Knight's Guide to understanding WHY Pc is superior

[QUOTE="Dynafrom"]

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

As a gaming CPU, it's actually competitive with the i7s. If you exclude the FarCry 2 results, which I hardly believe are representative of most games, the Phenom II X4 965 is easily just as good of a gaming CPU as an i7 in today's titles. Now once you start throwing in background tasks and look at future titles being more threaded then the picture becomes a little more muddy.

That's the conclusion from your own article.

Espada12

Heh..I don't even use AMDs man, but to call them cheapskates because they don't want to pay more for a couple of frames is quite silly I must say. I'm actually building an i5 system, but I'm thinking about an i7.. depends on how much I feel like spending. Even with the up coming games I do not believe the i7s are going to make much of a difference, especially at higher res and detail where most of the work is done by the GPU and I highly doubt an x4 965 is going to bottleneck a single GPU setup anytime soon.

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"][QUOTE="Dynafrom"] And the benches do prove MY point. Threaded applications have a 100% performance gap between the i7 and phenom's. Dynafrom

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

[QUOTE="Dynafrom"] Look @ the date of the article, most apps weren't multithreaded. Look @ games upcoming, and games that have come out since the review; BFBC2 for instance. I'm not going to bother arguing with AMD kids. Intel has the performance crown, and you cheapskates can stick with your AMD machines.

Dynafrom

Heh..I don't even use AMDs man, but to call them cheapskates because they don't want to pay more for a couple of frames is quite silly I must say. I'm actually building an i5 system, but I'm thinking about an i7.. depends on how much I feel like spending. Even with the up coming games I do not believe the i7s are going to make much of a difference, especially at higher res and detail where most of the work is done by the GPU and I highly doubt an x4 965 is going to bottleneck a single GPU setup anytime soon.

Well yes that is true, which is why I specifically went out of my way to mention, for gaming purposes only, the i7 and the x4 are pretty close, however due to tri channel ram and 8 cores (yea I know it's a quad setup to be 8 cores) the i7s will blaze past in terms of other applications.

MFDOOM1983

"Higher is better" :lol:

[QUOTE="DJ_Headshot"]

[QUOTE="Dynafrom"] Vs spending a little more and getting new bleeding edge tech?

Dynafrom

Bleeding edge tech? the gtx 275 is a year and a half old card and only around 5-15% better performance in games then a 4870. The phenom x4 will perform similar to an i7 in games. As far as actual performance in games is concerned the pc i listed will be close to the one you listed has similar lasting power and room for future upgrades. if you honestly believe its a "hunk of junk" then you know little about computers.

Fact: No 500-600 dollar PC will last more than 6 months.

I'm sorry but anybody who says that buying a PC is cheap ALWAYS forgets that 90% of people who don't own a good PC need a mouse, keyboard, monitor, and probably speakers or headphones and an operating system. All that alone adds up to about $300 extra to any price. Also a 600 PC will beable to play all of the games, but very few of the new ones on high settings and NO new games on high or even medium settings.

You want a PC that is going to last, that isn't going to break from cheap parts, that is going to not require an upgrade for 2-3 years? Drop at least 1 grand on the PC alone, not including software and extra hardware you will need (mouse, keyboard, monitor, speakers).

PC gaming can be superior because of the hardware and open platform but developers need to take advantage of it. If you just port a console game over to the PC, it just isn't right. Everything from the optimization of the engine to the UI will be wrong.

Good PC gaming requires money. There is no escaping it. If PC gaming were cheap, the consoles wouldn't be necessary. Consoles are there to provide another way to play games at a much lower cost than it costs to build and maintain a PC.

I love PC gaming, I just built a brand new computer, I bought 50 games on the Steam sale for dirt cheap, I love the open platform, I love how robust the features is, but I know for a fact that nothing about PC gaming is cheap. If you want quality, you have to pay for it.

Wasdie

I've been going for 2 years on a computer I spent $650 on. Still max all the games worth getting and see no point to upgrade anytime soon. There is no point constantly upgrading to get a 5 fps boost on Crysis or Metro.

[QUOTE="Dynafrom"][QUOTE="DJ_Headshot"]

Bleeding edge tech? the gtx 275 is a year and a half old card and only around 5-15% better performance in games then a 4870. The phenom x4 will perform similar to an i7 in games. As far as actual performance in games is concerned the pc i listed will be close to the one you listed has similar lasting power and room for future upgrades. if you honestly believe its a "hunk of junk" then you know little about computers.

DJ_Headshot

Yah I usually build a PC that is around mid end and when the parts become obsolete I built a new computer.

For people who buy the highest end stuff they usually have obsolete parts long before they need to upgrade.

It's like those Mac people who brag about 8 core (virtual remember that) processors and 64 gigs of RAM....

By the time those standards are needed the RAM used in the motherboard will be obsolete and so will the CPU and I will be buying all of that for far cheaper and the parts will be better.