I dont know about most intense game, but for me, the most intense gaming experiences I've had have either been: 1) The Normandy Beach level of Medal of Honor: Allied Assaut or 2) The white forest level of HL2:Ep2. Even though the normandy beach was ripped pretty much straight from Saving Private Ryan, I was so into it when I was playing. Complete immersion is rare like that in games. Then the white forest level, jump into your suped up charger, run down some combine hunters, launch a sticky grenade and then blast it with your pistol. So freaking awesome, I felt like I was in some over the top action movie.

I love intense games :D

Thanks for your input, I am finding it hard what to choose Dual or Quad a hand full of people on other fourms say get Dual and a hand full here and else were say get Quad. I have been shown benchmarks and the Dual looked better. For Quad overclocking keeps getting said I dont want to overclock for the simple reason incase it messes up and dont like the fact that you have to to get equal amount spec. Crossfire also keeps proping up what are the benefits?

Thank you again for your input.

barri12345

The 8800 Ultra is a great card...for a price. What resolution are you gaming in? If your answer isnt anything higher than 1680x1050, I'd recommend saving some money and going with the 8800GT 512 MB. Less than half the price for only a few less FPS. The 8800 ultra still holds the crown by far when you increase resolution because it has a lot more memory bandwidth, but if you are using a 1280x1024, it really isnt needed. Your call though. Looks like a good build.

Oh, and crossfire, that is basically the ATI/AMD equivalent to nVidia SLi. Putting in multiple GPUs to work together to achieve higher performance that one card (typically) can reach alone. [Shameless plug] There is a nice write-up on multiple gpu setups in the Overclocking Union Forum [/shameless plug.]

INTEL THINK THEY GOING TO WIN THIS WAR THEY BETTER DO THERE HOMEWORK PLUS AMD STILL ON 90 NM.bike749

Don't underestimate AMD you guys. Remember, they absolutley trounced Intel for TEN YEARS with their K8 architecture. AMD isn't stupid they had the largest microprocessor manufacturer, the one who defeated IBM, at their feet. They have something up their sleeves.

Consider this. AMD as had much more then six months to research and develop the HD 2xxx series. Do you really think that the problems that the HD 2900XTX are facing NOW were not seen months ago? This is AMD's baby, their answer to the G80 they obviously tested it many times against the G80 in it's pre-stage and development. I'm not one for conspiracy, but I wouldn't put it past AMD to blow smoke like this for publicity, it'd make sense seeing as how many people are content with their G80 cards. I'm sure many of those owners have heard about the HD 2900XTX now, and weather it was in a good or bad way I just know for a fact that things are never what they seem to be when you're looking at the underdog AMD.

sykonfc

AMD K8 architechture has only been out since september 2003, hardly 10 years.  Hell, its not even 4 years yet.  Even if you go back to the K7 line, that was only released in '99, only 8 years.  Plus, the Pentium 4 was very competitive with the Athlon XP series.  I'm all for rooting for the underdog, but at least do it with proper facts. 

[QUOTE="ChevelleFan"][QUOTE="mistervengeance"]

find me the parts for a full system( os, key/mouse, speakers, hdd, monitor, case, dvd drive, vid card, etc)

that will be able to run crysis on full.

for $1k max.

even with newegg, i guarantee you cannot do it.

(all parts must be new, preferably from online stores)

 

TheDarthvader

Impossible. You cannot run all current games on highest settings with a $1000 pc without sacrificing something.

You can actually. depends on the res u play

Yup.  I'd like to see ANY console game running at 2560x1600.  Seeing as most are run at 720p, which is lower res than 1280x1024, you arent making a fair comparison.  And for 1000 dollars, you can easily max out anything at 1280x1024.