ROFL, I think you could play crysis maxxed out with that rig never mind SHIV!

...extremely dated? That's a bit harsh. Couple years old, but 6800 ultras are still decent cards. I guess I build my machines with the idea that I'll be able to live with em for 5 years.

Since I've been using SLI for a couple years I feel justified in weighing an opinion. based on my REAL experience. I wouldn't waste my money again on dual cards... unless I really feel like I need to keep all 4 of these monitors. You'll be down $1700 and two years from now someone will be calling your rig extremely dated.

...and my comments about forcing you to operate on a single monitor and the dysfunctional nVidia configuration manager software are still going to be valid regardless of 68's vs 88's.

Overkill
 

There would be no problems or conflicts really with the game, however the cost of a system you described might be a problem especially if you consider how little increase in performance you get for spending a lot more. $$$-$$$$

For SH4 that would be overkill. The performance increase between say a Core 2 duo and Core 2 Quad or Extreme is not really worth the extra bucks (thats what I think), especially with a game that does not take advantage of the multiple cores. It is worth it if you do video/picture editing.

It is cheaper to build your own gaming pc then pay the markup of the seller. I was going to buy my computer but I decided it was best I build it and save over $ 1500 and I put that money towards my new car fund.

If you do buy a system with Vista make sure the card supports DirectX 10, ATI 2900HD or the GeForce 8800 series which you mentioned. Buddy of mine just got the ATI. The card was worth it, amazing stuff.

I would really not recommend a SLI configuration. The extra 2-20fps (my experience) does not justify the additional cost. ($500-$800) Diff MB and Card.

My Configuration...
Core 2 Duo E6700
Intel D975XB BX2 Motherboard
4X1GB OCZ Plat Revision 2 DDR2 800MHZ (previsouly 2GB)
Raid 5
Ati X1950XTX PCIE X 16
22in Benq WS

buteobuteo, sincerelly, what is the purpose of this thread???

you came here to say something like "hey, lets go hunting elephants with my new m1 tank, then we could make some practice with my new F22 shooting down some spitfires. But I'm still wondering if such systems like these would present any problems/conflicts.... BTW, did you see those photon rockets I put in my wheelchair? arent they loooovely?" :88)

Come on. You know the answer beforehand.

Isint it obvious.

Midlife crisis computer envy :88)

Why not scrap the new PC idea and just get a Harley?

You are soooo right!, mate :rotfl:

Actually, his question is completely and utterly justified. The fact that his processor can handle the game and the graphic card is obvious. However if Quad Core or SLI is going to be an issue is not.

SHIV doesn't benefit from multiple cores, so having anything above Dual Core is a waste of cash. (Go for a 2.4 GHz AKA the 6600). So, HyperThreading is all you can hope for unless they patch it to use dual cores (like they did with S.T.A.L.K.E.R.)

SLI is likewise something that has to be supported by the game, if not, it's simply not worth the cash, because the mediocre performance increase isn't worth it.

And since SHIV supports neither multi-cores or SLI, I say that rig is just way over the top. SLI is for extreme gamers. ONE 8800 GTS will be enough for SHIV ANY day. Got one myself and I can run it in 1680x1050 with 4x AA and 8x AF. Easy. So ONE 8800 GTX will be MORE than enough. And to get some power from the processor, get the E6600 2,4 GHz Core2Duo. More than enough.

At least that's my opinion. Don't go with the hype. SLI is dead. There's too little support for it, and too much cash to be spent to build a solid base to encourage game designers to add support for it.

I woudn't buy a quad core now, since the next gen ones (will probably be out late this year, or early nex year, are going to be a heck of a lot better. (the figures are 15-30% on the same clock speed)

Thanks for all the advice guys. I have decided after reading all your posts to opt for E6700 2.67Ghz Dual core + a single 768mb 8800 GTX.
One more question, XP or Vista.

buteobuteo,

Sounds like a much better plan, at least from a cost benefit standpoint. I am considering doing something similar with a Core 2 2.4 and a 640MB GTS (should be plenty horespower for SH4 at 1/2 the cost). Total for a new system is expected to be about 1100 USD.

I would go with the XP. From what I understand, Vista has some cool bells and whistles but there is no real performance increase and XP is a tried and true product (i.e. the bugs have been worked out). If you enjoy being a beta tester for MS then I would go with Vista.

Hit a little close to home....I used to own a porsche, now I drive a honda (minivan at that). It is amazing what you will do for your kids :D

Personally I would go with XP as hardware manufacturers havent really come up to speed with drivers for vista as yet.

Also I see a lot of CTD reports here and the great majority of them are vista users.

You can always upgrade in the future.

You will be extremely satisfied with that I am SURE... I have a E6400 with a 8800 GTS Superclocked and it runs everything awesome at max settings... your system would kick way more ass Im sure.

And screw vista until at least SP2... I am waiting until I need it for DX10 games and then I am going to get it.

I have a dual-core, with SLI twin 7900's. I get flickering graphics on occasion. I just keep reloading the game (2 x's usually) and eventually I get normal graphics. I run max resolution and when needed time compression over 3000 x normal. No sweat.

XP-pro, DX-9c, latest drivers.

My system never has any problems except with SH4, just occasional flickering. Hope that helps somehow.

buteobuteo,

Seems like you've made a decision. As a quad core owner QX6700 w/ a single 8800 GTX I wouldn't go quad core unless you're going to do lots of video encoding and heavy multitasking. Quad core is amazing if you are putting your minidv tapes on dvd, for example, or doing other video projects. I'm also a musician and use my pc as a home recording studio and quad core helps some w/ that software but not as much as w/ video.

Bottom line - if you are using your PC for everyday tasks, business, games, etc. do not buy quad core yet. I love the multitasking benefits of quad core but it's overkill if you aren't doing heavy multitasking ... Still, it is aweseom - I can burn a dvd, have adobe photoshop open, itunes open and play a game at the same time w/o any slow down. The axiom "software gets slower faster than hardware gets faster" does not apply to quad core - for once you will be a year or two or more ahead of software.

I use XP and am holding off on Vista until they come out w/ SP1 and until Cisco VPN comes out w/ Vista drivers. (Make sure your current hardware is compatible w/ Vista - many companies haven't released stable drivers).

BTW - I sold my car before I upgrading - wasn't cheap

Also, cooling - you need an aftermarket cooler (Zalman 9700) for a quad core chip. With good air cooling it stays cool ...