i always thought and it has always been true that graphic cards play a bigger role in gaming performance.. i dare say a 70% to 30% ratio
UNLESS ur cpu is really dated like >4years ago then yea.. a larger magin could be easily seen when compared with newer cpus
i know there's already a similar thread on this but that was before the 9600GT was released.
I am having a hard time choosing between these two cards. The price difference is abt $50 or there about. I'm using a 19" lcd (1280x1024) and my requirement is at least 4x AA and 16x AF in most newer...
i'm getting mix answers and i'm getting confused..
From evga's own forum i'm quite sure Penryns are supported how abt the 45nm quad core cpus(Yorkfield) will they work on an 680i board or only the later 780i?
namely QX9775, QX9650, Q9550 & Q9450
i dun do a lot of image editing, encoding or video editing but i do play many games... do u think 4gb will better prepare me for future games oor 2gb is enough?
2GB is way more than enough for XP..
say i get the 64bit version of Vista Premium...
is 2GB sufficient? I read an article over at AnandTech saying that 2GB is honestly only barely enough for Vista.. and newer games will require as much as 4GB..
the current prices of DDR2 rams are...
Is it a good gauge that my cpu will have good overclocking potential if my cpu can run stock speed @ low voltages..?
apparently i can run my E6600 at stock 2.4GHz at >1V...
I heard it's 3.5GB
or is it 4GB? (refering to the maximum it can fully ulitize and make out of)
should i get a pair 2x512MB Crucial Ballistix PC-5300 to go with the 2x1GB Crucial Ballistix PC-5300 one i already have. will it still run at dual channel? (3gb)
or should i just get...