Your ideal system would be...

[gryphon]

True.

But then if programms are written correctly and the OS works as it should. . it should be somthing like this.

user

application

OS

hardware

Your OS manages your hardware. Not the program itself. [ as the name Operatng System suggests ] The application should just parse it's data to the OS. Which in it's turn desides how to send it to which hardware.

Ok, before anyone starts bashing this .. Windows doesn't really do this as it should. In all hounesty that's not just Microsoft fault in making the OS in that way. It's also the programmes writing software for the Windows platform who have demanded to much of an open OS to write things for. Linux for example doesn't have this. So there is no DirectX or anything programms can use to address hardware directly with Linux.

[ again, note that because of people who just needed that support Linux has programms allowing those actions at this time :P ]

Where is this going to. Any individual programm might just be suited for a single CPU system. The OS handeling not just that programm but a few other background processes aswell is suited for a dual CPU system. Not an optimal situation to gain performance. But for some strange reason

[veK]

Does that mean we shouldn't buy new stuff now because it will be out of date anyway. Or anything we buy is functionless in a few months anyway ?

it's always like that and nobody can change it. all I wanted to say, was: it's a waste of money to buy such a system if you only need it for gaming, because you can buy less hardware and still run all current games with a good fps rate. I would buy half of that power and save the other half of the money to upgrade the system one year later. that was what I was trying to say...

[gryphon]

I agree. Although just a small note on that. Even for a server that system is way to much. ost Servers don't need more then 1gig of CPU and 512 of RAM for most tasks.

I currently work in a datacenter where they have four Sun fire servers dedicated for just about 30 computers and a couple of people working from home.

Another rack has about 12 HP servers with dual 2.8 Xeon's and 2 gig of RAM per computer. ( not to mention the 74gig Ultra SCSI3 disks ) All they do is playing web, mail and databse server for not more then 500 people. Needless to say that's a bit of overkill.

so my point was. You'r right. You could have saved money and bought less hardware to do the same task. But with your ideal system. You just don't bother to look at what it costs. It's a dream pc you would like to buy. Price and functionality don't belong in that equation. :)

[ but I think we both understand eachother :) ]

[Cyborg]

There are times, though, when there is only little progress in the industry.

Example:

Just when Radeon 9700 came out, three years ago, I bought it.

Damn, that was a good buy. It ran everything perfect, and it still does. However, it doesn't like AA. :(

But I hope you get my point. Let's say you bought Radeon 9800 a year ago... It would've been old by autumn last year because of the new generation of cards.

I've noticed that graphic cards sort of come in generations. If you buy the best card of the new generation when it comes, you can stick with it for quite a long time usually.

Another thing is CPU.

I bought it four years ago, and it still doesn't even show a sign of slowing down my system.

It's an AMD XP 2400+ running at 2260MHz.

However, the CPU will be slower than the newest ones at CPU intensive tasks like file compression and many other things.

(But my point here was that the CPU doesn't slow my games down.)

[gryphon]

hehe, how odd. The change of me having the same experiance with an Radeon and an AMD 2400+. :)

[Megashrap]

There are times, though, when there is only little progress in the industry.

Very true, a good example is when I bought an AMD-64 3200. After paying almost double for what I payed for an AMD 3000+, and comparing the two it was silly to have even bought into the 'new hyped CPU'. Lesson learned anyway. I mean the chances of me utilizing multitasking file compresion tasks and anything similar is pretty much 0. However gaming is another story.  :)

[veK]

It's a dream pc you would like to buy. Price and functionality don't belong in that equation. :)

he said:

"here's my dream machine, which im building right now:"

that sounds to me like he is currently ordering the hardware for that system. but maybe I just misunderstood it because of the language but isn't "which I'm bulding right now" a statement that he is currently doing this for real? that's why I startet the discussion about the necessarity of such a system.

as for the server you're right: most servers don't need such hardware, too. I was thinking about really poerful servers which have to calculate a lot. like the one from the watercool board (link posted above) which really needs that power for advanced calculating (don't know the exact use anymore...)

note: take a look at the overclocking thread, I'm currently overclocking my system, which isn't my "ideal system" but at least it's something whcih I have standing for real right next to me and which is good for gaming :)

[d3m0nger]

This topic is about how your system would look like if money was no object.

and in my case it isn't.

So I don't see what ur trying to point out veK

I don't really care if it goes outdated, which it won't for quite a while.

I'll just upgrade.

[gryphon]

ok, I have added up to the discussion for a while to. But think we now all understand what we are talking about with a dual gaming system.

Some whould love to have a dual. Others take money in the equation and would buy a almost simular performance system with just one CPU. Think enough said about both positions and we'll get along with the topic. It's a personall preferance which we can debate about untill we all see green. . but we're not gon'na do that. ;)

[veK]

@ avatar: I was trying to point out that it is a waste of money, even if money wasn't a object. that's all. in my opinion it's like this: even if money wasn't an object I wouldn't buy the most expensive armani (or whatever brand) suit if I knew it doesn't fit in the near future. so I woukld save the money (even if I was a millionaire) and buy those expensive suits by the time I know for sure they will fit for a long time (which will never happen with computer technology).

it's just my personal attitude not to spend money if it ain't necessary, even if I could afford the money and would be no loss in my purse. but whatever... you might think different about it and that's okay. so have fun with your system :)

@ gryphon: actually I see the sense in a dual cpu system as well as sli... but I don't see any sense in 16gig ram ;)

neither do you I think.

@ all: why don't you post your ideal system as well... this shouldn't become a discussion about one system, even if we did a discussion here, you could also post your system...

[d3m0nger]

Allright, well ok then  ;D

[erjin999]

Ideal system: One that dont crash in emperor...or anything.

[veK]

Ideal system: One that dont crash in emperor...or anything.

lol... nice comment erjin :)

[DukeLeto]

Ideal system: One that dont crash in emperor...or anything.

So, you want a Mac that can run PC Games?  Don't we all... ;)

[GUNWOUNDS]

-4 GB of whatever the best RAM is (not really up to date on that)

-Top SB 24-bit sound card

Mmmm....*salivating*

1.) OCZ is the best RAM

2.) Audigy 2 is the best sound card

(now you can update you post)  ;)

[Cyborg]

I must add that my ideal system, a Japanese supercomputer, would fly me to school every morning and do my homework flawlessly.

It would also vacuum clean the floor and do the dishes.

...And perhaps even buy me beer.