EPT[Guideline] SC2 Computers - Page 28
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
| ||
|
Jlab
United States217 Posts
| ||
|
Shivaz
Canada1783 Posts
edit: also the fps I get is 30ish. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
Personally I'm a big fan of Scythe. Shivaz: Indeed, I am quite skeptical of those results as well, since it performs under the ATi HD 4650M which is just an underclocked ATi HD 4650. | ||
|
Jlab
United States217 Posts
Think this fan can cool that efficiently. Also, are there any programs for seeing temps on CPU w/o going into bios | ||
|
RandomAccount#49059
United States2140 Posts
| ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/ | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
http://www.techpowerup.com/realtemp/ is another one | ||
|
Jlab
United States217 Posts
| ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
| ||
|
Xaanix
United States109 Posts
I noticed it only after enabling a utility (EVGA precision) and using the in game-OSD to watch my shader clock/core clock/memory clock on the GPU... I'm now getting 60-70 fps in most situations in game on ultra. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
I'll make sure to remember that it can happen o_o | ||
|
Nuttyguy
United Kingdom1526 Posts
| ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
| ||
|
Pplusad
Germany9 Posts
On March 20 2010 17:35 Xaanix wrote: seems you were right, i had a driver issue which had my graphics card running at 2d speeds while in 3d games. This was essentially cutting the GPU clock down to 400 mhz instead of 700. I noticed it only after enabling a utility (EVGA precision) and using the in game-OSD to watch my shader clock/core clock/memory clock on the GPU... I'm now getting 60-70 fps in most situations in game on ultra. E8500 3,8ghz oc + a 285GTX or whatever u had is waaay faster than 40fps  was to write about u probably having a driver issue with your video card but seems u solved it ------------------------------ to the guy with the 250GTS who has medicore framerate and cant play on ultra. The 250GTS is basically a very slightly tweaked 9800GTX which is from March 2008 So the 250GTs basically is a 2year old grafik card with some minor tweaks. would not really be surprised if u have troubles with that on ultra settings. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
And then again, the 9800GTX is just an 8800GTX with a die shrink right?  | ||
|
Nuttyguy
United Kingdom1526 Posts
On March 21 2010 06:34 FragKrag wrote: No it isn't. Just about all Macbooks and even some Macbook pros are horribly underpowered when it comes to gaming. FML gotta wait for some more money to get a new comp from scratch, but im wondering if 3d monitors are gonna even be useful for sc2 or even in the future. Or i can wait for the mac version of the beta and hope it runs MUCH MUCH better which i kinda doubt but then i'll have to use a one button mouse since the razer lachesis dont have mac support and the mouse just becomes a spastic ( no offence) FML . | ||
|
Floydian
United Kingdom374 Posts
Still fairly new to all this though, so have a few questions: CPUs - I keep on switching back and forth on which one to get. The current contenders being the i5 750, i7 860 and i7 920. There's a lot of talk in this thread on the 750 and then 920, but what are your opinions on the i7 860? It has a very similar price to the i7 920, but pretty much every benchmark and review I've read shows it outperforming the 920 fairly convincingly in most categories (eg - here). Hell, even the i5 750 outperforms the 920 on a few categories where hyper threading isn't really used. I seem to remember reading somewhere that the LGA 1156 CPUs have more aggressive turbo boosting or something? Can't seem to remember exactly. Maybe I'm talking bollocks. Obviously the big difference is that the 860 is on the 1156 socket rather then the 1366, but what does that actually boil down to? Obviously there's the dual channel vs triple channel ram...but what else? Is the 1366 more future proof? Should that really be a concern? I just found myself leaning more towards the 860. The 920 would end up the most expensive due to 1366 motherboard prices plus the triple channel ram. But wondered if the 860 is a bad choice seeing as I don't see it talked about nearly as much. I don't plan on doing any overclocking or any such shenanigans if that comes in to it. Motherboards - I have to admit, I probably find this part the most bewildering. There's so many of them. I don't really know where to start. I know as much as getting a compatible one with the CPU, but after that I'm a little lost. There's so many, and I don't even know half of the stuff listed on the rundown of what's on the motherboard. Should I just go for the cheapest compatible one? Any words of advice? One thing I don't really get is the whole expansion slot thing. Example - http://www.ebuyer.com/product/173451 Expansion Slots 1 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (single at x16) 1 x PCI Express 2.0 x16 slots (@x4 mode, 2.5GT/s) 2 x PCI Express 2.0 x1 (2.5GT/s) 3 x PCI Orrrr a 1366 motherboard - http://www.ebuyer.com/product/161061 Expansion Slots 3 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (at x16/x16/x4 mode) 1 x PCIe x1 2 x PCI PCIe being graphics card slots right? What's the difference between PCIe 2.0 x16 and PCI Express 2.0 x1. What does the '@x4 mode' mean? The whole expansion slot jargon is still over my head. But feel this is one of the more vital parts of choosing a motherboard, so wanna make sure I get it  One more question for now....I'd need my computer to be wireless compatible. It's the only option in my flat, the only phone socket is in my flatmates room. I'd need to get a wireless adapter card to fit in a PCI slot of the motherboard right? Something like this? Anyway, big wall of text there. I do ramble on a tad. Hope you don't mind answering some of these newbish questions. Thanks once again for this most awesome thread Fragkrag, it helps a lot! | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
1156 is not a bad option. if you care about power consumption aka if you like to leave your computer on all day 1156 consumes less energy than 1366 both at idle and load. performance-wise i highly doubt you'll notice a difference between 1156 and 1366 the only difference being you will be able to afford a nicer 1156 mobo for considerably less than a 1366 mobo. pcie x4 x8 x16 are just a measure of available bandwidth if i remember correctly. pcie 1.1 x 16 (or 2.0 x8) should do well for most but ideally you'll be wanting pcie 2.0 x16 (either way there's only about a 8-10% performance difference). i think there's a 2.1 now but i dont think any cards come close to being bottlenecked by 2.0 x16 yet. | ||
|
geostorm
Canada9 Posts
How do you troubelshoot oddities? Yikes. | ||
| ||
