Yeah that new intel chip is wasting away when it comes to gaming paired with that 8800GT. Last year when I upgraded from the same BFG 8800GT OC to a GTX 260 (early 192 shader model) all my frame rates more then doubled, even with the E2160 @ 3.2 I was running. I was able to run Fallout 3 from 1024 x760 no AA to 1600x1200 with AA and higher quality setting with higher fps.

The new style 216 shaders GTX 260s are pretty cheap right now due their plus year old tech but pack a wallop. Unless your running a 30" monitor of course. 🤣

i just slapped in a 1gb 4850 from 9600 gt 512mb works REAL GOOD 😁

I have a Core i7 940 system and have just installed a pair of Radeon 5850 GPU's... It's a good system but i think the Core i7 CPU is overrated and over priced after seeing some benchmarks for the cheaper and inferior Core i5 and AMD Phenom II 965 CPU's.

I feel totally cheated by Intel as i blew loads of cash on my main i7 940 gaming rig just to see my mates cheaper i5 750 system perform just as good in games 😒

PowerPie5000 wrote:

I have a Core i7 940 system and have just installed a pair of Radeon 5850 GPU's... It's a good system but i think the Core i7 CPU is overrated and over priced after seeing some benchmarks for the cheaper and inferior Core i5 and AMD Phenom II 965 CPU's.

I feel totally cheated by Intel as i blew loads of cash on my main i7 940 gaming rig just to see my mates cheaper i5 750 system perform just as good in games 😒

Well you should'nt have to upgrade your system for quite some time.

I always buy second tier /last gen parts and overclock. Big discounts but have to upgrade more frequently, but that's the fun part. I'm really surprised I haven't upgraded my video in over a year now, but I'm still happy with my systems performance running games at 1600x1200 and 2x AA.

My most powerful video card is my 8800GTX that I bought back in March 07 or so.

Otherwise I have a Core 2 Quad Q6600 from 8/07 and a Phenom II X4 940 from 1/09. I move hardware around a lot between home and work so I am fortunate enough to buy rather frequently. I rarely buy high end stuff though. I'm sure the 8800GTX will be my only exception to that rule because it was so impressive compared to its predecessors (and I had a rather lowly X800 at the time and was trying to play a lot of Oblivion).

i bought a 940 deneb an oced to 3.6 ghz i was hoping for 4ghz. might buy a 965 some day before they ditch am2/am3.

cdoublejj wrote:

i bought a 940 deneb an oced to 3.6 ghz i was hoping for 4ghz. might buy a 965 some day before they ditch am2/am3.

I think the AM3 platform will be sticking around for a while... there's still the Phenom II 975, 985 BE and the new "Thuban" 6 core CPU to appear on the AM3 platform. There is also the new AMD 890FX chipset coming out around June this year (also AM3).

I think the AM3 platform is just starting to show it's true potential and is only going to get better. I would not worry about AMD ditching it anytime soon 😀

I did not give my main gaming rig any thought... I just jumped on the i7 bandwagon and blew loads of money hoping i would get the best of everything! but that's not the case as my rigs main purpose is gaming and there are cheaper options out there that have equal or better performance in games.

bushwack wrote:

Yeah that new intel chip is wasting away when it comes to gaming paired with that 8800GT. Last year when I upgraded from the same BFG 8800GT OC to a GTX 260 (early 192 shader model) all my frame rates more then doubled, even with the E2160 @ 3.2 I was running. I was able to run Fallout 3 from 1024 x760 no AA to 1600x1200 with AA and higher quality setting with higher fps.

The new style 216 shaders GTX 260s are pretty cheap right now due their plus year old tech but pack a wallop. Unless your running a 30" monitor of course. 🤣

If you could provide a broader range of games with similar gains I might consider it. One specific game doesn't really mean much on its own.

franpa wrote:

bushwack wrote:

Yeah that new intel chip is wasting away when it comes to gaming paired with that 8800GT. Last year when I upgraded from the same BFG 8800GT OC to a GTX 260 (early 192 shader model) all my frame rates more then doubled, even with the E2160 @ 3.2 I was running. I was able to run Fallout 3 from 1024 x760 no AA to 1600x1200 with AA and higher quality setting with higher fps.

The new style 216 shaders GTX 260s are pretty cheap right now due their plus year old tech but pack a wallop. Unless your running a 30" monitor of course. 🤣

If you could provide a broader range of games with similar gains I might consider it. One specific game doesn't really mean much on its own.

I'm lazy, go read you some reviews! Then go buy Fallout 3 and a new video card to do it right. 🤣

I'll continue to hold out for a Geforce 300 card, I like smooth performance and AA at 1920x1080 and the Geforce 300 series looks to be the most likely to easily achieve that in graphically intense games..

franpa wrote:

I'll continue to hold out for a Geforce 300 card, I like smooth performance and AA at 1920x1080 and the Geforce 300 series looks to be the most likely to easily achieve that in graphically intense games..

I think Nvidia will have to get it right with the 300 series to top ATI's 5970... That card is an absolute beast 😁

PowerPie5000 wrote:

franpa wrote:

I'll continue to hold out for a Geforce 300 card, I like smooth performance and AA at 1920x1080 and the Geforce 300 series looks to be the most likely to easily achieve that in graphically intense games..

I think Nvidia will have to get it right with the 300 series to top ATI's 5970... That card is an absolute beast 😁

Must be why they still haven't released it... Oh I just checked the price's on the 5970's 😲 $700... To beat ATI the Geforce 300 gonna debut at $800. 🤣

You know i did a quick and dirty over clock with some good stress testing and i'm running my phenom 2 940 @ 3.6 ghz should be the same as the 965. once foxconn puts out a good bios, i might go through and spend some real time over clocking. i'm waiting for the 16gb ram kit prices to drop and the am2+ compatible 6 core to come out. i was elated to hear that amd is gonna make am2+ 6 core.

cdoublejj wrote:

You know i did a quick and dirty over clock with some good stress testing and i'm running my phenom 2 940 @ 3.6 ghz should be the same as the 965. once foxconn puts out a good bios, i might go through and spend some real time over clocking. i'm waiting for the 16gb ram kit prices to drop and the am2+ compatible 6 core to come out. i was elated to hear that amd is gonna make am2+ 6 core.

6 core on an AM2+ platform will be ok but i bet it will benefit more using an AM3 platform with DDR3 ram and a faster transport link 😀

Just out of curiosity, Why would you need 16gb of RAM? there is absolutely nothing that would use that much! At most it will probably cause more problems than it's worth 😒

I'm waiting for the AMD 890FX chipset to arrive... should be released around June/July this year

I'm definitely going to switch over to AMD when the 890FX chipset is released. I will get rid of my Core i7 PC as it's not the best CPU for gaming and CPU upgrades cost way too much for what you actually get!.

Ahh i remember the good days when AMD were the kings stomping all over Intel with their Athlon 64 while Intel were still wasting their time trying to improve the horrible P4 chip 🤣

currently waiting on the Geforce 400 series now, now that the 300 series turned into a mobile range.

from what I see GTX480 and 470 got released, they are faster than ATI's soluion (at least not the sinlge-board-sli ones) .... I have stepped down pc gaming, you just spend TOO MUCH and never get to play awesome games like the x360/ps3 have... I am console-only now in current-gen gaming 😁

keropi wrote:

from what I see GTX480 and 470 got released, they are faster than ATI's soluion (at least not the sinlge-board-sli ones) .... I have stepped down pc gaming, you just spend TOO MUCH and never get to play awesome games like the x360/ps3 have... I am console-only now in current-gen gaming 😁

Hmmm, yes the hardware is cheaper but they get you with more expensive games that don't look up to par as the PC. Oh yeah there's that monthly fee to pay online with the consoles too (Live and whatever the PS3 has).

Yes, I agree the consoles are cheaper initially. But Fallout 3 looks so sweet with the high resolution packs and other mods. You have those with your console right?

nope! this is a common "mistake" IMHO, that consoles look worse etc... well... (xbox live costs money, psn is free btw)
*I* personally do not care about gfx. I *do care* about games though. On pc's you cannot play God of War, you cannot play Bayonetta, you cannot play Darksiders, you cannot play Dante's Inferno, you cannot play Demon's Souls , Uncharted etc... (to name a few recent blockbusters...) Those awesome and great games just don't exist on pc versions. As for the gfx loss, sure there is BUT tell me a pc game that has Bayonetta's or GOWIII gfx... to my knowledge none exists (and I do have a GTX260/216cores vga) not to mention the fact that in console gaming you stand some meters away from your tv , so really you can't notice those small details in fast paced games... plus take into consideration the games one person wants to play, there are genres like rpg/fps that are indeed better on a pc