Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Hardware Entertainment Games

The Best Gaming PC Money Can Buy 360

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the don't-we-post-this-every-few-months dept.
SlappingOysters writes "Gameplayer has gone live with their best PC hardware configurations for Q1 2009. They've broken it into three tiers depending on the investor's budget. And while the prices are regional, it is comparative across the globe. The site has also detailed the 10 Hottest PC Games of 2009 to unveil the software on the horizon which may seduce gamers into an upgrade."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Best Gaming PC Money Can Buy

Comments Filter:
  • What a crock... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FortKnox (169099) * on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:02AM (#26356843) Homepage Journal
    Budget machine has a quad core? And is almost a grand?

    Tom's Hardware does these, and the budget is usually closer to the $600 mark, with the mid range around $1200.

    And the fact that they put two optical BD burners on the extreme one (one on each page) makes me think that this article was slapped together instead of fully investigated. Where's the benchmarks? The proof that you built a good machine?

    Looks like a buncha kids opened up newegg and built themselves machines in their head...
    • by XPeter (1429763) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:09AM (#26356955) Homepage

      And the fact that they put two optical BD burners on the extreme one (one on each page) makes me think that this article was slapped together instead of fully investigated. Where's the benchmarks? The proof that you built a good machine?

      Looks like a buncha kids opened up newegg and built themselves machines in their head...

      Why the hell would you want to benchmark one of those beauties? It's like a wife. Your supposed to spend money on it, care for it and look but not touch.

    • Re:What a crock... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ZirbMonkey (999495) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:23AM (#26357161)

      Tom's is way better. If I want to upgrade my PC or video card, they actually do proper benchmarks and realistic budgets. I may never have triple SLI, but only because I don't feel like dropping another $500 on video cards for relatively minimal fps gains.

      I dropped a grand on a new i7 system last week. Primarily because I was tied of my old Opteron 170 rig, but a good deal because I'd been influenced by the Tom's hardware midprice build. A grand is not "budget."

    • by TheKidWho (705796) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:28AM (#26357213)
      When they talk about hot computers, they are referring to your gpu/cpu temperature of course.
    • by Fross (83754) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @11:08AM (#26357705) Homepage

      Yo dawg, I heard you like burning, so we put a burner in your burner so you can burn while you burn.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Creepy (93888)

      Sharky Extreme used to do these (not sure if they do it anymore), and it sounds like the budgets are similar (though I think they had 4 tiers - budget, mid, high, and extreme). The budget machine there was also $1000, but that includes some stuff like Monitor that isn't always included in other PC building guides. The extreme guide usually had the disclaimer that "if money was no object...," so I say "only 2 blue ray burners? Why not 4?" I can't tell if they're similar due to the slashdotting.

      I'd questi

      • Re:What a crock... (Score:4, Informative)

        by FortKnox (169099) * on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @11:53AM (#26358305) Homepage Journal
        well, as the title of the article says, this is a gaming box. Quad isn't used in gaming, so you can get a duo with a higher clock speed at that price. They are spending like $200 on an AMD quad. With that price, you can get a top of the line intel at 2.4 or 2.6GHz that you can overclock the crap out of. For games, you need 2 cores and major clock speed, not a quad core and mediocre clock speed.
  • Pffft. (Score:5, Funny)

    by XPeter (1429763) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:02AM (#26356855) Homepage

    These PC's are low-end when compared to my overclocked Commodore 64.

  • ...there's not actually any games that needs anywhere near the horsepower they pack. I'm rarely impressed by a machine that with full details at super HD resolutions can run any game....at 400fps. Your eyes can only pickup 80fps anyway; you wouldn't know if it was 100 or 10,000 fps unless the fps counter didn't say.

    Oh, and in 1-2 years comparable hardware can be picked up at a tenth of the price.

    Still, I'm all for the advancement of benchmarking science, so this is still a good thing.

  • by syousef (465911) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:05AM (#26356897) Journal

    On the Extreme 4 GB of Video RAM? Seriously?

    Someone please Correct me if I'm wrong but if you're mapping 4GB of video RAM you'll not be able to run a 32 bit OS. Given that this is a gaming PC, wouldn't this be a deal breaker? I mean even the uber gamers occassionally like to run older games right?

    • It's not as though one can not run older games on 64bit hardware/OS's.

      Also, for software which supports 64bits it should be faster than it's 32bit equivalent, which is quite important for modern gaming.

      Also, there is a 64bit version of XP.

      Also, Vista really isn't that slow if you give it enough RAM - which clearly is not an issue in this case.

      As of the time of writing, for a brand-new top-of-the-line gaming machine you'd want Vista 64 on there.
      • by XMyth (266414)

        I'm curious why you think that "for software which supports 64bits it should be faster than it's 32bit equivalent" ?

    • by wisty (1335733)

      I think nethack can be compiled to run on a 64 bit system. If not, it's open source, so you can modify it yourself.

    • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:17AM (#26357089)

      Seriously, I'm honestly curious. I'm a huge PC gamer and I run Vista 64-bit. All 32-bit Windows apps, which accounts for most games made in the last 10 years or so, seem to run great natively. For older DOS games, well those don't run well in 32-bit Windows. You get no sound, video problems, etc. The NTVDM isn't really good fro games. So what you do is fire up DOSBox, which runs them great. However that runs just as well in 64-bit as it does in 32-bit.

      Thus far, I don't see any gaming problems with a 64-bit OS. So if you know of some, I'd be interested in what they are.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Phantasmagoria 2
        Gazillionaire
        Diablo 2
        Burn:Cycle

        And that is what I found in the first day of using Vista64
      • by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @11:09AM (#26357721)

        Seriously, I'm honestly curious. I'm a huge PC gamer and I run Vista 64-bit.

        No offence, but maybe a Wii Fit would be a good investment, then? I'm just sayin...

      • by GFree678 (1363845)

        Games which utilize PunkBuster fuck up pretty badly in 64-bit systems. PB just doesn't like the environment for some reason, though that's not surprising given how invasive it is as a low-level system scanner. Since PB doesn't yet have a 64-bit binary, until it does it will continue to misunderstand the 64-bit architecture and kick/unauthenticate players.

        This is from what I've read rather than personal experience so if my info is out of date I'll gladly suck a lemon.

    • by mikael (484)

      Not sure how the programming interface for graphics cards has changed, but the SVGA graphics cards used a 64K 'memory window' to make the contents of the video framebuffer available to the CPU. You could write a value into the page register which would indicate which bank of video memory the CPU should read and write to.

    • by Eudial (590661) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:20AM (#26357125)

      On the Extreme 4 GB of Video RAM? Seriously?

      Someone please Correct me if I'm wrong but if you're mapping 4GB of video RAM you'll not be able to run a 32 bit OS. Given that this is a gaming PC, wouldn't this be a deal breaker? I mean even the uber gamers occassionally like to run older games right?

      The kernel should deal with that. If you request some memory address, paging assigns a virtual address for the physical memory so that you can access -any- 4 Gb of data in some order.

      You can still only access 4 Gb at one specific time per process, but that should be enough for most purposes, no?

      • Don't some operating systems map the kernel's code and data into one end of every process's virtual address space? I believe that's why programs can't readily use the whole 4 GB for their own purposes.

        I believe this is remedied by using the x86 PAE extensions, or just by switching to a 64-bit operating system and recompiling your programs as 64-bit programs. (Although I think that on current Intel chips, you still only get something like 48-bit virtual addresses and 36-bit physical addresses.)

    • Yes and no. 32 bit windows has a mode called PAE, It will let you acces sa ful 4 gigs of RAM and then deal with video (and other hardware) memory separately. The catch is, hardware compatibility with pae mode windows is fairly low, since a lot of hardware manufacturers don't test their drivers in pae mode.

  • 6GB of ram? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wjh31 (1372867) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:06AM (#26356911) Homepage
    last time i checked, the i7 boards had 6 ram slots, for an easy 12GB. Also im pretty sure its possible to find boards with atleast 3 PCI-E slots, so they are missing an extra graphics card there. 6 SATA slots is also do-able, so with one to the BD burner, that leaves 5 for a raid 5 SSD config to give 1TB of SSD. And only one screen? 3 cards means 6 screens, i feel they missed some obvious extras
    • by houghi (78078)

      +1 insightfull

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by adachan (543372)
      3 Cards in SLI does not mean 6 screens. It does mean 1 screen that runs games really fast (or so Nvidia wants us to think). For a gamer, I think faster FPS is better than more screens (which very very few games support).
  • FFS (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:09AM (#26356947) Journal
    Seriously, can we please, please stop describing people who purchase dubiously durable consumer goods that will be obsolete within a few years as "investors"? And, obviously, stop describing those goods as "investments".

    There is nothing wrong, per se, with buying such things; but the notion that you are "investing" in them is patent nonsense.
    • Re:FFS (Score:5, Funny)

      by wisty (1335733) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:14AM (#26357001)

      In 1 years time, it will be worth 40% of what they paid for it. That's an investement, isn't it? Heck, it's not even a bad investement these days.

      • by Lumpy (12016)

        Ack! stop the investment word use!. It's an expense. It's a liability. It's not an investment.

        I really want to beat to death the guy that started talking about expenses as investments. Because it furthers the financial stupidity that plagues this nation.

        something that loses value != investment.
        Buying real estate can be an investment, but that gaming computer will never EVER be an investment.

        Buying stocks can be..... well... Stocks are an expense and liability right now, I think scratch off tickets are a

      • by JWSmythe (446288)

        A good firearm can be worth 10% or more than the purchase value in a year.

        I purchased an "affordable" .45 (name brand, just not hugely expensive) several years ago for $300. Last time I checked, in good/used condition it is worth about $500.

        I picked up another one, of a better brand name for about $600 about 3 years ago. Now it's worth about $800.

        I built out some very nice computers for myself over the years. They each cost about $2,000, using v

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Masami Eiri (617825)
      It is an investment, just not one with a monetary payout.
    • by Chrisq (894406)
      Normally I would agree with you, but looking at the stock markets over the last 12 months you might have been better off buying hardware....

      (Does anyone want to buy some SCO shares?)
    • Re:FFS (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Spazztastic (814296) <spazztastic AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:15AM (#26357045)

      There is nothing wrong, per se, with buying such things; but the notion that you are "investing" in them is patent nonsense.

      This. You put central air/heat into your house, you're investing it. You put money into a company, you're investing it. You fork out about $3000 to build a computer that is completely overkill, you're NOT investing it. An investment is when you'll see some sort of profit from it, so unless if you're a professional gamer and it will make your frag count increase by 23.2%, it's not an investment.

      • Re:FFS (Score:5, Insightful)

        by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:37AM (#26357317) Homepage Journal

        An investment is when you'll see some sort of profit from it, so unless if you're a professional gamer and it will make your frag count increase by 23.2%, it's not an investment.

        So I take it you put a fairly low value on personal enjoyment and satisfaction? BACK TO THE SALT MINES WITH YOU, SLAVE!

        • So I take it you put a fairly low value on personal enjoyment and satisfaction?

          "Investment" means "trying to grow your money." Nobody says "I'm investing in an ice cream cone," no matter how much they enjoy it.

          There's nothing wrong with spending money on what you enjoy. But let's not corrupt the meaning of words.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by drinkypoo (153816)

            "Investment" means "trying to grow your money."

            Maybe you should consider utilizing a dictionary occasionally. In particular, the American Heritage Dictionary defines sense three of the word as "Property or another possession acquired for future financial return or benefit." Pleasure is a benefit. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by evol262 (721773)
              Read dictionaries much? Familiar with basic grammar? The "benefit" is explicitly financial the way that definition is phrased, else it would be "Property or another possession acquired for personal benefit or future financial return".
        • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @11:31AM (#26358019)

          If investing for you means exclusively monetary returns, then you forgot the reason you need money in the first place. You failed to invest in your life.

    • Re:FFS (Score:5, Funny)

      by Greyfox (87712) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:23AM (#26357151) Homepage Journal
      Perhaps their belief that it's "investing" is an indication of why we're currently in the middle of an economic crisis.
  • by heitikender (655816) * on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:13AM (#26356997) Homepage
    ... best web-server hardware configurations money can buy, also 10 hottest server apps for 2009.
  • http://techreport.com/articles.x/16064 [techreport.com]

    How does that setup look for a current setup? Also, if there were further performance improvements to this setup, what would you change?

    • by jgtg32a (1173373)
      Get the 4870x2 instead, and double check that your PSU can support two of those if you wanted to
      • by poetmatt (793785)

        So other than a pair of x2's crossfired instead of just 4870's crossfired, you don't think there's much else? Or are you saying get a 4870x2 instead of 4870's in crossfire? If so, why even?

        What about a jump to 12G of ram instead of 6G? Matched triple-channel again.

        • by jgtg32a (1173373)
          I didn't really look too closely at it I just saw 2 4870@512, the 4870x2 is just two 4870 glued together but they have 1gb of ram each for a 2 gb card. This will also give you an upgrade path, if you wanted.

          I wouldn't really bother with 12gb of ram unless you were going to make an 8gb ramdisk to load the entire game into RAM.
  • Not worth it (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Junks Jerzey (54586) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:27AM (#26357207)

    Considering how few high-end PC games actually come out, getting a flashy PC just to play them isn't worth it.

    Hardware issues aside, serious gameplayers need to be where the developers are, which at the moment means the Xbox 360. A Nintendo Wii or DS is optional, for those people who want to see some of the more innovative designs. (PC gaming diehards can now interject the usual comments about FPS controls and real-time strategy games and mods.)

    And, yes, I'll point out that a 360 + Wii + DS + several years of Xbox Live is still cheaper than the PC mentioned in the article.

    • by jgtg32a (1173373)
      Any game that is on a console looks substantially better on the PC runs at a higher frame rate, and higher resolution, and has a better view distance.

      Xbox dev is identical to PC dev very little needs to be changed to do a quick port from one to the other.

      The PC in the article is a waste of money.
  • it is an Australian site - it's been "Conroyed"

    ---
    (I accidentally posted this in response to an incorrect article a minute ago - don't I feel stupid)

  • Don't do it! (Score:2, Redundant)

    by jcarkeys (925469)

    from the don't-we-post-this-every-few-months dept.

    Then why do you keep posting them?

  • What games (Score:2, Interesting)

    by phorm (591458)

    Maybe I'm just out of the loop, but I haven't seen a lot of "heavy" new PC games that would require an "ultimate gaming rig" these days.

    That's not to say that some good games/additions/etc haven't come out or aren't on the boiler, but what's out-or-coming that would require or make use of a souped-up gaming rig VS just a decent machine (with a decent graphics card)?

    • by Spad (470073)

      I agree entirely; I've got a moderately specced PC: Core2 E6400, 320Mb nVidia 8800GTS, 2Gb RAM, XP 32-bit and I've not played anything on it that I haven't been able to run at 1280x1024@72Hz on High detail (Even Crysis).

      I know it's supposedly "all about the 2560x1600 at 200fps" these days, but a) I hate widescreen monitors and b) I'm happy with 1280x1024 (Maybe 1600x1200 if I can find a reasonably priced 4:3 LCD that does it).

  • by yoshi_mon (172895) on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @10:49AM (#26357481)

    That these machines would not run half as well as some system that would cost half as much but built by someone with a clue. Not just someone who went down line and picked out parts based on how much they cost.

    For anyone really interested in performance rigs spend some time on a overclocking site. Those guys and gals really will show what it's all about. I know I'm damn amazed at some of the stuff they pull off and have learned a bunch just browsing.

  • "The Best Gaming Politically-Correct Money Can Buy"

    So they have some kid of new money that removes all references to God and the All-Seeing Eye? Hmmm.

  • But I was able to see a couple of pages before it went down. Did anyone notice the links to other stories at the bottom? I'm pretty interested in seeing which are the top 10 games to play while stoned.

  • Isn't the Phenom II line launching within days? If you believe the hype, they'll stand up to all the Intel offerings, and if tradition dictates, the AMD procs will be cheaper. I'm curious to see how they really perform.

Line Printer paper is strongest at the perforations.

Working...