Sniper Elite 4 review: Headshotting Nazis has never felt so good
I am about to purchase a new made to measure PC.
8gb mem needs 62 bit OS but i am told it still causes a problem - blue screen etc.
A motherboard with provision for three graph cards @PCI-X16 needs two identical cards (for SLI) but (i am told)the third must be different!
Has anyone come across the mem problem?
I do understand the need for two identical cards but why does it need the third to be different?
Has anyone come across this problem?
A three way sli should now be possible - have any of you got it?
Why 8gb mem
if it's made to measure, you must need this spec, if the people building it cant give you answers, i really wouldnt trust them to make your system. im guessing this isnt a gaming pc, what will it be used for? the problem with any sli set up is you don't get the worth out of the second or third card, 2 8800 ultras will never give you double the performance of a single card, thats why some concider it a waste. but need to know what it's going to be used for really.
I experiment with large graph files and I hope 8gb with the right OS will be faster than say 4gb.
MB are built for 8gb so it is disappointing if 8gb does not work satisfactory.
I use three cards for multi screens one (very) large desktop.IF I can use SLI it would be an added bonus because as I understand the system you get some extra power to the screen you are working on.I know you can go the other way and use one card with a number of outlets but then the card power is reduced.
I do not need SLI but do prefer 3 identical cards and it would be a pity not to have the extra benefit.
As i understand SLI - 3 cards would give not 3 times the power but poss 2.5.Even if it was only a factor of 2 i would prefer it if possible.
8Gb still seems to me more than you will ever need. i do Video and Video files are bigger by a mile than Photos. Never come across one running into Gigs even with more than one open. I would have thought 4gig would be enough
You take me back a quarter of a century.
The mags of the day were full of letters similar to your post asking why anyone would need such large mem - the starting point was circa 16K - yes 16K.
We actualy wrote programs ,that worked,in under 1KB of code!
From my point of view there is only one reason not to have 8Gb - that is if it does not work.
These days some of us like numerous programs working in the background - firewall etc.
Then there are programs such as better clocks than the standard issue - or even more than one clock (time zone).
Next we have the programs we are actually using plus the file(s) we are working on.
When i manipulate a file it automatically saves the alteration - more mem use.
Lets not forget the OS itself.
I accept that some of my graphics push the "envelope" beyond the PC which is used for email/news group and a bit of video editing.
A mem of 1gb or 2 gb will deal with that.
You may be surprised to learn that I have found graphic programs which can not handle my normal files.
This is not because of the file type - quite understandable - but because they have a low threshold on size.
The internet mainly uses files of say under 100kb with a graphic file of not usually more than 3MB.
Today's standard dig camera is shall we say around 6MB with top end circa >12MB
My files are circa 700MB or more.
In the good "old days" we would debate that having lots of mem encouraged sloppy programming.Why struggle to make smaller files/programs.
There were magazines that supplied "open source" programs and told us how to alter them - in other words how to learn comp language.
I wish they would do the same today.
Thanks to all of you for the replies.
Some of the Mags you talk about, I am about to bin as I still have a lot
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.