should £800 be a good rig?

[BloFeld]

I Spent £800 on a new comp and tbh i expectied it to be better..

The parts are:

Case: Antec Skeleton Performance Chassis - Black/Silver (No PSU)
Mobo: Gigabyte GA-EP45T-UD3LR intel P45 (Socket 775) PCI-Express DDR3
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 LGA775 'Yorkfield' 2.33Ghz 4MB-cache (1333FSB)
HDD: Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 500GB SATA-II 16MB Cache - OEM (ST3500418AS)
RAM: OCZ 6GB DDR3 PC3-10666C9 Gold Low-Voltage Triple Channel Kit (3 X 2GB)
PSU: OCZ GameXStream 700w Silent SLI Ready ATX2 Power Supply
GC: Sapphire ATI Radeon HD 4870 1024MB GDDR5 TV-Out/Dual DVI/HDMI (PCI-Express)
DD: AOpen DSW2012SA 20x DVD+-RW SATA Daul Layer

Any weak point in this system? And it says in system on my comp that its running 3.25 GB of RAM. should it not be 6?

Cheers

[skeletor]

Could of done with a bigger/faster hard drive to benefit from slightly faster access times.

Where is it lacking?

I guess you could of got a slightly better CPU but that should be more than enough to get a good framerate in most new games.

What size screen do you have and what OS are you using? Is it 32-bit or 64-bit?

[BlacKBlazE]

The specs look good for 800 quid to me !
But skel and liq are the experts so always ask one of them when it comes to asking about this sort shit.

[BloFeld]

Its a 32in HD T.V (got a VGA connection)
Im using windows XP proffesional with sp2
Its running highest 32bit

Its lacking in speed (loading pages or accesing files ect..) and with it been a quad core arnt you ment to be able to do mutliple tasks at the same time??? cause its slows down terrible if i try to do something for example a virus scan.

And also sould i be running 6.0GB of ram??? only in system it says its running 3.25gb.


my bros got a similar spec if not less (only a dual core) and that seems alot better than this.

Cheers for the help

[skeletor]

You have to use a 64-bit operating system.

32-bit is limited to 4GB of RAM but due to memory address allocation you can only really use 3.25GB to 3.5GB.

Quad cores aren't fully supported yet especially around the file system but there are some application mainly professional applications which really do make use of the extra processing power available.

And what exactly is "the highest 32-bit" there is only 1 32-bit.

Get yourself Windows Vista x64 and you will be laughing.

[BloFeld]

You have to use a 64-bit operating system.

32-bit is limited to 4GB of RAM but due to memory address allocation you can only really use 3.25GB to 3.5GB.

Quad cores aren't fully supported yet especially around the file system but there are some application mainly professional applications which really do make use of the extra processing power available.

And what exactly is "the highest 32-bit" there is only 1 32-bit.

Get yourself Windows Vista x64 and you will be laughing.

Im probably looking at the wrong thing. in properties on settings, color quality?? that right??

[skeletor]

You have to use a 64-bit operating system.

32-bit is limited to 4GB of RAM but due to memory address allocation you can only really use 3.25GB to 3.5GB.

Quad cores aren't fully supported yet especially around the file system but there are some application mainly professional applications which really do make use of the extra processing power available.

And what exactly is "the highest 32-bit" there is only 1 32-bit.

Get yourself Windows Vista x64 and you will be laughing.

Im probably looking at the wrong thing. in properties on settings, color quality?? that right??

No

But as you can only see 3GB of RAM I know you have a 32-bit operating system, so you will need to install 64-bit Windows on it and Windows XP 64-bit is absolute shite.

[BloFeld]

Lol, yes im a dumbass everyone laugh


So vista is best option?

Thanks alot for help

[skeletor]

Vista or Windows 7 beta, probably safer to get Vista, although I haven't had any trouble with Windows 7 yet.

[Forest]

Vista = FUCKING CRAP AND GAY.