System Upgrade - Possibilities ...

[Timbuk2]

Yes it's that time again, when one's creaky old system takes over a day to boot up, its valves are wheezing somewhat and the whole thing is getting a bit whiffy.

And, more to the point, I'm now seriously fed up with 45 second end-of-turn processing times in Civ 5.

Sooo ... a shiny new system is calling, one that will be NEW and MODERN for about 0.38 pico seconds.

I work in IT, so this is all weird and foreign to me. So for you people in the know ... I am thinking about the following setup and wouldn't mind help/advice/criticism/abuse:


Speedy thing: Intel Core i7 Quad Core i7-960 (3.20GHz) 4.8GT/s/bMB C
TRON board: ASUS P6X58D-E: DDR3, USB 3.0, SATA 6.0GB/s, 3-Way SLI
Program holding space: 12GB KINGSTON HYPER-X TRI-DDR3 1600MHz, X.M.P (6 x 2GB KIT)
Screen update device: 1280MB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX470 GDDR5 PCI EXPRESS
Porn storage: 1TB WD CAVIAR BLACK WD1002FAEX, SATA 6 Gb/s, 64MB CACHE (7200rpm)
Controlling AI: Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit - inc DVD & Licence
POWAH: CORSAIR 750W PSU (TX750) 80+ ULTRA QUIET

I will be using existing sound card, second HD (1TB), speakers, mouse+keyb, net card, and monitor.


My current setup is a Quad core Q6600, 4GB RAM, GeForce 8800GTX, 32bit Windows Vista arrangement. Over 4 yrs old now.

The spec I've listed above should be an improvement over current set up worth paying for? P'ticularly the move to 64 bit computing ... ?

[Angel_Mapper]

Seems good, going to upgrade to Win7?

[Illusions]

My current setup is a Quad core Q6600, 4GB RAM, GeForce 8800GTX, 32bit Windows Vista arrangement. Over 4 yrs old now.

You might want to ask around on the Civ 5 forums as to what might be slowing it down, as I'm running a similar setup, but with 8 GB of RAM and Windows 7 64 bit, but its not to play Civ 5 but do 3D work and rendering.

[EyeKhan]

Would you feel comfortable posting your ticket price on that system?

[Timbuk2]

Seems good, going to upgrade to Win7?

Yup yup. It's on my spec list.

You might want to ask around on the Civ 5 forums as to what might be slowing it down, as I'm running a similar setup, but with 8 GB of RAM and Windows 7 64 bit, but its not to play Civ 5 but do 3D work and rendering.

No immediate answer is forthcoming on the Civ forums. A lot of people have similar performance to me, and many reporting much, much longer waiting times too.

My 32 bit windows vista will make a difference here I think. Slow.

Would you feel comfortable posting your ticket price on that system?

Aye. Comes to around ~£1,425. So US$2,258

Not bad, keeping in mind that 'lectronics are stupidly expensive in the UK.

Priced at PC Specialist, where you order your components, they build it and ship it. They work out cheaper than buying the individual components and building it yourself. Cheaper than the likes of Dell and Acer and other major manufacturers too, for a like-for-like system.

[EyeKhan]

Wow. That's a lot. You could get an equivalent dell in the states for more like 12 to 15 hundred I think.

[Ominous Gamer]

What type of monitor are you plugging all this into? Unless you're pushing the higher than HD resolutions, I'm willing to bet you could save some cash with a 460, and SLIed 460s are considered to be the best bang for your buck, besting even 5870s.

Wow. That's a lot. You could get an equivalent dell in the states for more like 12 to 15 hundred I think.

Dell's closest prebuilt Alienware offering (Aurora ALX) comes with less ram, a slower graphics card, and a slower CPU. Still priced at $2,399.
Their XPS offering (9100), customized to match his specs but with an ATI 5870, comes in at $2159.

and, well...its Dell

[EyeKhan]

Hmmm.... maybe I misunderstood the awesomeness of the system he's bought...

[Being]

Yup yup. It's on my spec list.


No immediate answer is forthcoming on the Civ forums. A lot of people have similar performance to me, and many reporting much, much longer waiting times too.

My 32 bit windows vista will make a difference here I think. Slow.



Aye. Comes to around ~£1,425. So US$2,258

Not bad, keeping in mind that 'lectronics are stupidly expensive in the UK.

Priced at PC Specialist, where you order your components, they build it and ship it. They work out cheaper than buying the individual components and building it yourself. Cheaper than the likes of Dell and Acer and other major manufacturers too, for a like-for-like system.

I'd recommend against letting them build it. You won't know for sure whether they used some returned parts. But that's just me. Plus, I really enjoy the assembling part of building a PC.

[Timbuk2]

What type of monitor are you plugging all this into? Unless you're pushing the higher than HD resolutions, I'm willing to bet you could save some cash with a 460, and SLIed 460s are considered to be the best bang for your buck, besting even 5870s.

24" TFT, 1920x1600 native res.

What res is HD?

You think the 470 is OTT?

When upgrading, I never go for the cutting edge, the very latest, I tend to go for one step down. Prices for cutting edge are always ridiculous.

SLI - as in Dual SLI? Isnt that for anoraks obsessed with pushing mega FPS on the likes of Call of Duty and other first person shooters? Given that I don't play games that demand mega FPS really.

I guess I can see how much a 460 will bring the price down. Not sure about dual though ...

and, well...its Dell

My current set up is a Dell. The first and last time I'll buy one.

I'd recommend against letting them build it. You won't know for sure whether they used some returned parts. But that's just me. Plus, I really enjoy the assembling part of building a PC.

The company are fairly accomplished and widely used, so should be ok.

I would like to assemble myself, it would be satisfying.

But I'm a bit wary of things like cooling, how do I know I have enough, would I need more fans in the case, is the heatsink on the proc big enough. It's too much money to risk for me, so I let the professionals do it.

[Illusions]

24" TFT, 1920x1600 native res.

What res is HD?

1920 x 1080. Does your monitor really have that as its native resolution? Because thats squarer than the standard 4:3

[Timbuk2]

Apologies - just checked settings - 1920x1200

[Hazir]

That's some serious gadgetry buying

[Ominous Gamer]

I'm going to leech off of this before I attempt my own thread.
With Black Friday around the corner I'm planning my next computer upgrade. Which will likely only need to be a harddrive for now. 3TB drives were just announced so I'm predicting 1 and 2 TB drives to be the door buster items.

Would I get better performance out of Green 1TB drives at 5400-5900RPM in RAID 0, or a single 2TB drive at 7900RPM?

[Being]

I would like to assemble myself, it would be satisfying.

But I'm a bit wary of things like cooling, how do I know I have enough, would I need more fans in the case, is the heatsink on the proc big enough. It's too much money to risk for me, so I let the professionals do it.

Take advice from the pros...sharkeyextreme

[Ominous Gamer]

Digging this one up again....

Memory prices are in the toilet right now. Especially DDR3. I'm looking to upgrade to 8GB, but that would mean new memory and a new motherboard (which would actually be cheaper than sticking with DDR2).
Anyone else think 8GBs right now is worth it, or will the computer format continue to linger until the next console refresh several years down the road?

[Being]

Digging this one up again....

Memory prices are in the toilet right now. Especially DDR3. I'm looking to upgrade to 8GB, but that would mean new memory and a new motherboard (which would actually be cheaper than sticking with DDR2).
Anyone else think 8GBs right now is worth it, or will the computer format continue to linger until the next console refresh several years down the road?

Only triple-channel DDR3 entices me right now and they are not cheap especially since I'd need to upgrade motherboard and processor. And, my current 2 year old machine hasn't had a problem playing games at their highest settings, so...

[Lebanese Dragon]

Did you have a DVD player?

[Being]

Did you have a DVD player?

Who are you asking and why?

[Aimless]

I very much look forward to the day when cloud gaming will kill the PC monster

[Ominous Gamer]

I very much look forward to the day when cloud gaming will kill the PC monster

Oh hell no.

[Aimless]

Hell yes, and it will be an amazing energy-efficient future

[Ominous Gamer]

I see it being wasteful, anti-ownership, and catering to a common denominator. If I wanted vanilla gaming that looked and acted like everyone elses' I'd play on a console. Onlive is only a hint of that horrible path of cloud path.

[Lor]

... I'd play on a console.

Why do you say such nasty things?

[Aimless]

I see it being wasteful

What? How? It'll enable millions of people to have an enjoyable gaming experience without regularly having to upgrade hardware. The hardware in the clients seem far less wasteful than the hardware currently in existence in all the world's millions of gaming systems, be they PCs or consoles. And let's not forget economy of scale yo

Enthusiasts and other freaks can still have their own systems and kill the earth, don't worry.

anti-ownership

Eh?

[quote]and catering to a common denominator.[quote]

You say that like it's a bad thing

If I wanted vanilla gaming that looked and acted like everyone elses' I'd play on a console.

Hey OG the entirety of human existence is not about pleasing you and your quirks. Note how millions of people around the world actually DO play on consoles and seem to be very happy doing so. Mark my words OG, cloud gaming will be the bees knees and how!

[Ominous Gamer]

What? How? It'll enable millions of people to have an enjoyable gaming experience without regularly having to upgrade hardware. The hardware in the clients seem far less wasteful than the hardware currently in existence in all the world's millions of gaming systems, be they PCs or consoles. And let's not forget economy of scale yo

Enthusiasts and other freaks can still have their own systems and kill the earth, don't worry.

A month of gaming with Onlive uses over 250GBs of data. Thats enough to kill even US Comcast accounts. Its extremely wasteful considering how much information is tranferred repeatedly due to the nature of cloud gaming.

Eh?

Its the physcial manifestation of the license ownership written into EULAs. Cloud computer removes all consumer interference from the publisher's right to control the content you're paying for. Hot Coffee mods, community support long after a game dies (Total Annihilation), it all goes down the drain with cloud computing, because the gamer has no rights.
As it stands right now, you're paying full price to rent a game, and seeing how that model hasn't changed with other internet subscription based plans, there is no reason to think it would change with cloud gaming.

You say that like it's a bad thing

Because it is Having a base to work from is great, but forcing everyone to the same experience, same settings, same approved experience is not a good thing.

Hey OG the entirety of human existence is not about pleasing you and your quirks.

Note how millions of people around the world actually DO play on consoles and seem to be very happy doing so. Mark my words OG, cloud gaming will be the bees knees and how!

I use consoles as well, and I'm hoping we can get into the differences here a little deeper, but all you're projecting right now is that consoles gamers are happy because they're ignorant.

[Aimless]

A month of gaming with Onlive uses over 250GBs of data. Thats enough to kill even US Comcast accounts.

That's like, what, about 200 hours of gaming per month? Dude, that's enough to kill even American gamers as for the caps, that's just the current situation. Bandwidth will get cheaper and data transmission will become much much more efficient in the years to come (lots of initiatives already under way).

Its extremely wasteful considering how much information is tranferred repeatedly due to the nature of cloud gaming.

I'm sure they can improve the technology to require less transmission, and transmission itself will become less wasteful.

Its the physcial manifestation of the license ownership written into EULAs. Cloud computer removes all consumer interference from the publisher's right to control the content you're paying for. Hot Coffee mods, community support long after a game dies (Total Annihilation), it all goes down the drain with cloud computing, because the gamer has no rights.
As it stands right now, you're paying full price to rent a game, and seeing how that model hasn't changed with other internet subscription based plans, there is no reason to think it would change with cloud gaming.

But why is that a problem? For a large group of players this might be a very reasonable option! It offers another kind of flexibility. Ownership isn't the only thing of value in this world.

Because it is Having a base to work from is great, but forcing everyone to the same experience, same settings, same approved experience is not a good thing.

Let's say you're right and that there is really no room for any sort of variation wrt settings and "experience" with this tech. Why on earth is that inherently bad if players are happy with it?

You can roll your eyes all you like, but it's 100% true.

I use consoles as well, and I'm hoping we can get into the differences here a little deeper, but all you're projecting right now is that consoles gamers are happy because they're ignorant.

Hang on now, I've said nothing about the ignorance of console gamers. I have no idea why console gamers--or any gamers --are happy. All that really matters is that they are people who want to exploit gamer-glee are welcome to delve deeper into that question.

[Ominous Gamer]

That's like, what, about 200 hours of gaming per month? Dude, that's enough to kill even American gamers as for the caps, that's just the current situation. Bandwidth will get cheaper and data transmission will become much much more efficient in the years to come (lots of initiatives already under way).

90 hours a month. Bandwidth has gotten cheaper for years, and consumer prices have increased, bandwidth caps are new for the US, and don't appear to be going anywhere soon. Besides, you want cloud computing to be the next big thing, might as well use it on the next big thing in access, wireless data plans. Whoops, those are even worse off.

I'm sure they can improve the technology to require less transmission, and transmission itself will become less wasteful.

As games become more involved, more intense, larger, the amount to be transferred will only increase. Compression is out there, but compression is extremely hardware intensive. Defeating the entire point behind cloud computing. By its very nature cloud computing has, and always will have, an on going battle with lag. Anything done to decrease bandwidth cost will only end up increasing lag.

But why is that a problem? For a large group of players this might be a very reasonable option! It offers another kind of flexibility. Ownership isn't the only thing of value in this world.

How is buying something, only to be told you don't actually own it, but are in fact only purchasing the ability to have access to it, and that that access can be revoke at any time....good for anyone?
Cause the APB players could sure use a pep talk right about now.

Let's say you're right and that there is really no room for any sort of variation wrt settings and "experience" with this tech. Why on earth is that inherently bad if players are happy with it?

largely for the same reasons the Apple App store is bad.
Don't trust the consumer to make smart decisions, so take all decision making away from them.

I have no idea why console gamers--or any gamers --are happy.

Then why support cloud gaming when its so counter productive to what gamers are used to, and displayed a want towards?

[Aimless]

[QUOTE=Ominous Gamer;63578]90 hours a month.[quote]

The only info I've found from onlive's forums is that it's something like 150-300 hours a month. My own calculations puts it at much higher than that assuming a constant 10 megabits/sec downstream transfer rate at 1080p (in reality it's less) but I suppose they may have included upstream transfer as well.

Bandwidth has gotten cheaper for years, and consumer prices have increased, bandwidth caps are new for the US, and don't appear to be going anywhere soon. Besides, you want cloud computing to be the next big thing, might as well use it on the next big thing in access, wireless data plans. Whoops, those are even worse off.

Okay so your country is having some teething troubles, but at the same time cloud gaming companies will be able to make deals with ISPs and other crazies. After all, it's not like they're providing cable TV, so who would hate them??!?!

As games become more involved, more intense, larger, the amount to be transferred will only increase. Compression is out there, but compression is extremely hardware intensive. Defeating the entire point behind cloud computing.

1. You're still mostly transferring video and basic I/O

2. Dedicated decompression hardware if you must, can do it a lot better than general purpose computing hardware

3. As if the tech behind actually delivering data isn't continuously getting better and more energy-efficient

How is buying something, only to be told you don't actually own it, but are in fact only purchasing the ability to have access to it, and that that access can be revoke at any time....good for anyone?

Wow, you almost sound like people never eg. rent apartments, use spotify premium, subscribe to magazines, play WoW, pay for cable TV...

Cause the APB players could sure use a pep talk right about now.

Decronym pls.

largely for the same reasons the Apple App store is bad.
Don't trust the consumer to make smart decisions, so take all decision making away from them.

They trust the consumer to make the smart decision of not bothering with all that fucking hassle the simplicity is the SERVICE. I have nfi if the apple app store or any other app store is "inherently bad", from what I can see that assertion remains to be proven.

Then why support cloud gaming when its so counter productive to what gamers are used to, and displayed a want towards?

Because it will save the planet as well as save a lot of gamers. The more it develops the more gamers will begin to realise that they might be able to get used to something new, to want something else. Almost like human beings, capable of making new decisions

[Aimless]

PS. my point about not having any idea why gamers are happy is my way of saying that different things make different people happy and that I have no business making any sweeping statements or harsh judgements about what makes everyone happy, reading between the lines neither do you.