FMod

Please don't get it the wrong way - but not everything that costs more is always actually better. You are running four GPU, which is a quad-SLI, and quad-SLI works very poorly with most games. Only a handful of visual flicks like Crysis or BF3 actually make use of it. Fallout doesn't. Multiple GPU cause some processing delays, which can be be lowering your FPS. 18GB of RAM don't do anything at all, games can't use more than 4GB, another couple GB for the OS. All of that is running on a relatively weak CPU. It might be six-core, but most games, Fallout especially, only use 2 cores, the rest are dead weight. While at that, it's a Nehalem, which is ~10-15% slower per clock than Gesher. Have you disabled Hyper-Threading, at least? If not, there goes another 5%. A more modern, non-hyperthreading CPU like i5-2500K, overclocked to 4800 MHz, would be 35% to 40% faster than what you have now. As far as Fallout goes, at least. Your bottleneck is the CPU, so it doesn't even matter what the GPU is, but I suspect that a single HD7970 would beat 2x590 for this game as well. You're running have a lot of mods too, more than my setup, and I don't see Bashed Patch, 0.esp or Merged Patch.esp among them, which is a bad thing too. I think a few of your mods are incompatible or redundant, making another fps hit. So, to conclude, for the purposes of playing Fallout your setup is far from the greatest, you are running a very heavily and non-optimally modded game, and even with [email protected] I'm not getting consistent 60fps either; no one does.

Are you sure deleting your old saved games didn't work? You have to delete ALL of them, except for autosave and quicksave.

There is no coolant. The reactors haven't been running for a long long time. When you produce energy, you have to spend it somewhere, and cars remain cold and silent. It's just movie magic or call it game magic. No reason for them to explode at all.

It's like buying top of the line designer brand jacket (shoes, etc) for full price the day before they come out with a new collection.

If you're considering Corsair AX, might as well take Seasonic, especially recent Gold and Platinum series. The only reason Corsair AX are good is that they are Seasonics, but X-860 (not 850, 860) is newer and better built than the version that is sold as Corsair AX-850 and has been noticed to occasionally have noise issues. Seasonic Platinum are the best PSU on the market today period, overpriced Enermax units don't even come close. Platinum 1000 is the first PSU in the last five years to match Antec CP-1000 on power delivery quality, while surpassing it on noise and hands down on efficiency. Gold series aren't quite up there on power quality (still very good, but there are quite a few better units), but they're as quiet as any. However we're talking way outside what OP is likely to be going to spend. Maybe he could get Seasonic S12 or M12 series. Corsair HX650 used to be all Seasonic, but now I'm not sure, most their newer units are CWT.

Water with a bit of anti-bacterial additive. Do you really need a water cooling system? There are two options: 1) Relatively cheap, low-performance factory sealed systems. You have one now. Corsair H100 is probably better. But you'd be still paying $120 for a cooler that is only at best as good as a $60 air cooler - so why bother? Other than the dubious satisfaction of having some water inside your PC, they bring nothing. 2) High-performance component water cooling systems. These are good, and they allow you to cool the GPU. But $500 is the least you can expect to invest without skimping on components. The performance gain isn't major, but you can overclock your GPU higher. Better CPU cooling is more of an added bonus. These things take a lot of time to set up, as well, you need to get all the bubbles out, and they require regular inspection and maintenance to work safely. Mostly it's only worth it if you enjoy doing all the assembly and maintenance work, more like sort of a hobbyist thing than a strictly practical solution. I have some experience with water cooling from a few years ago, when there was a sharp spike in PC power consumption, but no good air cooling options yet. As of lately, there is less and less reason to use water cooling. One major market however is Crossfire and SLI rigs. If you are running more than one video card, there is strong reason to water-cool them, unless you want your PC to sound like a vacuum cleaner.

Yeah, I've blanked some fields before reuploading the image, since I'm not very comfortable posting some data around, sorry for that. Wish speedtest offered a more anonymized version. The numbers aren't doctored however, you can take my word on it, or not. But as you can guess this isn't speed to every server, just the nearest one Speedtest picks. It's not even physically possible to have 3ms ping worldwide: that time is only 550 miles at the speed of light (or electricity), and that's not counting delays in various hardware. Does illustrate a bit of a flaw in comparing Speedtest results however. If you are far away from the nearest Speedtest server, geographically or logically, your results will be worse than expected, and vice versa, having a server near you produces results that look better than they actually are.

GTX460 has an official TDP of 150 or 160W, and that's what one should plan for, since they do that. Another issue is that SLI tends to create a lot of hot air inside the case (although 2x460 is not like 2x480), with some designs, which creates additional thermal load on the PSU. Even without overclocking 400W sustained consumption while gaming is likely. You need headroom to avoid issues with cross-loading and voltage drop/rise under load. Top-grade PSU can keep perfect voltages, sub-$100 units don't. Within about 80% of their full 12V load, however, almost every OK quality unit is safe. Capacitors inside the PSU also dry out with time and heat, losing capacity and resulting in degraded power output and performance at higher output. Right away and especially with age, PSU become substantially less efficient and very noisy when working above 70%-75% of their rated load. So a low-cost 600W unit is acceptable for a 2x460 system, but only just. The 200W above sustained power consumption that is "left" should be considered safety margin, not headroom. If one plans on upgrading eventually, it will probably have to go. On the other hand, a quality 700-750W unit will operate at optimal load for efficiency, work quietly, and last for a long time. Antec EA-650 is perhaps the minimum you could reasonably use. --- Edit: If you have two PSU, of course, you only need to keep the total rating in that range.

600W PSU is not enough. 600 watts is enough, but you want a PSU that can put out more than that. $50 is not nearly enough budget. Units sold under the OCZ brand are not very good, in that box you get what used to be considered decent about 5 years ago. It works, but it's not something to load to the max. I'm afraid the cheapest suitable PSU for your PC on Newegg that I could recommend to a friend is Antec HCG-750: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371049 You can go for Antec EA-750, which is slightly cheaper: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371051 It's not quite as good, but it's still an Antec unit, delivering decent quality and generally low noise. HCG is well worth the extra $8 however. If you can't afford a suitable PSU, decide if you really need SLI that much. I struggle to imagine a situation where a single GTX460 would not be enough, if you tune the settings properly. SLI doesn't quite double the performance, it's noisy, and it has its complications.

Or, for the GPU, you could wait till 7970 is available, but it will cost a lot at first ($600+ realistically). Still, at least it's not being phased out like GTX580. Heatsink: Yeah, it's good... if you can find one in Norway. Thermalright Macho HR-02 is another very good heatsink, although may cost slightly more.

Seriously? Why would you need a .bat for that? Anyway, the way to do it is: start "C:\Program\Antivirus\Antivirus 1.exe" start "C:\Program\Antivirus 2\Antivirus 2.exe" start "C:\Program\Antivirus 3\Whatever.exe" Make sure to use "start" and quote marks.

GPU would be better switched for 560Ti... you'll see GTX580's value drop like a rock in less than a month. 560 won't drop much. Buy an aftermarket heatsink (Scythe Mugen 2 or 3) and use low-profile DDR3-1333 RAM, 8 GB. That will save you enough money to sell the 560Ti and get a 7950 or 7970 soon. Is that including a new monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers and chair? Better be for the price. Even though Norway is not US, I don't see the above costing 2.8. CPU should be $250, mobo $250, GPU $500, SSD $250, all roughly. RAM, heatsink, etc, another $250, you get $1,500 in components.

What program are you testing it with? I get this with speedtest: http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/8146/speedtestf.png That's it. Be careful, it disables security. Make sure to keep a software firewall. Turn DMZ off and restart the router if doing something risky.

But please, don't extrapolate. HIS doesn't make fans. It doesn't make video cards, either. They used to do some designs, but no more either. All you get from HIS is a piece of paper or plastic with their logo on it. The GPU is designed by AMD and made by TSMC or Globalfoundries. The PCB is designed by AMD and made by Unitech, Foxconn, Compeq, Wus, Quanta or whatever OEM is hired to do it. The cooling system is designed by AMD and the fans are made by Ningbo, Yate Loon, Fenshen, Zaward or one of the other makers. If your GPU break down too soon, it can be bad luck or poor quality power supply. If fans in your PC break down more often than usual, it's probably too dusty. Dust kills fans, PCs suck it in, unless there is a filter, they are liable to die. And you're supposed to vacuum your PC once in 3 months if it has intake filters, or monthly if it doesn't. Can skimp on it a little in winter, as your windows are closed and the fans rotate slower, but in the summer it's a must.

Actually it's pretty realistic - similar events have occurred historically. They just miscalculated the amount of ash released from the cities burning and the rate of ash fallout. Specifically they used ash release rates recorded from city fires, as would occur with older fission bombs, while attacks with newer fusion warheads would level city centers, greatly reducing the intensity of firestorms. These miscalculations might have been somewhat intentional, since at that time global nuclear war was a very real possibility. The theory of nuclear winter helped convince world leaders that it's a really bad idea and the threat of communism or capitalism respectively isn't worth going to a war that, this time, won't have any winners and devastate both sides. However, with the right kind of bombs, dropped the right way, and in the right amounts, a nuclear winter will happen. Not quite as long, but long enough for the entirety of third world to die out. First and second world nations have food stockpiles, the third world doesn't have enough food as it is. That part is very important to Fallout universe. Should NATO, China and Russia go to a nuclear war today, in 100 years your descendants won't be roaming the barren wastes with a big iron on their hip, they will be writing school papers on the great accomplishments of Kim Jong-Un (worst-case scenario) or Bhumibol Adulyadej (best-case scenario).

True. But I'm talking about balance, not realism. Fallout 3 and especially Nev Vegas give you all the advantages of a combat simulation game: cover and concealment, iron and telescopic sights, movement-depending spread, lowered shooting position, ammunition selection and one-shot kills. But where Flashpoint and ArmA give the same advantages to your opponents and provide them with AI suitable for the game, Fallout's engine fails. Have you seen FNV's NPC being shot at drop down, crawl behind a corner and return fire in short bursts? Not really - they just run straight ahead through your line of fire, waving their arms around and not hitting jack. In any environment intended to be realistic, anyone acting like that should go down like a panicked idiot. FO3 is actually slightly better at this than FNV (both modded), in a few designated areas NPC do take advantage of cover, but, still, most times they don't, or do it completely wrong. It's less realistic. Much less. But the difference is, classic Fallout doesn't run on a realistic engine fit for combat simulation, just a basic pen-and-paper calculator on a 2D hexmap. While your opponents are still unable to use the engine to the full (old popping out from behind the corner trick), you don't have anywhere as many tricks at your disposal either. The result is much less realistic combat, but more realistic combat outcomes. In Fallout classics, there is a lot of NPC you can't take out until you're much stronger and better equipped. Ranging from Aditum guards to Mercenary Raiders. And really just Metzger in Den required a combat character to take out without s/l. Drop these characters and maps into FNV's engine, and Metzger's gang is gone before he can say "-hit". That will exacerbate FO3's and FNV's problem where the only reason to choose non-violent approaches is for fitting the role or own amusement. That said, recreating Fallout classics in FNV would still be a great idea. But would it be better than the original games, IDK. I think a lot of what made them so good will be lost in the conversion.

Skyrim is very CPU-dependent. He probably should crank up the visuals, resolution etc, it won't make much difference, and cut down Actor Fade, which puts the heaviest load on the CPU. The only visual setting that shouldn't be cranked up is Shadows, best set to High rather than Ultra.

Not in the game. Once you reach 100 skill, both armors weigh nothing. However, Daedric will be better in terms of health. Also, before you reach 100 skill, heavy armor has substantially better protection. And it advances Endurance, the second most valuable attribute after luck, rather than cheap Speed. This is Oblivion section actually.

Oh, I can't fully agree. There is something - it's called FCOM. And ramp the difficulty up for good measure. If you want to survive, you have to go in heavy. That, or be an alchemist.

When Z68 doesn't cost a lot more than P67, it's a good idea to take it. You'll get some iGPU features for video playback and encoding. Plus it's always nice to be able to run it without your GPU. The iGPU is inside 2500K, it's just disabled on P67. I would suggest Asrock Z68 Pro3 if you're on a budget, can go up to Z68 Extreme3 if not. Good quality for moderate prices. Asus P8P67 and P8Z68 are some other good boards, but get ones without any suffixes (not LE and not Deluxe). For GPU choice you have to state your budget. HD6850-6870, GTX560Ti and HD6950 are some good choices for high settings (GTX570 has a flaw in its power supply).

Light armor is pretty useless in-game. In Morrowind, light armor rocked unless you get into extreme enchantments. In Oblivion, is there even any decent stock light armor? And making your character only viable with mods is a tough choice. The problem is not light armor per se, it's the extreme dependence of effectiveness on armor skill. Effectively you can only pimp out one of your armor skills, and that's going to be heavy armor 9 out of 10 times. Then already mediocre light armor starts looking even worse. Much worse. Am I alone in thinking Morrowind's light armors, like Netch Leather, actually look better than Oblivion's? That's before you get into Medium types that got merged with Heavy.

Yeah, tried that one. However overdoing it breaks the balance in the other direction. Like you said, with somebody shooting you out of nowhere. It's OK when it's a NCR sniper, but it starts happening with random just-spawned raiders. AI also still remains too stupid to prevent taking them out one by one, even when they're practically next to each other. I actually worked on some fixes myself, and managed to get somewhere by forcibly limiting accuracy. However no solution gets reliable balance like you have in 2D games. Simply put, a game with high-vis 3D engine like FNV requires that engine to have visibility and projectile routines, as well as a more active AI, like you get in Flashpoint and ArmA. It's not fixed by tweaking settings up and down.

Well, I don't use RFCW, so can't comment on that. Fallout 3 was actually somewhat harder, due to a lot of action in confined spaces and pimped-out supermuties. Except for the main quest - for instance that Enclave raid on the Memorial, where the player is something like level 8, and gets to take out dozens of power armored troopers with a rusty AK-47. In FNV, I don't remember when I last used a stimpak... actually never, although I did take a few healing powders at lower levels. They don't get a shot; a Ratslayer varmint rifle can take them out all the way from the edge of visibility. As it should, really - it just should be much more difficult to achieve that shot. In rare cases where the enemies do get a shot, they miss all the time with their broken weapons. It also has to be balanced so that molerats don't zero your health in two bites through power armor. My point here is that a direct translation of Fallout 2 to FNV engine won't be easily balanced. That church with Metzger's guards and chemicals? You can find a hill or get on a roof, take the guards out, take everyone else out as they are running out, without getting a scratch. Raiders and mafioso jumping you as you travel? They don't jump you, you jump them. Fallout 2 also got ridiculously easy at high levels, when you got the Gauss Rifle or Bozar and high enough Small Arms skill. But that happened around level 18, not level 8.

Not major, but you might want to shop around for a GPU that is already slightly overclocked (higher frequency), presuming you aren't going to yourself. Also, cooling systems differ, some are quieter than others, as a general rule larger heatsink and fan means quieter. Like I said, you can find it outright fanless. As for 6870 - it's faster than 6850, but not by much, so if cost is an issue, 6850 is OK. As for VRAM, most 6870 are 1GB as well, and you don't need 2GB for a GPU in this performance range anyway.

It's a game error, not Windows error. It's common. What mods are you running? Post the complete load order. Specify what manager you're using.