[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by QuantumDelta
http://www.pricewatch.com/1/2/5746-1.htm

Currently the best ones around.

Someone is behind the times

Thats the 754 socket, which is no where near the top today, today we have the 939 socket, which also has memory controller for all chips.

I still have no idea what all the slot chatter was about, but if its anywhere NEAR being related to the 939, its allready out,even here, in the boonies.

[JR2000Z]

Originally posted by Ace Pace


Nforce4
Athlon 64 3500+
Geforce6800GT (probebly HSI cooler)
1024 (or 2GB) of Corsair RAM
Raptor drive for system
DiamondMaxIII 300GB for storage
Plextor DVD burner
standerd CD-Rom
 

Yep. I'm planning on joining in the A64 3500 bandwagon also.

[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by JR2000Z


Yep. I'm planning on joining in the A64 3500 bandwagon also.

Which motherboard?

[JR2000Z]

GIGABYTE "GA-K8NSNXP-939" nForce3 Ultra Chipset Motherboard

[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by JR2000Z
GIGABYTE "GA-K8NSNXP-939" nForce3 Ultra Chipset Motherboard

When are you planning to buy? if later on, you could wait for the Nforce 4, but thats not a big deal, the GIGABYTE motherboard is fine.

[JR2000Z]

Unless nForce4 has AGP supported, I'm not getting it. I don't want to have buy another GPU just for PCI-Express.

[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by JR2000Z
Unless nForce4 has AGP supported, I'm not getting it. I don't want to have buy another GPU just for PCI-Express.

As far as I know, nforce4 could have an AGP, just like the 925X has AGP modded on it by makers.

[QuantumDelta]

So is the 39 the production version of the development 59?
I was offline for a while and lost all track of this stuff - and admittedly haven't seen any development reports on the 59 for a while o_O

[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by QuantumDelta
So is the 39 the production version of the development 59?
I was offline for a while and lost all track of this stuff - and admittedly haven't seen any development reports on the 59 for a while o_O

I think your off the track, the slot today is only in use by the Itanium 2.

Today, sockets 939 is basicly 939 pins.

[QuantumDelta]

.............Where........anywhere.....have I said slot........?
Other than after scrolling up - first post.

Intel use(d) Slot.
AMD use Socket.

[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by QuantumDelta
.............Where........anywhere.....have I said slot........?
Other than after scrolling up - first post.

Intel use(d) Slot.
AMD use Socket.

Gigantic misunderstanding on my part on your first post of page 3.

Both use Socket now, Socket T and 939.


Anyone try shinemaps with 3.8?

[QuantumDelta]

I just need to install the shinemaps since I have the 4.8s

[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by QuantumDelta
I just need to install the shinemaps since I have the 4.8s

I thought the Shinemaps were included in the media VP's?
Stupid Wiki, dosn't have anything on the shinemaps.

[Vertigo1]

Originally posted by QuantumDelta
Intel use(d) Slot.
AMD use Socket.

If you wanna get technical, they both used slot designs, and abandoned them. (AMD used Slot A for the first gen Athlon processors.)

[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by Vertigo1


If you wanna get technical, they both used slot designs, and abandoned them. (AMD used Slot A for the first gen Athlon processors.)

If you want to get historical you mean, Slot A was before even the Athlon time.

Anything before the P3 and the Geforce 2 is ancient history

[StratComm]

No good, 4.8 doesn't fix the problem.

[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by StratComm
No good, 4.8 doesn't fix the problem.

Oh well, should we wait for our graphics god to move to hardware shaders, or wait for ATI's rewrite of catalyst drivers?

[CP5670]

I need to try FSO on my laptop sometime, which has an integrated R9000 mobility 32mb (total POS; slow, buggy and non-upgradeable, but the ISTS prize computers were strangely business models). I never got around to trying it since the desktop's 6800GT runs it perfectly but it might be interesting to see if the problem occurs with the laptop drivers, which are different from the normal catalysts. Of course, I get all kinds of other image corruption issues with it in other games, so I'm not expecting much.

BTW regarding processors, here is something that has me sort of confused. Since the Opteron 150 is exactly the same as a 940 pin FX53 but with a locked multiplier, why does it cost like $250 less? At the moment it seems like a great deal even if the slightly higher prices of a 940 motherboard and registered memory are taken into account.

[Ace Pace]

Originally posted by CP5670

BTW regarding processors, here is something that has me sort of confused. Since the Opteron 150 is exactly the same as a 940 pin FX53 but with a locked multiplier, why does it cost like $250 less? At the moment it seems like a great deal even if the slightly higher prices of a 940 motherboard and registered memory are taken into account. [/B]

I'm not sure of this one, but Opertron's are optimized for server tasks, and as far as I know, do not have the extra commands that most Athlons have.
Leaving the fact the 940 is a dead end in motherboards and registered memory is PRICY.

[CP5670]

No they're completely identical apart from the multiplier lock; same AMD64 architecture, same memory controller, same clockspeed and same cache sizes, but the O150 is about $600 and the FX53 is about $850. Maybe it's because they expect the former to be bought in large quantities at once (for office workstations). 940 will eventually only be used for workstations/servers but at the moment the 940 boards have almost all the features of 939s and registered memory isn't that much more expensive. It still looks like quite a good buy right now.