So my new computer is finished

AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 2.4GHz
1024MB RAM
160 GB
Radeon X1600/X1650 Series
Windows XP Professional

Now I know I was a strong supporter of vista and still am but I only have 1gb of ram at the moment and will upgrade back to vista once I have 2 which should be shortly. XP is simply like a piece of chewing gum in a contraption, its only there to keep things in order until the real materials become available.

Also this may be my last post for awhile since I have to haul my hulking gaming machine up and down stairs..ok ok it isn't really that heavy but is extremely inconvenient that I have to take it downstairs to get internet access. I'm only on now to inform you guys of this and get a few updates to windows xp.

Well thats awesome!

Wish I had a better computer...

The athlon was not a good choice, you should have went with a Core 2 Duo/Quad.

Last time I went with intel I had outrageous heat problems. So knowing that my old AMD was alot cooler I made my decision. Why did you say it was a bad idea?

Believe me, the C2D is nothing like the Pentiums. Intel based the C2D architecture on the Pentium M, which was designed for laptops due to it's cooler nature. So what they created was a monster that runs cool; AMD's worst nightmare in other words. Even the mid-range C2Ds are lightyears faster than any Athlon, X2 or not, out there. And that power runs much cooler than the Pentiums did.

But if you still trust AMD better, you could have went with their more recent processors, the AM2s. Or have they maybe released the AM3s already? Those will be giving the Core 2 Quads a decent challenge I imagine.


Oh, and I suggest you get yourself at LEAST 2 GB of memory. 2 will be a minimum requirement before long.

I agree with bjossi. I have 2 GB of RAM in my new computer and oh my goodness it makes a difference too.

I think I'd rather go with an AMD myself.... but call me biased, my bro works with AMD! Your computer destroys my cruddy one...

Was your bro behind your back at the time you wrote that post?

If 300 miles from my back (my back points about northwest), then yes. I'm more thinking about maybe being able to get cheaper cards from AMD because my bro works there.

You are lucky that AMD and ATi merged, then.

I didn't have enough money for a tri or quad core processor. So I'm making due with the one I have right now, it plays ut3 nicely with the settings at 3 and dominates ut04. Me next upgrade is a graphics card.

I just built one recently too, second one actually. My first one had a AMD and it got a virus (vista's fault perhaps). Then the second one had a intel core 2 quad with 2.4 ghz each

I wouldn't say that Intel is simply better than AMD, unless cost is not an issue. Modern Intel is more powerful than modern AMD, but AMD is good if money is an issue. For example, a quick Newegg search found that a dual core 2.4GHz Intel CPU costs $118-$230. Same specs, but AMD costs $66. So, if you want cheap, then it seems AMD is good, for the specs. I know that my AMD 5600+ (dual core, OCd to 2.35Ghz) can handle anything it wants to, costing $124. If you're looking for bang for the buck (in the 2.4GHz arena), regardless of absolute costs of performance, then one might ask if Intel is 2-4 times faster than AMD for the same specs to justify the price being 2-4 times greater?

A simple "I say Yes" means nothing, so I went to www.tomshardware.com and looked at some charts. Since Echo brought up the 2.4GHz (native) frequency, I'll compare the AMD 64 X2 4600 (2.4GHz) to the Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe (2.4GHz), since I could not find the E4600 on the benchmark charts. The Intel is about 17% faster than AMD (using the 3dMark. All tests are about the same conclusion). However, this specific test compares a $66 AMD CPU to a $230 Intel core (but I bet the cheaper Intel CPU at $118 would have been about the same, if slightly weaker). here's the link to the data:
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu- ... 240%2C1262

Now, this test is not exhaustive at all, but I limited it to 2.4Ghz to make a direct comparison to Echo's purchase. Now, if you think 2.4GHz is bad bang for the buck compared to 2.8GHz or 3.0GHz or quad core, than buck away. Go to the chart and click on "View all products". If only Tom's Hardware would also show the price along with the CPU stats and scores. As of now, it seems that Intel definitely has the best performance CPU. Period. End of sentence. Question is: if you don't want the best, what's the cheapest thing that will give you "good enough for me"?

Riiiight.

Nice computer

Indeed, I would have put 2Gb of Ram too.

I'm mostly for AMD, their new dual / quad core technology seems really fine, only bad point I see at the moment is that they teamed with ATI

Amd Phenom

Take a look, seems quite fine...
Actually I would really want to see one in action to have a better idea of what's written.

Hehe, triple-core sounds weird.
But daimn that processor looks promising. AMD are giving Intel a worthy challenge there.

Indeed, I think as soon as I have money, I will buy this processor...

As you said, triple is quite weird, but the quad core seems maybe more performant than the one from Intel (which would be normal 'cause the quad core from intel have existed for some time now and the quad core from amd is really new, so they had time to work on something much better)

Intel will answer the Phenom threat with a 8-core processor before long.

This is what I love about market competition.

Yes, maybe, loool

Who do you think will invent the warp drive first ? Intel or AMD ?

Heh, Intel FTL v1.0. (FTL = Faster Than Light)

Would such hardware use warp drivers?

LOOOL I forgot that one...

True, maybe they do...

I guess in the future when poeple will turn on their computer, I imagine they will be warped to another dimension or to another planet, lol.
They would just have some problems to turn their computer off ! lol

The notice would be like:
Warning! Don't be alone when you turn on your computer or you could never come back.

Call me old fashioned, but I prefer the way computers work nowadays, just a screen, case and control devices.

That's not old fashioned, you young whippersnapper. Besides, computers in the arbitrary future won't warp you somewhere, but instead will have a processor in hyperspace, where the flow of time is proportional to the speed of your processor and the density of politicians in your neighborhood. This would allow for faster processing becasuse of the time dialation. Then, the data would be transmitted through a cable in a wormhole to your input/output devices, where one portal is at your computer and the other portal is at the moving processor in hyperspace. Also, due to the funky nature of dynamic wormholes, the data from the processor is computed several days before the request was sent to process that data. This means that whenever you go to your computer to do something, it is already done because that request was sent to the processor hours in advance. Just imagine the kind of frame rate you'd get in, say, Crysis 5: -15,000,000 FPS... yes, negative. Thus, we prove that time travel is simply freaky.

As far as I know, a wormhole is just a speedway within our universe. It's not a portal between two worlds, it's the tunnel itself that doesn't relate to known laws of physics. Both ends do, on the other hand.

And I don't think the worm hole tunnel has any time shifting. It is simply located in a copy of our universe in smaller scale, making the speed of light get us much farther in very little time. Black holes, on the other hand, bend time due to their infinite escape velocity.

This stuff is on the border of being science fiction, but it sounds promising for other means like space travel.

The interesting thing is that although worm holes would take some serious technology and tons of energy, they are not ruled out by quantum physics..

So one day...

Pretty frightening

Science fiction can lead us to tons of interesting and complicated things

Well, at least, I believe I'm already living in a science fiction world where planes can fly, where games are freaky awesome, where we will soon die from polution, ...
Amazing, isn't it ?

The human race will get cooked to death by the increasingly hot sun long before the pollution starts being life threatening to humans. The atmosphere is just so damn big. Surely it can increase average temps, but making the level of toxic gases lethal? Not any time soon.

Right, but it is even more horrible !

The solution is to get billions of corks and plug every single chimney and exhast. Then live underground harvesting energy from the heat in the rocks.

On topic --> I've never built a computer because I've never been bothered, had the time or felt that I've had the experience. I will not spend £200 on a graphics card or something just to snap it trying to put it in (which I am likely to do, going by past experience with important items).

Actually, some scientists theorize that a wormhole can act as a time machine if the two mouths of the wormhole are moving at speeds near that of light, relative to each other. This would make one mouth age faster than the other, meaning that the two mouths of the wormhole would exist at different times. Because of this, going through in one direction would take you into the past, while going through in the other direction would take you into the future. You could go as far into the past as the formation fo the wormhole and as far into the future as its termination. So, i wasn't ENTIRELY making up stuff.

Check out the "Wormhole as time travel" section here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole