These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Anyone dual-box with two monitors?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CCP Stillman
C C P
C C P Alliance
#41 - 2011-12-26 09:50:24 UTC
JonnyRandom wrote:
CCP Stillman wrote:
Personally I will run up to 3 monitors across 3 screens(Powered by 2x HD 5770s).

You have three monitors on your desk? How do they fit? Do you have a photo?

Yep. 2x 24" and a 22". I have a double-sided ala. what Riley Moore in this thread has.

I've got a 2 year or so old photo. Since then, I relocated to Iceland and had to drop one of the 22" monitors. Otherwise, same setup for all intents and purposes.

Just a random dude in Team Security.
CCP Stillman
C C P
C C P Alliance
#42 - 2011-12-26 09:51:57 UTC
Darren Corley wrote:
Riley Moore wrote:
I do. Once you go dual monitor, you can't go back, ever. Believe me, it's like a bad drug.

Ps, this is mine: http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/6112/251220110071.jpg


Dude, gief that room. Would work well with the 2 ovens I have that go by the name of computers.

As you might imagine, during the cold Icelandic winters, I really appreciate how well those bastards heat up the room. I rarely have to turn up the heat at all. Only when I haven't played any games during the evening, basically Big smile

Just a random dude in Team Security.
CCP Stillman
C C P
C C P Alliance
#43 - 2011-12-26 09:56:16 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
You dont need 16GB 8 is fine for 3 accounts.

i7 is overkill. That is a very nice turbo but you can get away with a good high end i5 and save a little. The extra oomph EVE wont be using for years and by then the i7 will be obsolete compared to 22nm models.

I run two clients on an ATI 4770 (4850 equivalent) if I run both at full res it will choke some but not terrible. And that is mainly due to the 512mb of ram when 1GB is needed. Running 3 with that monster of a card and a good i5 and 8gb of ram ought to be easy in my opinion. No need for SLI

I've also been fine with 8GB RAM for multi-boxing for a long while. The only reason I've considered upping that lately, is because I've got a bad habbit of leaving virtual machines running when not using them. Otherwise, 8GB is good.

But if you have 4/6 slots on your mobo(Dual vs triple-channel), I'd at minimum go for 2x 4gb or 3x 4gb. I was stupid enough to buy 4x2gb sticks for my machine. And now that I'm looking to upgrade, it's a headache having to replace sticks.

Just a random dude in Team Security.
Darren Corley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#44 - 2011-12-26 09:58:09 UTC
CCP Stillman wrote:
Darren Corley wrote:
Riley Moore wrote:
I do. Once you go dual monitor, you can't go back, ever. Believe me, it's like a bad drug.

Ps, this is mine: http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/6112/251220110071.jpg


Dude, gief that room. Would work well with the 2 ovens I have that go by the name of computers.

As you might imagine, during the cold Icelandic winters, I really appreciate how well those bastards heat up the room. I rarely have to turn up the heat at all. Only when I haven't played any games during the evening, basically Big smile


It doesn't get quite as cold here, -18C is the lowest i've seen. But if I was playing EVE on both, I'd want to open the window.
Sassums
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#45 - 2011-12-26 10:07:18 UTC
While the 16GB might be over kill - the cost difference between 8 and 16 is just so small - best to do it right. The board can support up to 32GB of Ram, but it jumps the price from $70-90(for 16) to over $300 for 32.

I am getting the Intel Core i7-2700k and the Intel DP67BGB3 board for $250.

Another $100 for RAM

And another 50-75 for CD/DVD Drives since my old ones won't work anymore and I am set.
Darren Corley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#46 - 2011-12-26 10:10:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Darren Corley
Sassums wrote:
While the 16GB might be over kill - the cost difference between 8 and 16 is just so small - best to do it right. The board can support up to 32GB of Ram, but it jumps the price from $70-90(for 16) to over $300 for 32.

I am getting the Intel Core i7-2700k and the Intel DP67BGB3 board for $250.

Another $100 for RAM

And another 50-75 for CD/DVD Drives since my old ones won't work anymore and I am set.


It's still your money in any case, but if you only really game on it, the i7 will be wasted. And with the RAM, unless it's 2 sticks of 8GB, i'd still go with 2x4. It's why I went with 2 sets of 2GBx3 for my desktop instead of 4 sets. 12GB is plenty, no need for the 24. Or higher for that matter.
Theia Roden
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2011-12-26 10:11:51 UTC
My setup consists of 24" (1920x1200) and 19" (1280x1024) Samsungs with one card, GTX470. Instead of streching same Windows on both, I use a program called UltraMon. It allows you to have separate resolutions, desktops, wallpapers and screensavers, and to determine which monitor an application will use. Very handy in dual-boxing.

CCP Stillman
C C P
C C P Alliance
#48 - 2011-12-26 10:13:14 UTC
Darren Corley wrote:
Sassums wrote:
While the 16GB might be over kill - the cost difference between 8 and 16 is just so small - best to do it right. The board can support up to 32GB of Ram, but it jumps the price from $70-90(for 16) to over $300 for 32.

I am getting the Intel Core i7-2700k and the Intel DP67BGB3 board for $250.

Another $100 for RAM

And another 50-75 for CD/DVD Drives since my old ones won't work anymore and I am set.


It's still your money in any case, but if you only really game on it, the i7 will be wasted. And with the RAM, unless it's 2 sticks of 8GB, i'd still go with 2x4.

Can you actually get 8GB sticks? I've not been able to track down any non-ECC ones. And I've never found any in Iceland nor Denmark.

Just a random dude in Team Security.
Darren Corley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#49 - 2011-12-26 10:15:05 UTC
Jerera
#50 - 2011-12-26 10:16:26 UTC
http://uppix.net/8/e/7/3ef2347bf8dc4e9600472fd1cac4b.jpg

GNU/Linux with xmonad (xinerama). Everything works fine.
Darren Corley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#51 - 2011-12-26 10:16:42 UTC
On my Desktop I'd have to use 4GB sticks to hit 48GB, anything more, like the 192 max i'd have to use ECC.
Endeavour Starfleet
#52 - 2011-12-26 10:36:26 UTC
CCP Stillman wrote:
Darren Corley wrote:
Sassums wrote:
While the 16GB might be over kill - the cost difference between 8 and 16 is just so small - best to do it right. The board can support up to 32GB of Ram, but it jumps the price from $70-90(for 16) to over $300 for 32.

I am getting the Intel Core i7-2700k and the Intel DP67BGB3 board for $250.

Another $100 for RAM

And another 50-75 for CD/DVD Drives since my old ones won't work anymore and I am set.


It's still your money in any case, but if you only really game on it, the i7 will be wasted. And with the RAM, unless it's 2 sticks of 8GB, i'd still go with 2x4.

Can you actually get 8GB sticks? I've not been able to track down any non-ECC ones. And I've never found any in Iceland nor Denmark.


Maybe ask CCP Atlanta? Or maybe someone can sell you some at fanfest?

As for ram. Generally it is by far best to get the biggest Ram sticks to meet the min requirements for dual or triple channel (2-3) And leave the rest open to buy the same sticks later.

16 tho is just insanely overkill. Just this year has 4gb become a moderate bottleneck and that requires you to have your browser and multiple games running at the same time. before that 1gb had been good for years.

With the cost of game development skyrocketing I just don't see 8gb being a bottleneck for years. As in by the time it does your entire system will be a dinosaur.
Darren Corley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#53 - 2011-12-26 10:38:00 UTC
You typically do 2 sticks instead of 4, or 3 instead of 6, to avoid stressing the IMC.
Endeavour Starfleet
#54 - 2011-12-26 10:41:54 UTC
I am not really worried about stressing the memory controller. Most of the time it is built into the CPU and has the same amount of ruggedness the rest of the system has anyway.

It is just that if you went all out with all them filled off the bat you leave no room for upgrading later. Some do this so they can upgrade their HTPC memory with the old later on but not everyone has an HTPC to use the old stuff.
Darren Corley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#55 - 2011-12-26 10:43:41 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
I am not really worried about stressing the memory controller. Most of the time it is built into the CPU and has the same amount of ruggedness the rest of the system has anyway.

It is just that if you went all out with all them filled off the bat you leave no room for upgrading later. Some do this so they can upgrade their HTPC memory with the old later on but not everyone has an HTPC to use the old stuff.


It's mainly due to the fact that with all slots filled, it's NOT as rugged as the rest of the CPU.

Especially if the system is for games and such, and you like to overclock. Or using high frequency RAM.
Sassums
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#56 - 2011-12-26 10:52:57 UTC
Darren Corley wrote:
Sassums wrote:
While the 16GB might be over kill - the cost difference between 8 and 16 is just so small - best to do it right. The board can support up to 32GB of Ram, but it jumps the price from $70-90(for 16) to over $300 for 32.

I am getting the Intel Core i7-2700k and the Intel DP67BGB3 board for $250.

Another $100 for RAM

And another 50-75 for CD/DVD Drives since my old ones won't work anymore and I am set.


It's still your money in any case, but if you only really game on it, the i7 will be wasted. And with the RAM, unless it's 2 sticks of 8GB, i'd still go with 2x4. It's why I went with 2 sets of 2GBx3 for my desktop instead of 4 sets. 12GB is plenty, no need for the 24. Or higher for that matter.


I am only spending $250 on a $350 CPU and a $180 Board. It would make no sense for me to instead buy a $180board and $180 CPU for an I5 - i'd be spending more money.

I am already taking a step down as I started looking at 32gb of ram instead of the 16. But for $90 or so its not a bad deal at all. Plus I don't plan on upgrading for a while.

This current PC lasted 7 or so years I think, I'd like the new one to do the same. The only thing that will stay the same in this new unit is the case, the power supply and the HDD.
Sassums
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#57 - 2011-12-26 10:53:45 UTC
Darren Corley wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
I am not really worried about stressing the memory controller. Most of the time it is built into the CPU and has the same amount of ruggedness the rest of the system has anyway.

It is just that if you went all out with all them filled off the bat you leave no room for upgrading later. Some do this so they can upgrade their HTPC memory with the old later on but not everyone has an HTPC to use the old stuff.


It's mainly due to the fact that with all slots filled, it's NOT as rugged as the rest of the CPU.

Especially if the system is for games and such, and you like to overclock. Or using high frequency RAM.


Not overclocking, 3.5 is more than enough.

This is the memory I am looking at:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231441&Tpk=F3-10666CL9Q-16GBXL
Darren Corley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#58 - 2011-12-26 10:57:07 UTC
Sassums wrote:
Darren Corley wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
I am not really worried about stressing the memory controller. Most of the time it is built into the CPU and has the same amount of ruggedness the rest of the system has anyway.

It is just that if you went all out with all them filled off the bat you leave no room for upgrading later. Some do this so they can upgrade their HTPC memory with the old later on but not everyone has an HTPC to use the old stuff.


It's mainly due to the fact that with all slots filled, it's NOT as rugged as the rest of the CPU.

Especially if the system is for games and such, and you like to overclock. Or using high frequency RAM.


Not overclocking, 3.5 is more than enough.

This is the memory I am looking at:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231441&Tpk=F3-10666CL9Q-16GBXL


Considering there are games out there that even 3.5Ghz on Sandy Bridge is not enough.... But who knows if you'll ever play them. That and you don't have to use OC'd RAM to OC SB anyways.
Sassums
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#59 - 2011-12-26 11:00:23 UTC
Darren Corley wrote:
Sassums wrote:
Darren Corley wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
I am not really worried about stressing the memory controller. Most of the time it is built into the CPU and has the same amount of ruggedness the rest of the system has anyway.

It is just that if you went all out with all them filled off the bat you leave no room for upgrading later. Some do this so they can upgrade their HTPC memory with the old later on but not everyone has an HTPC to use the old stuff.


It's mainly due to the fact that with all slots filled, it's NOT as rugged as the rest of the CPU.

Especially if the system is for games and such, and you like to overclock. Or using high frequency RAM.


Not overclocking, 3.5 is more than enough.

This is the memory I am looking at:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231441&Tpk=F3-10666CL9Q-16GBXL


Considering there are games out there that even 3.5Ghz on Sandy Bridge is not enough.... But who knows if you'll ever play them. That and you don't have to use OC'd RAM to OC SB anyways.


Seriously?

Well the CPU can turbo up to like 3.9 I think. All I am playing is EVE - will try out TOR eventually.

I have a 360 for everything else :)
Darren Corley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#60 - 2011-12-26 11:03:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Darren Corley
Sassums wrote:
Darren Corley wrote:
Sassums wrote:
Darren Corley wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
I am not really worried about stressing the memory controller. Most of the time it is built into the CPU and has the same amount of ruggedness the rest of the system has anyway.

It is just that if you went all out with all them filled off the bat you leave no room for upgrading later. Some do this so they can upgrade their HTPC memory with the old later on but not everyone has an HTPC to use the old stuff.


It's mainly due to the fact that with all slots filled, it's NOT as rugged as the rest of the CPU.

Especially if the system is for games and such, and you like to overclock. Or using high frequency RAM.


Not overclocking, 3.5 is more than enough.

This is the memory I am looking at:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231441&Tpk=F3-10666CL9Q-16GBXL


Considering there are games out there that even 3.5Ghz on Sandy Bridge is not enough.... But who knows if you'll ever play them. That and you don't have to use OC'd RAM to OC SB anyways.


Seriously?

Well the CPU can turbo up to like 3.9 I think. All I am playing is EVE - will try out TOR eventually.

I have a 360 for everything else :)


Yeah there are games out there where people still see performance gains pushing it all the way to 4.8Ghz or so.

Now, one of those is pretty badly optimized, and that's part of the reason it gets so much benefit. But MMOs in general tend to choke up on the CPU more than a single player game with the same GPU load. I just wish I could at least push my 12 cores to 4.5, but they don't like me and choke around 4.3