no if u go intel. if u want to save money go amd and the build i suggested. u can keep the hard drives biggerx suggested and the psu..
everything is good, though for the video card you should go with sparkle since they might give you better customer support. and get the corsair dominator ram, and the 1tb western digital caviar black. and get one of these cpu coolers: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835702007 and also for the case you should get a full tower case. thats as big as they go, and overall are much better than mid tower(smaller ones). some good cases are coolermaster cosmos s, antec 1200, coolermaster haf 932. the case is up to you, theyre all good so get one that you like
thats not necessary as that's pretty much an enthusiast board, and im sure you're not gonna be overclocking anything like crazy. the asus one is still a good overclocker to the normal user. and the evga classified is also about $120 more.
Future proof? Not reached its potential? Please do explain how a Quad Core not having reached its potential in games is any different to another QC and what does 'not reached its full potential' mean? You mean that no application can make use of all the cores/threads it has? If so, please prove that. As far as future proof goes AMD is far more future proof than Intel, unless you call all the different Intel are releasing and will change soon future proof.
More interested in the min fps, if you could supply that. Also most of that performance gain is purely from the extra memory, its a well known fact crysis benefits greatly from anything over 512Mb. Compare 2x 4870 512Mb with a single 4870 1GB and you wont see a difference that big. Any modern card today ships with 1GB memory or more.
I couldn't help but lol at this statement. Apparently you have no idea how GPU bound Crysis really is, or even how CrossFireX works with it's mirrored VRam :funny:
Not to sound crude, but why should we aid you by pointing out the specifics of your statement when your in defense? Quite frankly, I don't care what your perceptions are of dual GPU systems. Other than providing your own input for the OP's future system, you have not contributed any information of any significance to this thread. When I challenged you on your views, I provided hard facts to back me up with screen shots as foundation. Not only that, but there's plenty of Guru's here with dual GPU setups, and quite frankly, when they're set up right with working parts, the extra dough pays off in GPU bound games. Whether or not you continue your escapade is entirely up to you, but all you're going to accomplish by doing so is derail this thread and make yourself look ignorant.
okay let's keep the peace y'all... u implied that the reason the frames went up so much was because u had more vram in SLI 896mb + 896mb on each GTX275 but in reality in SLI the vram is mirrored so u still only have 896mb of vram with which to work with
No need to be rude or belittle another Guru Lavans. If I'm mistaken on how vram in corssfire works simply correct me, in a private message if your worried about the thread. I can only go by knowledge I believed to be correct and as far as I knew crossfire somehow benefited memory (altho I'm aware it doesn't increase it physically). Other things I mentioned about dual GPU's are facts, and I did add that preferring a single GPU was an opinion.
^ I prefer single GPU too, but yeh may have been better to correct u via PM, sorry dude ps. where did u get ur avatar from?
I'm not trying to belittle you, which is the reason why I took the time to run those benchmarks in an effort to educate you on how much one can benefit from a dual GPU system in GPU bound games. But it really agitates me when someone attempts to constantly contradict another with little to no handle in regards to what they're debating. I never once disagreed with you in regards to anything other than the stability of a dual GPU system and the performance gain. I know, first hand, that a dual GPU system can potentially have more issues than a single GPU system, but that's because it's easier to weed out faulty components as it puts more strain on the PSU, CPU, RAM, and North Bridge than the former ( prime example, my last motherboard wigged out whenever I enabled CrossFireX, which lead me to believe that it may have been a CrossFireX issue. Both cards were tested to work perfectly, as did both PCI-E lanes. But when I replaced the motherboard, all those issues went bye bye ). Also, just like any other system regardless of GPU count, most dual GPU "bugs" are quickly remedied with hotfixes and/or driver updates. That's me speaking out of first hand experience with a dual GPU system, which I had been using for the last year. The OP is asking about options for the most possible future proof system, which IMO if he gets cost efficient and fully working parts worth their salt, a dual GPU system is the way to go.
m8 you are starting to make me go dizzy in this thread. this build...that build? u have 2 bases for an amd or intel build. its quite easy choose one regards the cost. if u want to save money go for the amd if not go for the intel. both up and running will be awesome and you will love either one. i for one love my corei7 but am tempted few yrs down the line to try amd (again) because i think the diff between the two is marginal re fps and in terms of saving money can work out quite a bit cheaper. deltatux has stated many times if just gaming and surfing is all you want to do corei7 is overkill..go amd..and i think he's right or at least has a very good point. personally i am fine knowing that my pc is probably a bit overkill for games etc but i know i will keep it for the next 2 yrs at least and hopefully not have to change anything...