computer specs

I'm surprised there wasn't already a topic for this. anyways, I'm curious to see what other people's computer specs are.
mine are:

Manufacturer: Dell
Model: Inspiron 1525
OS: Windows 7 Home premium 32 bit
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo T5750 @ 2.00 GHz
Video Card: Intel X3100
HDD: 220 GB Toshiba mk2552gsx ATA device
RAM: 4.00 GB

Manufacturer: HP
Processor: AMD Phenom 9950 Black Edition
RAM: 4GB
Video Card: Nvidia GeForce 9800 GTX+
HDD: 250 GB
External HD: LaCie 750 GB

._. Computers outdate so fast... I've only had this beast for 2 years, it's already outdated, and I don't have any money to get a new one.

Manufacturer: COMPAQ
Model: No Clue
OS: 32 bit XP SP2
Processor: Something @ 2.20 GHz
Video Card: nVidia 7300 GForce GT
HDD: 500 GB (I have four hardrives crammed into my case.)
RAM: 512 MB

(I'm not at home, so I'm going on memory...)
Oh god, I never noticed that I have nearly as mush HD space as I do ram... If I had another 512, then my coupter wouldn't be as outdated.~_~

Manufacturer: *points at me*
Case: Antec P180 Mini
Processor: Intel Core i5 (4x2.66 GHz, could probably take it up to 3 GHz or more on air...)
RAM: Corsair XMS3 DDR3 2x2GB
GPU: Currently Radeon X850XT, getting my Radeon HD5850 very soon
HDD's: 1x WD Black 500GB, 2x Seagate 7200.7 160GB, 1x iomega Prestige 1TB external
OS: TinyXP Lite Rev. 09, switching to Win7 when Netgear gives me drivers for it, also planning to run hackintosh Snow Leopard as soon as it has proper i5 and HD5850 support


laptop
Manufacturer: Lenovo/IBM
Model: ThinkPad X61
OS: TinyXP Rev. 09
Processor: T something at 2.2ghz
RAM: 2GB
Integrated GPU: Intel X3100
HDD: I don't know, 120GB maybe?

What... am I the only person on the entire forum with less then a GB of ram?

I built this 2 years ago:

OS: Windows 7 Professional (Installed it last night, a definite improvement over Vista)
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5Ghz
GPU: Nvidia Geforce 8800GT
RAM: 2Gb
HDD: 160GB and a 160GB external.

Originally Posted by KiKi

._. Computers outdate so fast... I've only had this beast for 2 years, it's already outdated, and I don't have any money to get a new one.

Your computer was outdated when you bought it.

Originally Posted by KiKi

What... am I the only person on the entire forum with less then a GB of ram?

I didn't know that they still made computers with less than a GB of ram

Originally Posted by KiKi

If I had another 512, then my coupter wouldn't be as outdated.~_~

It would.

Originally Posted by KiKi

._. Computers outdate so fast... I've only had this beast for 2 years, it's already outdated, and I don't have any money to get a new one.

Video Card: nVidia 7300 GForce GT
RAM: 512 MB

This was never a beast.

Processor: Something @ 2.20 GHz

THIS MEANS NOTHING.

If I had another 512, then my coupter wouldn't be as outdated.~_~

RAM is really cheap, but you'd still need a decent video card.

320 GB HDD
500 GB External HD
NVIDIA GeForce 9400

These are my current specs, copied from my Xfire profile:

Processor: AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ @3.2 GHz
Memory: 2046MB Kingston ValueRAM DDR2 667 @356 MHz
Hard Drive: Western Digital Caviar Blue 640 GB (primary), Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 500 GB (secondary)
Video Card: ASUS EN8800 GT
Monitor: SAMSUNG T220 Touch of Color series
Sound Card: Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium
Speakers/Headphones: Sennheiser HD 280 Pro
Keyboard: Microsoft Digital Media Keyboard 3000
Mouse: Logitech G5 Laser Mouse
Mouse Surface: Allsop cloth mouse pad (black)
Operating System: Windows XP Home Edition Service Pack 3
Motherboard: ASUS M2NPV-VM
Computer Case: Antec Nine Hundred Advanced Gaming Case

It's not bad, but it's starting to show its age in gaming, and in general use. Because of this, I've decided to upgrade the CPU/motherboard/memory/heatsink. I have some parts bought already and am waiting on some others.

CPU: Intel Core i7 920 (hopefully D0 stepping; looking for an overclock around 4.0 GHz)
CPU heatsink: Scythe MUGEN-2 (performs about as well as a Thermalright Ultra Extreme-120, but comes with a fan and is still cheaper)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD3R (a bit lacking in features, but performs well enough and overclocks very well, considering the price)
Memory: OCZ XMP Ready Series DDR3-1600 (not totally decided on this yet; seems to be one of the better overclockable memory kits, but I'm not sure if it's really needed for me to hit a good 4.0 GHz on the CPU; the warranty on them seems extremely nice though)

I'm looking to upgrade the video card at some point as well, but I'm waiting until next year when I have the money for it. NVIDIA is coming out with its GT300 series as well, which may or may not destroy AMD's new great-but-not-amazing Radeon 5000 series; I'd like to wait a bit after the release of GT300 so that the playing field is level and free of post-launch hype, before deciding on what I want.

Processor: AMD Phenom II x4 720be @3.6Ghz
Memory: 4GB DDR2 RAM supertalent
SSD/Hard Drive: 80GB intep x25-m; 2*640GB WD caviers 1*250 Seagate 7200.10
Video Card: PowerColor hd4870
Monitor: Dell 2005FPW and Dell 207wfp
Amplifier: onkyo CR 305TC
Speakers/Headphones: Sennheiser HD 280 Pro
Keyboard: Logitch Ultra X
Mouse: Logitech MX518
Operating System: Windows 7 x64
Motherboard: Gigabyte UD4p AM2+
Computer Case: Lian Li PC v1000+ b


@sear, the 5800s ARE great and amazing, they just need proper driver support. I have this odd feeling that Fermi(aka GT300) won't be well suited for consumer use due to manufacturing costs. Fermi is about 50% larger than the 5800s which doesn't bode well for economic scaling. That said I was underwhelmed with GT200, I was expecting more of a leap than we got. It's price/performance wasn't adequate enough to impress me(in the past I had a 6200, 7600, a 7800 and an 8800 no ATi cards during that duration) Since I bought my 4870, it's gone UP in value by $20 on the retail channel(not bad for a $110 card) it's quieter than my 8800GTS(when you tune the BIOS) and runs cooler too and has a fair bit better performance/watt. I want a 5850 now, but will be holding off until GT300 is out(I might have low expectations, but that doesn't mean I won't jump on it if it ends up being amazing)

as for CPU choice, the i7 is a beast and we all know it. Consider an i5, they're cheaper, also ask around about app load time, going from a 4GHz c2d to a 3.6Ghz PhenomIIwas definitely an upgrade in system responsiveness(the c2d was a downgrade from my old opteron 165) and I feel as though my games are smoother. I'm hearing a lot of review sites(anandtech and xbit labs) claiming that the phenoms tend to perform better than the i7 durring very stressful gaming scenes(where your frame rate drops) though not as well in less stressful situations
I was a more of a benchmark/ego hound a while back, but now I'm at the point where I'm viewing each part as more of a commodity item, whatever gets the job the the cheapest wins. I feel my c2d purchase worked well in 2006 and was a decent choice, I feel that my p2 purchase also works since this upgrade didn't cost me much after selling my old parts off. The cost difference between an i7 and a p2 went towards an SSD. If you go for the i7 though, know that bumping up memory speed doesn't do much for it. higher memory speeds result in negigible diferences especially since the system wants to revert to dual channel at higher mem speeds and staying on the 1333strap is hard(requires 2.0GHz at 1.65V on mem) if you're going for a 50% OC. Uncore clocks tend to matter more than memory speed anyway and higher mem speed means you need to lower the uncore.

Originally Posted by ɹɐǝqıɹǝ

I'm looking to upgrade the video card at some point as well, but I'm waiting until next year when I have the money for it. NVIDIA is coming out with its GT300 series as well, which may or may not destroy AMD's new great-but-not-amazing Radeon 5000 series; I'd like to wait a bit after the release of GT300 so that the playing field is level and free of post-launch hype, before deciding on what I want.

I'm afraid the Fermi is going to be a failure, and if not, it's going to cost a lot when it's out (production costs are very high on it). Nvidia is using really low tactics now to try gaining ground (disabling PhysX for Radeon cards for example)

Originally Posted by nighthawkx

I'm hearing a lot of review sites(anandtech and xbit labs) claiming that the phenoms tend to perform better than the i7 durring very stressful gaming scenes(where your frame rate drops) though not as well in less stressful situations

Now disable hyperthreading and try again. :/

Originally Posted by Danger

Now disable hyperthreading and try again. :/

That is an excellent point which I hadn't even thought of. HT generally hurts games.

Originally Posted by nighthawkx

@sear, the 5800s ARE great and amazing, they just need proper driver support. I have this odd feeling that Fermi(aka GT300) won't be well suited for consumer use due to manufacturing costs. Fermi is about 50% larger than the 5800s which doesn't bode well for economic scaling. That said I was underwhelmed with GT200, I was expecting more of a leap than we got. It's price/performance wasn't adequate enough to impress me(in the past I had a 6200, 7600, a 7800 and an 8800 no ATi cards during that duration) Since I bought my 4870, it's gone UP in value by $20 on the retail channel(not bad for a $110 card) it's quieter than my 8800GTS(when you tune the BIOS) and runs cooler too and has a fair bit better performance/watt. I want a 5850 now, but will be holding off until GT300 is out(I might have low expectations, but that doesn't mean I won't jump on it if it ends up being amazing)

The 5000 series is great, I definitely agree, but it wasn't a generational leap like the GT300 (or the 4000 series for that matter) are looking to be. From what I've seen, GT300, while perhaps being more expensive (NVIDIA claims it will scale, but who knows), will probably take the performance crown. Its theoretical bandwidth is absolutely massive, and even though it has a lot of stuff on it dedicated to GPGPU computing, remember that it can natively run C++ code on them, and can also devote those resources to, say, shader calculations, which means that it may well wind up being a total beast of a chip in the end. I'm not putting my money on it yet, but I'm definitely going to wait and see.

Originally Posted by nighthawkx

as for CPU choice, the i7 is a beast and we all know it. Consider an i5, they're cheaper, also ask around about app load time, going from a 4GHz c2d to a 3.6Ghz PhenomIIwas definitely an upgrade in system responsiveness(the c2d was a downgrade from my old opteron 165) and I feel as though my games are smoother. I'm hearing a lot of review sites(anandtech and xbit labs) claiming that the phenoms tend to perform better than the i7 durring very stressful gaming scenes(where your frame rate drops) though not as well in less stressful situations

I've already got my motherboard, so no turning back now.

The Core i7 chips perform better with hyper threading in applications that only make use of 4 cores, but hyper threading is better in applications that can scale above that, preferably in a linear way. The Phenom II processors are awesome for gaming and compare pretty closely to Intel's, but in other tasks they tend to get beaten out pretty badly. I also prefer something with more overclocking headroom, and triple-channel memory is nice. As for the Lynnfield chips, well, we know they're great as well, but at this point they actually aren't significantly cheaper for me. The i7 860 is the one I'd be looking at, and it's more expensive than the i7 920 right now; coupled with the $200 motherboard I have, it's more or less the same in terms of cost (although memory might increase the price a bit). The Bloomfields, though, are simply faster clock-for-clock. The Core i5 750 represents an absolutely monstrous value for budget overclockers, but I want something with a bit more oomph to it.

Originally Posted by nighthawkx

If you go for the i7 though, know that bumping up memory speed doesn't do much for it. higher memory speeds result in negigible diferences especially since the system wants to revert to dual channel at higher mem speeds and staying on the 1333strap is hard(requires 2.0GHz at 1.65V on mem) if you're going for a 50% OC. Uncore clocks tend to matter more than memory speed anyway and higher mem speed means you need to lower the uncore.

I realise the memory speed won't make a massive difference; it's more an issue of stability. I know I'll have to overclock the memory a bit to get the processor way up high, but I'd prefer not to have to run it at 1250 MHz just to keep from crashing. Even if I do wind up having to run it at lower speeds, the trade-off is tighter timings. Either way, it seems to pay to have decent memory, though it's not the most crucial part, and I have enough money that I can spend an extra $20 on some good modules.

Manufacturer: Acer
Model: Aspire T180
OS: 32 Bit Windows 7 Home Premium (6.1, Build 7600)
Processor: AMD Athlon 64 3800+, ~2.4GHz
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce 6100 nForce 405
HDD: 300 GB Western Digital Caviar Blue (SATA. 3.5 In. 7,200 RPM)
RAM: 1.536GB

Not the best, but it runs smoothly and very fast.

I just want fermi to be released already. I hope it rocks, but I honestly expect it to be an R600 or an FX5800. Who wants a price war?

As it stands right now, i see nVidia trying to make a supercomputer in a card and not a video card. The concept is interesting and the potential uses are incredible... I can't even begin to utilize the power of such a chip... like literally, I have nothing which works with it other than games and I don't see games being helped much.

as for RV800... it's about as big of a leap as the 4800s were IMO. the 4800s were generally beating a 3870x2... the 5800s are trade blows with the 4870x2. Right now I beleive we have driver issues. The 4800s had A LOT of memory bandwidth relative to processing power. Their drivers were designed around the assumption that they'de never be bandwidth constrained. The 5800s have an OK amount of memory bandwidth relative to processing power, unfortunately higher end cards now only really scale at huge resolutions and huge resolutions like memory and memory bandwidth like no tomorrow. Onchip cache, like on fermi, probably would've helped a lot. from what I understand, a 5850 does beat a 4850x2 which is probably a fair competition since the drivers are about equally polished for both, and that's about what I would expect.

just a consideration insteed of the i7
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819117187
nehalem base xeon, it's cheaper... not 100% sure about how well suited it'd be but I heard some guys mentioning that chip.

._.
You guys are mean. My computer can run Oblivion at highest setting with not lag.
Also...
Your moms are outdated.

Originally Posted by KiKi

._.
You guys are mean. My computer can run Oblivion at highest setting with not lag.
Also...
Your moms are outdated.

lucky, you must have decent video card then, because Oblivion lags a lot for me.

Originally Posted by KiKi

._.
You guys are mean. My computer can run Oblivion at highest setting with not lag.
Also...
Your moms are outdated.

Define "without lag". I can run Oblivion on Ultra, 1680x1050, with 16xAF, at a near-constant 60 fps. It does slow down a bit when there are a lot of characters on-screen at once, but that should be fixed once I get my CPU bottleneck out of the way. Speaking of which, my Core i7 920 has arrived... now I just have to wait for my G.Skill Ripjaws to come in.