StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I am getting a new computer. It is an Alienware, one of the AMD based ones. Now before you go saying Alienwares are over priced I want to make it clear that buying an Alienware for me has been a dream that I have had for many years, much like how many dream of owning a red Corvette convertable or a hot rod. I have some questions that I hope you guys can answer for me. This computer is for gaming only(and maybe browsing the net), I will almost assuredly be doing nothing like video editing.

Specs:
Processor: AMD Athlon 64 FX 55 Processor w/ HyperTransport Technology
Motherboard: Alienware nForce 4 SLI Chipset PCI Express
Power Supply: PC Power & Cooling 510 Express
RAM: 2GB Low-Latency Dual Channel DDR PC 3200 at 333 Mhz -4x 512MB
Hard Drive: High Performance - Serial ATA - 250GB Serial ATA at 7,200 RPM w/ 8MB cache
Video Card: GeForce 6800 Ultra PCI Express 512MB DDR3 with Dual Digital and TV Out
Sound Card: Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS High Definition 7.1 Surround Firewire (IEEE 1394)
Speakers: Creative Inspire T5400 5.1 74-Watt Speakers
Otical Drives: Lite-On 16x DVD-ROM Drive with software DVD Decoder and NEC ND-3520 16x Doul Layer DVD R/W Drive
Monitor: NEC 17'' LCD1770GX-BK MultiSync- Black
OS: Window XP Professional with Service Pack 2
Power Protection: ?

Questions:
1. How will this system hold up, and how long will it last me as a good gaming computer?
2. How will it compare to the new technology that supposedly may come out in a year or two that was talked about in the thread about the new consoles being superior to PCs. Will there be an order of magnitude in difference?
3. Would I be better of waiting for the Athlon 64 FX 57 which I here is susposed to be available in June and retail for $900US, only $50US more than the FX 55? (I am planning on avoiding the mult-core X2 series as everying that I have read, even from AMD, is that the FX series are better for gaming.)
4. Would the monitor be good for gaming?Monitor Specs
5. Would the monitors high native resolution affect the ability to play older games? ie: Myth, Age of Empire, Homeworld, Tie Fighter, etc.
6. Would it be better to go with one GeForce 6800 Ultra 512MB card or doul GeForce 6800 GT 256MB cards with SLI Technology?
7. What is the difference between the GT cards and the Ultra cards(discounting the 512MB as there is a 256MB one as well)?
8. Would SLI affect my ability to play games not designed for it, as well as older games? I have done some research but haven't found anything conclusive.
9. Which power protection should I go with?List
I was leading toward the $26 OPTI-UPS SS1200 Automatic Voltage Regulator 6 outlet Surge Protector(not listed here but when you choose accessories) seeing as i don't think I need the back up battery and unplug during storms when at home(Note: there may be trouble with the house wiring preventing actual grounding in the room that it will be in)
10. Could I upgrade to SLI in the future with this setup if I only go with one card and manage to convince them to give me an SLI ready one?

I would really appreciate any help that could be provided. I have done much research on my own in the past few weeks, but these questions are still nagging at me. This is an important and expensive decision for me to make and I need the help of those more experienced than me to make it.

PS: I am upgrading from a PIII 700Mhz with 384MB RAM and Trident Blade XP based video card. I have had this computer for 5 years only only in the past year have I not been able to play new games.(albeit I have been playing games with the bells and whistles tuned down for obvious reasons)

1. This is an extremely high-end gaming rig. How long it will last you is dependent on how picky you are about how nice things look, i.e. how low are you willing to turn graphic settings down in order to achieve a playable experience.

3. There's always something better around the corner. Besides, I doubt the performance difference would be noticeable.

4. Looks like it. I'm not an expert on LCD monitors but the response time looks very good.

5. Homeworld should be able to scale up to higher resolutions, IIRC. The monitor can run at lower resolutions but simply won't look as good.

6. The 512 MB Ultra card that costs $1000 and is basically a "look at my penis everyone!!!" card? If so, go with the two GT cards.

7. IIRC, faster processor and memory.

9. Battery backups tend to make very good surge protectors, and it's really nice when a power flicker hits the house and your computer keeps on chugging.

Other recommendation: Get two sticks of 1 GB each rather than 4x 512MB - that way you can run the memory at DDR400/PC3200 rather than at DDR333/PC2700.

You don't need a 512MB video card. There is no advantage to using one. You'd be better off getting a second video card for SLI, which shouldn't cost much more. SLI when not supported by the game/driver combination, won't make a difference in game play. You can apparently tell the driver which SLI mode to use for a given game though.

The Ultra has higher performance, due to having a faster clock.

CRTs, when properly set up, will always look better than an LCD, due to the faster refresh time and higher contrast (blacks look blacker). Not withstanding the previous, all but the very oldest games will be fine at high resolutions. The very oldest games probably won't run properly anyways.

No clue on the processor, but $900 is an insane amount to spend on a processor, IMNSHO.

Out of curiosity how much less performance/life would I get if I scaled down to a AMD Athlon™ 64 4000+ Processor with HyperTransport Technology. Would I be able to tell the difference, since games rely more on the GPU today. (I should mention that I don't overclock.)

Also in the future how exactly do I go about judging processor when looking at the system requirements of games? I know AMD chips run much better than Intel (2.6Ghz FX 55 is better than P4 3.73Ghz Extreme Edition)

Wing Commander MAD wrote:Out of curiosity how much less performance/life would I get if I scaled down to a AMD Athlon™ 64 4000+ Processor with HyperTransport Technology. Would I be able to tell the difference, since games rely more on the GPU today. (I should mention that I don't overclock.)

Also in the future how exactly do I go about judging processor when looking at the system requirements of games? I know AMD chips run much better than Intel (2.6Ghz FX 55 is better than P4 3.73Ghz Extreme Edition)

The differance should be 5-10% maximum. And you probebly wouldn't, outside of cases like R:TW running SPQR mod with a 8 way bot battle at 100000 denari.

I second the suggestion to drop to a pair of 6800GT's, the 512MB might be usful in a couple of years, but by then, it would be too slow to use that ammount of RAM.

Also, if your thinking about waiting for ANYTHING, wait for the X2 line of AMD processors, those are duel cores, and if your paying that much money(I thought of spending on an alienware), those will bring a great benefit to your system.

I have done a bit more research and am leaning toward and X2, becuase they would give me better performance since there will still be programs running in the background(win XP, anti-virus, firewall,etc.) still no true multitasking though. I think the X2 will give my computer a longer life than even an FX57 would, if am wrong please explain why. Now the question is which to go with, I've already planned on spending a pretty penny on the cpu, so what would be better in the long run the the Athlon 64 FX57, Athlon 64 X2 4800+, or the Athlon 64 X2 4600+. Remember this is primarily for gaming and I would not be able to do any major component upgrades for another 4 years or so.

I have decided to go with the doul 6800GT cards as I feel those will last me awhile, heck I have been making do with a TNT2 card for the past 5 years.

PS: How likely are we to see multithreaded games in the next 1 to 2 years, as the X2 should definitely perform better than a single core in those? Will the multicore consoles perhaps spur some more development into multithreaded games for PC?

Real Multi-thread? just look at UE3, that will kill single threads.

Don't go for the FX-57, its just a waste of money, any X2 is a good buy.

A few things:

First: If you are planning to go Dual 6800's with an FX55, you need to make damn sure you have a quality power supply so you machine won't crash from power problems. I am not familiar with Alienware (I'm a build it yourself kinda guy), so I can't tell you if the power supply they include is good. If memory serves, each 6800 will draw ~100W from the 12V rail, and the processor is going to draw ~90W from the 12V rail. Additionally, your Motherboard, optical and magnetic drives, and other components are going to draw about 75W from the 12V rail too. So, when you peg your system playing the latest and greatest game, you're going to be drawing 400W+ just on the 12V rail (so about 34 Amps). You will want to make sure the PS you are getting will be able to handle 35+ amps on the 12V rail. NOTE: I've pulled most of these numbers from memory (read: from my ass), so you should probably do calcs yourself. =) Google is your friend

Second: If money is no real issue (which I assume given the specs you provide), then don't skimp on anything important. The specs you give quote you 333Mhz memory, when 400Mhz is top of the line. Also, CRT's still rule for gaming. LCD's have come a long way, but are still not as good (refresh rates, color quality, etc.) as CRT's for games. You’ll have to decide which is more important: Display quality or display convenience =)

Third: If you really want a gaming rig, go with the FX55 for now. Just make sure the machine you are getting is a socket 939 board (given that it's an nForce 4, this is almost certainly the case). With a socket 939, you have an upgrade path to the Athlon X2, IF Alienware is nice enough to provide a bios upgrade for you.

Miles, this is ALIENWARE, PSU's are not a problem, they hand out 650W monsters.

And I think he would prefer LCD's, esspecially with a high end card, since I don't think anyone would want to use a DVI-to-VGA adaptor.

Last, Alienware dosn't sell socket 754, he dosn't have to worry with that.

Oh... something that should be mentioned... If you do get the FX55, you should over clock it. It's something like a 40% possible increase in clock speed over stock. This could make a difference.

Beowulf wrote:Oh... something that should be mentioned... If you do get the FX55, you should over clock it. It's something like a 40% possible increase in clock speed over stock. This could make a difference.

The older FX's(55 and down) arn't the best OCers, getting a good Venice core and you can blow away the FX's.