New PC ??

Necs · 07-29-2008, 05:46 PM

need some suggestions

(Quad-Core)Intel® CoreTM 2 Quad Q9550 @ 2.83GHz 1333FSB 12MB L2 Cache 64-bit

with EVGA nForce 780i SLI Mainboard FSB1333 and (2) NVIDIA GeForce GTX260 896MB

or

Intel® CoreTM 2 Extreme QX9650 @ 3.00GHz 1333FSB 12MB L2 Cache 64-bit

with EVGA nForce 780i SLI Mainboard FSB1333 and (2) NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT 1GB

im hearing that EQ2 runs mostly off the CPU is this true? and also is there a big difference between Vista home premium 64bit and Vista Ultimate 64bit?

TSR-DanielH · 07-29-2008, 08:12 PM

Necs wrote:

im hearing that EQ2 runs mostly off the CPU is this true? and also is there a big difference between Vista home premium 64bit and Vista Ultimate 64bit?

Yes to running mostly off the CPU. No, the versions of Vista are mostly the same.You'd be better off going with the second setup in my opinion if your primary concern is Everquest 2. Faster single core processing is the key to getting EQ2 at high levels of performance. I still think the older AMD fx-57s are probably the best processor for EQ2 out of the box assuming you aren't running a lot of other programs in the background when playing the game. If you're the type to have Ventrilo, ACT, Trillian, and a few web pages open in the background then you'd be best served with the upper end Intel dual cores.Individual results may vary, but thats generally what I've seen.

Smirk · 07-30-2008, 05:52 AM

you might want to check out a crossfire setup with the extreme cpu too, 2 radeon 4850's are well worth the price if its in your price range

vochore · 07-30-2008, 11:18 AM

i would stay away from vista all together and go with xp pro 64...been running xp pro 64 for several months now and not 1 problem....vista will definatly slow your gaming down

Aurumn · 07-30-2008, 11:54 AM

Another vote for the dual core. I recently got a 3ghz AMD dual core and am able to run on Extreme Quality, though I knock it down a bit to get rid of that "application ran out of memory" dealie. Don't scrimp on the RAM either.

The game is gorgeous on or near max settings btw. The sunrise/sunset in Sinking Sands is beautiful from the docks.

Cassea · 07-30-2008, 12:38 PM

vochore wrote:

i would stay away from vista all together and go with xp pro 64...been running xp pro 64 for several months now and not 1 problem....vista will definatly slow your gaming down

Vista 64 runs EQ2 very very well and "IS" the future. Why tell someone to spend $100+ on somethign that will need to be replaced?Yes you take a small 10-15% hit when you run "old" XP games in Vista... just like when we used to run Win98 games in XP. But unless he/she intends to "only" run EQ2 "and" you assume that SOE will stop continuing to optimize EQ2 for Vista.Don't get me wrong... EQ2 for sure run better on XP, especially on older machines, but when you are building/buying a new machine with state of the art parts that have been made for Vista there is little reason aside from other software that will not run on Vista, to stay with the past.Vista takes more memory... memory is dirt cheap and with Vista 64 you can get 4gig for only $50ishARVista takes more CPU cycles but with multi-cores (and EQ2 only using one of those cores) you see no slowdown because Vista's background operations will run on one core, EQ2 on the other coreDriver support for Vista is fianlly at the stage in which things are very stable. If I get a single lockup a month (more like several months) then this would be alot and I use my computer alot! With XP the norm was at least once a week.I'm not anti-XP but why recommend XP64 over Vista64 for a new system unless a person has an old progrma that just does not want to run under Vista?I grow tired of the anti-Vista hype just as I grew tired a few years ago of the anti-XP hype. Progress is not perfect and not always smooth but right not Vista is clearly the better product no matter what the numerous "I hate Vista" people would have you think.... BTW 95% of the "I hate Vista" people used to be "I hate XP" peoplePeople can be strange SMILEY

-JBP.S. I do not assume you hate Vista BTW but EQ2 runs on a Vista 64 system very very well... rock solid I might add. I'm currently running EQ2 on XP32, Vista 32 and Vista 64 and all run EQ2 very well. If you already have XP and it's running well then there is no reason (unless you want more memory) to upgrade to Vista 64 but if you are getting a brand new system then you want Vista 64 and 2 sticks of 2gig memory (4gig total)P.P.S. Xp32 may run with up to 3gig of memory but the OS spilts the memory... IE you do NOT have 3gig free for programs and I'm not a big fan of running unmatched memory. With 3gig you either need to put in 2 2gig sticks (4 gig) and waste over a gig or put in 2 1gig sticks and 2 512meg sticks - unmatched. You are not even assured to get the full 3gig... some people get more than 3gig, some less and this only depending on the motherboard supporting more than 2gig. Clearly the "sweet" spot for each OS is:1. XP32 = 2 - 1gig sticks (2gig total)2. XP64 = 2 - 2gig sticks (4gig total)3. Vista32 = 2 - 1gig sticks (2gig total)4. Vista64 = 2 - 2gig sticks (4gig total)Running with 2 sticks of memory is clearly prefferable because the memory will run faster (tighter timings) but 2gig with slower timings is almost always better than 1gig with tighter timingsI am running Vista 64 with 4 2gig sticks (8gig) and the extra memory never gets used aside from extra hard drive buffering... not a bad thing but really not needed aside from be being able to brag that I have more memory than you do LOL

Cassea · 07-30-2008, 12:44 PM

Necs wrote:

need some suggestions
(Quad-Core)Intel® CoreTM 2 Quad Q9550 @ 2.83GHz 1333FSB 12MB L2 Cache 64-bit
with EVGA nForce 780i SLI Mainboard FSB1333 and (2) NVIDIA GeForce GTX260 896MB
or
Intel® CoreTM 2 Extreme QX9650 @ 3.00GHz 1333FSB 12MB L2 Cache 64-bit
with EVGA nForce 780i SLI Mainboard FSB1333 and (2) NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT 1GB
im hearing that EQ2 runs mostly off the CPU is this true? and also is there a big difference between Vista home premium 64bit and Vista Ultimate 64bit?

Vista Premium gives you more programs included that you may or may not use. Make sure you get Vista 64 and 2 sticks of 2gb memory (4gig) and save $$$ on that video card. NOTHING uses 1gig on a video card. It's all for bragging rights. Save some money and get the 512meg version or the 9600GT and spend the savings on a faster 2x core or bank the $$$ for next years round of vid cards.ATI and Nvidia are in a war right now. I've never seem so many good cards come out so fast. The ATI 4xxx cards are a true wonder and the new Nvidia's are rock solid as each company one up's each other every few months. Now is NOT the tiem to by that killer video card. Too many changes are happening too fast. The smart person will buy a "holdover" card like the 9600GT or 8800 for under $150 and wait a year. By then the dust will settle, prices on the higher end cards will drop, and you will be in a much better spot to judge what card you need for the long term.Sad fact is that there is little difference in performance (right now... hint hint Sony!) between a $100 and $500 video card... in EQ2-JBP.S. I see you want two video cards.... Two video cards is for rich people to brag (maybe you are rich LOL) because the second card seldom in real games gives you more than a 40% bump in speed. You are almost always better off buying a faster "single" video card over slower dual video cards. Now if $$$ is no object and you simple want the best then yes spend $1000 on a pair of video cards SMILEY

Sure your $1000 pair of monster cards will run EQ2 about then same as a $100 single card but other newer games will use those beasts and remember...In gaming 200fps is far far better than 60fps especially with LCD's that max out at 60fps anyway SMILEY

Two video cards allow one thing, to be fair. They allow you to game full speed in those insane higher resolutions.

07-29-2008, 08:12 PM	#2
TSR-DanielH Customer Service Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,593	Necs wrote: im hearing that EQ2 runs mostly off the CPU is this true? and also is there a big difference between Vista home premium 64bit and Vista Ultimate 64bit? Yes to running mostly off the CPU. No, the versions of Vista are mostly the same.You'd be better off going with the second setup in my opinion if your primary concern is Everquest 2. Faster single core processing is the key to getting EQ2 at high levels of performance. I still think the older AMD fx-57s are probably the best processor for EQ2 out of the box assuming you aren't running a lot of other programs in the background when playing the game. If you're the type to have Ventrilo, ACT, Trillian, and a few web pages open in the background then you'd be best served with the upper end Intel dual cores.Individual results may vary, but thats generally what I've seen. __________________ Daniel H Technical Support Representative Sony Online Entertainment

07-30-2008, 11:18 AM	#4
vochore Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 332	i would stay away from vista all together and go with xp pro 64...been running xp pro 64 for several months now and not 1 problem....vista will definatly slow your gaming down __________________ asus crosshair IV amd 965 be quadcore.stock clocking 3.4 ghz 8 gig mushkin 1333 7-7-7-20 timings 1 300 gig velociraptor 1 150 gig velociraptor creative x-fi xtremegamer fatal1ty pro 5.1 suroundsound speaker setup corsair hx 850 p/s asus dvd player and burner 24 inch asus widescreen monitor windows 7 64 bit evga gtx 570 classified vochore thebeastlord of the seventhammer omegar and druadon

07-30-2008, 12:38 PM	#6
Cassea Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 269	vochore wrote: i would stay away from vista all together and go with xp pro 64...been running xp pro 64 for several months now and not 1 problem....vista will definatly slow your gaming down Vista 64 runs EQ2 very very well and "IS" the future. Why tell someone to spend $100+ on somethign that will need to be replaced?Yes you take a small 10-15% hit when you run "old" XP games in Vista... just like when we used to run Win98 games in XP. But unless he/she intends to "only" run EQ2 "and" you assume that SOE will stop continuing to optimize EQ2 for Vista.Don't get me wrong... EQ2 for sure run better on XP, especially on older machines, but when you are building/buying a new machine with state of the art parts that have been made for Vista there is little reason aside from other software that will not run on Vista, to stay with the past.Vista takes more memory... memory is dirt cheap and with Vista 64 you can get 4gig for only $50ishARVista takes more CPU cycles but with multi-cores (and EQ2 only using one of those cores) you see no slowdown because Vista's background operations will run on one core, EQ2 on the other coreDriver support for Vista is fianlly at the stage in which things are very stable. If I get a single lockup a month (more like several months) then this would be alot and I use my computer alot! With XP the norm was at least once a week.I'm not anti-XP but why recommend XP64 over Vista64 for a new system unless a person has an old progrma that just does not want to run under Vista?I grow tired of the anti-Vista hype just as I grew tired a few years ago of the anti-XP hype. Progress is not perfect and not always smooth but right not Vista is clearly the better product no matter what the numerous "I hate Vista" people would have you think.... BTW 95% of the "I hate Vista" people used to be "I hate XP" peoplePeople can be strange -JBP.S. I do not assume you hate Vista BTW but EQ2 runs on a Vista 64 system very very well... rock solid I might add. I'm currently running EQ2 on XP32, Vista 32 and Vista 64 and all run EQ2 very well. If you already have XP and it's running well then there is no reason (unless you want more memory) to upgrade to Vista 64 but if you are getting a brand new system then you want Vista 64 and 2 sticks of 2gig memory (4gig total)P.P.S. Xp32 may run with up to 3gig of memory but the OS spilts the memory... IE you do NOT have 3gig free for programs and I'm not a big fan of running unmatched memory. With 3gig you either need to put in 2 2gig sticks (4 gig) and waste over a gig or put in 2 1gig sticks and 2 512meg sticks - unmatched. You are not even assured to get the full 3gig... some people get more than 3gig, some less and this only depending on the motherboard supporting more than 2gig. Clearly the "sweet" spot for each OS is:1. XP32 = 2 - 1gig sticks (2gig total)2. XP64 = 2 - 2gig sticks (4gig total)3. Vista32 = 2 - 1gig sticks (2gig total)4. Vista64 = 2 - 2gig sticks (4gig total)Running with 2 sticks of memory is clearly prefferable because the memory will run faster (tighter timings) but 2gig with slower timings is almost always better than 1gig with tighter timingsI am running Vista 64 with 4 2gig sticks (8gig) and the extra memory never gets used aside from extra hard drive buffering... not a bad thing but really not needed aside from be being able to brag that I have more memory than you do LOL

07-30-2008, 12:44 PM	#7
Cassea Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 269	Necs wrote: need some suggestions (Quad-Core)Intel® CoreTM 2 Quad Q9550 @ 2.83GHz 1333FSB 12MB L2 Cache 64-bit with EVGA nForce 780i SLI Mainboard FSB1333 and (2) NVIDIA GeForce GTX260 896MB or Intel® CoreTM 2 Extreme QX9650 @ 3.00GHz 1333FSB 12MB L2 Cache 64-bit with EVGA nForce 780i SLI Mainboard FSB1333 and (2) NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT 1GB im hearing that EQ2 runs mostly off the CPU is this true? and also is there a big difference between Vista home premium 64bit and Vista Ultimate 64bit? Vista Premium gives you more programs included that you may or may not use. Make sure you get Vista 64 and 2 sticks of 2gb memory (4gig) and save $$$ on that video card. NOTHING uses 1gig on a video card. It's all for bragging rights. Save some money and get the 512meg version or the 9600GT and spend the savings on a faster 2x core or bank the $$$ for next years round of vid cards.ATI and Nvidia are in a war right now. I've never seem so many good cards come out so fast. The ATI 4xxx cards are a true wonder and the new Nvidia's are rock solid as each company one up's each other every few months. Now is NOT the tiem to by that killer video card. Too many changes are happening too fast. The smart person will buy a "holdover" card like the 9600GT or 8800 for under $150 and wait a year. By then the dust will settle, prices on the higher end cards will drop, and you will be in a much better spot to judge what card you need for the long term.Sad fact is that there is little difference in performance (right now... hint hint Sony!) between a $100 and $500 video card... in EQ2-JBP.S. I see you want two video cards.... Two video cards is for rich people to brag (maybe you are rich LOL) because the second card seldom in real games gives you more than a 40% bump in speed. You are almost always better off buying a faster "single" video card over slower dual video cards. Now if $$$ is no object and you simple want the best then yes spend $1000 on a pair of video cards Sure your $1000 pair of monster cards will run EQ2 about then same as a $100 single card but other newer games will use those beasts and remember...In gaming 200fps is far far better than 60fps especially with LCD's that max out at 60fps anyway Two video cards allow one thing, to be fair. They allow you to game full speed in those insane higher resolutions.

07-29-2008, 05:46 PM	#1
Necs Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 51	need some suggestions (Quad-Core)Intel® CoreTM 2 Quad Q9550 @ 2.83GHz 1333FSB 12MB L2 Cache 64-bit with EVGA nForce 780i SLI Mainboard FSB1333 and (2) NVIDIA GeForce GTX260 896MB or Intel® CoreTM 2 Extreme QX9650 @ 3.00GHz 1333FSB 12MB L2 Cache 64-bit with EVGA nForce 780i SLI Mainboard FSB1333 and (2) NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT 1GB im hearing that EQ2 runs mostly off the CPU is this true? and also is there a big difference between Vista home premium 64bit and Vista Ultimate 64bit?

07-30-2008, 05:52 AM	#3
Smirk Server: Najena General Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 129	you might want to check out a crossfire setup with the extreme cpu too, 2 radeon 4850's are well worth the price if its in your price range

07-30-2008, 11:54 AM	#5
Aurumn Server: Unrest Guild: Executioners Rank: Teen of chaos (2 weeks + 6,857 astatus) Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,328	Another vote for the dual core. I recently got a 3ghz AMD dual core and am able to run on Extreme Quality, though I knock it down a bit to get rid of that "application ran out of memory" dealie. Don't scrimp on the RAM either. The game is gorgeous on or near max settings btw. The sunrise/sunset in Sinking Sands is beautiful from the docks.