Countdown for a new system

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

@ Skybird: I'm about a month behind you for getting a new computer, and I'm having the same dilemma about what it's going to look like.

We could help each other by job sharing then. I get a system, and you do the pay.

Currently figuring out how to do a dual boot. I think I have a confused understanding of what it is and how user software is handled by it. Will have a separate thread on that when the time has come.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

@ Vendor: Why do feel the need to quote an entire long post just so you can write one line?

I even wonder about the purpose of that one line!? Dungeon Keeper...? Wrong thread, maybe?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

We could help each other by job sharing then. I get a system, and you do the pay.

Currently figuring out how to do a dual boot. I think I have a confused understanding of what it is and how user software is handled by it. Will have a separate thread on that when the time has come.

Well, you know me. I know so little about the subject I was thinking of taking a hacksaw and some superglue to the hard drive...

[Herr-Berbunch]

The price of hard drives now is such that I wouldn't bother partitioning, you may as well get two, one for Win7 and one for XP - if you really need it. I run some older games just fine on Win7 and by disabling UAC I have no issues with running programs.

Good luck to you both. (Not that you'll need it!)

[the_tyrant]

My advice (I just built a new system):

Big hard drives are a great idea. I bought a 3tb drive for 199$, while a 1 tb drive is like 150$. The cost per gb goes down as the size of drive goes up.

4 cores are a good idea. Its barely more expensive than a duel core processor. and the performance increase is quite noticeable.

Also, build for the future. Get a good stable rig that can be upgraded.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by the_tyrant

My advice (I just built a new system):

Big hard drives are a great idea. I bought a 3tb drive for 199$, while a 1 tb drive is like 150$. The cost per gb goes down as the size of drive goes up.

But a 500 GB drive for 50 bucks still is even cheaper. And I do not need even that much. I simply do not need it, I do not buy new games in truckload amounts anymore.

4 cores are a good idea. Its barely more expensive than a duel core processor. and the performance increase is quite noticeable.

How is that? None of the games I plan to use is new and supports multiple cores. As I said, I have almost no interest in new stuff. So I think I am better off with investing into two cores with for example 3.3 GHz than into 4 cores with 2.8 GHz. Since my sims use one CPU only anyway, that leaves the game running with 3.3 instead of 2.8 GHz, and background processes on the other CPU. Core 3 and 4 would be of no use for me, or not!?

Also, build for the future. Get a good stable rig that can be upgraded.

Yes, absolutely. I would welcome USB 3 connectors, for example, for faster USB stick handling. Additional space for RAM, if I ever would need it (which I still doubt). But beyond that - I wonder what kind of "upgrade" in hardware I could need. Again, I do not buy software anymore like I used to buy in the past. Estimating that W7 will be supported for another 8-10 years, I think that is the amount of time the new if should hold out.

And in ten years it is possible that my interest in computer games has become so specialized and small (chess, cosims), that maybe I would prefer something in the style of a notebook then. If that still is available then.

FS9 can use more hardware than I currently have. But all other sims I mentioned already probably are served with hardware overkill capacities by my new system.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

But a 500 GB drive for 50 bucks still is even cheaper. And I do not need even that much. I simply do not need it, I do not buy new games in truckload amounts anymore.

Same here. I download a huge amount of music these days, but that's what I have an external drive for.

How is that? None of the games I plan to use is new and supports multiple cores. As I said, I have almost no interest in new stuff. So I think I am better off with investing into two cores with for example 3.3 GHz than into 4 cores with 2.8 GHz. Since my sims use one CPU only anyway, that leaves the game running with 3.3 instead of 2.8 GHz, and background processes on the other CPU. Core 3 and 4 would be of no use for me, or not!?

Interesting questions. I think I'd like to have as many cores as I can afford, but the GHz question puzzles me as well.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

as many cores as I can afford, but the GHz question puzzles me as well.

Software needs to explcitly support 2 or 4 cores, else one and the same workload of one core only gets equzally distriubuted amongst the avialable cores. Instread mof one core being on duty to 80% you then have 4 cores each of them being busy at 20%. To have all four cores running at 80% and getting the speed boost from that, you need softweare supporting that.

Thnat'S why modewrn chess engines nowadays get released in two versions: single core versions at around 40-50 Euros, and multiple core versions at around 80-100 Euros. Its the same engine, but optimised for several cores.

FS9 is single core only. You cannot get around that. You only get a GHz-independant speed boost from the fact that two processors for example allow you to have one CPU running Windows and background tasks, leaving the other free for fully calculating in the service of FS9.

That's why I prefer 2 high GHz processors over 4 CPUs with lower GHz.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch

The price of hard drives now is such that I wouldn't bother partitioning, you may as well get two, one for Win7 and one for XP - if you really need it. I run some older games just fine on Win7 and by disabling UAC I have no issues with running programs.

What is UAC?

Good luck to you both. (Not that you'll need it!)

I am confident, I maintain the notebook of my mother with Vista since 2 years, and hate it, and since two months I maintain another notebook of a friend of hers, with Windows 7, and I like it. So the new OS is not all that new anymore. But still there are details I probably don't know, since I had no need to investigate them since he does not need them, but I will need them due to different needs of mine.

P.S. BTW, a pure Windows 7 partition, will 32 GB enoiugh in nsize, considering future Windows upgrades, SPs and system restore points?

P.P.S. I noted with enthusiasm that W7 since the first time ever features a volume cloning function, like Acronis for example. That way I can form an image of the full HD installatrions onto another, separate HD. Does that function in W7 work reliable, or are you still better off with using separate software for that?

[the_tyrant]

Originally Posted by Skybird

What is UAC?

User account control
the popup asking you if you actually want to do something or not

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by the_tyrant

User account control
the popup asking you if you actually want to do something or not

Ah yes, very annoying in Vista, and although less so, still annoying in W7. I need to learn how to switch that one off.

It would be nice to have all software also running in administrator mode automatically.

Microsoft is exaggerating some things there - for no productive use.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Ah yes, very annoying in Vista, and although less so, still annoying in W7. I need to learn how to switch that one off.

It would be nice to have all software also running in administrator mode automatically.

Microsoft is exaggerating some things there - for no productive use.

You wouldn't want to disable UAC. It's a security measure. Without it you're opening your PC to hackers WIDE open.

It's preferable to have strong passwords for UAC about 20 or more random characters and change them periodically.

Amateur hacker could download app that will try to break your UAC password with sheer CPU power especially if you have the habit of leaving the internet online for long period of time. So changing them periodically is important than ever.

[HunterICX]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Currently figuring out how to do a dual boot. I think I have a confused understanding of what it is and how user software is handled by it. Will have a separate thread on that when the time has come.

IIRC,

You install the oldest version of Windows first on one of the partitions,
then you install the other version of Windows on the other partition.
Both Windows installments create entries in the boot.ini file so when you boot up your computer a screen should appear where you can select which of the windows version you want to launch.

as for the card, the Nvidia 460 is still a good deal for the price.

HunterICX