Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I have to upgrade my comp, to tide me over for next years build.

 

More Preformance.

5846855_ra.jpg

 

More Sound for the preformance.

5997193_sa.jpg

 

And the 400 watt supply will need some help, switching to a 550watt.

d1d76245-f5c6-4db9-a07b-70d26fab338f.gif

Posted

im not that mad on sound, if i had that kinda money to spend, i'd upgrade my processor and RAM for a faster computer, rather than getting a better sound system, unless you're really into music and sound effects, i dont think it is by any means needed.

 

at the same time, looks nice! :)

Posted

I am using a P4 2.4ghz with 533mhz fsb, and 1 gig of corsair pc2700 @ 333mhz ram.

Next year I will build a new system, and reuse the sound card and speakers. Adding a sound card will increase your preformance by 20%. Its less work for your processor.

Posted

I think I mentioned it somewhere else on this board before. IMO if you're spending that much money on sound you should invest in a nice stand alone receiver and a surround sound package. This way, you can play your music, but also have a hometheatre. Also, you can build a hometheatre piece-by-piece so you can slowly invest and build a nice system from the ground up. For instance, I spent about 3 grand on my home theatre, but I did it over a period of like 3 and a half years. Now I have a kick ass time watching DVD's and can flip the system over to computer if I want to. Just curious, how big are those speakers in that pic?

Posted

mad_madrigan: keep more than the sound card from your old PC, you should include the RAM, may as well keep the HDDs in addition to new ones & you can have a dual processesor (dont know how, heard of it though)

 

dunno bloodhound, not much into laptops, just do a googley search etc!

 

wow, we posted at the same time! looking at the pic, look at the size of the buttons on the remote, so the speaker dont look too big, but size = volume, NOT quality.

Posted

definetly right on the size = volume not quality. I have a pair of the bose double cubes and they sound beautiful (no bass though). I also have a 15 inch cerwin vega subwoofer. While it has shaken the wiring of the lights in my house loose so they don't work anymore, the next one I buy will most likely be a 10 inch, slightly higher quality subwoofer.....

Posted

I've spent about £150 so far on my sound system for my computer. I have a £250 sony amplifier (STR-DE585) which I managed to pick up for £70 from eBay. My dad had some kickass speakers that I used for my fronts, and my backs are 2 £50 speakers which I managed to pick up for £25 each. My centre speaker/sub are on order :)

Posted

I know some headphones sound real good, but I prefer the open sound. I tell ya, looking up all of the new stuff out there, its getting hard not to start buying now. Where did that darn credit card application go (dont believe in those damn things). But that new P4 extreme edition looks nice. 2meg L3 cashe, 800mhz fsb. mmmm.

Posted

ive got the speakers which came with my computer, i see no need in upgrading to play games and listen to music... just as im not too fussed with graphics, ive got a 64MB NVIDA GeForce4 MX, it plays all in 1024 x 768 and thats good enough, my headphones dont stretch from the computer headphone port to my head! so im looking for long wire length headphones!

Posted

I run my 19in monitor at 1600x1200@32BPP, not a bad look at all. I play too many games not to have some kind of video quality. Never tested my benchmarks though.

Posted

i dont need that quality to enjoy a game, 1024 x 768 allows for high resolution gaming at what people what call a "realistic look" totaly smoothly, to enjoy a game i dont want to see pixels and i need a good game play, 1024 x 768 boast immense quality which totaly satisfies the needs of 90% of all people and 75% of gamers.

Posted

I dont see pixils while playing, I get a great fluid look and feel during play. Recently bought Far Cry, great game that uses up resources like crazy. I run it at 1280 x 764. If I was to boost it to 1600 x 1200 like my regular desktop, It would be choppy, that is why I must upgrade again.

Posted

it just depends on what ur native resolution is. if ur using tfts , then using anything except the native resolution will give a messed up picture. i find 1024 768 sufficient enough for my purposes

Posted

yes farcry is what some people would call a resource hogger, although it only acts that way whilsts running, however as dave said, he set everything to max, lower the graphics to maybe 800 x 600 and whilsts still looking respectable i would imagine he would have a smooth game.... also other factors like shadowing and triple-buffering are unnecesarily and resouce demanding.

Posted

Recomended system per the case:

(not minimum req.)

 

AMD Athlon XP Model 2000+ or above P4 2ghz

512meg to 1g of ram

Sound blaster audigy

4x dvd

4gb of free space

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.