]I am sorry but what are you saying as you are really giving bad advice.You are not at all aware of PC hardware.In $700 you can build a PC that DESTROYS any console.It will have an 8800GT and a core 2 CPU and BTW the E6600 completely destroys the pentium D.Neither the 7900GS and pentium D are worthwhile products anymore.They are still good for games but if somebody is buying new parts than those products are simply not worth buying becasue there are much better products in the market now.And to the user above yes in $600 you can make a DAMN GOOD PC trust me.It will beat any console and wont just be on par with them.It will "easily" play crysis in high settings in 720p.Seriously just make a topic in the PC hardware forum and they will gladly help you.Gambler_1You really should pick your fights better. You're not going to get many favors around here going after Mr. PC. I know plenty about PCs, and a 650-700 dollar rig (all ammenities included) is about equal to or slightly better than consoles. The 7900GS is one of the highest end DX9 cards. You don't need DX10 compliant cards to get graet graphics. Not to mention the Pentium D 945 is easily on par with or better than the E6600. THere may be better products out, but for the frugal consumer these are the perfect products.
How can anybody not like PC gaming?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
How did you prove that they can be doubted? Is there past instances where they were unfaithful about FPS drops? Seems to me like they are pretty trustworthy. Unless, ofcourse, you have evidence that they are unfaithful about FPS drops. FACT: Gamespot experienced FPS drops in their games. That was the point of Skrat's post, to show that there are FPS drops in some 360 games. You have not disproven gamespot at all. As a matter of fact, gamespot > you as far as that goes. You haven't done anything to disprove them whatsoever.[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"] proved that they can be doubted as its not 100% that those FPS drops were seen because there very well could have been something wrong, they never list the testing conditions or when and where the FPS drops happened, they just say single player and multiplayer it could be anywwhere, theres no way to be 100% certain that those FPS drops are there. Anyway I never wanted to prove them wrong as I cant because they are more credible, I just wanted to show that its not 100% that they are right, the only way to get that is to play it yourself, and I have played it myself and I never got FPS dropsFlexmaster_365
They don't list the conditions of getting those drops thats the whole point, they could have done something wrong along the way and theres no way to know for certain to be 100% sure that the conditions were 100% appropriate, so I have shown that theres quite a bit of room of doubt, doubt that cant be overcome unless you play the game and see for yourself, and I have played the game and I have seen for myslef countless times that PDZ ran smooth as silk never dropping a frame.
What the **** is this "they could have done something wrong".:|They were just playing the game the way they like and they experienced FPS drops which proves how weak the 360 is.You cant magically do anything to "force" FPS drops unlike any other time in the game.:lol:
[QUOTE="Gambler_1"][QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="f50p90"][QUOTE="Gambler_1"][QUOTE="f50p90"]I've played games on my PC before, I prefer consoles. Simple as thatbawathegamerNo it's not as simple as that.Why do you prefer consoles give me a reason? I like sitting on my couch with my 42" HDTV. And I know you can connect a PC to it but what a pain in the ass if I had to move it everytime I went from gaming to homework, to using the internet. I don't have to worry about viruses killing my CONSOLE. It's less expensive. FRIENDS can come over and play with me, things of that nature...
[QUOTE="_Pedro_"]No it's not as simple as that.Why do you prefer consoles give me a reason? I like sitting on my couch with my 42" HDTV. And I know you can connect a PC to it but what a pain in the ass if I had to move it everytime I went from gaming to homework, to using the internet. I don't have to worry about viruses killing my CONSOLE. It's less expensive. FRIENDS can come over and play with me, things of that nature...[QUOTE="f50p90"][QUOTE="Gambler_1"][QUOTE="f50p90"]I've played games on my PC before, I prefer consoles. Simple as thatf50p90
why is it that it seems every console fanboy has a 42" HDTV and than go on whining about the price of a PC :?
I had 2 HDTVs before I bought my HD Consoles. I bought them for watching TV, not gamingand my cpu, ram, hdd, case, os, motherboard, isn't for gaming, so I guess that means my pc cost me $250 for gaming. find me a console that is under $250 and runs cod4 in 720p maxed out or runs stalker, crysis etc
if your going to use the argument I have a a hdtv, I can bet 80% of systemwars has a pc form the last year or so with a cpu that is pleanty good enough and the only thing the lacks is gpu so you can't say pc gaming is expencvie if you own a hdtv
I bet many people over here who call PC gaming expensive actually only need a GPU and power supply upgrade and maybe a stick of more ram and that's it they will have a pretty good gaming PC.I guess it's their loss.
thats a terrible assumption.i have an amd single core 2ghz 2400+,512 ddr ram,agp based motherboard,.i highly doubt just a gpu or power supply would help.lol.
Ya I said many people and NOT all.And yes you need a total overall of your PC to get a good gaming PC.You can keep your DVD drive,probably casing,maybe PSU if it's powerful enough and you can keep your harddrive as well.
[QUOTE="Gambler_1"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"][QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"][QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]PC Gaming is expensive, complicated and most of the best games are on consoles so what is there to like?bawathegamer
a tiny bit more but $20 less per game quicly adds up, over 1 year the extra spend on console games = a new mainstream graphics card. plus you can't run photoshop on your xbox
$20 is nothing when you compare that to constant upgrades.
1 Year speed? Where most 90% of PC's still cant run or play COD4 or Gears, you need to spend $2000 or more.
Why the hell do I care about photoshop? I wanna play games...
Constant upgrades?Just like your constant console buying right?
:|
Besides a cheap gaming PC can run all games at highest of settings, bar Crysis....... GeOW and COD4 arent even system intensive games.... Surprise surprise really, the 360 is almost comparable to a low end gaming computer.
Yea constant upgrades every 6 months, and only $2000 PC's run COD4 and Gears as smooth as the 360. Plus 90% of PC owners cant even play Halo 2. :lol:
A $400 PC can max out COD4 in 720p with 100fps much better than the 360 and ps3.:lol:A $700 can max out COD4 in native 1080p for some elite gaming that consoles can never ever even dream off.
you mean a brand new pc ? 400$?
Yes that's what I mean.An 8600GT for just $60 can max out COD4 in 720p.[QUOTE="bawathegamer"]you mean a brand new pc ? 400$?
_Pedro_
without screen, easily.
edit: Sorry, misread the quoted post. 100FPS with only a $400 pc is unachievable.
Yes I admit that was a bit of an overexxageration but a $400 PC CAN max out COD4 in 720p and LOL we are talking on par with consoles here and it would actually give 100fps maxed out in 600p.[QUOTE="Gambler_1"][QUOTE="bawathegamer"]The framerate issues in HL2 on the xbox were certainly gameplay affecting and overall really annoying.They got in the way and ruined some of the best moments of the game.if theres one thing i dislike about pc gamers/magazines etc is the obsessionwith frame rate.wtf? if it doesnt hinder gameplay thats all that matter.i hate graphic *****s.my pc runs maxpayne on 25 fps.
im just trying to make a point that a majority of gamers could care less about frames per second and high settings as long as its playable. i love half life 2 and played it on the original xbox.i didnt complain.i loved the game.i went out and bought half life 1 plus all its mods for my pc.
bawathegamer
maybe to you.....but because i didnt have a pc capable of running the game i played it on the xbox.other than the frame drop immediatly after the loading sequences it was quite good.i never got frustrated and didnt think it hindered the game.(what i consider good..is definatly not the same as what you would consider good) .
did you actually play the entire game on the xbox ? im not debating the xbox version is great but i had no problems with it even though the pc version is light years ahead preformance wise.as i mentioned i played maxpayne 1 at 25 fps tops on my pc .......i dont mind.....didnt hinder the game for me at all.i play warcraft 3 alot and i get fps in 20's.i barely care.i loved the game nontheless. i became a fan of hl after playing it on the xbox.bought hl1 and all its mods on pc.
When I played it for the second time,it was on my new PC maxed out and the experience of playing it for a second time was actually much greater for me than playing it for the first time.It did not just had to do with unbelievable graphics and butter smooth gameplay but keyboardmouse also really helped make the experience better.
[QUOTE="Gambler_1"]]I am sorry but what are you saying as you are really giving bad advice.You are not at all aware of PC hardware.In $700 you can build a PC that DESTROYS any console.It will have an 8800GT and a core 2 CPU and BTW the E6600 completely destroys the pentium D.Neither the 7900GS and pentium D are worthwhile products anymore.They are still good for games but if somebody is buying new parts than those products are simply not worth buying becasue there are much better products in the market now.And to the user above yes in $600 you can make a DAMN GOOD PC trust me.It will beat any console and wont just be on par with them.It will "easily" play crysis in high settings in 720p.Seriously just make a topic in the PC hardware forum and they will gladly help you.VandalvideoYou really should pick your fights better. You're not going to get many favors around here going after Mr. PC. I know plenty about PCs, and a 650-700 dollar rig (all ammenities included) is about equal to or slightly better than consoles. The 7900GS is one of the highest end DX9 cards. You don't need DX10 compliant cards to get graet graphics. Not to mention the Pentium D 945 is easily on par with or better than the E6600. THere may be better products out, but for the frugal consumer these are the perfect products. I understand you are a good and respected user and I certainly respect that fact as you didnt get to level 38 for nothing.
However the problem is that you dont know what you are saying period.You cant even find a 7900GS anymore and even if you did it simply wont be worth it as there will "certainly" be a better card at that price.I mean the 9600GT is much better than 7900GS and only costs $110.I wouldnt advice anyone getting a new PC to get anything lower than a 9600GT right now.And if you are building a new rig now and want it to last than getting a DX10 card is a smart choice.Even the best DX9 card which is the X1950XTX 512MB is "easily" outclassed by mid rannge DX10 cards so there is no point in buying them anymore.Those cards are still more than capable of playing games very well but you have to understand that they are not worth buying anymore.
And ya go ahead and make a topic in the PC hardware forum about the pentium D being on par with the E6600 and people will laugh at you for saying that.Anyways I have got proof that this is not even a comparasion here.E6600 wins easily no contest.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=877&model2=888&chart=421
You are right about all of these, but there are a few reasons not to like PC gaming.
1. Lack of local multiplayer. If you have some freinds over at your house, would you rather fight each other on Halo or Brawl or would you want to take turns playing PC games?
2. Price. Admit it, a gaming PC could cost quite a lot of money.
3. It's all about opinion. I, for instance, love Nintendo's first-party games like Zelda, Metroid, Mario, ect. PC lacks these, so it is less appealing to me.
However the problem is that you dont know what you are saying period.You cant even find a 7900GS anymore and even if you did it simply wont be worth it as there will "certainly" be a better card at that price.I mean the 9600GT is much better than 7900GS and only costs $110.I wouldnt advice anyone getting a new PC to get anything lower than a 9600GT right now.And if you are building a new rig now and want it to last than getting a DX10 card is a smart choice.Even the best DX9 card which is the X1950XTX 512MB is "easily" outclassed by mid rannge DX10 cards so there is no point in buying them anymore.Those cards are still more than capable of playing games very well but you have to understand that they are not worth buying anymore.And ya go ahead and make a topic in the PC hardware forum about the pentium D being on par with the E6600 and people will laugh at you for saying that.Anyways I have got proof that this is not even a comparasion here.E6600 wins easily no contest.Gambler_1And you clearly have no idea what you're saying. You're just going to dig your hole deeper. A 7900GS is easy to find as long as you know where to look, and it is one of the most high end DX9 cards out there. It combines reliability with affordability at the same time. Not to mention the 9600GT isn't even out yet in most major retail chains, and the places that DO carry it, like pricewatch, have the price listed at about 150 dollars which is MORE EXPENSIVE than a 790)GS You don't need DX10 cards when we're talking about rigs on par with consoles. After all, thats what the origin of this conversion was. Or were you not even paying attention to the posts you were responding to? 1950 is a viable alternative to the 7900GS if you don't mind going with ATI. However, we're strictly staying with DX9 cards, and the 7900GS is easily one of the best options currently available. The link you gave with benchmarks for the two CPUs is basically counting crumbs. The pentium D945, in practical situations, will perform on par with the E6600. You're not going to get a huge ammount of extra added value with the E6600 to begin with. You suffer from what all the new upstarts have when they come to system wars and try to argue PCs. You have to take into consideration VALUE, PRICE, and overall longevity. In the context of the conversion I was having with the guy, we were talkinga bout PCs on par with consoles. Your addition of DX10 cards has nothing to do with the original post you responded to. A 7900GS and a Pentium D945 are two viable medium-high end PC components for a relatively low price equivalent to consoles. Ultimately you fail.
[QUOTE="Gambler_1"]However the problem is that you dont know what you are saying period.You cant even find a 7900GS anymore and even if you did it simply wont be worth it as there will "certainly" be a better card at that price.I mean the 9600GT is much better than 7900GS and only costs $110.I wouldnt advice anyone getting a new PC to get anything lower than a 9600GT right now.And if you are building a new rig now and want it to last than getting a DX10 card is a smart choice.Even the best DX9 card which is the X1950XTX 512MB is "easily" outclassed by mid rannge DX10 cards so there is no point in buying them anymore.Those cards are still more than capable of playing games very well but you have to understand that they are not worth buying anymore.And ya go ahead and make a topic in the PC hardware forum about the pentium D being on par with the E6600 and people will laugh at you for saying that.Anyways I have got proof that this is not even a comparasion here.E6600 wins easily no contest.VandalvideoAnd you clearly have no idea what you're saying. You're just going to dig your hole deeper. A 7900GS is easy to find as long as you know where to look, and it is one of the most high end DX9 cards out there. It combines reliability with affordability at the same time. Not to mention the 9600GT isn't even out yet in most major retail chains, and the places that DO carry it, like pricewatch, have the price listed at about 150 dollars which is MORE EXPENSIVE than a 790)GS You don't need DX10 cards when we're talking about rigs on par with consoles. After all, thats what the origin of this conversion was. Or were you not even paying attention to the posts you were responding to? 1950 is a viable alternative to the 7900GS if you don't mind going with ATI. However, we're strictly staying with DX9 cards, and the 7900GS is easily one of the best options currently available. The link you gave with benchmarks for the two CPUs is basically counting crumbs. The pentium D945, in practical situations, will perform on par with the E6600. You're not going to get a huge ammount of extra added value with the E6600 to begin with. You suffer from what all the new upstarts have when they come to system wars and try to argue PCs. You have to take into consideration VALUE, PRICE, and overall longevity. In the context of the conversion I was having with the guy, we were talkinga bout PCs on par with consoles. Your addition of DX10 cards has nothing to do with the original post you responded to. A 7900GS and a Pentium D945 are two viable medium-high end PC components for a relatively low price equivalent to consoles. Ultimately you fail.LOL man wanna have a bet with me.Just make a topic in the PC hardware forum about this and you will make a fool out of yourself.Should I make a topic over there and you will come there as well?
Just answer this.You can get a better card for the SAME price of the 7900GS so why on earth would anyone buy a 7900GS in this point in time?Doesnt matter if we are making something on par with consoles or not there is no reason to get an inferior product for the price you pay for it.
And ROFL an E6600 not worth it over pentium D?Man OK I am gonna make a topic about this in the PC hardware forum now as just becasue I am new to gamespot you are thinking that I am some noob at PC hardware.
]LOL man wanna have a bet with me.Just make a topic in the PC hardware forum about this and you will make a fool out of yourself.Should I make a topic over there and you will come there as well? Just answer this.You can get a better card for the SAME price of the 7900GS so why on earth would anyone buy a 7900GS in this point in time?Doesnt matter if we are making something on par with consoles or not there is no reason to get an inferior product for the price you pay for it. And ROFL an E6600 not worth it over pentium D?Man OK I am gonna make a topic about this in the PC hardware forum now as just becasue I am new to gamespot you are thinking that I am some noob at PC hardware.Gambler_1I don't need people from other forums to fight my battles for me. You're ultimately wrong when it comes to video cards. The 7900GS is easily the best card if you take into consideration afforability, reliability, etc. The 9600GT, which you brought up, only sells in speciality stores like tigerdirect, compusa, etc for OVER 200 DOLLARS! ITS OVER 200?! Thats right, the 7900GS is CHEAPER than the 9600GT at this momment in time. Its a great alternative for many people who A) don't have vista B) Want to spend a relatively low ammount of money. An E6600 is not worth the extra mmount of money you're going to be paying iin the first place. You're paying extra money for what ultimately results in a negligble performance increase in all practical situations. These are the facts.
[QUOTE="Gambler_1"]]LOL man wanna have a bet with me.Just make a topic in the PC hardware forum about this and you will make a fool out of yourself.Should I make a topic over there and you will come there as well? Just answer this.You can get a better card for the SAME price of the 7900GS so why on earth would anyone buy a 7900GS in this point in time?Doesnt matter if we are making something on par with consoles or not there is no reason to get an inferior product for the price you pay for it. And ROFL an E6600 not worth it over pentium D?Man OK I am gonna make a topic about this in the PC hardware forum now as just becasue I am new to gamespot you are thinking that I am some noob at PC hardware.VandalvideoI don't need people from other forums to fight my battles for me. You're ultimately wrong when it comes to video cards. The 7900GS is easily the best card if you take into consideration afforability, reliability, etc. The 9600GT, which you brought up, only sells in speciality stores like tigerdirect, compusa, etc for OVER 200 DOLLARS! ITS OVER 200?! Thats right, the 7900GS is CHEAPER than the 9600GT at this momment in time. Its a great alternative for many people who A) don't have vista B) Want to spend a relatively low ammount of money. An E6600 is not worth the extra mmount of money you're going to be paying iin the first place. You're paying extra money for what ultimately results in a negligble performance increase in all practical situations. These are the facts.Here's a 9600GT for $110.:roll:
And I dont have anything more to say that this.
I hate to say this but you are officially owned.
[QUOTE="Gambler_1"]]LOL man wanna have a bet with me.Just make a topic in the PC hardware forum about this and you will make a fool out of yourself.Should I make a topic over there and you will come there as well? Just answer this.You can get a better card for the SAME price of the 7900GS so why on earth would anyone buy a 7900GS in this point in time?Doesnt matter if we are making something on par with consoles or not there is no reason to get an inferior product for the price you pay for it. And ROFL an E6600 not worth it over pentium D?Man OK I am gonna make a topic about this in the PC hardware forum now as just becasue I am new to gamespot you are thinking that I am some noob at PC hardware.VandalvideoI don't need people from other forums to fight my battles for me. You're ultimately wrong when it comes to video cards. The 7900GS is easily the best card if you take into consideration afforability, reliability, etc. The 9600GT, which you brought up, only sells in speciality stores like tigerdirect, compusa, etc for OVER 200 DOLLARS! ITS OVER 200?! Thats right, the 7900GS is CHEAPER than the 9600GT at this momment in time. Its a great alternative for many people who A) don't have vista B) Want to spend a relatively low ammount of money. An E6600 is not worth the extra mmount of money you're going to be paying iin the first place. You're paying extra money for what ultimately results in a negligble performance increase in all practical situations. These are the facts.Wow vandal I'm very surprised to see a hardcore hermit not know a lick about pc hardware :lol:
Oh and e6600>>>>pentium D. I actually upgraded from a pentium d (3ghz) to a q6600 (dual e6600 no big dif) and the performance gain is phenomenal. Look up some cpu benchmarks.
The 7900gs and my x1950xt were both great dx9 cards, but now a mere 9600gt (mid-range) will thrash them in every single benchmark. The image quality gained from the 9 series over the 7 series is alone worth it, along with the ability to do AA+hdr at the same time.
Refuting any of the above is pointless.
Here's a for $110.:roll: And I dont have anything more to say that thisI hate to say this but you are officially owned.Gambler_1110 after rebate? AHAHAHAHHA oh please. If I went dumster diving I could easily find a 7900GS for below 110 if you include rebates. Pricewatch is probably the cheapest place you're going to find a 9600GT at 150 dollars with no shipping and handling. These are things that you have to take into consideration. Once again you fail. Building a rig is about putting together a comprehensive gaming machine that can play games at fairly decent settings for a good budget. Its not about wasting 30-40 extra dollars on 4FPS like you're suggesting for video cards. The 7900GS is easily one of the best choicse for people looking for afforability and don't have vista. The rig I proposed with a pentiumD946 and a 7900GS is perfect for these kind of people. The 945D, while not the best processor in the world, is completely functional, and will operate on par with a E6600 on all practical situations. I could really care less what the people in the PC hardware forum are saying. After all, I was taking classes at ITT for computer science before transferring to a law school. I know plenty about PCs and about building them as well. The PC I proposed is great for the situation that I was talkinga bout with the other poster. Your posts failed on a number of different levels; failure to look at the context of the post, failure to look at the context of the rig provided, and failure to take everything into consideration.
And you clearly have no idea what you're saying. You're just going to dig your hole deeper. A 7900GS is easy to find as long as you know where to look, and it is one of the most high end DX9 cards out there. It combines reliability with affordability at the same time. Not to mention the 9600GT isn't even out yet in most major retail chains, and the places that DO carry it, like pricewatch, have the price listed at about 150 dollars which is MORE EXPENSIVE than a 790)GS You don't need DX10 cards when we're talking about rigs on par with consoles. After all, thats what the origin of this conversion was. Or were you not even paying attention to the posts you were responding to? 1950 is a viable alternative to the 7900GS if you don't mind going with ATI. However, we're strictly staying with DX9 cards, and the 7900GS is easily one of the best options currently available. The link you gave with benchmarks for the two CPUs is basically counting crumbs. The pentium D945, in practical situations, will perform on par with the E6600. You're not going to get a huge ammount of extra added value with the E6600 to begin with. You suffer from what all the new upstarts have when they come to system wars and try to argue PCs. You have to take into consideration VALUE, PRICE, and overall longevity. In the context of the conversion I was having with the guy, we were talkinga bout PCs on par with consoles. Your addition of DX10 cards has nothing to do with the original post you responded to. A 7900GS and a Pentium D945 are two viable medium-high end PC components for a relatively low price equivalent to consoles. Ultimately you fail.LOL man wanna have a bet with me.Just make a topic in the PC hardware forum about this and you will make a fool out of yourself.Should I make a topic over there and you will come there as well?[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Gambler_1"]However the problem is that you dont know what you are saying period.You cant even find a 7900GS anymore and even if you did it simply wont be worth it as there will "certainly" be a better card at that price.I mean the 9600GT is much better than 7900GS and only costs $110.I wouldnt advice anyone getting a new PC to get anything lower than a 9600GT right now.And if you are building a new rig now and want it to last than getting a DX10 card is a smart choice.Even the best DX9 card which is the X1950XTX 512MB is "easily" outclassed by mid rannge DX10 cards so there is no point in buying them anymore.Those cards are still more than capable of playing games very well but you have to understand that they are not worth buying anymore.And ya go ahead and make a topic in the PC hardware forum about the pentium D being on par with the E6600 and people will laugh at you for saying that.Anyways I have got proof that this is not even a comparasion here.E6600 wins easily no contest.Gambler_1
Just answer this.You can get a better card for the SAME price of the 7900GS so why on earth would anyone buy a 7900GS in this point in time?Doesnt matter if we are making something on par with consoles or not there is no reason to get an inferior product for the price you pay for it.
And ROFL an E6600 not worth it over pentium D?Man OK I am gonna make a topic about this in the PC hardware forum now as just becasue I am new to gamespot you are thinking that I am some noob at PC hardware.
get ready to get flamed badly.[QUOTE="Gambler_1"]Here's a for $110.:roll: And I dont have anything more to say that thisI hate to say this but you are officially owned.Vandalvideo110 after rebate? AHAHAHAHHA oh please. If I went dumster diving I could easily find a 7900GS for below 110 if you include rebates. Pricewatch is probably the cheapest place you're going to find a 9600GT at 150 dollars with no shipping and handling. These are things that you have to take into consideration. Once again you fail. Building a rig is about putting together a comprehensive gaming machine that can play games at fairly decent settings for a good budget. Its not about wasting 30-40 extra dollars on 4FPS like you're suggesting for video cards. The 7900GS is easily one of the best choicse for people looking for afforability and don't have vista. The rig I proposed with a pentiumD946 and a 7900GS is perfect for these kind of people. The 945D, while not the best processor in the world, is completely functional, and will operate on par with a E6600 on all practical situations. I could really care less what the people in the PC hardware forum are saying. After all, I was taking classes at ITT for computer science before transferring to a law school. I know plenty about PCs and about building them as well. The PC I proposed is great for the situation that I was talkinga bout with the other poster. Your posts failed on a number of different levels; failure to look at the context of the post, failure to look at the context of the rig provided, and failure to take everything into consideration.It's quite more than a few frames...try playing crysis on med/high @ 1280x1024 on a 7900gs
It's quite more than a few frames...try playing crysis on med/high @ 1280x1024 on a 7900gs achilles614I did, and I was getting a constant 45FPS with a dip at around 30FPS on the big firefights after all the tweaking was said and done.
[QUOTE="achilles614"]It's quite more than a few frames...try playing crysis on med/high @ 1280x1024 on a 7900gs VandalvideoI did, and I was getting a constant 45FPS with a dip at around 30FPS on the big firefights after all the tweaking was said and done.on med/high? what resolution hmm? That's a big fat lie, if it's at the settings I listed. I can't push that and my card is a lot more powerful than that. Tweaks can only go so far.
you don't want 7900GS trust me.. I had one and I played crysis at 1024x768 no aa med,low with fps drop at some points. also I COULDN'T max COD4, need for speed pro street, gears of war, GUITAR HERO 3(LOLZ), Oblivion.... 9600GT to my understanding can play most of those games maxed with some aa.TrooperManaicYou didn't have AA on? Oh really? Thats a surprise considering you can't even have HDR and AA on at the same time on a 7900GS in the first place. 0_o If you had Crysis running at medium/high settings you can't even access AA on a 7900GS.
[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="achilles614"]It's quite more than a few frames...try playing crysis on med/high @ 1280x1024 on a 7900gs achilles614I did, and I was getting a constant 45FPS with a dip at around 30FPS on the big firefights after all the tweaking was said and done.on med/high? what resolution hmm? That's a big fat lie, if it's at the settings I listed. I can't push that and my card is a lot more powerful than that. Tweaks can only go so far.
1360X768. I turned down LOD foliage, turned off shadows, and generally did some minor tweaks that didn't effect the overall game too drastically, and you still got the major kick out of it.
you don't want 7900GS trust me.. I had one and I played crysis at 1024x768 no aa med,low with fps drop at some points. also I COULDN'T max COD4, need for speed pro street, gears of war, GUITAR HERO 3(LOLZ), Oblivion.... 9600GT to my understanding can play most of those games maxed with some aa.TrooperManaic
What?? a 7600GT does that.... something fishy here :S. I know first hand as i had one..
[QUOTE="achilles614"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="achilles614"]It's quite more than a few frames...try playing crysis on med/high @ 1280x1024 on a 7900gs VandalvideoI did, and I was getting a constant 45FPS with a dip at around 30FPS on the big firefights after all the tweaking was said and done.on med/high? what resolution hmm? That's a big fat lie, if it's at the settings I listed. I can't push that and my card is a lot more powerful than that. Tweaks can only go so far.
1360X768. I turned down LOD foliage, turned off shadows, and generally did some minor tweaks that didn't effect the overall game too drastically, and you still got the major kick out of it. Having shadows off detracts a lot from the overall visual flare especially without the canopy shadows. Point is there is no choice, that if you're building a new rig that you should go with the 7900gs unless it's for a mega cheap build.
Having shadows off detracts a lot from the overall visual flare especially without the canopy shadows. Point is there is no choice, that if you're building a new rig that you should go with the 7900gs unless it's for a mega cheap build achilles614Potatoe/potato. I've always played games without shadows on and never really noticed a huge detraction from the game. And that WAS the point of my original post, to build a mega cheap/reliable rig that will provide practical performance.
[QUOTE="achilles614"]Having shadows off detracts a lot from the overall visual flare especially without the canopy shadows. Point is there is no choice, that if you're building a new rig that you should go with the 7900gs unless it's for a mega cheap build VandalvideoPotatoe/potato. I've always played games without shadows on and never really noticed a huge detraction from the game. And that WAS the point of my original post, to build a mega cheap/reliable rig that will provide practical performance.ok I admit I didn't read your original post...just basing it on the link in the pc hardware forum.
In building a pc you reach a point that you can only go so cheap, and at that point the console would be a better alt.
[QUOTE="TrooperManaic"]you don't want 7900GS trust me.. I had one and I played crysis at 1024x768 no aa med,low with fps drop at some points. also I COULDN'T max COD4, need for speed pro street, gears of war, GUITAR HERO 3(LOLZ), Oblivion.... 9600GT to my understanding can play most of those games maxed with some aa.VandalvideoYou didn't have AA on? Oh really? Thats a surprise considering you can't even have HDR and AA on at the same time on a 7900GS in the first place. 0_o If you had Crysis running at medium/high settings you can't even access AA on a 7900GS.... if you didn't understand my post please re read it because I see signs of neglect.
[QUOTE="TrooperManaic"]you don't want 7900GS trust me.. I had one and I played crysis at 1024x768 no aa med,low with fps drop at some points. also I COULDN'T max COD4, need for speed pro street, gears of war, GUITAR HERO 3(LOLZ), Oblivion.... 9600GT to my understanding can play most of those games maxed with some aa.jangojay
What?? a 7600GT does that.... something fishy here :S. I know first hand as i had one..
no it dosent.. I had the original 7900GS and it didnt MAX the games.. I had to play at a lower res and have no aa in my games..[QUOTE="achilles614"]Having shadows off detracts a lot from the overall visual flare especially without the canopy shadows. Point is there is no choice, that if you're building a new rig that you should go with the 7900gs unless it's for a mega cheap build VandalvideoPotatoe/potato. I've always played games without shadows on and never really noticed a huge detraction from the game. And that WAS the point of my original post, to build a mega cheap/reliable rig that will provide practical performance.Ok find me a brand new 7900GS for under $100 then we will talk.
Potatoe/potato. I've always played games without shadows on and never really noticed a huge detraction from the game. And that WAS the point of my original post, to build a mega cheap/reliable rig that will provide practical performance.Ok find me a brand new 7900GS for under $100 then we will talk. I know where to find it less then $100 but I wont post it because that idiot might actually buy it :lol:... well at least were trying to make him understand how crippled the 7900GS is compared to current cards in the same price range.[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="achilles614"]Having shadows off detracts a lot from the overall visual flare especially without the canopy shadows. Point is there is no choice, that if you're building a new rig that you should go with the 7900gs unless it's for a mega cheap build Gambler_1
Potatoe/potato. I've always played games without shadows on and never really noticed a huge detraction from the game. And that WAS the point of my original post, to build a mega cheap/reliable rig that will provide practical performance.Ok find me a brand new 7900GS for under $100 then we will talk. Heres one for exactly 100 dollars: http://oemxs.us/shopping/index.php?target=products&product_id=29820[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="achilles614"]Having shadows off detracts a lot from the overall visual flare especially without the canopy shadows. Point is there is no choice, that if you're building a new rig that you should go with the 7900gs unless it's for a mega cheap build Gambler_1
and heres a EXTREMELY better card for ONLY $49 more but with mail in rebat it all together is $109...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814261002
If you disagree that this is a steal then you are either too cheap to pay the money and wait to get it back :lol: or are too lazy to work... and don't give me the oh! I am too young to get a job... I have been working for the the star ledger since I was 14-16
[QUOTE="jangojay"][QUOTE="TrooperManaic"]you don't want 7900GS trust me.. I had one and I played crysis at 1024x768 no aa med,low with fps drop at some points. also I COULDN'T max COD4, need for speed pro street, gears of war, GUITAR HERO 3(LOLZ), Oblivion.... 9600GT to my understanding can play most of those games maxed with some aa.TrooperManaic
What?? a 7600GT does that.... something fishy here :S. I know first hand as i had one..
no it dosent.. I had the original 7900GS and it didnt MAX the games.. I had to play at a lower res and have no aa in my games..You need to format or something.
I don't need people from other forums to fight my battles for me. You're ultimately wrong when it comes to video cards. The 7900GS is easily the best card if you take into consideration afforability, reliability, etc. The 9600GT, which you brought up, only sells in speciality stores like tigerdirect, compusa, etc for OVER 200 DOLLARS! ITS OVER 200?! Thats right, the 7900GS is CHEAPER than the 9600GT at this momment in time. Its a great alternative for many people who A) don't have vista B) Want to spend a relatively low ammount of money. An E6600 is not worth the extra mmount of money you're going to be paying iin the first place. You're paying extra money for what ultimately results in a negligble performance increase in all practical situations. These are the facts.Wow vandal I'm very surprised to see a hardcore hermit not know a lick about pc hardware :lol:[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Gambler_1"]]LOL man wanna have a bet with me.Just make a topic in the PC hardware forum about this and you will make a fool out of yourself.Should I make a topic over there and you will come there as well? Just answer this.You can get a better card for the SAME price of the 7900GS so why on earth would anyone buy a 7900GS in this point in time?Doesnt matter if we are making something on par with consoles or not there is no reason to get an inferior product for the price you pay for it. And ROFL an E6600 not worth it over pentium D?Man OK I am gonna make a topic about this in the PC hardware forum now as just becasue I am new to gamespot you are thinking that I am some noob at PC hardware.achilles614
Oh and e6600>>>>pentium D. I actually upgraded from a pentium d (3ghz) to a q6600 (dual e6600 no big dif) and the performance gain is phenomenal. Look up some cpu benchmarks.
The 7900gs and my x1950xt were both great dx9 cards, but now a mere 9600gt (mid-range) will thrash them in every single benchmark. The image quality gained from the 9 series over the 7 series is alone worth it, along with the ability to do AA+hdr at the same time.
Refuting any of the above is pointless.
The Pentium D 945 can't even reach the C2D E4300...
The added performance isn't worth the extra 50 dollars. Its not like its going to make sweeping changes to the overall gameplay. You're still going to be getting graphics on par with consoles with a 7900GS and you're still saving a significant ammount of money.and heres a EXTREMELY better card for ONLY $49 more but with mail in rebat it all together is $109...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814261002
If you disagree that this is a steal then you are either too cheap to pay the money and wait to get it back :lol: or are too lazy to work... and don't give me the oh! I am too young to get a job... I have been working for the the star ledger since I was 14-16
TrooperManaic
Pentium D 945 can't even reach the C2D E4300...Hellsing2o2Once again, those benchmarks are really counting bread crumbs. For all practical situations the Pentium D945 is a cheap alternative to some of the more expensive CPUS. With those other CPUs you're paying more, getting a neglible performance increase, and you have to get some other parts to prevent bottlenecking. The PC that I proposed works very well together. Heck the PC i've been talkinga bout is the one I own. OMG a PC gamer who doesn't focus on every single FPS? Insanity. I focus more on afforability and practicality. I'm NOT paying 50 bucks for 4-9 negligble FPS.
[QUOTE="Gambler_1"]Potatoe/potato. I've always played games without shadows on and never really noticed a huge detraction from the game. And that WAS the point of my original post, to build a mega cheap/reliable rig that will provide practical performance.Ok find me a brand new 7900GS for under $100 then we will talk. Heres one for exactly 100 dollars: http://oemxs.us/shopping/index.php?target=products&product_id=29820And here's an infinitely better card for $100 after $30 rebate.[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="achilles614"]Having shadows off detracts a lot from the overall visual flare especially without the canopy shadows. Point is there is no choice, that if you're building a new rig that you should go with the 7900gs unless it's for a mega cheap build Vandalvideo
I am sorry but you have to be a real fool to pick up the 7900GS over the 8800GS.
[QUOTE="TrooperManaic"]The added performance isn't worth the extra 50 dollars. Its not like its going to make sweeping changes to the overall gameplay. You're still going to be getting graphics on par with consoles with a 7900GS and you're still saving a significant ammount of money.and heres a EXTREMELY better card for ONLY $49 more but with mail in rebat it all together is $109...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814261002
If you disagree that this is a steal then you are either too cheap to pay the money and wait to get it back :lol: or are too lazy to work... and don't give me the oh! I am too young to get a job... I have been working for the the star ledger since I was 14-16
Vandalvideo
The 9600GT is as powerful as an 8800GTS 640MB, Which is more then twice as powerful as the 7900GS. Not worth the extra $50 for sure! (sarcasm).
[ an infinitely better card for $100 after $30 rebate.I am sorry but you have to be a real fool to pick up the 7900GS over the 8800GS.Gambler_1Rebates, rebates, rebates. Thats all I hear from you. I found a 7900GS in five minutes thats cheaper or as cheap as all your proposed cards WITHOUT a rebate or any kind of special deal. Do I have to peice it together for you? That means if I really put some time and effort into it and checking classified ads and looking for special offers I could probably buy one for HECKA cheap. Quite frankly you aren't worth the effort. I've already proven my point beyond what is required. The rig I proposed is cheap, practical, and reliable. That was the purpose of my original post. I have no reason to get an 8800GS when I DONT EVEN HAVE VISTA.
[QUOTE="TrooperManaic"]The added performance isn't worth the extra 50 dollars. Its not like its going to make sweeping changes to the overall gameplay. You're still going to be getting graphics on par with consoles with a 7900GS and you're still saving a significant amount of money. the over all performance is on par with 8800GT LOL I switched my 7900GT to a 3850 512mb and saw a world of difference and saw it again when I bought my 8800GT LOL. listen do your homework go to benchmark sites and learn how a videocard works and why having better technology = better overall performance... when you are done surfing the Internet and understand the difference between 7900GS and 9600GT or 8800GT for that matter you'll understand why $50 is absolutely worth it and you're getting the money back anyway with mail in rebate :lol:. Oh newer games use SHADERS without then it will bring your GPU to its knees and that is definitely something the nvidia 7 series doesn't have.and heres a EXTREMELY better card for ONLY $49 more but with mail in rebat it all together is $109...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814261002
If you disagree that this is a steal then you are either too cheap to pay the money and wait to get it back :lol: or are too lazy to work... and don't give me the oh! I am too young to get a job... I have been working for the the star ledger since I was 14-16
Vandalvideo
The 9600GT is as powerful as an 8800GTS 640MB, Which is more then twice as powerful as the 7900GS. Not worth the extra $50 for sure! (sarcasm). Hellsing2o2Welcome person #15 who didn't read the original context of my post. We were talkign about a rig on par with consoles WITHOUT DX10 capabilitys. A 7900GS is a cheap alternative which is going to provide graphics on par with consoles at comperable frame rates. That was the purpose of my post, and fulfilled that purpose. You people who giving all those more expensive cards that I'm not going to even be taking advantage of without vista.
[QUOTE="TrooperManaic"]The added performance isn't worth the extra 50 dollars. Its not like its going to make sweeping changes to the overall gameplay. You're still going to be getting graphics on par with consoles with a 7900GS and you're still saving a significant ammount of money.Are you telling me that a 9600GT is neglagibily better than the 7900GS.:lol::lol:and heres a EXTREMELY better card for ONLY $49 more but with mail in rebat it all together is $109...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814261002
If you disagree that this is a steal then you are either too cheap to pay the money and wait to get it back :lol: or are too lazy to work... and don't give me the oh! I am too young to get a job... I have been working for the the star ledger since I was 14-16
Vandalvideo
A 9600GT has "much better" image quality than the 7900GS and ROFL what 4-5FPS you speak off.A 9600GT can give you DOUBLE the framerates over 7900GS.
This is such a dumb argument it's not even funny.:|
over all performance is on par with 8800GT LOL I switched my 7900GT to a 3850 512mb and saw a world of difference and saw it again when I bought my 8800GT LOL. listen do your homework go to benchmark sites and learn how a videocard works and why having better technology = better overall performance... when you are done surfing the Internet and understand the difference between 7900GS and 9600GT or 8800GT for that matter you'll understand why $50 is absolutely worth it and you're getting the money back anyway with mail in rebate :lol:. Oh newer games use SHADERS without then it will bring your GPU to its knees and that is definitely something the nvidia 7 series doesn't have.TrooperManaicA world of difference? Once again, another person who failed to understand the context of my original post. We were talkinga bout graphics comperable to consoles. You don't need OMG 100FPS at max settings to be achieveing graphics comperable to consoles, especially when you don't even have Vista. So once again, I emplore you reread my posts, because a 7900GS, in the context of my post, is a viable, cheap option. Quite frankly, an 8800GT isn't going to be worth it when I'm playing games in DX9. I'm not paying 50 dollars for negligble FPS increases.
Are you telling me that a 9600GT is neglagibily better than the 7900GS.:lol::lol:A 9600GT has "much better" image quality than the 7900GS and ROFL what 4-5FPS you speak off.A 9600GT can give you DOUBLE the framerates over 7900GS.This is such a dumb argument it's not even funny.:Gambler_1For the tenth time in the context of my original post YES. You have failed to read it once again. We were talkign about graphics on par with consoles in DX9. For someone who DOES NOT HAVE VISTA or DX10 support, a 9600GT isn't going to providing the extra added value. I'm able to play the most technologically advanced game currently on the market at 30-45 FPS constantly without much fidelity loss. I'm not paying 50 dollars for a negligble increase.
[QUOTE="Gambler_1"][ an infinitely better card for $100 after $30 rebate.I am sorry but you have to be a real fool to pick up the 7900GS over the 8800GS.VandalvideoRebates, rebates, rebates. Thats all I hear from you. I found a 7900GS in five minutes thats cheaper or as cheap as all your proposed cards WITHOUT a rebate or any kind of special deal. Do I have to peice it together for you? That means if I really put some time and effort into it and checking classified ads and looking for special offers I could probably buy one for HECKA cheap. Quite frankly you aren't worth the effort. I've already proven my point beyond what is required. The rig I proposed is cheap, practical, and reliable. That was the purpose of my original post. I have no reason to get an 8800GS when I DONT EVEN HAVE VISTA.You dont need vista with DX10 cards.:|
Having an 8800 and not having vista is still totally worth it.You need an 8800 to max out many DX9 games.And as for DX10 games well most of them are so poorly optimized so far that even an 8800GTX cannot max them in full DX10 graphics.But most if not all DX10 games so far look almost identical to their DX9 counterparts so you arent missing much at all by not having vista so far.
You dont need vista with DX10 cards.:| Having an 8800 and not having vista is still totally worth it.You need an 8800 to max out many DX9 games.And as for DX10 games well most of them are so poorly optimized so far that even an 8800GTX cannot max them in full DX10 graphics.But most if not all DX10 games so far look almost identical to their DX9 counterparts so you arent missing much at all by not having vista so far.Gambler_1But you DO need vista to take full advantage of the card. WITHOUT vista its not worht the extra added price sticker when all I'm getting is a negligble performance incraese. For the tenth time I, and most console games as I see it, WOULDN'T CARE ABOUT TEN-FIFTEEN FPS.
[QUOTE="TrooperManaic"]over all performance is on par with 8800GT LOL I switched my 7900GT to a 3850 512mb and saw a world of difference and saw it again when I bought my 8800GT LOL. listen do your homework go to benchmark sites and learn how a videocard works and why having better technology = better overall performance... when you are done surfing the Internet and understand the difference between 7900GS and 9600GT or 8800GT for that matter you'll understand why $50 is absolutely worth it and you're getting the money back anyway with mail in rebate :lol:. Oh newer games use SHADERS without then it will bring your GPU to its knees and that is definitely something the nvidia 7 series doesn't have.VandalvideoA world of difference? Once again, another person who failed to understand the context of my original post. We were talkinga bout graphics comperable to consoles. You don't need OMG 100FPS at max settings to be achieveing graphics comperable to consoles, especially when you don't even have Vista. So once again, I emplore you reread my posts, because a 7900GS, in the context of my post, is a viable, cheap option. Quite frankly, an 8800GT isn't going to be worth it when I'm playing games in DX9. I'm not paying 50 dollars for negligble FPS increases. I don't care about your ORIGINAL post you said that the 9600GT wasn't worth extra $50.. I know what you are getting at but don't believe people the graphics on consoles compared to 7900GS they are compared to the 8800GT and above...if you don't believe me waste your money on that 7900GS piece of garbage and compare. I say this because I have my pc monitor right by my tv which my friend plays my xbox 360 while I play other games. It is very comparable... as far as I am concerned that this is a joke thread and you are too naive to take our words into consideration in short.. you are a lost cause.
[QUOTE="Gambler_1"]You dont need vista with DX10 cards.:| Having an 8800 and not having vista is still totally worth it.You need an 8800 to max out many DX9 games.And as for DX10 games well most of them are so poorly optimized so far that even an 8800GTX cannot max them in full DX10 graphics.But most if not all DX10 games so far look almost identical to their DX9 counterparts so you arent missing much at all by not having vista so far.VandalvideoBut you DO need vista to take full advantage of the card. WITHOUT vista its not worht the extra added price sticker when all I'm getting is a negligble performance incraese. For the tenth time I, and most console games as I see it, WOULDN'T CARE ABOUT TEN-FIFTEEN FPS. not true that was a sals ploy by microsoft to get people to buy vista... DX9 can be as demanding as DX10 at times.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment