A Few Questions

[ironsight]

Vonviper, estabu,
Yep! The latest quad uProcessors are at their efficient best when executing 64 bit applications which far as i can tell no game currently supports. And quads as mentioned shine when extreme application multi tasking is required.
Even though my MOBO supports 8 gigs a RAM, i can only install 4 gigs because i'm running 32 bit XPpro. Aside from multi-tasking benefits, investing in a quad processor today is really an investment for future 64bit applications run by a 64bit OS. There are 64 bit consumer applications out there today but not enough IMO to justify running a 64 bit OS. For businesses, its a whole different story.
And then there's the issue of upgrading to 64 bit drivers for every peripheral the OS controls.
Right now today for best gaming performance and assuming one is running a decent processor 'n memory is investing in the best graphics card one can afford.

[estabu2]

Agreed ironsight. I have thought about upgrading to a new OS and processor, I have 32 bit XP and an overclock 2.1 @ 2.6, but now I see that the new tri-channel RAM is getting huge gains over the dual channel and the new i7 cores are awesome. I run 3 GB and I don't have any problems, but I think I would rather upgrade my mobo instead of getting a new OS. Plus, Microsoft is coming out with Windows 7 in like early 2010. I better get ready with like 6GB of Ram because I assume it is going to take a motherload to run it.

[Amish John]

After the last couple posts I'm starting to understand why so many people are switching to gaming systems like Xbox and Playstation. Many people don't have the time, the interest, or both to become part time computer engineers. I've sold computers at both Circuit City and Gateway in the past as a part time job and my head still spins at the amount of computer knowledge some of you have. Probably for most people if they know enough about their computer to know if it meets the recommended system requirements on a game box that should be enough. Unfortuneately, for people that want to run games on a PC these days, sometimes you have to have a high level of computer knowledge.

I also use Microsoft Flight Simulator X a lot. That is a prime example of needing good computer technical skills if you want the program to run well. On those forums the discussions often center around how to get that FSX resource hog to run acceptably.

That's one thing I like about TC2M. You can play it and normally forget about computer technical issues as long as you have the recommended specs (which is not true for FSX).

[norb]

I'm the same way John. I stick with what I have unless there is a good reason for me to upgrade. When I got bioshock I needed a new video card, so I got one. But I don't just upgrade for the purpose of upgrading. I have a reason, find the solution, and upgrade just that. I also still look for a deal. 64 bit and quad are not necessary for 98% of people, it's just a sales gimmick. For most 32 bit XP and dual core works better than anything, also since quads are out you can get the best dual core pretty inexpensive.

[69th NYSV]

estabu2 wrote:

...Plus, Microsoft is coming out with Windows 7 in like early 2010. I better get ready with like 6GB of Ram because I assume it is going to take a motherload to run it.

The almost criminal part is they became the giant they are by marketing a small, low footprint, yet powerful program called DOS. And yes I know the dirty little secret that they only refined something they bought the rights to, but I digress. It's quite astounding that you completely abandon your roots and go the complete opposite way.

Do not be fooled, the early betas of Windoze 7 are merely Vista with more lipstick. Micro$oft spent a lot of time & money and will not be told what you want to buy. They tell the world what they get to buy. If they would only listen they would make more money and more people happy.

Example, make a stripped down, basic version, of whatever OS they currently wish to sell, with up to date driver support for gamers, and people that do not need or want the bells and whistles, only speed. It would cost them nothing other then packaing artwork to do this. They have resisted this with all their might because they're afraid it would outsell the bigger, costlier "Full" version. So, how about selling them for the same price! In the end they would most likely sell more copies because the gamers would still want the full version for everything else.

[estabu2]

Well said 69th!!

[69th NYSV]

norb wrote:

64 bit and quad are not necessary for 98% of people, it's just a sales gimmick. For most 32 bit XP and dual core works better than anything, also since quads are out you can get the best dual core pretty inexpensive.

I hear you, but we all know this is the way technology advances. If not we'd all still be using our 8086's with 64kb of ram! I remember the same argument when the "Pentiums" first came against the 486 processor, ahh memories. It also was only months ago that the argument was most everything ran best on a single core processor as most of the software isn't designed to take advantage of additional cores...

But, as the market becomes more saturated with multi-core CPU's and 64 bit OS's that software snowball is reaching the top of the hill and will shortly be racing down the other side. As an example I know of couple flight sims and a tank sim that are going to be released in the next couple of quarters that have been designed to take advantage of multi-CPU/GPU.

You also will start to see dual-core processors slowly start to die out. Whether people like it or not the future is now the quad and any processor sold with less cores will be rejected quads. AMD is already doing this with their Tri-cores which are quad chips that one of the processors was inferior. Rather then scrap the chip they disabled the bad processor and bang you have a tri-core and you salvaged something. AMD's latest chip release is quads only with dualie's scheduled for later, and speculation is that AMD is stockpiling rejected quad parts (which is small with modern facilities) until the quantity is sufficient to meet demand for the lesser core chips. It could be quite awhile until the latest generation dual-cores reach the market as tri's will be first.

By no means does this mean you need to run out and upgrade to the latest and greatest of anything. But just remember, that the winds of time stand still for no man.

[JC Edwards]

Estabu!! You need to get your butt down here to my place and install my VC! Pronto Mister!:lol:

[estabu2]

JC Edwards wrote:

Estabu!! You need to get your butt down here to my place and install my VC! Pronto Mister!:lol:

You still have NOT installed that VC:laugh: :laugh: JC, it is so easy man. I have installed CPU's, CPU fans, VC, RAM, and they all install the same. Plug and Play is a beautiful thing. Just pull out the old VC and push the new one in, run the cd that is in the box, and download the latest drivers. Then you are all set.

I laughed loud when I just read your statement.

[JC Edwards]

estabu2 wrote:

JC Edwards wrote:

Estabu!! You need to get your butt down here to my place and install my VC! Pronto Mister!:lol:

You still have NOT installed that VC:laugh: :laugh: JC, it is so easy man. I have installed CPU's, CPU fans, VC, RAM, and they all install the same. Plug and Play is a beautiful thing. Just pull out the old VC and push the new one in, run the cd that is in the box, and download the latest drivers. Then you are all set.

I laughed loud when I just read your statement.

I looked!:lol: And damn if I can figure out where the heck it goes! Need to git'er done demmit!:P