Whadya think?Post Date: 2008-09-19 |
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author | |
Gibbi 
Newbie 
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Whadya think?Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 8:22am |
|
Here is my configuration. I'm new here, so be gentle!
System Configuration: |
|
 |
|
|
Nomak
Senior Member 
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 442 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 10:15am |
|
Harleys right on, but i would go with three if money allows.
150gig @10k rpm - for OS/Apps
*but if you know exactly the # of extra apps aside from OS you will be using and how much space in total you will need, go w/ SSD drive, DSO offers 64/128/250 gigs SSD drives*
300gig @10k rpm - for games only.
*same as above go w/ SSD if you have money to spare*
500gig @ < any speed > - for general junk.
*do not go for 1TB drives as they are a pain to manage and defrag*
And as far as your system setup goes:
a. See if you can change to OCZ ram of the same MHz
b. Go w/ LightScribe for your cd/dvd drive.
c. Go with 4 year warranty
d. Request memory fan kit w/o OC
e. If you want to OC your CPU, you will have to get liquid cooling for it to be worthwhile.
And finally i cant seem to find your OS, Windows Home Prim. 64 bit if anything.
[edit] Found your OS, you aint getting one, hehe.
 Edited by Nomak - 19 Sep 2008 at 10:21am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 10:44am |
|
OS will be Vista Ultimate 64-bit. This is a big jump from my current desktop. My laptops have been more powerful than my desktop for a few years now. I've put an upper limit of $3,000 on the build and that includes monitor, so changing the HDDs would work, since the 150GB and the 750GB are about the same price. Going to SSD drives, however, would be pricy.
My order is already in. I should have come here first for some help. I tend to do things out of order most of the time, so I'm still on course. I originally had two 500GB drives and decided to go with the faster 10k drive at the end. I'm still happy having the extra storage space and I'm certain this will meet my needs for many years. Thanks for the comments. I'm still trying to pick up on a lot of changes that occurred over the last 4 years. |
|
|
|
|
Nomak
Senior Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 442 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 11:14am |
|
"Solid" is in their names!
 ... but their price could use a tweak or two.
I dont know why so many people dont trust raid arrays, HDs nowadays are pretty stable, plus you should* have a back up in any case (even if youre not running a raid array). And if anything, DSO has you covered for life.
Personally, I would worry about 1TB drive crapping out instead. Edited by Nomak - 19 Sep 2008 at 11:16am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 12:04pm |
|
Hmm, actually the difference in price is a lot more than I expected, since the retail prices are similar. Going with the 150GB would be an increase of $150 over the 750GB, which is too steep, IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE 
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 3:21pm |
|
Gibbi, price range?
ticket number? you have got alot of problem in that build. corsair craps out, you should have gone with ocz. you are not overclocing so you should have gone with ddr2 and save some bucks you should have taken off the keyboard. I would downgrade the 750 to 500, I think the velociraptore is great for the os Edited by DST4ME - 19 Sep 2008 at 3:29pm |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 3:56pm |
|
I went with the 750, due to several reviews that mentioned the increased performance over the 500. As to DDR3 vs DDR2, true, its more expensive, but if I decide to OC in a few years, its there, plus the MOBO had n-wireless built in which I could use right away without using a slot for a network card. I needed the keyboard/mouse for another reason and it seemed reasonable @ $30. Between Corsair and OCZ, is the verdict in ? Is OCZ much more stable than Corsair to warrent always going wiht OCZ? OCZ is the cheaper route I believe.
My price range was under $3000. As for ticket number, I can go create one, but I didn't do a save, prior to clicking on the Buy Now button. The saved configurations were all different. Ticket #: 184704 http://www.digitalstormonline.com/comploadsaved.asp?id=184704 |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 4:13pm |
|
Gibbi, there is no performance increase between HDDs unless there is rpm or involved. Who ever told you that the 750 performs better then the 500, you need to go shoot them in the head for:
a. not knowing what the heck they are talking about b. for giving you bad advice. the only difference between the 750 and 500, is the 250GB of extra room the 750 has, they both perform the same way, down side to the 750GB HDD is that its gonna be next to impossible to maintain. you got dual cards, with stage 3 cooling, you are not gonna be able to do much OC with that much heat. If you want OC for future then you need to go liquid cooling now, the liquid cooling will keep the PC cool while the fans work on the dual card. With out liquid cooling you are not gonna get much OC. since you can't get much OC its best to go with ddr2. yes OCZ is more reliable, if you want to send in your ram to change in a month or so then go with corsair, if you don't want to do that go with OCZ. Now so from now on you know yourself, here is how you judge HDDs, first you look at the "rpm" (rounds per minute) the faster disk spins the faster the drive  so a 10,000 rpm HDD is much faster then a 7200 rpm HDD, next thing to look at is cache, the more the better , other then that, ofcourse get the size you want.
Edited by DST4ME - 19 Sep 2008 at 4:25pm |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 5:32pm |
|
So, increased area density on platters does nothing to improve data transfer rates? Improving head movement (IntelliSeek) does nothing to improve performance? Changing recording method from longitudinal to perpendicular does nothing to improve performance? The 750GB has a 30% boost over the 500GB in internal transfer rates, due to the increased area density. More data can be read over the same distance on the platter. The manufacturer shows this in their specs and I've seen several benchmarks from 3 different reviewers stating it as fact. Compared to the 10k drive, you are right, the 750GB is slower, but you would be surprised at the difference, I doubt it is a 50% difference as the rpms would suggest.
The 4870x2 is a single PCB, not dual cards. How it compares with 2 4870s w/ Crossfire, as far as heat, I'm uncertain, but I wasn't planning to OC at the present time. I'm thinking of checking about the memory certainly. I had no reason for the Corsair other than knowing the brand, I've used Corsair memory before without issue, but not DDR3. Not sure about DDR2, since I would have to ditch the MOBO too, which means going with the older chipset. I'd like to hold onto this computer for as long as my present one. Considering my present PC is an Alienware build from February 2002, I'm making an insane jump here. And the cost is actually cheaper than what I paid 6 years ago. I certainly can't complain. I really appreciate your comments and graphics on the drives. A few days ago, I would instantly say/think that 10k rpm drives were superior in all regards, due to superior spindle speeds. However, after doing some reading, there seems to be much more going on than just how fast the drives spin. It makes me stop and pause a moment. The newer generation of drives are actually improving without having to change the rotational speeds. Albeit, the 10k drives still excel in many areas, just not as drastically. |
|
|
|
|
Nomak
Senior Member
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 442 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 5:42pm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 6:01pm |
Listen, I'm not surprised at any difference between teh 750 and 500 cause aside from the 250GB of more room you got noting else and you won't notice any difference, I dare you to show me how any app will run faster or writes faster on the 750, cause it won't
you are mistaken to pick the 750 but are free to do so, but its a bad choice and nobody will notice any difference in speed in a 750GB, good luck managing that. Unlike you I have done my own test and don't need to rely on others so do me a favor and don't tell me what I already know you will not find one person that think that a velociraptor won't kick anything you have up and down, they compete with ssd's now you want us to forget all the test resutls because of some misleading reviews you have read? sorry boss, I'm a bit offended that you think I have not done my homework and apprenty I pulled the stuff out of my behind and am wrong about it, the reality is that you are wrong and you just gonna have to pay for it to find out. or you may not since you will never actually test the 500GB over the 750GB to know everything you said amounts to nothing when it comes to actual results.
All that supposed speed that you will never notice is not worth the headache of managing a 750GB HDD anyways, good luck, backing it up, defraging and etc., etc., gpu: Video Card(s): ATI Radeon HD 4870X2 2GB is 2 cards, of 1GB so that is 2 times one "4870 1GB card" 2 1GB card will put out some serious heat. ram: tho you have used corsair we watch 100 times what you have used go out, based on that experience I advised you to go with ocz, again its your money, you are free to do with it what you want. DDR2 vs DDr3: upto to you
If my tone is a bit harsh then I apologize, truthfully I do but I was never asked how I know one is not faster then the other, I was just told I'm wrong. I don't appreciate that. anyways my apologies again, hope it didn't come across harsh 
Edited by DST4ME - 19 Sep 2008 at 6:24pm |
|
|
|
|
Alex
Admin Group 
Digital Storm Supervisor 
Joined: 04 Jun 2012 Online Status: Offline Posts: 16314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 6:08pm |
|
DST4Me, I love the custom images you always put up.
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 6:09pm |
|
Thank you, but apparently its all out of my behind
 Edited by DST4ME - 19 Sep 2008 at 6:10pm |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 7:15pm |
|
I, too, like the images DST4Me put up.
The only way I learn is by asking questions and also, by using multiple sources. I then have to take in everything that is said/written and come up with a reasonable assessment of all the information and hope that I learn correctly. I'm not sure where I insulted you, DST4Me, but it certainly wasn't my intentions. I chose the 750GB over the 500GB based on specs and some articles from three different sources. The 150GB 10k drives were also part of the benchmarks and outperformed the 7200rpms, except for sustained sequential reads. Don't ask me what real-life application does sustained sequential reads, I don't have an answer. I hate looking at benchmarks, some are highly biased in subtle ways. But, as you stated, I'm not going to test the 500GB alongside the 750GB to know. Your comment was RPMs and cache size are the only concern with performance. I'll honestly agree I read that and thought that's too simple. Especially, after reading, about platter densities, head movement and perpendicular blah, blah. This is why I asked several questions about other factors that make up a disk drive. The one statement I made about the 750 having a 30% boost over the 500 is taken from a spec sheet. It may have been misleading, I do not know. It seemed plausible to me, at the time. It still does. I'm going to end here with links to two of the articles I read, I'd appreciate if you all would comment on those sites and the validity of their findings. I would also appreciate any suggestions on technical sites that have reviews of the various components that make up these systems (especially CPU, PSU and GPUs). I'm here to gain more knowledge and I tend to ask a lot of questions till I'm confident I understand it. Sorry, DST4ME, if I came over as being offensive, it was never my intention. I did make the change to OCZ, btw, but still stuck with DDR3, since I want to stay with the X48 chipset (hoping its a bit future proof, although more expensive memory). Here are the links: http://techreport.com/articles.x/12673 http://www.pcper.com/article.php?type=expert&aid=446 I need to know how to quote, so these are more readable.  |
|
|
|
|
Kliebor2
Senior Member
Joined: 22 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 659 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 7:27pm |
|
Given the fact that the 500 and the 750 are different technology, I would have to say that you are likely quite correct Gibbi, it will be faster.
As to harder to maintain, that is a load of horse hockey to quote Sherman T Potter. If you take care of your drives defrag regularly (easy with Vista) and use common sense any size drive is a breeze to maintain. My job is a database administrator and we use terrabyte clustered drives... they are clusters of dozens of raid arrayed smaller drives but the virtual drive created as a single server drive is huge... and never, with proper maintenance have I had a problem... ever :) Dave 
|
|
|
Digital Storm 950Si - Q9450 Quad Core @ 3 Ghz
Dual PNY OC2 GTX 560Ti 8 Gigabytes DDR2/800 2 Western Digital 500 GB SATAII 7200 RPM HD |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 7:40pm |
|
I'll throw this out before going to play some boardgames with some friends. Yeah, I still sit down around a table and play games.
 When I think of disk performance I think of transfer rates and seek times. Since, this is a gaming site, seek times would be the most important factor with disk selection, hence RPMs. Most gaming applications, if not all, would fall under this. Large file transfers and, less significant, load times of large applications would be more along transfer rates and less with seek times. Don't shoot me for saying this, but I also went with the 300GB 10k, due to its better internal transfer rate over the 150GB 10k.  And, yes, another article said so, along with another source, which I won't mention at this time. |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 7:40pm |
|
they are different yes, will you see the difference no.
I dare anybody to prove me wrong in real life @KB, defraging a 750GB HDD takes much longer then a 500GB, to say different is a load of horse hockey
backing up a 750GB HDD takes much longer then a 500GB, to say different is a load of horse hockey
anti virus scanning a 750GB HDD takes much longer then a 500GB, to say different is a load of horse hockey
anti spyware scanning a 750GB HDD takes much longer then a 500GB, to say different is a load of horse hockey
any noticeable difference you are ever gonna see in any drive is either gonna come in rpm or cache, even cache is barely noticeable, the only main difference is rpm, so you can say and jump up and down all you want but its not gonna spin your drive any faster. you want to spend more time backing up, defragging, scanning with anti virus, scanning with anti malware for some tiny unnoticeable speed, go ahead.
I have said my peace, you guys want to throw your time and money away go right on ahead, you can't say nobody told you Edited by DST4ME - 19 Sep 2008 at 7:46pm |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 7:45pm |
The 750 GB is for storage. I planned for the OS and main games to be on the 300GB Raptor. I was thinking the same thing as far as OS being seldomly accessed during game play. The largest internal drive I've had on a desktop (at home) is an 80-GB drive, so 300 GB will do fine for space. Currently, when I'm playing game, my spyware basher tends to instantly fireup during peak times to download any new updates.  |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 7:50pm |
Oracle DBA myself Dave. Old school too, which is why I consider transfer rates, although I probably should throw that idea away when thinking monster game performance. Glad you chimed in! |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 7:56pm |
|
[quote]
backing up a 750GB HDD takes much longer then a 500GB, to say different is a load of horse hockey
{/quote] Only if they are completely full.  If the 500GB has 300GB and the 750GB has 100GB, I think we know which will finish first. Of course, if they both have 100 GB, which would finish first? I'll apologize upfront. |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 8:02pm |
|
lol so you advise people to get a 750Gb HDD and then store only 20GB on it? all cause of some speed you will never notice or makes any difference?
I can't in clear concious advise people to get a drive and only use 1/3 of it
W A S T E - O F - M O N E Y Edited by DST4ME - 19 Sep 2008 at 8:03pm |
|
|
|
|
Kliebor2
Senior Member
Joined: 22 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 659 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 8:17pm |
|
Actually DST, current conventional wisdom is to allow no more than 70-80% drive usage before you add another drive or upgrade the drive.
In Common use for my home PCs I use 75%. Much more than that and defrag becomes less efficient, error rates increase, etc... At work we actually prefer to maintain 40% free space, adding drives to the array as needed to maintain that. You would be amazed the performance that you lose as a drive fills up. Now as to the rest, are you suggesting that when one puts a 300 GB hard drive in their PC you consider it a waste of time and money if they do not immediately go out and flush fill it with 300 GB of stuff just to feel fulfilled? That to me is the waste of time and money... :) Dave  |
|
|
Digital Storm 950Si - Q9450 Quad Core @ 3 Ghz
Dual PNY OC2 GTX 560Ti 8 Gigabytes DDR2/800 2 Western Digital 500 GB SATAII 7200 RPM HD |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 8:29pm |
|
1. the HDD I advise to our highend users or the ones have the money for is the fastest drive we have in most cases, it just happens to be 300GB. Also most users here say they are gamers and games take lot of space.
2. ok I will break it down for your so you understand better: defraging 75% of a 750GB HDD takes much longer then a 500GB, to say different is a load of horse hockey backing up 75% of a 750GB HDD takes much longer then 75% of a 500GB, to say different is a load of horse hockey anti virus scanning 75% of a 750GB HDD takes much longer then 75% of a 500GB, to say different is a load of horse hockey anti spyware scanning 75% of a 750GB HDD takes much longer then 75% of a 500GB, to say different is a load of horse hockey is that better? now according to you, the higher price of the 750GB, the extra heat that a 750GB generates, the more power the 750GB uses and all the extra time it takes to do everything is worth an unnoticeable speed, speed so small you won't even notice it during defrag, scanning or anything. Lets hope the readers are thinking clearly Edited by DST4ME - 19 Sep 2008 at 8:33pm |
|
|
|
|
Kliebor2
Senior Member
Joined: 22 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 659 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 8:47pm |
|
Actually, reading the specs on the 750 on western digitals site the 750 is lower power consumption, so power is not an issue.
Lets compare apples to apples, put the same 300 GB on the two drives and compare, again based on specs of the drives the 750 will be faster, by your estimation not noticably, but we all have different thresholds for what we notice Keep in mind the 750 is a newer peice of technology so it has some improvements. I just stated it would be faster, which from the looks of the specs is a true statement. As for anything else, it all depends, yes defragging a 75% full 750 GB drive will take a bit longer, but, you will store 1.5 times as much stuff on the drive before you need to replace or upgrade or add a new drive. Everything is a trade off you need to decide where your needs meet the cost spread and the effort required to update/upgrade vs upkeep. We all have different points we decide are optimal, and in many cases the right answer for one person is not the right answer for everyone. Dave |
|
|
Digital Storm 950Si - Q9450 Quad Core @ 3 Ghz
Dual PNY OC2 GTX 560Ti 8 Gigabytes DDR2/800 2 Western Digital 500 GB SATAII 7200 RPM HD |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 Sep 2008 at 10:54pm |
|
I said it before I say it again, the difference in speed is so minuscule that its not worth the extra money, not to mention the long time it will take to backup, defrag, and scan the bigger drive.
So say what you will the answer is the same everytime. Q: Am I gonna notice any difference in speed between the 750GB and the 500GB? A: NO so as you see its got nothing to do with who is using it, no matter who uses it, the drives will spin the same speed DST 
|
|
|
|
|
widdlecat
DS Veteran 
Joined: 11 Mar 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 840 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 1:49am |
|
Just because discs are spinning at the same rate does not make them all equal in performance. You must consider how the data is accessed and how many discs are in the drives. The technology that Seagate utilised first with vertical storage and now with the new WD drives is an improvement over previous tech.
Whether it makes a sizable improvement or not is as important as does overclocking by a tiny bit more than the other guy matter. It's all a numbers game and in the end, both will run your games. I guess if you're a pro gamer it's all important, but how many here are pro gamers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 1:57am |
|
After taking all of that into account and putting the drives next to each other to write, scan, defrag, etc. the difference is totally minuscule and not noticeable, I will change my name to what ever you like if anybody ever sees any difference from this drive vs the 500GB in any game
Its nothing like little OC at all. equivalent of OC to HDD would have to be raising the rpm a little. Edited by DST4ME - 20 Sep 2008 at 1:58am |
|
|
|
|
Kliebor2
Senior Member
Joined: 22 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 659 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 7:24am |
|
Well you will see one major difference, you will be able to store 50% more before a need to upgrade or add a new drive, so even if you are completely correct, I have my doubts on that, as I see the way changing drive technology gets better with every revision at work all the time and it is a measurable improvement shaving seconds off boot time in identical ghosted images, so sorry DST but I think you will see it possibly in several ways.
The added storage is always a value, and if you are like me, I back up, defrag, virus scan etc at night when I sleep, I do not sit there and watch the pretty progress bars, so to me, wether it takes my pc 2 hours 3 minutes or 2 hours 27 minutes or hell 4 hours 9 minutes, I could care less, I am asleep and not watching it. YMMV Dave |
|
|
Digital Storm 950Si - Q9450 Quad Core @ 3 Ghz
Dual PNY OC2 GTX 560Ti 8 Gigabytes DDR2/800 2 Western Digital 500 GB SATAII 7200 RPM HD |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 7:40am |
|
A strange twist has occurred. Overnight my under $3000 order turned into a $13,000 order. It also jumped from Stage 1 to Stage 3! Wow!
Here is the new spec: Chassis: Antec 900 Exterior Finish: - EXOTIC StormBlue High-Gloss Automotive Paint Finish Interior Finish: - EXOTIC StormBlack High-Gloss Automotive Paint Finish Power Supply: 1200W PC Power & Cooling (ESA Edition) (Dual/Triple/Quad SLI Compatible) Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad QX9770 Extreme 3.20GHz (1600MHz FSB) (12MB Cache) Motherboard: nVidia 790i Ultra Core 2 Quad (nForce 790i Ultra SLI) (DDR3 Only) System Memory: 4GB DDR3 2000MHz OCZ Platinum Edition (Extreme-Performance) Card Reader: External USB Digital Media Card Reader (Black) Hard Drive 1: 128GB Solid State (By: OCZ) (Ultimate Lightning Speed) Hard Drive 2: 128GB Solid State (By: OCZ) (Ultimate Lightning Speed) Raid Option: - No Thanks Hard Drive 3: 128GB Solid State (By: OCZ) (Ultimate Lightning Speed) Optical Drive 1: Blu-Ray Writer/Reader (Burn Blu-Ray discs and play them) Optical Drive 2: Blu-Ray Writer/Reader (Burn Blu-Ray discs and play them) Internet Access: Bigfoot Killer Network Card (Features MaxFPS and UltimatePing Technology) Video Card(s): 3x SLI Triple (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 1GB) (Includes PhysX Technology) TV Tuner: Pinnacle PCTV USB HD Pro Stick (HDTV, Video Recording, Video Capture) Sound Card: Asus Xonar D2X (PCI-Express Slot Based) (Recommended) Extreme Cooling: Liquid Chilled FrostBite Dual Loop System for CPU & Triple SLI Internal Lighting: Blizzard Internal Lighting (Blue Edition) (Cold Cathode Tubes) Modifications: NVIDIA Enthusiast System Architecture (ESA) System (Install, Test, Optimize Computer) CPU Boost: Yes, Overclock the processor as much as possible with complete stability Graphics Boost: Yes, Overclock the video card(s) as much as possible with complete stability Memory Boost: Yes, Overclock memory timings (Includes Memory Fan Kit Installed) Windows Boost: Yes, Disable and tweak all of the non-crucial services on the operating system Windows OS: Dual Boot (Windows XP Professional & Windows Vista Ultimate (64-Bit Edition) Restore Kit: Digital Storm Specialized Recovery System (DVD Image Based) Protection: McAfee Internet Security (Includes: AntiVirus, FireWall and AntiSpyware) Office: Microsoft Office 2007 Pro (Word Excel Outlook Publisher PowerPoint Access Accounting) Benchmarking: 3D Mark Vantage Advanced Edition (By: Futuremark) (Pre-Install) (Vista Compatible Only) Pre-Install Game: Call of Duty 4 (Pre-Install, apply updates, and test gameplay with my system) LCD Display: Samsung 24 inch (Widescreen) (Black) (High-Performance Gaming Display) Surge Shield: APC 1300VA Uninterruptible Backup Surge Conditioner (Recommended) Speakers: Razer Mako THX Advanced Speaker System (2.1 System) (Includes Subwoofer) Keyboard: Razer Tarantula Gaming Keyboard Mouse: Razer Lachesis Gaming Mouse (High-Speed Gaming Grade) External Storage: Corsair 32GB Flash Survivor Ultra Rugged USB 2.0 Drive Warranty: 4 Year Platinum Care Extended Parts & Labor Warranty ( Question: is this faster than my original order? Would all of that even fit into an Antec, isn't that a large mid-tower case? Why am I even asking these questions? Oh, I'm still in shock  Seriously, I'm sure its just an error that will be easily resolved. Just thought I'd show you the new spec? Any comments on it? |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 8:04am |
|
Oh, its currently that. Considering its 5am Saturday out in California, I won't be able to confirm if its just a glitch with my order or whether they are actually building this beast. It certainly couldn't have gotten past stage 1 with my CC.
|
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 8:10am |
|
Other than the case, since I obviously must have it! Is there anything I could add to remove my other limbs?
|
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 8:21am |
|
The only thing I did was call and ask to change the 4gb Corsair to 4gb OCZ. The only line items that match my original order are Raid and Restore Kit.
|
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 9:57am |
Well, I'm not worried about that, since there should be NO WAY the CC will accept that amount. If it does, what's the point of having limits? If it does, I will be more upset with the CC company than DSO. To the point, of dropping the card. I suspect that painting that case can only get you in trouble, since you need a fire extinguisher close by when you power it up. Or the Verizon Network guys using hand fans. The weekend is the only thing that bugs me. Although, I'm fairly confident that things will be resolved, having to wait until Monday to officially know will eat me up at some point. I need to find a good movie or get immersed in a good shootout somewhere. |
|
|
|
|
Ramdurand
Senior Member
Joined: 11 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 221 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 10:15am |
|
Sorry for jumping on this post but for some reason it won't let me post a new topic. I have a 8 year old Gateway that is on its last leg. I was wondering if the rig is overkill for gaming and general use. I want it to last along time before really upgrading again. Thanks for your input.
Ticket Number: 184501
Total Price with Instant Savings: $6,785.00 Direct Load URL: http://www.digitalstormonline.com/comploadsaved.asp?id=184501 Specifications: Chassis: Cooler Master HAF 932 Exterior Finish: - Standard Factory Finish Interior Finish: - Standard Factory Finish Power Supply: 1200W PC Power & Cooling (Turbo-Cool Edition) (Dual/Triple/Quad SLI Compatible) Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad QX9770 Extreme 3.20GHz (1600MHz FSB) (12MB Cache) Motherboard: nVidia 790i Ultra Core 2 Quad (nForce 790i Ultra SLI) (DDR3 Only) System Memory: 4GB DDR3 1600MHz OCZ Platinum Edition Card Reader: Internal Digital Media Card Reader (Black) Hard Drive 1: 300GB Western Digital VelociRaptor (10K RPM) (16MB Cache) (Extreme Speed) 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) (LightScribe Edition) Wireless Access: High Speed Network Port (Supports High-Speed Cable / DSL / Network Connections) Video Card: 2x SLI Dual (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 1GB) (Includes PhysX Technology) TV Tuner: - No Thanks Sound Card: Razer Barracuda AC-1 (Recommended) Extreme Cooling: Liquid Chilled FrostBite Dual Loop System for CPU & Dual Video Cards Internal Lighting: Blizzard Internal Lighting (Blue Edition) (Cold Cathode Tubes) Modifications: LCD Temperature Display & Fan Controller Boost Processor: Yes, Overclock the processor as much as possible with complete stability Boost Video Card: Yes, Overclock the video card(s) as much as possible with complete stability Boost Memory: Yes, Overclock memory timings (Includes Memory Fan Kit Installed) Tweak Windows: - No Thanks, Please do not tweak the services on the operating system Windows OS: Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium Restore Kit: Digital Storm Specialized Recovery System (DVD Image Based) Protection: - No Thanks Office: Microsoft Office 2007 Home and Student (Word Excel PowerPoint OneNote) Benchmarking: - No Thanks Install/Test Game: - No Thanks LCD Display: Samsung 24 inch (Widescreen) (Black) (High-Performance Gaming Display) Surge Shield: - No Thanks Speakers: Logitech 2.1 System (Black Edition) (Model S220) (Includes Subwoofer) Keyboard: Microsoft Multimedia Desktop 2.0 (Multimedia Keyboard + Optical Wheel Mouse) Mouse: - No Thanks my keyboard comes with a mouse External Storage: - No Thanks Warranty: 4 Year Platinum Care Extended Parts & Labor Warranty (Highly Recommended) |
|
|
|
|
Gibbi
Newbie
Joined: 19 Sep 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 25 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 Sep 2008 at 11:06am |
|
No worries. Hopefully, DST4ME is still reading this for his input. My initial thoughts would be OS should be 64-bit and, perhaps a second drive for storage. I'll leave whether the cooling is overkill, with that particular setup of GPU, CPU and PSU. I suspect its okay, since other than a third 280, you've maxxed out the heat providers. Especially, with the OC included.
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| 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
