The PS2 was about 4-5 times the power of the dreamcast when all is said and done. The dreamcast as mentioned earlier in this topic WAS NOT TWO 64 BIT PROCESSORS, but was 1 128bit risc cpu made by Hitachi which was more powerful than the equivalent speed pc processor at the time. Its GPU was a power vr 2 which could render 9 million polygons per sec basic, but that fell to 3 million with special effects and shading and stuff. It had 8mb video ram and 24 meg of main ram.

The PS2 however had a custom 300 mhz cpu with 2 vector co processors (much like the cell now and its spe's), which greatly increased the power of the cpu when they were all used together. The GPU was custom built by sony and could do 75 million basic polygons per second, which came down to 20-25 million with effects on. YES the gamecube could only do 10 million with effects and this is apparent when looking at metal gear solid on the ps2 vs the twin snakes on the cube. The ps2 version has a much greater polygon count when compared side by side even though it is the older game, and lets not forget Gran turismo, can anybody really see that game being rendered by a gamecube? i rest my case. ( even the wii is bad now and that is supposed to be a gamecube x2.

The other real reason that some of the dreamcast games looked better than most ps2 games, was not because of polygons or raw processing power but because of the resolution of the textures (much higher due to more video ram), plus the fact that the DC could also use texture compression much better than the PS2 could (fit about 30 meg of textures into 8 meg of video memory), mainly due to it being an off the shelf pc video card.

Looking back at soul calibur, arguably one if not the best looking dreamcast game, the polygon count was quite low on the characters and backgrounds, although the resolution of the textures and all of the special effects made the game look awesome when all combined together.

So to sum up, the ps2 was much more powerful than the dreamcast, but because of it's difficult to program hardware and low video memory, it took a great developer to get the most from the system with games such as gran turismo 4 and metal gear solid 3, zone of the enders or moto gp etc etc:)

Here is my current set up by day........

http://img115.imageshack.us/my.php?image=s5000550fq3.jpg

AND BY NIGHT........

http://img223.imageshack.us/my.php?image=s5000546nz0.jpg

AND

http://img223.imageshack.us/my.php?image=s5000561eg7.jpg

What do you guys think?

vista basic IS THE SAME as the other versions minus a few pointless features (aero, media centre etc), but what people dont tell you is that it is not only cheaper to buy but is MORE SYSTEM RESOURCE FRIENDLY..Thats right, in basic is takes about 400mb ram idle, and in premium it takes about 600mb ram when idle...pretty nifty eh?

So if you only have 1 gig or less then basic is the option for you.

PS YES it can do all of those which you asked..:)

A 300 watt power supply is sufficient for that card...heck even nvidia recommends a 300 watt psu minimum for its new geforce 8600gt, so a 300 watt will defo be enough for a 7600gs....

Although the more the merrier (power that is). :)

thanks for the replies guys...My cpu is a 65nm process so in theory it should run cooler than all the 90nm ones, although at full 100% usage the bios says it is running at 50/51oC and less than this if used less.

I did used to have a celeron d 3.08ghz once and that was a 90nm process. Its temperatures when idle were 52 oC and under stress was 61/62 oC, which after checking google is completely normal, so i suppose a 3.46ghz 65nm cpu under full load with a temp of 51 oC is also normal?

I will try the thermal paste you recommended and if no joy i will maybe buy another fan...plus i have checked my bios and i cannot change the settings of the speed fan control...they are blanked out at pre-set values.

Although when normal the fan is about 2000rpm and when full is 4757rpm...If i turn the speed fan control off in the bios the fan automatically goes to its max of 4757 continuously...This is loud but stays consistent so is not as annoying.

My last question would be---if i turned off speed fan in the bios and allowed my fan to run at full wack, would i damage any part of my system or wear the fan out in a short period of time...i only ask cos a chap above says his fan is running at 4400 now, and that is not much less than mine when on full.

Forget all of the headaches involved and do what i do. Buy a cheap dell pc from the net (much much cheaper than store prices) with a decent cpu and ram, and then buy a kick ass graphics card also on its own. Bang it in and hey presto a pre-built machine with warrenty for about the same as the parts on their own....minus all of the fiddling around.

Remember that when games go dx10 it is the gpu that will be doing all of the donkey work so the cpu (as long as it is decent) does not have to be the dogs...Just get the best graphics you can afford. DX9 relies too much on cpu but dx10 gives the system more power over your graphics card.