Hardware Optimal PC/ Laptop specs

[Originality]

Passmark is the link I would've given if I weren't typing all this from my phone at work. That's the reason my answers are lacking today.

When it comes to graphics rendering, you do not want an APU. You want a graphics card capable of as many FLOPS as possible and a CPU that won't bottleneck it. That is why I have not recommended anything from AMD in this thread. Now if it were just gaming, is be singing a completely different tune.

The one thing comparison charts from benchmarks don't tell you, AMD graphics drivers have issues with the best graphics rendering software. It's bad enough a problem that universities recommend nVidia over AMD in all computers. On the other hand, when it comes to actually playing the games, AMD graphics cards achieve higher framerates for their price points.

 

[Rydian]

The model numbers are what's important.

Model numbers again mean nothing, it's actual performance measured in benchmarks like others have said.

I'm not saying read the model numbers as if they were a numerical indicator of power.

Hell, I pointed that out...

EDIT: Nevermind, it was another thread where I pointed out model differences (like an HD 5350 being weaker than a 4890).

 

[Originality]

Well the model do give a comparative guide within each series. As an example, the HD 5650 will be weaker than the 5670, or the 5870. What it doesn't tell you is that it's practically the same as the HD 6650, but that's because the HD 6 series isn't much different from the HD 5 series... only the flagship cards got a redesign.

I suffered a BSOD a minute ago to bring you this comment.

 

[Rydian]

There's always the cases of architecture changes within a series.

 

[Originality]

Like with the GeForce 9 series?

 

[Rydian]

Not even something as striking, as sometimes things like PSU requirements and heat dissipation can be changed.

And yeah, like you said re-branding older cards in newer lines.

 

[Alaude]

considering that u need the rig for gaming and 3d rendering then i would recommend for you:
any of the Intel's 3rd generation processors they are all good enough. for gpu it's better you take the Nvidia 500 sereis(especially the Nvidia GTX 560 Ti) as they have Physx.
and Mainly!! do not ignore the power requirements because they are also a crucial, you better take it from a good brand i recommend corsair. for ram u take G.Skill's RipjawsX 2x4GB sticks.

 

[Berthenk]

considering that u need the rig for gaming and 3d rendering then i would recommend for you:
any of the Intel's 3rd generation processors they are all good enough. for gpu it's better you take the Nvidia 500 sereis(especially the Nvidia GTX 560 Ti) as they have Physx.
and Mainly!! do not ignore the power requirements because they are also a crucial, you better take it from a good brand i recommend corsair. for ram u take G.Skill's RipjawsX 2x4GB sticks.

The 500 series is indeed better for GPGPU purposes because of something I read (something about less floating point calculation units? Don't know the details but the results can be found here, double precision floating point performance severely lacks compared to a reference (and underclocked!) Radeon 7970), though you won't necessarily use PhysX for physics calculation (don't know much about it, but I'd say you'd use Cuda or other environment for GPGPU acceleration) or rendering so you might be better off using AMD's 7000 series either way.
There is a lot more support for Cuda than the open alternative though and PhysX won't work properly on a non-NVIDIA system, because Ageia couldn´t be arsed to write proper code for a CPU equivalent with better CPU instruction sets (like SSE1, 2, 3, MMX, etc.).

Also, you seem to think that PhysX is not a feature for the 600 series but it is.

For RAM, it does not really matter which brand you take because you've almost always got lifetime warranty (Kingston, for example), I think you should just take the cheapest you can find if you need to save some money here and there but if you do have enough money, get more than you need so you can have a virtual RAM drive which can come in handy.

 

[Alaude]

lol i nvr mentioned that only the 500 sereis has PhysX support . btw he asked for a good specs so i mentioned bout the ram sticks too which i think is best for the budget pls read the posts careflly before you reply . But, you seem to have a misunderstanding of PhysX technology, it has significant importance in games and only Nvidia's gpu's are capable of it it from 9800gt and up and number 2 you seem to ignore the basic function of ram the better the ram the faster the basic tasks of an appiclation.

---

 

[Berthenk]

lol i nvr mentioned that only the 500 sereis has PhysX support . btw he asked for a good specs so i mentioned bout the ram sticks too which i think is best for the budget pls read the posts careflly before you reply . But, you seem to have a misunderstanding of PhysX technology, it has significant importance in games and only Nvidia's gpu's are capable of it it from 9800gt and up and number 2 you seem to ignore the basic function of ram the better the ram the faster the basic tasks of an appiclation.

Oh, I guess I just misinterpreted "for gpu it's better you take the Nvidia 500 sereis(especially the Nvidia GTX 560 Ti) as they have Physx."
Also, as is written in my post, I do have at least some basic understanding of PhysX (i.e., only done properly via faster NVIDIA GPUs). PhysX is only useful for some fancy schmancy visual effects like shattering glass and liquids among others, and as you said, in games, ergo, not in rendering.

Also, you won't notice faster (by better I assume you meant higher clocks, or lower CAS latency) RAM unless you get your panties in a bunch about benchmarks (even then it does not matter that much) or are using an APU. Only more RAM has added value otherwise.