zigzag 0 Posted September 8, 2006 ok thanks i will check out some HP and Asus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stegman 3 Posted September 8, 2006 Hang on a second: -DirectX10 is not backwardly compatable. So if i install DX10, none of my old games will work. Meaning I'll have to roll back? -Vista uses DX10 and/or DX9.0L. So what benefits does DX10 have over DX9.0L? I guess all new games will run with DX10, but will DX9.xx keep running (E.G: DX9.0M, N, O upto DX9.0X and beyonds)? @Bill Gates; what are you guys playing at, eh? You just keep making life harder and harder for us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vektorboson 8 Posted September 8, 2006 - OpenGL is language (programming) portable, DirectX is more or less tied to M$ Visual C++ That's not true; DirectX (at least up until version 9.0) uses COM for its classes, so every languages that implements COM, can use DirectX (ie D). If a language/implementation doesn't support COM, but the C-conventions, you need to create a C-wrapper around DX and then some headers for your specific language. Nevertheless I prefer OpenGL: Its API is the same since years and years. New Hardware capabilities are being immediately available through Extensions as opposed to DirectX were you either need a new version or some hacks to fully utilize your new hardware. Implementing Shaders is a peace of cake. And especially since MS left the OpenGL-ARB, it can't block the development of new OpenGL-standards anymore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
4 IN 1 0 Posted September 8, 2006 problem solved thanks Victor (turns out that i need to use the hard way through) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VISTREL 0 Posted September 8, 2006 I heard that Vista will have some problems with OGL. And DirectX has been improved a lot since version 8. It is as fast if not better than OpenGL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GBee 0 Posted September 8, 2006 I heard that Vista will have some problems with OGL. If it does that will only be because of a deliberate attempt by M$ to drive developers to using DX. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted September 8, 2006 PROCESSOR: Pentium® D Processor 820 with Dual Core Technology (2.80GHz, 800FSB) MEMORY: 2GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz - 2 DIMMs HARD DRIVE: 250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache? OPTICAL DRIVE: Dual Drives: 48x Combo + 16x DVD+/-RW w/ dbl layer write capable MONITOR:20 inch UltraSharp 2007FPW Widescreen Digital Flat Panel VIDEO CARD: 256MB nVidia Geforce 7300LE TurboCache SOUND CARD: Integrated Sound Blaster®Audigy? HD Software Edition FLOPPY & MEDIA READER: No Floppy Drive Included SPEAKERS: Dell AS501 10W Flat Panel Attached Spkrs for UltraSharp? Flat Panels I was just wondering if you guys thought that this would be a good investment. As of right now I think it would work out well for the price ($1,700) but just wanted a second opinion. Purposes of computer: -Photo Editing (Photoshop) -Armed Assault (Maybe Game 2) -Armed Assault World Editing (Visitor) -Listening to Music I was also wondering if the sound card and speakers were good since I listen to a lot of music and I know nothing about soundcards and could probably afford to get a "Sound Blaster® X-Fi? XtremeMusic (D), w/Dolby® Digital 5.1" but do not know if it is really worth the $75 or not. Also under optional ports it says: "IEEE 1394 Adapter OR Serial & PS-2 PCI Adapter" What are those? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
j w 0 Posted September 8, 2006 For 1700 u shud get atleast a 3.0Ghz, since that version is not much more expensive then the 2,8ghz (we talk 15-20bucks) And, for 1700 u shud get a Conroe... What brand is the comp, or is it in parts? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted September 8, 2006 Dell XPS 410. Who I am really hating right now because it won't allow me to get a 3.0 ghz on this model and this is the cheapest I've managed to make a system so far that is still useable. I had one at 1,000 but the video card sucked and it had some other problem too. A Conroe? (I am very limited in my knowledge of computer hardware.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeMeSiS 11 Posted September 8, 2006 VIDEO CARD: 256MB nVidia Geforce 7300LE TurboCache Turbocache? it doesnt even have its own RAM, you should at least get a x1600xt, x800xt or better if you want to enjoy ArmA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted September 8, 2006 VIDEO CARD: 256MB nVidia Geforce 7300LE TurboCache Turbocache? it doesnt even have its own RAM, you should at least get a x1600xt, x800xt or better if you want to enjoy ArmA My two other options: 1.) 256MB ATI Radeon X1300 Pro [add $50] 2.) 256MB nVidia GeForce 7900 GS [add $200] Would the $50 one be sufficient or do I have to do the $200 one or would all 3 of them suck? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeMeSiS 11 Posted September 8, 2006 VIDEO CARD: 256MB nVidia Geforce 7300LE TurboCache Turbocache? it doesnt even have its own RAM, you should at least get a x1600xt, x800xt or better if you want to enjoy ArmA My two other options: 1.) 256MB ATI Radeon X1300 Pro [add $50] 2.) 256MB nVidia GeForce 7900 GS [add $200] Would the $50 one be sufficient or do I have to do the $200 one or would all 3 of them suck? Well, the 256MB nVidia GeForce 7900 GS should do the trick, i have a x1600xt and im very happy with it but i wouldnt recommend any lower (and im defenitly not a FPS whore) EDIT: But IMO your system is seriously overpriced, cant you buy it at some other place? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted September 8, 2006 VIDEO CARD: 256MB nVidia Geforce 7300LE TurboCache Turbocache? it doesnt even have its own RAM, you should at least get a x1600xt, x800xt or better if you want to enjoy ArmA My two other options: 1.) 256MB ATI Radeon X1300 Pro [add $50] 2.) 256MB nVidia GeForce 7900 GS [add $200] Would the $50 one be sufficient or do I have to do the $200 one or would all 3 of them suck? Well, the 256MB nVidia GeForce 7900 GS should do the trick, i have a x1600xt and im very happy with it but i wouldnt recommend any lower (and im defenitly not a FPS whore) EDIT: But IMO your system is seriously overpriced, cant you buy it at some other place? I probably could but my entire family buys stuff from Dell and they generally don't have problems with it so I tend to trust Dell a lot. I especially trust them because I always hear from people "my hard drive melted" or "my blablabla lit on fire". But do you have any recommendations of where I could get a good reliable "im not going to explode on you." computer? I was originally going to have my friend build me one but A, he moved and B, the same reason in the first paragraph. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeMeSiS 11 Posted September 8, 2006 But do you have any recommendations of where I could get a good reliable "im not going to explode on you." computer? If anything is going to explode then its a dell laptop battery But im sorry, i dont know any good US shops who sell PCs. Ive heard newegg.com is ok but i never bought anything there and i find their site to be incredible confusing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Myrmidan 0 Posted September 9, 2006 Personally I dont see Dx10 coming in to play for a long time if at all. At the end of day it all comes down to the market if people dont buy vista then they will not buy/use dx10. Vista being Another example of Microsoft tryin to cash in and close an end of the market. When PS3 comes out the xbox 360 will crash and burn bill gates knows it and so does every developer out there. And when it comes down to it a developer can make or break a platform if they see a component as being to hard to use or no profitability then they wont use it. Cos at the end of the day "money dont make my world go round, I'm reaching out for a higher ground"-Dave Brent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Colossus 2 Posted September 9, 2006 Graphics means attention and cash, which DX10 will give plenty of. So DX10 will widely be used for sure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crashdome 3 Posted September 9, 2006 Hang on a second:-DirectX10 is not backwardly compatable. So if i install DX10, none of my old games will work. Â Meaning I'll have to roll back? First... you can't install DX10. You either get it when you buy Vista or you don't get it at all (Which I don't understand why all the complaining from everyone.. just DONT buy Vista if you don't want it so badly) Quote[/b] ]-Vista uses DX10 and/or DX9.0L. So what benefits does DX10 have over DX9.0L? I guess all new games will run with DX10, but will DX9.xx keep running (E.G: DX9.0M, N, O upto DX9.0X and beyonds)? Think about when DirectX9 came out versus the capabilities of DirectX8.1. That should give you an idea about how long and what it will take before a full switch over. DX9.0L is final for series 9 AFAIK. Quote[/b] ]@Bill Gates; what are you guys playing at, eh? You just keep making life harder and harder for us. I always laugh at this... harder how? harder as in you don't get stuff for free?? You can't have your cake AND eat it to? To include everyone else who was ranting... They have completely re-did DirectX (yes yes AGAIN - I know) and it's either make it worse by trying to meld it back into XP or earlier systems OR optimize it for the newest OS. XP is 5 years old btw... think about that... that is almost twice the distance between Win95 and Win98 and between Win98 and WinXP. I paid my money 5 years ago and trust me.. even if I had paid full retail, off-the-shelf price at $300 (which I didn't) and had the worst experience than anyone else ever had with XP... that is still like $60/year. I pay more for my 3 domain names registration. If it's so bad to have to upgrade... or that you gotta PAY someone who's hoping to make a living for what they do... ..then vote with your dollar(or local currency) and don't buy or use it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
j w 0 Posted September 9, 2006 Yeah, newegg.com has very good products, but their site sux big time But you don't know anyone that can build computers for you? Dell intend to be overpriced for normal persons, though, good offers for buisniess and school etc. If you wish, I could give you a good list of what to get for ~1700USD at newegg.com Then you just need someone to put the pieces together. JW Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted September 9, 2006 Yeah, newegg.com has very good products, but their site sux big time But you don't know anyone that can build computers for you? Dell intend to be overpriced for normal persons, though, good offers for buisniess and school etc. If you wish, I could give you a good list of what to get for ~1700USD at newegg.com Then you just need someone to put the pieces together. JW Na, don't worry about that. I might try to build my next computer but at this point I don't have time to try to learn how to build one or to go looking for someone who does. So other than the system being overpriced is it all going to work okay? Im still not sure what those two port things are and if I need them or if the sound card and speakers are of okay quality. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EiZei 0 Posted September 9, 2006 1700 USD computer with a 7300 and no intel duo processor? Ouch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wamingo 1 Posted September 9, 2006 Quote[/b] ]XP is 5 years old btw... think about that... Yes, XP is old, yet from a technical standpoint (efficiency etc), vista will doubtly be better for consumers - at all. And what exactly will Vista provide you with? Not a lot Except, if you want to use the next generation of games and software, you will, in all likeliness, have to buy it. The problem is choice. Microsoft locks down content made for windows like was it made for a console. (playstation games don't play on xbox or pc for instance). There's nothing wrong with that as such, except the monopoly-like status that windows has, is making choice next to non-existant. No one in a sane state of mind, who wants to earn a living, would develope ordinary consumer applications and games for a platform with ~10% or less of the market. No one. Windows sits on an enourmous share of the market. It's an undeniable fact. Therefor developers and thus consumers has little or no choice if they wish to make or play games, respectively. For some it is without a doubt about money, and for those who need several computers, individuals or companies, investing in windows can become an expensive endevour. But windows brings a lot of issues with it as well. Microsoft has the money to set its own standards and it shows that they're willing to go very far to beat the competition... The result is that the consumers suffers in forms of a poor unrivaled OS and zero portability of software. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crashdome 3 Posted September 9, 2006 And what exactly will Vista provide you with? Not a lot I don't know.. I've been using it and I like it alot more than XP. But then again, I'm not just a game/computer geek. I actually use alot of what it offers. In ragards to gaming, MS went to Xbox for a reason. It wants games on the console and yes it does want to lock down its OS (like Sony, Nintendo, etc..) Hell, Macintosh is far worse than MS is. You can't install their OS on ANYTHING except a Mac. Just because MS plays the middle ground (somewhat Open yet somewhat Closed) it just gets bashed from both ends. However, Mac and Linux have been out for quite awhile now and I sure wish people would put their interests where their mouth is sometimes. i.e. Stop flaming a company in what could be a good discussion thread and SWITCH. If a game comes out DX10 only.. then don't buy it. It's that simple. I also know how expensive MS products are... I buy them all the time (Windows Server 2003, Exchange Server 2003, MS Office, XP for workstations) and the truth is out of the MAcs and Linux boxes we have (yes we do run a variety of OS systems at our company for different purposes) the ROI is much cheaper on MS software. Linux is a technical nightmare - I've got SO many stories - and the Macs are expensive AS HELL. I'm not saying MS is the best choice but it certainly hasn't been the worst choice for us so far... Oh great... now I just went OT... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GBee 0 Posted September 9, 2006 No one in a sane state of mind, who wants to earn a living, would develope ordinary consumer applications and games for a platform with ~10% or less of the market. No one. Maybe, maybe not - 10% of the share is still a HUGE number of systems. However the more important point, is that with a little care and very little extra effort they can develop software/games which works on 99% of systems instead of just the percentage running windows. ID software managed to produce games which ran under both linux/windows. In fact I found like most games that they ran *much* better under linux (faster fps etc) than under windows. Linux is gaining a lot of ground, it's now reaching the point where more people I know (friends, family, work etc) are using linux than are using Windows. There will be a huge number who decide that paying a couple of hundred or more for vista is a waste of money and given the rapid improvements of linux they will (and should) swap. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sirex 0 Posted September 9, 2006 You can't install their OS on ANYTHING except a Mac. i didnt read the rest of your post. but this part isn't true. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites