kalniel

Shame the new Type-R is such a let-down underneath the skin compared to its predecessor. I'm not sure we should be using the term 'hot hatch' for these modern behemoths anyway - they're all big and heavy. My old car was a hot hatch... -- OLD IMAGE REMOVED (imageshack) --

Does anything change if you invert the power button cable?

You don't need the speaker one - that's just for cases that have a separate speaker. The important one is the power +/- (in that picture it's the smaller red and black cabled connector) - note that's different from the power LED, which is just the on light :p

Right so the case button isn't wired up correctly. Try inverting the case power cable.

Is the green light turning on/off as a result of you pushing the case 'on' button, or is it on all the time that the wall socket is turned on? Additional question (which might have a simple answer) - why have you got black connectors going to your graphics card, rather than the red ones labelled PCI-express?

What kind of nothing? (Ie, did the power light come on, any hum from the PSU, and fans spinning etc.?)

*nods* I usually put the case cables in early on, because they can be fiddly if you've got PCI cards near the bottom of the board. Power button/front panel cables are the worst - no two manufacturers seem to use the same scheme so you just have to look at the cables to try and determine which pins are which. Again the motherboard manual is the most helpful thing, as it should detail which pins go in which sockets. That manual should also say which graphics card slot to use, though if they are identical then it doesn't matter - it will be one of the longer slots. Any pics of your progress? :)

You'll be fine. Just follow the case and motherboard instructions (mostly motherboard).

How much did you manage to overclock the GX2 then? I'd have thought they'd be quite tricky because of the dual PCB.

Set the TDU process affinity to one CPU (core).

But at any given time it will be limited by one or the other. I'm obviously not doing a very good job of explaining this - you can't deal in absolutes. Everything PC is relative, which is one of the reasons developers prefer making console games. If you stick a poor CPU in then you'll be CPU limited for modern games. If you stick a poor GPU in then you'll be GPU limited for modern games.. that's about as absolute as you get. Everything else depends on each game engine, each situation, and the performance characteristics of your computer components. The only way you can test it is by changing the graphics demands and seeing how that affects your performance. If you raise graphics and don't see an FPS change then you are CPU limited (in the absence of other caps such as v-sync, which might still be on even if you think it's not). If you lower graphics and do see an FPS increase then you were GPU limited.

If one game doesn't have an FPS cap, why would that stop another game from having one? Likewise if one game isn't CPU bottlenecked, why does that apply to another game? Especially when you're talking about such a GPU heavy game as Crysis - of course that isn't going to be CPU dependant! :p Every game engine has different characteristics and uses hardware in different ways.

Suggests there's either a 60fps cap or your CPU is bottlenecking you from going further in this particular game. Or you have v-sync on.

Recognises.. but can't do anything with at all. The last 2gb of the 4gb address space in 32bit is reserved for the OS. That means programs can only access the first 2gb of physical memory out of the box. PAE is on by default since SP2, and doesn't have any effect on the size of the virtual address pool available to programs because windows is still taking up it's bunch, especially with that graphics card which was my point. How much memory shows in your system properties box? To get programs to use the 2-3gb space you have to use the /3gb flag which is nothing to do with PAE, but instead forces windows into the last 1gb of virtual address space, freeing up the first 3gb for programs to use. However, a program compiled for 32bit OS still won't be able to see more than 2gb, unless it is compiled as Large Address Aware. At the end of the day, there is nothing you can do to stop windows reserving the last 1gb or so of the 4gb address space. The only solution is to go 64bit. edit: Simple explaination in much clearer English than I could manage: http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm

It depends what you look for in a good PSU. The overall Wattage isn't the best indicator. But yes, that PSU is supported by nVIDIA as working with that card, although nVIDIA state there is a problem with the 8pin cable latch being too wide, meaning you'll need to get an adaptor (unless they've updated it in the meantime). A list of others can be found here: http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_9800gx2_pwr_supply.html Personally I would go for one with a 120 or 140mm fan, as they will be quieter than the Antec which only has an 80mm one, though looking at the list it seems a lot of PSUs have the problem with the cable width. If you mean start off with 64bit then yes, it'll work fine with all your components.

1009mb is the reserved virtual address space that the vista driver display model uses. It doesn't have much relevance to anything other than helping Vista run out of address space when you have 4gb of ram and/or a graphics card with a large amount of actual VRAM. No tweaking of memory will affect your performance for TDU - you are completely limited by the processing power of that graphics chip.

Looks mostly good - only two concerns: 1) A 32bit operating system can only see 2gb of ram. But worse, you'll run out of virtual memory address space if you use that graphics card, especially if you try and tweak windows to see up to 3gb. With those components you really need to go 64bit. 2) Check that the power supply is suitable for that card - go to the nvidia website and see what power requirements it has (especially on the 12v rail) and match that against the specs of the PSU you're thinking of getting. I think you're fine for connectors, assuming the motherboard comes with 2x SATA cables.

Someone call? :p Unfortunately this one can't be plugged into any old laptop, you need to have a special circuit and connector from AMD - at the moment they're aiming for using their puma chipsets, but they seem to be quite open about allowing others to use it as well. You might be more interested in the Asus XG station (or something like that - the name keeps changing) which was meant to be through the express card slot. It won't be anything like as effective as the AMD solution, but you should be able to run it on any laptop (if they ever release it).

I'm not really cool enough to admit this, but I already knew about the avb site and I'm a proud owner of ASoT on CD. It's just to the left of Beethoven in my collection :D

There isn't really much hype about the HD48xx - ATi are just doing another very sensible mainstream release, ie fantastic value for money. The GTX 260/280 though.. look brutal. Mega expensive, mega hot, mega-powerful. But not very elegant!

nVIDIA had an amazing high-end card when they originally released the 8800GTS 320/640 and GTX. It was so good that ATi realised they couldn't compete at the top end so instead they knocked out some more mid-range chips and sold them at a mid-range price. nVIDIA's mid-range offering was the 8600 chip which was worse than the previous generation's mid-range, so in the mainstream and higher volume market ATi trounced nVIDIA. nVIDIA realised they had to do something about it quite quicky, so they brought forward the plans for their next generation series (9000) and the chip at the heart of that series is called G92. First of all they cut down a few shaders, lowered the clocks, and released it as the 8800GT. Even with the reduced stuff the next generation chip was so good (again) that this performance mainstream chip completely blew away nVIDIA's previous high end chip, the 8800GTS (both 320 and 640mb versions), which was supposed to be higher up in the line out. Suddenly there's no point having a 8800GTS because the cheaper 8800GT performed a lot better. So they re-enabled some of the shaders and clockspeed of the G92 and released another card called the 8800GTS 512mb. Being based on the G92 it is really quick. The problem is it's called the same thing as a complete different and much worse performing chip! When they came to release the next generation (the 9000) they were kind of a bit stuffed again, because they'd already released the chip into the 8000 series cards.. so they just tweaked the clockspeeds a little bit and rebadged the same cards. Hence a 9800GT is coming out soon that'll be very similar to the 8800GT, and the 9800GTX isn't really a step forward either. What this means for us: Now is a good time to grab some great bargains! The 8800GT and the 8800GTS 512mb are for most intents and purposes just as fast as the 'new' 9000 series equivalents.. because they're the same chip. At the same time they're sold at cheap prices to compete with last generation products.

Why are you saying no? I didn't ask you a question :p

This is a rhetorical question isn't it? :p

That's good then. They used to be cheaper, but if the 9800GTX is cheaper now then go for that one. If you catch an offer you can get the 512mb GTS for around £145, sometimes less. As for which 8800GT, it doesn't make a lot of difference - look at price, warranty, software bundle etc. Don't just go solely for the biggest factory overclock, as sometimes these aren't all that stable with demanding games (I've seen several problems people had on the Atari forums solved just by suggesting they drop the clocks on their factory OC/d 8800GT a little bit). You should be able to get a good one for around £110-£120 including vat and delivery.

Oh sorry, I thought when you said 'Do you honestly think Atari or Eden would miss out on a opo to make a huge amount of money on TDU2?' you were asking me a question. I just answered the question, I didn't repeat your post - where is the equivalent question in my reply for instance?