Recommend me a gaming desktop

[John Crichton]

How bad is it to have "older" stuff?

I did find a Alienware Aurora base system for my price. Has quad core, 6G RAM and a nVidia 260. I know the 260 is the lowest of the high end. Is that all I really need, given that my own system is a pIV 3.4, with a 8500 card?

I can only speak to my experience at this point but I've had some absolute nightmares with my Alienware computer. However, since I installed Win7 it hasn't given me a single problem. I could have sworn some of the hardware was faulty even after getting it serviced multiple times but it's looking more and more like Vista was the culprit (for the record, my other Vista machine has run just fine). 6 months ago I would have steered you away from Alienware but now I say if the price is right go for it.

I upgraded the system to the 260 recently and I've been playing Dragon Age on max settings with no probs. I don't play any of the big FPS type games so DA is the only example I can give. Also, it's running on a 50' plasma and buttery smooth. That said, you may want to sink a few more bucks (as others have mentioned) into the video card if this is a dedicated gaming rig.

 

[evildmguy]

You guys rock! Thanks for the great advice!

The alienware I priced out is:

PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ i7 920 2.66GHz (8MB Cache) Quad Core Processor
OPERATING SYSTEM Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium, 64bit, English
VIDEO CARD Single 1.8GB NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 260
MEMORY 6GB Triple Channel 1067MHz DDR3

I was worried it was too low but it is the i7, so that's good. At least, I hope it's the right one.

And thanks for the good word on the 260! That's nice to know! I'm not getting a new monitor but have a nice flat panel already.

I am wondering about Alienware as well. It's like Sony, just paying for the brand name. I don't mind doing that if the quality is there.

I hate Vista and wouldn't put that on a gaming machine. I go back to XP Pro before Vista but, as you can see, it would come with Windows 7, which I have only heard good things about.

Again, my thanks!

edg

Edit: JC, I would love to put more into the video cards but I don't think my wife will go for it! So, part of the reason I am cautious is to make sure I can upgrade it later, probably when the now top cards are more middle cards. Thx!

 

[John Crichton]

Edit: JC, I would love to put more into the video cards but I don't think my wife will go for it! So, part of the reason I am cautious is to make sure I can upgrade it later, probably when the now top cards are more middle cards. Thx!

Probably a good call. Now that I think of it, I did the same thing: skimped on the video card and bought a better one at a MUCH better price a year or so later.

Make sure to let us know how the rig is running when it gets there.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I can only speak to my experience at this point but I've had some absolute nightmares with my Alienware computer. However, since I installed Win7 it hasn't given me a single problem. I could have sworn some of the hardware was faulty even after getting it serviced multiple times but it's looking more and more like Vista was the culprit (for the record, my other Vista machine has run just fine). 6 months ago I would have steered you away from Alienware but now I say if the price is right go for it.

I upgraded the system to the 260 recently and I've been playing Dragon Age on max settings with no probs. I don't play any of the big FPS type games so DA is the only example I can give. Also, it's running on a 50' plasma and buttery smooth. That said, you may want to sink a few more bucks (as others have mentioned) into the video card if this is a dedicated gaming rig.

Maybe the Vista drivers specifically where bad, and the new Windows 7 drivers are better?

I recently found out why 64 Bit WIndows is bad - Visual Studio on-the-fly-code-changing-while-debugging doesn't work now. In other words - totally irrelevant disadvantage to most people.

 

[John Crichton]

Maybe the Vista drivers specifically where bad, and the new Windows 7 drivers are better?

I have no idea. It's only been about a month or so but zero BSoD so far where before it was weekly.

 

[Thanee]

PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ i7 920 2.66GHz (8MB Cache) Quad Core Processor

That's a socket 1366 CPU (the Bloomfield; the 1156 are the Lynnfield), which is also hinted at with the Triple Channel RAM, but that is certainly not a problem.

The 1366 is the better tech.

It's just also the more expensive tech (which is the reason why I would settle with the 1156), but if it fits the budget...

Tom's Hardware on current CPUs:
Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: November '09 : Introduction - Review Tom's Hardware

And thanks for the good word on the 260! That's nice to know!

The 260 is a good card. Really, I have one from 2 generations before that (8800GTS640) and it runs EVERYTHING absolutely fine (on high to max settings) today still (including Crysis, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, L4D2, ...). The 260 should be quite a bit faster, so there is nothing to worry about.

Still, the new Radeons blow the current GeForce generation away, speedwise. The Radeon HD5870 is the fastest single card right now (and I would generally steer away from SLI/Crossfire solutions due to inherent problems).

Tom's Hardware on current gfx cards:
Best Graphics Cards For The Money: November '09 : October Review And November Updates - Review Tom's Hardware

I am wondering about Alienware as well. It's like Sony, just paying for the brand name. I don't mind doing that if the quality is there.

I would never buy a package computer like that, but I have other options, which you might not have. I can just go into one of several stores here and let them build my machine with exactly the parts I want, and I get a complete custom system, professionally built, fully tested, OS preinstalled and with 2 years full warranty for a price none of the "big names" can match (it costs like €25 + a very competitive price for the various components). Can't do much wrong there.

But as I said, if you do not have shops like that in the US, you are probably better off buying a system like the one you are looking at. It's certainly better than scratch-building everything yourself, unless you have some experience/interest in that area.

I hate Vista and wouldn't put that on a gaming machine.

I have Vista on my gaming computer and have had zero problems with it.

But today there is no point in getting Vista anymore. Win7 all the way.
And yeah, 64bit is probably the right choice, too, nowadays.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Rackhir]

PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ i7 920 2.66GHz (8MB Cache) Quad Core Processor

I was worried it was too low but it is the i7, so that's good. At least, I hope it's the right one.

The faster i7 chips are considerably more expensive for little more gain. The i7 920s are generally excellent overclockers, if you wish to give that a try. Though one feature of the i7 chips is basically a dynamic overclocking feature (turbo something or other), where it will crank up the clockspeed on one or more of the cores.

I've found the stock 2.66 ghz speed to be plenty on my hackintosh.

VIDEO CARD Single 1.8GB NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 260

And thanks for the good word on the 260! That's nice to know! I'm not getting a new monitor but have a nice flat panel already.

1.8gb? You mean 1.5 gb? Gobs of memory on video cards isn't necessarily better, at least unless you have a very large monitor (30"+). So don't pay extra for more memory on the card. An overclocked version or the next step up is a better place to invest the money. 1GB or so is plenty of ram for most resolutions.

Edit: JC, I would love to put more into the video cards but I don't think my wife will go for it! So, part of the reason I am cautious is to make sure I can upgrade it later, probably when the now top cards are more middle cards. Thx!

The 260 you are looking at is almost certainly plenty powerful and things are currently shifting to the next gen cards. So there's no point in going for the high end stuff at the moment. The graphics cards change much more rapidly than any other component of your computer anyway.

Also, it's running on a 50' plasma and buttery smooth. That said, you may want to sink a few more bucks (as others have mentioned) into the video card if this is a dedicated gaming rig.

A 50" plasma is either 720p or 1080p. 1080p translates out to a resolution of 1920x1080. Which while much higher than SD TV resolutions, is not a very high resolution for a computer monitor. Most >20" monitors and some 20" monitors will hit that.

 

[Thanee]

Is it just me, or is a 50 ft. plasma a little excessive.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Nebulous]

Nah, i have one. I just don't have a computer to run on it. Actually, i'm not sure how good it would look or if there would be any lag time. Although Blue Ray, 360 and PS3 look awesome on it.

With that said, what is the ideal computer to use on a 50" Samsung 60hz plasma 1080p?

 

[Rackhir]

With that said, what is the ideal computer to use on a 50" Samsung 60hz plasma 1080p?

What do you mean by "ideal"? For what purposes do you want the computer? How much money do you want to spend?

If you mean gaming. Most reasonable "gaming" video cards paired with a decent processor and sufficient ram will do 1080p resolutions.

If you mean play back videos, pretty much any non-bottom of the barrel machine should handle that. Especially if you have anything resembling a decent video card.

IME, if you want to use the computer with TV, you will get better results if the TV has a DVI input (like most video cards) or your video card has an HDMI output (like most TVs). Trying to use a HDMI to DVI adapter (or vice versa) may cause some overscan problems.