Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Question about graphic card & about directx

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=189)

- - Question about graphic card & about directx (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=21484)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heliocon (Post 265541)

Dude, are you blind? I told them to buy a cheaper cpu then others suggested. Seriously you need to read...

Hmmm... first reply you made.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heliocon

You want to aim at a 4 core CPU, preferably a i7 which are the best atm...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Get an i7...

I eagerly await your huge copy and paste reply from Wikipedia/Tom's Hardware/wherever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heliocon (Post 265573)

"Because DirectX10 is a subset of DirectX11 if your running Windows 7..."

Really? I was talking about what you typed, not what you quoted (just noting what I thought was an unintentional discrepency).

No what I said is logically(and mathematically) correct. You are either miss-reading it or are trolling.

IF DirectX11 is a Superset of DirectX 10.1 THEN DirectX 10.1 MUST logically be a SubsSet of DirectX11.

from Wiki again
"Direct3D 11 is a strict superset of Direct3D 10.1 — all hardware and API features of version 10.1 are retained, and new features are added only when necessary for exposing new functionality. This helps to keep backwards compatibility with previous versions of DirectX.

"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX_10#DirectX_10

For your argument in this case to be correct you must be able to list one feature of DirectX10.1 that is not in DirectX11.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger (Post 265590)

You are correct - I made a mistake because I was taking chronological order into account and I got my terms wrong. My bad m8

Quote:

Originally Posted by speculum jockey (Post 265582)

Hmmm... first reply you made.

I eagerly await your huge copy and paste reply from Wikipedia/Tom's Hardware/wherever.

Why? Whats your argument? I said buy a gen 1 i-7, they said buy a gen 2 i-7 or gen 2 i-5 which are both more expensive than the gen 1 i-7 I believe. If you are too lazy to read/think, its not worth the time to try and educate you. Its easy information to find and it is pretty clear what I stated and that you are either playing dumb or trolling.

So what hardware would you suggest? Do you think for $800 you can play COD on good settings? I would say definitly not.

Hi,

Question turned another way, would the game look nicer (recent amazing visual effects) when changing from (for example) Nvidia 260 to 5xx serie which - as far as I understand - does support a further feature rich set of visual effects on top of older cards ?

Thanks

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heliocon (Post 264697)

The fact that my hardware post was used by Creative assembly and pinned at the top of their forums for the guide on pc hardware? The fact that I compete in EVGA rig competitions. Also I have about 5-6 computers running atm of various ages for work, so I am familiar with a range of setups.
Sandybridge is not worth the extra $, you are paying for an integrated gpu on a cpu thats not needed. Above that sandybridge is the same as gulftown except the architecture was shrunk and they slaped on that integrated gpu then marked up the price. If you get a 40nm i7/i5 you can overclock it to 4.25+ghz on air stable, and 4.5-4.75 with a good water cooling system. Also buying an i5 is retarded if you want to keep the pc for any amount of time, how long are those 4 threads going to last you when BF3 comes out later this year and uses 8? For now its ok but it has no lasting ability as more companies come out with heavily threaded engines.

In addition the fact that you picked the 15 2500 is lol worthy. You do realise for like $20 more you could of got the K which has the better integrated GPU, and has a unlocked multiplier for overclocking? If you bought it, dumb decision you should of read more.

@Codex - no they are not really comparable, the 980 wins out, and those tests were favourable to the i5, so keep your thinking cap on ok? If a program only uses 4 threads then of course there will not be a large performance differance, some of those programs were from 2007... Now on the otherhand I have 12 threads and 6 cores, which means an immediate 33% boost due to the cores and up to (but unlikely) 3x more performance with heavily threaded programs (graphics design etc).

As for my CPU I needed it for rendering for Autodesk/Maya cgi, I also intend this pc to last for a bit so will be eventually adding another 12g of ram, and 2 more 580s with a nice raptor raid setup or even better SSDs. So to be bottlenecked by the CPU would suck, which wont happen when I overclock the 980x to 4ghz+...

I bought the i5 2500k - But I am not going to argue with your logic, as money does not appear to be a deciding factor for you.
For me it was and the i5 2500k serves me well. I am however interested in your statement that battlefield 3 will utilise 8 cores.
I have not played any game yet that has come even close to using even 3 cores effectively let alone 4 properly.
For what you do for a living 8 cores may be the way to go.
But the i5 2500k is a good cpud that overclocks well and if you want to blow most of your budget on a graphic's card which is what clod demands then the small performance boost an i7 gives is not worth the money :grin:

Just realised you also suggested cheaper options than mine in the i7 line. Have to agree with you on that.

Just like to point out that in the two UK-based retailers that I usually use for PC components (Scan and OCUK) there are currently NO socket 1366 or 1156 i7s cheaper than the i5-2500K.

Closest was the quad core i7-950 at 188 (pounds) compared to the 2500K at 166.

Cheapest 6-core was i7-970 at 440 pounds.

And the i7-8xx's start at 206, and are considered inferior to the SBs.

Basically to get any better performance than Sandy Bridge you need to spend a huge amount more. And even then it may not be worth it if you don't run highly threaded applications.

Hi,

Better graphical effects with newer card ?
e.g. gtx 260 --> serie 5 ?

Or just smoother & faster ?

Regards

Quote:

Originally Posted by jf1981 (Post 267332)

Hi,

Better graphical effects with newer card ?
e.g. gtx 260 --> serie 5 ?

Or just smoother & faster ?

Regards

Sheesh jf........I don't think your microphone is working :confused:....lets just go get a beer ;)

sg

"But you guys! Video Editing! Seriously, i7 is cheaper and better than i5! You guys, pay attention to me, despite everything I ever said being either wrong or a lie, or a longwinded quote from Wikipedia." :(

"LISTEN TO ME!!!!" :evil: