weEvil

You don't need an 8800GTS for that, or a power supply that will rival most ovens. Also photoshop uses a good processor and plenty of ram more than a good video card. Take that money and spend it on a fast drive to use as a scratch disk. To avoid slowdowns. nVidia integrated graphics make Vista happy. You don't need to go overkill for that. Or Madden and Need for Speed. They will both run ok with integrated graphics, and even better with something like a 8600GT. A good fan arrangement will help much better than lots of fans. You need to tweak around with the airflow in the case. You need 3 fans at most. Or 4 very silent ones since they don't move that much air. You just have to know how to arrange them and how to seal the case to make sure the air goes exactly where you need it and not leak through crevices or unsealed openings. Some sticky electrical tape and card paper will be good for 'sealing' parts of the case.

my bad. delete.

LOL! The above statement contradicts everything else. Add in an 8800GTS like you mentioned in a post later and it makes no sense at all! Anyway, I'd start to think more carefully about what you really need the PC for. Workstation? Graphics design? (3D & 2D) Mainstream Gamer Machine/High End General Purpose? Or a hot, screaming, expensive banshee of a PC that will devour everything you throw at it. Mostly games.

The 2600 is good at what it does. Games, nope. Cad, nope. But a general purpose with HD capability, hell yes. I wonder if she will be able to tell the difference between 200fps in Luxor and 3000 fps with a quad.

Good choice. And if the X38 isn't all that its cracked up to be, but that time you can get a P35 or a 680i (or even 700 series) for cheap.

That's what they said about AGP.

That sucks man! Luxor must be really laggy! What you need is a dual cpu board. Quad core Xeons. Throw in 4 8800GTXs, 16GB of DDR3 and you're good to go! I can't believe you've been running it without that! Geeeez. The low fps must be getting to you. P.S. If you want to use something like Microsoft Office or an internet browser, you'll need to upgrade again. No less than an octo-core (for your new quad cpu server board). And make sure its a high-watt monster like the 6000-X2. It also doubles as a furnace in your house. Saves you money. All joiking aside look into a ow power system. VIA chipsets and CPUs come to mind. They use little power (less heat produced in your room), some don't even need a fan so its completely silent, and they're pretty cheap. Great for Vista. You can use the internet, word processor, games... don't expect to run Half-Life 2 without an upgrade on it but they are fantastic for a workstation. Throw in a passive cooled Radeon HD 2600Pro into that and you've got a system that is powerful enough to watch HD movies, and play some Half-Life. And pleasant too since you won't hear the whirring of the fans. You won't have any.

I'd get something high efficiency. 80plus certified. Less cooling needed for the case and lower power bills. High efficiency ones are usually quieter if the correct fans (or no fans at all) are installed. Less heat produced in the PSU means less cooling, which means less noise.

What about the new 2600XT GDDR3 version? Its pretty **** good for the low price point.

Get a 7600GT or a 7900GT if you want more power. Also, the ATi x1950 or whatever its called is another good option (in terms of $$$$). But they get alot hotter than the GeForces. Don't bother with the whole DX10 shebang. No games have a good implementation of it, and any that have DX10 look almost the same as their DX9 counterpart but significantly slower. If you want DX10, I suggest you wait awhile and then build a new rig with a new generation of cards. GeForce9 series.

Looks pretty nice. For a machine that will run XP (or 2003) its great. Just don't expect it to run any games or Vista.

Backlight. The OLDEs won't be a feasible replacement for awhile. Too expensive. And don't OLEDs burn out real quick? That's why this never caught on for TV Displays?

7600GT or 7800GS++ if you can get your hands on one. It has a 7900GT chip in it. Or get a 7900GT off eBay if the 7800GS++ is too pricey or too rare. I wouldn't bother with the first-gen DX10 cards. Not even any real DX10 games yet.

Just go to business depot with a ruler and start measuring.

Awwwww.. That's really disappointing now. So which monitors have great contrast then? Also, any word on the new LED backlit ones? When are they supposed to hit the market?

Hmmm. DDR2-800. If its got great timings then huraaah! Thanks for the advice. Care to recommend a good brand while you're at it? I'm not planning on setting any overclocking records so I don't need really expensive ram. I'm looking for something high(er) end that has a fantastic bang-for-buck. Looking to load a system with anywhere from 4-6gigs of ram. 4 seems like a good balance. Need it for cad and photoshop and such. Want to get a good brand & model that I can buy 4 gigs of without paying an arm and a leg.

Ouch! You got a PS3. Looks like its going to be useless now that you got a new rig. With ALOT of choices for games... unlike your PS3. Oh well, I guess it could make a great grill though: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3Hh3tBdHwM Best wishes on your new system.

Nice! Then the ultra is a good choice for a good price! Look at some of the Samsung ones. They came out with some nice LCDs that have a 2000:1 contrast ratio. Regular contrast, none of that dynamic mumbo jumbo.

8800 Ultra is a ripoff. You might as well just get an overclocked 8800GTX. Or two for that price.

I'd get something quiet. As long as it keeps it cool, its no problem. Don't care about cooling performance myself unless I plan to overclock.

Ok... so was I right in my post above? DDR2 is dual pumped? With a quad pumped FSB? Or does a Core2 use DDR2-1066 to work at max effectiveness?

My bad. I thought the FSB was a 1:1 ratio on the Core 2 Duos. Looks like the Core2s have a quad pumped FSB and the Ram has a dual pumped FSB. So 1333/2 = 667. So DDR2-667 Ram would work just fine. So a 333FSB (x4 since its quad pumped) works with DDR2-667 RAM. Right? So what's the need for this new high performance DDR3 ram then? What would DDR3-1333 be good for? Besides being more expensive?

I thought it was weird that you posted exactly the same things on three separate sites.

Well, I guess I'll have to wait for some good DDR3 then.

Ok. So what's a better alternative then? And what's the performance hit?