AlienPost Date: 2008-06-10 |
Post Reply 
|
| Author | |
MikeMaravani 
Groupie 
Joined: 09 Jun 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 109 |
 Quote Reply
 Topic: AlienPosted: 10 Jun 2008 at 5:30pm |
|
I heard that aliens crash too easily. and that its a bad investment. DS dont worry i dont plan to buy from them, but for future referance and advice to everyone else i would like to know.
|
|
 |
|
|
Tripwire
Newbie 
Joined: 14 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Jun 2008 at 5:33pm |
|
I've had an Alienware for 5+ years and it's a great machine. Very stable and really haven't had any issues to speak of. I guess I got lucky (and now my son will be inheriting it).
I'm going with DSO since Dell bought out Alien
 and my rig is now a bit too old to handle some of the newer software coming out. |
|
|
950Si | 1000W C HX | Q9450 OC | 4GB C DDR2 1066MHz | 150GB WD(10K)+250GB WD(7200) | Air Cool 3 | 2x SLI 8800GTX OC | SB X-Fi FPS
Order-5/18 S1-5/20 2-5/22 3-6/9 4-6/9 5-6/9 6-6/16 7-6/17 |
|
|
|
|
Wallyguitar
Senior Member 
Joined: 21 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 100 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Jun 2008 at 6:09pm |
I'm with you on this. Alienware lost a lot of it's appeal when Dell took over. Although, if I had to go with a big computer company, Dell would be up there.
I always cringe when friends ask for computer help and I find out it's a HP or Compaq. Dell's are pretty easy to work with/upgrade when it comes to major computer companies.
|
|
Click pic to see config |
|
|
|
|
MikeMaravani
Groupie
Joined: 09 Jun 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 109 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Jun 2008 at 6:19pm |
|
k i wasnt too sure im going to buy my new rig but idk if i should wait for the new video card. any tips?
Case: Digital Storm 950Si (Black Anodized Aluminum Finish) Power Supply: 1000W Corsair HX (Dual/Triple/Quad SLI Compatible) Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 2.66GHz (1333MHz FSB) (12MB Cache) Motherboard: nVidia 780i Core 2 Quad (nForce 780i SLI) Memory: 4GB DDR2 Corsair at 800MHz XMS2 Floppy / Card: - No Thanks Hard Drive 1: 500GB Western Digital (16MB Cache) (7200 RPM) (SATA) Hard Drive 2: - No Thanks Raid Option: - No Thanks Hard Drive 3: - No Thanks Optical Drive 1: DVD-ROM/CD-ROM (DVD Reader 16x / CD Reader 40x) Optical Drive 2: DVD±R/RW/CD-R/RW (DVD Writer 20x / CD-Writer 48x) Network Card: High Speed Network Port (Supports High-Speed Cable / DSL / Network Connections) Video Card: 2x SLI Dual (nVidia GeForce 8800GT 512MB) TV Tuner: - No Thanks Sound Card: Motherboard Multi-Channel High Definition Audio Physics Card: - No Thanks Cooling: Air Cooled Stage 3 WindTunnel (Copper Heatpipe Heatsink & Zalman Case Fans) Case Lighting: Blizzard Internal Lighting (Red Edition) (Cold Cathode Tubes) Round Cables: Enhanced Interior Air Flow (Optical Drive & Floppy Cables (Red Cables) User Manual: Personalized Platinum Digital Storm Binder (Includes Paperwork/Benchmarks/CDs/Manuals) Overclock Processor: Yes, Overclock the processor as much as possible with complete stability Overclock Video Card: - No Thanks, Please do not overclock my video card(s) Overclock Memory: - No Thanks, Please do not overclock my memory Tweak Windows: - No Thanks, Please do not tweak the services on the operating system Windows OS: Microsoft Windows Vista Home Basic Restore Kit: Digital Storm Specialized Recovery System (DVD Image Based) Protection: - No Thanks Office: - No Thanks Benchmarking: - No Thanks Pre-Install Game: - No Thanks LCD Display: - No Thanks Surge Shield: - No Thanks Speakers: - No Thanks Keyboard: - No Thanks Mouse: - No Thanks Warranty: 3 Year Platinum Care Extended Parts & Labor Warranty Support: Lifetime Toll-Free Platinum Care Technical Support |
|
|
|
|
Wallyguitar
Senior Member
Joined: 21 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 100 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Jun 2008 at 6:23pm |
|
Drop the round cables and upgrade to overclock memory.
Just my $.02
|
|
|
Click pic to see config |
|
|
|
|
!ender_
DS Veteran 
Joined: 24 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 4219 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Jun 2008 at 11:40pm |
|
i would suggest NOT:
OC the processor or ram without the other, its wasted energy and $
sli cards with a g80 engine, or at all
that case
|
|
|
|
|
widdlecat
DS Veteran
Joined: 11 Mar 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 840 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Jun 2008 at 3:14am |
I have an alienware laptop... area 51m and I don't use it much anymore. I bought it 4 years ago and it can't run any of my games. It can run starcraft and mechcommander, but not oblivion or anything newer than that. It doesn't support dx9 even though my 7 yr old pc was able to. I had a few issues with it and tried customer service a few times. They had difficulties understanding me. I think it's my mix of californian and missouran accent. I don't hear it, but apparently those in florida can't understand me. They were no help at all, but I can still use the laptop to surf the internet when I'm willing to put up with all the noise. It's the loudest and heaviest laptop I've ever seen. It's an expensive paperweight basically. In the end, I wish I had never done business with alienware. (if I buy a new pc from them, they might give me $100 off the purchase provided I give them my old laptop) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tyler Lowe
Newbie
Joined: 14 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 0 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Jun 2008 at 11:28am |
|
The case is fine, better than fine really. It's solid aluminum construction, and has more than enough fan mounts to get the job done. I would drop the round cables and grab some Dominator RAM instead, it'll overclock better. I would ask about the DVD ROM selections and make sure DSO is using SATA on the basic DVD readers. If not, get a couple of litescribe drives. That will keep cabling to a minimum. The 88GT is a G92 based GPU. The G92 is a die shrink of the G80, so in a round about way, it's G80 based, but then so are the new cards coming out. A pair of 88GT's is massively powerful. It will run all current games at extreme settings except for Crysis. Where the SLI really shines is high resolutions. If you will be playing at 1280x1024 or lower go with a single GPU solution like the 98GTX. Up to about 1600x1200, a 96GT pair will actually perform on par with the 88GT pair in the majority of situations, and can, believe it or not keep pace with a 98x2 in many situations. If you wanted to save some money, and still benefit from SLI, that would be the way to do it. Trying to overclock a CPU without addressing the RAM is not going to yield the best possible performance results, by a fair margin at that. If you request overclocking on the one, you want it done on the other as well. Edited by Tyler Lowe - 12 Jun 2008 at 11:29am |
|
|
|
|
gamerk2
Groupie
Joined: 28 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 198 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Jun 2008 at 12:41pm |
|
If you buy Alienware, make sure to get all the cooling you can. Thier cases are solid aluminum, no side vents on them.
My old Pentium D cripples my old build, as it regually gets hot enough to cause a system shutdown. My dissatisfaction with them is one of the reasons i went with DS for my new rig.
|
|
|
|
|
Bill the Cat
DS Veteran
Forum Bitch!
Joined: 27 Aug 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1150 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Jun 2008 at 4:01pm |
Hey Tyler,
After all these months, I still don't understand statements like this. The system's FSB is 1333 MHz stock. If you push the FSB 20% to 1600 MHz, the FSB only matchs the native speed of the 800 MHz RAM. This would take the CPU to 3.2 GHz. How much farther is is likely to go? Is there really significant incremental performance by having the RAM run somewhat faster than the FSB? What am I missing? Is overclocking RAM all about reducing latency for random reads and writes?
OR, answer a simplier question. Does 800 MHz RAM run noticably better than 667 MHz RAM on a 1333 MHz FSB?
|
|
|
3.6 GHz E6850, 4 GB RAM, GTS 250, TJ9, Win 7 64-bit
4.4 GHz i7 3930K, 16 GB RAM, GTX 670, 550D, Win 7 64-bit |
|
|
|
|
!ender_
DS Veteran
Joined: 24 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 4219 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Jun 2008 at 6:58pm |
|
the best answer to that bill is to learn by trying, there is no correct answer, however i can definatly tell you that changing the ram speed AWAY from the "sweet 1:1 ratio" did me a lot of good
you can see the results below
obviously ram timings are an issue, some say that nvidia boards get the most out of an OC with tightly-timed ram at medium speeds, while asus boards thirst for ram speed and medium timings... how true this is, i couldnt tell you, but in my case, i can tell you that it definatly was 100% true, i saw very little to no results from attempting to tighten my timings (which in all below tests are 5-5-5-15 2T)
there are 100 other tips like changing the multiplier to 8 and going to 400 fsb, etc etc etc, the best way to find the answer is to try it on your system and see if YOU see a difference, then, run each benchmarker many times through. if things are clearly better, obviously your going in the right direction.. i can definately tell you that PCMark yielded more of a difference than everest, as i have found everest is the toughest tester, i use it as my primary, and on top of that, the entire system, including game UIs, all ran smoother after releasing the 1:1, so clearly i stuck with it
TEST 1
Core Voltage 1.325 V
CPU Clock 2405.4 MHz (original: 2400 MHz) CPU Multiplier 9x CPU FSB 267.3 MHz (original: 266 MHz) Memory Bus 400.9 MHz DRAM:FSB Ratio 12:8 Memory Read 6451 MB/s
Memory Write 4824 MB/s Memory Copy 5221 MB/s Memory Latency 75.5 ns CPU Queen 17282 CPU Photoworks 15154 CPU ZLib 63137 KB/s CPU AES 17920 FPU J 8919 FPU M 4398 FPU SJ 2247 TEST 2
Core Voltage 1.325 V
CPU Clock 3374.8 MHz (original: 2400 MHz, overclock: 41%) CPU Multiplier 9x CPU FSB 375.0 MHz (original: 266 MHz, overclock: 41%) Memory Bus 375.0 MHz DRAM:FSB Ratio 1:1 Memory Read 7236 MB/s Memory Write 6840 MB/s Memory Copy 6290 MB/s Memory Latency 68.6 ns CPU Queen 24242 CPU Photoworks 16243 CPU ZLib 88543 KB/s CPU AES 25136 FPU J 12490 FPU M 6167 FPU SJ 3149 TEST 3
Core Voltage 1.325 V
CPU Clock 3374.8 MHz (original: 2400 MHz, overclock: 41%) CPU Multiplier 9x CPU FSB 375.0 MHz (original: 266 MHz, overclock: 41%) Memory Bus 562.5 MHz DRAM:FSB Ratio 12:8 Core Temps M/Mx 35 / 62 Memory Read 9019 MB/s Memory Write 6844 MB/s Memory Copy 7345 MB/s Memory Latency 53.7 ns CPU Queen 24249 CPU Photoworks 21606 CPU ZLib 88651 KB/s CPU AES 25188 FPU J 12510 FPU M 6175 FPU SJ 3152 TEST 4 Core Voltage 1.468 V
Ram Voltage 2.160 V CPU Clock 3402.0 MHz (original: 2400 MHz, overclock: 42%) CPU Multiplier 9x CPU FSB 378.0 MHz (original: 266 MHz, overclock: 42%) Memory Bus 562.5 MHz DRAM:FSB Ratio 12:8 Core Temps M/Mx 34 / 67 Memory Read 9131 MB/s Memory Write 6900 MB/s Memory Copy 7445 MB/s Memory Latency 53.3 ns CPU Queen 24489 CPU Photoworks 22524 CPU ZLib 89375 KB/s CPU AES 25414 FPU J 12623 FPU M 6226 FPU SJ 3184 |
|
|
|
|
Bill the Cat
DS Veteran
Forum Bitch!
Joined: 27 Aug 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1150 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Jun 2008 at 9:25pm |
|
!ender_,
I'll accept the evidence, but I still wish I had a theory to hang it on.
|
|
|
3.6 GHz E6850, 4 GB RAM, GTS 250, TJ9, Win 7 64-bit
4.4 GHz i7 3930K, 16 GB RAM, GTX 670, 550D, Win 7 64-bit |
|
|
|
|
Tyler Lowe
Newbie
Joined: 14 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 0 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Jun 2008 at 11:17pm |
|
Bill, the answer to your question is "yes", 800MHz RAM will have an impact over 667MHz RAM, but not in a way that someone that was not looking for it would notice, with the caveat that 667MHz RAM is at a "1:1 true" ratio with the FSB. The main reason I suggest having the RAM OC'd, has more to do with being able to achieve a higher stable overclock of the CPU than it does with raw RAM bandwidth. RAM speeds in excess of 800MHz tend to have a very small impact on performance outside of synthetic benchmarks, and even in the case of those synthetics, if you run a test geared towards measuring overall performance without testing RAM bandwidth, you will see next to no shift past ~6400 MB/s. If the object of your tweaking is to put up better synthetic scores, overclocking the RAM is definitely in and of itself worthwhile.
If you are looking for a reason that systems tend to run smoother when exceeding a 2:1 effective or "1:1" ratio, think in terms of overcoming the delay before the first cache line can reach the L2 processor cache. You don't need to exceed it by much, just a little bit will help to "smooth things out". Edited by Tyler Lowe - 12 Jun 2008 at 11:19pm |
|
|
|
|
!ender_
DS Veteran
Joined: 24 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 4219 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 Jun 2008 at 12:48am |
|
yea, back to the evidence youll see i was maxed out with my speed before i bumped up the ram speed a bit, which gave me more headroom than i used, but i was content with the result
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum |
About Digital Storm
Contact Information
Facility Tour
Financing
Buy Now, Pay Later
Downloads
GSA Schedule
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Request Help
Call: 1-866-817-8676
(Hours 9AM-5PM PST)
Topic Options