first set FSB to 400 and RAM speed to 800 but I got an error when I restarted my computer saying "Over clocking failed..." Why's that? 70C seems a bit high for only 30 mins you should go for an hour at least. what program are you using to stress test?
Prime95
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
