Best Bang for Buck?

[pikayou]

I'm getting set to purchase a new Powermac, and was wondering how to best spend the last $500 or so. Which option would give me the biggest bang for my buck? a) Go from dual 2ghz to dual 2.5ghz b) Double my ram to 2gb c) Upgrade video card from 9650 to X850. Thanks!

[sCreeD]

Begs the eternal retort: "That depends on what your planning to do with it." Games, 2d graphics, 3d graphics, video, etcetera?

And this belongs in Purchasing Advice. ;)

[kscherer]

Now that we are in the proper forum: :p

I'm with sCreeD, or ScreeD, or scrEEd or . . . nevermind

If you're doing video - faster Mac with mucho RAMolla.

If gaming - slower Mac with Huge-Video-Card action.

2d graphics - slower Mac with mucho RAMolla.

3d graphics - faster Mac with mucho RAMolla and Huge-Video-CArd action.

etcetera! :D

[The Return of the 'nut]

best bang for the buck?

save the money. all the things you listed as looking to buy are overpriced today and will be outdated in a few months. at that point you can upgrade to something much better for simiilar prices or get those upgrades for less than today (with the exception of the processor speed but dual 2Ghz is fine for most of everything and will last several years)

[dlstarr7]

If I followed 'nuts advice I would still be using Apple //c. ;)

[sCreeD]

Now that we are in the proper forum: :p

I'm with sCreeD, or ScreeD, or scrEEd or . . . nevermind
Mock, mock, mock. :D

sCreeD is me; me is Screed, but when I'm feeling evil me is scr33d.
ScreeD - smelly bloke from Cardiff
scrEEd - avoid him, trust me...

Where was I? Oh...
If you're doing video - faster Mac with mucho RAMolla.

If gaming - slower Mac with Huge-Video-Card action.

2d graphics - slower Mac with mucho RAMolla.

3d graphics - faster Mac with mucho RAMolla and Huge-Video-CArd action.

etcetera! :DAnd if you want to play Doom 3, double that.

[pikayou]

Thanks for all the advice! What if I put in another way, though: which of the three things originally mentioned (dual 2ghz, 1gb ram, or 9650) is most likely to be the limiting factor on the system? For example, would increasing to 2gb ram be pointless if the real bottleneck was in the processor?

BTW, I'll probably be looking to do a lot of 2D graphics work and some gaming. I'd like to be able to play games that are currently cutting edge, basically, but won't be upgrading in the future to stay that way.

[The Return of the 'nut]

Thanks for all the advice! What if I put in another way, though: which of the three things originally mentioned (dual 2ghz, 1gb ram, or 9650) is most likely to be the limiting factor on the system? For example, would increasing to 2gb ram be pointless if the real bottleneck was in the processor?

BTW, I'll probably be looking to do a lot of 2D graphics work and some gaming. I'd like to be able to play games that are currently cutting edge, basically, but won't be upgrading in the future to stay that way.

well. the one component you likely will never upgrade is the processor. so, if you want to blow money. blow it on that. you'll be getting a 1Ghz faster computer in a way.

[DMBand0026]

Where was I? Oh...And if you want to play Doom 3, double that.

Don't play Doom 3, thats some scary stuff. I played it on my brother's XBox a while ago and I almost crapped myself I was so scared. Geez, there's no need for that.

[infoterror]

If I followed 'nuts advice I would still be using Apple //c. ;)

Not a bad machine, for the day. Of course, two years following Apple released a 2.6mhz $2500 machine called the //gs, which was completely out of line with reality... nice sound though.

[Res]

I would go with the faster processor -- you can upgrade your video and ram at a later date, but the processor is something your are stuck with.