The "PC Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
As you may know, I'm saving for a new graphics card and I'm looking at the GTX 960 as a good card for the money that also works well with a standard 500w PSU.
But....what if I saved a bit more and bought a new PC? My CPU is not great, it's an A8 APU and it's struggling at times, the motherboard is creaky and only an FM2 and won't take anything other than the APUs due to the wonderful knobbling HP do on their Bios. So I'm thinking here's a challenge, find me a PC (on Amazon as I have vouchers making up some of my money towards it, or take £150-£200 off the maximum price) that will; a) run all the latest games at high settings or thereabouts (not necessarily ultra), b) costs less than or around £500 and c) looks pretty.
This is the best I've come up with so far:
Go!
But....what if I saved a bit more and bought a new PC? My CPU is not great, it's an A8 APU and it's struggling at times, the motherboard is creaky and only an FM2 and won't take anything other than the APUs due to the wonderful knobbling HP do on their Bios. So I'm thinking here's a challenge, find me a PC (on Amazon as I have vouchers making up some of my money towards it, or take £150-£200 off the maximum price) that will; a) run all the latest games at high settings or thereabouts (not necessarily ultra), b) costs less than or around £500 and c) looks pretty.
This is the best I've come up with so far:
Go!
Page:
Dr. Garin wrote:
Then what is the problem?
£400 will buy you a i5 barebones that leaves you £150-£200 for your graphics card? Get a R9 380 or a GTX 960, I doubt you'd be unhappy with either.
I gues s I'm stuck in the graphics card element, really. So much conflicting information. Thr R9 380 looks a better bet with the extra ram but the 970 is supposed to edge it, but then more games are needing more than 2GB
I'm guessing an i5 4460 will be enough for most games on the CPU front?
Then what is the problem?
£400 will buy you a i5 barebones that leaves you £150-£200 for your graphics card? Get a R9 380 or a GTX 960, I doubt you'd be unhappy with either.
I gues s I'm stuck in the graphics card element, really. So much conflicting information. Thr R9 380 looks a better bet with the extra ram but the 970 is supposed to edge it, but then more games are needing more than 2GB
I'm guessing an i5 4460 will be enough for most games on the CPU front?
Then what is the problem?
£400 will buy you a i5 barebones that leaves you £150-£200 for your graphics card? Get a R9 380 or a GTX 960, I doubt you'd be unhappy with either.
£400 will buy you a i5 barebones that leaves you £150-£200 for your graphics card? Get a R9 380 or a GTX 960, I doubt you'd be unhappy with either.
Dr. Garin wrote:
pb wrote:
[i]This is still ongoing.
I've taken everybody's suggestions into account (yes, even yours Chas) and I still can't decide.
Things I know for sure:
1) I don't want to build this one myself, I have done a previous one and don't mind but I don't have the time this time around.
Not clear if this has already been talked about but does the middle ground work here? Buy a barebones, add your own hdd + gfx card and install windows. Certainly get more for your money than buying an off-the-shelf machine.
2) My average PC life (before I buy another or upgrade) is 3-4 years. I'd like this to be longer but if I'm buying easily upgradable stuff then it's not too bad.
Typically the only answer to this is to spend more money. There are no choices here that are any more or less future proof than others. As good a measure as any are the consoles. To some degree, development will be bound by what the consoles are capable of. From what I can see has been mentioned, you're buying better than them so I think that's as good as you can hope for.[/i]
I've got Windows already and I priced up the graphics card, memory and base unit separately and it actually works out cheaper to get the full thing.
pb wrote:
[i]This is still ongoing.
I've taken everybody's suggestions into account (yes, even yours Chas) and I still can't decide.
Things I know for sure:
1) I don't want to build this one myself, I have done a previous one and don't mind but I don't have the time this time around.
Not clear if this has already been talked about but does the middle ground work here? Buy a barebones, add your own hdd + gfx card and install windows. Certainly get more for your money than buying an off-the-shelf machine.
2) My average PC life (before I buy another or upgrade) is 3-4 years. I'd like this to be longer but if I'm buying easily upgradable stuff then it's not too bad.
Typically the only answer to this is to spend more money. There are no choices here that are any more or less future proof than others. As good a measure as any are the consoles. To some degree, development will be bound by what the consoles are capable of. From what I can see has been mentioned, you're buying better than them so I think that's as good as you can hope for.[/i]
I've got Windows already and I priced up the graphics card, memory and base unit separately and it actually works out cheaper to get the full thing.
pb wrote:
This is still ongoing.
I've taken everybody's suggestions into account (yes, even yours Chas) and I still can't decide.
Things I know for sure:
1) I don't want to build this one myself, I have done a previous one and don't mind but I don't have the time this time around.
Not clear if this has already been talked about but does the middle ground work here? Buy a barebones, add your own hdd + gfx card and install windows. Certainly get more for your money than buying an off-the-shelf machine.
2) My average PC life (before I buy another or upgrade) is 3-4 years. I'd like this to be longer but if I'm buying easily upgradable stuff then it's not too bad.
Typically the only answer to this is to spend more money. There are no choices here that are any more or less future proof than others. As good a measure as any are the consoles. To some degree, development will be bound by what the consoles are capable of. From what I can see has been mentioned, you're buying better than them so I think that's as good as you can hope for.
This is still ongoing.
I've taken everybody's suggestions into account (yes, even yours Chas) and I still can't decide.
Things I know for sure:
1) I don't want to build this one myself, I have done a previous one and don't mind but I don't have the time this time around.
Not clear if this has already been talked about but does the middle ground work here? Buy a barebones, add your own hdd + gfx card and install windows. Certainly get more for your money than buying an off-the-shelf machine.
2) My average PC life (before I buy another or upgrade) is 3-4 years. I'd like this to be longer but if I'm buying easily upgradable stuff then it's not too bad.
Typically the only answer to this is to spend more money. There are no choices here that are any more or less future proof than others. As good a measure as any are the consoles. To some degree, development will be bound by what the consoles are capable of. From what I can see has been mentioned, you're buying better than them so I think that's as good as you can hope for.
This is still ongoing.
I've taken everybody's suggestions into account (yes, even yours Chas) and I still can't decide.
Things I know for sure:
1) I don't want to build this one myself, I have done a previous one and don't mind but I don't have the time this time around.
2) My average PC life (before I buy another or upgrade) is 3-4 years. I'd like this to be longer but if I'm buying easily upgradable stuff then it's not too bad.
3) I want to be able to play as many games as possible, including forthcoming games, at 1080p 60fps, which includes some CPU intensive games.
I've taken everybody's suggestions into account (yes, even yours Chas) and I still can't decide.
Things I know for sure:
1) I don't want to build this one myself, I have done a previous one and don't mind but I don't have the time this time around.
2) My average PC life (before I buy another or upgrade) is 3-4 years. I'd like this to be longer but if I'm buying easily upgradable stuff then it's not too bad.
3) I want to be able to play as many games as possible, including forthcoming games, at 1080p 60fps, which includes some CPU intensive games.
chasfh wrote:
Dr. Garin wrote:
[i]I bet those arrows are running at 60fps @ ultra settings.
That's almost funny.[/i]
Garin never stops chas ;¬)
Dr. Garin wrote:
[i]I bet those arrows are running at 60fps @ ultra settings.
That's almost funny.[/i]
Garin never stops chas ;¬)
Dr. Garin wrote:
I bet those arrows are running at 60fps @ ultra settings.
That's almost funny.
I bet those arrows are running at 60fps @ ultra settings.
That's almost funny.
I bet those arrows are running at 60fps @ ultra settings.
DL wrote:
@chas ...
Why do you have those 'blue shortcut arrows' on your desktop?
I keep my games on a separate hard drive, that's how the icons show up. Probably could get rid, just never have...
@chas ...
Why do you have those 'blue shortcut arrows' on your desktop?
I keep my games on a separate hard drive, that's how the icons show up. Probably could get rid, just never have...
Page: