PDA

View Full Version : Help me build a computer


bombadillo
09-21-2009, 2:14 PM
I had a computer built back in 2001 and it has been a real champ. I went with some of the best stuff at the time but its getting quite dated. I would like a computer to last 5+ years again and it has to be quality but not necessarily the absolute top of the line costing twice as much because it has the most current toys and gimmicks. I'd like to go through www.cyberpowersystem.com if I could through their intel or AMD configurator. They have specials but I just don't know much in the last 5 years the new motherboards to go with or not go with, new processors and the quad core and more technology out there. I have a very good idea what I like and what I don't, but i'm looking for a solid machine thats in the 800 dollar ballpark without breaking the bank, 4gb RAM, 1TB HD, Quality power supply, DVD/CD ROM and a DVD/CD burner (Yes I want dual drives I like it that way and continue to use it as such) Decent cooling, and anything else I may "need" let me know as new things have come into the scene since i've been in it much. I just don't know all of these new terms for the brands and processors and other technical garble. Let me know what you think or any other routes that I may take!

jammer2k
09-21-2009, 2:52 PM
What are you wanting to do with the computer? the company you link to seems to be more into the gaming systems. Their price seems fairly good, a quick check with Newegg shows a good price match so no problem there.

A couple of things I noticed is that they get their price looking even lower by not including the OS or monitor in their price, you have to add them in using the configurator.

As for long lasting you may want to look at an Intel Core I5 or I7 processor and something with an Intel X58 chipset. You also may want to wait until the end of the month before buying as then it will include Win7 already installed, unless you really don't mind trying the upgrade process later.

imtheomegaman
09-21-2009, 2:53 PM
aren't you much better off these days buying a pre built machine?

sfwdiy
09-21-2009, 2:59 PM
aren't you much better off these days buying a pre built machine?

Depends on how you define better off. If you're referring to simplicity and user-friendliness out of the box, then yes. If you're talking about power and value for the money, customization, extensibility and ability to upgrade, then not at all.

--B

bombadillo
09-21-2009, 3:02 PM
What are you wanting to do with the computer? the company you link to seems to be more into the gaming systems. Their price seems fairly good, a quick check with Newegg shows a good price match so no problem there.

A couple of things I noticed is that they get their price looking even lower by not including the OS or monitor in their price, you have to add them in using the configurator.

As for long lasting you may want to look at an Intel Core I5 or I7 processor and something with an Intel X58 chipset. You also may want to wait until the end of the month before buying as then it will include Win7 already installed, unless you really don't mind trying the upgrade process later.

The things I will be using it for, are obviously internet perusing, music, video, some gaming, power point and similar programs, and DVD/CD burning. The basic computer stuff. I have found that the gaming setups tend to last a lot longer because they're made for more "abuse" from running hot, and using demanding video and memory. I built a "gaming" system that still actually runs VERY well but its getting dated and more and more things aren't accepted because of system limitations so its getting time to upgrade. I have considered the windows 7 and am absolutely in no hurry. the I7 processor seems to be the route I want to take. I have been a big AMD fan but it looks like Intel is kicking butt in the new market.

aren't you much better off these days buying a pre built machine?

I prefer to buy machines built to my specs and honestly I looked at Dell and a few other companies and they're little if any cheaper. I couldn't find one to meet my specs that didn't cost more than I could build it for. Plus, cyberpower has great support and guarantee their products. I also like full size cases for cooling so things aren't jammed so close together and overheat. I always add fans and all the cooling options I can because like an engine, if you have a large area under the hood with great cooling, it just runs better.

Thanks for the responses, especially the recommendations.

Apex
09-21-2009, 3:22 PM
Have you considered a laptop and maybe an external hard drive? You can get a pretty decent machine for $549-$699, and that leaves you a few bucks left for a nice external HDD as well as a cordless mouse.

If your primary concern isn't gaming, this is the route I'd probably run.

bombadillo
09-21-2009, 3:28 PM
I absolutely don't like laptops because they run hot and rarely last more than 2-3 years using them between 1-3 hours a day. My wife and I use our computer constantly and getting a tower thats large and well cooled helps make a computer last dramatically longer. Plus, they're a royal pain to work on. I can upgrade ram, memory card, fans, CPU, and other stuff with a desktop that I can't do with a laptop very easily. When a single thing goes out on a desktop, its usually replaceable whereas a laptop you typically get proprietary stuff that's harder to replace (not all the time, but a lot of times)

jammer2k
09-21-2009, 3:47 PM
The Intel i7 X58 one will definatly work, it may be a little more than 800 though. The main changes I would make are make sure to get the 64 bit OS if you want more than 3 gigs RAM and the other defaults are just fine on the hardware side.

On the software side they still offer XP, but you will be limited to 3+ gigs of RAM (3.25 or so) so buying XP and 6 gigs is a bit of a waste. Also they don't include a monitor in the default build so you will either need to use your existing one or get a new one.

bombadillo
09-21-2009, 3:56 PM
Looks like its gonna be more in the 800-1k ballpark. I'm not thrilled about it, but thats what i'm going to have to do. I have a legal copy of XP pro right now I may just keep, but depending on reviews, windows 7 looks promising. I have a nice 22" monitor now so the tower is all I really need.

JaMail
09-21-2009, 4:04 PM
ive been building my own systems for a while and honestly at this point, start out with a preconfigured tower with the components you want with the manufactures extended warranty to cover your first two years. it seems hardware doesnt last as long as it used to so that manufacturers warranty can save you money and time. you can get some incredible deals on dells for instance

Studio XPS 9000 is only 1100
Intel® Core™ i7-920 processor(8MB L3 Cache, 2.66GHz)
Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1, 64-Bit
20.0" Dell ST2010 HD Widescreen Monitor (nice bonus)
Dual Drives: 16x DVD-ROM Drive + 16x DVD+/-RW w/ dbl layer write capability
(dual drives, another nice bonus)
Memory8GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM2 at 1066MHz - 4 DIMMs
Hard Drives750GB 7200 RPM3 SATA Hard Drive
Video CardnVidia GeForce GT 220, 1024MB
Hardware Support Services2Yr Ltd Hardware Warranty,5 InHome Service after Remote Diagnosis6


you really cant beat the price for the components as listed, go to tigerdirect.com or walk around frys one day and try to price out everything that comes with it, the ONLY thing i dont like about that setup is the 475 watt powersupply. but for a general high power system, cant really beat that, depending on what types of gaming your into you "might" need to upgrade the video card with something a little more juiced. component prices have gone down way to much to make it worth building your own, especially as you will never be able to match the economies of scale the major manufacturers have.

kpw001
09-21-2009, 5:50 PM
Looks like you don't need anything souped up, you might just want to browse Dell's site for a pre-built tower. In my opinion, they do tend to over charge for increased RAM and hard drives and dual optical drives so get the machine and then upgrade those parts yourself from sites like newegg.com or tigerdirect.com or even pay a visit to Frys.

If you can wait a few more weeks, I'd suggest getting the new computer with Windows 7 pre-installed. You might also find less RAM will go father with 7 than it does with Vista so you may not even have to upgrade that and save a few bucks. Plus I like 7 much better than Vista anyways!

sargenv
09-21-2009, 5:51 PM
I've been building my own computers since the mid 90's but I think I'm finally fed up with all the different things that can go into one and I think the next computer I get will likely be a laptop with a large external drive or two. I don't do any gaming so CPU power isn't as big a deal. I just want it to be able to keep up with me for the next few years.. until I need to upgrade again.

Flogger23m
09-21-2009, 7:06 PM
You would want to go with Windows 7 64bit. This is what everyone is switching to. I used it myself for a few hours, and it seems nice. I don't like the UI though. But aside from that, it is pretty much like Vista.


I've heard mixed reviews from Cyberpower. Sometimes the PC works great, sometimes they forget to plug in some parts completely, ect.

Just stay away from Ibuypower.


The AMD Phenom 2 CPUs are doing pretty well to. You'll have to check benchmarks and compare motherboards to see which one is cheaper in the end.

AMD tends to keep older CPUs around longer, so you'll likely have cheaper upgrade options in 3-4 years if you feel like you need it. AMD is generally better in the sub $100 market.

Make sure the PC supports DDR3 as well.

If you plan on using a decent video card, make sure you get a case that is big enough and has room for good airflow and extra fans. These things have got huge. And have extra room, in case you want to upgrade 3 years down the road.

And don't get a no name brand PSU, they don't cut it anymore.

bombadillo
09-21-2009, 7:17 PM
If you plan on using a decent video card, make sure you get a case that is big enough and has room for good airflow and extra fans. These things have got huge. And have extra room, in case you want to upgrade 3 years down the road.

And don't get a no name brand PSU, they don't cut it anymore.


Thats why I'm going for a full sized case with 3 extra fans. What I WANT is about 1100 bucks. What I need is about 800. We'll see what I can sell off to do this.

Gunaria
09-21-2009, 7:24 PM
http://www.dell.com/business/desktops?~ck=mn

1JimMarch
09-21-2009, 7:54 PM
I would go with a medium-grade ATI video card over NVidia right now. Too many quality control issues with NVidia lately. Something in the medium 4000 series with 512megs RAM should do nicely in a desktop - new enough to run OK and be fully driver supported, old enough to be in the $100-$150 range unless you're a gamer who wants to go bigger.

This thing for $75 is all most folks need:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814103071

If that one card doesn't go the whole five years, that's OK, the stuff out there now for $300 will be worth $75 three years from now...

(This is a process I call "surfing behind the curve" and it can give you huge price/performance benefits.)

ATI is also giving more info to the open source community, so driver support is getting better and better. In a couple years when you might finally be willing to stop drinking the MS kool-aid, an ATI card will put you in great shape to jump to a real OS :).

locosway
09-21-2009, 9:20 PM
If you or a friend can't build the machine then look for a reputable shop that's local. If you're concerned with a good warranty and need customer service then I'd suggest Dell.

As for hardware, I'd stick with Intel even though I'm a long time AMD fan.

4GB's of RAM is enough at this time unless you have special needs.

1TB HDD is large enough for most people, however never keep all of your eggs in one basket. Since hardware is so cheap you may want to look into a RAID solution with 3 1TB drives.

Also, if you're into good sounds then don't use the onboard audio unless you get a decent board with a good chipset.

locosway
09-21-2009, 9:22 PM
I would go with a medium-grade ATI video card over NVidia right now. Too many quality control issues with NVidia lately. Something in the medium 4000 series with 512megs RAM should do nicely in a desktop - new enough to run OK and be fully driver supported, old enough to be in the $100-$150 range unless you're a gamer who wants to go bigger.

This thing for $75 is all most folks need:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814103071

If that one card doesn't go the whole five years, that's OK, the stuff out there now for $300 will be worth $75 three years from now...

(This is a process I call "surfing behind the curve" and it can give you huge price/performance benefits.)

ATI is also giving more info to the open source community, so driver support is getting better and better. In a couple years when you might finally be willing to stop drinking the MS kool-aid, an ATI card will put you in great shape to jump to a real OS :).

I can't recommend ATI with a straight face. They've been plagued by terrible support for drivers just until a couple years ago. Not to mention Nvidia has always really put a hurt on them.

If you're looking for a company that's Linux compatible Nvidia has some good Linux drivers even though they aren't open source.

Corbin Dallas
09-21-2009, 9:59 PM
i'm looking for a solid machine thats in the 800 dollar ballpark without breaking the bank,

4gb RAM,

1TB HD,

Quality power supply,

DVD/CD ROM

and a DVD/CD burner (Yes I want dual drives)

Decent cooling




You are not going to hit your mark as a custom build.

I would recommend an off the shelf unit with an upgrade combo drive and maxed out ram.


Just to give you a good starting point, a "quality" powersupply starts in the 650W range and alone averages $100

A good case that has at least 2 5.25" bays and room for 2 HD's with a standard motherboard slot will cost you another $100 on average.

With just these 2 components, you've blown 25% of your budget.

Now, if you want something that will last you 5 years (assuming moore's law) you will need to get the best of the best now.

A good quad-core intel processor is yesterday's top of the line. Move forward to the new I7 (icore) 6 core processor which even at the lowest number will cost you near $600.

So without memory, HDD's or DVD's, you've now blown your $800 budget.


So, with your budget, I would look for a pre-built system that meets your needs within your budget.

Corbin Dallas
09-21-2009, 10:03 PM
I can't recommend ATI with a straight face. They've been plagued by terrible support for drivers just until a couple years ago. Not to mention Nvidia has always really put a hurt on them.

If you're looking for a company that's Linux compatible Nvidia has some good Linux drivers even though they aren't open source.


Although I would agree in the past, AMD has since bought ATI and the Linux support for the new cards is outstanding.

However, Nvidia still has better Linux support overall.

Flogger23m
09-21-2009, 10:29 PM
I can't recommend ATI with a straight face. They've been plagued by terrible support for drivers just until a couple years ago. Not to mention Nvidia has always really put a hurt on them.




I feel the same about Nvidia. Add the fact that the AA and image quality doesn't look as good. At least to me.

The 7900 series also seemed to have a lot of heating issues.

locosway
09-21-2009, 10:39 PM
I hate it when people recommend OS's when hardware is the topic.

If he's not trying to run something completely tied into the M$ dev framework then Linux is a perfectly capable OS and could save him a lot of money in the long run.

bombadillo
09-21-2009, 11:29 PM
You are not going to hit your mark as a custom build.

I would recommend an off the shelf unit with an upgrade combo drive and maxed out ram.


Just to give you a good starting point, a "quality" powersupply starts in the 650W range and alone averages $100

A good case that has at least 2 5.25" bays and room for 2 HD's with a standard motherboard slot will cost you another $100 on average.

With just these 2 components, you've blown 25% of your budget.

Now, if you want something that will last you 5 years (assuming moore's law) you will need to get the best of the best now.

A good quad-core intel processor is yesterday's top of the line. Move forward to the new I7 (icore) 6 core processor which even at the lowest number will cost you near $600.

So without memory, HDD's or DVD's, you've now blown your $800 budget.


So, with your budget, I would look for a pre-built system that meets your needs within your budget.

Maybe a bit more than expected, but for 900-1k I can find everything I was looking for and more. I could go with 3, 120mm fans, liquid cooled CPU, and lots of extras and ended up with 6 gigs of ram. This was with name brand everything and a 7 or 800w power supply. I think custom would be the way to go if I can do it all for under 1k. I already have an OS so i'm not worried too much about that. I can always upgrade to windows 7 later on down the road when i'm done with XP pro.

1JimMarch
09-21-2009, 11:35 PM
However, Nvidia still has better Linux support overall.

No they don't. ATI is actually releasing info to the open source community on how to write drivers for the hardware. NVidia is NOT. Given a year or two more of THAT trend and without question, ATI is going to blast ahead. As it stands, some of the older ATI cards already have full open source driver support including some code moved into the kernel where it runs faster. I've tried an x1200 low-end ATI-based laptop with Karmic alpha and it runs GREAT with that new open source driver. That's going to move up the whole product line over time.

OS support is just one reason to buy ATI.

The other is the HUGE batch of flat-out bad chips NVidia has been shipping, esp. in the 8400/8600 range. Lawsuits are piling up; massive numbers of Apple, HP and other notebooks are affected along with an unknown number of desktops and video cards. Basically, NVidia has done a screwup possibly big enough to bankrupt them. See also:

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1028703/nvidia-g84-g86-bad

Read that and tell me NVidia is a good deal. Forget the tech side, you can avoid those bad chips, but also look at the ethics (or lack thereof) NVidia has shown. Just HP affected? Like hell.

AMD has helped ATI out a lot in terms of both financial and driver stability in Windows and Linux.

bombadillo
09-21-2009, 11:40 PM
How about this. Maybe upgrade to 6gb of ram, and upgrade the cooling. If you purchase vista home premium, you get a freebie coupon to windows 7 home premium or whatever upgrade you choose, and has pretty much everything thats still very new such as chipset and processor. They're pretty much the top of the line without being the absolute latest cutting edge. As someone else said, "riding behind the wave" is what i've always done to get something tried and true without paying outrageous prices up front.

http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/system/Gamer_Xtreme_3000/

kpw001
09-24-2009, 9:45 PM
I hate it when people recommend OS's when hardware is the topic.

If he's not trying to run something completely tied into the M$ dev framework then Linux is a perfectly capable OS and could save him a lot of money in the long run.

Well I think the OS is just as important as the hardware. A big example would be the hardware demands of Vista over 7 or Linux. You don't have to pay for extra RAM or dedicated video card when you can achieve just the same with less RAM and an integrated video chipset. More bang, less buck.

locosway
09-24-2009, 9:49 PM
Well I think the OS is just as important as the hardware. A big example would be the hardware demands of Vista over 7 or Linux. You don't have to pay for extra RAM or dedicated video card when you can achieve just the same with less RAM and an integrated video chipset. More bang, less buck.

So you can't run a dedicated card with Vista, 7, or Linux?

What about integrated video?

Honestly, it all works... The only time you may run into issues is if you're running under 1gb of ram and want to open up an application. Then again, with Linux you could just run a small window manager like Flux and not worry about it.

M198
09-25-2009, 8:13 PM
I hate it when people recommend OS's when hardware is the topic.

If he's not trying to run something completely tied into the M$ dev framework then Linux is a perfectly capable OS and could save him a lot of money in the long run.

For those of us who use our computer for gaming, Linux is not an option. Newegg is selling Vista Home Premium 64 bit for $108.00 with a free coupon to upgrade to win7. Bare bone kits are they way to go. If you already have a perfectly capable case and PSU (500W+), why pay for new ones. You can buy a new MB and CPU along with some DDR3 ram and you've got a brand new computer right there. As long and the other things in the old computer are still good like monitor, keyboard, mouse, PSU, or case, you only need to upgrade, not buy a whole new one.

locosway
09-25-2009, 8:32 PM
For those of us who use our computer for gaming, Linux is not an option. Newegg is selling Vista Home Premium 64 bit for $108.00 with a free coupon to upgrade to win7. Bare bone kits are they way to go. If you already have a perfectly capable case and PSU (500W+), why pay for new ones. You can buy a new MB and CPU along with some DDR3 ram and you've got a brand new computer right there. As long and the other things in the old computer are still good like monitor, keyboard, mouse, PSU, or case, you only need to upgrade, not buy a whole new one.

I saw the Dalai Lama today, and he said something that I found interesting.

"Ignorance is the cause for our suffering"

If you think Linux can't be used for gaming then I don't know what to say. I've been using Linux to play my games for years without any more problems than a Windows computer.

M198
09-25-2009, 9:28 PM
I saw the Dalai Lama today, and he said something that I found interesting.

"Ignorance is the cause for our suffering"

If you think Linux can't be used for gaming then I don't know what to say. I've been using Linux to play my games for years without any more problems than a Windows computer.

You saw the Dalai Lama today? Alright............ Anyway, sorry to hear about your suffering but let me assure you that I do dual boot Linux (Ubuntu) and have been using Linux since I has in high school (Red Hat days). I even have YellowDog installed on my PS3 which is all but pointless. Anyone ever figure how to get flash working on a 64 bit core yet? It doesn't work even when I use firefox in 32-bit move. That brings me back to my original point which is running WINE (a program that simulates running an OS that Linux geeks hate) to run COD4 seriously borders close to insanity. That's before the recompiling even starts. I never understood the act of starting an OS, then running a program (sorry, "compatibility layer") that runs like another OS so that I can maybe play the game that was meant for the OS that I didn't load to being with? That being said, I love using Ubuntu as a project, It's always fun to muck around with and for something that free, it's great. But I'd like to play my DX10 games, with Shader 3.0 and all sort of shiny things instead of reading forums on how to trick linux into running DirectX. That's just me.

locosway
09-25-2009, 9:51 PM
Wine and Cedega work great. I'd rather use Linux with my games along with these two programs that allow them to play.

If you don't like using Wine or Cedega then don't. But don't come on here spreading FUD about Linux not being able to game. If you want to pay for your OS every couple years instead of using something that's free then go ahead. No one is stopping you from doing this. I'm just trying to stop the spreading of FUD against Linux.

Linux is a capable OS in all areas. I've seen my share of Windows and Mac issues, so saying Linux is too hard to learn is FUD as well. If anything, Linux is easier once you unwrap your head from the current ideology.

M198
09-25-2009, 10:05 PM
Wine and Cedega work great. I'd rather use Linux with my games along with these two programs that allow them to play.

If you don't like using Wine or Cedega then don't. But don't come on here spreading FUD about Linux not being able to game. If you want to pay for your OS every couple years instead of using something that's free then go ahead. No one is stopping you from doing this. I'm just trying to stop the spreading of FUD against Linux.

Linux is a capable OS in all areas. I've seen my share of Windows and Mac issues, so saying Linux is too hard to learn is FUD as well. If anything, Linux is easier once you unwrap your head from the current ideology.

You might honestly be the first people who has ever said that Linux is easier to learn to use than Mac or Windows. That's simply an outrageous statement. In the 10 year's I've been running Linux I have honestly never heard that statement anywhere. Seriously. Anywhere. Ever. Honestly. It's simply not true. Back to my original point, while I generally do like Linux just to be snobish and different( but not in that really snobish Mac way) and show my friends the cool Beryl effects, it's not much use for gaming. I'd gladly pay $100 every few years to run my games in windows. Cedega and crossover games are both pay applications/service. Neither of them can run new games at windows speeds on comparable hardware.(edit: both can run SOME games at almost windows speeds). WINE needs to be tweaked, hacked, tickled, and bribed to play some games and some games won't play at all. I'm not spreading FUD at all. The fact remains, if you are a PC gamer, get windows. If you are uncomfortable with having any control over your computer, get a Mac. If you want complete control and don't mind typing "sudo" (a lot) then go with with Linux. That's not FUD, it's solid advice.

locosway
09-25-2009, 10:15 PM
If you sit someone down in front of a computer, a person who's never used a computer. Linux is usually the clear leader in usability with it's plethora of software and rock solid stability.

Cedega is very cheap if you go that route. However I've found that Wine works fine with all of the games I've tried. The only time I run into issues is with those value bargain games that are so intricately tied into the M$ system they won't play.

Microsoft has a fine product if that's what you're used to. My wife likes Windows and OSX better than Linux. Although that's what she's become accustomed to. I stopped trying to convert people to Linux a long time ago. Now I just go around and correct people when they're wrong.

Linux can play games just fine. If there's a brand new game that doesn't work, usually it's working within a few days or weeks. Why? Because developers refuse to release their games for Linux.

I'll use World of Warcraft as an example here. They use Linux clients internally for testing and development. They have a Linux backend too. However they will not release a Linux client yet, but are planning to sometime in the future. So, instead you can use Wine to run your game.

The OSS community is great, responsive, and responsible. I've yet to see a company match what the OSS community can do. For this very reason I support them whenever I can. For this reason I've become accustomed to running my games on Linux. Hell, I've even installed Steam and ran those games on here.

M198
09-25-2009, 11:06 PM
If you sit someone down in front of a computer, a person who's never used a computer. Linux is usually the clear leader in usability with it's plethora of software and rock solid stability.

Cedega is very cheap if you go that route. However I've found that Wine works fine with all of the games I've tried. The only time I run into issues is with those value bargain games that are so intricately tied into the M$ system they won't play.

Microsoft has a fine product if that's what you're used to. My wife likes Windows and OSX better than Linux. Although that's what she's become accustomed to. I stopped trying to convert people to Linux a long time ago. Now I just go around and correct people when they're wrong.

Linux can play games just fine. If there's a brand new game that doesn't work, usually it's working within a few days or weeks. Why? Because developers refuse to release their games for Linux.

I'll use World of Warcraft as an example here. They use Linux clients internally for testing and development. They have a Linux backend too. However they will not release a Linux client yet, but are planning to sometime in the future. So, instead you can use Wine to run your game.

The OSS community is great, responsive, and responsible. I've yet to see a company match what the OSS community can do. For this very reason I support them whenever I can. For this reason I've become accustomed to running my games on Linux. Hell, I've even installed Steam and ran those games on here.

Like I said earlier, I don't believe most people would agree that recompiling code and running programs from command lines are user friendly, but we can agree to disagree. I happen to think that Macs are by far the easiest OS to use and that's why I hate it so much. It's an OS wrapped in bubble wrap. Nothing goes wrong with it because you couldn't break it if you tried. The reason there aren't a lot of virus written for Mac is because only 10% of computers run it. Linux is at about 1 - 2%. Back to the original point, windows is better for gamers. All you have to do to run WoW is add -opengl to the command line and you're golden, but a lot of games are not so easy and require a lot of fairly involved editing to get wine to work with them. The fact remains that using WINE to run the game means that it doesn't run "just fine". I stand by my statement that PC Gamers should use windows.

locosway
09-25-2009, 11:11 PM
Like I said earlier, I don't believe most people would agree that recompiling code and running programs from command lines are user friendly, but we can agree to disagree. I happen to think that Macs are by far the easiest OS to use and that's why I hate it so much. It's an OS wrapped in bubble wrap. Nothing goes wrong with it because you couldn't break it if you tried. The reason there aren't a lot of virus written for Mac is because only 10% of computers run it. Linux is at about 1 - 2%. Back to the original point, windows is better for gamers. All you have to do to run WoW is add -opengl to the command line and you're golden, but a lot of games are not so easy and require a lot of fairly involved editing to get wine to work with them. The fact remains that using WINE to run the game means that it doesn't run "just fine". I stand by my statement that PC Gamers should use windows.


Wait, you say Linux is hard because you have to type archaic commands in a terminal. Yet OSX is easy. Wait, these two OSes are 98% the same!

Have you used a Linux distro lately? I haven't had to compile anything in a long time. Even my 7 year old knows how to use Synaptic to install software. Most Linux distro's are point, click, done.

M198
09-25-2009, 11:41 PM
Wait, you say Linux is hard because you have to type archaic commands in a terminal. Yet OSX is easy. Wait, these two OSes are 98% the same!

Have you used a Linux distro lately? I haven't had to compile anything in a long time. Even my 7 year old knows how to use Synaptic to install software. Most Linux distro's are point, click, done.

I'll say it again, I dual boot with Ubuntu and Vista. I've been using it for over 10 years, how about you? I also do a lot of gaming and use both practically every day. Take it from someone who knows both OS (obviously you don't), windows is better for gaming. BTW, I also have an old Mac Book that I inherited and haven't used in a long time. If you haven't had to complie anything in a long time, you are obviously not playing games in WINE.

Edit System Specs.

Case - Generic minitower
CPU - e7500 @ 3533.0 MHz = 11.00 x 321.2 MHz @ 1.2875 V
Memory - 4G Patriot PC 6400 @ 900 MHz
MB - MSI G45M Digital
GPU - 9800x2
OS - Ubuntu 9.04 - Vista SP2 32bit (PS3 - yellowdog 6.1)
PSU - Antec EA750 750W
Misc - Partridge in a pear tree.

locosway
09-26-2009, 12:16 AM
I've used Linux for 10 years as well. I've also been a Linux Administrator for 6 years. However, I'm sure you understand the intricacies of Linux far better than I.

Bed time...

1JimMarch
09-26-2009, 2:24 AM
I'll comment on Linux, ease-of-use and games below. But first let's illustrate what's "wrong" with Linux.

The deal with Flash64 is you have to install it manually. This is due to politics: Adobe has a rock-solid flash64 player but since they haven't shipped 64bit flavors for Windows or Mac yet, they refuse to admit the Linux Flash64 exists.

Or rather, they've labeled good working code "alpha" (meaning pre-release unstable) when by all appearances, it ain't. Therefore, the major distros like Ubuntu won't ship it, therefore you have to manually install the Flash64 "alpha" if you can find it at all. See this thread for details:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1241313

And that's exactly the sort of thing that goes wrong.

Now, take a brand new user and set up Linux for them, INCLUDING all the normal "media tuning" like adding flash, MP3, quicktime support, etc...and they'll have a great experience. ESPECIALLY if they're not already wrapped around Windows-style thinking. (Mac users don't really "think" per se :) - seriously, they often have less of a clue than even Windows folk.)

Example: bit of a long story condensed but, my landlady had a temporary tenant in another unit who was just a kid age 15 up from Mexico briefly to study for a series of tests. So he was bored as hell, I helped throw together some parts for a "ghetto PC", low-grade P4, 512megs RAM, 60gig HD. Nothing special, certainly not "gamer class". But OK for web-surfing, music, even watching movies. Cost me all of $40 to build, landlady chipped some of that in. Ran XUbuntu on it, kid took to it like a duck to water. His last PC experience had been Win98 on something really horrid years ago in Mexico.

As to gaming. I'll say it: Windows is better for now. BUT, virtualization is getting better including video hardware pass-through. I run WinXP under Virtualbox and it now has "experimental" but working OpenGL support which some Windows games use instead of DirectX. DirectX 10-level support is being worked on. Given the incredible rate of progress by Virtualbox and VMWare, the "game gap" is going to shrink soon.

If you're a hard-core gamer, go the dual-boot route.

The nice part about virtualizing XP (or Vista/7) is that if anything goes wrong with the Windows build, you can just reload it from backup. The entire Windows image lives in a single file within the Linux disk structure. If the Windows "guest" operating system catches a bug, no sweat, literally one drag'n'drop copy fixes it...and the virus can't jump up into the "alien" Linux disk structure, it's fully "captured" within the guest OS image.

bigmike82
09-26-2009, 8:00 AM
"If you think Linux can't be used for gaming then I don't know what to say. I've been using Linux to play my games for years without any more problems than a Windows computer."
*shakes head*
You can't honestly tell me that gaming on Linux is *as* good as it is on Windows.

Actually, Jim, I just read your other post, and I seem to have misinterpreted your statement. My apologies.

Look at the Wine app DB, and look at all the games that are gold and below. There are bugs when trying to play that game because you're trying to play it through a windows compatability layer. Some of these bugs are nothing more than annoyances, and some of them make the game wholly unplayable.

Right now, Windows has the clear advantage when it comes to gaming. Until Linux gets more support from the actual producers, this will not change.

"If you're a hard-core gamer, go the dual-boot route."
+1

locosway
09-26-2009, 8:04 AM
I never said Windows wasn't better for gaming. Although, Windows isn't *better*, it's just the games are released under Windows.

My complaint was the complete dismissal that you can play games on Linux. This is untrue. I play games on Linux and have done so for a while now. Lets also not forget the number of free games for Linux as well.

1JimMarch
09-26-2009, 9:37 AM
Lets also not forget the number of free games for Linux as well.

You ain't kiddin'. Battle for Wesnoth rocks if you're more into strategy than thumb-twitchin'.

For the record: the reason I'm on Linux is that in Sept. of 2006 I got hit by a nasty WinXP botnet virus of some sort. Spent three days chasing the damned thing with the tools available then, got FED UP when I realized even if I could kill it this could happen again, and downloaded Ubuntu (Dapper).

I've not booted Windows as my primary OS since. Not even once. I'll tolerate it as a virtual machine for those times I need Windows apps...

locosway
09-26-2009, 1:08 PM
Warsow is a neat FPS. It's a lot like the game XIII and Quake 2 mixed together.

As for strategy, I love RTS. I grew up on RTS. I'm still waiting for a really good RTS for Linux. So far there isn't one, but there are a couple that are close and are really promising.

bombadillo
10-19-2009, 5:28 PM
Still nothing yet, I have waited till windows 7 is out and now im going back and forth between cyberpowersystem and Dell. I can build a monster computer on cyberpower with a ton of cooling for around 1100 or so with dual drives and the whole bit, but dell makes it pretty easy. They sure charge a buttload for memory though.

bombadillo
10-19-2009, 5:57 PM
This is pretty much what I built. I have a bit of extra cash so what do you think before I bite the bullet?

* *BASE_PRICE: [+985]
* BUNDLE: None
* BLUETOOTH: None
* CD: LG 22X DVD±R/±RW + CD-R/RW Dual Layer Drive (BLACK COLOR)
* CD2: LG 22X DVD±R/±RW + CD-R/RW Dual Layer Drive [+30] (BLACK COLOR)
* CAS: NZXT Zero 2 Crafted Series Steel Full Tower Case [+40] (Black Color Trim)
* CASUPGRADE: NONE
* CS_FAN: Maximum 120MM Color Case Cooling Fans for your selected case [+15] (Blue Color)
* CPU: Intel® Core™ i7-920 2.66 GHz 8M L3 Cache LGA1366
* CARE: Professional Wiring for All WIRING Inside The System Chassis - Minimize Cable Exposure, Maximize Airflow in Your System [+19]
* FREEBIE_OS: None
* FLOPPY: NONE
* FAN: Intel LGA1366 Certified CPU Fan & Heatsink
* FREEBIE_RM: None
* FA_HDD: None
* FLASHMEDIA: INTERNAL 12in1 Flash Media Reader/Writer (BLACK COLOR)
* HDD: Single Hard Drive (500GB SATA-II 3.0Gb/s 16MB Cache 7200RPM HDD)
* HDD2: NONE
* IEEE_CARD: NONE
* KEYBOARD: Xtreme Gear (Black Color) Multimedia/Internet USB Keyboard
* MOUSE: XtremeGear Optical USB 3 Buttons Gaming Mouse
* MODEM: NONE
* MULTIVIEW: Non-SLI/Non-CrossFireX Mode Supports Multiple Monitors
* MONITOR: NONE
* MONITOR2: NONE
* MOTHERBOARD: Asus P6T SE Intel X58 Chipset CrossFireX Mainboard Triple-Channel DDR3/1600 SATA RAID w/ eSATA,GbLAN,USB2.0,IEEE1394a,&7.1Audio
* MEMORY: 6GB (2GBx3) PC1333 DDR3 PC3 10666 Triple Channel Memory (Corsair or Major Brand)
* NETWORK: Onboard Gigabit LAN Network
* OVERCLOCK: No Overclocking
* OS: Microsoft® Windows® 7 Home Premium [Pre-Sell, Ships on/after 10/22] [+104] (64-bit Edition)
* OS_UPGRADE: None
* POWERSUPPLY: 800 Watts Power Supplies (CyberPowerPC XF800S Performance ATX 2.0 Power - Quad SLI Ready)
* PRINTER: None
* PRINTER_CABLE: None
* RUSH: NO; READY TO SHIP IN 5~10 BUSINESS DAYS
* SERVICE: STANDARD WARRANTY: 3-YEAR LIMITED WARRANTY PLUS LIFE-TIME TECHNICAL SUPPORT
* SOUND: HIGH DEFINITION ON-BOARD 7.1 AUDIO
* SPEAKERS: None
* TEMP: NONE
* TVRC: None
* USB: Built-in USB 2.0 Ports
* USBHD: NONE
* VIDEOCAMERA: NONE
* VIDEO: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 1GB 16X PCI Express [+8] (Major Brand Powered by NVIDIA)
* VIDEO2: None
* VIDEO3: None
* VC_PHYSX: NONE
* VC_GAMES: None
* WNC: NONE
* _PRICE: (+1201)
* _view_: detail