Why the hell do you have that many computers in your home?pr5owner said:okay this is real nurdy, my home network lol
don't know if you can see my machine, its the one with dual monitors, anyways here are the specs
Athlon Barton 1.833Ghz@2.2GHz
Areo7+ heat sink and blower
480W Pwr Supply
1GB Ram PC3200
MSI Nvidia FX 5600 256MB DDR (8x AGP)
ATi Radeon 7500 64MB DDR w/ TV out(PCI)
80GB Maxtor 7200RPM Fluid bearing
40GB Maxtor 7200RPM Fluid bearing
Asus A7V600 RAID, w/ Gigabit lan
Liteon 16x DVD ROM
Liteon 48x12x48 CDRW
Creative 5.1 5300 Surround speakers
Dual 10" banpassed sub w/ 500W amp
Too poor for a Floppy drive
Soft56K modem (caller id)
Creative live 5.1 SB
Samsung 19" flat screen
KDS 19"
microsoft KB/optical mouse
chuyler1 said:Anything over a 1.3 is overkill for the average user. The only application that I notice a difference between my g/f's 1.4GHz laptop and my 2GHz PC with all the bells and whistles is Adobe Photoshop...specifically the wait time when applying cpu-intensive filters.
I don't play the latest and greatest video games but NFS Porsche, Half-Life, Max Payne, Stronghold, and The Sims work fine on both computers. The Sims, w/o any expansion packs, worked fine on my Celeron 300.
2400+ is a waist of electricity. You might as well double up your computer as a space heater. Just get 512MB of ram and a 7200RPM hard drive and you'll be all set. People often confuse the need for a faster cpu with the need for more ram or a faster graphics card.
hi-perf said:reason why i suggest a 2400+:
1. Price difference is minimal compared to a Tbird 1300
2. Will last longer in the upgrade chain than say a Tbird 1300.
3. Generates less heat than a Tbird 1300 (still)
so is a 9800 pro 256mb a waste of electricity if all of his averageness is going to be playing at most solitare and minesweeper?