Battlefield 2
-
spoolude wrote:
Check out tomshardware.com - Ati R520 core - read up buddy
you'd better back up that tomshardware.com claim with a link, because i don't see anything on that page about the x1800xt or r520. i have found several pages that say the newest ati flagship card is only 16pipelines. besides, do the math. a 16 pipeline card running at several hundred mhz faster than a 24pipeline card will put up similar numbers (think of the intel vs amd rivalry)
i also have a 3500 939, and unless you can show me a cpu-id screenshot that says it's a 1mb cache, i prefer to believe amd that it's a 512.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAssets/K8_Electrical_Spec_Rev_ENG.pdfyour pc is not a $2k machine, and if you spent that much, you were a fool.
my newest machine:
athlon 3500, 90nm - 180
asrock agp/pci-e mb - 74
1gb 2.5 latency pc3200 - 89
160gb hdd - free when nathan upgraded
antec case and 350watt psu - 70
6600gt pci-e - 120
dvd-rw - free after installing some hardware for someone
total - 533
going to keep laughing?
i know this isn't a 500 machine, but i decided to build another 939 machine just in case i keep this one long enough to upgrade to a dual core in the future. best part about this one? it cost me nothing. i sold my old socket939 3000+ machine to upgrade to something with pci-e and a faster cpu. the socket 462 barton core xp cpu will play any game on the market, and will do it for far less than the 64bit cpu's, so i could have saved about $100 by using an older chip.why didn't i buy a 7800gtx? why should i? the 6600gt is the best card on the market when it comes to excellent performance at a good price.
once again, we come to the point where i show you that i set a goal and had a budget in mind for how much i wanted to spend, so i stuck to it. if i really wanted to build a pc to mop up yours, i could, but i would just be that much more pissed off in 6 months when i could buy everything all over again for half the price.you just keep thinking you're on top of the world because you paid top dollar... some of us realize that the human eye can't discern any significant difference between 60fps and 100
-
out there wrote:
if it was really worth my time, i would acquire a copy of everquest 2 and play it to see just how horrendous the max settings at 1280x1024 (because 17" is what most people have) are and then start looking.If you really want I have a copy of it I dont play anymore... I could run it on my machine if you want to show you or you could run it on yours. Its so bad it locks my machine up which is sub par for how cheap it was.
-
spoolude wrote:
I did you a favor and posted under anandtech.com a thread under the forum General of - BF2 computer for under $500 - please read, your quite the comedian there
you're just full of lies. i've been reading anandtech for a while, so i checked to see what might have been said... and (surprise) i found nothing. (searched for bf2 and 500)
link?
who just got owned? -
lone wolf? meaning that you capture the flag alone?
how about getting through the enemy lines without dying; making your way to the objective without being seen or setting off landmines (which you can't see); setting dynamite that takes 30seconds to detonate and protecting it from being defused until it blows? there are so many variations of maps with enemy territory i couldn't hope to explain the ideas behind them all. -
http://games.activision.com/games/wolfenstein/
we've had 14 people playing at the house at one time, it was excellent.
it's a free game that was scrapped because there was a problem with the ai (apparently). anyway, there are lots of servers available online with several mods.
i think it's way more enjoyable than bf2/1942 or call of duty. it's not so much fun when you keep getting taken down by a sniper every few seconds (bf and 1-2 hit kills), and enemy territory allows your character to take more hits before going down, so you have a chance to respond to being attacked. not only that, but my biggest argument is the lack of creativity in bf. yay, capture the flag... map after map after map...
don't misconstrue, the bf games have some neat stuff going for them, but enemy territory still takes the cake -
Phats wrote:
Yea, i'm usually medic and in the chopper, but out there, what game is this??Sounds good, and pete i'll cll ya and lt you know what server most of us are on, there's like 5 other people we get on a server with.
Cool, I'll have to send you the one that Eric and I frequent.
-Peter
1991 240SX
-
out there wrote:
http://games.activision.com/games/wolfenstein/
we've had 14 people playing at the house at one time, it was excellent.
it's a free game that was scrapped because there was a problem with the ai (apparently). anyway, there are lots of servers available online with several mods.
i think it's way more enjoyable than bf2/1942 or call of duty. it's not so much fun when you keep getting taken down by a sniper every few seconds (bf and 1-2 hit kills), and enemy territory allows your character to take more hits before going down, so you have a chance to respond to being attacked. not only that, but my biggest argument is the lack of creativity in bf. yay, capture the flag... map after map after map...
don't misconstrue, the bf games have some neat stuff going for them, but enemy territory still takes the cakeHuh, that looks reasonable, i may have to check it out, if i don't think it's retarded, i may try to find you and see what server you're usually on
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login