Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rackhir" data-source="post: 4991055" data-attributes="member: 149">Considering that you can get a video card for <$50 that will do the 1080p playback, the processor as I said is not worth worrying about.A 30" monitor at typical prices is around $1,200. That's probably about twice as much as the OP is looking to spend on the computer and monitor. It's more than most people spend on their TVs. Also it requires a dual-link capable video card to drive it, which is also more money. I would certainly hope you'd be getting something for all that money. That you can "see the difference" doesn't change the fact that on a computer monitor, the resolution does NOT directly relate to the picture quality. It simply affects how much you can see on the screen at one time. Computer monitors btw have almost always been of much higher quality than TVs, since clarity is paramount with most computer work.For any typical sort of user, there is essentially zero advantage to anything more than a dual core. You need to be using highly threaded, highly parallel software before triple or quad cores give you any advantage. Given that triple and quad core chips often have lower clock speeds than the equivalent dual core chips, this actually makes their larger number of cores a liability for most people.</blockquote>