What GHz Mhz and memory does your processor have?

Southend Rage · Post by **Southend Rage** » 06 Nov 2006, 20:07

What GHz Mhz and memory does your processor have?

What do you considor a good amount to play NFSC at above a framerate of 40?

And what do you reccomend for a video card

Please answer because i am getting a new PC and i need this info

my operating system is standard windows Xp home edition does this matter?

BrontoX · Post by **BrontoX** » 06 Nov 2006, 21:11

This should be in "Hardware & Software"

Abrams · Post by **Abrams** » 06 Nov 2006, 22:12

exactly, moved.

Jmac- · Post by **Jmac-** » 07 Nov 2006, 04:53

For processors:

AMD Athlon64
AMD Athlon64 X2
AMD Athlon64 FX
AMD Opteron

Intel Pentium D 900 series
Intel Core 2 Duo
Intel Core 2 Extreme

For Memory:

1 GB
2 GB

For Graphics Cards:

Nvidia 6800GS
Nvidia 6800GT
Nvidia 6800 Ultra
Nvidia 7600GT
Nvidia 7800 series
Nvidia 7900 series
Nvidia 7950 series

ATI X800 series
ATI X850 series
ATI X1800 series
ATI X1900 series
ATI X1950 series

keiri · Post by **keiri** » 07 Nov 2006, 05:29

I'm running an Opteron 165 (stock) with 1GB of PC2700 RAM and an x800xl AGP and I get stable frames with the game running at 1280x1024 with max settings.

But If you're looking for a new PC I'd go with an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600, 2GB of Ram, and an X1950 pro. Not a bad setup for under a thousand dollars (way under).

K

prince1142003 · Post by **prince1142003** » 07 Nov 2006, 05:34

AMD64 3200+ O/C'ed to 2.25 GHz
1024 MB RAM
ATI Radeon X700 Pro AGP 256 MB

Carbon runs fine. Other than the occasional crashes, everything's a-ok.

darknight788 · Post by **darknight788** » 07 Nov 2006, 06:39

Pentium 4 northwood originaly 2.0 ghz , overclocked to 2.4
1024 GB PC2700 RAM
Nvidia 6800 GT 256 MB
carbon demo runsfine has only crashed on me once, can play MW at 1024 x 768 max everything with 33 fps

If your looking for 40 + fps get a processor with atleast 2.0 ghz, and at least 1 GB of RAM, and a good vid card like a 7600 GT. i think that setup should give you good performance. the 6800 GT is good but only after some modifications ( opening pipes and overclocking )

Southend Rage · Post by **Southend Rage** » 07 Nov 2006, 08:30

will carbon run with these?
Components
AMDÂ® Athlonâ„¢ 64 Processor 3800+
Genuine WindowsÂ® XP Home Edition, SP2 (No Media)
No Vista Upgrade
Collect & Return, 1 Year Service only
No Monitor
1024MB Dual Channel DDR2 533MHz [2x512] Memory
80GB (7200rpm) Serial ATA Hard Drive with 8MB DataBurstâ„¢ cache
16x DVD-ROM Drive
256MB ATIÂ® RadeonÂ® X1300 Pro PCI Express graphics card
Integrated 7.1 Channel High Definition Audio

vellu · Post by **vellu** » 07 Nov 2006, 08:38

It will run, but the graphics card isn't all that powerful. You may need to use lower detail levels. Also consider a bigger hdd (unless you really don't need more space) 160-200 GB doesn't cost much more than the 80GB.

Southend Rage · Post by **Southend Rage** » 07 Nov 2006, 08:58

I should have said my price limit is Â£467
How bout this
Components
IntelÂ® PentiumÂ® D 915 Dual Core Processor (2.80GHz, 800MHz, 2x2MB)
Genuine WindowsÂ® XP Home Edition (Does not include Operating System Re-installation CD)
No Vista Upgrade
Collect & Return, 1 Year Service only
No Monitor
1024MB Dual Channel DDR2 533MHz [2x512] Memory
80GB (7200rpm) Serial ATA Hard Drive with 8MB DataBurstâ„¢ cache
48x CDRW/DVD Combo Drive
256MB ATIÂ® RadeonÂ® X1300 Pro graphics card

vellu · Post by **vellu** » 07 Nov 2006, 09:42

As far as gaming goes, whether you have Dual-Core or not isn't relevant yet. Very few games today truly benefit from the second core. But in the future definitely, and for more serious work (video editing, rendering, etc.) the dual-core will blow away single cores by a hefty margin.

Ps. Why isn't there a Windows media included? Is there some other recovery media instead? I would not buy a pc without somekind of recovery/installation media no matter how cheap the setup (even if the licenses are valid).

redarmy · Post by **redarmy** » 07 Nov 2006, 09:57

I have A64 3200+, 2GB ram, GF 6600GT, and it works as it should.

PSZeTa · Post by **PSZeTa** » 07 Nov 2006, 16:05

darknight788 wrote:If your looking for 40 + fps get a processor with atleast 2.0 ghz, and at least 1 GB of RAM, and a good vid card like a 7600 GT. i think that setup should give you good performance. the 6800 GT is good but only after some modifications ( opening pipes and overclocking )

Pipes are locked to sell a card as a lower spec one. Every stock GT has 16 opened pipes.

Southend Rage wrote:I should have said my price limit is Â£467

That isn't going to get you 40+ fps, it will at low settings. Live with it or save money.

mdesign05 · Post by **mdesign05** » 09 Nov 2006, 19:29

-Athlon 64 3700+ San Diego core @ 273x10 = 2.73 GHZ, cooled by Coolermaster Hyper48 HS+F

-2x512mb GeiL ONE (BH5 Chips, not TCC1) @ 273 mhz, 3.6 VDIMM, 2-2-2-5 (great RAM, highly recommend it)

-Wintek Leadfast 7800GTX 256 @ 511 mhz core/1400 mhz memory, cooled by arctic cool

DeMyX · Post by **DeMyX** » 09 Nov 2006, 19:36

For graphic card, dont buy anything if your not getting the Nvidia 8800.

It support DirectX 10 and such a huge waste to buy a gfx card wich wont support newer games.

StreekG · Post by **StreekG** » 10 Nov 2006, 03:41

I'm running a Sempron 3000+ (2 Ghz i think it equates to)
2x 512mb DDR400 Ram
ATi Radeon 9550 256MB (Upgrading soon)

Southend Rage · Post by **Southend Rage** » 10 Nov 2006, 11:58

What GFX Cards Support DX10?

DeMyX · Post by **DeMyX** » 10 Nov 2006, 12:27

Only 1 so far. Nvidia 8800 something. I don't remember the name exact, but just search for it.

2fast4all · Post by **2fast4all** » 11 Nov 2006, 04:37

GeForce 8800GTX and GTS is the current fastest gfx card right now, beats the x1950xtx in crossfire.

t3ice · Post by **t3ice** » 11 Nov 2006, 05:40

@ Southend Range : I am able to play Carbon with all the farking' settings on max (including anti aliasing set to 4x ) ..and res at 1280x1024 ....and stll have 40 - 50fps
ON AVERAGE! ..here are my specs:

Intel core2duo E 6600 ..o.c at 2.816Ghz - core1, 2.797Ghz - core 2
Asus P5N Sli mobo ( 1067 Mhz fsb )
2Gb ddrII ram O.C at 866Mhz
600W psu
..oh yeah...a 7900 GTX ...512Mb

AND A HELL LOTTA COOLING!

Jmac- · Post by **Jmac-** » 14 Nov 2006, 06:26

vellu wrote:As far as gaming goes, whether you have Dual-Core or not isn't relevant yet. Very few games today truly benefit from the second core. But in the future definitely, and for more serious work (video editing, rendering, etc.) the dual-core will blow away single cores by a hefty margin.

Ps. Why isn't there a Windows media included? Is there some other recovery media instead? I would not buy a pc without somekind of recovery/installation media no matter how cheap the setup (even if the licenses are valid).

Dual Core benefits gaming in a different way for the average user ... Many users have many background tasks running, which with a dual core setup, allows one core to handle those background program while the other core focuses on the game.

Now, if you're comparing a single core 2 GHz Athlon64 to a dual core 2 GHz Athlon64 with a fully-optimized system, then you're not going to see any difference ...

As for the no Windows disc, it's quite common with pre-manufactured units. You're expected to create recovery discs after you finish setting up Windows.

Jmac- · Post by **Jmac-** » 14 Nov 2006, 06:34

DeMyX wrote:For graphic card, dont buy anything if your not getting the Nvidia 8800.

It support DirectX 10 and such a huge waste to buy a gfx card wich wont support newer games.

I disagree to some degree ...

While I do agree that if you're purchasing a high-end graphics card at the moment, you'd be stupid not to get a G80 given its massive performance advantages in DX9 over the R500/G70 offerings of similar price, plus the DX10 capability for the future.

However, considering DX10 games are still at least a year off and many users don't have $450+ to spend on a graphics card, going with a midrange card ($100-$250) will net you good performance with high quality settings @ 1280x1024 in 99% of games on the market for the next year or two. By the time you'd need to upgrade, you would be able to get a card that's substantially faster than the GeForce 8800 GTX for considerably less money.

With PCs, there's no such thing as futureproofing ... If you want to keep up with games, you're going to be upgrading every 1-3 years no matter if you buy a lower-midrange card or the most expensive card on the market. Sure, the more expensive card will buy you more time and give you better performance for the current games, but it's also more expensive in the long run than going with a new midrange card every year.

darknight788 · Post by **darknight788** » 14 Nov 2006, 06:40

i think im going to wait on the DX10 cards for now atleast until some DX10 games hit the market. the reason is because by the time those new games come out ( whenever that is ) is the 8 series going to be inferior to another type of gfx card from Ati or maybe even nvidia. everyone knows that when new technology hits the streets it has already been surpassed. although i must admit the 8800 does sound very impressive. im just speculating here