Talesin always ebat me in these threads and posts all the juicy info first, so I won't bother repeating what he said again, but simply add my voice to the clamour.
Yes ATI's driver support was originally poor, in fact the drivers that shipped with my radeon were pretty cruddy but the latest Cats are great, easy to use and resolved every graphics issue I had. The very latest ones also work with DX9 which surprised me as nothing else I have does ;o
<!--QuoteBegin--TheInfragableKrunk+Apr 25 2003, 08:53 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TheInfragableKrunk @ Apr 25 2003, 08:53 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->**** ATI...im sticking with nVidia...ATI has some **** driver support.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> They USED to be ****... <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--> The latest catalyst drivers are as good as anything Nvidia has ever produced and believe me they will get even better...
And before you ask im not an ATI ****.... i have an old ti4600 in my machine which i bought on 1st week of release <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> and in my opinion whilst Nvidia used to be great..... ATI > Nvidia
Matt my friend, if your 4600 is so old, would you be kind enough to donate it (read: give) to me? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Ok so here goes for whoever says nvidia isn't confusing...
(starting at the GeForce 3)
GeForce 3 released GeForce 3 Ti200 and Ti500 released. The 200 is inferior to the original and 500 is superior. On the GeForce 2 series, the MX200 and 400 have been released (200 inferior, 400 superior to original MX) the GeForce 2 Ti is superior to the GeForce 2 GTS GeForce 4 series released. MX series (built on GeForce 2 core) arguably superior (slightly) to the GeForce 3s. Ti Series (derived from GeForce 3 core) is largely superior (4200<4400<4600) GeForce FX series released. FX (5400, 5600 and 5800)
The (FX) 5400 is equal to the MX series (inferior to the GeForce 4 Tis) The 5600 is supposedly equal to the 4200 and the 5800 is superior to the 4600.
Now is that easy, compared to the atis:
7000<7500<8000<8500 and now 9000<9500<9700<9800 ?
Only exception is the 9600, inferior to the 9500 due to an error in marketing (I believe it was similar to a 9700 but with some blocked functions and pipes)
Dont forget the difference between the 9700 and the 9700 pro cards etc... <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> And yes i will donate you my card so long as you donate ?200 to the |MaTT| charity based here in sheffield, UK <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
espescially when u can let your 9500 with 128mb run like an 9700 pro <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
Heh. Especially with the ability to 'soft upgrade' the 9500 Pro 128 into a 9700 Pro 64. Bit of driver-hackage splits the RAM in half, dedicating each to its own channel... bringing up the 128-bit bus to the full 256-bit. Slightly slower though, which can be overcome with a touch of an overclock. And so, for about $160 if you know where to look, you have the fastest video card on the market.
Er.. used to. Now that the 9800 is out, even the 9700 is getting powered past.
well you guys do sound knowledgable, i swear i read somewhere that ATI cards are designed to do well on benchmarks, so even though they appear superior they dont actually perform in real situations, like theye had a driver hack that game different resulting numbers to 3dmark.... or maybe that was nvidia propaganda....
ill be getting a new card in probably august; and perhaps it will be an ATI Radeon All-In-Wonder 12,800. Pro
Reading the comments in this thread, I may have been converted to ATI, I currently run an Nvidia rig.
If I choose to buy an ATI graphics chipset, which one do you suggest, I was thinking the Hercules Prophet looks pretty good. I never thought that the All-In-Wonders were any good, they aren't really optimized for gaming, especially where cooling is concerned, correct me if I'm wrong?
I have a radeon 8500LE. sure there are some glitchs here and there but overall the card runs very well. too bad my cpu is holding it down <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo--> 900mhz
This is the biggest proof I have seen thus far that history <i>does</i> repeat itself. A few years ago, 3Dfx came out with the Voodoo 5000 which was eerily like the Geforce FX in terms of bulkiness (hell, it even required a seaperate plug because it used to much power!). Then we see the small unnoticed competitor come out with a 1 slot, power efficient, and utterly **** kicking card called the TNT. 3Dfx lasted a bit longer, but coupled with its proprietary rendering engine (that was falling behind OpenGL) and falling sales of the Voodoo 5000 it was in a deep hole it never got out of.
Now, years later, we find Nvidia in almost the exact same position. Releasing a overhyped card thats a hair below the underdog's latest offering, coupled with a noisy fan, bulky design, and lower performance then the 1 slot Radeon 9800. It gets a notch closer to 3Dfx with the implimentation of its Cg language (short for <i>C for Graphics</i>), while not as extreme as a proprietary 3d rendering engine (3Dfx's Glide) it may force gamers into 2 categories: ATI and Nvidia. And as we have seen before, when that happens, gamers usually unite under the more universal of the 3D cards.
Nvidia may have some tricks up their sleeve, but the entire GeforceFX disaster really shook up many people's faith in them. If they lose out anymore to ATI, it will almost certainly be a done deal.
----
Note: I did not rip the above from any online/offline source, yes, I am that good of a writer....when I want to be <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Zel+Apr 25 2003, 12:00 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Zel @ Apr 25 2003, 12:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> well you guys do sound knowledgable, i swear i read somewhere that ATI cards are designed to do well on benchmarks, so even though they appear superior they dont actually perform in real situations, like theye had a driver hack that game different resulting numbers to 3dmark.... or maybe that was nvidia propaganda.... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> complete hear-say and speculation
the 9500 and 9600 seem to do quite fine in real games (splinter cell, unreal 2k3)
check it... yeah they bit the big one on the 9500 so get them while they're still being sold
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
edited April 2003
I'd go with a Built By ATI card, myself. Hercules has had... disappointing.. support for their cards in the past.
All the AIW gives you is a TV-In, and I believe a Firewire port (maybe).. as far as I know, all Built By ATI Radeon cards have TV-Out by default. Most including a DVI connector with a DVI->VGA adaptor plug so you can have a second monitor attached.
If you can find one, the R9500 Pro 128 is probably the best bang-for-buck card at the moment. Not the same caliber as the full-on R9700 Pro, but very decent nevertheless. If you're waiting a little, see how far the R9700 Pro 128 price drops. Especially once the R9800 Pro 256MB DDR2 edition comes out, in April. (Which, while being a graphics MONSTER, will run an estimated $500 at release)
(edit) The 'optimized benchmark path' thing is also a combination of propaganda, and past history. Older ATI cards (when they were still playing catch-up) DID have nearly benchmark-specific rendering paths in the drivers to boost their scores. The newer ones (starting with the Radeons) didn't need them any more. They actually slowed the cards down, having the extra cruft in the drivers, so it was removed. Part of why the R9700 runs so fast and smooth, and why a R9000 Pro can beat out the low-end GFFX. :b (/edit)
I have a Sapphire Radeon 9000 128 MB and it works well for me. ATI forever! nVidia never! <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--TenSix+Apr 25 2003, 01:12 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TenSix @ Apr 25 2003, 01:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Now, years later, we find Nvidia in almost the exact same position. Releasing a overhyped card thats a hair below the underdog's latest offering, coupled with a noisy fan, bulky design, and lower performance then the 1 slot Radeon 9800. It gets a notch closer to 3Dfx with the implimentation of its Cg language (short for <i>C for Graphics</i>), while not as extreme as a proprietary 3d rendering engine (3Dfx's Glide) it may force gamers into 2 categories: ATI and Nvidia. And as we have seen before, when that happens, gamers usually unite under the more universal of the 3D cards. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> blech. 1: Cg is not proprietary, they are standardizing the way windwos interacts with video hardware and making all games run better all over, ATI will mimic thing and then the whole world of graphics cards will be on equal footing again, so that is a non-point. i dont give credit to nvidia for inventing it, because that doesnt matter in the end.
2: who cares if its larger? if they put that leaf blower dealy on the top instead of on the bottom it would go out an unused slot without even blocking any PCI. i don kno about you, but there is no PCI above my AGP port, so nvidia should be using this handy space... never having physically seen one of these cards, i dont really kno which side that beasty hooks on to...
The 9800 is the fastest card on the market. The standard 9800 which is around 100 dollars less that 9800 pro can be over clocked to be indentical to the 9800 pro. Now the 9800 IS > FX. Also ATI 9800 is the offical card of Doom3. The FX is the offical card of Deus Ex 2, however ATI 9800 will run it just as well considering it has DirectX9 optimization.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->1: Cg is not proprietary, they are standardizing the way windwos interacts with video hardware and making all games run better all over, ATI will mimic thing and then the whole world of graphics cards will be on equal footing again, so that is a non-point. i dont give credit to nvidia for inventing it, because that doesnt matter in the end. 2: who cares if its larger? if they put that leaf blower dealy on the top instead of on the bottom it would go out an unused slot without even blocking any PCI. i don kno about you, but there is no PCI above my AGP port, so nvidia should be using this handy space... never having physically seen one of these cards, i dont really kno which side that beasty hooks on to... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->[QUOTE]
1. If ATI mimics it, there will eventually be problems with the 2 trying to interact. Its a given almost.
2. Dosent matter, the fact is, its a NOISY fan AND its big. Now look at the 9800, no big noisy fan, only 1 slot, and it performs almost exactly like the GeforceFX....and it costs the same. If I had the $400 to shell out, I would go with a ATI simply because its more efficient.
i just find it extremely difficult to believe that soemthing as hot as a GFFX can be slower than a standard sized card., it must have extra horsepower inside there waiting to be discovered by optimized detonators!
Zel if you're wondering why I hate the GeForce FX, know that I sometimes leave on my computer at night and I sleep like 2 feet away from the back of my comp.
Now go there: <a href='http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030127/geforce_fx-06.html' target='_blank'>http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030...orce_fx-06.html</a>
and download the 3 mp3s comparing the GFFX to the 9700.
and if the fan was over, it could possibly block south-bridge/processor/memory, not counting it cant blow out the air outside as it is intended to.
<!--QuoteBegin--Error404:+Apr 25 2003, 12:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Error404: @ Apr 25 2003, 12:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Reading the comments in this thread, I may have been converted to ATI, I currently run an Nvidia rig.
If I choose to buy an ATI graphics chipset, which one do you suggest, I was thinking the Hercules Prophet looks pretty good. I never thought that the All-In-Wonders were any good, they aren't really optimized for gaming, especially where cooling is concerned, correct me if I'm wrong? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> sounds like your starting to cross over to the dark side <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'><!--endemo--> horrible thing to do...... lol
<!--QuoteBegin--Cereal_KillR+Apr 26 2003, 03:22 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cereal_KillR @ Apr 26 2003, 03:22 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Zel if you're wondering why I hate the GeForce FX, know that I sometimes leave on my computer at night and I sleep like 2 feet away from the back of my comp.
Now go there: <a href='http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030127/geforce_fx-06.html' target='_blank'>http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030...orce_fx-06.html</a>
and download the 3 mp3s comparing the GFFX to the 9700.
and if the fan was over, it could possibly block south-bridge/processor/memory, not counting it cant blow out the air outside as it is intended to. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> with 5 80 mm fans and 4 60 mm fans already in my case, i understand your plight....
2 80 mms here, and a noisy cpu fan. Good thing I got silent alim. I'm seriously thinking about getting watercooling though <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> And still download, it sounds like a leafblower, it really does.
err, the fridge is not really an option, what u gonna do with the cables? the water/ice on your comp??
some ppl have been trying it in HOlland (www.tweakers.net it's dutch) but, it's kinda hard to do, just get wc+peltier <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
hehe I was thinking of something like <a href='http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20021216/p4_41-03.html' target='_blank'>this</a> <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<img src='http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20021216/images/13.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image'> <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> That won't be much less noisy though <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
and btw watercooling isn't like throwing your pc in a pool. It's water that flows in and out of your computer passing over your CPU/GPU and eventually hdd through tubes to cool it down.
Comments
Yes ATI's driver support was originally poor, in fact the drivers that shipped with my radeon were pretty cruddy but the latest Cats are great, easy to use and resolved every graphics issue I had.
The very latest ones also work with DX9 which surprised me as nothing else I have does ;o
They USED to be ****... <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--> The latest catalyst drivers are as good as anything Nvidia has ever produced and believe me they will get even better...
And before you ask im not an ATI ****.... i have an old ti4600 in my machine which i bought on 1st week of release <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> and in my opinion whilst Nvidia used to be great..... ATI > Nvidia
<!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Ok so here goes for whoever says nvidia isn't confusing...
(starting at the GeForce 3)
GeForce 3 released
GeForce 3 Ti200 and Ti500 released. The 200 is inferior to the original and 500 is superior. On the GeForce 2 series, the MX200 and 400 have been released (200 inferior, 400 superior to original MX) the GeForce 2 Ti is superior to the GeForce 2 GTS
GeForce 4 series released. MX series (built on GeForce 2 core) arguably superior (slightly) to the GeForce 3s. Ti Series (derived from GeForce 3 core) is largely superior (4200<4400<4600)
GeForce FX series released. FX (5400, 5600 and 5800)
The (FX) 5400 is equal to the MX series (inferior to the GeForce 4 Tis) The 5600 is supposedly equal to the 4200 and the 5800 is superior to the 4600.
Now is that easy, compared to the atis:
7000<7500<8000<8500
and now
9000<9500<9700<9800 ?
Only exception is the 9600, inferior to the 9500 due to an error in marketing (I believe it was similar to a 9700 but with some blocked functions and pipes)
espescially when u can let your 9500 with 128mb run like an 9700 pro <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Er.. used to. Now that the 9800 is out, even the 9700 is getting powered past.
ill be getting a new card in probably august; and perhaps it will be an ATI Radeon All-In-Wonder 12,800. Pro
If I choose to buy an ATI graphics chipset, which one do you suggest, I was thinking the Hercules Prophet looks pretty good. I never thought that the All-In-Wonders were any good, they aren't really optimized for gaming, especially where cooling is concerned, correct me if I'm wrong?
too bad my cpu is holding it down <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo--> 900mhz
Now, years later, we find Nvidia in almost the exact same position. Releasing a overhyped card thats a hair below the underdog's latest offering, coupled with a noisy fan, bulky design, and lower performance then the 1 slot Radeon 9800. It gets a notch closer to 3Dfx with the implimentation of its Cg language (short for <i>C for Graphics</i>), while not as extreme as a proprietary 3d rendering engine (3Dfx's Glide) it may force gamers into 2 categories: ATI and Nvidia. And as we have seen before, when that happens, gamers usually unite under the more universal of the 3D cards.
Nvidia may have some tricks up their sleeve, but the entire GeforceFX disaster really shook up many people's faith in them. If they lose out anymore to ATI, it will almost certainly be a done deal.
----
Note: I did not rip the above from any online/offline source, yes, I am that good of a writer....when I want to be <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
complete hear-say and speculation
the 9500 and 9600 seem to do quite fine in real games (splinter cell, unreal 2k3)
check it... yeah they bit the big one on the 9500 so get them while they're still being sold
<a href='http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030416/index.html' target='_blank'>http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030...0416/index.html</a>
All the AIW gives you is a TV-In, and I believe a Firewire port (maybe).. as far as I know, all Built By ATI Radeon cards have TV-Out by default. Most including a DVI connector with a DVI->VGA adaptor plug so you can have a second monitor attached.
If you can find one, the R9500 Pro 128 is probably the best bang-for-buck card at the moment. Not the same caliber as the full-on R9700 Pro, but very decent nevertheless. If you're waiting a little, see how far the R9700 Pro 128 price drops. Especially once the R9800 Pro 256MB DDR2 edition comes out, in April. (Which, while being a graphics MONSTER, will run an estimated $500 at release)
(edit)
The 'optimized benchmark path' thing is also a combination of propaganda, and past history. Older ATI cards (when they were still playing catch-up) DID have nearly benchmark-specific rendering paths in the drivers to boost their scores. The newer ones (starting with the Radeons) didn't need them any more. They actually slowed the cards down, having the extra cruft in the drivers, so it was removed. Part of why the R9700 runs so fast and smooth, and why a R9000 Pro can beat out the low-end GFFX. :b
(/edit)
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
blech.
1: Cg is not proprietary, they are standardizing the way windwos interacts with video hardware and making all games run better all over, ATI will mimic thing and then the whole world of graphics cards will be on equal footing again, so that is a non-point. i dont give credit to nvidia for inventing it, because that doesnt matter in the end.
2: who cares if its larger? if they put that leaf blower dealy on the top instead of on the bottom it would go out an unused slot without even blocking any PCI. i don kno about you, but there is no PCI above my AGP port, so nvidia should be using this handy space... never having physically seen one of these cards, i dont really kno which side that beasty hooks on to...
2: who cares if its larger? if they put that leaf blower dealy on the top instead of on the bottom it would go out an unused slot without even blocking any PCI. i don kno about you, but there is no PCI above my AGP port, so nvidia should be using this handy space... never having physically seen one of these cards, i dont really kno which side that beasty hooks on to... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->[QUOTE]
1. If ATI mimics it, there will eventually be problems with the 2 trying to interact. Its a given almost.
2. Dosent matter, the fact is, its a NOISY fan AND its big. Now look at the 9800, no big noisy fan, only 1 slot, and it performs almost exactly like the GeforceFX....and it costs the same. If I had the $400 to shell out, I would go with a ATI simply because its more efficient.
yeah yeah yeah i give in, ATI = win.
Now go there:
<a href='http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030127/geforce_fx-06.html' target='_blank'>http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030...orce_fx-06.html</a>
and download the 3 mp3s comparing the GFFX to the 9700.
and if the fan was over, it could possibly block south-bridge/processor/memory, not counting it cant blow out the air outside as it is intended to.
If I choose to buy an ATI graphics chipset, which one do you suggest, I was thinking the Hercules Prophet looks pretty good. I never thought that the All-In-Wonders were any good, they aren't really optimized for gaming, especially where cooling is concerned, correct me if I'm wrong? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
sounds like your starting to cross over to the dark side <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'><!--endemo--> horrible thing to do...... lol
Now go there:
<a href='http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030127/geforce_fx-06.html' target='_blank'>http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030...orce_fx-06.html</a>
and download the 3 mp3s comparing the GFFX to the 9700.
and if the fan was over, it could possibly block south-bridge/processor/memory, not counting it cant blow out the air outside as it is intended to. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
with 5 80 mm fans and 4 60 mm fans already in my case, i understand your plight....
And still download, it sounds like a leafblower, it really does.
some ppl have been trying it in HOlland (www.tweakers.net it's dutch) but, it's kinda hard to do, just get wc+peltier <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<img src='http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20021216/images/13.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image'> <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> That won't be much less noisy though <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
and btw watercooling isn't like throwing your pc in a pool. It's water that flows in and out of your computer passing over your CPU/GPU and eventually hdd through tubes to cool it down.