Halo 1 & 2 for PC
This topic has moved here: Subject: What PC would be better to play halo on?
  • Subject: What PC would be better to play halo on?
Subject: What PC would be better to play halo on?
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

What PC is better and why?

1: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-deta ils.asp?EdpNo=1431436&Sku=A458-1110%20B

Or

2: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-deta ils.asp?EdpNo=1462313&CatId=1887

  • 06.20.2005 8:35 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Please help me :)

  • 06.20.2005 8:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

They both have integrated graphics. You will probably want to go with the intel one because it has a PCIe slot and the AMD one has AGP.

[Edited on 6/20/2005]

  • 06.20.2005 9:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

While PCIX is nice - it's not all as l337 as you folks seem to think it is. AGP can handle most games - up to HL2 and Doom 3. I would definitely say P4's are antiquated and crappy, imho. The AMD chip is also 64 bit - which has its advantages.

I would never buy an Intel chip.

  • 06.20.2005 10:32 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: aM Inspire
The AMD chip is also 64 bit - which has its advantages.

I would never buy an Intel chip.


intel has 64 bit chips now, so look for a pentium 4 6xx series if you want that. If you really want multitasking bliss, get a dual-core processor. for intel, it's the 8xx series.

I never used an AMD processor, so i can't really argue with you about whether intel or AMD is better.

  • 06.20.2005 10:40 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Its a 754 pin. I was thinking that they are both around the same usefulness now but the intel (with PCIe) will have better upgrade opperatunities.

  • 06.20.2005 12:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

GET A AMD, thats all i got to say, relly i dont care what u get. So just get any AMD as long as its a AMD, its going to be beter compared to the competitive Intel. go to amd's web site and check it out.

  • 06.20.2005 1:45 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

GET A AMD, thats all i got to say, relly i dont care what u get. So just get any AMD as long as its a AMD, its going to be beter compared to the competitive Intel. go to amd's web site and check it out.

  • 06.20.2005 1:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Mr B
Posted by: aM Inspire
While PCIX is nice - it's not all as l337 as you folks seem to think it is. AGP can handle most games - up to HL2 and Doom 3. I would definitely say P4's are antiquated and crappy, imho. The AMD chip is also 64 bit - which has its advantages.

I would never buy an Intel chip.


Its not totally 'l33t' yet, but the fact is if your buying a new system now, and its meant for gaming, you really should get PCI express. You wont have to upgrade so soon later on.

With the PCI equivilent cards only costing a fraction more than AGP, if buying a new gaming system it would be daft to go for AGP now.


And so you see now my bias against Intel shines through....

  • 06.20.2005 2:07 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

You can't compare an AMD 754 to an Intel 775. The Intel system will be far better since the LGA775 socket is newer, by at least 1-2 years.

Besides, a socket 939 system using a 6600GT is about $900 on that site, while an Intel one without the graphics card is $800 - it'd be cheaper to go with the AMD, and even at the Intel systems' best they aren't as up-to-par as the AMD systems. The AMD's appear to be significantly faster as far as those barebones.

Why not build one from scratch? It can be pretty easy and inexpensive to get the parts. If you're on a budget you can get a socket 939 AMD64, Chaintech or ECS board, RAM, a PSU, decent graphics card, and all the rest you need for under $900. Probably even lower.

Like:
AMD64 3000+
Chaintech VNF4 Ultra Zenith
1GB Corsair Value Select DDR400
Antec 450watt
6600GT
Case [whatever you want]
80GB HDD
DVD+/-RW

Ultra-budget would be a Sempron socket 754 system, but an AMD64 socket 754 system is also pretty cheap.

PCI-express is good for future upgrades but AGP is about the same. I will say that there is about 20-30fps on higher end graphics cards that use PCI-e than AGP, but that shouldn't be a major concern.

At any rate, those two are very different. It would be more fair to you to compare socket 775 to 939 or socket 478 to 754. I'd go with an AMD system if I were you, considering that they are much more affordable than a comparable Intel system.

BTW - Intel 64-bit proc's are a fair amount more expensive than the AMD processors. In addition, going to Tom's Hardware Guide, tomshardware.com, you can see that the AMD dual-cores blow out the Intel ones. Not only in benchmarks - AMD runs at 55C, Intel at up to 70C.

[Edited on 6/20/2005]

  • 06.20.2005 2:43 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Ok but would the 64bit PC play halo 2 with everything on high and res at 1024x768 at a good frame rate? that is with a good agp video card not the onbored..

[Edited on 6/20/2005]

  • 06.20.2005 5:21 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

The videocard would have to be at least a 6600gt, but yes, it would - I think, no one has any info or anything on Halo 2 PC, so we don't know how demanding it will be. But even right now a 6600gt can handle most games on high with decent frame rates.

  • 06.20.2005 7:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I know a guy with a Radeon 9600 that runs HL2 and Doom 3 - he swears - with no problem...

AMD trumps.

  • 06.20.2005 8:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Since I've had to use my opteron/9600xt pc since my wd raptor died on my main machine, I've done well on Battlefield 2 with medium settings. However, Doom 3 on low and Half Life 2 medium. Like I said, high settings with higher resolutions, the 6600gt will give those and nothing lower really will. It's what he said he wants, I'm only telling him what the bare minimum card is for that. Mard will tell you the 9600XT can only go so far.

Mard has to play 800x600 on Halo with most settings enabled, several not. Really, you'd be paying $100 more for the 6600gt and getting something that will last much longer - hence saving him the trouble of upgrading sooner and wasting $100 in addition to the cost of a newer card.

I mean, he did say he wants very good graphics [high, 1280x***].

  • 06.20.2005 8:59 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i would go with the second one, i have experiance with the first one because i pretty much have the same specs, plus a video card, and my halo still hurts, but then again i got my system 3 years ago. your way behind the curve if you go with that first one, and seeing how cheap both of them are i would upgrade the video card to at least a radeon 9800 256mb, never been a big fan of nvidia because the first "good" card i got from them crapped out in 2 weeks and they wouldnt refund me.

EDIT: my 9600PRO will play halo on 1024x768 (with the new catalyst drivers), but thats pushing it, i used to play on 640x480 before that

[Edited on 6/20/2005]

  • 06.20.2005 9:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Ok I will get the 64bit PC with the 6600gt
thanks for the help everyone

  • 06.20.2005 9:17 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

np ;)

  • 06.20.2005 9:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

the thing about intels... as they get faster and faster... they make em run hotter and hotter.

amds are quite the contrary.

  • 06.20.2005 11:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

you should definetly go for the second one with the AMD 64, more up to date, but i would recommend a socket 939...also you would want to get at least a 6600 GT video card, or if you want to save money a 9600 XT would be awsome....

  • 06.21.2005 12:37 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

What if I went with the 6600 and not the 6600GT? The reason is I dont have DVI on my monitor..

This is the card I would get instead of the 6600GT its just the 6600

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-deta ils.a sp?EdpNo=1240195&Sku=TC3H-1016

[Edited on 6/21/2005]

  • 06.21.2005 10:14 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I believe the 6600 has 6 pipes, while the GT has 12... Is that right, SLD?

So the GT would be worth the extra money, imho.

  • 06.21.2005 10:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I would pay the $20 more for the 6600gt its just like I said I dont have DVI

  • 06.21.2005 10:52 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I am almost positive (99.99999999999999%) sure that you don't need a DVI monitor. It is worth paying the extra for the GT.

  • 06.21.2005 12:50 PM PDT