Mad Mardigan Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 I have to upgrade my comp, to tide me over for next years build. More Preformance. More Sound for the preformance. And the 400 watt supply will need some help, switching to a 550watt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 im not that mad on sound, if i had that kinda money to spend, i'd upgrade my processor and RAM for a faster computer, rather than getting a better sound system, unless you're really into music and sound effects, i dont think it is by any means needed. at the same time, looks nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mardigan Posted October 10, 2004 Author Share Posted October 10, 2004 I am using a P4 2.4ghz with 533mhz fsb, and 1 gig of corsair pc2700 @ 333mhz ram. Next year I will build a new system, and reuse the sound card and speakers. Adding a sound card will increase your preformance by 20%. Its less work for your processor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodhound Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 i am looking for a external sound card as well. cos my laptops integrated ac97 sound is god damn awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badchad Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 I think I mentioned it somewhere else on this board before. IMO if you're spending that much money on sound you should invest in a nice stand alone receiver and a surround sound package. This way, you can play your music, but also have a hometheatre. Also, you can build a hometheatre piece-by-piece so you can slowly invest and build a nice system from the ground up. For instance, I spent about 3 grand on my home theatre, but I did it over a period of like 3 and a half years. Now I have a kick ass time watching DVD's and can flip the system over to computer if I want to. Just curious, how big are those speakers in that pic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 mad_madrigan: keep more than the sound card from your old PC, you should include the RAM, may as well keep the HDDs in addition to new ones & you can have a dual processesor (dont know how, heard of it though) dunno bloodhound, not much into laptops, just do a googley search etc! wow, we posted at the same time! looking at the pic, look at the size of the buttons on the remote, so the speaker dont look too big, but size = volume, NOT quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badchad Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 definetly right on the size = volume not quality. I have a pair of the bose double cubes and they sound beautiful (no bass though). I also have a 15 inch cerwin vega subwoofer. While it has shaken the wiring of the lights in my house loose so they don't work anymore, the next one I buy will most likely be a 10 inch, slightly higher quality subwoofer..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ed84c Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 im still running on 333Mhz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mardigan Posted October 10, 2004 Author Share Posted October 10, 2004 I already have a surround sound system for my tv, 300 watt sony system with 2 10' subs getting 50 watts a piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 I've spent about £150 so far on my sound system for my computer. I have a £250 sony amplifier (STR-DE585) which I managed to pick up for £70 from eBay. My dad had some kickass speakers that I used for my fronts, and my backs are 2 £50 speakers which I managed to pick up for £25 each. My centre speaker/sub are on order Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 Ha! I have the speakers that came with the computer.... Why bother? Can't you just buy $150 fancy headphones that work just as well and cause less clutter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mardigan Posted October 10, 2004 Author Share Posted October 10, 2004 I know some headphones sound real good, but I prefer the open sound. I tell ya, looking up all of the new stuff out there, its getting hard not to start buying now. Where did that darn credit card application go (dont believe in those damn things). But that new P4 extreme edition looks nice. 2meg L3 cashe, 800mhz fsb. mmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 ive got the speakers which came with my computer, i see no need in upgrading to play games and listen to music... just as im not too fussed with graphics, ive got a 64MB NVIDA GeForce4 MX, it plays all in 1024 x 768 and thats good enough, my headphones dont stretch from the computer headphone port to my head! so im looking for long wire length headphones! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mardigan Posted October 10, 2004 Author Share Posted October 10, 2004 I run my 19in monitor at 1600x1200@32BPP, not a bad look at all. I play too many games not to have some kind of video quality. Never tested my benchmarks though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 i dont need that quality to enjoy a game, 1024 x 768 allows for high resolution gaming at what people what call a "realistic look" totaly smoothly, to enjoy a game i dont want to see pixels and i need a good game play, 1024 x 768 boast immense quality which totaly satisfies the needs of 90% of all people and 75% of gamers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mardigan Posted October 10, 2004 Author Share Posted October 10, 2004 I dont see pixils while playing, I get a great fluid look and feel during play. Recently bought Far Cry, great game that uses up resources like crazy. I run it at 1280 x 764. If I was to boost it to 1600 x 1200 like my regular desktop, It would be choppy, that is why I must upgrade again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodhound Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 it just depends on what ur native resolution is. if ur using tfts , then using anything except the native resolution will give a messed up picture. i find 1024 768 sufficient enough for my purposes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 11, 2004 Share Posted October 11, 2004 Far Cry eats my computer. Then again, I did crank up all the settings to the top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodhound Posted October 11, 2004 Share Posted October 11, 2004 i ve read that its one of the most demanding games out there. is it more power hungry than doom3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted October 11, 2004 Share Posted October 11, 2004 yes farcry is what some people would call a resource hogger, although it only acts that way whilsts running, however as dave said, he set everything to max, lower the graphics to maybe 800 x 600 and whilsts still looking respectable i would imagine he would have a smooth game.... also other factors like shadowing and triple-buffering are unnecesarily and resouce demanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mardigan Posted October 11, 2004 Author Share Posted October 11, 2004 Recomended system per the case: (not minimum req.) AMD Athlon XP Model 2000+ or above P4 2ghz 512meg to 1g of ram Sound blaster audigy 4x dvd 4gb of free space Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now