NationStates Jolt Archive

Ok, well here is where we are on the magic journey that is getting everything optimal to run FSX (Flight Simulator X). DVD Drive, check, RAM, need 512MB more, need a better CPU, and graphic cards basically suck since it's a PCI Radeon card that doesn't support DirectX9. This computer is basically one of those $500 "family" computers, not a gaming computer. Now, I will be graduating in December, which means for at least 6 months I will have a full time job that hopefully will pay higher than min. wage because I will have a college degree. So, I have two options on the computer front. I can either keep this one, and try to customized it, or I could salvage the DVD Drive, the 512MB Ram memory stick, the video card, and just order a new higher end gaming machine. What do y'all think? For those who are wondering, this is what FSX requires (Keep in mind, this is Bare Min.)

OS: Windows XP SP2 256 MB
Processor: 1.0 GHz
Hard Drive: 15GB
Video Card: DirectX9 hardware compatibility with 32mb of ram and support.

You should probably give a complete list of your system's specifications. It's hard to tell what you need to do, as you didn't show your RAM's type and speed, your sound card, your case, your power supply, or your motherboard.

pull what you think you will need and be able to use in your new PC, and sell off what you can of the old one (don't forget to keep the hard drive) and just buy a new PC, it doesn't have to be perfect, just something you can live with until you have more $$ to customize further.

What are the actual specs of the machine you have (everything - including PSU, because decent hardware will eat a cheap PSU in a fatal way)?
What kind of memory is it?
If you're using a PCI (that's PCI, not PCI-Express, yes?) graphics board, do you have a PCI-E or AGP slot available?

where can I find my specs?

It's hard to say without knowing the exact specs of the machine you have now. However, I personally am the sort of person who keeps a machine as long as I can, with an upgrade or two along the way if necessary, then getting a completely new one when it's no longer practical to upgrade.

Also, this game takes up 15 GB?!

where can I find my specs?

open it up and look inside?

It's hard to say without knowing the exact specs of the machine you have now. However, I personally am the sort of person who keeps a machine as long as I can, with an upgrade or two along the way if necessary, then getting a completely new one when it's no longer practical to upgrade.

Also, this game takes up 15 GB?!

MSFS (Microsoft Flight Simulator) tends to take up alot of HD.

1 GHz? Buy a new computer.

CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php) will be able to tell you many things.

For the PSU you'll probably have to take the side off the machine and have a look at the sticker on it. As you bought a budget machine it's probably complete crap, though.

Edit: For graphics... Try in Device Manager or Display Properties, although that's not really ideal.

open it up and look inside?

lol.

Well this much I do know

OS: XP with SP2
HD: 33.1
Video Card: ATI Radeon 9250 256 MB (PCI)
RAM: 760 MB RAM
Motherboard: Intel Celeron CPU 2.5GHz

CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php) will be able to tell you many things.

For the PSU you'll probably have to take the side off the machine and have a look at the sticker on it. As you bought a budget machine it's probably complete crap, though.

Edit: For graphics... Try in Device Manager or Display Properties, although that's not really ideal.

I love you ... you are the only one here that uses cpu-z that I have heard of anyways lol

CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php) will be able to tell you many things.

For the PSU you'll probably have to take the side off the machine and have a look at the sticker on it. As you bought a budget machine it's probably complete crap, though.

Edit: For graphics... Try in Device Manager or Display Properties, although that's not really ideal.
haha, thanks. I did the CPU-Z thing and found out that I had forgotten that I had added another memory stick to my PC, I knew it seemed faster.....LOL I am such a dork....ignore me. :(

MSFS (Microsoft Flight Simulator) tends to take up alot of HD.
15 GB seems excessive, but maybe that's just me.

15 GB seems excessive, but maybe that's just me.

You never played MSFS have ya?

I love you ... you are the only one here that uses cpu-z that I have heard of anyways lol

Hehe, ta - it's a useful little tool :)

Where is the poll?

New computer. Don't waste money upgrading.

Ok, well here is where we are on the magic journey that is getting everything optimal to run FSX (Flight Simulator X). DVD Drive, check, RAM, need 512MB more, need a better CPU, and graphic cards basically suck since it's a PCI Radeon card that doesn't support DirectX9. This computer is basically one of those $500 "family" computers, not a gaming computer. Now, I will be graduating in December, which means for at least 6 months I will have a full time job that hopefully will pay higher than min. wage because I will have a college degree. So, I have two options on the computer front. I can either keep this one, and try to customized it, or I could salvage the DVD Drive, the 512MB Ram memory stick, the video card, and just order a new higher end gaming machine. What do y'all think? For those who are wondering, this is what FSX requires (Keep in mind, this is Bare Min.)

OS: Windows XP SP2 256 MB
Processor: 1.0 GHz
Hard Drive: 15GB
Video Card: DirectX9 hardware compatibility with 32mb of ram and support.

Go to Tiger Direct and look at their bare bones kits.

I would like to also add that if I get a new machine, I would like one I could greatly customized later on.

You never played MSFS have ya?
Nope. Last flight sim I played was the first Mac F/A-18 Hornet game. :p

Holy shit, a Celeron? Get a new computer.

I would like to also add that if I get a new machine, I would like one I could greatly customized later on.

It actually looks like the game might just run on what you've got, although it'd probably be very sluggish.
If you don't mind a chunky 820MB download, give the demo a try (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimulatorx/downloads.html).

If it doesn't, or it's too slow/ugly, it's probably the graphics card letting you down. If you find out which motherboard you're using (the Celeron 2.5GHz is your CPU) it'll probably be easy to find out if it has an AGP/PCI-Express slot that a more decent grahics card can use, although that'll probably necessitate a new PSU.

If the game doesn't run acceptably and your machine doesn't have an AGP/PCI-E slot, it's new computer time. There probably isn't much worth salvaging from your existing one; I'd copy anything important off the hard disk and try and flog it for a few quid to reduce the pain of the new one.

It actually looks like the game might just run on what you've got, although it'd probably be very sluggish.
If you don't mind a chunky 820MB download, give the demo a try (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimulatorx/downloads.html).

If it doesn't, or it's too slow/ugly, it's probably the graphics card letting you down. If you find out which motherboard you're using (the Celeron 2.5GHz is your CPU) it'll probably be easy to find out if it has an AGP/PCI-Express slot that a more decent grahics card can use, although that'll probably necessitate a new PSU.

If the game doesn't run acceptably and your machine doesn't have an AGP/PCI-E slot, it's new computer time. There probably isn't much worth salvaging from your existing one; I'd copy anything important off the hard disk and try and flog it for a few quid to reduce the pain of the new one.

There is no AGP/PCI-E slots, just PCI slots. Also my video card apparently does not support DirectX9.

Ok, all I want is the machine itself, not the mintor, sound system, mouse, or keyboard, just the machine.

Now, direct me to a machine that can handle FSX!

PS: I already have FSX, that's why I'm looking for a new machine.

I have actually been planning out to buy my new computer, a uber gaming PC. I would suggest actually buying your pc until Vista comes out on Nov 7, and get the DirectX 10 graphics cards as they enter the market sometime this christmas.
I would suggest you buy a Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4gHz which can easily be overclocked to 3.6gHz with little volt increase. You will most certantly will need to buy a new motherboard, and i would suggest a Gigabyte GA-965P-DQ6 which has 3 1x PCI-E and 2 16X PCI-E, and would get 2 gigs of DDR2 800 ram. Also make sure to pick up a few 750gig 7200rpm drives, or for fast data transfer i would suggest a 120gig 10,000rpm raptor drive (or get the 15,000rpm version if you have 600$ for a hard drive). The graphics card is the hardest to give a recomendation to, as with vista and DirX10 there will be a new gen of GPUs, so i would probably suggest either a ATI1900XTX with 512 GDDR3 ram.

This computer will enable you to play any game on the market, and most likely any game well into 07-08...

There is no AGP/PCI-E slots, just PCI slots. Also my video card apparently does not support DirectX9.

Ok, all I want is the machine itself, not the mintor, sound system, mouse, or keyboard, just the machine.

Now, direct me to a machine that can handle FSX!

PS: I already have FSX, that's why I'm looking for a new machine.
What's your budget?

I have actually been planning out to buy my new computer, a uber gaming PC. I would suggest actually buying your pc until Vista comes out on Nov 7, and get the DirectX 10 graphics cards as they enter the market sometime this christmas.
I would suggest you buy a Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4gHz which can easily be overclocked to 3.6gHz with little volt increase. You will most certantly will need to buy a new motherboard, and i would suggest a Gigabyte GA-965P-DQ6 which has 3 1x PCI-E and 2 16X PCI-E, and would get 2 gigs of DDR2 800 ram. Also make sure to pick up a few 750gig 7200rpm drives, or for fast data transfer i would suggest a 120gig 10,000rpm raptor drive (or get the 15,000rpm version if you have 600$ for a hard drive). The graphics card is the hardest to give a recomendation to, as with vista and DirX10 there will be a new gen of GPUs, so i would probably suggest either a ATI1900XTX with 512 GDDR3 ram.

This computer will enable you to play any game on the market, and most likely any game well into 07-08...

Well I won't have a full time job till December, so this will work. I wonder if Alienware will have a good system by then.

What's your budget?

As of right now, nothing

When I get my job in December, hopefully enough to at least buy a $1,500-2,000 system.

Well I won't have a full time job till December, so this will work. I wonder if Alienware will have a good system by then.
That was going to be my advice. Wait for Vista. Wait for DX10 video cards.

While there's always a reason to wait before buying, this Vista thing is a pretty major threshhold.

That übermachine listed would be out of your price range, but you could easily clear those MSFS specs for $1500.

Alienware's prices aren't as bad as they used to be (being bought by Dell has helped a lot there), but that likely also means Alienware PCs will now come with a lot of extra crap you don't want (just like Dell PCs).

I'd suggest finding a local builder. By all means build a few systems on major manufacturers' web sites (Dell, Alienware, ViciousPC) to work out what specs you want, but then take those specs to a local builder to avoid all that OEM crap.

Yeah, there are the DirectX 10 graphics cards to look forwards to, but rumours are that the first batch might be rather power-hungry. If you're feeling impatient it might well be worth getting a respectable DX9 card and upgrading with the second or third batch. But time will tell, as usual.

One thing though; have you tried installing and running the game? I know your graphics card doesn't support all of DirectX 9's features, but unless the game requires Pixel Shader support it should have some DX9-complient drivers that'll mean it at least runs the game. Worth a try, if you've already bought it :)

Anyway, I can't recommend a specific seller in the US (Alienware are extortionate, though, and Dell aren't so hot) as I'm in the UK and build my own machines, but if you were buying now I'd suggest something like:

Intel Core2Duo CPU - either the e6300, e6400 or e6600 according to budget. AMD can't hold a candle to them at the moment.

Mainboard - your (carefully researched) choice, Asus are generally a good, safe (but not necessarily cheap) bet. But do research first.

RAM - 1-2GB of DDR2. Not budget or value memory; Corsair, Geil, OCZ, something like that. Higher speed = better, lower latency = better. Choose according to budget, but check for compatibility with your chosen mainboard (you're buying the whole machine, so probably won't have to worry about this or the mainboard too much - but a good idea to look them up before you buy, if you can).

Graphics card: So many choices! The ATI X1900XT is a good bet, and the 256MB version is quite cheap. Dunno how the X1900GT fares. The ATI X1950XTX is about the fastest you can get at the moment, and therefore more expensive. The nVidia 7900GTX is similar performance to the X1900XT, and a 7900GT would be OK if it's cheap(er than an X1900). The 7950GX2 is silly money. Other cards I'll let you look up yourself ;)

PSU: At least 400 watts, and if you're planning on getting one of the first batch of DX10 cards then 500 or 550 watts is a better bet. The brand is even more important; Enermax and Seasonic are great; I've heard good things about Hiper; Q-Tec are absolute shite. It's important to get a good one, because when they blow up they often take the mainboard with them. Read reviews of the PSU before you buy it. Decent PSUs are quite expensive, so bought machines often skimp here.

Hard disk: What you like, preferably not Maxtor, not less than 7200RPM. More cache = better. I like Western Digital (Raptors are ace, but very expensive) and Seagate, personally.

Other stuff: Whatever you want, but don't bother with a PhysX card; waste of cash.

Anyway, whatever you choose: Research it carefully first, and don't just take mine - or anyone else's - word for it!

Grab a digital camera. Open up your case, take a picture of the graphics card, and host it on imageshack than link it here.

Unzip this (http://www.cpuid.com/download/cpu-z-137.zip) program, and run it. Click the memory tab and take a screenshot. Again host and link it.

But basically, buying a new graphics card and new RAM sounds like the better option, if youwill be able to afford a brand new one in a few months time.


EDIT: OK, I actually read the thread. Since you do not have a agp or pcie slot, you will have to do a rebuild. Build your own. Alienware/Voodoo PC/Falcon all overcharge. I do not know about newegg or the other crappy sites you yanks use, but the big site in Canada, ncix.com, will build it for $50. I think they do ship to the US, and that'll add another $50. Basically, get your budget ready, and then create a thread asking for help building your computer. Have an idea what you want from it (MSFS is a good start, but is that the only game you play), and be able to give us an exact budget.

New computer. As a rule of thumb, if the system or the components are more than a couple of years old a new computer is a much better investment.

Also realize that FSX needs a very powerful machine to run well. The minimums listed in the box will just allow you to install the game, but it will crawl. You'll need at least 3 GHz and 1Gb to start moving it at a decent speed, and in some cities you'll find the frame rate dropping to 7 or 8 fps.

There are some tweaks to make it run faster, but still I'd say that's the minimum system you need for FSX.

And, yup, 15Gb, two DVDs. It's all those textures mostly.

New computer. As a rule of thumb, if the system or the components are more than a couple of years old a new computer is a much better investment.

Also realize that FSX needs a very powerful machine to run well. The minimums listed in the box will just allow you to install the game, but it will crawl. You'll need at least 3 GHz and 1Gb to start moving it at a decent speed, and in some cities you'll find the frame rate dropping to 7 or 8 fps.

There are some tweaks to make it run faster, but still I'd say that's the minimum system you need for FSX.

And, yup, 15Gb, two DVDs. It's all those textures mostly.
Getting a better Graphics card will make a bigger difference than wasting your money on a 3GHz processor.

Wait a couple months for Windows to start offering Vista coupons for Vista compatible computers in conjunction with HP or someone then buy a new computer. Even their cheaper computer these days are good, well once you get a new vid card.

Personally, I'm just going to wait until next year and see what is out then put down 1-2k on a new rig.

Getting a better Graphics card will make a bigger difference than wasting your money on a 3GHz processor.
Yeah, but that won't help you much without more RAM.

Judging by the hard drive size, his computer has to be at least 6-8 years old. It is unlikely to even support AVG, which died before it really lived. The best idea would be to hit up the cheapest new comp her can get and grab a cheap 256mb vid card.

Wait a couple months for Windows to start offering Vista coupons for Vista compatible computers in conjunction with HP or someone then buy a new computer. Even their cheaper computer these days are good, well once you get a new vid card.

Personally, I'm just going to wait until next year and see what is out then put down 1-2k on a new rig.
Keep XP. Buying Vista is worse than agreeing to sell your soul for a Twinkie.

Keep XP. Buying Vista is worse than agreeing to sell your soul for a Twinkie.
If you want abandonware. And it will be free to less than $50 for Vista if you take advantage of the coupon.

Assuming you want abandonware.

So, they will let you reinstall XP. And lets face it, you are going to look at porn, and you are not going to want to spend $250 to repair your mistake.

Getting a better Graphics card will make a bigger difference than wasting your money on a 3GHz processor.

Oh, yeah. And a graphics card. A 3GHz processor or higher will still make a big difference in FSX because it really needs to make a high number of calculations to figure out where you are, where you will be and the same for all that AI traffic. And that even before it has to draw it all.

Oh, yeah. And a graphics card. A 3GHz processor or higher will still make a big difference in FSX because it really needs to make a high number of calculations to figure out where you are, where you will be and the same for all that AI traffic. And that even before it has to draw it all.
True, but it does not justify the $1200 price tag of an 2.94GHz when 2.68 is just $700.

True, but it does not justify the $1200 price tag of an 2.94GHz when 2.68 is just $700.

Well, if you go with the Core Duo you don't need the top of the line model, being more efficient a lower clock speed will do. Or maybe not, since FSX is essentially a single threaded application that won't benefit from extra cores. It's all down to MFLOPS.

An Athlon 64 3800+ runs FSX nicely in most circumstances. And those are much cheaper.

Well, if you go with the Core Duo you don't need the top of the line model, being more efficient a lower clock speed will do. Or maybe not, since FSX is essentially a single threaded application that won't benefit from extra cores. It's all down to MFLOPS.

An Athlon 64 3800+ runs FSX nicely in most circumstances. And those are much cheaper.
So? Conroe has more than just two cores to make things more efficient.

So? Conroe has more than just two cores to make things more efficient.

Yup, but that doesn't mean that all of those things will make a significant difference in a particular application. It may, it may not. I haven't seen reviews yet that compare the performance of FSX on various CPUs, so I can't tell.

And even if it makes it, say, 20% faster, it's still hard to justify spending 3 or 4 times more.

Yup, but that doesn't mean that all of those things will make a significant difference in a particular application. It may, it may not. I haven't seen reviews yet that compare the performance of FSX on various CPUs, so I can't tell.

And even if it makes it, say, 20% faster, it's still hard to justify spending 3 or 4 times more.

True, but maybe if I remembered to overclock this kernel compile wouldn't take as long.

Keep XP. Buying Vista is worse than agreeing to sell your soul for a Twinkie.

Sure if you want to be stuck on DirX9 for the rest of time. Microsoft is unable to release DirX10 for XP, due to the massive graphical overhaul of the desktop, and the 3d rendering it does. So, at least at this point, Vista=DirX10, XP=Dirx9; with just that i will be getting vista...

Grab a digital camera. Open up your case, take a picture of the graphics card, and host it on imageshack than link it here.

Unzip this (http://www.cpuid.com/download/cpu-z-137.zip) program, and run it. Click the memory tab and take a screenshot. Again host and link it.

But basically, buying a new graphics card and new RAM sounds like the better option, if youwill be able to afford a brand new one in a few months time.


EDIT: OK, I actually read the thread. Since you do not have a agp or pcie slot, you will have to do a rebuild. Build your own. Alienware/Voodoo PC/Falcon all overcharge. I do not know about newegg or the other crappy sites you yanks use, but the big site in Canada, ncix.com, will build it for $50. I think they do ship to the US, and that'll add another $50. Basically, get your budget ready, and then create a thread asking for help building your computer. Have an idea what you want from it (MSFS is a good start, but is that the only game you play), and be able to give us an exact budget.

neat, and yea MSFS is basically the only game I really play. I am obsessive when it comes with aviation. :D

Ok I just look at ncix.com, now how do I get to the part where they build my PC for $50 and ship it for $50? and are there any other cost I should be worried about?

Sure if you want to be stuck on DirX9 for the rest of time. Microsoft is unable to release DirX10 for XP, due to the massive graphical overhaul of the desktop, and the 3d rendering it does. So, at least at this point, Vista=DirX10, XP=Dirx9; with just that i will be getting vista...

I'm surprised at the number of people who on this forum who rant at the government stealing their rightful freedom that blindly sign the lisence agreement with MS.

You should probably give a complete list of your system's specifications. It's hard to tell what you need to do, as you didn't show your RAM's type and speed, your sound card, your case, your power supply, or your motherboard.

Correct.

But even looking at what Wilgrove has already listed...for a machine that old, i'd definitely suggest building a new one.

I wonder if I can just skip the whole Vista and XP debate and just use the Linux OS for MSFS.

I wonder if I can just skip the whole Vista and XP debate and just use the Linux OS for MSFS.

Nope. MS HATES Linux with all its heart. There is no way in hell MSFS is going to run on Linux, even through emulation.


Plus I am prolly the only one who would argue for XP.

Eh I think I'll stay with XP until they worked out the kinks with Vista. Trust me every Windows OS will have kinks in it at the beginning. So XP will be more stable. Now regarding the ncix.com website. Now is it $50 for the whole computer, or just the manual labor of putting it together?

Eh I think I'll stay with XP until they worked out the kinks with Vista. Trust me every Windows OS will have kinks in it at the beginning. So XP will be more stable. Now regarding the ncix.com website. Now is it $50 for the whole computer, or just the manual labor of putting it together?The main problem will be drivers. Most companies don't seem to think that Windows is serious about releasing Vista as in the three years that they have had to create drivers, only a few companies have put out any usable driver.

Just they labor. Parts are separate.

The main problem will be drivers. Most companies don't seem to think that Windows is serious about releasing Vista as in the three years that they have had to create drivers, only a few companies have put out any usable driver.

Just they labor. Parts are separate.

ahh, I knew it was too good to be true. Might as well build my own.

ahh, I knew it was too good to be true. Might as well build my own.

You couldn't buy the raw matterials for a computer for $50.

Its still much cheaper.

You couldn't buy the raw matterials for a computer for $50.

Its still much cheaper.

Ok, so how do I get started on this process?

Ok, so how do I get started on this process?

Save up some money.

Save up some money.

after that.

after that.

Start bragging about having enough money to build a system. Several people will pick parts for you, then argue about the choices.

Start bragging about having enough money to build a system. Several people will pick parts for you, then argue about the choices.

LOL, sounds like you've done this. A few times.

LOL, sounds like you've done this. A few times.
A few people from the forums decided to build a new system just before I did.

Nope. MS HATES Linux with all its heart. There is no way in hell MSFS is going to run on Linux, even through emulation.


Plus I am prolly the only one who would argue for XP.

You can make MSFS 2000, 2002 and 2004 work with Linux by using Cedega.

You can make MSFS 2000, 2002 and 2004 work with Linux by using Cedega.

Cool, I hope it works for FSX then.

You can make MSFS 2000, 2002 and 2004 work with Linux by using Cedega.

Cedega is for chumps. Wine ftw!

Cedega is for chumps. Wine ftw!

Wine?

Wine?

WINE to be accurate. An acronym for Wine Is Not an Emulator.

Lets you run Windowsstuff on Linux. Milage veries, bit it tends to be quite poor.

WINE to be accurate. An acronym for Wine Is Not an Emulator.

Lets you run Windowsstuff on Linux. Milage veries, bit it tends to be quite poor.

ahh. Well, if I do go with XP, I just want the bare minimum XP. The only extra I want is Microsoft Office really.

new computer

Liberty EKB;11872138']new computer

We already made that decision, it's just now whether to buy one, have someone build me one, or build it myself.

Ok I watched this video tonight, of one guy running FSX on his machine, and it look like it was running pretty well. Here were his specs.

CPU: Pentium IV 3.2 Ghz
RAM: 1 GB (I may add 2 GB to my new machine)
Graphic Card: Nvidia 7600GS 256Mb AGP

He didn't mention his HD space. But for my machine, eh let's just make it 80GB.

Ok I watched this video tonight, of one guy running FSX on his machine, and it look like it was running pretty well. Here were his specs.

CPU: Pentium IV 3.2 Ghz
RAM: 1 GB (I may add 2 GB to my new machine)
Graphic Card: Nvidia 7600GS 256Mb AGP

He didn't mention his HD space. But for my machine, eh let's just make it 80GB.

As of now it will probably be something like:

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo ~2.4GHz
RAM: 2 GB OCZ PC2-8000
HDD: 250GB
Graphics: NVIDIA 7900 GT

However. By the time you get the money together, that system will be garbage.

I got another gig of RAM today for my birthday. Now I've got 1.5Gb, which means I can finally get around to Oblivion again. :p

As of now it will probably be something like:

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo ~2.4GHz
RAM: 2 GB OCZ PC2-8000
HDD: 250GB
Graphics: NVIDIA 7900 GT

However. By the time you get the money together, that system will be garbage.

Hmmm, wouldn't the lower GHz on the CPU means that it's processing it slower? Also, what is the difference between dual core and just one core?

Here's another person specs that's running everything at max, or near max on FSX.

Intel Pentium D CPU 3.00GHz
Nvidia GeForce 7600GT 256
Samsung SP2504C 240 Gig Hardrive
2 Gigs Ram

Hmmm, wouldn't the lower GHz on the CPU means that it's processing it slower? Also, what is the difference between dual core and just one core?

More efficient elseware. Don't worry, Intel has spent the last fifteen years telling you that clock frequency is the only thing to worry about and t is going to bite them in the ass. But whynot an analogy?

You and me are loading boxes off a truck and into your new house. You make 5 trips a minute (your frequency) while I only take 3 a minute. However, you take one box a trip while I take two. Who moves more boxes? Me. I move 6 to your 5, even though you work at a much faster frequency.

Now dual core is basically two processors squashed into one.

More efficient elseware. Don't worry, Intel has spent the last fifteen years telling you that clock frequency is the only thing to worry about and t is going to bite them in the ass. But whynot an analogy?

You and me are loading boxes off a truck and into your new house. You make 5 trips a minute (your frequency) while I only take 3 a minute. However, you take one box a trip while I take two. Who moves more boxes? Me. I move 6 to your 5, even though you work at a much faster frequency.

Now dual core is basically two processors squashed into one.

Ahh cool. Well after searching the Intel Core 2 Duo into NewEgg. I found this machine, it's not for gaming, but I think it'll actually do pretty nicely.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16883107194

Ahh cool. Well after searching the Intel Core 2 Duo into NewEgg. I found this machine, it's not for gaming, but I think it'll actually do pretty nicely.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16883107194

It would be horrible. Why? Integrated graphics.

Buy a new computer or just customize the current one?Yes. Consume. Obey. Reproduce. (Image (http://growabrain.typepad.com/growabrain/money3.jpg))

It would be horrible. Why? Integrated graphics.

ahh your right.