Jump to content



Recommended Posts


My new computer, I got my greedy little hands on the black and green version. IT'S GOT NEON LIGHT! :shock:

Stuff that's in it:

MSI K7N420 motherboard

AMD XP2400+ (2.00 Ghz)

512 MB DDR333 ram

80 GB Seagate 7200 rpm

Radeon 9600 Pro 128 MB

16x40x DVD-Rom

NEC 16x DVD-Burner

onboard sound and network (10/100)

300 Watt boxes (to be replaced by a 5.1 system O_o )

All that for 625 Euro.

Any tips on what to upgrade next year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HP = my brand of computer.......

HP sucks = me unhappy

me unhappy = i dont do well in school

i dont do well in school = i dont go to college

i dont go to college = i never leave the house

i never leave the house = my parents go insane

so the moral of the uh......... story.............. is dont get a HP computer!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AMD is better as far as gaming goes. Many benchmarks are out there to prove it.

HERE, it takes Intel's latest Extreme Edition chips to beat out the mid-range AMD Athlon 64 3500. The EE's actually lose to the 3500 in the UT '03 bench. It's the same story on the NEXT PAGE of benchmarks.

Here's a couple benches with some later games like Halo and Far Cry:

X-bit labs

X-bit labs 2

Simply put, if you're building a gaming machine, AMD is the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, AMD is better for gaming, BUT, did you know that Intel's cache speed is actually the same as the CPU itself and the AMD is half?

So say you have a 3Ghz P4, you get 3ghz of cache speed

but, AMD = 2.8Ghz XP CPU = 1.4 Cache Speed.....

You do the math...Only reason AMD does better in gaming, is becuase of the dye in the CPU itself....the P4 takes around 1.4 Million DYE while the XP is at about 1.1 Million dye....

just a nerd's .02 :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of all that jargon, I stick to the benchmarks. Numbers can be spat at me all day long, but, in the end, their actual performance is what I care about. I've seen too many benchmarks from both games and number crunching apps to know that AMD is my choice. AMD pretty much kills Intel in gaming and isn't too far behind in other apps. The big cache on the P4s was made so they had an answer to AMDs latest line of chips. They didn't actually have those in their long-term gameplans. While the huge caches do help quite a bit, AMD is still the clear winner when it comes to performance and future upgradability with the 939 socket.

Just for the record, I'm not one of those hardcore AMD fans. I've actually never owned an AMD based computer in my life. It's been Intel up until now. Times are changing though. 8)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*revives thread*

I think I got a problem and my guess is that it's the videocard.

Installed newest DNA drivers, and went from 1x AGP (standard, what the hell?) to 4x. Twice a lock-up at 3dmark05.

Installed AIDA32 to see if the temperature might be the problem, this is what I get:

Motherboard 28

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not yet, and I'm trying to keep this computer somewhat clean, so as little uninstalls as possible.

One thing I remember: when installing the DNA driver I was given a choice between 'fps rates': normal, high, ultra, insane, HL2 (lol.)

I chose ultra, I suppose that was overdoing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...