21 réponses à ce sujet

[What a Twist]

I'm getting a new desktop PC. I want one that can run dragon age easily, but I don't want to go too far over $2,000.

How does this look?

Intel® Core™ i3 530 2.93GHz (4MB Cache) Dual Core ProcessorSingle 1GB GDDR5 ATI Radeon™ HD 5670 - DirectX® 11 Enabled3GB DDR3 1333MHz Dual-Channel Memory[/list]

And that's for about 1,000 + tax.
I'm alright with software, but I know more about brain surgery than I do hardware.



The next in that line up is for about $1,800 and it's specs are as follows:


Up to Intel® Core™ i7 980x 3.33GHz (12MB Cache) Extreme Edition Quad Core Processor. Overclocking options available.Up to Dual 1GB GDDR5 ATI Radeon™ HD 5870 CrossfireX™ Enabled GraphicsUp to 24GB (6x4GB) 1333MHz Tri-Channel MemoryExclusive "Active Venting" thermal management system[/list]

Modifié par What a Twist, 24 juillet 2010 - 10:20 .

[DABhand]

Canadian or American? or Australian?



From your first idea, I noticed 3GB DDR and 1GB on the Graphic Card, I assume you are going to be using a 32bit Windows 7?

[PSUHammer]

I would say, the i3 is pretty weak. You want to put your money in Processor and a graphic card. The ATI card is decent, but the processor needs work.



What about motherboard? Hard drives? Are you getting at least a decent 500+ watt power supply?

[DABhand]

The close to 3ghz cores is good enough, its not weak. Only drawback is its dual core. Great value for money and good performance. So the i3 is a good CPU, no idea why you think its bad.

The 5670 is an ok card, not the greatest, but if the op is going for an Intel CPU he is best with an Nvidia card, he could easily get a Geforce 460 or 465 about double the price of a 5670 and more performance also.

Modifié par DABhand, 25 juillet 2010 - 03:00 .

[PSUHammer]

Who said it was bad? Its the entry level processor in the i series, thats all. If you are building a PC, I always say start with the best processor you can afford to future proof yourself.



Plus, even though ATI was bought by AMD, their cards work fine with Intel processors. In fact, I went with ATI with my last purchase as Nvidia drivers were flaky at the time

[DABhand]

1. You said the CPU was weak, when you were wrong. You may start off with a high end straight away, but not everyone has that sort of cash to buy an i7.



2. Recent motherboards for the last year have seen Intel good with SLI and poor with Crossfire, Reverse is true with AMD boards.

[adrichardson]

I3's pretty good value for money. If OP isn't doing anything that'll benefit from more than 2 cores, it's fine. Judging by the spec, I take it it's an Alienware Aurora? For the money, you'd be better off with an XPS 9000 and a 5770 (U$1079).



Failing that, shop around. I'm sure people here will be happy to cast their eye over any options you come up with.

[itbewillyum]

You can get a gaming rig like i bought from newegg or tigerdirect for $1200....Comes with 8g of ram 1tb HD Win 7 64bit and a Intel Core i5 650 @ 3.20 GHZ processor....Im not the most technical guy here but since buying this pre-built pc i havent ran into any issues with games i play on the highest setting having issues and as it stands now my computer seems to run most games.If i do run into an issue with games its my connection speed and not my pc causing the issue.

[itbewillyum]

http://www.tigerdire...11&Sku=SYX-1038



Isnt this a decent rig? It may not be alienware top of the line quality but it has everything most games require to run and run well.Haven't had any issues with the pc since i bought it.

[DABhand]

Problem is here guys, if he is from Australia costs are much higher due to exchange rates etc.

[PSUHammer]

DABhand wrote...

1. You said the CPU was weak, when you were wrong. You may start off with a high end straight away, but not everyone has that sort of cash to buy an i7.

2. Recent motherboards for the last year have seen Intel good with SLI and poor with Crossfire, Reverse is true with AMD boards.

Opinions, buddy.  No need to have a nerd Napoleon complex.

BTW, so you are assuming someone can afford two graphics cards for Crossfire/SLI but only the low end processor in the i Series?  Interesting logic to support your opinion.

Modifié par Hammer6767, 26 juillet 2010 - 02:51 .

[DABhand]

Hammer6767 wrote...

DABhand wrote...

1. You said the CPU was weak, when you were wrong. You may start off with a high end straight away, but not everyone has that sort of cash to buy an i7.

2. Recent motherboards for the last year have seen Intel good with SLI and poor with Crossfire, Reverse is true with AMD boards.

Opinions, buddy.  No need to have a nerd Napoleon complex.

BTW, so you are assuming someone can afford two graphics cards for Crossfire/SLI but only the low end processor in the i Series?  Interesting logic to support your opinion.

Of course Opinions, but you clearly stated that it was a poor CPU which was the wrong advice. And no nerd napoleonic complexes here.

I am not assuming he will have 2 cards, I am pointing out that latest Intel and AMD boards dont work well with respective GPU's. That is a fact. He may for instance decide in the future to get the same GPU again to link em, only to find out that the motherboard he got doesnt work well ATI cards at all.

So its a professional opinion of mine (through experience and knowledge) that he should get an Nvidia GPU if he gets an Intel CPU.

[Loerwyn]

It's the unprofessional opinion of me that dual cards is the most pointless way to spend money when building a gaming rig. On a Price:Performance level, it's incredibly low benefit and you're effectively going "Come on, problems! Come to me!". It's improved in recent years, but it's still far from being a fully viable way to build a gaming PC. You're much better off getting an SSD for your OS and using a conventional drive for data/games.

I think Intel are putting out the better CPUs at the moment (could be wrong), with ATi putting out the best cards. I can't see there being much of a problem.

[PSUHammer]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

It's the unprofessional opinion of me that dual cards is the most pointless way to spend money when building a gaming rig. On a Price:Performance level, it's incredibly low benefit and you're effectively going "Come on, problems! Come to me!". It's improved in recent years, but it's still far from being a fully viable way to build a gaming PC. You're much better off getting an SSD for your OS and using a conventional drive for data/games.
I think Intel are putting out the better CPUs at the moment (could be wrong), with ATi putting out the best cards. I can't see there being much of a problem.

I have to concur.  SLI and Crossfire rigs have always seemed like overkill to me.  Lots of cash for little gain.  I have always just gotten the best graphics card I could afford, at the time (ATI or Nvidia) and never had issues.

The reason I always got the best processor I could afford, first, is because usually a processor upgrade included a new motherboard, and most likely RAM.  So by getting the fastest one you can budget for, you future proof yourself.  You may get away with just upgrading your graphics card every few years.  I usually have a CPU last 3-4 years before a major upgrade.  Graphics card every 2.

[PSUHammer]

DABhand wrote...

Hammer6767 wrote...

DABhand wrote...

1. You said the CPU was weak, when you were wrong. You may start off with a high end straight away, but not everyone has that sort of cash to buy an i7.

2. Recent motherboards for the last year have seen Intel good with SLI and poor with Crossfire, Reverse is true with AMD boards.

Opinions, buddy.  No need to have a nerd Napoleon complex.

BTW, so you are assuming someone can afford two graphics cards for Crossfire/SLI but only the low end processor in the i Series?  Interesting logic to support your opinion.

Of course Opinions, but you clearly stated that it was a poor CPU which was the wrong advice. And no nerd napoleonic complexes here.

I am not assuming he will have 2 cards, I am pointing out that latest Intel and AMD boards dont work well with respective GPU's. That is a fact. He may for instance decide in the future to get the same GPU again to link em, only to find out that the motherboard he got doesnt work well ATI cards at all.

So its a professional opinion of mine (through experience and knowledge) that he should get an Nvidia GPU if he gets an Intel CPU.

No I did not.  I said it was "weak."  Which it is true compared to the other processors in that lineup.  If that's all someone can afford, then by all means go for it.  The budget he outlined for his first choice did not mention SLI or Crossfire so that seems like a moot argument.  (The second option does, but, again, drop the second card and you are closer to the first system with a similar budget)

And, I am not sure you can contend that every single model of Intel MB's from all the different manufacturers have issues with ATI cards.  That's pretty broad and speculative assertion.

Modifié par Hammer6767, 27 juillet 2010 - 10:14 .

[BrunoB1971]

think of all of this this way, the cheaper you go, the faster you will have to upgrade whcih in the end does not save you money.



The big piece to look at his your motherboard, you need to have a good motherboard that is somewhat futureproof to some degree.



I would recommend buying the asus gaming boards because they are built for gaming.



if you buy a good motherboard you will be able to do many hardware upgrades in the long run without having to start from scratch all the time. also look at the latest cpu sockets. and what is coming in the next year or so. you do not want to buy a motherboard that you wont be able to upgrade your cpu from another year from now.



I got an I7 cpu qud core in my machine and it is real good..stay in the I7 range but dont go crazy on trying to get an extreme or some other overhyped and overcharged cpu. like i said the i7 980 is good and at a good price.



your other choices seemed good...but invest in a good motherboard....read a lot of reviews on them, the plus and minuses and then you can decided whci brand and model you want....





a good review site is hardware canuck.,....they got good reviews on many different computer parts and they seem to be honest about their reviews...

[DABhand]

Hammer6767 wrote...

No I did not.  I said it was "weak."  Which it is true compared to the other processors in that lineup.  If that's all someone can afford, then by all means go for it.  The budget he outlined for his first choice did not mention SLI or Crossfire so that seems like a moot argument.  (The second option does, but, again, drop the second card and you are closer to the first system with a similar budget)

And, I am not sure you can contend that every single model of Intel MB's from all the different manufacturers have issues with ATI cards.  That's pretty broad and speculative assertion.

Weak = Poor in my dictionary, but it is known that AMD in particular has been anti-Nvidia so people will buy their ATI GPU's. Thats business for you.

And Intel have responded in Kind giving more support and compatibility with Nvidia cards and less support/compatibility with ATI cards.

The point is not moot, you are assuming that I said for him to get 2 cards, I did not, I said for future purchases and upgrades it would be more advisable to get an Nvidia GPU if he goes for an Intel CPU. It was good advice.

You only have to try it out for yourself, say a Quad Core 3ghz per core, both AMD and Intel and the same ATI 5870 for example. It will perform better with the AMD CPU than the Intel one, stick in a Geforce 470 and it will perform better with the Intel CPU. Crossfire or SLI the respective cards and its even more noticeable.

[Gorath Alpha]

On a frames per dollar basis, both CF & SLI return poor values.  Sometimes the problems they add are sufficient to discourage the buyer from ever trying dual GPUs again.  We already have so much more CPU power at the high end that the fastest quads and the soon to arrive multi-cores with more than four are major overkill.  On the other hand, there are still larger, higher resolution displays (and multiple displays, up to six), that literally use up as much graphical power as can be thrown in that direction. 

When comparing hardware setups for games, it is the snappiness and sharpness of the images that are the most immediately noticeable indication of performance.  Video cards literally represent half of the effective influence on how speedy that a given system will be perceived to be on a subjective basis.  Therefore, never skimp on that part, if performance is a consideration. 

A Radeon HD 5670 is a pretty good value in its class, giving good frames per dollar in value, but when it's time to name the parts that are right for a gaming system, its class is only "Mainline", and if you want a large display some day, it's not what you need.  Its 128 bit memory system effectively limits it to Medium Resolutions, and to no more than 512 MBs of VRAM that a game will be able to use. 

Dependng on whether you want a little furnace cooking away in the video card slot, you may want to avoid any but the very newest of the Geforce Fermis, which mostly run hot as can be!   You also would have potential problems with drivers, which has been the very largest complaint, besides poor value, that the Geforces have had to endure.

Personally, I have chosen not to play games in any 64 bit OS, and the only Windows 7 I have is 64 bit, so I use it with non-game applications while getting used to it.  Vista's two Betas were very disappointing, so the better PCs here are running Windows XP, still.  That is the OS I recommend to other game players, as well.  

Gorath
-

[DABhand]

Games are fine in a 64bit OS, they effectively run in 32bit anyway with no slowdown at all. Added bonus of course is the ability to use more RAM over the 4gb limitation of 32bit OS's (even when most 32 bit windows prefer to show 3GB even with just a 512MB GPU).



CF and SLI are fine, it's just so many people don't understand it to appreciate it, the ones that complain about it mostly I have seen all have a 5970 which is a dual GPU with crossfire onboard.



Plus some dont realise you do really need a good PSU to run in CF/SLI. No point trying to do it on a 500-600W PSU

[searanox]

Sounds like you're buying a pre-built system, which will be much more expensive; pre-builts are usually easier if you're on a budget and return adequate performance for standard desktop tasks (web browsing, office work, etc.), but as you go up the performance chain you pay much more money. You will have far better results with building your own system, both in terms of customisation and in terms of the price/performance ratio; it's not too difficult to do, but if you have no experience with assembling computer hardware, and don't have a friend to help you out with it, pre-built systems still may be worth the price premium.

[phil3995]

 I agree with searanox building your own system is so much better especially when it comes to performance/price ratio. 

[basdoorn]

What a Twist wrote...
I'm getting a new desktop PC. I want one that can run dragon age easily, but I don't want to go too far over $2,000.

How does this look?

Intel® Core™ i3 530 2.93GHz (4MB Cache) Dual Core Processor
Single 1GB GDDR5 ATI Radeon™ HD 5670 - DirectX® 11 Enabled
3GB DDR3 1333MHz Dual-Channel Memory

And that's for about 1,000 + tax.
I'm alright with software, but I know more about brain surgery than I do hardware.

The next in that line up is for about $1,800 and it's specs are as follows:

Up to Intel® Core™ i7 980x 3.33GHz (12MB Cache) Extreme Edition Quad Core Processor.
Overclocking options available.
Up to Dual 1GB GDDR5 ATI Radeon™ HD 5870 CrossfireX™ Enabled Graphics
Up to 24GB (6x4GB) 1333MHz Tri-Channel Memory
Exclusive "Active Venting" thermal management system

Dragon Age will run fine with an Intel Core i3 2.93 GHz and Ati Radeon 5670. The other system is ill defined, as everything is specified as 'up to ...' instead of the real components you get for the $ 1,800. To me this alienware rig looks overpriced for what I get at default options, an Intel Core i7 930 with an Ati Radeon 5770 at $ 2,100 at this time. So instead I looked at Dell for you and despite my opinion that gaming PC's should be custom built by yourself or a local specialized computer shop, I came up with the following Dell XPS9000 machine.

Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium, 64bit, English
Intel® Core™ i7-920 processor(8MB L3 Cache, 2.66GHz)
9GB DDR3 SDRAM at 1066MHz - 6 DIMMs
750GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive
ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB GDDR5
21.5" Dell ST2210 Full HD Monitor with VGA cable
16X DVD+/-RW Drive
Soundblaster® X-Fi™ Xtreme Audio
Dell Studio Consumer Multimedia Keyboard
Dell Studio Optical Mouse
Studio XPS 9000

Base price $ 2,008, with discount of $ 458 makes your end price $ 1,550. It comes with free shipping if you have a coupon, otherwise you probably pay another $ 100 or so and still easily fits your $ 2,000 budget. Anyway, this system will play Dragon Age really well with the Intel Core i7 920 quad core CPU and an Ati Radeon 5870 high-end graphics card (double the performance of an 5770 and 4 times that of an 5670). The default 8GB dual channel memory option offers less memory bandwidth, which is why I went with the 9GB instead. A triple-channel 6GB option would have been sufficient for an office/internet/gaming system over the next few years but was not available. Also, I opted for a Soundblaster X-Fi over the default audio chip on the mainboard as the X-Fi supports EAX (hardware audio effects) which are nice to have when gaming.

If you need a new screen maybe you should invest a bit more in this as it is ultimately where you are looking at all the time, the Dell Ultrasharp screens are real nice but a 24" one adds $ 400 to your budget (worth it in my opinion but your priorities might differ). Other peripherals like mouse+keyboard I did not look at, but maybe you would also like a gaming mouse+keyboard instead of the default Dell equipment. You can get faster processors in this system, but you will pay much more for only a slight increase in performance. $ 470 to upgrade an i920 (2.66 GHz) to an i960 (3.2 GHz) is a very bad value deal to me. It is better spent on peripherals like the Ultrasharp 24" screen, or an SSD (Solid State Disk) to boot from, should such an option become available. Otherwise keep it in your pocket and use it for upgrades in about 2 years, or even save it for a future system.

Of course other vendors will have similar systems and you should really consider building a computer by yourself (with help) or having a local specialized computer shop do this for you, as you do not have to pay for stuff you do not really need this way and probably you will also get better cooling and a better power supply to boot. Things like the strange 9GB memory option, screen you cannot order the computer without, and default mouse and keyboard that are of limited use for gaming can all be avoided claiming a part of your budget and ultimately garage/storage space.

Modifié par basdoorn, 29 juillet 2010 - 09:48 .