Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
which pc spec is better
Sabradin
Member Posts: 772
single 8800gt 512mb, 3.3GB RAM
or
dual 8800gt 512mb, 2.8GB RAM
?
specifically for playing this game
Just when you think you have all the answers, I change the questions.
Comments
dual 8800gt 512mb, 2.8GB RAM
That 500mb of ram won't make much of a difference. Another 8800gt would be faster.
Even dual 256mb versions of the 8800GT would be quicker than One 512mb version with the extra ram
This is only true if the game supports the crossfire/SLI system. Otherwise its just a waste of a lot of money.
True, Nvidia guys are working with FC though, one would assume considering 'Archlord' is optimised for Sli that AoC would with the Nvidia branding logo part of the package. For ATI guys we have had passed assurances, that not only will ATI cards work but also that Crossfire should be optimised too here is one post: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/1728307#1728307 if you search around on www.bymitra.com dev tracker sure there is more there too.
You never, ever, ever get twice the performance when you have SLI enabled - and that's a truism going all the way back to the very first Voodoo cards - yet, you *do* have twice the cost. SLI/Crossfire is not a very good means of increasing your performance from a 'bang for the buck' perspective.
I just upgraded to an 8800GT this week, and even Don't-Mind-Me-I'm-Just-Here-To-Cripple-Your-Machine Crysis plays at 30-40 FPS with goodies turned on.
Get the 8800GT, and put the other $200 you saved toward building a Terrabyte-sized RAID, that way you'll have plenty of room for those 4GB-sized FRAPS movies you're going to want to take...and you *are* going to want to take them - trust me.
Now if we're talking about bang for the buck, then your typical PC user will be wasting a pretty nice chunk of cash in unused storage. If you're gaming, you would be ill-advised to clutter your HD with loads of garbage only to significantly decrease your performance over the long haul. I'd buy a second GPU 100 times out of 100 over doubling even what I have now, which would put me at 300gigs. That's just my opinion, but if you're a gamer.. isn't video performance a bit more important than telling your friends that you have more storage than you'll even need in your life?
FRAPS? If all you're doing all day is watching your fraps, you need to get out more.
Now if we're talking about bang for the buck, then your typical PC user will be wasting a pretty nice chunk of cash in unused storage. If you're gaming, you would be ill-advised to clutter your HD with loads of garbage only to significantly decrease your performance over the long haul. I'd buy a second GPU 100 times out of 100 over doubling even what I have now, which would put me at 300gigs. That's just my opinion, but if you're a gamer.. isn't video performance a bit more important than telling your friends that you have more storage than you'll even need in your life?
FRAPS? If all you're doing all day is watching your fraps, you need to get out more.
Oh, I don't know. I've been of the casual mindset for quite a while and I've managed to collect quite a bit of stuff over the decades. (What do you mean by "Delete"?). It's all here. Games. Programs. Old bits of music or movie clips or stuff I downloaded from the net (or BBS's - yes, there's some downloads from before the net in here too). If you never throw anything away it's amazing how much stuff you can accumulate over time. I've only got about 100GB free at the moment - the other 1.4TB is pretty much taken. Might be getting to the time for another 500 GB drive, I think.
Forum signatures are stupid and annoying. I've turned mine off.
A bit stupid question.. Ofcorse better system.. expensive system.. is better.. More Money = Better PC.. More Frames Per Second.. Better visual .. better sound .. etc..
every question is stupid, homes
though your statement may be considered stupid since its stating the obvious as if it werent so
-----
So about SLI technology. I know you never get twice the performance. The graphs I've looked at show around a 50% improvement.
But I need to be assured... a game (or program) has to be designed to be able to use SLI technology, sort of like how the game has to be designed to use multi-core? I figured somehow it was different. That does put a question mark into the equation; I don't have faith that FC will make the effort to use SLI technology if it is difficult to do. I want to see an official statement about that. However my new problem is finding something official within two weeks (when I purchase my pc).
Just when you think you have all the answers, I change the questions.
if you're running xp. the ram will make absolutely no difference at all. if you're running vista, then it will matter a little more but the sli will by FAR make up for it. question is...what type of memory are you buying that costs 250 bucks for 512? i ask this because it seems you have a choice of spending 250~ on the extra card, or 250 on the extra 512mb which is a MASSIVE rip off.
I don't know any ram that costs that much.
The game is nearly two months away (march is the new january) and you'd think SLI technology is a fundamental programming issue where if it would have been done it would be done by now, and so the question can be answered. Doesn't mean it will, but I think I'll do what I can to find out.
Just when you think you have all the answers, I change the questions.
I've not heard anything about SLI/Crossfire support, but I haven't really dug into it, I know they work with Dual Core proc. but that's about it.
Eh, if wanna do recordings, the FAR best thing would be either using the DVI/AVI/TV exit port and hooking it up to a harddisk recorder, or to another computer via tv card, that way theres NO performance decrease on your gaming computer due to the recording
that is what i have done (harddisk recorder method), and im loving it.