Aller au contenu

Photo

Time for the new gaming PC


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
13 réponses à ce sujet

#1
Sylvius the Mad

Sylvius the Mad
  • Members
  • 24 126 messages

It's been some time since I last did this.  I'd appreciate some advice.

 

I have a healthy budget.

 

Let's assume I know nothing about building a PC (not true, but I'd rather not bias responses).  What hardware should I prioritise?  What operating system should I run?

 

Thanks.



#2
bmwcrazy

bmwcrazy
  • Members
  • 3 622 messages

If you want to go with the Intel platform, you can wait for the new Z97 mobos.

 

Other than that, try to get one of those R9 290x with a bigger and quieter dual or triple-fan cooler.

 

As for the OS, you can either get Windows 7 or Windows 8.

 

DirectX 11.2 will be exclusive for Windows 8 but personally, I hate 8's start screen and its stupid apps.



#3
NekkidNones

NekkidNones
  • Members
  • 994 messages

I would try to get a mobo with mSata support.  Specifically one using an intel sata controller.

Though I can't think of a current game that takes advantage of an mSata caching drive, they may yet in the future.  If not, then it is a bit of built in flexibility for future upgrades/expansion.

 

videocard and monitor will obviously be a very important consideration for a gaming PC.  Are you going to run with 1, 2, 3 or 6 monitor setup?  720, 1080, 4k?



#4
bmwcrazy

bmwcrazy
  • Members
  • 3 622 messages

My Intel mobo has an mSATA port but all it does is replacing one of the SATA ports when it's being used.

 

Instead of using Intel's SRT, I just use two SSDs for OS and games and a couple 4TB 7200RPM HDDs for storage.



#5
Sylvius the Mad

Sylvius the Mad
  • Members
  • 24 126 messages

I would try to get a mobo with mSata support. Specifically one using an intel sata controller.
Though I can't think of a current game that takes advantage of an mSata caching drive, they may yet in the future. If not, then it is a bit of built in flexibility for future upgrades/expansion.

videocard and monitor will obviously be a very important consideration for a gaming PC. Are you going to run with 1, 2, 3 or 6 monitor setup? 720, 1080, 4k?

I have a monitor I like. 1920*1200.

But I might go 4K before too long.

#6
NekkidNones

NekkidNones
  • Members
  • 994 messages

I'd recommend waiting on 4k until the screen sizes and refresh rates reach a point where there is greater value, but that is a different point for every person.  Just be aware that it will happen. Like me personally, I don't know if I'd ever get one.  Unless I do something new with an HTPC setup.



#7
Kaiser Arian XVII

Kaiser Arian XVII
  • Members
  • 17 303 messages

I still can't find many monitors that surpass 1920*1080 resolution even on the Internet (only a few 1920*1200)!

 

Can you introduce me few monitors that have 2.5K and 4K resolutions?



#8
NekkidNones

NekkidNones
  • Members
  • 994 messages

Google "buy 4k monitor" and I am sure you'll catch results.



#9
Guest_Rubios_*

Guest_Rubios_*
  • Guests

SSDs are so 2010, real men use PCIE Flash storage now.



#10
Kaiser Arian XVII

Kaiser Arian XVII
  • Members
  • 17 303 messages

Google "buy 4k monitor" and I am sure you'll catch results.

 

No. It wastes too much time of mine.

 

Anyway I only found a 3840 x 2160 1050$ Dell Monitor. The others were TVs.

*finishes searching*



#11
NekkidNones

NekkidNones
  • Members
  • 994 messages

more interesting(to me)

 

http://linustechtips...-new-favourite/



#12
Guest_Rubios_*

Guest_Rubios_*
  • Guests

Eww... 16:9 is bad enough, I wouldn't go wider even if they paid me to.


  • Kaiser Arian XVII aime ceci

#13
Kaiser Arian XVII

Kaiser Arian XVII
  • Members
  • 17 303 messages

Eww... 16:9 is bad enough, I wouldn't go wider even if they paid me to.

 

Yeah. 16:10 is much more interesting than 16:9.

I wouldn't get wider either.



#14
Sylvius the Mad

Sylvius the Mad
  • Members
  • 24 126 messages

Yeah. 16:10 is much more interesting than 16:9.

I wouldn't get wider either.

I vastly prefer 16:10 to 16:9.  16: 9 just isn't tall enough.

 

I've been using a monitor that is 1200 pixels tall since 1999 (I ran 1600*1200 CRTs before I went flat panel).  1080 is too short.