They said the CPU got 24 cores, accually its 12 cores with 2 threads on each core. So 24 threads on 12 cores. Windows recognizes each thread as 1 core so for some people it can be missleading.
I didn't notice any negativity in your comments Mistwaver1985... and your first comment was helpful, thanks man.
Heh, heh ... touche today are we, torrne667? My head has already been boiled. Can I beg you to boil it again, preferably in water in excess of 132°F this time? Listen. I didn't say there's anything wrong with "experimenting". I experiment all the time. My comments weren't negative -- they were informative -- and suggestive. There's a difference there, 'bro. Their goal here is to create the ultimate gaming machine -- excuse me for shining my two cents on the subject. I was unaware that sharing your knowledge and personal experiences was deemed "negative" and "stifling". I'm not even going to touch your remark about "if we let you run gaming sites," -- I'm just going to pretend I never seen it. Y'know, we could go at this all day, doesn't really bother me. I'm just a hardware enthusiast trying to give some people advice who may be in the process of building an ultimate gaming rig for themselves, and if they go by this video, they will be saddened, disappointed, and ready to plant a stick of dynamite in their mouth and detonate it when they find out their super-rig runs worse than their budget-line machine did. I just did a benchmark in Batman: Arkham Asylum with everything on ultra-high and got 24 FPS minimum, 134 FPS maximum, and 86 FPS average. Clearly superior to this system But, I'm just going to stop there since I'm being negative and stifling.
@mistwaver1985 seriously... number one, go and boil your head secondly, If we let you run gaming sites it would be the biggest snooze-fest ever. Thirdly, Experimentation is good, stop trying to stifle everybody with your negative comments.
There are several flaws here. Number one, as someone stated, the Xenon CPU is not designed for gaming, it's designed for rendering work, which is why it scored so high in the first test. Secondly, the excessive amount of RAM they're using. Yes, that is correct, too much RAM can be a bad thing and can cause your computer to choke up. Thirdly, the triple SLI. As long as the SLI technology has been in use, it's still a very buggy technology that doesn't function properly, and in more cases than not cause your frame rate to be reduced instead of improved. Also, a lot of people misconceive how multiple processing works, and think the processing speed multiplies. The fact here is they work in conjunction with each other, just as multi cores on a CPU does. Once the first GPU or CPU reaches 100% load, the second GPU or CPU will kick in and it spreads the load across both GPU's or CPU's, and continues on for how many cores your CPU or GPU has. I wouldn't recommend anyone to use SLI just yet. Maybe in another few years when they have all the kinks worked out. If I were to win that system, the first thing I'd do is get rid of the triple SLI setup and the "dedicated" PhysX setup and go to using just one of the cards. Secondly, I'd get rid of that Xenon CPU (depending on what socket it has -- I've never built a system around a Xenon chip as I've never had a use for rendering power), and I'd bring the memory capacity down to 4-6 GB, which is more than enough for anything these days.
ROFLMAO! That letter she read out toward the end cracked me up. LOL! But man, what a rig! Overkill much? Lol! I'm surprised Crysis didn't scream at them and burst into flames.
I believe a part of the reason for the delays is also the heat. As more heat is generated, it causes systems to have major issues with processing power. I would say this rig would run in the mid 3000 range, maybe 3599 or so. If they added a liquid cooling system, which is all the pc rage today, to this setup it would increase performance.
Only great thing here is the cpu, 3 gtx460 is kind of weak.I have one gtx480 and have similar performance (10 % less)
@KriobaKeys Well, you have to keep in mind they used more RAM then they should have. As awesome as it is to push the limit of RAM you can add, too much will actually end up slowing things down. 8 Gigs can actually do that. 4 to 6 GBs is all that's really needed. Even then, it depends on the actual speed of the RAM. I had a desktop that had 4GB of RAM running at 553, while a 2GB desktop I had ran more smoothly because it was running at 1200.
GB of RAM doesn't always mean faster. Especially when you use too much RAM.
It just shows how ridiculously expensive and frustrating PC gaming is if even these PC can't run Arkham on full settings without bad frame rate moments. It's quite sad to be honest, i'm poor so i'll stick to consoles.