O I'm not saying that it's a bad system by no means. I want to upgrade but I just don't see a reason to right now.

dude its quad core... 3.4Ghz TIMES 4 AFRICAN AMERICAN! and btw overclock that to at least 4.0 ghz... get that mofo thang to 16 Ghz.

Having 4x 4GHz procs doesn't mean you run at 16GHz. Dumbass.

so hows it running omega?!?! I know you got it today!

Gman your my hero.

LOL @ Gman's post.

It runs incredibly. This thing has like 3 huge fans and 2 smaller ones, so its like an A/C unit, lol. A few problems, though: 1.) the multicard reader that I got for it was installed improperly (crookedly behind the actual reader's faceplate) and 2.) the front giant-ass fan wasnt plugged in (minor issue). Everything is fixed now after a little tinkering and now I'm just waiting for Modern Warfare 2.

Two of the simplest problems you could have had.

Yeah doesnt that mean it runs 4 cores running at 3.4ghz each.. which is saying 16ghz basically?

No you have 4 cores running at 4 gigs but the one task is split up onto them 4 cores so that it computes faster. It doesn't run at 16 gigs. Alright let me put it into a simple way. You have 4 AFRICAN AMERICANS standing around, you each have them do one part of a field so that it is harvested faster. Then they can move on to the next field. So do you understand now. Time is money so get back into the field bitch.

yeah i F*CKING knew that..... 1 task F*CKIN split up between the 4 channels. so basically thats 3.4ghz each channel that ONE task is split up between.. so not necessarily 16 ghz but it is.... because the task it F*CKING split up... sooooooooo nvm ill ask my friend.. thanks?

no no no. you guys need some multi core processor edumacations. multi-core processors are most beneficial when running multiple programs/processes at once. meaning i can open 4 programs at the same time, and each program (in theory) open up at the same speed as if i was opening them individually on a single core processor of the same speed. so if the load time is 5 seconds for each program, on a single core the 4 programs would take 20 seconds to load simultaneously, and on a quad core it'd take 5 seconds total. (someone correct that if necessary, but i'm pretty sure that's right).

"The amount of performance gained by the use of a multi-core processor is strongly dependent on the software algorithms and implementation. In particular, the possible gains are limited by the fraction of the software that can be "parallelized" to run on multiple cores simultaneously; this effect is described by Amdahl's law. In the best case, so-called embarrassingly parallel problems may realize speedup factors near the number of cores. Many typical applications, however, do not realize such large speedup factors and thus, the parallelization of software is a significant on-going topic of research."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-core