Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

Many times, when i see people say "pc gaming is expensive" I often see people try to show them a cheap custom rig. However i have seen many of these so called "gaming pcs" Be either very weak and low quality or some times not even usable.

They do things such as leaving out windows use ultra low end psu,cases,motherboards ect.

Have you guys ever seen this?

Most PC gamers are not like this. But you may run into one who is so dedicated to pc he may try to bend the truth a little.

I also kinda find the Idea funny of comparing an OEM to a custom machine. Part of the cost of a console or a oem pc is the price it takes to put it together.

I have used some cheap parts in my pcs over the years. I got two dead PSU and one dead mother board. If your going to be using a powerful machine you should always make sure you don't cut corners!

Yes you don't need a uber pc to game on the pc. Some people make it out to be that a 350$ pc can max out everything at 1600p with x24AA and be good for years. Exaggerations can be kinda dangerous if the person you are trying to help does not know what they are doing.

#1 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

Many times, when i see people say "pc gaming is expensive" I often see people try to show them a cheap custom rig. However i have seen many of these so called "gaming pcs" Be either very weak and low quality or some times not even usable.

They do things such as leaving out windows use ultra low end psu,cases,motherboards ect.

Have you guys ever seen this?

Most PC gamers are not like this. But you may run into one who is so dedicated to pc he may try to bend the truth a little.

I also kinda find the Idea funny of comparing an OEM to a custom machine. Part of the cost of a console or a oem pc is the price it takes to put it together.

I have used some cheap parts in my pcs over the years. I got two dead PSU and one dead mother board. If your going to be using a powerful machine you should always make sure you don't cut corners!

Yes you don't need a uber pc to game on the pc. Some people make it out to be that a 350$ pc can max out everything at 1600p with x24AA and be good for years. Exaggerations can be kinda dangerous if the person you are trying to help does not know what they are doing.

#2 Posted by Dagbiker (6976 posts) -

I don't want to sound like Im ragging on you. But I don't think your doing your self many favors by pissing on Steam and now, PC gamers. If you have an example then cite it. otherwise all your doing is generalizing PC gamers.

#3 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

otherwise all your doing is generalizing PC gamers.

I think that's his entire point.

#4 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@banishedsoul1 said:

Yes you don't need a uber pc to game on the pc.

To run at console level or slightly better you can build a very cheap PC. 1280x720 @ 30 FPS is not even remotely difficult for mid-range PC hardware these days. Hence why you see people suggesting relatively weak setups.

I mean come on, Crysis looks better than any console game and the graphics card that could run that on the built-in "High" setting is almost 6 years old. (8800GTX/8800 Ultra)

I think if anything people outside of PC gaming are the least honest, they just jump on the bandwagon that it's expensive and that's that.

Edit: and nothing wrong with using cheap motherboards, that has very little to do with how reliable they will be, usually they just have less features and overclocking options. Never want to cut corners on PSUs though.

#5 Posted by Hippie_Genocide (579 posts) -

The problem I have with the whole price argument with pc vs. console is its very rarely apples to apples. People like to "conveniently" leave out the cost of their hdtv and home theater setup when comparing the two.

#6 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@Hippie_Genocide said:

The problem I have with the whole price argument with pc vs. console is its very rarely apples to apples. People like to "conveniently" leave out the cost of their hdtv and home theater setup when comparing the two.

I still find it bizarre so many people will pay hundreds and hundreds for a huge TV then proceed to use shitty built-in speakers.

#7 Posted by Hunter5024 (5688 posts) -

@Sooty said:

@banishedsoul1 said:

Yes you don't need a uber pc to game on the pc.

To run at console level or slightly better you can build a very cheap PC. 1280x720 @ 30 FPS is not even remotely difficult for mid-range PC hardware these days. Hence why you see people suggesting relatively weak setups.

I mean come on, Crysis looks better than any console game and the graphics card that could run that on the built-in "High" setting is almost 6 years old. (8800GTX/8800 Ultra)

I think if anything people outside of PC gaming are the least honest, they just jump on the bandwagon that it's expensive and that's that.

Edit: and nothing wrong with using cheap motherboards, that has very little to do with how reliable they will be, usually they just have less features and overclocking options. Never want to cut corners on PSUs though.

If you're just going to get something that runs console level then that sort of voids a lot of the arguments for gaming on the pc in the first place.

#8 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@Sooty said:

@banishedsoul1 said:

Yes you don't need a uber pc to game on the pc.

To run at console level or slightly better you can build a very cheap PC. 1280x720 @ 30 FPS is not even remotely difficult for mid-range PC hardware these days. Hence why you see people suggesting relatively weak setups.

I mean come on, Crysis looks better than any console game and the graphics card that could run that on the built-in "High" setting is almost 6 years old. (8800GTX/8800 Ultra)

I think if anything people outside of PC gaming are the least honest, they just jump on the bandwagon that it's expensive and that's that.

Edit: and nothing wrong with using cheap motherboards, that has very little to do with how reliable they will be, usually they just have less features and overclocking options. Never want to cut corners on PSUs though.

If you're just going to get something that runs console level then that sort of voids a lot of the arguments for gaming on the pc in the first place.

By console level I meant dirt cheap probably multiple second hand components, it's pretty difficult to find video cards that low end new, aside from the low profile ones meant for HTPCs and the like.

For a couple of hundred you can build a pretty great one.

#9 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@Sooty said:

@banishedsoul1 said:

Yes you don't need a uber pc to game on the pc.

To run at console level or slightly better you can build a very cheap PC. 1280x720 @ 30 FPS is not even remotely difficult for mid-range PC hardware these days. Hence why you see people suggesting relatively weak setups.

I mean come on, Crysis looks better than any console game and the graphics card that could run that on the built-in "High" setting is almost 6 years old. (8800GTX/8800 Ultra)

I think if anything people outside of PC gaming are the least honest, they just jump on the bandwagon that it's expensive and that's that.

Edit: and nothing wrong with using cheap motherboards, that has very little to do with how reliable they will be, usually they just have less features and overclocking options. Never want to cut corners on PSUs though.

If you're just going to get something that runs console level then that sort of voids a lot of the arguments for gaming on the pc in the first place.

This is kinda what i mean. some people might say a 8800 gt is a great card to have even by todays standards. Not saying thats what sooty is trying to say but i hope you get my drift. If he tried to sell me this pc saying it was amazing because it can play games a little bit better then consoles when it cant run newer games nearly as well as a newer gpu.

#10 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -

Yeah I hate it when this happens. Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600. To put it into perspective even the most barebones office PCs cost about $500 from just about anywhere, such a PC would be restricted to running modern games at low-medium settings if that, and then what's the point?.
 
You're not going to find much more of a PC fan than me, but I'm realistic. A reasonable estimate for a gaming PC nowadays is about $1,000, or about $1,200 if you account for shipping and taxes. Still extra for things like SSDs and controllers. You can certainly buy a functional machine for below that, but at the sacrifice of quality and longevity. It's expensive, but what makes it worthwhile is the long term savings of not needing to be subscribed to a service like XBL, the plethora of game sales, and the significantly improved graphics quality and game performance. 

#11 Edited by Jams (2961 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@Sooty said:

@banishedsoul1 said:

Yes you don't need a uber pc to game on the pc.

To run at console level or slightly better you can build a very cheap PC. 1280x720 @ 30 FPS is not even remotely difficult for mid-range PC hardware these days. Hence why you see people suggesting relatively weak setups.

I mean come on, Crysis looks better than any console game and the graphics card that could run that on the built-in "High" setting is almost 6 years old. (8800GTX/8800 Ultra)

I think if anything people outside of PC gaming are the least honest, they just jump on the bandwagon that it's expensive and that's that.

Edit: and nothing wrong with using cheap motherboards, that has very little to do with how reliable they will be, usually they just have less features and overclocking options. Never want to cut corners on PSUs though.

If you're just going to get something that runs console level then that sort of voids a lot of the arguments for gaming on the pc in the first place.

Not if it at least gets your foot in the door to PC gaming. You can at least future proof your pc by getting the motherboard with the latest chipsets that support the latest functions. Get a lower end CPU, graphics card and enough ram to do what you want and your golden. You can cut corners like not getting an optical drive and a smaller sized HDD. Then later you can upgrade that $120 graphics card to the $400 one, or maybe a higher end CPU. When it comes to PC gaming, the world is yours.

edit; oh yeah and don't forget about reusing components that you already have from the computer you're upgrading from (that is if you can).

#12 Posted by Hunter5024 (5688 posts) -

@Sooty said:

By console level I meant dirt cheap probably multiple second hand components, it's pretty difficult to find video cards that low end new, aside from the low profile ones meant for HTPCs and the like.

For a couple of hundred you can build a pretty great one.

What about building a newer one that can run all the latest games on the best settings?

#13 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

#14 Edited by warxsnake (2650 posts) -
@Hunter5024 said:

@Sooty said:

@banishedsoul1 said:

Yes you don't need a uber pc to game on the pc.

To run at console level or slightly better you can build a very cheap PC. 1280x720 @ 30 FPS is not even remotely difficult for mid-range PC hardware these days. Hence why you see people suggesting relatively weak setups.

I mean come on, Crysis looks better than any console game and the graphics card that could run that on the built-in "High" setting is almost 6 years old. (8800GTX/8800 Ultra)

I think if anything people outside of PC gaming are the least honest, they just jump on the bandwagon that it's expensive and that's that.

Edit: and nothing wrong with using cheap motherboards, that has very little to do with how reliable they will be, usually they just have less features and overclocking options. Never want to cut corners on PSUs though.

If you're just going to get something that runs console level then that sort of voids a lot of the arguments for gaming on the pc in the first place.

Except even then, the cost of games themselves drops within months to a quarter what they sell for on console. 
 
All in all PC gaming can be as cheap as you want it to be, or super expensive. You can focus on buying indie games and only games that are on sale, or you can go the opposite way and buy stuff like 200$ peripherals to play your favorite sims. Or you can do all of the above, which is the ultimate strength of the free platform. 
I have a beast of a rig, but that was entirely my choice in what I wanted to go with, which is the entire point of PC gaming. Its all upto you. 
#16 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -
@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

So am I. There's no point in getting a PC that cheap if the experience is the same/marginally better than consoles. And it won't be "damn close" to running anything at Ultra 60fps. 
#17 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@Geno said:

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

So am I. There's no point in getting a PC that cheap if the experience is the same/marginally better than consoles. And it won't be "damn close" to running anything at Ultra 60fps.

Newegg > GTX 460 for $140

$100 AMD quad core

$50-100 Motherboard

Cheap set of 4GB RAM

Cheap case

Decent-ish PSU

Cheap hard drive

Easily doable for $500-600, not bringing SSDs into it because they are far from a necessity. Haven't factored in Windows since I'm just talking hardware.

If you don't think a GTX 460 is damn close to running anything at ultra then you might wanna look at benchmarks again because that card is no slouch. Just slightly behind my own and I'm running BF3 perfectly on ultra.

#18 Posted by Jams (2961 posts) -

@Geno said:

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

So am I. There's no point in getting a PC that cheap if the experience is the same/marginally better than consoles. And it won't be "damn close" to running anything at Ultra 60fps.

but what if the graphics are marginally better, you get unlimited mods and the load times are so fast, you don't get to read the loading screen tool tips with a hard drive that can store your entire PC game collection without having to swap discs? Is it worth it then?

#19 Edited by 2HeadedNinja (1618 posts) -

@banishedsoul1 said:

This is kinda what i mean. some people might say a 8800 gt is a great card to have even by todays standards. Not saying thats what sooty is trying to say but i hope you get my drift. If he tried to sell me this pc saying it was amazing because it can play games a little bit better then consoles when it cant run newer games nearly as well as a newer gpu.

You do realize that you can do more with a PC than playing games, right? Even if you don't have the latest high end components, you probably get a machine that lets you play better looking games, and do everything else a PC can do. A console is an entertainment device, which is fine, but a PC is both an entertaining device and a working device. Not to mention the fact that the knowlege that comes with gaming on a PC (general handling of PC's) will come in handy in most jobs at some point. Nobody in the working world cares how good you are at using a console, but being able to handle a PC is a whole differend story.

Are PC's more expensive than consoles? Sure they are, but you get much more value than with a console.

[edit:] not to mention that PC games are usually a good chunk cheaper than console games ... so even if you get a more expensive machine, if you play a lot you get your moneys worth soon enough.

#20 Posted by SlasherMan (1725 posts) -

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

So am I. There's no point in getting a PC that cheap if the experience is the same/marginally better than consoles. And it won't be "damn close" to running anything at Ultra 60fps.

Newegg > GTX 460 for $140

$100 AMD quad core

$50-100 Motherboard

Cheap set of 4GB RAM

Cheap case

Decent-ish PSU

Cheap hard drive

Easily doable for $500-600, not bringing SSDs into it because they are far from a necessity. Haven't factored in Windows since I'm just talking hardware.

If you don't think a GTX 460 is damn close to running anything at ultra then you might wanna look at benchmarks again because that card is no slouch. Just slightly behind my own and I'm running BF3 perfectly on ultra.

This guy's got the right idea.

#21 Posted by SathingtonWaltz (2053 posts) -

I built my little brothers budget gaming PC for the low price of $300, plus $20 dollars shipping for all the parts. Specs are as follows:

CPU - Intel Celeron G530 2.4GHz Dual-Core Sandy Bridge

GPU - AMD Radeon HD 7770

RAM - 4GB

HDD - 500 GB 7200 RPM

Case - Fractal Design Core 1000 Micro ATX Case

MoBo - ASRock H61M-DGS LGA 1155 Intel H61 Micro ATX Intel Motherboard

PSU - 350W Diablotek

I bought him a 20" 1440x900 matte Acer monitor, HP laser mouse, and basic Keytronics keyboard for an extra $100. Also picked him up a $30 dollars 2.1 Altec Lansing sound system (I have one myself, it's surprisingly great for the price)

Total price: $470

It's obviously a budget PC, but it still surpasses console quality in graphics.

#22 Posted by Hunter5024 (5688 posts) -

@Jams said:

Not if it at least gets your foot in the door to PC gaming. You can at least future proof your pc by getting the motherboard with the latest chipsets that support the latest functions. Get a lower end CPU, graphics card and enough ram to do what you want and your golden. You can cut corners like not getting an optical drive and a smaller sized HDD. Then later you can upgrade that $120 graphics card to the $400 one, or maybe a higher end CPU. When it comes to PC gaming, the world is yours.

edit; oh yeah and don't forget about reusing components that you already have from the computer you're upgrading from (that is if you can).

But then you're just spending way more money than you would if you were just to buy a 360, in preparation for when you intend to spend even more money.

@warxsnake said:

Except even then, the cost of games themselves drops within months to a quarter what they sell for on console. All in all PC gaming can be as cheap as you want it to be, or super expensive. You can focus on buying indie games and only games that are on sale, or you can go the opposite way and buy stuff like 200$ peripherals to play your favorite sims. Or you can do all of the above, which is the ultimate strength of the free platform. I have a beast of a rig, but that was entirely my choice in what I wanted to go with, which is the entire point of PC gaming. Its all upto you.

You can get games for really cheap on consoles too though, and except for in the case of the biggest franchises they drop just as drastically in price on consoles as on PC. Enslaved was going for 15 bucks about 3 months after it came out. On consoles you also have the option of rentals, and borrowing from friends which you can't do on a PC.

#23 Posted by AlexW00d (6275 posts) -

I made back the cost of my PC from the fact that games are roughly 40% cheaper in about a year. It would have cost me more to continue with the PS3 I already had and bought games for that.

Online
#24 Posted by tourgen (4502 posts) -

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

yeah, I spent $600 and built a really nice system - but I re-used a case and a $20 DVD drive I had lying around. I can play everything maxed out at 1080p so I'm pretty happy with it :) plus I can drop in a better video card when the "next-gen" games start hitting next year.

#25 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

@2HeadedNinja said:

@banishedsoul1 said:

This is kinda what i mean. some people might say a 8800 gt is a great card to have even by todays standards. Not saying thats what sooty is trying to say but i hope you get my drift. If he tried to sell me this pc saying it was amazing because it can play games a little bit better then consoles when it cant run newer games nearly as well as a newer gpu.

You do realize that you can do more with a PC than playing games, right? Even if you don't have the latest high end components, you probably get a machine that lets you play better looking games, and do everything else a PC can do. A console is an entertainment device, which is fine, but a PC is both an entertaining device and a working device. Not to mention the fact that the knowlege that comes with gaming on a PC (general handling of PC's) will come in handy in most jobs at some point. Nobody in the working world cares how good you are at using a console, but being able to handle a PC is a whole differend story.

Are PC's more expensive than consoles? Sure they are, but you get much more value than with a console.

[edit:] not to mention that PC games are usually a good chunk cheaper than console games ... so even if you get a more expensive machine, if you play a lot you get your moneys worth soon enough.

you can do other things with a console as well but this is not the point of this topic. selling me a pc with a 8800gt today and saying its a good deal because it can do more then consoles does not mean its a worth while machine when it comes to gaming.

#26 Edited by mandude (2669 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

If you're just going to get something that runs console level then that sort of voids a lot of the arguments for gaming on the pc in the first place.

I'd say that the cost of PC games could justify about any rig.

#27 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -
@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

So am I. There's no point in getting a PC that cheap if the experience is the same/marginally better than consoles. And it won't be "damn close" to running anything at Ultra 60fps.

Newegg > GTX 460 for $140

$100 AMD quad core

$50-100 Motherboard

Cheap set of 4GB RAM

Cheap case

Decent-ish PSU

Cheap hard drive

Easily doable for $500-600, not bringing SSDs into it because they are far from a necessity. Haven't factored in Windows since I'm just talking hardware.

If you don't think a GTX 460 is damn close to running anything at ultra then you might wanna look at benchmarks again because that card is no slouch. Just slightly behind my own and I'm running BF3 perfectly on ultra.

- GTX 460 is practically low end at this point, don't even try to lie. I have GTX 670 SLI and even I don't get a consistent 60fps on Ultra with BF3. 
- A $100 AMD quad core is about an order of magnitude worse than a $200 Intel K series. You spend less money upfront, but screw yourself for any usage beyond a few months.  
- $50 motherboard = no dual GPU option, low end chipset, poor overclocking capacity. Again, screwing yourself out of years of value to save just a few upfront dollars. 
- Cheap case, cheap RAM, cheap hard drive pretty much speaks for itself.  
 
So you'd spend about $600 for the PC equivalent of a disposable camera. I'm talking $1,000 for a PC that will be mid-high end, futureproofed for several years, and includes Windows. 
 

@Jams said:

@Geno said:

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

So am I. There's no point in getting a PC that cheap if the experience is the same/marginally better than consoles. And it won't be "damn close" to running anything at Ultra 60fps.

but what if the graphics are marginally better, you get unlimited mods and the load times are so fast, you don't get to read the loading screen tool tips with a hard drive that can store your entire PC game collection without having to swap discs? Is it worth it then?

I guess that would depend on the value of mods to the person. Something to note however is that many mods are graphically based, high res textures, more foliage, more weather effects etc, so buying a low end gaming PC locks them out of that.  
 
Overall it's better just to spend more money upfront for better value parts. The savings come back to you in the long run, and you'll have a more enjoyable experience. 
#28 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@Geno said:

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

So am I. There's no point in getting a PC that cheap if the experience is the same/marginally better than consoles. And it won't be "damn close" to running anything at Ultra 60fps.

Newegg > GTX 460 for $140

$100 AMD quad core

$50-100 Motherboard

Cheap set of 4GB RAM

Cheap case

Decent-ish PSU

Cheap hard drive

Easily doable for $500-600, not bringing SSDs into it because they are far from a necessity. Haven't factored in Windows since I'm just talking hardware.

If you don't think a GTX 460 is damn close to running anything at ultra then you might wanna look at benchmarks again because that card is no slouch. Just slightly behind my own and I'm running BF3 perfectly on ultra.

- GTX 460 is practically low end at this point, don't even try to lie. I have GTX 670 SLI and even I don't get a consistent 60fps on Ultra with BF3.
- A $100 AMD quad core is about an order of magnitude worse than a $200 Intel K series. You spend less money upfront, but screw yourself for any usage beyond a few months.
- $50 motherboard = no dual GPU option, low end chipset, poor overclocking capacity. Again, screwing yourself out of years of value to save just a few upfront dollars.
- Cheap case, cheap RAM, cheap hard drive pretty much speaks for itself.

So you'd spend about $600 for the PC equivalent of a disposable camera. I'm talking $1,000 for a PC that will be mid-high end, futureproofed for several years, and includes Windows.

Haha wow, a GTX 460 low end, despite the fact it can run Crysis 2 on Very High with over 50 frames. Okay pal. Nothing wrong with cheap RAM, as RAM speeds/timings make very little difference to gaming performance, maybe you're reading too heavily into SiSandra benchmarks.

and dual GPU? Who cares. Better off replacing the card entirely as dual GPU setups are a total waste of time unless you're running at 2560x1600 or multiple monitors, even then a single GTX 6XX can probably cover it.

Just to back up my argument here's a PC I just built up, I didn't even go for the cheapest parts, the motherboard is $40 more than it really needs to be:

I left out the case & hard drive, since they are so cheap anyway. Add the case & hard drive in and you'll be at what, $550 ish? Go for a cheaper motherboard and RAM if you like, as 8GB is still not actually required.

That PC is surprisingly beefy. BF3 on high or ultra at 1080P is easily doable, doubt ultra will run at a a constant 60 FPS but it's certainly not gonna run it too badly.

Personally I have an i5 (non Sandy Bridge) @4Ghz, a heavily OC'd GTX 470 and 4GB RAM, BF3 multiplayer on ultra at 1080P is silky smooth for me. (it blips below 60 if I run through a shit ton of smoke, but that's the only time it drops) My processor and RAM are from 2009, the AMD processor is probably better than mine at this point. (actually I just looked that up, no it isn't - but still, fortunately most games are GPU bound)

and that's all I have to say on the matter. My argument is both solid and factual. TOODLES!

#29 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

@Sooty said:

@Geno said:

Some enthusiasts will militantly insist you can get a good gaming PC at a price comparable to consoles, e.g. $400-600.

What? That's more than doable. You can easily put a good gaming PC together for $500-600. It won't run BF3 on Ultra at 1080P / 60 FPS but it'll be damn close to it.

I'm talking about custom building though, not pre-packaged from Walmart.

So am I. There's no point in getting a PC that cheap if the experience is the same/marginally better than consoles. And it won't be "damn close" to running anything at Ultra 60fps.

Newegg > GTX 460 for $140

$100 AMD quad core

$50-100 Motherboard

Cheap set of 4GB RAM

Cheap case

Decent-ish PSU

Cheap hard drive

Easily doable for $500-600, not bringing SSDs into it because they are far from a necessity. Haven't factored in Windows since I'm just talking hardware.

If you don't think a GTX 460 is damn close to running anything at ultra then you might wanna look at benchmarks again because that card is no slouch. Just slightly behind my own and I'm running BF3 perfectly on ultra.

you should have factored in windows because its not a gaming pc without one adding another 100$ to your price tag as well. those parts are kinda old as well but i will let you go on it.

#30 Posted by SmilingPig (1337 posts) -
#31 Posted by me3639 (1760 posts) -

I still only have a dual core / iceq 4850 gc / 4 gig ram pc i built(2yrs ago) that still plays all current games at 1920x1800 resolution. I usually turn off AA, or run it minimal but everything looks and runs great. Hell, i still have a $200 graphic card(radeon 6950) sitting in the box because i havnt seen the need to install. You just have to take the time to ask, read and learn.

#32 Posted by WMWA (1162 posts) -

Someone build me a PC. =D

#33 Posted by Spoonman671 (4640 posts) -
@Geno: I agree with most of your points, but as a 460 owner, I have to say that you're underestimating it.  I've been surprised by how long mine has lasted me and how much performance I get out of it.  I've had no real problems with games like Crysis 2 and The Witcher 2.
#34 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -
@Sooty:
 
GTX 460 was released 2 years ago as a mid end card. It's now low end, or at the most, bottom of mid end until GTX 660 is released next month. Suggesting this card for use in a new gaming PC and that it can run some of the most demanding modern games at 50fps is disingenuous at best.
 
You give an entry level PC build lacking half of its components that uses a nearly 4 year old CPU and it still costs $450. Enough said. Conversation can't go anywhere when you lack fundamental knowledge about components and are being deceptive.
#35 Posted by SathingtonWaltz (2053 posts) -

@Geno: The GTX 460 is more than capable of running any game on the market with at least high settings.

#36 Posted by colubroid (39 posts) -

@banishedsoul1 said:

Yes you don't need a uber pc to game on the pc. Some people make it out to be that a 350$ pc can max out everything at 1600p with x24AA and be good for years. Exaggerations can be kinda dangerous if the person you are trying to help does not know what they are doing.

This part I agree with. There are no one size-fits-all solutions in PC's. People have to spend some time researching to figure out what they want and then have some patience to find good deals. Anyone who is not willing to put a little effort into educating themselves on a product shouldn't blow a few hundred dollars.

If a random dude in a forum says video card A is better than B. Don't just take it as gospel: google around and find out why. There are tons of review and benchmark sites that explain exactly what different pieces of hardware will or wont do.

#37 Posted by Tim_the_Corsair (3065 posts) -
@banishedsoul1 What's with the agenda? Did a Valve employee and a PC enthusiast tagteam your dog or something?
#39 Posted by Dagbiker (6976 posts) -

Next topic, Why dose Bill Gates need all that money?

#40 Posted by SlasherMan (1725 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

Next topic, Why dose Bill Gates need all that money?

To buy a good PC that can run games marginally better than a console duh!

#41 Posted by SathingtonWaltz (2053 posts) -

@Dagbiker: hahaha.

#42 Posted by bellmont42 (321 posts) -

@Geno: You obviously have a very narrow view of a hardware choices and sound like you are just arguing to argue.

My "cheap" 3.2ghz phenom II, low end gtx 460 and 4gb of slow ddr2 RAM can play anything out there. I don't care about OMG UBER MAX SETTINGS as long as I can play smoothly (that includes bf3 at 30+ fps on high).

Being able to play pc games at a respectable level is not as expensive as you make it out to be. For future proofing you just need to choose the right motherboard then upgrade your CPU / RAM / video card as you can afford it IF you wish to do so.

#43 Posted by usgrovers (166 posts) -

From my calculations, keeping a gaming PC of midrange capabilities is around the cost of buying a console every year (I will custom build a midrange PC for $600-$700 every 3 or 4 years). It's not unreasonable to keep a decent PC for gaming, but compared to consoles there is still a gap; a gap that is untenable for many.

#44 Posted by Gruff182 (857 posts) -

@AlexW00d said:

I made back the cost of my PC from the fact that games are roughly 40% cheaper in about a year. It would have cost me more to continue with the PS3 I already had and bought games for that.

In all the threads you see on the price of PC gaming, this key point never gets its due.

Buying a (usually) better version of the same game on day one for less, is one thing. Then we have the steam sales, where most of us end up with library's of great games that theres not enough hours to even get to.

#45 Posted by Hamst3r (4484 posts) -

Console gamers need to factor in the PC they use to access these forums and bitch about the cost of PC gaming.

#46 Posted by spartanlolz92 (511 posts) -

@Sooty said:

@Hippie_Genocide said:

The problem I have with the whole price argument with pc vs. console is its very rarely apples to apples. People like to "conveniently" leave out the cost of their hdtv and home theater setup when comparing the two.

I still find it bizarre so many people will pay hundreds and hundreds for a huge TV then proceed to use shitty built-in speakers.

because some people are more visual orientated than sound orientated. I know I'm like that Id prefer a nice tv over nice speakers any day

#47 Posted by Ducksworth (660 posts) -

This is silly.

PC's have their madness sales, consoles have used games year round, you can always pirate on a PC but chances are you can probably hack your console and pirate there as well. If you are someone who wants to minimize the amount you spend on software then it doesn't matter what platform you're on.

I'm not a full fledged PC gamer yet but it's clear that it does't take much money to surpass a console at a technical level but that might all be irrelevant depending on various factors of your life. I have a good number of friends who play Carl Of Duty and most of them play on the PS3. I don't care how amazing or cheap it is on a PC because I want to play with my friends. On the flip side, there are plenty of games my friends don't have but I would love to play. I don't own a very capable PC yet but I do have a console that can play some of those games. Knowing that I am going to get a gaming rig sooner or later I make a conscious choice to stick to as many console exclusives as possible.

tl;dr Sandwich.

#48 Posted by JasonR86 (9710 posts) -

@banishedsoul1:

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

#49 Edited by DoctorWelch (2774 posts) -

I built my PC a year ago for about $800 and can run pretty much everything at max settings. The key is to do a shit ton of research about pricing compared to power at the exact time you are making your PC and you will get a good deal. I got a lot of my parts on a 1-day sale or weekend sale at Newegg. The actual cost of the PC I have was probably $1200, but when I bought different things together I got way better deals.

I have a 20" Samsung Monitor, Sandy Bridge i7, GTX 560Ti (this was not the latest and greatest when I bought it, and the only game that took a frame rate hit was Skyrim when I installed a shit ton of mods), 1TB storage, 8 GB of DDR3 RAM, and a MB with dual DVI and like 10 USB ports including 3 USB 3.0 ports.

Anyone who says buying a PC can be as cheap as buying a console is an idiot, but your Xbox isn't going to satisfy all of your computing needs. So if you're going to buy a computer, you might as well make one for $800 and then you can run pretty much anything and it will look better than its console counter part.

#50 Posted by Vinny_Says (5709 posts) -

Why do I feel this argument only exists because the current console gen has been going for like a million years.