dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
5
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Lees Summit, MO
·Google Fiber

me1212 to C0deZer0

Member

to C0deZer0

Re: The future of Gaming? PC or Console?

the 600ti is for max settings AND dx11, for lower settings and dx9 a 650 will do just fine. And even IF you needed a 660ti to play those are NOT $600! So yeah thats ether trolling or outright lying.

"Secondly, uh, no. 800x600"
It RENDERS at 600p, then stretches the image to 720p or 1080p, learn a few basic things about how graphics work before you type. You are making an fool of yourself.

"The 360 can output every game in its library at 1080p"
lol no, it upsacles(stretches the image) to 1080p it renders at 600p.

"Thirdly, I would not trust a $50 PSU as far as I can throw it."
a 500w 80+ bronze is $50, hardware does not cost nearly as much as it used to.

"And of course none of this takes into account the cost of monitor"
use a tv, ether vga or hdmi and hook it to the tv.

"Saint's Row the Third may natively support up to 3x1 monitor setups"
Most people don't use it, just because it supports it doesn't mean everyone uses it.

C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium Member
join:2001-10-03
Tempe, AZ

C0deZer0

Premium Member

The fact still stands that you cannot build a complete system for $600 as you so claim.

Hell, a good motherboard for either platform alone already runs between $2~300, and that doesn't account RAM, CPU (keep in mind, none of the benchmarks I listed run on anything other than a 3770K, which is also a $300-something chip).

And per my experience, that $50 PSU you so laud will not only not have enough rails or connectors to properly outfit a gamer-worthy box, but will end up costing you what you spend on the rest of the system later when it (and let's not kid ourselves, it will) spectacularly combust itself in failure and take out half the hardware in the machine with it.

When I first bought my 8800GTS, it was a $400 part. Same thing with the GTX 285. Both of which I purchased the models with a higher amount of video memory for staying power. As such, it's been my experience that those GPU's outfitted with more vRAM tend to remain useful a helluva lot longer. Cheapest available 4GB RAM nVIDIA card on Newegg is about $440 as of this writing. Maybe if you're lucky, you could gamble with a refurb model for $380, if it ever becomes available.

And even The Witcher, a game that was built on DirectX 9, manages to be lauded for its graphics, but last I read an article about pushing it thanks to their release of the "extended edition" and graphics upgrades the company did, Hard|OCP wouldn't recommend anything short of an SLi or X-Fire to run with everything on.

Also, I've yet to come across a single TV that didn't look like complete ass when used as a monitor, regardless of inputs supported. Only time I've seen a TV handle a VGA signal well is when coming from the Dreamcast, and even then it admits up front it's an 800x480 signal.

jomama
@optonline.net

jomama

Anon

LOL die hard console fanboy there

Ghastlyone
Premium Member
join:2009-01-07
Nashville, TN

Ghastlyone to C0deZer0

Premium Member

to C0deZer0
said by C0deZer0:

The fact still stands that you cannot build a complete system for $600 as you so claim.

Hell, a good motherboard for either platform alone already runs between $2~300, and that doesn't account RAM, CPU (keep in mind, none of the benchmarks I listed run on anything other than a 3770K, which is also a $300-something chip).

And per my experience, that $50 PSU you so laud will not only not have enough rails or connectors to properly outfit a gamer-worthy box, but will end up costing you what you spend on the rest of the system later when it (and let's not kid ourselves, it will) spectacularly combust itself in failure and take out half the hardware in the machine with it.

When I first bought my 8800GTS, it was a $400 part. Same thing with the GTX 285. Both of which I purchased the models with a higher amount of video memory for staying power. As such, it's been my experience that those GPU's outfitted with more vRAM tend to remain useful a helluva lot longer. Cheapest available 4GB RAM nVIDIA card on Newegg is about $440 as of this writing. Maybe if you're lucky, you could gamble with a refurb model for $380, if it ever becomes available.

Dude, I don't know where the fuck you shop for computer parts. But you need to find a new store. You're getting ripped off.

200-300 dollars for a motherboard? lol

Nothing other then a 3770k? lol

Then, you claim PC gaming takes a 600 dollar GPU, and proceed to link to an article and talk about a 660ti. Are we talking 600 dollar GPUs? Or are we now talking $280-300 GPUs? That's a far cry from 600 dollars.

You're clearly trying to drum up hyperbole regarding prices and hardware requirements for PC gaming.

C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium Member
join:2001-10-03
Tempe, AZ

C0deZer0

Premium Member

The same place you do.

Proper Motherboard ? $300.
If you bothered to read the various setups used by sites to benchmark how well a game runs, you'd see they'd either be using a $329 i7-3770K or a more expensive 3960X at $1069 to drive their numbers. Meaning anything slower would have some minutiae of lesser performance.

A 660 Ti now can be had for $289 a piece, but it isn't going to last like a GPU with 4gigs of vRAM.

You laud something like Crysis, which still has trouble running on most new systems, as the triumph of PC gaming; while I personally thought the game was boring and stupid beyond belief, that game practically requires an insane investment on hardware. But then you double-back and claim you can make a complete system for $600 - which I've yet to see any of you post - that could run the games properly. And by properly, I mean at a minimum of 1920x1080, with High (and above) settings, PhysX where supported, and do so fluidly. And by fluid, I would mean an ideal of above 60frames/sec, but I'd just as settle for something that doesn't go into stutter-fits like the Crysis SP demo would do even when its internal counter would report my system rendering at 90+fps.
Expand your moderator at work
C0deZer0

C0deZer0

Premium Member

Re: The future of Gaming? PC or Console?

If you can't reply without lunging insults and resorting to name-calling, then all you're doing is making your retort look even less credible.

Since you've yet to post a complete computer system that is game worthy for this $600 price tag, and you can't prove your points, I think I'm done here.

Krisnatharok
PC Builder, Gamer
Premium Member
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit

Krisnatharok to C0deZer0

Premium Member

to C0deZer0
Bullfucking shit. Take this console fanboy attitude elsewhere. I'm not even going to quote the bad information, and instead just offer my thoughts on the steaming pile of crap that is this thread.

• A modest Z77 motherboard usually runs just north of $100, and you can get a quality Z75 board for $85. I've used it in builds before.
• The "best" CPU for any single card setup, up to even twin dual GPUs, is an i5-3570K. More threads = more heat and a lower OCing threshold. The best setup for 2+ high-end GPUs (680s/7970s) is the i7-3820, and it is even cheaper than the i7-3770k on Newegg. What makes it better than the i5? Not anything regarding cores or clockspeed, but the ability to saturate PCIe 3.0 lanes to take full advantage of all cards. Even bringing up the 3960X shreds what little credibility you have left in the topic.
• So now more VRAM = futureproofing? LOL--do you think that GT 650M is powerful because it has 2 GB of vram??
• The Radeon 7870 is available at just over $200 (the cheapest is $210) and is capable at playing almost any game out there at 1080p.

I dislike topics like this, because it invariably degenerates into an imbecilic dick measuring contest between one camp and another. I game on a desktop, a laptop, and an xbox 360 (admittedly not as much as in the past).

Both platforms have their strengths, and consoles certain have a big appeal to the casual market, whereas desktops will always appeal to hardware geeks (like me) who enjoy fine-tuning their own builds without having anything locked down by a manufacturer.

Anyways, carry on with the misinformed bullshit. I hope prospective builders don't visit this thread.

Ghastlyone
Premium Member
join:2009-01-07
Nashville, TN

Ghastlyone to C0deZer0

Premium Member

to C0deZer0
said by C0deZer0:

Proper Motherboard ? $300.

If you're naive enough to purchase that motherboard, then you deserve to stick with your Xbox 360.
said by C0deZer0:

If you bothered to read the various setups used by sites to benchmark how well a game runs, you'd see they'd either be using a $329 i7-3770K or a more expensive 3960X at $1069 to drive their numbers. Meaning anything slower would have some minutiae of lesser performance.

I didn't waste money on an i7 for gaming luckily. I bought an i5 for a hundred dollars cheaper and getting the same performance. Review sites I've read all show the 3570k as being the best bang for the buck CPU out there, and for $100 cheaper to boot.
said by C0deZer0:

A 660 Ti now can be had for $289 a piece, but it isn't going to last like a GPU with 4gigs of vRAM.



So they were 600 dollars when they first released? That's how you're trying to portray it with that statement.

Why are you so hung up on Vram? Only thing Vram is going to help with are multi monitor setups and higher then normal resolutions. You aren't future proofing with opting for 4gbs of vram over 2gb.
said by C0deZer0:

You laud something like Crysis, which still has trouble running on most new systems, as the triumph of PC gaming; while I personally thought the game was boring and stupid beyond belief, that game practically requires an insane investment on hardware. But then you double-back and claim you can make a complete system for $600 - which I've yet to see any of you post - that could run the games properly. And by properly, I mean at a minimum of 1920x1080, with High (and above) settings, PhysX where supported, and do so fluidly. And by fluid, I would mean an ideal of above 60frames/sec, but I'd just as settle for something that doesn't go into stutter-fits like the Crysis SP demo would do even when its internal counter would report my system rendering at 90+fps.

I never lauded Crysis when it released. I didn't even play that game until about 3 months ago for the first time because it was on sale on Steam for 4.99.

People that purchased 8800 GPUs back in the day like you say you did, tend to have a sour taste in their mouths for some reason.

Blockgorilla
Sarcasm is my native tongue
join:2010-02-11
Wichita, KS

Blockgorilla to C0deZer0

Member

to C0deZer0
are you confusing the issue, the computers your talking about, the ones reviewers use to benchmark the games, are top of the line systems designed to find the breaking points.

Playable and maxed out graphics are in different ballparks.

Krisnatharok
PC Builder, Gamer
Premium Member
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit

Krisnatharok to C0deZer0

Premium Member

to C0deZer0
said by C0deZer0:

Since you've yet to post a complete computer system that is game worthy for this $600 price tag, and you can't prove your points, I think I'm done here.

I've built a couple, and you can get an i3-3220, 8GB ram, Radeon 7770, and about a 500 GB HDD for that price.

Check out:
Our latest builder: »Need help building a desktop gaming computer (specifically here, CAN pricing, so US is $80-100 less)

Slightly more, but includes monitor and KB&M: »[Parts Check] Proposed student/light gaming build

This build is $850, but can max every game on ultra: »Re: Gaming build for teenager
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Lees Summit, MO
·Google Fiber

1 edit

me1212 to C0deZer0

Member

to C0deZer0
»www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 11146083

»www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· &x=0&y=0

»www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 17139026

»www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 14130827

»www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 20148540

»www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 13157326

»www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· &x=0&y=0

»www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 32116986

There, windows included.

EDIT: found a better case.

TigerLord

join:2002-06-09
Canada

TigerLord to C0deZer0

to C0deZer0
said by C0deZer0:

Since you've yet to post a complete computer system that is game worthy for this $600 price tag

Easy:
»pc.ncix.com/ncixpc_new/n ··· -4822591

I think you lack the proper education to be able to judge PC gaming in its current state.

You are doing our users and our forums a huge disservice. I've built over 85 PC such as this one as well as other PC with smaller budgets and if you are to consider the utilty/price ratio PC are superior to consoles in every possible way.

The only con to PC gaming is the entry price is slightly higher because a PC is a multifonction system by design and there's no way to reduce costs by making it a "gaming only" machine which is essentially what a console is.

El Quintron
Cancel Culture Ambassador
Premium Member
join:2008-04-28
Tronna

El Quintron

Premium Member

said by TigerLord:

The only con to PC gaming is the entry price is slightly higher because a PC is a multifonction system by design and there's no way to reduce costs by making it a "gaming only" machine which is essentially what a console is.

Even the "lower priced console" argument is debatable because most consoles are subsidized or sold at a loss, with those costs recouped via licensing fees.

I don't *mind* my PS3 but the only reason I have it is because I started playing PC games after I bought it, if I had been playing PC games before this I would have never gotten a PS3 in the first place.

I AM
Premium Member
join:2010-04-11
Ephrata, PA

I AM to C0deZer0

Premium Member

to C0deZer0
It's funny though when a console first releases people line up then resale it on ebay for 1k+. I don't see the point in this, just go build a PC.

Like I said I'm playing Ps4 and Xbox 720 now while consolers wait.