What's with those people...

[Ichigo]

The first one is obvious, but for the latter I mean those people that ask if they should get another 7800GT for SLI 7800GT's for 1280x1024.

 

[EndGame]

Perhaps they can't afford everything at once.............

 

[LiquidImpulse]

yea..people like me arent rich, so I opt for 2 17" CRT's

 

[ronach]

Well, there will always be those people that just plain want and can easily afford the biggest and greatest, they tho are in the minority. Imoa...computing is at a crossroads, hardware technology has outpaced it's software counterpart. In order to sell people this expensive hardware, the manufacturers have to somehow convince the buying public that they REALLY NEED THIS STUFF. What you are seeing when someone asks if they should buy another 7800GT or other expensive card, is someone that has bought into the manufacturers line, someone who just wants one regardless, or the newbie who is looking for bragging rights. By the way, a percentage of the posts that we see here and on other tech sites, are generated by Hardware Company weinies pushing their stuff in any way they can get away with. All us old time techies here, know that the latest and greatest stuff is not really needed NOW, but will be, when the software catches up. There you have it, not looking for a flame here, just the way I see it.

 

[Ichigo]

I mean that they won't get the performance they want.

Crap speakers are crap speakers, regardless of soundcard.

SLI 7800GT's are heavily bottlenecked by a 1280x1024 resolution.

 

[3chordcharlie]

As a 'trailing-edge' consumer (who just upgraded to a radeon 8500LE, at a cost of free, from my gf2mx), I'm surprised by the number of people who upgrade every generation, but especially by people like the OP describes. I use my monitor every minute that my computer is turned on, and I want it to look good. Why bother upgrading my video card if I'm still looking at the computer-world @XGA (I'm not, I'm just saying).

As far as sound goes, I would much sooner invest in a good speaker set (or preferably a good receiver and speaker set) that's going to last me many years (and live with bad prologic surround for a while), than buy a soundcard that will be obsolete next time someone releases a new game, and probably doesn't work as well as soundstorm did anyway

 

[dunkster]

I use a sound card (cheap Audigy 4) with $50 speakers (cheap Logitech X-530) because:
- On-board sound quality clearly sucks.
- On-board sound is also noisier.

I plan to replace my 9800Pro vid card with something faster because:
- I'd simply like higher frame rates.

I still use my Samsung 955DF CRT monitor because:
- I don't need anything better.

I suspect there are others who think similarly, despite smug and demeaning posts about 'those people'.

Hope this helps!

 

[Geomagick]

For me

I have a SB X-Fi Fatality attached to a separates hifi (just stereo)

I have a single 7800gtx which outputs to 1 Dell 2005FPW and 1 Samsung 191T.

As far as upgrades go, I have been considering an Arcam amplifier for my stereo, and keep toying with the idea or changing the 191T to a second 2005FPW, but both are seriously on hold since I ordered a Macbook Pro the other day.

 

[corkyg]

Ichigo has a valid point. The age old rule in good sound reproduction makes the final transducer that you hear with your ears the most important part of the chain. I see the same principle in the display chain - that which you see is very likely the most important link in the chain.

But, 3ChordCharlie also has a valid point. All of these things are tradeoffs with respect to affordability. It also makes a difference as to where you computing interests are. Gamers need frame rates - those who prefer to spend there time in more productive activity do not really need those frame rates.

Just some thoughts.

 

[RussianSensation]

Consumers buying things they want and don't need is what keeps the economy going. If people looked at depreciation costs of new vehicles and realized it actually doesn't make sense to buy a new car for the majority of them, then car companies wouldn't make new cars to sell. We need those who always want the latest and greatest.

I dont think 7800GT SLI for 1280x1024 4AA/16AF is overkill. Look at SS2, COD2, and FEAR and you'll see those cards being put to good use easily. Obviously it's either these are the users who: 1) do not care so much for $ or 2) think they need the additional frames 3) want to have latest and greatest. So even if logically it doenst make sense to you, someone who only plays BF2 online might need 100fps stable at all times.

 

[hardcandy2]

I like having the stickers on my computer case.

 

[imported_rod]

spend more on a soundcard than speakers

Dunno? I use onboard sound, and spend less than $50 on Speakers + Headset. Even $1000 computer speakers and a $500 sound card don't rival a $600 home theater system + $15 optical cable.

more on a video card than their monitors?

I can understand that. I have a 19" CRT (~$200) but to play HL2 at 1600x1200 with 8xAA will require a 7800GT (~$400).

RoD

 

[Raduque]

I'll always spend more on a videocard then on my monitor. I got an hp p1120 20" CRT for free. And if I spend more then $25 on a soundcard, I'll be spending more then I spent on my speakers (reciever was free, towers were $25).

Originally posted by: Ichigo
SLI 7800GT's are heavily bottlenecked by a 1280x1024 resolution.

How so? Wouldn't not having a super-high resolution allow a person to simply crank both max details and AA/AF and still maintain extremely playable FPS?