- Oct 5, 2007
- 1,714 (0.39/day)
|Processor||Intel C2Q Q6600 @ Stock (for now)|
|Cooling||Proc: Scythe Mine, Graphics: Zalman VF900 Cu|
|Memory||4 GB (2x2GB) DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15|
|Video Card(s)||GigaByte 8800GT Stock Clocks: 700Mhz Core, 1700 Shader, 1940 Memory|
|Storage||74 GB WD Raptor 10000rpm, 2x250 GB Seagate Raid 0|
|Display(s)||HP p1130, 21" Trinitron|
|Audio Device(s)||Creative X-Fi PLatinum|
|Power Supply||700W FSP Group 85% Efficiency|
It will depend on the game, obviously. If the game uses PhysX and you have the hardware physics enabled a cheap Geforce will give you a lot better performance. Probably you wouldn't be able to enable hardware physics without a Geforce or Ageia ppu, there's the possibility that some few games wouldn't even work, so in reality it's either more frames with no enhanced gameplay, or less frames but outstanding physics. Choose what you prefer.You misunderstood me. Say someone has a 4850 and they are trying to decide to either go crossfire (buying a card of equal price as the one they have) or save some money and get a cheap nvidia card. Would they see better performance with the cheaper nvidia card, or with the equally priced 4850?
Some people are on a budget and can't "just buy a 200 series card" lol.
The whole point of this is to have a lot better physics than what an entire (4 cores) Overclocked Quad can handle. Even the 8400 GS has probably more number crunching power than the fastest quad.It is better just to buy a quad core CPU and to use it's additional 2 cores for physics in games. In this way you will have more balanced PC.