PDA

View Full Version : mid rang pc



Akuma
11-16-2005, 11:46 AM
MSI K8n Neo 4Fi 1394 Nforce $130
AMD Venice 3500+ $299
256mb Sapphire X800GTO $274
1G (2x512mb) corsair value $139 all prices AUD
Maxtor 8M SATA 120GB $102

17" MAGVIEW 8MS $295
----
$1,238

what yous think about this for a gaming pc i cant spend much more not sure bout GPU good card but no SM 3.0

Yawgm0th
11-16-2005, 12:09 PM
Go for a 6800GS. It's pretty close in price.

Don't get an LCD unless you really need one.

I'd recommend Western Digital or Seagate over Maxtor.

You're forgetting case and PSU, and a PSU that comes with a case won't be sufficient.

Akuma
11-16-2005, 12:13 PM
Go for a 6800GS. It's pretty close in price.

Don't get an LCD unless you really need one.

I'd recommend Western Digital or Seagate over Maxtor.

You're forgetting case and PSU, and a PSU that comes with a case won't be sufficient. yeah i know about the case i got this list from the net and they dont have case pic so ill have to go down to the shop and have a look

we dont have 6800GS but ive check the american prices and it costs alot more.
i like the overclock abilty of the X800GTO and it seems good value

and why not an LCD ?

Yawgm0th
11-16-2005, 12:40 PM
we dont have 6800GS but ive check the american prices and it costs alot more.It doesn't cost a lot more over here, but if it does there then the GTO is fine. Granted the 6800GS came out very recently and might be available for a comparable price.


and why not an LCD ?
Costs more, has inferior image quality, and isn't as good for gaming due to a number of issues. Even without ghosting and whatnot, an LCD can never allow you to see your games at over 60FPS because they do have refresh rates and thus far, it's always 60Hz, though the response time (and don't take the rated response time for anything) is a bigger problem anyway. In addition to those issues, CRTs will play games at higher resolutions.

Unless you really need the desk space or portability, there's absolutely no reason to get an LCD. The size is the only advantage LCDs have ever had.

AsianBatman
11-16-2005, 01:35 PM
Yes lcd screens are inferior to crts for games, i am not sure about the 60fps gap though yawg. I have a 19' lcd, and its hard to see certain spots in games like counter strike which is curcial to your survive. While i use my 17' crt dell flat face and play at 1600x1200 and the image sharpness and quality is nice.

Akuma
11-16-2005, 03:57 PM
just check a few site cant find any GS and alot of places dont sell CRTs any more

just though id through this in my current rig scored 160 on 3dmarko3 oh yeah i rule :( (gefore 2 )

Spongebob
11-16-2005, 09:30 PM
Speaking about LCD monitors....P.C. monitors do have some catching up to do in order to keep up with the current high end graphic card adapters. I don't think this is a good time to invest into an expensive P.C. monitor. Maybe we will see something that is native to DVI connectors, HDTV compatable, and support high resoluting & refresh rates next year.

Yawgm0th
11-17-2005, 06:14 AM
Yes lcd screens are inferior to crts for games, i am not sure about the 60fps gap though yawg.
What aren't you sure about? Neither the refresh rate nor the response time allow you to see more than that in one second. Granted, most games are still playable and enjoyable at framerates well below that, but the simple lack of the option is enough to turn me off. I know I'd want more than 60FPS if I were still playing CSS. Not quite as crucial for BF2, especially since I'm flying most of the time anyway.