You're going to need a better power supply. Also, get a decent CPU cooler if you're still running the stock one; you'll want to overclock that Q6600 as much as possible. Adding an HD 6770 to this setup should fit perfectly fine.
MSI offers a longer warranty, a better cooler, and a better price point. Plus, 1GB of VRAM is plenty for Full HD resolution. The price of this Gainward card is already getting close to what a GTX 570 costs, so I wouldn't touch it. Both are GTX 560 Ti, so they're running the exact same GPU.
Come on with the questions. Can't you see they're the exact same cards? The only differences are the VRAM amount and the cooler, not to mention the price.
There's already a thread for GPUs, so just move over there. List your CPU, motherboard, and power supply. Or, if you're building a whole new rig from scratch, start a new thread and actually answer the questions in the rules.
I don't have any issues with AMD drivers, so that's news to me. If you're short on cash right now and absolutely need a GPU, go with that Radeon HD 6670. Out of the options you listed, it draws the least power and should hold up fine... maybe treat yourself to an EVGA 450W power supply for your birthday. That Fortron 400W is ancient—it was decent, sure, but you can get an EVGA 450W for about the same price. You'll be able to run Battlefield 3... hopefully. 😁 There are people out there running setups even weaker than yours, so they'll find a way to make it work.
The Radeon HD 6770 is the strongest thing here; everything else is weaker. It’s not a massive power hog, so let's assume that Trust power supply can handle it. I don't know about all this locking stuff—I haven't played anything substantial in a while—but I ran Call of Duty back in the day on an HD 5750, which performs similarly to the HD 6770, and it didn't cause any issues. It’ll plug right into the motherboard, so don't sweat that. Based on what some people are saying, Battlefield 3 will likely require a quad-core CPU and a GTX 460 or HD 6850 for recommended settings. You clearly don't have the budget for those, so the closest you could get would be an HD 6790, followed immediately by the HD 6770. Don't expect maxed-out settings; aim for medium or medium-plus if these hardware requirements turn out to be true. The GTX 1030 is a bad choice. It pulls more power and is the weakest option listed.
If you're strictly limited to that one shop, then go with It outperforms the GTS 450, but the prices there are ridiculous... it's a shame because you can grab a GTX 460 for the same money back home in the States.
The reviews say the BX2450 is better, but don't take my word for it—or anyone else's here, for that matter. I don't own that monitor, and I doubt most of you do either. We're all just basing this on what we read in test reports. If your goal is gaming, movies, or series, the solution is the Dell u2311h. It's an IPS panel. It isn't LED, but who actually thinks LED offers a real advantage? Dell is built exactly for what you need at a reasonable price. You'd need a ruler to notice it's an inch smaller. Plus, these Samsung models have terrible input options—just one VGA and one HDMI each. The Dell gives you VGA, DVI, and DisplayPort. If you care about aesthetics, the Dell still beats those shiny, lacquered ones any day.
I I'm actually on board regarding the Dell U2311H. It’s cheaper than both of these options, features a superior panel, and the stand offers every possible adjustment you could want.
A 27'' screen is just too massive for gaming when you're sitting close at a desk. You aren't going to have decent reaction times in shooters unless you develop some kind of chameleon vision to cover those wide angles.
Terry Reyes91 said:What’s even the point of these cases, especially the ones under $50? Anyone got a recommendation for an AMD build around that price point?
Check out this link from ADM:
The problem is the build quality. You've got terrible insulation, sloppy connections, and cheap materials. Then there's the sheet metal thickness—or lack thereof—and the fact that it lets way too much dust settle inside because there are holes everywhere. You don't have anything intelligent to say in this category below. $100Honestly, I feel sick just seeing Linkworld and EVC mentioned.
ADM is a joke when it comes to their PC case selection compared to the competition. At this point, our only real move is to spec out builds with Cooler Master cases—they're the only ones actually worth the money.
And honestly, Linkworld is a whole different story—you can find just about anything on there.
I've got an AMD Radeon HD 3850 paired with an Intel Core 2 Extreme E6750. I ran Crysis 2 on high settings; it played smooth without any stuttering or fatigue, but honestly, that game is such absolute trash that I uninstalled it almost immediately. We all know why GTA IV isn't even worth discussing, but there's no debate that an Nvidia GTX 460 will crush it. My old 8800GT handled it without breaking a sweat.
Low or medium? I haven't touched those settings on any game since I bought this rig with my old 8800GT... at this point, the Nvidia GTX 460 is going to walk all over those games like the Lakers against a high school team. 🙂
Obviously, there are two or three titles out there—either because they're poorly optimized or just massive resource hogs—that he wouldn't be able to run on high settings. But just giving him a blunt no is pointless... if nobody follows up with an explanation, he'll wonder why we suggested the Nvidia GTX 460 in the first place, only to have you call it a bad choice without providing any actual reasoning.
Metro is a different story, and as for Crysis 2—if you're actually talking about Far Cry 2, then I don't see why that wouldn't hit max settings.
Terry Reyes91, once again, that Nvidia GTX 460 priced at $350 with a 3-year warranty is unbeatable in the gaming world at this price point given its performance. The HD 6850 is slightly more powerful, but it costs about $33 more, and I'm not even sure if you can find an MSI model that offers that same 3-year warranty.
I’m posting this here since there isn't a dedicated thread for international sportsbooks:
DraftKings offers a deal where they give you a 100% match on deposits ranging from $10 to $100. I went through the fine print, and it says you need to place at least three bets with minimum odds of 1.50 before you can withdraw funds from your account (from what I gathered, that applies to the total odds per slip, not that every single leg needs to be 1.50). I don't get why they haven't closed the loophole in this scenario:
-I deposit $100, get the bonus, and now my account sits at $200. I place three separate bets, wagering $10 on each with 2.00 odds... so I've met their requirement by hitting those 1.50+ odds per slip. Regardless of whether I win or lose all three, in the worst-case scenario, I still have $170 left. Based on their rule that I can withdraw after three bets, I just take my $170 and run. That's an easy $70 profit for zero effort.
Has anyone signed up for DraftKings lately? Are you guys more familiar with how this specific bonus works?
Set a daily mileage goal for yourself. If you’re living in Washington, D.C., head over to Rock Creek Park. Start with 10 laps, then ramp it up steadily. Follow the run with some heavy lifting at the gym if you need to pack on muscle fast. Obviously, eat clean and eat frequently... get enough sleep and stick to a regular schedule. Add sprints into the mix—total suicide drills on the basketball court and stuff like that. If you actually commit to this, you'll be ready for whatever you're asking about within a month. But after that, don't stop. Keep running and lifting if you actually want to stay fit and be able to run without dying. This has to become a lifestyle; otherwise, I don't know why you'd bother if you're just looking for a quick fix.
What else are you going to do? Just run. And when it gets brutal, you keep running anyway. Toss in some explosive training, pull-ups, push-ups, all that stuff... there isn't any other way.