Your Hardware

by **Deathstalker** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 13:54

Hi! I'm curious what hardware do u have.
I have:
Processor: Intel Celeron D 330 2,66 GHz Socket 775
Mainboard: MSI MS-6782
Memory: 1 slot: 512 DDR-SDRAM, 2 slot: 256 DDR-SDRAM
Graphic card: ATI Radeon 9550 AGP 128 MB
Music card: Realtek AC97 Audio
Display: Belinea 17' 101715
Mice: Razer Diamondback 1600 DPI
Keyboard: A4Tech KB-21
Internet: 1 Mbit/s
OS: Windows XP Pro SP2

This is piece of shit and scrap. I don't know how can it works :lol:

by **SoLInvictuS** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:36

Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz (2 CPUs)
Memory: 512MB RAM
Hard Drive: 160 GB
Video Card: RADEON X1600 Series
Monitor: Standaardbeeldscherm
Sound Card: Realtek AC97 Audio
Keyboard: USB-hoofdhub
Mouse: USB-hoofdhub
Operating System: Windows XP Home Edition (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 2 (2600.xpsp_sp2_qfe.070227-2300

by **Union** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 14:09

I bought this one in september last year (when c2d got to our little country

) :
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 (2,13GHz)
Motherboard: Asus P5W DH Deluxe
RAM: 2x1024MB DDR2 800MHz Geil (PC2-6400)
Graphics card (current): Radeon X1300 (O_o - next week it'll be asus 7950GT 512mb)
HDD: 320GB seagate SATA2 16mb
PSU: tagan 580W
Monitor: Samsung 205BW HAS (20" WS)
Keyboard: logitech G15
Mouse: Razed diamondback
OS: windows Vista buisiness 32bit
Internet conn.: SiOL 10m/768k

I got my 7950 in the mail last week, but i didn't go home to pick it up (gonna do that this friday

)

Hf every1

by **Buu** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 14:20

damn my PC sucks i bought it 2 years ago
CPU:AMD sempron 3000+ 1,81 ghz
RAM:1 ghz DDR(2x512 kingstone)
graphics card :Radeon 9600 pro 256 mb
HDD: 120 gb
Music card: Realtek AC97 Audio
Keyboard: A4Tech KB-21
Internet: Chello

1,5 Mbit/s
Monitor: Samsung 205bw has 20"
Mouse: ET-33 nemo (or sth like that)
OS:windows XP professional

by **Pancake** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 14:28

Manufacturer: FUJITSU SIEMENS
Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.86GHz
Memory: 1022MB RAM
Hard Drive: 80 GB
Video Card: ATI MOBILITY RADEON X300
Monitor: Plug und Play-Monitor
Sound Card: SoundMAX HD Audio O
Speakers/Headphones: USB-Root-Hub
Keyboard: USB-Root-Hub
Mouse: USB-Root-Hub
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 2 (2600.xpsp_sp2_gdr.070227-2254)

Greetz torte

by **Pele** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 17:26

Processor:AMD Athlon Dual core 3800+
2.01 GHz
2 GB RAM
video card:Geforce 256 mb
Internet: 4mbit/s
Keyboard:(i think good)Logitech
Mouse:Genius laser 1600 dpi
Operating system: Windows XP home
monitor: Samsung SyncMaster 940N (lcd)
mikrofon:logitech

Pele

by **NightMare** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 18:48

AMD athlon 2400+ mmx 3dnow 2,0GHZ (( yes i know..

))
memory 512mb..
80gb HD
40gb HD
videocard - XFX nvidia gforce 7600 gs 512mb
mouse - dno old one with ball -.-

need to buy myself new one

keyboard - Qwerty from IBM
windows xp Pro
monitor - philips 190cw (19inch LCD WIDE MONITOR )
no headset need to but one too:) yeah got one but mic is broken letterly:P
not the best but i can game and stuff so its good

LaterzZ

Night,,

by **Wastl** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 21:08

Xfire (scroll down)

Gaming Rig
Manufacturer:
Dell
Processor:
Intel Core2duo @ 2.40GHz
Memory:
2046MB RAM 4x 512MB
Hard Drive:
ca. 300 GB
Video Card:
NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GS
Monitor:
Philips Flatscreen
Sound Card:
Dell Standard
Speakers/Headphones:
Wireless Headphones / Typhoon Headset
Keyboard:
Dell Standard
Mouse:
Logitech MX518
Mouse Surface:
Steelpad QcK
Operating System:
Windows Vista

by **NightMare** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 21:29

how is vista like?? much changes??

LaterzZ

Night,,

by **Stormcrow** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 21:38

Laptop:

Dell Inspiron
1.86 Ghz
ATI Radeon Mobility X700
1024 mb RAM
120 GB HDD

PC 1:

AMD Athlon XP Barton 3200+ (round 2 Ghz)
ATI Radeon 9800
1024 mb RAM
160 GB HDD

PC 2:

Intel Celeron 2400 Mhz
ATI Radeon 9200 SE
512 mb RAM
80 GB HDD

Next one will come in September or October for ET:QW and specially for LAN-Party's *slobber*

Mouse: Logitech MX518
Mousepad: X9001 Gamingmousepad

Edit:

How is vista? I've made a elobaration over different OS's for my studies. We've testet performance etc., and Windows Vista sucked up in every single benchmark we have written.

Windows XP is 2 times "better", Linux/*nix - Systems even three times better. If i ever have to use a M$-OS's, ill take Windows XP.

by **Draggiejj** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 22:34

Manufacturer:
Powerline
Processor:
AMD Athlon 1024 MB or so ( My com is old

)
Memory:
512 MB Ram
Hard Drive:
80 GB
Video Card:
NVIDIA GeForce 5200 FX @ 512 MB
Monitor:
Philips 190S
Sound Card:
Realtek AC97
Speakers/Headphones:
Realtek AC97
Wireless Headphones / Typhoon Headset
Keyboard:
Trust Slim line KB-1400S
Mouse:
Trust Predator Gaming Mouse GM-4200
Operating System:
Windows XP Home edition.

by **jarski_1516** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 23:06

Stormcrow wrote:How is vista? I've made a elobaration over different OS's for my studies. We've testet performance etc., and Windows Vista sucked up in every single benchmark we have written.

So Windows Vista needs more from your computer than older Windows? Thats a big surprise, of course it needs more power, because its so much nicer to look and have more gadgets etc.. :roll:

Try to compare xp to Windows 95 for example and try which one gives you more FPS in games.. We are living TODAY and if your computer sucks, dont use vista, if your computer sucks more, dont use xp etc.. I would NEVER go back to xp from my vista ultimate and you wont either if you just try it with good computer. IÂ´m so tired of these Linux fanboys and people who are against vista because vista is so much better than xp, if you havent tried it dont say it sucks because some1 who is thinking of buying it will read it and never buys it because of that you dont have experience from it and you say it sucks because you dont have computer good enough to run it.. I have nothing bad to say about linux or xp because I have tried those BEFORE I say something bad about those and vista is so much better than xp really if you have good computer. Linux is good too and I envy those people who have enough skills to use that, but everyday use was too hard to me and I couldnt find programs which I needed etc.. So if you have good computer, buy vista..

"Windows XP is 2 times "better", Linux/*nix - Systems even three times better. If i ever have to use a M$-OS's, ill take Windows XP." What was that?!? Why its 2 times worse than xp? Give some facts with that? And sorry that Im little bad mood, I just fought today with some1 who had crappy computer and he said vista sucks ass because he was just jealous to me because I have computer which can run vista without problems and he had no money to buy it.. So nothing personal to you stormcrow, Im just tired to defence vista because its really good and people just say it sucks without even trying it.. I dont get money from my defencive speaks, I just want that people have better OS than xp.. Its my point..

by **Stormcrow** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 23:47

Hey buddy, listen, i am studying that crap, so dont tell me im a linux-fanatic. It's fact, made on the newest computers we have on our university in an objective way. Whatever...

I am not in my bachelor thesis, i have neither the time nor the delight to vindicate our work. So i dont begin with the mathematical stuff, but here a fact which might show what i mean:

Rendering a animation with blender which has only 140 frames tooks about 52 minutes, with Windows XP only 27 minutes, and with Solaris less then 20 Minutes.

Which advantage i have made to buy a brand-new computer with the newest hardware running under M$ Vista if i can have the same performance with an little bit older computer running under M$ XP? And your comparison with Win 95 is crap, XP is the standard atm.

And thats my point.

by **SoLInvictuS** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 0:06

I have XP and Vista
about same computers...
Vista is nicer and that is all
gaming is equal for me

but I have heard other negative things about Vista so I will never put it on this PC ;-)

but ty for the info

by **jarski_1516** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:26

You cant say that xp is 2Xbetter than vista and linux is 3xbetter than vista just because of raw performance numbers. For normal user it doesnt matter if you get 400 or 300 FPS when you play games, or when you unpack zip-file it doesnt matter does it take 20 or 15 seconds. Of course vista needs more power from your computer and is little slower if you compare xp and vista with same computer because vista is more advantace and have more features and eyecandy than xp. (also Vista is still pretty new OS so it needs SP1 to get to the same performance than xp or just a little closer) What was my point is that theres so many other things that say is OS good or bad than performance (like userfriendlyiness and it looks good and easy to use etc.) So you cant say that vista sucks because of just it performance (which is logigal thing because its newer OS) bacause SO many of us here are getting OS to homecomputer and use it for gaming and surffing etc, normal things, and then its so much more important thing that OS is easy and good to use than "xp is 4 secs faster than vista" Sorry if my first post was a little attacking, I dont want war, still friends?

I didnt say that you are Linux fanboy, I was telling my todays argues with those people.. So sorry about that if you saw that thing like I was saying that to you..

EDIT: and I noticed your "" when you said "2x better" but some1 maybe dont understand it so I made it a little clearer..

EDIT2:

SoLInvictuS wrote:Vista is nicer and that is all
gaming is equal for me
but I have heard other negative things about Vista so I will never put it on this PC

See, thats what I ment..

by **RAmpaGE** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:47

wake up, people dont just use computer for gaming. lol whats the difference of 400 and 300 frames. Yeah its 100 frames!!!

If im rendering stuff ( a full scale video of 30 minutes) of course it matters if i can render it in 3 days or in 8 hours. I AM FINISHING MY WORK FASTER.

I dont care if my backround is darker blue, or the menu fade in nicer.
But when i start a 3d api in vista, it has to take down all the 3d desktop, just to start my api, IT TAKES TIME.

So in everyday life i would say this sums up to 5 times more productivity simply because i use a better operating system.

So what the big deal of Vista besides the graphics, what is really new?

What is really new, and is used everyday from people on their work and makes their life easier?

What is this breakthrough they are talking about??

I didnt see it, the only things i saw in vista is the drm stuff to protect Hollywood movies, and to do that they crippled all the movies playback.
It means i cannot even send my RENDERED MOVIE which BELONGS TO ME to somebody to view it in FULL RESOLUTION. I have to create signatures and DRM licenses which cost money.

Damn blender is the shit stormy, open source at its best. Im using it for 5 years now, if u get used to it it can outperform any 3d design software.

Oh and here my rig:

CPU --> AMD Athlon 4800 x2 64bit

MB --> ASUS M2N32- sli deluxe (8 channel audio, wifi, dual gigabit lan with network teaming +sums up to 2 gbit transfer)

MEM --> 4x1 GB DDR2 (dual channel) clock 533, with dual FSB=1066

HD's --> x6 RAPTORS in RAID, x2 maxtors 500GB

GPU --> 2x Nvidia 7950GX2(dual sli sandwich with 512 mem each card) 500Mhz clock, 600 Mhz memory clock
Makes a total of 4 cards(QUAD SLI) working in parallel with a total of 2 GB of graphic memory

by **jarski_1516** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 17:34

... I said SO many of us here use computer for normal things.. You use it for work and OFCOURSE then raw performance numbers are more important to you than userfriendliness and eyecandy. Like a racecar and a familycar. It doesnt matter to F1 driver do car have a airconditioner or not, but familycar user wants airconditioner because he use it for normal driving and wants comfortable from car. It doesnt matter to familycar if that car goes 200km or 160km per hour, it matters is it good to drive. So if you need raw power, then use linux etc. but you shouldnt say that something else sucks if it isnt made to satisfy your needs and its made to satisfy some1 elses needs..

by **RAmpaGE** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 18:21

simply said, something isn't GOOD if it is on the same hardware and has shit performance.
Of course it matters if u have a family car and a race car, but this example u have given is simply not well put. If u compare race cars with family cars they don't have the same engines , parts etc. But in this case with computers they have and vista simply sux with the same hardware.

Lets put it this way:
If u have a car and u have the opportunity to select between fuel of 3 companies, and
nr 1. fuel is free, consumes less to drive,parts and service(software) by using this fuel are free, and ur car is faster, and has the opportunity to carry more passengers and heavier load (run more programs simultaneously)

nr 2. fuel is very expensive, ur car consumes more,part and service cost money,ur car is shit slow (vista), cannot carry many passengers.

nr 3. fuel price is ok, but parts and service(software) are shit expensive and limited, ur car is fast and carry a lot of passengers

By fuel i mean operating system,
nr1. is Linux
nr2. is Vista
nr3. is a mac(technically it uses Linux but ok, i don't want to make mac users angry, but mac is consequently stealing open source, adds a little retouch and sells it)

make up your mind and choose one??!!??!

by **jarski_1516** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 20:16

RAmpaGE wrote:1. fuel is free, consumes less to drive,parts and service(software) by using this fuel are free, and ur car is faster, and has the opportunity to carry more passengers and heavier load (run more programs simultaneously)

nr 2. fuel is very expensive, ur car consumes more,part and service cost money,ur car is shit slow (vista), cannot carry many passengers.

nr 3. fuel price is ok, but parts and service(software) are shit expensive and limited, ur car is fast and carry a lot of passengers

By fuel i mean operating system,
nr1. is Linux
nr2. is Vista
nr3. is a mac

1: needs more skill to use properly and is ugly (cant play games except some)
2: have air condition, ABS, and lether seats and you have money to pay for those (easy to use and have good compatility to softwares) (I know that some1 says that many softwares arent compatility with vista but I havent seen that kind a software yet, have been using this half a year now!)
3: I dont say anything about this, because I dont have experience about macs (cant play games except some, say if I am wrong)

If youre power user and you need performance linux or mac is the choice
If youre not power user and you just want easy use and nice looks, go to vista. I dont need power to video editing etc. so I choose this.

PS: I didnt understood that passenger thing (nevermind, now I understood)

by **Bounty** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:06

CPU : P4 Prescott @ 3,5 GHz cooling :Akasa Evo 120 Amber
GraCa :GeForce 7950 GT
Mem:2x 1024 mb kingston DDR II
MoBo:Asus P5K-E WiFi-AP
HDD:2x Seagte @160 gb
PowerSupply :OCZ GameXStream 600W
Case :ThermalTake Armor Junior

ahjo Sys :MS XP SP2
Mouse :Razer Krait <3
Keyoard : OEM (best ever !!!)

by **adg** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:49

Heres mine

:

Operating System: Microsoft Windows XP Professional 5.1.2600 (WinXP Retail)
OS Service Pack: Service Pack 2
CPU: Intel Pentium 4 530, 3000 MHz (dualcore)
System Memory: 1536 MB (DDR2-533 DDR2 SDRAM)
Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT (256 MB ddr3)
Disk space: 260.8 GB (135.3 GB free)
Keyboard: Logitech G15
Mouse: Logitech MX1000

by **3o6k0** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:38

Procesor:Amd athlon 3.2 ghZ
Memory: 1gb RAM
HDD:260Gb RoxXx

Video card:GeForce 6200
Sound card:Realtek AC97
Operating system:Windows XP with visual style of Vista

Monitor: Samsung SM 920n
Keyboard:Pleomax pkb 7000x
Mouse:Logitech vx revolution

by **Deathstalker** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 16:54

Mine sux XD Which configuration of hardware do u prefer? I'd like to buy new machine. I need comp to playing newest games.

by **Union** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:41

Hm if you're buying it now (or rather this fall when prices normaly drop

) i'd recommend intel core 2 duo (E6600 or newer at least), but if i were you i'd wait for AMD's barcelona and then compare the price and performace VS intel's c2d or c2q. Then i'd decide which one to buy

And since this topic's gone from hw to vista i'll add some observations (everyday use):
Pros for vista:
- nicer TCP/IP stack (well...i think

) - 10,2mb/s downloading from a 100/100mbit source (xp top speed 10,1) to my 10/768 connection
- eye candy (can't help it, it's pretty

)
- a bit faster when un-raring dvd's/divxses (dvd with 9x rars size of 50m takes vista around 2,5/3minutes if it's *.iso, *.img takes up to 4minutes (O_o) / divx with forgot_how_many_rars with the size of 15m takes up to 30seconds or so (depends on disk usage and applications) - XP dvd took me around 4minutes for iso and 4m30s for img)
- faster deletion of large number of files (almost instantly "deletes" (we all know ntfs doesn't delete files) all my files - last time i was deleting almost 200gb of dvds and music and so on....shift-del, ok, deleted

)
- fairly stable (1 bluescreen becouse of an old version of powerDVD, upgraded the thing and it works nicely ever since)
- doesn't use "swap" unless needed
- loaded with drivers, and some drivers are installed through windows upgrade (not all though - took MS almost 4months to add a driver for my wi-fi card (some realtek on-board - don't even use it so i didn't mind))
Cons:
- superPI went from 27s to 29s (same speed of cpu etc) - as a remark, same machine got superpi of 19s in linux (didn't even bother to load it - liveDVD distro

)
- i experienced a slight drop in performance in older games, newer games however run "normaly" (a few fps up or down - armed assault even runs faster...weird

)
- some older software tends to crash (it helps if you set so there's no "DEP" for it, but that's not very good :\ )
- gazillion of unwanted and unneeded services (took me almost 20minutes to disable them all)
- some times the thing stalls when copying a large number of files
- if some other process is using the file and you try to delete it...sometimes explorer window crashes (happened twice to me, not more)
- doesn't handle uptime well...after a cuple of days the thing starts to slow down, starts using "swap" aplication start time increases etc
- problems with some drivers and programs (that's realy the fault of lazy developers but ok)
In my humble opinion, Vista's not bad...but it ain't perfect, it's got quite a lot of nasty bugs and it's not fully optimised (i'll even say that it's not optimised even a bit), but hopefully, that'll change when SP1 comes out. I was surprised at how much ram it needed (as everyone was telling me it needs like 2gigs of ram just to run it etc) - 670mb with all the drivers and apps i use loaded (XP - 650m), but the usage of ram drasticly increases when there are 2 users on the system (my roomate and me for example - if we're both logged in ram usage hits the 9xx number - xp got to 800

)
And when you're comparing it with XP...remember how much problems XP had when it came out...it was only usable when SP1 was released, until then windows 2000 "PwNz0r3D" it (and i remember quite a few people whining how much ram it uses, that you need an uber duber machine just to run it, that performance drops etc...kindof the same scenario with vista, don't you think

)
I recommend giving vista a try...it's not bad when you get used to it and hopefully the SP1 will fix some of the bugs etc

Hf

P.S. vista/xp/anyMSproductHere is no good for 3D modeling and rendering, linux pwns 'em all ^^

by **Deathstalker** » Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:23

I was finding out about various processors and I come to that I'd like to buy sth from AMD like Athlon x2 5000. Quad core is too expensive and I'm going to buy sth cheaper like a.m. Athlon. Which is better: Athlon x2 or Intel Core 2 Duo? Which is more efficiency on that range of price?

Your Hardware

Your Hardware

hardware

Who is online