I could have sworn you thought that XFX nVidia 6200 i linked was just horrible or something.

Is there a different producer to look for in that card that is preferrable?

I did. But I didn't know you were running such an ancient system.

LOL. Ok?

You can know one thing about some aspects of something, and not other aspects. That doesn't mean you haven't got knowledge.

The life comment...I'd get into that.. but uh..bannage.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]6800 Ultra for that price. Also, I'd suggest upgrading to a 3.6ghz P4 670j Prescott (that's probably gibberish to you, just remember 3.6GHz P4EE) if you can. The thing is a beautiful chip. Honestly, unless you do heavy video/audio/image editing, more than a gig of RAM is useless, especially in games. For instance, the first game to really NEED a gig of RAM was BF1942. Wanna know the next game? FarCry. It took years, YEARS for a gig of RAM to become the staple, and with good reason. Two gigs will take even longer, because with a gig less of the RAM is taken up by the operating system. Trust me guys, it's a waste of money. As long as you have a gig of PC3200 RAM, you're fine.[/QUOTE]


I have 2GB ram, and I would never, ever trade down.

2GB RAM == no swap drive at all == massive performance. The performance difference between 1gb and 2gb is not only noticible, it's quite an improvement, especially with Doom at max detail, or games like FEAR.

[QUOTE=Cool Matty]I have 2GB ram, and I would never, ever trade down.

2GB RAM == no swap drive at all == massive performance. The performance difference between 1gb and 2gb is not only noticible, it's quite an improvement, especially with Doom at max detail, or games like FEAR.[/QUOTE]

No, it's not. I've played on my friend's pimped out system, and it's really not that great. I have swap on VERY LOW (only because when it's off it messes up) and I notice no lag. I wouldn't swap down from 2gb either, but it's not that big of a deal.

Temp--you don't know ****, period. That's my point.

That's a pretty ignorant statement to make. Considering I worked for apple just under a year, and have used computer's most of my life, I think I know quite a bit about computer's. Just because I don't sit in front of one 24/7 like you probably do, learning EVERYTHING there is to know about them, doesnt mean I'm not knowledgeable about computer's. Stop being such an ignorant ***. Seriously. If you get this upset about people discussing comptuers, maybe you should get an intervention.. or a life.

Seriously, stop with this crap. You've already been banned for it once, why do you feel the need to "prove" you're the allmighty comptuer god, or try to rattle my chains. I already PM'ed you what I thoguht about you and such, leave it that and leave me alone.

1) Macs are vastly different beings from computers. This is something I learned when I got my iBook.

2) My friend's owned computers all his life. He barely knows what RAM is. Try again.

3) It's not bad to be computer illiterate, which you pretty much are. It's just that you -know- you're right when you're not. I don't sit in front of computers all day, I just learn quickly. I spend a few hours everyday, mainly when I get home (6-7ish) on the computer and then I go to sleep. I don't game, I read the news, mostly tech-related. You learn a lot if you do that. For about 6 months when I was 15 or 16 I spent a LOT of time poring over tech news and information sources because I didn't know anything about computers, and I wanted to learn more. I still have a lot to learn, but I at least know what I'm talking about, how each component functions, etc, and that's got me happy. I'll learn more about the motherboard and whatnot later.

4) I like how you consistently call me a geek with no life. It makes me giggle in its inaccuracy.

Oh, forgot, in befo da lock.

So far, you've yet to prove me wrong on that theory. Giggle all you want.

What am I supposed to do? Post pictures of myself? I don't have any currently, nor any to post of me and my friends. Probably change now that I can get digi cams from the graphic imaging department, but I'm hardly going to go out of my way to get pictures taken of me with friends just to prove to you that I have a life. That'd just be....well...pathetic.

Besides, loners don't smoke weed. Unless you're one of those weird homicidal/suicidal ones. ;\

Your mannerisms and the way you speak around here perhaps? Or how you get upset when someone posts something opposing your infinite computer "wisdom" ? How you tend to take topics like this personally? Those would be a good start.

And...I fail tosee how weed has anything to do with this however, just because you smoke it,doesn't automatically make you a popular guy. Shouldn't a wise man like you know this?

Oh no, I know a lot of unpopular stoners. But I'm not a stoner. I only do it socially. Note: Social. Meaning interacting with other beings.

My mannerisms on the net are nothing like my mannerisms in real life. Everyone who knows me knows this. It's like that with pretty much everyone I know.

Even if you're only that way online, it doesn't matter. You still give that impression to other people. You paint that fake picture of yourself, which to others, like myself, is a true image of you. Which brings me back to my original point, you've yet to prove otherwise.

EDIT: Let's um. Get back to the original topic. Shall we.

If I did prove otherwise, it'd just prove I needed to prove something to you. Catch 22.

You don't have to prove anything to me if you dont choose to. But if you don't want me to regard you in the manner I just spoke of you as, or the image Ihave of you and your personality in mymind, I'd have to require some proof. Other than that, people are going to regard you in certain ways.

Yes, I have no freakin clue what I was talking about. I've only used this system for 3 months, I must definately be wrong.



My system saw FPS improvements of 10-15% with 2GB ram.

I don't care what your friend's PC did, or what you think you know about 2GB of RAM from being at his house. I am telling you what my experience is, and there's absolutely no way you can deny it in good faith.

Yeah, Matty, but you also claim Gigabyte is a horrible brand, and that Apple products are absolutely horrible. I know both of these to be wrong in my own expereince. So I think I'll stick with you're blinded by personal opinion.

And you completely missed the point.

You seem to think that my FACT of 10-15% FPS improvement is an opinion. I don't see how you come to this conclusion, but you are just the same.

As for your OPINIONS on the Gigabyte brand (Which does suck, with horrible tech support and faulty hardware) and Apple (which doesn't, it's just a ripoff), that has nothing to do with this topic.

Yeah, despite all those people who have given Gigabyte excellent reviews, especially for the newest line. The only flaw in the old ones is that they weren't overclockable.

Oh yeah, and they're NOT SUPPOSED TO GIVE TECH SUPPORT ANYWAYS. Unless you're replacing via warranty.

And I used to think that me getting playable framerates in Doom 3 with a Ti4400 at 1024x768 medium settings was a 'fact'. Then I realized why the lighting was odd--I had it at performance image quality settings. Moral of the story: what you THINK isn't always FACT.

There's no question that Gigabyte's documentation and support sucks, but I have never had a problem with any of their hardware.

It seems A LOT of you tech "gurus" like to make stupid judgements based on just a few product experiences. You never bother to rule out other factors like, oh, the pre-keyboard interface perhaps.

I used to hate MSI, because they had a very widely known flaw in their nForce2 line that the capacitors would just pop off or blow at any point in time. In fact, a few boards caught on fire because of this, and one damaged tons of hardware. But I've not seen the same problem in recent products, so I try to withhold judgement (though I don't think I'll ever personally buy from there, I stopped warning against getting them).

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]Yeah, despite all those people who have given Gigabyte excellent reviews, especially for the newest line. The only flaw in the old ones is that they weren't overclockable.

Oh yeah, and they're NOT SUPPOSED TO GIVE TECH SUPPORT ANYWAYS. Unless you're replacing via warranty.

And I used to think that me getting playable framerates in Doom 3 with a Ti4400 at 1024x768 medium settings was a 'fact'. Then I realized why the lighting was odd--I had it at performance image quality settings. Moral of the story: what you THINK isn't always FACT.[/QUOTE]

And yet again, you completely miss it.

This IS fact, not what I think. I dropped the extra stick of ram in, the FPS went up 10-15%. I didn't change settings, I didn't screw with quality, and other things.

And to Emon: I consider 3 bad mobos, one of which had its southbridge severely damaged straight out of the box (like, you could tell just from looking at it) enough to call the company bad. And the fact that I had to fight them to RMA it is enough for me never to use the company again. They could give 5 star service and awesome performance now, I wouldn't care.

I understand that you don't want to buy from Gigabyte after a few bad experience since there are other, possibly superior alternatives, but you shouldn't go shouting "OMG GIGABYTE SUCKS!!" 3 motherboards is infantesimal to the amount of motherboards they make each month.

And who said I do that? I tell people my experiences and let them decide.

....

No, you shove it down their throat, and decide for them whenever I suggest a gigabyte board. ATi used to have problems with their 8500 line...yeah, that was years ago and they have definitely gotten a lot better. Note--there's often problems in shipping and it's not always the developer's fault. Not to mention, there's a small margin of error. Brian also swears that AMD is the devil and they suck and blah blah blah. I've never had a single problem from them.

And I'd like to see proof of this CM.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]No, you shove it down their throat, and decide for them whenever I suggest a gigabyte board. ATi used to have problems with their 8500 line...yeah, that was years ago and they have definitely gotten a lot better. Note--there's often problems in shipping and it's not always the developer's fault. Not to mention, there's a small margin of error. Brian also swears that AMD is the devil and they suck and blah blah blah. I've never had a single problem from them.

And I'd like to see proof of this CM.[/QUOTE]


Oh, I shove things down people's throats?

Nah. /me remembers Tempermental and Yoshi going at it

And please, 3 seperate occasions of bad mobos, it's not the shipping company. Especially when the southbridge one was in a sealed box, and was not visibly damaged on the outside.

And for proof? Nah, that's okay. You expect me to yank a stick of ram out of here and run benchmarks?

Not that you'd believe the benchmarks even if I did do them. "That's BS, it's Photoshoped, you adjusted the settings, etc etc"

And don't bother replying, this thread's been derailed enough. If you reply, I won't respond anyway.

Figures, you just have to have the last word. So mature.

CM, were you running just one 1gig stick before you added more, or was it in a 512x2 duel channel configuration? If not, perhaps buy adding the other 1gig stick (I'll assume it is) that duel channel was enabled and accounted for that small performance increase?

2 512MBs.

I've ran nothing but dual channel RAM since the Nforce2 chipset first came out.

When a post about video cards incite flame wars, um...

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]Yeah, despite all those people who have given Gigabyte excellent reviews, especially for the newest line. The only flaw in the old ones is that they weren't overclockable.

[/QUOTE]

I had a gigabyte 9800 pro 128. It OCed to 9800 xt speeds no problem. No artifacts whatsoever either. I can push it a bit further, but it will start affecting IQ.

*runs off in the direction of the bomb shelter*

Hes talking memory I believe.

Gigabyte motherboards. I wouldn't use their video cards. They're usually not nearly as good as other offerings.

How does the regular Geforce 6800 ($200 AGP) compare to the 6800 GT ($300) and 6800 Ultra ($400)?

For some reason, I'm not finding any benchmarks that have the regular Geforce 6800 at all.

you obviously didn't do much looking to find a good price...

6800 is 200-ish, maybe less, 6800GT is 250-300, 6800 Ultra is 350 at MOST.

6800 does hold its own, but it lacks in the fact that, for the most part, you can't use AA and AF in high quality games. Still get high settings though.

Huh? The price is just an estimate for comparison purposes.