Quote:
Originally Posted by NLS61
Oh man,
Yes i follow now i'm over London chasing a 100 plus bogies then i want the faster of the two posibilities.
So I bought the most price sencible in the performance curve.
Furthermore you are assuming that I have a monitor that does 60 refresh rate.
You assume right but do you know the resolution?. I might be at 2550x1600
As it is i'm not because I would have bought a 580 card.
I Understand quit a lot a bout performance but also a bout what wich performance cost on the polar.
So what is sencible priced and what is not is a price performance equasion.
You might argue that my system is not the best price performance one can get probably that is where your AMD system scores.
I want a system that scores high on the performance curve without costing "me" an arm and a leg.
At under 600 euros this system does that.
In the end we will see who's got it right.
See you over London,
Greetz,
Niels
|
Respect to all those who upgraded now but NLS61's comment is exactly why I would wait until CoD is out.
I've got a nagging suspicion that as soon as we fly over London <paste Tree_UK's comments here

> with some medium amount of objects the frames will drop dramatically. Just like with the Crysis euphoria in 2007, people upgraded before the game was out, mainly to have more GPU power, but when released the game just bought any system to it's knees.
With CoD I think it's going be CPU intensive and the 2500k and 2600k may not be enough, don't get wrong it's a great CPU, but a lot of what the reviewer sites base their comparisons and recommendations on are on games that are 12 months old or older and are GPU limited not CPU.
I hope I'm wrong but my male intuition is acting like my cautious wife telling me to wait.