If you game, you want a CRT unless you can afford a very pricey LCD that has minimal response time, and they often lie in the specs about those. I just got a 19in CRT for $30, made in 2005, and I am ganna sell my LCD because I just cant game properly with the 8ms response time. I gatta have 0.
Quadcore is overkill. Dualcore is just now getting utilized by games and other software, and it has a long way to go. I wouldn't be surprised if QuadCores dont become a logical consumer standard for another 5 years, or never. A respectable C2D is ganna be more than enough for your games. Its mostly the video card that deserves your attention. CPUs can bottleneck your shit, but a mid range CD2 wont bottleneck even $400 video cards. So dont worry.
Advice on desktop PC wanted
Parts
Ok guys, you gave me a good idea already of what Im looking for. I'll see if I can compile a list of parts from the tips you told me, and calculate how much it will cost me - if I do decide for parts I'll post here again.
Ivo.
Ivo.
Re: Parts
Expect to pay a grand for a viable modern gaming PC. Well thats in USA anyway.Ivo wrote:Ok guys, you gave me a good idea already of what Im looking for. I'll see if I can compile a list of parts from the tips you told me, and calculate how much it will cost me - if I do decide for parts I'll post here again.
Ivo.
A grand might be somewhat conservative given the trend in video cards.
Just remember, get a solid case with enough fans for good airflow. If possible get a case that supports 120 mm fans instead of just 80 mm. Also, a VERY solid, HEAVY power supply, dual fan preferred.
And don't get a sound card unless you just have to have the very best. On-board (motherboard) audio is really alright these days.
Just remember, get a solid case with enough fans for good airflow. If possible get a case that supports 120 mm fans instead of just 80 mm. Also, a VERY solid, HEAVY power supply, dual fan preferred.
And don't get a sound card unless you just have to have the very best. On-board (motherboard) audio is really alright these days.
Re: Parts
I expect to pay much more than that in Europe. Just that Nvidia card, the 8800GTS - the most expensive single part (I think?) with 640 MB (instead of 320) is 400 Euros in Portugal. In Switzerland it goes for 300 Euros. Even then I wouldn't be surprised if it goes for 300 USD there, and the Euro is currently worth more than a dollar (actually close to 1.4 now). I'm ok to pay 1500 Euros, as long as that comes with a nice screen that I can use for other stuff (DC is a given, but hopefully there are TFT with SCART). I might get an old CRT later, although I don't think I'll fret much about response time (I'm used to a 15 inch laptop screen with 4 years - I won't complain).Mozgus wrote: Expect to pay a grand for a viable modern gaming PC. Well thats in USA anyway.
Ok, some parts for consideration
I'll put a summary of parts I've mostly decided so far with some comment. I started by deciding the most expensive parts to see if I was on the right track to keep it below a total that would be too much. Except the monitor as I have no idea there.
Vid card: XpertVision GeForce 8800GTS, PCI-E, 640MB GDDR3 (the precise specs depend slightly on where I get it). I wanted the 640MB version so I could have higher resolutions.
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, Quad Core, 2.4 GHz, 2x4MB
I decided on quad core anticipating the future. They came down in price recently, and they are not much more than dual. I took the opposite approach on memory as you will see.
Motherboard: something like this...
http://www.digitec.ch/ProdukteDetails2. ... kel=136977
And memory: Patriot DDR2 2GB Kit, PC8500 1066MHz,CL5,(Kit-of-2) Low-Latency (5-5-5-12)
I decided to go for DDR2 and not DDR3 - the later is quite expensive for the performance benefit (and would require a different motherboard). I'm only putting 2GB first but leaving 2 slots free in mobo.
I decided to get a solid power supply as advised, something like a 500GB HDD that is reasonably fast (instead of my original idea of more than one HDD). After that I need a box and cooling fans, a DVD writer, and a monitor (I do want a TFT, I don't play that many FPSs online so I'll live with the delay for now). I have spare mouse and keyboard so I don't need those.
Am I forgetting any component? Do the ones I picked look off in any way? Anyone recommends things to look out for in TFT screens?
Ivo.
Vid card: XpertVision GeForce 8800GTS, PCI-E, 640MB GDDR3 (the precise specs depend slightly on where I get it). I wanted the 640MB version so I could have higher resolutions.
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600, Quad Core, 2.4 GHz, 2x4MB
I decided on quad core anticipating the future. They came down in price recently, and they are not much more than dual. I took the opposite approach on memory as you will see.
Motherboard: something like this...
http://www.digitec.ch/ProdukteDetails2. ... kel=136977
And memory: Patriot DDR2 2GB Kit, PC8500 1066MHz,CL5,(Kit-of-2) Low-Latency (5-5-5-12)
I decided to go for DDR2 and not DDR3 - the later is quite expensive for the performance benefit (and would require a different motherboard). I'm only putting 2GB first but leaving 2 slots free in mobo.
I decided to get a solid power supply as advised, something like a 500GB HDD that is reasonably fast (instead of my original idea of more than one HDD). After that I need a box and cooling fans, a DVD writer, and a monitor (I do want a TFT, I don't play that many FPSs online so I'll live with the delay for now). I have spare mouse and keyboard so I don't need those.
Am I forgetting any component? Do the ones I picked look off in any way? Anyone recommends things to look out for in TFT screens?
Ivo.
I really think you need to read some reviews of quad cores and get some opinions from professionals, if you wont take mine. Sometimes you plan so far ahead into the future that the specific point you planned for never actually reaches the present, as it spun off into an alternate timeline. For example, who's to say that between the time when quad cores become fully utilized, and now, that there won't be some breakthrough in single core technology that pushes multicore setups off the market?
My rule of thumb with computer hardware is only buy what you will actually use to its fullest today.
I've seen way too many cases where people buy more than they need or are able to use, and by the time they do need it (if ever), that technology is much cheaper and they would have been better off buying a new machine when the time came with the new technology.
I've seen way too many cases where people buy more than they need or are able to use, and by the time they do need it (if ever), that technology is much cheaper and they would have been better off buying a new machine when the time came with the new technology.
Support Racketboy on Patreon
Follow Racketboy on Social: Instagram / Twitter / Facebook
Subscribe to Email Newsletter (Blog / Guide Updates Every Week or Two)
Follow Racketboy on Social: Instagram / Twitter / Facebook
Subscribe to Email Newsletter (Blog / Guide Updates Every Week or Two)
-
lordofduct
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 2907
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:57 pm
- Location: West Palm Beach
You Ram and video card I have no complaints... DDR3 isn't really necessary right now, especially seeing the FSB speeds of the processors today, DDR3 isn't really necessary.
As for your mobo choice and processor choice.
Well the mobo is fairly good. I personally love MSI brand, don't know why, but I consider it a lot of bang for your buck. The only thing I don't like on it is the ICH9 storage controller, it's not much of an improvement over the crappy ass ICH8. But if your going to stick to Windows and Sata devices it's not a big deal. (if you plan on going with linux... HA... you might want to look around).
other then that though the mobo seems good (really it's hard to avoid the ICH family of storage controllers).
As for your processor... well I can concede to what Mozgus and Racketboy say, but at the same time benchmarks say otherwise, but what good are benchmarks really? I mean have you ever heard of software out there that truly utilizes the dual core let alone the quad core? Not even Vista itself really utilizes it, it still assumes your running on basic x86 architecture with the RISC translator core.
A true performance boost in real time use? I'd say no, not even in gaming. Maybe a slight one. If the price is with in say 50 bucks of eachother, then go for it, the little extra boost and 'chance' of adoption to the quad core set up might pay off. But if it costs more then that in comparison...
why do it?
As for your mobo choice and processor choice.
Well the mobo is fairly good. I personally love MSI brand, don't know why, but I consider it a lot of bang for your buck. The only thing I don't like on it is the ICH9 storage controller, it's not much of an improvement over the crappy ass ICH8. But if your going to stick to Windows and Sata devices it's not a big deal. (if you plan on going with linux... HA... you might want to look around).
other then that though the mobo seems good (really it's hard to avoid the ICH family of storage controllers).
As for your processor... well I can concede to what Mozgus and Racketboy say, but at the same time benchmarks say otherwise, but what good are benchmarks really? I mean have you ever heard of software out there that truly utilizes the dual core let alone the quad core? Not even Vista itself really utilizes it, it still assumes your running on basic x86 architecture with the RISC translator core.
A true performance boost in real time use? I'd say no, not even in gaming. Maybe a slight one. If the price is with in say 50 bucks of eachother, then go for it, the little extra boost and 'chance' of adoption to the quad core set up might pay off. But if it costs more then that in comparison...
why do it?
I really don't think games will fully, or even measurably, take advantage of quad core CPUs by the time your system is no longer top of the line. Now, if you are a Photoshop junkie, do 3D rendering, or love RayTracing (POV FTW) then the quad core might make a bit of sense, particularly if the price difference isn't much.
Now, look at the down sides. If you have 4 cores and nothing really pushes more than 2 of them, that means 2 idle cores are sitting around generating heat and using up power. Not nearly as much as a system under load, mind you, but they will still be running at some level.
Now, look at the down sides. If you have 4 cores and nothing really pushes more than 2 of them, that means 2 idle cores are sitting around generating heat and using up power. Not nearly as much as a system under load, mind you, but they will still be running at some level.