I have a 17" Macbook Pro and it could very well be the best piece of hardware I've ever owned. I've been a Windows guy since 3.1 and have spent a lot of time in and out of my computer, and while that time is definitely well-spent, I wish I would have bought a Mac several years ago.

That being said, I know my Mac's limitations. I can play the Blizzard games through OSX, and any pre-2006 Windows games through Boot Camp pretty well. Oblivion starts to wear down, but I can play it on med/low settings. Half-Life 2 works pretty well. However, I got the Mac in order to do things that the Mac is good at. Namely, I'm a musician and composer, and Macs are just well known as superior machines when it comes to the audio/visual arts. I run Sibelius and Logic (two music softwares) and they are totally flawless. Yes, you can get good music programs to work on PC, but comparing the two systems, I'd go with Mac. Also, the OS is just so nice to work with. It's simple - and while some folks would frown upon simple, I think they are just being pretentious. It's a great OS.

So go for a Mac if you want to use it as a great computer. Not as a great GAME computer. Building your own is still vastly superior for performance and price.

Using Crysis as the deciding factor is the problem here. Unless EVERYTHING in your rig is absolute top-of-the-line (and even if it is), Crysis is going to virtually kick its ass. The game is just too much for current hardware to handle without giving some manner of stretch room, somewhere - be it resolution or settings.

Get whatever you think the best monitor is, and enjoy it. Don't worry if you can't run Crysis at the highest resolution; just enjoy your sweet huge monitor!

Hey folks,

I'm nearing the end of (re)building my PC, and have started to think about upgrading my monitor, as well - I just don't know if it's really worth it or not. Either that, or I know it's worth it and am starting to talk myself out of it, AFTER talking myself into thinking about it. Wild.

My system:

• Q6600 @ 2.4
• Gigabyte P35 Mobo
• 2GB DDR2-800 Corsair XMS
• Currently a 7900GS but upgrading to an 8800GT (as soon as it's shipped)

I've had a Viewsonic 17" LCD 8ms for the past couple of years, and it's been nice enough - max resolution of 1280x1024, and it's done it's job, albeit in a workmanlike manner. With the new rig, though, I've been thinking about getting a new monitor. Something shiny and cool. And big (but not too big - or too pricey).

The caveat is that I use my PC for composing music - so more screen real estate is definitely a plus when working with big orchestral scores/movie clips for film/etc. So, it would be cool for more than just games. I'm just wondering what I should be looking at, and if it's worth it to upgrade from my current monitor - since I want a significantly better one for not too much money (looking at $150-250ish, maybe a bit more, depending).

Any suggestions?

Right on, thanks guys.

The main reason I asked is because this is the first time i've had my hand in a total overhaul of my rig. I've never built my own before, and have these nagging worries that I installed my CPU wrong, or hooked up the wrong little cables to my mobo or something dumb like that. I guess I didn't.

...

:) Thanks, though.

Overclocking can help you increasing your performance. (that guy did it, and gained more than expected)

4543 is fine for a 7900gs, the average is 4200 so the q6600 helped you there.

Getting the 8800gt will help you getting around 9k or 10k 3dmark's at stock speeds.

wklzip

So what you're saying is that basically everything's kosher with what I have. I'm planning on upgrading my vid card this winter, but I just spent about $500 on CPU/Mobo/RAM and was minimally freaking out that for some reason that combo wasn't working correctly.

If it looks like it's only the vid card that's holding me back, then I'm cool with it.

Hey folks,

Just curious about this benchmark test and how accurate it is, and possible if anyone can give me a ballpark regarding where my machine is/should be.

I'm running a:

• Q6600 @ 2.4 (stock)
• 2gb Corsair XMS2 Twin2x2048-6400
• 7900GS 256 mb
• Gigabyte P35-DS3L

The 3DMark06 gave me a score of 4543, putting me above 44% of other computers. I figured I'd get a little better marks than that, even with the outdated vid card.

There were some issues in the results, though, mainly the analyzer saying I had a Q6700, not a 6600, so, what's the deal there?

Finally, under the comparisons tab, it says the number one ranked rig with similar configs got 9800 marks vs. mine, and the sample machine had a Quad-core @ 2.4 and a 7900GS (albeit 668MHz/900MHz vs. my 468MHz/661MHz).

My main question is, is my rig performing the way it should be? Is 4543, a lower-than-middle-of-the-road score what I'm looking at with a quad core 6600, 2gb of pretty good ram, a good mobo, and my current vid card? How much would adding an 8800GT bring? Is it just the vid card that's slowing me down, or something else?

Anyway, I guess that's like 12 main questions, not one, but you get the point. I'm just looking for some expert advice/palm reading here. Thanks in advance. Hopefully I get some feedback.

man just do whatmy matedid use the 8800gts for about 6hr non-stop and put it back in the box it should die then phonethem and say you want a refund the card is broken on arrival and if they say why didnt u call before say ur brother gave it to u as a birthday gift today and it's not working IQT786

Wow that's hard to read.