This topic contains 198 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Irishbandit 7 years, 2 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #48399

    Viking62
    Participant

    😀 I found this–Just what I need–It is cheap & there is support for 32/64 bit at their website….Yee-Haaw–Thx everyone for the great help so far:)
    BTW-I will be offline all next week–>Dec30th thru Jan6th–I will read replies & any new info when I return–Thanks again everyone for the help;)

    SABRENT SBT-USC6M USB to Serial (9-pin) DB-9 RS-232 Adapter Cable – Retail

    * Features: Converts a standard 9-pin serial port to USB Complies with USB Specification v1.1(0) & USB CDC v1.1 Full Compliance with USB specification v1.1 Supports the RS 232 Serial interface (standard 9-pin serial) Supports automatic handshake mode USB full speed communication and Bus Powered Single Cable USB to Serial communication Supports
    * Labor: 1 year limited
    * Package Contents: 6ft USB to Serial (9-pin) DB-9 RS-232 Adapter Cable Driver Disk
    * Parts: 1 year limited
    * Model #: SBT-USC6M
    * Item #: N82E16812156009
    * Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

    * 3 Business Day Shipping $4.99
    * Volume Savings up to 14%
    * Your Price:$12.49

    Oh….& I save that PCI slot for something else 😆

    #48400

    PeanutsRevenge
    Participant

    I feel this is a pretty large ommission given your talking a PC that can do everything including gaming.
    What monitor do you have or want this PC to run and will it be more than just one monitor?

    If you only have interest in say 1280x blah resolution, then an 8600GT 256 would be fine, more than that, I would definately stick with the 8800GT, if the 256MB version is out when you come to purchess this rather tasty machine, then give it serious consideration (its not out here yet, hence I went 512 8800GT, but ALOT of thought went into it, but its just a brilliant card that gets SOOO close to it £400 big brother the 8800 ULTRA with some tweaking, that, you just do NOT get better bang per buck.

    However, if you are looking to get this machine in 2-3 months, think about AMDs spider platform, would save you $$$ with only a small knock down in performance, which could easily be gained in 12 months by throwing another THREE graphics cards into the mix when they’re $60 each.

    #48401

    Laptops Daddy
    Participant

    …I betook myself to linking
    Fancy unto fancy, thinking what this ominous bird of yore –
    What this grim, ungainly, ghastly, gaunt, and ominous bird of yore
    Meant in croaking ‘Nevermore.’

    Quad X-fire/SLI is ridiculous. Quote the laptop, it’ll never work.

    http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-128-LT&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1008

    Considered an ATI HD3800 at all? They’re what’s driving down the 8800 prices I hear.

    I would never pay more than £150 for a graphics card. £120 is about right for high-end.

    Viking (pm),

    Regarding RAM. The advantage in matching RAM speed to FSB is debatable these days. We discussed it here a few months back.

    We’re at the limit of my understanding to be honest, and I’m not inclined to research it.

    But if it helps:

    Traditionally, matching FSB/external clock speed to RAM chip speed is the way to go.

    A 1066 “Quad Pumped” Intel has an FSB of 266Mhz. 800 DDR2 RAM has a chip speed of 200Mhz. To confuse the issue, DDR2 RAM has a bus speed that’s double the chip speed (it’s doubled up – hence the double latency). So DDR2 800 bus speed is 400Mhz (2 per cylcle for 800).

    It’s all very confusing, and way beyond my scope. I do know that Intel CPU’s tend to make use of a lot more cache, and I doubt it’s ’cause they get it cheaper.

    I think I’d stick with 800 DDR2.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_side_bus

    #48402

    PeanutsRevenge
    Participant

    Its not so much having matched speed, its about having quick RAM for the 4 cores to be able to gain access to data without sitting waiting while the other cores get served.

    Core 2 doesnt really care about latency timings, it cares about FAST RAM especially quad core, let alone the up coming eight cores.

    #48403

    Laptops Daddy
    Participant

    : ) peanuts. limit of my understanding. you’re gonna make me prove it. i think the concern for intel is in transferring data from one core to another. (isn’t this the crux of the ‘native quad core’ race? (beyond heat output)). so, it’s not so much about serving independent cores with data, as it is offloading data from one core to another once it’s there.

    i would think memory/fsb synchronicity is as important as ever, but i avoid reading tech news, amateur hardware guides and benchmark comparisons like plague, so you likely have me at a disadvantage.

    anyway, memory latency is always an issue. if nothing else, cas latency ratings are a direct measure of chip quality. from my experience, it’s not unusual to find dual ratings on the same chip (e.g. 333MHzC2/400MHzC3).

    1066 C4 may be worth a little extra, but 1066 C5 is just as likely repackaged 800 C4.

    i’d steer clear of anything that adds a price premium for those with plastic windows, lights, and oversized rear spoilers on their ford escorts. maybe it’s just me.

    an important point to remember, i think, is that motherboard/chipset design (production design), conforms with what’s available at the time. it wouldn’t be cost effective to do otherwise. so, you’re limited by the chipset.

    something important:

    many DDR2 800 chips rated at C4 are given only to operate at those timings with non-standard voltage. (e.g. 2.5 volts). be sure your motherboard supports it. (most high-end abit ones will, others may not).

    hope that makes sense. it’s very late.

    #48404

    PeanutsRevenge
    Participant

    Yes your right, a high FSB is important for multi-core Intel chips that use the old FSB (They are just about to replace it with a system similar but slightly better than Hypertransport 2.0) but quick memory is important for serving the cores.

    Hence Y I say go with good high speed memory where 1150 is the norm.

    Latency is NOT an issue with Intel chips, hence the rapid take up of DDR3 in chipsets, they need high speed, not low latency, which AMD still likes.
    Remember, Intel have the memory controller in the northbridge, AMD have it in the core, hence memory efficiency is higher in AMD (hypertransport helps too ofcoarse).

    This is also where quad Crossfire/SLI come along. The reason they are currently not availible is that the transport bus has been too slow, but with intels upcoming QuickPath and AMDs hypertransport 2.0 (and 2009 3.0) the speed will be there.
    Just wierd that they are working to incorporate decent GPUs into the CPU.

    #48405

    Laptops Daddy
    Participant

    @peanutsrevenge wrote:

    Latency is NOT an issue with Intel chips…

    i think you missed the point

    #48406

    PeanutsRevenge
    Participant

    I now fully recommend the 8800GT 256Mb card, its only out of its depth above 1440 resolutions and Anti aliasing.

    http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/GeForce-8800-GT-256,review-29841.html

    #48407

    Viking62
    Participant

    I opted for the G.Skill Ram–See the pg.1 build list for the details–I just could’nt pass up 4GB’s of Ram at that price (less than $100.00 U.S.) & will stand up to a Cas Lat. change or two 😉 *Saved me $40.00+ also over the Corsair Memory* Lifetime warranty intact!

    #48408

    Viking62
    Participant

    I need a honest-non biased, real life opinion on these two cards–Which is best or are they somewhat equal?
    8800GT DDR3/X1950Pro GDDR3
    GT=http://www.antaresdigital.com/customer/product.php?productid=17935&cat=435&page=1

    X=http://www.eaglebit.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=eb-570-00401&Click=14
    Thx guys
    🙂
    *These cards both claim the same Max Resolution also (2560 x 1600)*
    Btw-I will not X-Fire or Sli
    *Need to be Windows & Linux friendly also*

    #48409

    naka
    Participant

    Viki under linux ati sucks. They have poor drivers, almost no support, the games often freeze and you can expect all kind of unpredictable effects.
    On the other hand nvidia have good support/drivers both under windows and linux.

    Dont compare card only by technical detail. Usually card with same prices have verry simular performance.

    #48410

    parasti
    Participant

    That might change, though. ATI/AMD have started releasing documentation for their graphics and there’s already a new “open source” driver based on that documentation. It is still work-in-progress, but I expect it’ll be perfectly usable in about six months…

    #48411

    Laptops Daddy
    Participant

    @viking62 wrote:

    …Which is best or are they somewhat equal?
    8800GT DDR3/X1950Pro GDDR3

    Do you mean somewhat equal in value? ‘Cause you know there’s a generation gap?

    Depends on the price. An 8800gt should be a little faster (20-30% on paper?), but they’re currently 2-3 times the price.

    I’d go for an x1950pro at 50 pounds over an 8800gt at 150 pounds every time.

    #48412

    PeanutsRevenge
    Participant

    AMD are working to be open friendly with ATI, but I can see it taking a good year or so to bring themself upto Nvidias level.

    8800GT is a fantastic card and DX10, so should you make the switch in the cards lifetime, then its a better bet than the 1950.
    If you are looking for great performance from your machine, then go for the 8800, otherwise I can see you feeling let down with the latest games. The performance difference is pretty large when chucking AA into the mix, which im sure you will want to do.

    #48413

    Laptops Daddy
    Participant

    @peanutsrevenge wrote:

    AMD are working to be open friendly with ATI, but I can see it taking a good year or so to bring themself upto Nvidias level.

    just to be clear, peanut buddy. youre talking about linux drivers? (i doubt the lacking open source support is an accident).

    the x1950 was never meant to compete with the 8800

    if ati are an option these days with an intel chipset (id like to think they still are), its the HD3800 you need to look at. i hear a DDR4 HD3870 is quicker than an 8800 for the same money.

    *if i remember rightly, the x1900’s were competing with the 7900’s (if u care). that was a couple of years ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 200 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.