how this for £1900

shaffaaf27 · 8 Feb 2008 at 00:09

well its been like 6 months, so ill check, for fun, how close the price is now. (ps i tried to match it exactly. some item nto there, so i got the equivalent.

i think the main reason it went down is due to the price crash of RAM, and the GTX.

otherwise, some stuff has gone up. and i wonder how it will be back in august

Ezyryder · 8 Feb 2008 at 00:58

Buy this memory instead. Much better value :

http://overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MY-022-GS

If you are getting a GTX (and I dont see the point) get the cheapest. Otherwise go for a 3870X2 or a 8800GTS

Better value again!

porta · 8 Feb 2008 at 08:17

Ezyryder said:
Buy this memory instead. Much better value :

http://overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MY-022-GS

If you are getting a GTX (and I dont see the point) get the cheapest. Otherwise go for a 3870X2 or a 8800GTS Better value again!

i guess you missed the date when this thread started

square_imp · 8 Feb 2008 at 11:52

these days really not worth a GTX, for a 20" screen a GT will be enough.

shaffaaf27 · 8 Feb 2008 at 15:10

well the purpose of the thread changed, a yesterday, from a few months back

.

obviously i wouldnt do that. hell i wouldnt choose most o f those things atm.

VortexA1 · 8 Feb 2008 at 16:20

Ezyryder said:
If you are getting a GTX (and I dont see the point) get the cheapest. Otherwise go for a 3870X2 or a 8800GTS Better value again!

Ditto.

Also quad core isn't just for encoding - windows allocates the cores accordingly to work needed - makes for smoother experience.

DavidB · 8 Feb 2008 at 16:30

windows allocates the cores accordingly to work needed

By that logic every program that runs on windows is quad core enabled.....which just isn't true.
I think your both missing the point of this update tbh

HangTime · 8 Feb 2008 at 19:19

Interesting to see you've had to pay more for the 500gig had (ok so it's a different model...). I've noticed that HD prices have stagnated a lot in recent months.

shaffaaf27 · 8 Feb 2008 at 20:07

actually, its the same model. its just differently named

a couple of items have stayed static or gone up.

was surprised about the HDD, as bigger ones are being made, so i thought prices would have dropped.

VortexA1 · 8 Feb 2008 at 20:08

DavidB said:
By that logic every program that runs on windows is quad core enabled.....which just isn't true.
I think your both missing the point of this update tbh

no but windows is..im not saying the program splits itself up in bits(if it's not quad enabled) ..but for example ,of course windows might not do it like this ..scanning hard drive uses one core and then sees another program and then puts that load on another.

i don't want to get inane about it. at the mo my cores are all doing something and im not doing much. no 'quad core' enabled program.

Richdog · 8 Feb 2008 at 20:10

porta said:
i guess you missed the date when this thread started

No, that was stickroad...

russ0r · 9 Feb 2008 at 00:17

DavidB said:
By that logic every program that runs on windows is quad core enabled.....which just isn't true.

Every program that runs on Windows is quad-core enabled, because the OS they are running on knows to spread the CPU workload between the 4 cores.

Whether every program running on Windows is quad-core optimised is a different matter. When a program is running 4 different threads executing simultaneously and lets them interact and exchange information about the program running - that is when you'll see real performance benefits.