This is an archive of the mabination.com forums which were active from 2010 to 2018. You can not register, post or otherwise interact with the site other than browsing the content for historical purposes. The content is provided as-is, from the moment of the last backup taken of the database in 2019. Image and video embeds are disabled on purpose and represented textually since most of those links are dead.
To view other archive projects go to
https://archives.mabination.com
-
ikamiru wrote on 2013-08-06 10:48
[SIZE="1"]This might not be 100% accurate data it is what I remember and might be wrong.[/SIZE]
GPU also known as Graphics Card handles the drawing of models, anti-alias(smooth edges), shadow placement and lighting and translates this into something your screen can show.
RAM is important for handeling functions basically the game writes the tasks it might need into the RAM(Random Acces Memory) so that the game won't have to load the task before being able to execute it.
CPU also know as Proccesor reads and executes the tasks that are given by the ram. (mostly calculations and predictions)
SSD/HDD loads data into the RAM the faster it can do this the faster the RAM can use this.
TLDR;
CPU RAM and GPU = FPS
SSD/HDD = Load Speed
SSD is about 30% faster then the fastest HDD.
-
Evaris wrote on 2013-08-06 16:39
-
MareneCorp wrote on 2013-08-06 21:39
Holy crap I came back to a fight. Anyway, I'm not scared of custom building - I'm just currently interested in what options there are for prebuilt; I could get a custom built no problem. Also, I'm not going to be gearing it towards complete gaming, it's going to have to run a few other programs (Garageband, things...) so I'm looking for something more basic. I feel like you guys are throwing TNT at me :(
-
Evaris wrote on 2013-08-06 21:41
Quote from MareneCorp;1132391:
Holy crap I came back to a fight. Anyway, I'm not scared of custom building - I'm just currently interested in what options there are for prebuilt; I could get a custom built no problem. Also, I'm not going to be gearing it towards complete gaming, it's going to have to run a few other programs (Garageband, things...) so I'm looking for something more basic. I feel like you guys are throwing TNT at me :(
I still stand by my recommendations as likely your best options.
-
RebeccaBlack wrote on 2013-08-07 05:16
Quote from MareneCorp;1132391:
Holy crap I came back to a fight. Anyway, I'm not scared of custom building - I'm just currently interested in what options there are for prebuilt; I could get a custom built no problem. Also, I'm not going to be gearing it towards complete gaming, it's going to have to run a few other programs (Garageband, things...) so I'm looking for something more basic. I feel like you guys are throwing TNT at me :(
In that case, picking parts would work. Just got the impression you weren't interested in that by the first post.
Based on what Evaris posted, my only complaint is that the CPU is kinda light for that GPU. I'd get a slightly less powerful GPU and a slightly more powerful CPU. But eh, that's just me. RAM is fine. HDD is standard (but this is really a personal decision for you in the end). You might not need a CD drive if you don't really use CDs. I guess it's nice to have. I feel the same way about aftermarket fans but it's also cheap to get.
On second thought, maybe the CPU is about right, because the GPU has to be good in the future too.
-
Compass wrote on 2013-08-07 06:11
Quote from MareneCorp;1132391:
Holy crap I came back to a fight. Anyway, I'm not scared of custom building - I'm just currently interested in what options there are for prebuilt; I could get a custom built no problem. Also, I'm not going to be gearing it towards complete gaming, it's going to have to run a few other programs (Garageband, things...) so I'm looking for something more basic. I feel like you guys are throwing TNT at me :(
Do you want this to be you?
[Image: http://puu.sh/3VN8X.jpg]
Also answer my question ;___;
-
Evaris wrote on 2013-08-07 06:13
Quote from RebeccaBlack;1132668:
In that case, picking parts would work. Just got the impression you weren't interested in that by the first post.
Based on what Evaris posted, my only complaint is that the CPU is kinda light for that GPU. I'd get a slightly less powerful GPU and a slightly more powerful CPU. But eh, that's just me. RAM is fine. HDD is standard (but this is really a personal decision for you in the end). You might not need a CD drive if you don't really use CDs. I guess it's nice to have. I feel the same way about aftermarket fans but it's also cheap to get.
On second thought, maybe the CPU is about right, because the GPU has to be good in the future too.
<Recommends systems with 4-6 years of minimum upgrades as an active lifespan in mind>
Quote from Compass;1132707:
Do you want this to be you?
[Image: http://puu.sh/3VN8X.jpg]
Also answer my question ;___;
And this is why you don't put a crappy GPU in a gaming rig period, nor do you cheap out on your PSU or... oh gods all the things that are just plain wrong there...
-
RebeccaBlack wrote on 2013-08-07 06:42
Yeah, I kinda thought about it for a bit and it would be nice to have that GPU in the future with the CPU. Right now it might be a tiny bit overpowered by comparison to the CPU but that'll even out in time.
-
Evaris wrote on 2013-08-07 06:44
Quote from RebeccaBlack;1132731:
Yeah, I kinda thought about it for a bit and it would be nice to have that GPU in the future with the CPU. Right now it might be a tiny bit overpowered by comparison to the CPU but that'll even out in time.
Not to mention future games that are CPU intensive which are console ports should be coded for AMD instruction sets in an 8 core configuration seeing as well, the PS4 and XBO both are running a low clocked AMD 8 core. So most games coming out 2014-2020 will fall in this category and as such while it might not be that great for gaming -now- compared to higher end Intel chips, it should be more than enough for upcoming titles, and in such console port titles outperform comparable i5 systems. Plus, with that AMD chip there is always overclocking down the line if the OP gets curious, and that cooler should support an overclock of around 4.0-4.4ghz with reasonable temps depending on the binning.
-
RebeccaBlack wrote on 2013-08-07 07:02
You know, I've heard that argument a lot but I'm not sure how true it'll be. It makes perfect sense, but will they really port their games like that knowing most people have quad core CPUs? Very possibly, but maybe not. Thing is, consoles are running their cores at far lower frequencies anyway. We may have more than enough power to run it the best we can and probably won't be CPU limited in that regard.
But it's really just assumptions at this point. We can't really know what they'll do with their games. All we know is historically, ports have been terribly optimized as a general rule. Will a market of primarily quad cores fight hard enough against it to do anything?
-
Evaris wrote on 2013-08-07 07:05
Quote from RebeccaBlack;1132746:
You know, I've heard that argument a lot but I'm not sure how true it'll be. It makes perfect sense, but will they really port their games like that knowing most people have quad core CPUs? Very possibly, but maybe not. Thing is, consoles are running their cores at far lower frequencies anyway. We may have more than enough power to run it the best we can and probably won't be CPU limited in that regard.
But it's really just assumptions at this point. We can't really know what they'll do with their games. All we know is historically, ports have been terribly optimized as a general rule. Will a market of primarily quad cores fight hard enough against it to do anything?
intel is rumored to have 8 core Ivy bridge extreme chips coming out, have had 6 cores for years, and quad core i7s can handle 8 threads. Also keep in mind older ports were running from single to triple core systems of non-x86 systems, whereas if it's optimized for eight threads in the console then they just... don't change the code for no good reason, seeing as the new consoles are x86 based.
-
Evaris wrote on 2013-08-07 07:05
Quote from RebeccaBlack;1132746:
You know, I've heard that argument a lot but I'm not sure how true it'll be. It makes perfect sense, but will they really port their games like that knowing most people have quad core CPUs? Very possibly, but maybe not. Thing is, consoles are running their cores at far lower frequencies anyway. We may have more than enough power to run it the best we can and probably won't be CPU limited in that regard.
But it's really just assumptions at this point. We can't really know what they'll do with their games. All we know is historically, ports have been terribly optimized as a general rule. Will a market of primarily quad cores fight hard enough against it to do anything?
intel is rumored to have 8 core Ivy bridge extreme chips coming out, have had 6 cores for years, and quad core i7s can handle 8 threads. Also keep in mind older ports were running from single to triple core systems of non-x86 systems, whereas if it's optimized for eight threads in the console then they just... don't change the code for no good reason.
-
RebeccaBlack wrote on 2013-08-07 07:11
Quote from Evaris;1132753:
extreme chips
Meh.
Irrelevant to 99% of the gaming market. Just like 6 cores are now.
quad core i7s can handle 8 threads.
I've had one since like 2009-2010 and it
still isn't really being used by a lot of things to this day. It's really down to a few programs and games. They're terrible at optimizing stuff.
whereas if it's optimized for eight threads in the console then they just... don't change the code for no good reason.
If no one uses 8 cores there's an incentive to change.
The CPU will be fine either way, especially if you're doing more than one thing at once (like playing a game on 4 cores and recording it on the other 4). I don't think having an 8 core CPU is in any way a bad thing, I'm just saying it might not see such benefits as much as people have been predicting.
-
Evaris wrote on 2013-08-07 07:16
Quote from RebeccaBlack;1132764:
Meh.
Irrelevant to 99% of the gaming market. Just like 6 cores are now.
I've had one since like 2009-2010 and it still isn't really being used by a lot of things to this day. It's really down to a few programs and games. They're terrible at optimizing stuff.
If no one uses 8 cores there's an incentive to change.
The CPU will be fine either way, especially if you're doing more than one thing at once (like playing a game on 4 cores and recording it on the other 4). I don't think having an 8 core CPU is in any way a bad thing, I'm just saying it might not see such benefits as much as people have been predicting.
CPU thread utilization should become more common as more heavily threaded chips become more common in the lowest common denominator or the primary development point. In this case consoles, as well as applications have been getting more highly threaded in more cases each year, so yeah unless the trend suddenly stops for some unforseen reason it is a fairly safe bet for 2014-2020.
-
RebeccaBlack wrote on 2013-08-07 07:26
I'd say that yeah, for that long of a range. 2020 is quite a ways away though ;__;
I think he'll like it.