It appears that I now need a desktop too . . .

Remove all ads!

Ugh. Crossfire.

Yeah, there hasn't been a worse idea ever than going Crossfire to save a few bucks.

Graphics cards wise the best card on the market now is the nVidia GTX 460 1GB. I don't care which way you approach things - it's cheap, it's high performance, it's reliable, it doesn't use too much power, it doesn't generate an awful lot of waste heat.

Bigger numbers are misleading in this case - the GTX 465, GTX 470 and GTX 480 are not better cards. Not because they're slow - anything but - but because they demand a whole lot of power.

ATI's graphics cards are fine, as long as you only play old games, don't use Linux, Vista or Windows 7, don't care for heat generation, power use, reliability...

... essentially, ATI's cards provide a superior DX9 bang for the buck, but everything else about them is inferior. DX10/DX11 performance and Linux drivers being two of the common weak spots.

For processors, Intel's fast and runs cool, but expensive. AMD's the opposite in all of those. So if you don't mind the heat generation, AMD can really make things easier for your wallet.

 

One caveat to that, for what it's worth: my brother is a brainiac who builds his own machines all the time. He's hyper-rational, technically hyper-competent, and extremely knowledgable about all things-computer. He also builds machines that generally don't work very well.

He's basically offered me free computers before that he would propose to build for me. I always politely decline and opt to pay for a Dell, and I have never regretted that. It's great when you press the on button and it just works.

One last thing - when custom machines built by a friend/relative experience problems, you're more likely to end up resolving them yourself. My brother's tech support response is often "Huh, I'll be damned. Well, let me know how it works out."

 

Ragusa - Dual cores? Does Intel still even make dual cores? The article you listed is sort of old. You may want want to look at some current numbers and charts and see which one is at the bottom of the pile, especially in DA and Fallout performance. Also, which AMD processor are you recommending, so that we can compare the cost to performance ratio?


Check this link:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/20

That's fine, just keep in mind that you are taking a performance hit. Do you use your computer for more than gaming? For instnce, atm I'm converting WAV files I created in Audacity (from vinyl) to lossless files [Flacs] in Winamp. Very fast on my Intel. It is especially good at these kinds of tasks.

 

I hate to say this but Wal-Mart offer CyberPower and IBuy PCs through their website if you are interested. You can order an IBUY system through Best Buy, at least at one point in time you could.

As for CyberPower vs. IBuyPower, it is my understanding they are managed by the same company. I would go with IBuyPower as their customer support is better if you go that route.

If I was you I would purchase a high end machine from HP, Dell or Gateway at BestBuy or Wal-Mart; you can get one with a 5770 GPU or 460GTX for about $850-950. This includes the AMD 6 core CPU or Intel 4 core CPU with 6-8GB of RAM and SATA - III 1TB harddrive.

 

Not really high-end. Maybe we should determine what is high, middle and low-end, since there may not be agreement. High-end machines, at least in my experience, begin at about 2K without a monitor. The middle would be under 2K down to about $900.00. Most under 900.00 - 600.00, including a good monitor, would be about the low-end.

Anything less will probably have a Fisher-Price sticker on it.

DMC - Well, that makes it easy. Take a look at the charts on the link. There are a good number of games which show their respective CPU performance. Decide what you think you can live with regarding the CPU and all of us can help build the rest around it. There are a lot of opinions here.

 

Chandos,
thanks for the correction. I admit I am somewhat out of the loop as far as CPUs are concerned sine I don't intend to upgrade any time soon. It was info to the best of my knowledge.

The trend is right though. AMD is 'good enough' for what dmc has in mind, and costs less. For his gaming purposes crossfire is not necessary. One decent card is sufficient. My single ATI 4870 has no problems whatsoever running Crysis, DA:O or ME2 on my new 22 in. That should be even more so with newer cards.

 

That's because you bought smart, and that's still a nice system, even by current standards. You won't have to upgrade for a while because you planned for the long-term. Good move.

Splunge - Barmy is right. That AW is not a very good buy at all. It is way overpriced for what you are getting.

 

Yes

And add to that the SSD for the OS. Best upgrade I ever got myself. I get a Windows Experience index of 7.1 of a possible 7.9, on a two year old system. It starts Open Office as fast as you can say *snap*. And for instance my comp just crashed to BSOD (which happens once in a while when running Winamp, Firefox and my momentary game of choice). It rebooted, including me logging in, in 45 seconds. Starting my game will take another 15 seconds, and I'm back in the game. Makes crashes so much less annoying.

And I only spend a couple months on pondering over my 'perfect' configuration

 

Always Intel Intel and Intel.

I have an older (18 monts) AMD Phenom 2 810 running on 4x2,6

Every option in a game goes to max. AA, Shadow, resolution, detail evything is maxed out.

So 1000$ for a pc No. No way.

This is a pc with a 6 core, from AMD made by a big shop.http://www.alternate.nl/html/produc...=BUILDERS&l1=PC-Systemen&l2=Complete+systemen

click meer details. I know it is in Dutch but you get the point.

 

That high-end price heavily depends on how gullible you are. Going for the latest and greatest in high-end parts will always end up costing a lot, and you'll end up with something that's going to be outdone by parts half the price in six months. No sense whatsoever to go for the highest performance parts. But you can still get a high end computer for half the price you listed - there will always be a model that's basically equivalent to last generation's very top model at half the price.

You can get a perfectly good computer for $400... the real problem is that you really can't expect to play any games on it. For a gaming computer, well, I'd say about $1200 sans monitor gets you a good, handbuilt gaming computer.

 

Thanks for the feedback on the Alienware, guys. After doing more to familiarize myself with current CPUs and GPUs, you're absolutely right - AW is way overpriced.

Actually, I'm liking the Cyberpower units at newegg.ca - quite a few different choices, and ~2/3 of the cost of an equivalent AW machine. I'm thinking about this one, although this one is ~$400 less, and seems pretty good. Not as powerful as the first one, but I'm not sure if the first one is worth the extra $400.

 

Go to the cyberpower website and cutomize your own rig; make sure you select a OS as most Cyberpower and IBuyPower machines do not come with an OS if you don't select one.

 

All the FRs listed should be fine for DA:O. I think you will be OK with an AMD. But I think DA2 may require a bit more horsepower though.

You think 2K is a lot to spend on a PC? Really? People spend that much all the time. That's a very conservative cost for a high-end computer. I sold my share of 3-4K computer systems to people who just wanted "the best" I had. Those "gullible people" as you call them are the ones that make it possible for you to buy those cheaper systems. Do you really think manufactures and stores can stay in business selling only $600-900.00 systems? If you really think there is profit in selling those cheap computers, you should work on the other side of the counter for a few weeks. It will give you a while new perspective.

Today, I could probably rack up even more in volume and profit because high-end machines now have 2 or 3 graphics cards and as many SSD drives installed in them.

No one is speaking of the "latest and greatest" at a meager 2K. That kind of PC is far more than that: 4-5K, easily. 2K will barely get you into the high-end.

Prove that that is any different for a cheaper machine.

You honestly believe that you can purchase a computer with the "highest performance" parts for a paltry 2K?

That's just BS and you know it. A high-end computer for 1K? Prove it.

That's true of ANY computer. So what? Well, maybe not. Looking at last years Intel line compared to the same price point today, I'm not sure I'm seeing that. Well, the burden of proof is with you to prove that the new Intel chips are "half the price" of last year's, so have at it and try and prove it.

Edit: You said 6 months ago, not a year ago. But I thought it was 18 months since the last release. Well, you might know the answer to that, Taza. When was the last release before Sandy Bridge?

 

Nonsense. It depends on what you buy. Period. I bought expensive parts because that made sense, and spent a great deal of effort on analysis before I bought anything - I didn't have money to waste. Also, if I put the money together, I put something along the lines of $ 2000 in my computer, and it is still competitively good after two years. You aren't gullible when you buy a good CPU, or a good GPU, or a lot of RAM or an SSD. It is sensible to buy these things when you don't want to replace your computer in two years. I intended from the onset to use my rig for at least four years*

That it is overtaken by newer and better tech in six months is correct, but only to the extent that the next generation core-i-something, is better. What a pointless comment to make. The new generation is always better. Sure, I would have gotten a better comp for my money had I bought half a year later, but I would have gotten my comp half a year later - and then I would have found myself in the same situation that in another six months my tech would be overtaken by something still better. That's the iron law of computers. So what?

Spoiler

* my rule of thumb says that in 2013 I'll probably replace it with something four times better again. My current rig is about four times better than my old one - instead of a single core 2,67MHz I have now four cores at that speed, I quadrupled my RAM etc. For my rule to hold my next comp will have to be a sixteen core and my GPU will need to have four cores ... Not even totally unrealistic.

 

I don't see where it is "half the price" though.

Taza - I know you know your stuff about computers. But I think the market has changed over the last year. No longer is there that big a jump in technology every six months, and the pricing is much more stable now. Example: I bought my Lynnfield, i5 750, a year ago for 199.99 and a small discount for a combo deal. Note that it is still very competitive on the Benchmarks that were published just a few weeks ago. And also the price is still basically the same as it was a year ago. The other i5 release, Clarkdale 600 series that was released after the Lynnfield was not as robost as the i5 750, which was released 16 months ago. Compare against current AMD:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/20

That is a mid-range processor, but I still feel I'm getting good value and use out of it. All the i5s are supposed to be mid-range CPUs. The i7 is the high-end and the 3 is the low end. I didn't market it that way, Taza, Intel did.

 

Okay, I'd start flaming if I got into this in detail, so I won't.

I'll just say your numbers are absurd. Completely loco. I would love to see a breakdown on the parts there.

And that the manufacturers would stay in business just selling mid-class stuff... because the high-end stuff barely moves in the numbers to make manufacturing it at all profitable.

@Ragusa: The general feel of the market is that the parts that were super-awesome back then can be had for much, much cheaper waiting for a while - the higher end they are, the faster their prices fall. So the ultra-high-end very cutting edge stuff isn't worth it - if you can wait for a few months at least - whereas the upper mid-range stuff can very well weather for several years. Not a pointless statement.

 

Which numbers would you like to see, home boy? I'll be glad to post them for you.

Dude, I sold a A LOT of high-end stuff. It's the only way to make any money. At least in this town.

No, low-end stuff [under 1K].

 

Well, it does look like I'd avoid the stores in your town, then. Their prices could be why they weren't doing so well. Overall, ripping people off in a ludicrous way is hardly the way toward positive word of mouth.

Gimme a sample 3k system breakdown, then. Individual part prices.