[quote who="angus1949" reply="6" id="2433322"]Has anyone installed and used 7 on an x86 system? Field Value CPU Type AMD Athlon XP, 2200 MHz (11 x 200) 3200+ Would need 32 bit I assume.[/quote] You would have to give us some more system specs before we could tell you if it would run (amount of RAM is very important and model of video card to a lesser extent). I wouldn't bother with it with that CPU anyways. Seeing as it's about 6 years old, I d
DrKillinger
Impulse usually has no trouble maxing out my 10mbit connection (works out to 1.0-1.2MB/sec). Anyway, I've got a question. Does anybody who purchased Red Faction: Guerrilla know of any issues with the impulse version? Also, I know that I exceed the minimum requirements, but I've heard that this game is a real performance hog. I've got the following hardware: 1. AMD 7750 2.7Ghz dual core CPU 2. 9600GT 512MB video card 3. 4GB DDR2 800 RAM 4. Native resolut
I live in the US and the sale price is $30 (it was $35) for the bundle and $20 for just Sins by itself (it was $30). I'm not sure what the prices are in the UK, but it seems to me you're paying the same price as everyone else (at least in the UK and US it seems). No offense, but I'd suggest you read about the prices of the products a little more before trying to raise hell.
Really a sound card is only a good buy only if you have decent speakers and/or headphones. Personally, If I didn't have a very specific goal in mind for my upgrade, I'd save my $100 and put it towards a complete overhaul at a later date. As far as whay Moosetek13 says, I have to disagree to a certain extent. While $100 will not give you an overall leap in performance across the board, putting you're money in a specific place to accomplish a specific goal can greatly increase performan
Well, (keeping in mind what Mystikmind pointed out) the best upgrade really depends on what you want the computer to do better. If you're running out of hard drive space, buy another hard drive. If you really want to encode music or video faster, get a faster CPU. If you want to play games at a higher framerate and/or higher detail/resolution, I would get a new video card. I'm pretty sure you can snag an ATI 4850 card for around $100. Otherwise if you prefer Nvidia cards a 980
Maybe it's just me, but I'm not seeing anything about getting the beta or signing up in that link. I do however, like the new Impulse Phase IV and look forward to trying out Ready to Play :)
Always wanted to play this one. I'll have to dig up DOSbox again, but it'll be worth the effort. [edit] FYI Download is going horribly slow. Speed is about 6-7KB/sec. Makes me feel like I have an internet connection from the time when this game was released... :P
Hey Stardock! They're still looking for a publisher... *winkwink* *nudgenudge*... [e digicons]:grin:[/e] The trailer certainly looks impressive and I am definitely keeping this one on my radar.
As far as I know, the other publishers (ie. Activision, THQ, Paradox etc.) have the final say as to when and where their games are available on Impulse. I don't know any more than you do about how much pressure Stardock applies to get certain titles available in certain regions. Besides, it's preposterous to assume that Stardock hates all of Europe. Maybe they hate a certain country, like Luxembourg (who likes them? [e digicons]:P[/e] ), but to hate an entire cont
I've never seen a group of people complain about coupons this much. For those that missed the 20% off, you didn't exactly lose anything. There will more than likely be more deals in the future, either pay full price like you would have anyways or wait out the next deal. I agree that 2-3 day only coupons are not very consumer friendly (In my mind, they are an obviously just looking for people to make irrational snap buying decisions, an impulse buy [e digicons]^_^[/e] ) , but it is n
If your power supply is old or crappy, then there is no better card than the ATI 4670. It has no external power connector so it's friendly with low wattage power supplies. I personally wouldn't bother with the other two you mentioned as the 4670 should only cost about $10 more than the 4650 and any card lower than that probably wouldn't be enough of an upgrade to bother with. If you told us anything about your power supply or what your budget is, we could be much more helpful.
I don't know how much you plan on playing games, but that 9500GT is underpowered for the price. Honestly the ATI 4670 kicks it's ass all around for the same price. I'm an nvidia guy myself, but I wouldn't feel right telling you to buy a 9500GT for the same price as a 4670. The ATI 4830 I listed as an alternative for $20 more kicks both of their asses with ease. Here's a good article comparing the 9500GT and 4670: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3405&p=7
I'll be looking forward to tuesday then... :)
I just built a new desktop with a $500 budget and I bought a 7750. It really is the best CPU you can get for the money (for a low end budget). Here's my build suggestions: Cooler Master Centurion case: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119106 Enermax 500W Power Supply: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817194038 AMD Athlon X2 7750: http://www.newegg.com
Just FYI even though the Athlon X2 7750 is not labeled as a Phenom CPU, it does indeed use the same Phenom architecture as the Phenom I's (Phenom II is definitly superior to Phenom I, but both are much better than the Athlon 64 chips). For $60 the 7750 is a hell of a chip to beat. To the OP: If you gave us a budget we could be much more specific.
In most applications, the X4 9500 is going to be slower than the X2 7750 due to it's lower clock speed. Only in programs that were made to use 4 cores will the 9500 win. If it's between those two, I'd get the 7750 in a heart beat. That's probably a biased answer seeing as how I am typing this from a computer with a 7750 in it :) . However, if your budget allows it, there maybe some better options... Take a look at this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N
129mb/s = 16.125MB/s = 947.5 MB per minute = 56850 MB per hour X 3 hours = 170550 MB = 166.55 GB... ...I guess that'll just have to do... [e digicons]:P[/e]
I'm certainly not involved with the development of Sins (or any game for that matter) and I certainly don't know anything that Ironclad or Stardock might have planned, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for any new graphical updates to Sins of a Solar Empire. The graphics certainly aren't bad. I mean they're not bleeding edge thats for sure, but I find them pleasant enough. Then again, I still play Total Annihilation and Galactic Civilizations 1. Cutting edge 3D graphics are not cr