Vista, or waiting for Windows 7

[Felon]

Sorry for the thread necromancy, but I was just thinking about this thread the other day while poking around in CNet looking at budget desktops. Drothgery had a very "chip-on-the-shouldery" response to my previous post on page 1 that I didn't bother to reply to, but I couldn't forget the general recation that I was "greatly exaggerating" when I posited that a decent gaming PC could run $1000.

I was really hoping I was wrong, because I knew I'd be in the market again soon and I've lost any yen to scratch-build. Thing is, it seems that the reviews on budget PC's in the sub-$700 range are pretty universal in declaring that they're unfit for 3D games without a video card upgrade. They also don't pack wifi, and then there's the whole thing about cheap PC's sacrificing upgradability due to design compromises. Even with the top-rated ZT Affinity 7308M and Gateway SX2800 praised for having top benchmarks for performance in their their class, they aren't deemed fit to game without an upgrade.

So I'm wondering, where's our disconnect? I don't Google anyone selling better or cheaper gaming PC's. Is there some wonderful source I'm missing out on?

 

[Thanee]

When I buy a PC, I go to a computer store that builds them from the parts I select.

It's definitely viable to get a decent gaming machine for about $500, if you carefully select the components.
It might not run Crysis with all settings turned to max, but it will run anything you can buy today decently.

Of course, you won't find anything like that pre-built from the bigger companies.

Bye
Thanee

 

[drothgery]

So I'm wondering, where's our disconnect? I don't Google anyone selling better or cheaper gaming PC's. Is there some wonderful source I'm missing out on?

Nope. OEM's aren't all that interested in selling cheap gaming PCs, because gamers who aren't interested in building their own rigs or playing on consoles are one of the last holdouts of people willing to spend lots of money on PCs. To get an good cheap gaming PC, take a cheap PC with a full-sized case and a decent power supply, and add a $150 video card (and possibly another 2GB of RAM for $35, or another 4 GB for $60). Though actually Dell doesn't overcharge all that much if you take the base Studio desktop, upgrade to a C2D E7500 for $70, upgrade to 4GB of RAM for $75 ($35 at crucial.com) , and upgrade to a Radeon 4850 w/ 512 MB for $180 ($110 at newegg.com), it'll be $694 (w/o monitor). WiFi's another $70, if you've got your router next to your consoles and you'd rather not run Ethernet cable -- or you can get a USB wireless adapter for as little as $8 at newegg.

 

[Felon]

Nope. OEM's aren't all that interested in selling cheap gaming PCs, because gamers who aren't interested in building their own rigs or playing on consoles are one of the last holdouts of people willing to spend lots of money on PCs. To get an good cheap gaming PC, take a cheap PC with a full-sized case and a decent power supply, and add a $150 video card (and possibly another 2GB of RAM for $35, or another 4 GB for $60). Though actually Dell doesn't overcharge all that much if you take the base Studio desktop, upgrade to a C2D E7500 for $70, upgrade to 4GB of RAM for $75 ($35 at crucial.com) , and upgrade to a Radeon 4850 w/ 512 MB for $180 ($110 at newegg.com), it'll be $694 (w/o monitor). WiFi's another $70, if you've got your router next to your consoles and you'd rather not run Ethernet cable -- or you can get a USB wireless adapter for as little as $8 at newegg.

Speaking of Newegg, I've been looking at both their AMD DIY kits and their CybergamerPCl. Thoughts?

 

[Aus_Snow]

Well, I ain't drothgery, but I'll go ahead and post some thoughts on those, regardless.

The AMD DIY kits are probably OK (hm, maybe the x3 720, anyway) but you might as well just pick up the specific parts you want or need, IMO.

The complete PC is not that good at all. They've got the CPU and GPU round the wrong way entirely, for starters, if you're wanting to be play games on it. GPU should always *at least* match the CPU, and 99% of the time (or more, again IMO) should exceed it, price-wise. So, i7 + HD4830? Horrible combo. Not the absolute worst I've seen, but that's not saying much!

Sometimes, if you're not too familiar with all this stuff, checking out one of the many places like Anandtech (e.g., here) or even an OC site, could pay off. Very rarely is a suggested system going to be just right for a given person at a given time, but they're easily modified, to suit needs, budget, looks, etc.

The one I linked to in that article is OK, but here's my take on it: the case is fine, the PSU I'm not familiar with but it looks alright, likewise the RAM, an aftermarket CPU cooler wouldn't be needed unless OCing, and you could easily spend a bit less on the motherboard and hard drive if you wanted to.

All of which means you could end up paying a even less than their ~$700-$750 for a base system (variable depending on things like needing a KB+mouse or not). Mind you, I'd be tempted to get a nicer (e.g. laser) mouse for gaming, if it was within overall budget, now I mention it. . . oh, and a decent Full HD LCD. According to Anandtech there, the Acer monitor is a good find, coming with HDMI cable an' all. Haven't seen it personally, so can't comment on its quality. Also, look into some of the LCD warranty differences - it's possilbe you could save yourself some major hassles, if you choose one of the better ones.

If there was a little wiggle room, I'd recommend the GTX 260+, atm (with, for example, the Phenom II x3 720 listed above). But it's only a month (or less?) before new ranges of video cards come out, so actually, I might be tempted to wait just a tad longer, and see what happens.

Hiope that helps.

 

[Thanee]

Even with new video cards coming out, the GTX 260 will likely remain the best choice for a good-but-not-overly-expensive gaming PC.

But the price might drop some, when the new cards hit the market.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Felon]

Well, I ain't drothgery, but I'll go ahead and post some thoughts on those, regardless.

The AMD DIY kits are probably OK (hm, maybe the x3 720, anyway) but you might as well just pick up the specific parts you want or need, IMO.

The complete PC is not that good at all. They've got the CPU and GPU round the wrong way entirely, for starters, if you're wanting to be play games on it. GPU should always *at least* match the CPU, and 99% of the time (or more, again IMO) should exceed it, price-wise. So, i7 + HD4830? Horrible combo. Not the absolute worst I've seen, but that's not saying much!

Not sure I follow you here. The 4830 isn't trash. Reviews indicate that it's got a lot of bang for its buck. Are you saying that by virtue of there being so much CPU horsepower, the graphics card should therefore be a $300 screamer?

If there was a little wiggle room, I'd recommend the GTX 260+, atm (with, for example, the Phenom II x3 720 listed above). But it's only a month (or less?) before new ranges of video cards come out, so actually, I might be tempted to wait just a tad longer, and see what happens.

Hiope that helps.

It's a help, thanks.

 

[drothgery]

Not sure I follow you here. The 4830 isn't trash. Reviews indicate that it's got a lot of bang for its buck. Are you saying that by virtue of there being so much CPU horsepower, the graphics card should therefore be a $300 screamer?

The 4830 was a good value when it was released (hence reviews saying it's a good value); recent pricing trends mean that it's only $10-$15 cheaper than the significantly faster 4850 (which itself is only ~$20 cheaper than the GeForce 260 the guys who actually do PC gaming instead of just reading the articles about it like me -- I have no idea why I bother reading video card reviews; I game on my Xbox 360 if at all -- recommend). And the Radeon 4770 performs about the same as the 4830 for the same price, but uses less power.

But it's more if you're trying to optimize gaming performance, getting a $280 Core i7 920 and a ~$100 video card isn't a great idea, since most games are far more limitted by video card performance than CPU performance. It'd be a better value to get a better video card and a less expensive CPU (and a less expensive overall system, because you'd have a less expensive motherboard and DDR2 memeory is cheaper than DDR3). On the other hand, video card upgrades are much easier than CPU upgrades.

 

[Felon]

So, is it viable to take a PC that's sized for media-serving, and then rev it up with a low-profile video card? I know the compact PC's have weaker power supplies, but I don't want two different PC's--you get a computer to multi-task, after all.

 

[drothgery]

So, is it viable to take a PC that's sized for media-serving, and then rev it up with a low-profile video card? I know the compact PC's have weaker power supplies, but I don't want two different PC's--you get a computer to multi-task, after all.

Maybe. Looking at the low-profile and low-profile ready cards available at NewEgg, it seems like they top out at a Radeon 4650 or a GeForce 9600 GT (there's one GeForce 9800 GT card, but it apparently runs very hot). Which might be okay, depending on what you want play, but certainly won't be pushing the envelope on anything.