Viewing Thread:
"Motherboard + CPU advice..."

I have picked up a few weeks contract work and I inted to pick up a new motherboard and CPU afterwards. I currently have an Athlon 2600 XP + with KT400 motherboard. I am looking to switch over to Intel. What is the best motherboard and CPU at the moment, money shouldn't be an object. I am looking for a setup that will overclock easily enough.

Any advice would be appreciated, cheers!

ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> With no AA or AF on 1024x760 with full details I was getting a crap
> frame rate and it felt choppy in the outside environments.

Well its a demo. It ran ok at 1600x1200 full details on my XP2800, 1Gb PC2700 and 9800 Pro 128mb. I am using the 4.2 drivers with it. How do you check the FPS?

ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> cookie monster wrote:
> Am i the only person here that thinks Intel is inferior to AMD?
>
> They used to be but the new Pentium 4 processors are supposedly
> better than any AMD to date.

No its still a mix match really. The new P4s do somethings better and the new AMDs do other things better. P4s are really good at encoding video and MP3. Gaming is about the same depending on the game engine. Really depends on what you want from a PC and the price of the CPU you can afford.

Really with a XP2600 you should be ok for now. Try to overclock the CPU so it uses a FSB of 200, then run some PC3200 RAM. The increased FSB will give you a good performance boost, even if you leave the CPU running at the same clock rate.

If you have the money then spend it on a new CPU, but you might as well wait and get one thats going to be alot faster later on in the year.

With no AA or AF on 1024x760 with full details I was getting a crap frame rate and it felt choppy in the outside environments.

ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> Explain why the Far Cry demo only runs at 20-30fps with a 9800 XT, 1GB
> PC2700 RAM and a processor clocked to run at 2.1GHZ?

But what settings? If your using full anti-aliasing and anistropic filtering at 1600x1200 with full effects then no wonder.

I am running Far Cry demo at 1600x1200 full details, no anti-aliasing and its smooth. Dont know what fps its at as I dont know how to show it. But the game play is smooth and plays fine. Remember that TV is only running at 25fps so as long as you get a steady 25-30fps you will get a smooth game.

The games not out yet so its far from finished, and the performance level will increase once its finished.

It's a demo.
It's unoptimised.
They tell you to use old drivers.
People on that forum are reporting wildly divergent performance with near identical hardware.

Basically, it's a work-in-progress. Wait for the real deal and then you can start using it as an excuse to upgrade.

Explain why the Far Cry demo only runs at 20-30fps with a 9800 XT, 1GB PC2700 RAM and a processor clocked to run at 2.1GHZ?

* wonders if anyone read his post *

You kids are crazy, you have no concept of money, and spend all your time chasing meaningless benchmark scores. Excuse me for trolling up this thread, but I see this so often on these forums. Processors stopped becoming the bottleneck back when 1.5Ghz was broken.

cookie monster wrote:
> Am i the only person here that thinks Intel is inferior to AMD?

They used to be but the new Pentium 4 processors are supposedly better than any AMD to date.

I haven't tried P4's, so i can't really compare.

So I guess you're the only one here who thinks AMD is superior to Intel.

Am i the only person here that thinks Intel is inferior to AMD?