I must say, the constructs voice acting was impressive. In addition the art style Wild Star is based on seems to be integrating well with the world Carbine Studios is creating.
@gonzzan I actually bought Skyrim on release. Got home at about 1:30am and ended up finishing from the character builder at 4am got sleepy and went to bed without playing.
@Sunnykat Its clear you don't know what your taking about. When comparing CPUs its not entirely correct to compare CPUs with equivalent clock speed when they have entirely different architectures. Its not about clock speed its about throughput. Based on your comment I guess the P4 @ 3.0 should be compared to the Phenom II @ 3.0 . Ignorance is a bliss , I suggest you keep your comments to yourself before talking about any "technical details". You were doing alright until you stopped accusing me of being a fan boy.
@a_mop65 You are right, but at the end of the day it comes down to the consumers budget. Some people don't notice $400 less in their pockets while others do. Some of us still like to flex some e-peen muscle even if its the stupid thing to do.
@SEAL_team_six Sigh... another retard that starts his argument with "stupid Intel fanboys". First of all I dont give a crap about AMD or Intel. Whichever gives me more performance for my buck, I go with. Or do you just copy/paste that into every discussion you get into on the Gamespot boards, fanboy this fanboy that. Anyways whatever. Second of all I do not see anywhere in my last statement that I was discussing "budget" PC's? I don't care if you can make a build that cost you 2 bucks, and from the pricing I stated you could clearly tell that I wasn't talking about a budget PC. Third of all you come in here about 1 month after my comment when pricing is clearly different then it was 1 month ago especially with the mobos(and I happened to use a 400 buck one in my comparison). Phenom II scores 10275 vs a 16352 for the i7 920, which is a mighty difference for an enthusiast builder, and on water-cooling AMD's 940 is overclocking up to 3.8 - 3.9 and the i7's are getting 4.0-4.2 (4.3 in some extremely lucky cases) . Your talking budget , I'm talking about bang for buck at enthusiast settings.Two entirely different things, hence your ignorance aggravates me. Yes I know the Phenom II 940 is not on the same tier as the i7 and can't be compared but it still remains as AMD's flagship processor that happens to aim at the lower spectrum end of the market. "When you compare performance between the CPU's,you'll see how much you screwed yourself over when you are spending less on the graphics." I'm more interested in CPU bottlenecks. We are talking about CPU's here and not graphic cards (hence they were not included in my comparison). As for how defensive you are in your post , it seems that you are the fanboy, kid. Go have fun with your "l33t" talk and troll another post.
@rattyocaster What is your definition of value? Your comment saying the "AMD route is better value"is a mere fallacy. Comparing an AM2+ mobo / DDR2 / Phenom II x4 940 vs a LGA1366 mobo / DDR3 / Core i7 920 there is only a difference of $250 bucks. Check the prices for yourself. AMD stated they will be moving to DDR3 Q2 of 2009 so that takes about $100 off the difference. The processor prices are hardly different give or take $75. The only advantage AMD has are the cheaper AM2+ boards because they are more readily available then the LGA1366 ones. While you save your mere $150 to get your "better value AMD setup" I'll happily be blowing sh1t up with my core i7 920 overclocked to 3.6 GHz at 5 -10 frames faster then you. What is that you say? 5 -10 frames is not even noticeable? Yes, it is when those frames come at a 60 FPS break point. Have a good day sir, enjoy the 7 extra meals you saved at McD's.
@DarthHideous_1 No it seems your missing the point. With the new i7 architecture when multi-cores are not utilized the 3 other cores end up shutting down anyways giving more clock speed on just 1 core. So you get a taste of both worlds with the i7. @adamas78 AMD is getting left behind quick, and it seems they opted to win over the lower end market with this chip-set. Nothing to be enthusiastic about. Like you I was hoping AMD gets back into the game but this chip-set doesn't do it. Nevertheless for people that want to upgrade from scratch and don't have an AM2+ board, what are they gonna do? $250 in savings hardly justifies buying an AM2+ board just to pop in a Phenom II x4, and that savings gap is only going to be about $150(off the mobo) when AMD mitigates to DDR3 in a few months. You guys will have to change to DDR3 sooner or later anyways, so that's hardly an argument that should be included in price comparisons. So that makes me wonder what the hell is AMD thinking with this chip-set. But on another note, the tomhardware review on the Phenom II x4 vs the i7 is pretty much incorrect. Taking into account the massive memory bandwidth advantage the core i7 had and the clock speed. I think they failed to successfully overclock their Phenom II. They also failed to note that while the i7 was running at 80c the Phenom II was running relatively cold at 64c.
Alright, so the Phenom II X4 outperforms the Q9400,so what?!?! Why would I buy a Phenom II x4 when I can blow the same cash on a Core i7 920. I have a feeling that AMD is going for the cheap PC sector, come on AMD I didn't buy a Core i7 yet, hoping you can blow us away with something new but this ain't it, my hopes all seem to be a pipe dream now.
SiNoNaX's comments