Halo 1 & 2 for PC
This topic has moved here: Subject: Will this homebuilt PC play Halo and with what frame rate?
  • Subject: Will this homebuilt PC play Halo and with what frame rate?
Subject: Will this homebuilt PC play Halo and with what frame rate?
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Pentium 4 530 3.0GHz - 1MB Cache - 800MHz FSB - SKTLGA775 Processor with HT Technology

DFI LANParty UT 915P-T12, UV Round Cables, CMOS Reloaded, UV Sensitive Slot

(x2) PNY 512MB DMM DDR 400Mhz/PC3200 Memory Module Non-ECC (1024MB Total)

XFX GEFORCE 6600GT PCI-E 128MB DDR3



Also please leave any recommendations on what to change!

  • 01.26.2005 7:35 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

nice specs halo will play nice on that very nice:)

  • 01.26.2005 7:56 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Just wondering if i shud get a Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro 256MB GDDR3 instead???? :S

  • 01.26.2005 8:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Just wondering if i shud get a Sapphire Radeon X700 Pro 256MB GDDR3 instead???? :S

  • 01.26.2005 8:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I don't think it would make that big of an improvement the 6600 is a nice card. I would use that money on a sound card and some surround sound speakers if you don't have any already.

  • 01.26.2005 8:16 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Yeah, the improvement will be minimal at best. Get a Creative Labs card w/5.1 and a $55 set of 5.1 speakers. Other than that, your set.


Aww...you didn't get an AMD processor...

  • 01.26.2005 9:21 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Heyyo,

My latest timedemo was like this:

screen rez: 640x480
refresh rate: 120Hz
framerate: VSYNC
Specular: off
Shadows: off
Textures: high
Particles: high

and I got around :41.53F/S

with your setup on my settings? You'd probably get over 70F/S. Your system pwns mine dude, you can crankt he graphics pretty high, and have a GREAT HaloPC experience. ;)

I agree with davis, you should've just bought amd, cheaper prices, and better for gaming than a P4. P4's are better for multi-tastking, and multimedia (burning cds, encoding videos, etc).

  • 01.26.2005 10:23 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I havent bought anything yet i was just wondering which is better i could still get an AMD whats the best (affordable) amd for gaming? also what mo-bo shud i get 4 it?

  • 01.26.2005 10:57 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Heyyo,

Here's what I suggest. Prices are Canadian and this's a comp warehouse I buy from, so prices will vary):

AMD Athlon64 (socket 939) $214 CDN (the P4 you wanted is over $250 and ain't as good in games! that's savings there, you can add it up for other better comp parts now, like a custom cpu fan):
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=12842&vpn=ADA3 000BIBOX& manufacture=AMD

DFI LANPARTY UT NF4 ULTRA-D MOTHERBOARD (socket 939) $190 (the one you were looking at for the P4 was over $200):
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=13825

Or if you want top of the line, guaranteed quality, you'll want assus. Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe (socket 939) $257.64 CDN:
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=13423

Some optional cooling upgrades. I suggest the cpu one over the case ones since your cpu generates the most heat. The otherones do cool down your system overal, and they're cheaper and tend to come with led's. You can always clip them and put your own colors for fun. ;)

(OPTIONAL) Thermaltake A1838 Slient Boost (socket 939) $31.33 CDN:
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=11590&vpn=A183 8&manufac ture=THERMALTAKE

(OPTIONAL) Coolermaster TLF-R82 80MM LED Case fan $10.98 CDN each:
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=10227&vpn=TLF-R 82-E1&manufacture=COOLERMASTER

[Edited on 1/26/2005 11:56:26 AM]

  • 01.26.2005 11:53 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Ive been looking into AMD and i alredey knew that they had a slower clockspeed so why are they so good? Like a 3000+ i used to think that was 3ghz but its only 1.8ghz but ive also read GH/z arent everyting n they shud b da last fing you look @ so i dont know.

I was already thinking of gettin an AMD with A8N-SLI Deluxe! but i dont know if it will be as good as a 3.0 P4???

  • 01.26.2005 2:01 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Well, thats the great megahertz myth as told by intel for many years for marketting purposes.

The 3000+ denotes that it should run as fast as a 3.0 ghz pentium, technically speaking its actually a reference to an older AMD processor, but generally speaking, an athlon64 3000+ is the equivalent of an intel pentium 4 3.0ghz, regardless of it's clock speed.

But the real deciding factor is bench marks rather than the name of the processor or any arbitary figure.

And the benchmark you should rely on? Any number of those done by tomshardware guide (www.tomshardware.com), but for your convenience, here is a good one to sum things up. And all test results were derived from a fair test.

Go here

To sum up, for gaming go for an Athlon 64, if you're more into video editing or stuff of that ilk, go for a pentium 4.

One last thing, please remember that the 64bit version of Windows XP will eventually be released, and when it does you'll get a nice speed bump in the OS.

  • 01.26.2005 2:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Amen to AMD's. Lower price, better performance, and 32/64 bit support!

  • 01.26.2005 3:26 PM PDT

* Pr: ĭnʹtərnĕts: "I hear there's rumors on the uh (pause), Internets...

yeah get AMD, Intel is just like so 2 years ago

  • 01.26.2005 4:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Heyyo,

Nicely said egor. ;)

Oh, the 64bit version of Windows XP is out, but it's a beta, the retail will probably be for the longhorn windows version, the next one in the makings.

For the athlon64 in 32bit mode, it acts something like 32bit+8bit. So it gets a little extra juice outta the power that is the Athlon64. :)

  • 01.26.2005 10:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT



I think Intel is a better innovator than AMD, but AMD has done a great job of positioning itself as a true competitor. Plus Intel has the advantage of making a great deal more stuff than just CPUs- motherboards, networking, sound and video, and a whole lot more, so their revenue is higher, so more money R&D.

AMD needs to drop their Performance Value and go back to straight Mhz ratings and get their CPUs into the high 3 Ghz range. I don't believe that my 2,063 Mhz actually performs like a 2800 Mhz Pentium IV for a second, at least as far as speed is concerned. But speed isn't everything, instruction sets and FPAs count, too.

  • 01.27.2005 2:16 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Heyyo,

*sighs* optimizations > raw power, thus AMD > Intel

enough chatter, benchmarks prove all.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041221/cpu_charts-15.html#d irect x_9

There's an interesting one:

AMD Athlon64 3200+ lineup beats the Intel P4 3.40GHz lineup... PWNED by a cpu that's supposed to be the equivalent of a whole 200MHz weaker.

now in multimedia (video encoding):
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041221/cpu_charts-18.html

P4 3.2GHz lineup beat the AMD Athlon64 3200+ lineup by a few seconds. so equivalents preform aboot the same.

Now, throw your muscle theory out the window, cause in the world of computers? true technicians strive for the most efficient, and optimized computer parts... Intel penitum lineups seems to be made by engineers who focus on raw power..

[Edited on 1/27/2005 10:12:15 AM]

  • 01.27.2005 10:09 AM PDT