Could someone double check these to make sure they are compatible? Thanks.

Motherboard
CPU
RAM (4 gigs)

If you guys know of anything cheaper that runs the same, please post back.

Yes. But why are you buying an Athlon 64?

Even if you're an AMD fanboy and want to ignore Intel's massive lead in performance with the Core 2, AMD have released their new Phenom chips anyway, you might as well be buying a Pentium 4...

I currently have an Intel Pentium 4, the AMD would be a upgrade from what Ive got (a Intel Pentium® 4 3.00GHz, 3.00Ghz.

So, would the AMD A64 X2 6400 not be better than my current Pentium 4?

Also, the Phenom chip is nearly $300! Thats a lot for a processor. If Intel has the same speed processor for a lower price, please tell me because I am willing to buy a Intel, I just prefer AMD because of my experiences...

Yes, I am an AMD fanboy

Also, is it just me or is AMD all about FSB while Intel is about Ghz + Cache?

Well, if you absolutely must have AMD. I used to be an AMD fanboy too. Then I discovered how much better Intel is right now. (Thanks to Elanzer and Rifleman for talking me out of buying an AMD) And you're probably better off buying another Intel processor.

My point about the Pentium 4 was that you're buying tech a whole generation behind. Seriously, for another $50 or so you could get a Core 2 that destroys that Athlon.

Alright, well is there on that you would recommend?

To give you an idea Im wanting to play Crysis...lol

This will be my spec's

(Motherboard)
(CPU)
4 gigs of ram
Radeon X1950 Pro 256mb
200gig HD
700watt power supply

Thats all the important stuff. So what CPU would you recommend? CPU < $200

well, i got my e6550 for $180 and it plus my other pieces run crysis on med/high with no problems.

i kinda wish this was at this price back when i bought mine... but
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16819115029
oh well.

that would eat that amd up nicely i believe. altho, elanzer would know better, so dont eat me

Unless you're a fan of overclocking just get the most expensive Core 2 in your budget then run it through here, the one N1N3-D1C3 linked to is a reasonably good choice. But to be honest, combined with those other specs you posted if you're upgrading just for Crysis you will be disappointed. You'll only be able to play it comfortably on medium.

My box handled the demo on all high OK, it got a tad choppy in a few spots though. You definitely want a Core 2 though, they're far superior at the moment. You might want something better than a x1950 though. Personally, I'm looking at purchasing an NVidia 8800 gt (I currently have a 7900 gt) in the near future.

Alright, so If I were to get a CPU then it would be a HUGE upgrade from my Pentium 4?

Also, I just got the X1950 256MB. I was just using Crysis as an example.

And why would I eat you? I am here to learn from you guys, that why I asked

Lets say I did want a GC would this be a good choice? (I've been wanting Quake Wars)

The CPU would almost literally be double the speed in some situations, so yeah.

Not to disappoint you, but at this point in time a x1950 is a pretty bad purchase, you could get newer cards for roughly the same price.

As for that GTS, I would say not at this time. Nvidia is releasing a refreshed version of it in the next few days/weeks that outperforms it significantly.

Elanzer, are you referring to the 8800 GT? I've been trying to find them for sale and they're not in stock anywhere. I read an article on the card a few weeks ago on tomshardware so I assumed it had been released.

The GT was a new card and it's already out if you can find it. What I was referring to is the refresh of the old GTS with the new G92 chip that's in the GT.

Cool, thanks.

One last question.

I have a mobo that was a 775 socket. The only problem is that is only supports up to 533 ram.

Would it be in my best interest to buy a whole new mobo or just stick with 4 gigs of 533 ram?

You'll definitely want a new motherboard (socket 775 with ideally either the X38 or P35 chip), even if that one you've got does support the DDR2 required for the Core2, it would pretty much be running it at half speed.

Your motherboard probably doesn't support the Core 2's.

Alright, thanks for the help.

Santa Claws. Check Newegg. They jsut restocked their 8800GTs. Makes my mouth water but dammit, I just had to get a 320mb GTS. Should have listened.

Yeh...nvm I didint read carefully

Dude, the 8800 GT cards already sold out on newegg. Thats where I buy all my computer parts anyway

Thanks for the heads up though

Would I need 4 gigs of that RAM, or only 2 gigs? (800 mhz)

For what exactly?

Gaming, like HL2, Source, Bioshock, that kinda stuff.

Depends on your OS, system, game to game.

I'd say 2GB is enough for XP and running new games on high settings, more is needed if you have Vista, up to 2.5. Anything more than 3GB even on Vista is overkill really, hardly anything will use it all anytime soon.

Sorry to bring this post back up but...

If I'm only wanting to run steam games, would the EVGA GeForce 8600 GTS be a decent choice? (Check out the Clock speeds, and GB/s)

Also, would that card (8600 GTS) be and upgrade from and X1950 Pro?

I would go for the X1950pro. The 8600's aren't as good as they should be.

Alright, I believe I will upgrade my Mobo, CPU, and RAM today. (Mobo & CPU and RAM)

I'm going to hold off an the 8800 GT until I can get enough money.

Is it a good idea to buy the mobo, cpu, and ram first? (Or should I get just the 8800GT?)

That is a pretty good combo you got there. I would of went with 4gb of ram. However 2gb is fine.

And once you get a 8800 GT you will be very happy. It is an awesome card for the price.

Now that I think about it, I have 1gig of RAM thats 533mhz, would it hurt to throw it in the comp along with the other 2gigs of 800mhz?

E6750 or Q6600 ?

Go with the quad, no questions asked.

What i currently use, and it works great.

So the RAM wouldn't hurt anything, or slow anything down?

(Sry I keep posting about the same things)

Umm, i'm sure it will be fine. It can't hurt it i guess, i mean my old computer had a 1gb stick that was faster then that one 256mb ram i had and it worked good.

Do you know of a good 17"-19" CRT Monitor (1280x1024) that is less that $100?

Your not really going to get any type of monitor for 100 bucks that is good.

And i don't really know any that are good for that cheap.

Got all my parts: Quad Core 2.4Ghz, 2Gigs of DDR2 800Mhz RAM, and a 680i LT.

Im amazed at how fast everything runs. I have yet to see my net_graph 3 fall under 250!

Thanks for all the help.

If you use the 553Mhz ram in your system the 800mhz ram will slow itself down to the 553mhz ones speed.

Woot congrats.

there are tons of 19" you can find around cheap if you look hard enough.

i found my 19" crt for like $60.

WolfXI could you send me a link for one of those?

well, i found mine locally from one of the pawn shops around town.

sorry bud
probably not worth buying over da webz since it's bloody big and shipping might be a bit much.

Alright, thanks anyway.

If anyone has any suggestions on any type of monitor for gaming, please tell me.

Type of monitor?

CRT - better display quality and flexibility
LCD - takes up less space and is generally considered better for extended reading activities

CRT may have better display quality but you don't notice it so much with a high end display, and the benefits far outweigh the negative imo.

Eh... was that post for or against CRT?

For TFT obviously, unless you really have the room.

Well no... It's not too obvious really seeming it doesn't mention LCD/TFT once, it just says that apparently you don't notice CRTs superior image quality with high quality CRTs and that the benefits of CRT far outweigh the negatives? Looks more like a pro-CRT statement to me. Though I'm pretty sure coming from you it's not meant to be...

CRT, I can't stand LCD for some reason.

Excellent. You can join our little cult of CRT-lovers.

No it's obvious I meant you don't notice the quality difference as much with a high end TFT because common sense would say that something high end would be better than the low end, so saying you won't notice the higher quality of one of them, (when we already know CRT is "superior") if the other is higher end, to me at least it is obvious what I meant, though by using CRT and LCD I could have saved confusion.

I have nothing against CRT's except for the mobility of them compared to TFTs, though between a decent CRT and a High End LCD the differences aren't as big as you seem to make out, as if TFTs look crap. Only question I want to ask is why did you bother asking which one was better if you're going to say you won't be getting an LCD anyway?

I think it would of been better if you replaced the pretty ambiguous 'high end display' with 'high end LCD' then.

Also, comparing a high-end LCD to a (I'm presuming you meant) average CRT is hardly a fair test. A high-end CRT will better an equivalent LCD like always. CRT has much more accurate and clear colours, as good a contrast as you can get, cheap, all the viewing angles you need, isn't as sharp as to leave jagged edges around some items (but can be easily sharpened if needed), and overall just has better image quality. That's why all professionals use them for image design, and not LCD. If you have burnt-out retinas and require an ultra-bright display, spend a lot of time reading, have power considerations, or a small desk, then LCD is best.

Well known facts.