Slashdot Mirror
Build an $800 Gaming PC
ThinSkin writes "Building a computer that can handle today's games doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg. In fact, you can build one for less than $800, especially given that many hardware manufacturers have cut costs considerably. Loyd Case over at ExtremeTech shows gamers how to build an $800 gaming PC, one that features an overclockable Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 and a graphics-crunching EVGA 260 GTX Core 216. The computer exceeded expectations in gaming and synthetic tests, and was even overclocked well over spec at 3.01GHz."
Yeah but can it run windows7?
i kid i kid!
i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
It's not the same core as the 3GHz models or anything, oh wait
spend $400, get one thats 90% of this speed, in a year sell it for face value on craigslist, rinse and repeat.
I've been getting free upgrades for many years now.
They're not gaming PCs. The only one that comes close is the PS3 which could run Linux, but since it can't actually access the GPU it's not exactly going to be a gaming behemoth.
I know that consoles are a perfectly legitimate gaming platform, but posting about their cheap cost in article about PC gaming is like posting about the specs of a high end PC in a thread about console gaming.
Erm, it runs linux ya know.
I am sure we had a story like this the other week. I am pretty sure we have it every couple of weeks. Considering this has been (more or less) the way of things for probably about five years (I have been following the 'good enough' philosophy for that long, from a Radeon 9600xt, through a GeForce 6800, to a Radeon 4850 today), it isn't news to any nerd. You stopped needing a top of the line computer for gaming around the turn of the century when clock rates stopped doubling every 12-18 months and ATi got good enough to really compete with nVidia.
========
CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
Overclocking no longer means what it did before. It's basically intel and the motherboard manufacturers graciously allowing you to use the actual power of the processor you paid for. That's not overclocking, its reversing underclocking. I laugh every time my idiot roommate claims his computer is overclocked, when he did nothing but say "do it" in a manager program in windows.
The April 2009 version of Ars Technica System Guide covers three systems priced at $700, $1600 and $12,500. The link is http://arstechnica.com/hardware/guides/2009/04/ars-technica-system-guide-april-2009-edition.ars Tweaking the first two systems here and there should cover requirements of most users.
Great, i misread your first comment... i need sleep...
My top of the line system is about $500. (More than what my 1994 Pontiac Grand Prix is worth.) That's good enough to run Quake at 500 FPS. :P
True, it can't access the RSX under Linux, but it's still a PS3. One:
in a terminal and it boots right back into GameOS so you can play your PS3 games or in my case, my PS3/PS2/PS1 games.
And even under Linux you can still play games, there's always Nethack, or Jools, or Megamek, or Epyx Rogue under Dosbox, or the PC version of Diablo under QEMUized Win95.
though the two are coming very close to merging in some way. there was a time when i would NEVER consider a console for games, but considering where the development has gone, i find very few appealing titles that are exclusive to the PC- most i can get on my console and not have to worry about compatibility, framerates etc. at an $800 price point you could get a PS3 and a netbook and do everything that gaming rig does, but do it better, have a laptop and a gaming rig and not really have to worry if the console breaks (not likely - save for the RROD on the360) you still can do your work on the laptop. it really is a valid counter point to a gaming rig, an i think to have a conversation about gaming hardware and not acknowledge the alternative is just ignorant. if you cant rationally consider that then you probably have no business spending $800 on a toy
i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
I don't understand why gamers have this die hard loyalty/borderline bias for Intel. Granted, they are better than AMD hands down - they're a bit of an overkill. Unless you're an extreme gamer, you'll never actually need the extra power, and to recommend the Q8400 over the Phenom II X4 940 is odd considering they're usually priced within $5 of each other.
I build a new computer almost exactly a year ago. 4 Gigs of DDR2 800 Low Latency memory, 7200 RPM SATA II hard drive with 32mb cache, an Athlon X2 5000 BE (I just bumped the multiplier from 13 to 15 to get it at 3ghz) and a HD 3870. With the exception of the CPU, everything is is running at stock speeds. These are the games I play:
Call of Duty: World at War
Fallout 3
Race Driver: Grid
NBA 2K9
Drakensang
I was sure my computer would be sluggish, but it runs all these games just fine with excellent graphics at a 1680x1050 resolution. The point? At the time of my building, all of the mentioned games were (for the most part) considered "current generation", and my CPU was lumped into the scrap heap with the "only if you have to" parts. When I actually started playing games, I soon realized that my performance was exactly what people said I wouldn't achieve.
anandtech.com
tomshardware.com
maximumpc.com
pcmag.com (hard to find, though)
arstechnica.com
sharkyextreme.com
I mean, really....does anyone think it's hard to find this stuff?
You can even find sample builds on amazon.com and on newegg.com if you look around a bit.
I don't understand why you would go with a Quad Core. If you're looking to trim costs, get a Core 2 Duo and overclock the hell out of it. Spend your money on a better graphics card if it's for gaming. I have a quad core and it really only gets utilized for video encoding.
Disagreeing with me does not mean you get to mod me troll.
What the hell do you get paid, $500 an hour?
PCs are not hard to put together. Even if you got every little screw and piece not assembled, it wouldn't take more than 3-4 hours.
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
But here on /., fiddling with computers is supposed to be your hobby! And sex life!
Gonna go cry now and comfort myself by trying to install linux on my nintendo DS...
First, most of the overclocking taboo today is just marketing gimic.
Yea, you can fry out your processor being stupid with it, but the vast majority of people will be able to OC their processors in a very stable way for long periods with no problems. Chances are unless they are doing really crazy crap, the processor will be outdated (like by the time it got out of the box) before it looses any life from an OC.
The AMD black edition for example. Yea, AMD does not endorse it but they are actively marketing a processor for overclocking. The MB makers are providing all the tools including on many motherboards the auto features that stop newbies from burning it out. point and click over clocking, with an edge of danger to get people to do it without really doing it.
I even buy my low end workstations at my office with the intent of overclocking them when they start to reach their end of life. Gives me another year out of them, when I would have replaced them anyway. At that point I got nothing to loose. Well, at least it gives me something cool to do with them before retiring them to spare parts.
Living in Chile
I had a friend working at an AMD factory. He toll me the manufacturing process isn't precise enough to produce specifically 3GHz, 2GHz or 1GHz CPUs. Or at least this model helps in diminishing costs, they could probably make the process precise enough but it would raise costs.
So how do they do it ?
They produce 3GHz, 2GHz and 1GHz CPUs in one process all at the same time, there is no difference between the manufacturing process for each speed.
They then test each produced CPU to see how much clock speed it can handle then classify them with regards to this criteria.
When demand for higher clock speed CPU goes down and they have too many CPUs that can handle 3GHz on shelf, they just stamp "2GHz" on them and sell them as "2GHz" CPUs to diminish their inventory.
So overclocking would seem like a gamble, it might work perfectly because the company actually sold you a CPU that was rated for a higher clock speed. It may also not work because the company sold you a 2GHz CPU that was rated to handle only 2.000352 GHz.
Don't take for granted that because your friend or blog posters successfully overclocked a given CPU model, you will automatically have as much success.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
I feel like we should be paying you for that comment if the time was really that valuable. Then again, I can't help but feel... In the time it took for you to browse through TFA and comment: I probably could have popped the CPU in, mounted the cooler, inserted the memory, and started to screw the motherboard into the case. You're practically done! Granted, I'm not denying the convenience of a prebuilt machine. But to me, building my own systems and tinkering with them is a hobby. I don't envy whatever your profession is if you can't find the time for a bit of nerdy leisure.
...and the 2 hours it takes me to uninstall all the crap Dell puts on my box or reformat and reinstall is free?
Granted, OCing is a bit much, but it's pretty trivial to put a system together in an evening...assuming you know what you're doing. If not, congrats, you've just saved yourself a $300 community college course;)
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
You can build it a lot cheaper with branded components that cost way less: Here's my rig and prices translated into USD at INR47:$1
M2N-E-SLI mobo: 189
AMD Athlon X2-63 bit dual core 4200+: 96
9800GTX+ AND 8600GT (yeah two): 189
LG 17" monitor LCD: 93
Case: 20
OCZ Vanquisher cooler: 35
Point of View PSU: 170
Total: 792
Hell, the shops here will fix it up, assemble and home deliver free if you spend this much amount at one shop.
I got a free MS Natural keyboard, Microsoft Mouse and a 8GB JetFlash card free
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
I'd say that learning how to put a computer together is as important to use a computer as knowing how to change a wheel is to driving a car, and it's not hard either.
But hey, if you prefer to pay rather than learn, you can get it for far less than $1000 anyways. Your local friendly neighbor geek wouldn't charge you more than $50 for it, and it's possible he'd still do it for half that amount.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
Wha? I spent forty minutes swapping out a P4 AGP board for a DFI x38 with 2 GB Patriot, an E8500, and a ZOTAC 7600GS DVI piping 1080P to a 46" Toshiba 46RV535U via GBPVR and VGA piping to an Asus 20" monitor running 1600 x 900 simultaneously. I was drooling the entire time and it works incredibly well with cycles to spare. I can browse the web and watch The Fifth Element in 1080p at the same time without any lag. Are you saying I am wasting my time? There are very few things I'd rather be doing.
The power supply was good for a socket 775 and I already had a case, monitor, and HDD, so the RAM, MB, Video card, and CPU cost me $400 (from Newegg, of course). Then again I have dozens of cases and HDD lying around. Doesn't everyone?
I'll post pictures when the CPU and video are liquid cooled.
but how much is x360 + netbook + tv?
Yes, you can go 'cheap' and spend 'only' 800 dollars on a machine. But that's not REAL cheap - that's just a budget, new computer. Me, I can go REAL cheap and still have a reasonable gaming experience.
I bought a used Pentium IV with a 40 GB HDD and 1 GB of RAM for 50 dollars, with a crashed O/S. It's a Dell, and I have a Dell install CD, so don't need to worry about the OS code or Genuine Advantage. I dug for a bit at pricewatch.com to get a new AGP video card with decent 3D performance in a low profile. Reviews just a year or two ago indicated it was a good chipset. It came with a DVD drive, no burner. 25 dollars got me generic mouse, KB and speakers.
Spent an afternoon, loaded a new OS, (WinXP) drivers from Dell support, and video card drivers, and I now have a system that plays newish games like Star Wars, WoW, and GTA 3 SA and GTA IV at 1024x768 on the 17 inch CRT monitor bought at a yard sale. High end? Not a chance. But for bang/buck, the 650 bucks saved on this rig will go a long way towards helping to pay for my kids' college.
And still lots of fun!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
How much do you get paid an hour??? It really doesn't take that long to put a PC together. Personally I can't justify paying someone else to do something so trivial. Sure if your buying an Email machine any old Dell/IBM/HP etc box will do, but go find yourself a pre-built gaming rig... IME they are generally put together with crap parts and expensive. Mate of mine got one like this as he didn't want the fuss, ended up with a vid card that was passively cooled and the whole machine would like up during gaming unless he had a desk fan pointed at it and the side of the case pulled off. 8 Trips to the shop for warranty and no fault found...
I'll take my chances building one myself, it's hardly rocket science.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of cats. MEOW!!
But then, it really depends how much money you want to spend on your games.
I pick all my games up on Steam when those 75% off sales come around.
TF2 - $10
Left4Dead - $20
Assassin's Creed - $10
Universe at War - $5
I imagine by the time I've bought 20 games, I've saved money by spending more money on a gaming PC.
But y'know, if you have no morals(or are a college student), PC games cost nothing! :P
most i can get on my console and not have to worry about compatibility, framerates etc.
Plus, you know, it's a PC, so you never have to worry about framerates like you do on a console. Have you seen the shit FPS a lot of those games get? I sure can tell when they drop below 60! At least with 25% of my computer's budget being spent on the GPU, I know it'll never lag for this generation of games.
And besides, I couldn't live without my mouse and keyboard. :) I imagine if I played Left4Dead on XBoxlive, I'd sorely miss all the accusations of aim hax.
Ah, but you're not spending $800 on a toy. You're taking a purchase that you would have made anyway, and upgrading it to also act as a toy. Those upgrades (graphics card and maybe a better CPU than you'd otherwise get) cost around $300.
I upgraded my old college desktop to a gaming rig 4 years ago, at a price of $350, and still have no problem playing modern games. I'd say it's about even with consoles in terms of bang for your buck.
On the other hand, there are those who always have to have the latest hardware and the best framerates, and end up dropping $2 grand on a PC every year or two. I could never justify that sort of cost, but then, I don't see the allure in collecting model ships or fine tuning my car either.
For the record, I also own an Xbox 360, and I greatly enjoy it as well (when it's not blinking those three accursed lights at me).
If this topic was about playing chess, why would I bother to pay $58/hr to play chess?? I'd have to be a fool!! Umm. Maybe I like playing chess in my spare time. Same goes for DIY'ers who like to build their PC.
Oh and as others have said, what in the world would take u that long to put a machine together? Do you make $200-300/hr or somethin?
Camping on quad since 1996.
$800 for a gaming PC? I don't think that much was needed for a long time, unless you had to play the latest game on your 2600" screen with a high resolution. For roughly $300 these days, you can build a machine to play any game you want on a 19" screen. You don't really need anything more than a GeForce 9 (~$100), and a high end X2 (~$60). The other ~$140 is more than enough to get some RAM, hard drive, dvd burner, motherboard, especially if you find a deal on newegg or the like.
This here which is quite a decent machine is only $287 ($322 before rebates). Just add a DVD burner for ~$25, and you're all set.
You can be an insane coder too, read: Insane Coding
So....
What is the optimum configuration that yields the high-enough FPS/high-enough resolution/lowest latencies with the minimum of price?
In other words - Build a system configuration at the minimum price after which any incremental gain in performance is disproportionate to further input in price?
An optimization problem there.
Teeheehee! I've got a Porsche
Or to put it another way, isn't the whole point of TFA to spend less on a worthy gaming rig? How on earth does that turn in to an excuse to flop out your more expensive penis extension?
I don't therefore I'm not.
Some of us prefer to have a computer over a console. I'd rather play Fallout 3 on my computer because I can't stand console controllers, especially for FPSs. Its nice to be able to Alt-tab out of games and check things out, and to be able to download patches for buggy games, and extra content for the expandable ones. Consoles also suck for RTS games, as in there aren't any to speak of.
Also PCs are cheaper to deal with, once you have one for gaming. Throw in a $80 video card every 2-3 years and your good to go. This seems to be slowing down as well, so I wouldn't doubt it if your 4-5 year old card works fine.
Right now a decent video card gets you better graphics than on a console as well. As consoles age their hardware gets dated, and can only look modern by software tweaks.
Yes, more expensive to begin with, but it does more than just sit in your living room and collect dust.
Also, why the heck would I want to buy a console with either a 50% failure rate (360), or one that costs a heap more than its functionality warrants? Neither of which even come close to a computer when you don't pony up $1500 for a new TV graphics wise.
Also, can you play Dwarf Fortress II or Nethack on your big fancy PS3, out of the box?
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
and seriously, spreadsheets are so 90s!
That doesn't make them any less useful.
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
See, that's because you got a 63 bit processor. The problem with 63 bit processors is you have no end of bizaar problems trying to run modern 64 bit, or even 32 bit software and that's why you save the $8. Myself, I'd spend the extra $8 on 64 bit. :-P
Funnily enough, this is the second reply to this story by someone with a -1 bug. Someone else mentioned their old 485DX33 system.
I don't therefore I'm not.
$30 and a $5 Little Caesars pizza if you find the right geek.
My God! It's full of eval()'s.
the thing is, if you want to run current games, you will have to spend about that same amount every 18 months or even sooner.
It just isn't right: game developer should settle down once and for all, and make games that run on a 1 year old platform just as their 1 year old games did/do. Luckily I'm not a gamer (not a fanatical one anyway) or I'd be bankrupt.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Perhaps I am missing something, but Civ III just MUST be older than the parent's 4-5 year spectrum.
e5200(easily overclockable to 3.3-5 ghz on stock cooling) $70
MSI P35 Neo-F Motherboard $50
4 gigs DDR2-800 $40
Radeon HD4770 $100
500 gig HD $50
DVD Burner $20
Case + acceptable PSU $50
Total $380 and it should play any game in existence acceptably until you start to push the resolution up 1920 x 1080
$30 and a $5 Little Caesars pizza if you find the right geek.
Bring the parts and the pizza, I'm good. Oh, and that "spare" machine you put in the garage after you let the magic smoke out last year.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Actually I usually assemble my own PCs because I think I generally do a better _quality_ job than the staff at the "whitebox" shops. They do it _much_ faster I'm sure (I have to consult the motherboard manual on the pins and other stuff). But we had a whitebox shop put together a few PCs for the office, and stuff started getting loose or falling apart a year or so later. Not even sure if those guys even care about taking antistatic precautions.
:).
So even if you save time getting them to do it, it costs you time and money when it falls apart earlier.
FWIW I actually spent a LOT of time getting Windows XP to the state I like (Yes linuxfans, the topic is gaming PC so Windows ok?). All the updates, drivers, MS/other viewers/players/codecs, menushowdelay to something low, NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate [1], turn off autorun [2], startmenu customizations, classic mode, sound scheme, folder options (yes I do want to see system files, and file extensions and run stuff in a separate process), tweakui, browser running as a separate user, all sorts of crap like that
Before anyone says Linux is easier: I also had to spend a lot of time getting my Linux server to the state I like - ups monitoring (some of the el-cheapo UPSes out there require some mods to nut, and I used to have to mod nut so it'll shutdown at a particular battery voltage - because I wanted to leave more reserve in the battery ), HDD monitoring and email alerts, vmware (suspend VMs before shutdown when the UPS battery runs low etc). With Linux I usually can't reuse the old configs - because things have changed a lot by the time I get a new server.
[1]
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem]
"NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate"=dword:00000001
[2]
For XP Home:
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\policies\Explorer]
"HonorAutoRunSetting"=dword:00000001
"NoDriveTypeAutoRun"=dword:000000ff
For XP Pro use gpedit.msc to do it.
And Age of Empires 2 was released back in Feb 1996, which makes it 13 years old now.
:)
doh, why do I even bother. He's going to be modded 5 and I'll be -859365834 troll for speaking the truth
yah matey, I totally agree. PC gaming just beats consoles, just look at GTA4 and other genre you mentioned.
I do have some consoles around for the "gatherings" and occasional chick visits, you know, like in Sims 3.
There are definitely reasons for preferring a PC, but some of yours don't make much sense :-)
Some of us prefer to have a computer over a console. I'd rather play Fallout 3 on my computer because I can't stand console controllers, especially for FPSs.
It takes some getting used to, and you'll never be as good with a controller than with keyboard and mouse, but it's not as bad as many PC gamers pretend it is. Besides, lots of good FPS never make it to PCs.
Its nice to be able to Alt-tab out of games and check things out,
True, but on the other hand, nothing prevents you from also using a laptop, netbook or iPhone while playing a game on a console.
and to be able to download patches for buggy games,
In my opinion, that's not a plus, it's a minus because the main result of this is that games are released in what is essentially an unfinished state. Unfortunately, the PS3 and Xbox now also allow patches for buggy games, so some console games are released with gameplay-killing bugs, too.
and extra content for the expandable ones.
The same applies to consoles.
Consoles also suck for RTS games, as in there aren't any to speak of.
That has changed in recent years. Even the Wii has a neat little RTS with Swords & Soldiers.
Also PCs are cheaper to deal with, once you have one for gaming. Throw in a $80 video card every 2-3 years and your good to go.
The PC update race is slowing somewhat, but on average, console hardware is still cheaper (although games tend to cost more).
How exactly are you going to get good "PC games" on a console? There are still entire genre's that are just ass on a console. For the action types a console just isn't any good for FPS and RTS games. For MMO's you go PC or you don't play at all. Consoles have some good strategy games in the tactics style RPG's but the deeper strategy games like Civ 4 or Gal Civ are ignored on consoles for the most part.
Really if you are a PC gamer there is still no way you can just dump your PC and survive on console games alone.
And Age of Empires 2 was released back in Feb 1996, which makes it 13 years old now.
dude age of empires 1 is from 1997 and 2 is from 1999
How much for gaming rig + cinema display?
I've just recently assembled a new gaming PC (to make a long story short, I wanted to upgrade my old machine to a new CPU architecture, which meant also upgrading motherboard and memory, but the upgrade hassle factor was so large that I just ended up buying the rest of the parts and making a new PC) and I've go a Quad Q6600 (G0 stepping, the easier to overclock) running rock-stable at 3.2 GHz, when the stock speed is 2.4 GHz (while, thanks to using a passive water-cooling setup - a Reserator V1, temperatures are below 60C at load and noise is minimal).
My experience is similar to the one described by the guys in the article - for about $1500 (discounting VAT and converting from GBP to USD) I got a high-mid-range gaming machine* capable of running any of the newest games with max settings and 4xAA (anti-aliasing) at the maximum resolution my monitor supports (1280x1024) with lots of horsepower to spare, and which is comparatively as good as a top of the range machine would be 5 years ago (at the time, that's what you would need to run all new games at max setting at that resolution). If I went for the same relative (versus latest games at the time) capabilities 5 years ago the cost would've been at least 2 times as much.
(PS: Even though I've reused my existing water-cooling equipment - worth about $200 if new - some of this is offset by the fact that I got a factory-watercooled graphics board, which is between $50 and $100 more expensive than the stock version: anybody not going for a full water-cooled setup would just get the stock version)
* Specs: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 overclocked to 3.2GHz (watercooled); Nvidia GTS280 (watercooled); 4GB premium (faster) PC2-8500 memory (5-5-5-18) stock speed 1066 MHz (slightly overclocked); 2x250GB SATA2 HDD in Raid 0 configuration (Programs disk) + 1x640GB SATA2 HDD (Data disk); an old Reserator V1 for watercooling with replaced, higher capacity pump.
But wouldn't it be cheaper to buy an X-Box 360 for £160? I am no X-Box fanboy, but it does run games well, and looks good doing it (Bioshock water effects FTW). What I am trying to say is, you could buy a gaming computer for £500 ($800) or you could buy a games console for £160 to £300, and it will look better on your HDTV. Besides, every time you buy an X-Box 360 M$ actually loose money, they only make it back on the games, so, everyone could chip their X-Boxes, pirate their games and seem M$ crumble :D
Tell us (geek crowd) more pls.
Seriously its like waving a flag in front of a bull. Cue the epenis discussion, none of which will be news to any slashdot reading PC gamer. Why don't you just post a snapshot of today's discussion on rage3d or overclock.net or the like.
Better go break out my 3Dmark vantage benchies and waste hours and hours tuning my ram timings for a 0.5% gain. Then I post links to newegg for the benefit of international readers.
oh wait, I wasted them already on slashdot
Hmmm...
Considering i have a 38.4MBps connection to the 'net supplemented by a backup connection (from another ISP) of 2Mbps, both of which are NOT throttled in any way, and i have the freedom to download anything anytime i want, plus indian equivalent of FCC actually man dating net neutrality as per law and sending to jail company execs that don't obey their advertised speed limits, and the fact i can buy a 9800GTX+ in the next door PC shop, AND got Spore one day earlier than released in US, yeah i guess we are pretty backward.
BTW, how's comcast treating you now?
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
I'm guessing most people on Slashdot have an internet connection... they just don't feel the need to brag about it. Learn to recognize humor ;)
As for your government agencies "man dating", I don't even want to know what that's about... :p
Bragging that you can get better connectivity pretty much anywhere in the world other than the US is a bit like racing a legless kid. It isn't done in polite company.
(at other times of course...)
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
but it's pretty trivial to put a system together in an evening...assuming you know what you're doing.
And the "knowing what you are doing" is exactly the problem. I don't buy many PCs, because there simply isn't a need for an upgrade every two years, instead I am more in the 5+ year range. So each time I look around for new stuff pretty much everything has changed. Almost all knowledge of previous generations is close to worthless, as power supplies, cables, cards, cooling, cases and so on all have changed. The screws holding things together are still the same, but thats about it.
A gaming rig that does what a PS3 can do isn't all too expensive. Say 700 Euros (probably $700 US over there) including a 200 Euro TFT...
If all you need for your computing needs is a netbook, sure, going with a console isn't such a bad idea. But if you're going to be spending $500 on a new PC anyway, you might as well stuff in $50 more for a decent graphics card and game on that...
For instance, I've never gotten into console gaming because I don't need to - I've always had decent PC hardware for reasons other than gaming (video encoding, real-time audio apps), so PC gaming was the logical way to go. If you don't need a powerful PC for stuff like that, a console might not be such a bad idea.
When I saw a quad core recommended for a bargain gaming PC I knew I would read about an nvidia card not too far down the list followed by 'gamer/overclocker' ram. Yep it's YAFBBS (Yet Another Fan-Boy Build Story) with no actual useful advice for anyone on a budget.
At the moment a Radeon 4770 would be a better choice, if the not the #1 on bang for buck, as touted by most reputable sources. Highly clockable e7xxx or e8xxx range core 2 duo still kicks quad core ass for less money (easy stable 4ghz), less power draw and subsequent heat problems. What really gets my gall with these kind of websites, is the ram recommendations. That quad core has a 1333mhz bus, thus DDR2 faster than 667mhz gains almost no improvement in memory bandwidth and latency, yet somehow there is a huge market for this kind of crap.
I hate to sound like a greybeard but back in the day it was all about making dirt cheap parts outperform four-figure parts. Now overclocking parts cost more and are much less challenging to work with. If anything overclocking is boring now, it's all about bling. Remember the Celeron 300A?
Yep, CL5 800 is just fine. If you want another 5% in benchmarks you can blow your dosh on CL4 1066mhz. Even if you overclock your FSB speed, you'll watch your bandwidth scores scale up, even holding ram speed at a fixed 800mhz! Even if your FSB is stepping up faster than your ram speed, your memory benchmark scores will continue to go up. It only really makes more sense to come down in latency, 667 CL3 is lower *realtime* latency than 1066mhz CL5, and even reasonable 'value ram' will reach those timings with a voltage boost. Yep the socket 775 platform is that crappy. Spend your money on other areas please.
No IT professional worth their salt recommends anything above reasonably priced and reliable 800/1066 ram, unless you really are going to push high FSB speeds on a core 2 duo, maybe worth paying a whisker more. You don't really need heat spreaders either, and a strip of aluminum and 3M thermal tape will do the job better than $20 set of aftermarket spreaders.
Honestly, you could blow this thing away in benchmarks for less money.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
The article seemed to be confused about the size of the HD in the gaming rig. Initially, it states that they found a 320GB drive for $43, but the final table says it's actually a 250GB drive. Either way, isn't that quite a small drive - you suspect that installing 15-20 games on that rig could potentially fill the 200GB or so that would be available after the OS install. Newegg have the excellent 1TB Samsung Spinpoint F1 for $84.99 - four times the capacity (and I bet faster, cooler and quieter too) for twice the price.
One thing I didn't see covered by the article was how noisy the rig was - it always worries me that when you get beefy power supplies, CPUs and graphics cards, the thing can sound like a jumbo jet. Now I know that game sound effects can drown most of that out, but what about when you're not playing games? Can you sleep in the same room as the gaming rig is if you leave it turned on overnight?
Some of us prefer to have a computer over a console. I'd rather play Fallout 3 on my computer because I can't stand console controllers, especially for FPSs. Its nice to be able to Alt-tab out of games and check things out, and to be able to download patches for buggy games, and extra content for the expandable ones. Consoles also suck for RTS games, as in there aren't any to speak of.
Some of us prefer genres other than FPS and RTS, such as "party" minigame collections, "smash" platform fighting games, and other kinds of arcade-style multiplayer action games whose major-label publishers have traditionally ignored the PC platform.
Also PCs are cheaper to deal with, once you have one for gaming. Throw in a $80 video card every 2-3 years and your good to go.
Until they stop making video cards for your motherboard (e.g. the transition from AGP to PCIe). Or until the CPU is also inadequate.
Yes, more expensive to begin with
Especially if you have to buy four PCs at once, one for each player. Online play doesn't help when your friends are visiting your house.
Also, why the heck would I want to buy a console with either a 50% failure rate (360), or one that costs a heap more than its functionality warrants? Neither of which even come close to a computer when you don't pony up $1500 for a new TV graphics wise.
An entry-level $600 TV makes Wii look good. Not all genres need 1080p or higher resolution.
Also
You know...
can you play Dwarf Fortress II or Nethack on your big fancy PS3, out of the box?
They don't come preinstalled. But Linux runs on PLAYSTATION 3 well enough to run NetHack.
How about a version of this project that targets 1080p HDTV/DVR instead of gaming? To run Linux of course - for the horsepower, and the thrill of finding drivers :).
--
make install -not war
I know that consoles are a perfectly legitimate gaming platform, but posting about their cheap cost in article about PC gaming is like posting about the specs of a high end PC in a thread about console gaming.
Then why don't more PC game publishers make console-style multiplayer games to be played on PCs connected to TVs?
PCs are not hard to put together. Even if you got every little screw and piece not assembled, it wouldn't take more than 3-4 hours.
Install Windows, restart. Apply service pack, restart. Apply more updates, restart. Install network driver, restart. Install video driver, restart. Install sound driver, restart. Install Ubuntu or Mandriva for dual-booting into an actual work environment not targeted by the majority of malware authors, restart. Install updates for that, restart. That's what takes hours when building a PC.
You know the same argument can be applied to consoles, right?
Name a few console-only titles worth playing then.
MMOs have been featured on consoles thanks to Square-Enix. Final Fantasy XI has been released for both the PS2 and the 360. I suspect you can play it on a PS3 as well. I know with the PS3 there's no real limitation that would make it inadequate to run an MMO client. You can connect a keyboard and mouse via Bluetooth or USB.
Personally, I think PC gaming will and has been going into decline. The last remaining genre that will hold out on PC gaming will be strategy games, but even those will go away. People say that FPS are superior on the PC, I agree, but it is the very reason why they are superior on the PC that makes them unbalanced. The mouse. When you introduce a new style of mouse, it completely upsets the balance. Those that can afford or even use that superior style start to quickly outclass those that can't. That is why I think console FPS are the way to go. You provide uniform hardware with standard inputs that all players have. It also makes it easier on the developer. You have one hardware configuration to work with, instead of a virtually unlimited set of configurations.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
Should I waste my time?
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Here is the parts list for the PC they built:
And a bit about why the Intel vs AMD:
Another alternative is to go all AMD. You could build an $800 gaming rig based on a Phenom II X4 840 and 1GB Radeon HD 4870. That would be close in performance to our $800 system, but would probably fall just a little short overall.
I personally like to support AMD given that the alternative is to have Intel monopolize the market. But shrug unless AMD is the clear winner most sites will always push Intel so no real surprise. (My feeling is it goes back to the old, "Nobody every got fired for buying Intel," type of mentality.)
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
Supreme Commander
Demigod
Left4Dead
Team Fortress 2
Julie Moult is an idiot.
You bastard, comcast sucks for us Americans stuck with it.
Seriously though, as a grad student I can pull 4-5 gigs of data a day when at home and comcast throttles me for 12 hours afterwards it is ridiculous to not be able to use netflix when I pay for it. If I could pay 200 dollars a month for a 20 meg connection unthrottled I would.
So in September I am moving to a place with Verizon FiOS and I am going to tell my apartment manager why when I collect my deposit.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
I built my current PC for 350 (75$ mail in rebate from newegg dropped it from 425, but I also had to pay 140$ for XP64)
GEForce 9500 GT OC AMD 2.8GHZ Dual Core Athlon 300GB HDD DVD Burner 4GB RAM KSI Mobo or some shit (I forget exactly) Runs most games great. Bioshock at full graphics, Mass Effect at just under full graphics, any game slightly older at full graphics. Works wonders.
2 words... Game Stop.
i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
And how was your last dinner at Outback??
Oh wait...
What are you doing, machining your own screws?
If you buy computer parts and a desk chair, the desk chair will take longer to put together.
See here to do what the parent speaks of.
I work on enough computers that I build up an OEM and Dell image of XP a couple times a year in case I need to do reinstalls.
I've never slipstreamed Vista updates, but if your net connection is fast enough, you really don't need to reboot more than once or twice to apply every update.
That said, I'd love to figure out how to slipstream IE8 and WGA and so on, as the process I mentioned above *does* leave a few things out.
Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
Unless you have a specific need- HTPC/Silent PC/foo. Just get wait for a slickdeal on a dell vostro. Up the ram and stick a real video card in there and you've got a sweet machine for less bucks and less work. Usually they come with a gigantic widescreen monitor, too.
It's not 1998 anymore, BYO doesn't make sense most of the time.
--- Do you believe in the day?
I did roughly the same for about $440 after a rebate. I skimped on the CPU but spent a little more on a video card. I got full versions of Call of Juarez and Call of duty WOW included for free as well. Nothing great but it works for the games I play.
Western Digital Caviar GP WD7500AACS 750GB 5400 to 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive - OEM
Item #: N82E16822136150
$59.99
OCZ Platinum 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model OCZ2P10664GK - Retail
Item #: N82E16820227298
$59.99
LG 22X DVD±R DVD Burner Black SATA Model GH22NS30 - OEM
Item #: N82E16827136152
$24.99
HEC 6K28BBX585 Black 0.8mm SECC Steel MicroATX Mini Tower Computer Case 585W Power Supply - Retail
Item #: N82E16811121004
$64.99
ASUS M3N78-VM AM2+/AM2 NVIDIA GeForce 8200 HDMI Micro ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail
Item #: N82E16813131318
$72.99
AMD Athlon 64 X2 7750 Kuma 2.7GHz Socket AM2+ 95W Dual-Core black edition Processor Model AD775ZWCGHBOX - Retail
Item #: N82E16819103300
$58.99
XFX GS250XYDFC GeForce GTS 250 512MB Core Edition 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card - Retail
Item #: N82E16814150357
$134.99
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
Most people try to hit the $500 price point with pretty good results:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%24500+gaming+computer
Maybe $800 is good for a (admittedly not very decent) gaming laptop... which would come with a display too...
Though I guess you could knock off $100 if you dump the Windows Vista OS, for, say Linux, an old copy of WinXP, or even Windows 7 beta, all of which would run games faster than Vista.
I wrote an overclocking buyers guide and I have been updating it relatively frequently over the last few years. it hasn't been updated in a few months tho as my work has started taking up more of my time. but, it too could also be seen as a gaming guide http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=483065
Good luck getting your system through POST with that PSU ))
Given the choise between Hitler and RIAA/MPAA I'd go for the first one - at least he knew when to shoot himself.
Buy both and STFU?
But their games are still disjoint. I own a Wii and a PC and games for both. The titles for Wii happen to lack moddability, and the titles for PC happen to lack shared-screen multiplayer. Or where do I get moddable shared-screen games?
Or market your own solution that has the advantages of both and make $$$ if you can sell it.
As a programmer, where do I find the artist and the businessman?
Some of us prefer to have a computer over a console. I'd rather play Fallout 3 on my computer because I can't stand console controllers, especially for FPSs. Its nice to be able to Alt-tab out of games and check things out, and to be able to download patches for buggy games, and extra content for the expandable ones. Consoles also suck for RTS games,
This is just the same old argument that sounds like it's from 2000. Funny thing is, everyone owns a computer regardless of whether they own a console or not, so there really isn't anything as a "console only" owner. As such, people tend to not be nearly as defensive about their consoles as the PC-only die-hards are. Anyone with a "big, fancy PS3" can go buy an RTS for their computer if they want to.
But PCs as full replacements for consoles isn't flying for a couple of big reasons:
* Hundreds of millions of dollars are being poured annually into developing console games, so if you care about games at all, then you're missing out by boycotting consoles. There are good PC games and ports, too (like Fallout 3), but they're in the small minority. Consoles are where the action is.
* Mobility and, as a result, low power consumption are driving PC sales. Most people would prefer a slick laptop with 6 hours battery life over a thousand-watt gaming rig.
Honestly, a console--or a handheld game system like the Nintendo DS--is relatively inexpensive, so there's no reason to over-justify your insistence on only playing PC games. Just pick up a $130 DS and you can get some amazing experiences. And I'm seriously glad I own an Xbox 360, because some of the best games in recent years are for that system.
These games are much more than 5 years old, which means they do not fall in the range of 4-5 years.
TA Spring
You know that in the vast majority of cases, there's no problem just saying "no" when the installer asks you to restart?
I agree that clicking No works for a lot of drivers and applications that install background services. But Windows Update and some other installers will fail if the last installer left a RunOnce: "The installer could not start because a previous installation has not completed. To complete the previous installation, restart your computer." You can skip about two or three of those restarts by clicking no, but you'll run into one that checks for a RunOnce first. And you'll still need to restart to put on Linux or FreeBSD for "actual work".
Buy a $300 Dell loaded with bloatware and OEM garbage. Make sure it has at least Intel Core 2 Duo, two ram slots and a PCI-E video slot. Format the hard drive (getting rid of bloat and OEM garbage), upgrade to 4gb ram, buy a decent 3d video card (what are they now days, about $200 for a good one?). There's a $550 solution (if you already have keyboard, mouse, monitor).
It's worked well for me for well over 10 years now. If you have to go through the pain of owning a Windows based system, you might as well buy cheap, upgrade cheap, dispose of cheaply when it outlives it's gaming worthiness (about 2 years).
You both are forgetting the best thing about PC games: mods. Counter Strike would not exist without the help of Half-Life and Valve Hammer.
It takes some getting used to, and you'll never be as good with a controller than with keyboard and mouse, but it's not as bad as many PC gamers pretend it is. Besides, lots of good FPS never make it to PCs.
For me, it is more horrible than you can imagine. Consoles need to just give up on strafing, it doesn't work well with a controller at all and just makes turning awkward, they will never turn that second josytick into a mouse. Also, consoles are made for TV's which you watch from a slight distance, which is fine for me for third person games, but for fps I like to be closer to the screen. I've yet to see a good console exclusive fps.
and extra content for the expandable ones.
The same applies to consoles.
Actually consoles are the ones getting more exclusive content these days, so I'm not quite sure where he was going with this. PC still wins at user created content tho. I know there's ways to get mods for some console games, but that's always been a PC niche and probably always will be. (this sucks for games I prefer on consoles that have active modding communities like GTA)
The PC update race is slowing somewhat, but on average, console hardware is still cheaper (although games tend to cost more).
Lots of people don't have HDTVs still, so choosing a console also means buying a new TV if they want to play at anything higher than 480p whereas they can play up to 1600x1200 on even older monitors. It doesn't help that most console games aren't even rendered at full HD anyway, scaling helps but still. I'm gonna agree with you on raw cost tho, however, comparable pc hardware gets cheaper the longer the console has been out, decent hardware putting the 360 to shame is less than half the cost of a 360 now. ---
Especially if you have to buy four PCs at once, one for each player. Online play doesn't help when your friends are visiting your house.
Directinput supports up to 64 controllers connected to the same PC. (you were going to play with a controller anyway since you favor consoles, right? ;)
and of course i didnt preview to see that my quotes and responses are all fubar'd
Uhhhh, you just need to copy a file to your flashcard and run it. That's it. You lose all geek cred if you have to "try" at it. That is unless you're installing Gentoo, in which case you get bonus points.
I obviously have never actually tried to do anything of the sort. I did however spend 14 hours in lab yesterday, so I think I have plenty of geek cred. Maybe not linux geek cred though.
Put this system together in Feb... AMD 9600 quad core black box cpu -$85 Cheapest Gigabyte mobo i could find for cpu which met my specs - $65 4 gig patriot ddr3 ram $25 Powercolor 4830 with HDMI slot -$85 80g sata hdd $35 Case & ps - $40 Rebates totaled about $75 so system in total was around $260 Started off with the specs i wanted, got the normal prices, told my self i would shop around for 2 weeks, if i didnt find better i would buy at the normal price. it's run solid and plays world of warcraft very nicely with most settings on high MY goal was a sys with decent specs now, and then once Diablo 3 & Starcraft 2 look into buying a more powerful vid card if needed.
..just because you can, doens't mean you should...
Super Smash Bros. Brawl
Tales of Symphonia
Final Fantasy XII
The New Super Mario Bros.
Fire Emblem
Super Mario Galaxy
The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time
Star Ocean: The Last Hope
Etc.
If you are a J-RPG fan, or a fan of platforming games, then the console is really the only way.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
What game still runs well over dial-up? I have relatives who live out in the country, where an 0.05 Mbps v.90 connection is considered "high speed". And how would I talk everybody into buying a copy of the same game?
Heh, so if they're out in the country, it's cheaper in gas to have them drive in all the time for a night of Wii sports?
So what do I do when I want one advantage of consoles (games that don't need a separate machine, a separate monitor, and a separate copy of the game per player) and one advantage of PCs (game mods and indie games)?
Suck it up and buy both?
Julie Moult is an idiot.
It's just Spring RTS these days.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
I think this post takes the thread. :)
Julie Moult is an idiot.
That's what I did about a year ago. (I already had the Vista copy, the DVD-ROM, and the SATA hard drive, so it was cheaper.)
But it's a 32-bit AMD triple-core Phenom. And, of course, being 32-bit, I only put 2 gigs in it. (I might add another one some day.) An nVidia 9600GT, about 160 dollars.
All this stuff about super-fast gaming machines is nonsense. I can run any game I've ever tried at maximum settings. Spore, Fallout 3, NWN2, whatever Ive tried. Scores a 5.9 in Vista on everything but processor, which is a 5.3.
People who build $1000 water-cooled computers or even things in this article for $800 to play games are like people who buy Monster cables.
Buy a ~$150 video card, a midrange processor, a midrange motherboard, fill it with memory, and buy generic crap to fill out the rest. (No, a game's performance doesn't depend on the speed of the hard drive or even the DVD-ROM.)
And you're done for at least three years, at which point the newest games will start requiring you to turn down settings. Boo hoo.
With the money you saved, buy a Wii for casual multi-player gaming. And a cheap stereo to use as an amp and speakers.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
Some of us prefer to have a computer over a console.
You know, you can have both. This computer vs console flamewar that always comes up is as ridiculous as the Nintendo/Sega console wars of the early 90s. Can't we agree that there are pros and cons for each, and it's really a matter of personal preference?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
You obviously haven't played many console games recently. There have been many examples of games with serious bugs that needed patching immediately or glitches in games like Gears of War 2 which meant the multiplayer was dominated by cheaters for months after release before a patch came out.
Other games have been patched but still have issues Saints Row 2 is full of bugs which vary from falling through the world into other areas to hard locking the console requiring a reset.
Some of these bugs are hard to spot without exhaustive playtesting but some are obviously a result of a rushed release schedule and should never have seen the light of day.
What game still runs well over dial-up? I have relatives who live out in the country, where an 0.05 Mbps v.90 connection is considered "high speed".
Heh, so if they're out in the country, it's cheaper in gas to have them drive in all the time for a night of Wii sports?
I'm not coming just to play video games. I happen to be at their home or vice versa for some other reason.
So what do I do when I want one advantage of consoles (games that don't need a separate machine, a separate monitor, and a separate copy of the game per player) and one advantage of PCs (game mods and indie games)?
Suck it up and buy both?
If I buy both, then the console game still won't be moddable, and the PC title game won't have shared-screen multiplayer.
That is hardly the case. Most pc games are half the price of the console version on release. Left 4 Dead was £22 on release on PC and is still £40 on the Xbox in most places.
Super Smash Bros Brawl is one of very few games that have everyone playing on one view. Normally four player means hoping the game supports split screen and then putting up with a quarter of the tv, and reduced graphical fidelity to keep the frame rate playable.
I am not saying that split screen isn't fun, just that it isn't available on all games and doesn't offer the full game experience.
Super Smash Bros Brawl is one of very few games that have everyone playing on one view.
Bomberman and Gauntlet are other examples you might see cited. If they did support LAN play, all the machines would be rendering the exact same picture to all the monitors anyway.
Normally four player means hoping the game supports split screen and then putting up with a quarter of the tv, and reduced graphical fidelity to keep the frame rate playable.
That or each player's view is ordinarily taller than wide, and an 8:9 or 4:9 view for each player fits fine inside the 16:9 frame of an HDTV. That's the case for Tetris or Dr. Mario.
http://www.ubersoft.net/comic/hd/2000/12/age-umpires
http://www.ubersoft.net/comic/hd/2000/12/age-umpires-ii
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
Let me say again, a PS3 with a Linux install is still a PS3, meaning it can still play PS3 games when you boot into what SCEfoo calls GameOS: Resistance, MGS4, Fallout 3, Oblivion, The Orange Box, Killzone, whatever. It's kind of like, but not exactly like dual booting between Linux for day to day uses and Windows just for the games.
MMO's *may* have the potential to eventually lend themselves well to consoles, but there is one thing that may prevent it. And that is communication with random players. Chatting efficiently requires a keyboard of some sort, and an on-screen keyboard used with the controller is just too cumbersome. VOIP could work, except who wants to hear the voice of every jackass playing an MMO? And yes, while FFXI is a console MMO, it plays like ass. The only reason it's got any significant number of subscribers at all is because it's the *only* MMO on consoles.
You're wrong about PC gaming though. PC gaming isn't going anywhere, any time soon. The reason for that is because almost everyone has one now. And with advances in gaming performance hardware trailing off so much over the last few years, most of the ones currently in use are also perfectly capable of playing most games out there, and most of the games coming out in the near future. At worst, they might require a $50-$100 graphics card to make it happen. We've finally reached a point where average new PCs from 3 years ago are still viable for gaming. And look at this article. It wasn't so long ago that you would have had to spend twice the $800 price tag to build a kickass gaming rig capable of playing any game at max settings at say 1280x1024 resolution. This $800 rig will manhandle any game at that resolution. And for probably half that, you can build one that will run any game at at least medium settings (graphics that still look better than any Xbox 360 or PS3 game) and run at a perfectly acceptable frame rate.
And while FPSs can be lots of fun on a console, until you have an actual mouse for it, it just won't work as well as on a PC. For a RTS you'll need both a mouse and a keyboard.
The only realistic conclusion that anyone can draw is that we're going to be using both consoles and PCs for gaming for quite some time. While there is definitely some overlap, overall they really are two different tools for two different jobs. For myself, I own a decent PC, a Wii, and a DS. I would also have a PS3, except there's been too many other things demanding my money.
There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
I consider amateur developed mods to be a bad thing in certain ways, in that I believe they encourage developer laziness. Perhaps Valve would have finished Half-Life a lot sooner if they knew fans weren't all busy playing counter-strike and clamoring for a new game. Perhaps other developers would actually finish their games and not release buggy/incomplete crap if the modding community wasn't out there to pick up the pieces and fix things for them.
Trackballs are far faster and more precise than the normal mouse. Since turning speed tends to be limited by how quickly you can move the mouse rather than any artificial game imposed limit, the trackball with its freespin can let you do some ridiculous tricks.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
because we are just starting to come to the true PC / Console wars. You'll see just this happening as penetration of HD becomes deeper. Right now HD penetration is like 30% (arbitrary #, I don't really know) Once that hits >80% which will be very soon, as TV prices keep coming down (32" 1080p @ costco for $459) PC games will start being developed for TVs. Right now though, most people don't have a PC connected to a TV.
Most /.'ers probably do have a pc connected to a tv. I do, but I don't have an HD tv yet. Mostly because I have a 2048x1536 resolution SGI monitor that some idiot threw away. (P.S. It's great for WoW!) When everyone has an HD TV, AND a home media PC or better, games will go to "console style" but we're not going to be there for 3-8 years (ish).
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
There are still a couple really amazing releases every year, even if you don't count the indie stuff. Just about anything from Valve, for instance (Portal, HL, L4D, etc.) The PC still gets at least one or two very good RPGs a year that are either exclusive (The Witcher) or so much better on the PC that it might as well be (Oblivion, which only nudges up out of "mediocre" territory, through "good" and in to the edge of "very good" when heavily modded). Strategy games, of course, continue to be very nearly a PC-only genre, as do sim-type games (flight sims, etc.)
Fallout 3 isn't an FPS, it's an RPG that looks like an FPS. You don't need super accurate aiming since you're supposed to be using VATS most of the time. It takes time to get used to a dual analog controller, at first you won't have the fine manipulation skills to be able to use the right analog stick properly, but give it some time.
There's a few, mostly PC ports or RTS's developed simultaneously for console and PC like Warzone 2100. Red Alert 3 is the most recent one I know of.
More like $600 or $700. You can pay less if you go smaller or settle for 720p/1080i. Mine is a 19inch 720p/1080i model which sits on a desk, since I often boot into Linux on my PS3.
There's no Dwarf Fortress for Linux on PPC. I couldn't play Nethack on my big fancy PS3 right out of the box, but I had Yellow Dog Linux install media ready and as long as you have that, you can install Linux on your PS3 right out of the box. Then I could play Nethack, the quickest way being
or:
Though I personally did a source compile since I use some patches.
1. I'd rather not have to tweak my graphics settings or even run a tool to choose the graphics settings best suited for my machine.
2. Full sized keyboards can be attached to the PS3 at least. I have a full sized Bluetooth keyboard and mouse that I use when typing out messages instead of the software keyboard. I haven't bothered to try to connect my Bluetooth mouse yet, but I believe you can.
Here's how I look at it. I can throw down $400 for the newest gaming system, and be assured that the graphics setting will be just as good or only slightly worse that the highest end gaming PC. I don't have to worry about patches breaking the system or making the game not work, heck I don't even need to worry about manually downloading and applying patches and updates the game will check for them when I put it in and ask me if I want to install it now or later. I can attach a keyboard, mouse, and voice communication microphone all via Bluetooth, meaning I can replicate the same gaming environment that a PC would provide.
As a developer I don't have to worry about whether the game will work on Windows XP, Vista, 7, 2000 or 98. That's not even considering making it work for Macs or Linux.
There are only two advantages that are still left in the PC's ballpark and that is being able to put the entire game on the hard drive and custom user modifications like with TES. The hard drive is only going to help with load times and it is honestly something I'm willing to put up with for less hassle. The custom user mods will be the biggest savior for PC gaming, until console can figure out how to provide for it. So far people are stuck with mods and extensions only available through the xbox and playstation stores.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
Oh contraire mon frere, according to two reviews some Tom's Hardware and this bad boy http://www.extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp it will just fit. 398 watts to be exact. Plus this PSU has a little room to spare.
Actually my point was that for $200 dollars more you can have a machine that blows away any other graphics system per dollar and have a MB based on a next generation platform. It was not dick waving my any stretch of the imagination. Plus if you're that cheap get a Lenovo netbook on the Ion platform.
Ok, now you're stretching things quite thin. Since neither can satisfy you, don't buy either. :) Get a pack of cards and a chessboard instead.
Julie Moult is an idiot.
because we are just starting to come to the true PC / Console wars. You'll see just this happening as penetration of HD becomes deeper. Right now HD penetration is like 30%
I've heard 34%, but that's about right. But even for the other two-thirds, I don't see a problem with using a $40 adapter to convert VGA signals from a PC into S-Video or composite signals for an SDTV. In fact, such a converter is built into several aftermarket video cards using an NVIDIA or ATI chipset. Granted, SDTV out blurs small text, but apps with big enough text (such as StepMania, DOSBox, ScummVM, Midway Arcade Treasures, and various Flash games blown up to the full screen) look as good as their console counterparts. I just wonder why there aren't more PC-native games designed for use with an SDTV output.
I buy most of my console games used from the local rental place. Most of my PS3 games cost me between $15 and $25. That may not be $5, but its not like everyone pays full bang.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Not only that, if there are bugs in the console version, the patch has to be sent to Microsoft or Sony first, and from the time the developers release the patch to when it's pushed out to the customers is generally at least a month.
Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
I'd say that learning how to put a computer together is as important to use a computer as knowing how to change a wheel is to driving a car, and it's not hard either.
Unfortunately, that cause is just as badly lost as the computer one. Worse even; at least with a computer ignorance can't leave you stranded 30 miles from the nearest mechanic.
So the ps3 and 360 would look better on composite graphics too
Not always. Sure, the downsampling from 720p to 480i/480p is a cheap form of FSAA, as you point out. But the HDTV capabilities of these consoles tempt the artists to make text so small that it's next to unreadable on an SDTV. Dead Rising is notably guilty.
Then by all means get a console.
I would, but I also like to play game mods, and consoles are notorious for blocking them. For instance, a Dance Dance Revolution-style game for consoles generally won't have a mechanism for adding custom songs. Nor will a fighting game have a way to add characters (except token efforts such as Fighter Maker 2). I can't think of any console game at all that allows for the sort of scripting that one would need for a total conversion mod, even with the substantially sized hard drives of the Xbox 360 and PLAYSTATION 3 and the substantially sized SDHC card slot of the Wii.
Though they generally prefer all the guitar hero games on the the PS2.
If only I could add real custom songs with real guitar parts using a real guitar...
My Wii doesn't see much use outside of said drunken parties.
I must have a different perspective because I babysit.
I think the next step is consoles with upgrade ports for video cards and ram
The NES and Super NES had that. Game Paks had video enhancement chips (MMC5 on NES and Super FX on Super NES) and RAM (a lot of NES carts had an 8 KiB SRAM chip, which quintupled the NES's RAM capacity). Even the N64 had a chip to add 4 MB of RAM to the console's existing 4 MB, required to play Majora's Mask and most of Perfect Dark. And don't get me started on the Nintendo DS, for which an official 8 MB RAM expansion (for Nintendo DS Browser) and unofficial 16-32 MB expansions (SuperCard, M3, EZFlash) were released.
Nintendo wasn't the only console maker to have upgrades. NEC had the TurboGrafx-CD and the various "system cards" with RAM to buffer CD data, Sega Genesis had the Sega CD and 32X, Sega Saturn had the 4 MB RAM card, and Philips CD-i had the MPEG decoder.
Fallout 3 isn't an FPS, it's an RPG that looks like an FPS. You don't need super accurate aiming since you're supposed to be using VATS most of the time. It takes time to get used to a dual analog controller, at first you won't have the fine manipulation skills to be able to use the right analog stick properly, but give it some time.
Fallout might have been a bad example. To be honest, I'm getting bit old for twitch gaming, it seems. Well, maybe not too old, but the genre seems to be a bit less fulfilling than it was in the mid-to-late 90's. There hasn't been a game with the "wow" factor of Quake 3 Arena, or UT.
For some reason, this is opinion take it with salt, it seems like consoles are holding back the FPS genre. Developers seem to be making games for console hardware and porting it to PC then, which leads to rather sad graphical leaps these days. That and someone decided that Halo was actually an exemplar of the genre, which should be emulated, which pretty much means that FPS makers are shooting for mediocre now.
There's a few, mostly PC ports or RTS's developed simultaneously for console and PC like Warzone 2100. Red Alert 3 is the most recent one I know of.
I'd still take those two game on the PC, over the console. Its about the control scheme.
More like $600 or $700. You can pay less if you go smaller or settle for 720p/1080i. Mine is a 19inch 720p/1080i model which sits on a desk, since I often boot into Linux on my PS3.
So, you can build a gaming rig for 800+Monitor, which runs around $200. So, $1000 for a decent gaming rig, or $400+$600 for a PS3 and a TV to utilize it, which also is $1000. Factor in, then, that PC games are still $50, while PS3 games are $60, and with services like Steam you can grab new games cheaper from time to time on the PC. And if your unscrupulous, PC games are free.
There's no Dwarf Fortress for Linux on PPC. I couldn't play Nethack on my big fancy PS3 right out of the box, but I had Yellow Dog Linux install media ready and as long as you have that, you can install Linux on your PS3 right out of the box. Then I could play Nethack, the quickest way being
Thanks for reminding me why I love Slashdot.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
I wasn't really claiming one was better than the other, I was addressing the OP who claimed that consoles are the way (and only way, was implied) to go.
Get what you want. I personally would rather spend money on the hardware I already have and use daily, than go buy another piece of hardware that does the same thing, without all the useful features. Yes, I have a Wii for parties, since it works better for that than my PC.
I'm not boycotting anything, I just haven't found a reason to get more than a PS2 yet. With my TV I can't tell the difference between the "next gen" and the PS2 or 360. Games haven't functionally changed enough to warrant it, either.
Yes, laptops are big in the entry PC and college markets now. I can see this making some difference. I personally prefer, when at home, to stare at my 48" flat panel, than hunch over my 17" laptop though. I went for laptops for awhile in college because they were more convenient sounding, and I got sick of messing with hardware. But eventually I decided that being able to do incremental hardware updates was better than watching my laptop slowly sink into obsolescence (yes, thank god for Linux, keeping old cruddy computers running long after their prime, like zombies).
It always boils down to taste.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
1. You're in luck then. Most quality PC games auto-detect your hardware and choose the optimal settings for you. Install the game and fire it up.
2. Sure they can. But that doesn't mean most people have one.
Here's how I look at it. I can throw down $400 for a good PC and be assured that the graphics will be as good as or better than any gaming console out there, and for another $400 I can throw together a system that makes any console look like last year's breakfast. And not only that, I can also use that same PC for a bazillion other things. In fact, chances are I already have that $400 PC for those bazillion other things and at most I need to throw down $50 for a graphics card upgrade.
Sarcasm aside, people like you are the ones that keep perpetuating the pointless debate. You obviously entirely missed the point of my previous post. It really makes me question your reading comprehension. Let me sum it up for you in one convenient sentence: There is no competition between consoles and PCs.
And you're wrong about the patches and updates. In fact, the more consoles try to replace PCs, the more patches and updates are going to become the norm.
You also missed one other huge advantage PCs have over consoles: repairs and upgrades. If your Xbox 360 gets the RROD, you have exactly one option: wait for Microsoft to fix it or send you a new one, while you wait 1-2 weeks without your game system. Yawn. If my PC has a hardware failure, I can go buy a replacement part (usually for about $50-$100) and replace it immediately. If the failed part is still under warranty, I have the choice to either wait like the Xbox owner for a replacement from the manufacturer or replace it myself and then stash the replacement from the manufacturer for a spare. When it's time to upgrade, you have to wait for the console manufacturer to decide to build a new model. Then you have to replace the whole thing all at once. You may also have to replace all your games. You might even have to replace your TV. Who knows? It's entirely up to the console manufacturer.
As long as PCs exist, people will code games for them, and consumers will buy and play those games. It's just that simple.
There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
FWIW I actually spent a LOT of time getting Windows XP to the state I like
You might be interested in building a custom XP install disk with your registry changes integrated into the install.
The clash of honour calls, to stand when others fall.
...plus indian equivalent of FCC actually man dating net neutrality as per law...
There is an Indian agency responsible for Man Dating? Pretty forward thinking country, that India it is...Now if I could just figure out how one dates a net neutrality.
Who modded the parent Funny? I forgot about it, but I used to do that all the time when I was a kid. Old hardware and some food, the easiest and cheapest way to bribe young geeks into doing whatever you want ;)
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
What's the point in that? I don't see why I would risk crashes/corruption/instability on a machine I count on for a job. Plus, I don't see how overclocking old hardware really makes a difference anyway - does overclocking your P4 1.8Ghz to 2.2Ghz really mean much when a new machine is going to be far faster than either?
You're forgetting that most people here have more time than money. Particularly those that are on salary. And that's not even counting those of us who like to tinker anyway.
The freedom to steal movies faster, cool.
I pay $106 per month, 50GB traffic free PM (extra chargeable), and 24x7 access. Its so fast that rapidshare had to block my ip for 2 hours when i was downloading a... "classic non-copyrighted HD movie." Each 200MB file was opening up 5 simulatenous connections to RS and Flashget was having 4 files being downloaded at same time: which translates to 5x4= 20 connections to RS from same ip at speeds exceeding the rate at which i could write to a USB 2.0 drive. They banned me for 2 hours and warned me that if i try again my ip would get a permanent ban.
Damn those RS bastards.
Now i download 2 files at a time and open up 2 connections for each file. My speed varies between 1500KBps to 1829KBps.
To assuage myself i download from torrents, although those seeding torrents can offer 256KBps max...
But i was able to download Windows 7 RC1 (3.8 GB) in 20 mins 13 seconds flat ! Flashget really does work!
Oh, BTW, if my connection goes down and i get a ticket number. i don't pay any rent for the down day.
This sucks majorly for the ISP, so they are maniacal in repairing any faults. When i shifted from one room to another the first guy screwed up the wiring and my speeds were about 4Mbps. I called, got a refund for those days and had a technician the next day at 8AM at my door. That guy forced me to sit with him until 12.30 while he fixed the bad wiring, made sure my connection was triple-wired (the ISP's internal network can't handle the speeds they offer, so they wire together 3-4 connections into a single one for me) and tested thrice at speedtest.net to make sure i got what iam paying for.
Only then did he get my "completion" signature so that the ISP could start billing me in full.
Tell, is there any other excellent premium file sharing service like RS? No other services comes as close with its massive amount of files (all of which are legal)
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
So you saying that US connectivity is a legless racer? Wow! And i always thought US was the forerunner in internet & broadband...Guess we have to compete against Korea which has insane speeds.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
And i always thought US was the forerunner in internet & broadband...
Um, you must be new here... ;)
Guess we have to compete against Korea which has insane speeds.
Yes, or Japan. Pick your poison...
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
... I used to do that all the time when I was a kid...
I'm in my thirties, and still doing it - it's amazing just how powerful that 5-10 year old machine is, when it's "just" running a CLI mode "server" OS...
... and who doesn't like pizza?
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Well, my last dinner at Outback was significantly overpriced, in a noisy &poorly decorated restaurant, and with too-large servings of mediocre food. And with no decent beer. How was yours?
I believe the most relevant terms that you don't seem to be grasping is Gaming PC. You seem to get the gaming part, but you are missing out on the PC part. IOW, this article is about building a "gaming PC" for $800. It is not about being able to play games for $800. It is about building a PC, specifically in order to play PC games. As the PS3 cannot play PC games, it does not fit in well as a PC gaming machine.
HTH. HAND.
Stop Global Warming!
Just say no to irreversible processes!
The freedom to steal movies faster, cool.
I have been waiting for a long time to ask this:
What exactly do you mean "steal"? Do i walk into showroom and flick a few DVDs without paying for them?
Does my unpaid downloads cause a revenue loss for Universal and others? In what way? Did they think i was going to pay for their DVDs?
Did i "steal" an original film and cause a revenue loss for Universal?
Kindly explain what do you mean by "steal". If you cannot, shut the fcuk up.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
As the PS3 cannot play PC games, it does not fit in well as a PC gaming machine.
As the PC (singular) cannot play most multiplayer games, it does not fit in well as a party entertainment machine. Most multiplayer PC games appear to be designed with a LAN-party mentality with one PC and one copy of the game per player. If I have friends over for some other reason and we want to play a game on the side, it'll be hard to talk them into carrying PCs with them. Wii, PLAYSTATION, and Xbox 360 work as an imperfect substitute, but almost no console games provide for user-created mods the way Half-Life provided for Counter-Strike.
you don't need a cinema display to play a PC game. a 1680x1050 monitor is going to give an imagine quality that is hard to tell from a hd tv for gaming purposes.
True, a 22" 1050p PC monitor has more pixels than my 32" 720p HDTV, but it's physically smaller. This means it's harder to see from the sort of distance that four players sit at.