I just want to chime in here and give an example of a truly budget system that can still run Crysis and provide a good experience(I figure it's a decent game to use as a benchmark). I'm running it at 1680x1050, all settings on medium (still looks fine) and getting about 30 FPS average.

I bought my system two months ago off newegg. l (already had monitor, speakers, keyboard). Yes, I'm using AMD, but it provides a good price/performance ratio on a budget system like mine.

• Some cheap case, with a mid-tier 585W PSU
• Gigabyte mobo that I can at least go to Phenom on if I want to later on
• 2GB gskill RAM (pretty good for the $45 it cost)
• AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ BE @2.66 Ghz (with arctic cooling freezer 64) I've overclocked to 3.3Ghz, but currently running at stock settings
• eVGA nVidia 8600GT 256MB

• Seagate 250GB HDD

Total cost was $525. That's not a whole lot more than a console is it?

kahless2369

OO that's a good one! Good to know. But again, combine that with upgrading and all... still more expensive. Not necessarily by much, but yeah. Also, something else I thought of is that while most people on System Wars or most hermits anyway may know a lot about building an amazing computer for very cheap, the majority wouldn't be as resourceful and knowledgeable, so that's also a factor. Just a thought anyway.

[QUOTE="CodeZebra"]

I also have an example of a really good computer from scratch for about 900 dollars that Horrowhip has provided.

Ramadear

What are the main components?

It's right in the post, under the first setup from Gamespot that is admittedly overpriced. It's in the little quote box too, so it should be easy to spot.

[QUOTE="mudman91878"]

Everything is grossly overpriced.

PandaBear86

We can counter-attack by saying the PS3 costs $1800, and the games cost $250 :P

lolllll That's hilarious! I just hope you don't take my post as an attack though :( I'm not trying to attack any system!

[QUOTE="mudman91878"]

Your pricing is an absolute joke.

$500 for an 8800 GTX?

$300 for vista?

$300 for ram?

$150 for hard drive?

$350 for monitor?

Everything is grossly overpriced.

Ramadear

I agree wholly. His pricing is awful, spending so much on unecessary things. I could build a PC from scratch for around $1500 at max. He has spent a extra $1300 on things he doesn't need.

I also have an example of a really good computer from scratch for about 900 dollars that Horrowhip has provided.

PC gaming is more expensive. But not grossly more expensive like your post made it seem...

horrowhip

True, and thank you for showing that. I was initially thinking of trying to do that, but at least for me the gruntwork required for that is a bit too much, espeically considering I more wanted to discuss it and not find every little thing, you know? Thank you! (I hope you don't mind that I borrowed your post and featured it in mine!)

um... where the **** are you getting your prices? E6600 is $200. but the E6750 is better for $180.

Also $300 for 2GB of RAM? REALLY? WTF? 2GB is $50-100 or $150 for good stuff.

horrowhip

Haha okay sorry! I really have to apologize for the pricing. Again, I simply did a search on google products and looked at the results that came up and found something feasible.... a;lksdj;alksdjf;alsf sorry!

I just did a quick search for the stuff that GameSpot used. I mentioned that in the post. I realize it's overpriced, but I'm just saying that it is an indication of the fact that PC gaming is more expensive.

I could have gone in and done a lot of research, found equivalent stuff that would have still done the same but are a lot cheaper, but I mean I'm not trying to buy the stuff here, I just wanted to do a quick and dirty analysis. And put up my thoughts along with it.

**Edit: I'll keep editing this for a little while to reflect the discussion and fix things.

Over the course of the few years that I've watched System Wars say a great many things about PC gaming. Some are complete **** and some very logical. Sadly I can't compile the other things, but I would like to write out my thoughts.

I will try to make as much of this post as objective as possible while analyzing the different aspects of PC gaming. If you're going to say something, please read first. Oh, and please excuse any small spelling or grammar mistakes. It's a lot to type, and I don't feel like going back and revising. If there are any glaring, big mistakes though, lemme know.

1) Price

a) Building the Computer

PC gaming is expensive (but not like, ridiculously more expensive than console gaming). There is no circumventing that. If price is an issue, by all means go with a console. However, PC gaming is very manageable on a budget similar to consoles. Perhaps a bit higher, but still similar. In any case, let's first take a look at the high-end of gaming, the real expensive side.

For my analysis, I shall use Gamespot as my benchmark, if you will. I'm going to take a look at GameSpot's systems in their performance guides and go from there. (NOTE: I realize that GameSpot's systems may be on the expensive side. However, it is handy to have GameSpot's hardware guides as a standardized reference point. If you have other advice for people interested in building rigs out there, please post that in replies to this post) For price I will use Google to come up with a reasonable approximation. I realize that other ways may have lower or higher prices, but generally prices aren't DRASTICALLY different, so I will refer to Google to standardize a reference. Also I realize prices change over time, so keep that in mind as you analyze what I am about to say. Everything I say here is valid as of May 28, 2008.

I will use Crysis to begin with. Crysis is arguably the most intense game out there in terms of system requirements. However, it is important to remember that Crysis' performance is somewhat of an outlier relative to the majority of PC games out there. In any case, let's begin.

Here is the system setup indicated by GameSpot (from the CPU and Memory section):

System Setup: Intel Core 2 X6800, Intel Core 2 QX6600 Intel Core 2 Duo E6600, Intel Core 2 Duo E6300, Intel 975XBX2, AMD Athlon 64 FX-60, AMD Athlon 64 4000+, ASUS A8R32-MVP Deluxe, 2GB Corsair XMS Memory (1GBx2), 160GB Seagate 7200.7 SATA Hard Disk Drive, Windows Vista 32-bit. Graphics Card: GeForce 8800 GTX, beta Nvidia ForceWare 169.09.

Now, let's focus on playing at 1600 x 1200 resolution at a reasonable frames per second (fps), which in this situation I will define to be approximately 30 fps. Out of all the components listed, the changes in CPU at the higher end of the fps didn't do too much, so let's just say you're going with the middle of the pack, the Core 2 Duo E6600

Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 - ~$300

GeForce 8800 GTX (one card) - ~$500

Intel 975XBX2 - ~$200

2GB Corsair XMS Memory - ~$300

Hard Disk - ~$150

Vista (assume Ultimate) - ~$300

Input Devices (no specifics, I'm simply assigning a budget) - $150

Monitor (again, no specifics except for resolution) - ~$350

Case (assigning budget) - ~$150

Power Supply (assigning budget) - ~$200

Media (assigning budget) - ~$100

Miscellaneous Costs (assigning a little bit of leeway) - ~$100

The total of all that: ~$2800

Note on the pricing: I'm using exactly what GameSpot built... that way I have some standardized reference, you know? However, in light of what has been brought up, I will also do a look at equivalent setups without what GameSpot exactly had. It'll be a bit more time

Here's an example of what a PC could cost if customized some more (and not built exactly like GameSpot's):

I can post a build that beats yours for a fraction of the price.. $900. I set it up for Mongo-Boss but may as well post it here.

EVGA GeForce 8800GT 512MB - $179.99 after rebate. Lifetime warranty.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz - $219.99. 3 year Warranty

CORSAIR XMS2 2GB DDR2 800 - $48.00. Lifetime Warranty

Rosewill 750W Power Supply - $89.99.

EVGA LGA 775 nForce 680i SLI ATX Intel Motherboard - $159.99 after rebate. 1 Year Warranty

Rosewill Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Case - $26.99. No Warranty(not needed anyway)

Western Digital Caviar 250GB HDD - $69.99. 5 Year Warranty

ASUS Black 18X DVD-ROM - $17.99. No Warranty

Microsoft Windows Vista 32-Bit Home Premium OEM - $94.99

Total = $907.92

My 8800 GT is slightly worse than the 8800 GTX but not much... I got a quad core in there. It is basically just as good as the one you "posted"

horrowhip

Hopefully you don't mind my borrowing your post!

PLEASE KEEP IN MIND: This is building a computer completely from scratch, and also assuming that absolutely no variation is made from the setup that GameSpot used. The game performance in terms of fps isn't going to be affected by the hard disk, for example, so you could get a cheaper hard disk. Or use your old one. Also you may have an old DVD drive or something you can use that entirely takes out the cost of Media. Along those lines you may even have an old monitor you want to use, old input devices, and perhaps an old operating system. Also you may opt for XP instead of Vista. HOWEVER since this is GameSpot, I have gone with what they have built. I can see for myself that (given my budget assignments and all) there are areas where the cost can be reduced DRAMATICALLY so the $2800 is a very high estimate. Still it is indicative of the cost of PC gaming.

Again, I mentioned that Crysis is an outlier, so I'll take a look at Call of Duty 4 (CoD4), another popular First Person Shooter (FPS) that is gorgeous. CoD4 is an interesting game in terms of analyzing system requirements because it is also on the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3.

Here are the PC system setups for CoD4 (from the CPU and Memory section):

Interestingly the highest resolution used is 1280 x 1024, so we'll go with that. I'll shoot for approximately 60 fps for CoD4 at 1280 x 1024. We've already determined that about 30 fps is at least playable, a boost of resolution from 1280 x 1024 to 1600 x 1200 on the same system probably won't drop the fps to below 30 (if my understanding isn't too flawed - if that is the case, please correct me). There are two differences from the Crysis setup I will look at here: the video card and the operating system. I'm ignoring the hard disk because the old hard disk would work just fine.

GeForce 8800GT 512MB - ~$200

Windows XP Professional - ~200

The net decrease in cost is $400, bringing the total down to: ~$2400.

NOTE: Again, I realize that the cost is variable depending on your needs and where you are willing to compromise, as well as the effects of time. Still, the point is that to build a computer completely from scratch as GameSpot did is expensive.

HUGE NOTE: I REITERATE THE FACT THAT THE NEEDS OF THE PERSON BUILDING THE COMPUTER WILL DIFFER. Perhaps the person building the computer isn't as interested in FPS games. In that case they can tone down the raw horsepower of the rig and make it less expensive. Perhaps they don't need as big of a hard disk, or the same motherboard. That can also decrease the cost of the rig. However, my analysis is a decent high-approximation of building a decent gaming computer that can give the interested person a reasonable level of cost to expect in a worst-case scenario.

b) Games

This is a small section. The prices of games on PCs are generally cheaper than console games by about $10 US because of licencing fees necessary for console games. In terms of the types of games and such, I will discuss that later in a more subjective manner. Objectively speaking, the only thing that can be said is that PCs tend to have more of games that can utilize the keyboard and mouse, like RTS games, while they both have the same amount of games like FPS games and whatnot that can be relatively similar even with different control schemes.

c) Comparing Consoles and PCs

Let's go with $2000 for a fully fledged PC that can play most of the latest games (all of them if you turn down quality settings in Crysis and other high-requirement games). It is a computer you've built customized to your needs and you are happy with it.

Compared to a console, that is about $1600 more. If you want to include the price of games, then if you bought 160 games you would have a more cost effective system in the PC due to the decreased cost of games. However, that is not feasible.

Now, let's be fair here - I included monitors for the PC, so we should look at the cost of a display device for the console. It is a given that most people have a TV lying around, but so do PC users. It is also true that most of the time the TV or monitor lying around isn't of the latest capabilities. However, the lifetime of TV technologies tend to be longer than for technologies on PC just because of the different nature of both industries, at least as they were. I'll get to the changing climate of TV and whatnot later.

It's up to you whether you include the cost for a TV or not. If you are looking to build an entertainment center completely from scratch, and you are debating between getting a PC gaming center or a console gaming center, then the TV cost comes into play. However, if you already have a HD-capable TV in your house, but you're also considering building a gaming PC from ground up, then the console will be cheaper. However, if you have input devices, good quality monitors, and other old parts you can use (perhaps from your old PC) in your house, that drastically reduces the cost of a gaming rig and it might end up being cost competitive with consoles if you intend on getting quite a few games. (Remember, I'm assuming a $10 saving every time you buy a PC game instead of a console game.)

Generally though, I would say that console gaming is very likely much cheaper. But again, REMEMBER: Cost will change depending on the needs, so what I have said here can only be a reasonable approximate. Or perhaps not even that if your needs are much different.

2) Upgrading

To take a look at the need to upgrade, here is how I'm defining "need": You need to upgrade when your system requirements fail to meet minimum requirements of games that you want to play. If you don't want to play Crysis, you don't have to upgrade. If you don't want to play Supreme Commander, you don't have to upgrade for it.

Still, let's assume you want to play all games. I will start with that assumption and then start with Call of Duty 4. Here is CoD4's minimum requirements (obtained from IGN):

Minimum Requirements:
Intel Pentium 4 2.4 GHz or AMD Athlon 64 2800+ processor or any 1.8Ghz Dual Core Processor or better supported
512 MB RAM (768 MB RAM for Windows Vista)
8 GB of free hard drive space
Video card (generic): NVIDIA Geforce 6600 or better or ATI Radeon 9800Pro or better

Let's look back in time at PC games and see if we can find when the Geforce 6600 or Radeo 9800Pro and the Pentium 4 2.4 GHz were not the minimum, but in fact recommended. To keep the level of system taxation similar, I'll look for another FPS. One game I found that works pretty well is F.E.A.R., which was released towards the end of 2005. Here are its recommended requirements (again, from IGN):

Recommended Requirements:
P4 3.0GHz or equivalent
1GB RAM
256MB Radeon 9800 Pro or GeForce 6600
Pixel Shader 2.0 support

Sound familiar? CoD4 came out towards the end of 2007, so then using this method of assessing need to upgrade, the upgrade cycle for PCs is about 2 years. As is the trend, it seems, this time assessment will change depending on what you need. If you are a hardcore PC gamer and need the best fps at the best resolutions all the time for every game you play, then you will probably be upgrading quicker than every 2 years. If you are a pretty average gamer, then you should be fine with the 2 year cycle or hell, you could probably even stretch it to 3 or 4 years. If you are a lower-end PC gamer, if you build a great gaming PC once, you may not need to upgrade for 5 years or more.

The need to upgrade depends on the games you want to play and the quality that you absolutely need for the games you do want to play. Still, PC gaming comes out as more expensive than console gaming.

3) Some More Subjective Thoughts

Now, I said I'd keep it objective, but I feel that a subjective analysis will shed some more light onto it as well. So I've given you fair warning.

a) Experience

To begin with, there are the many arguments I hear about the different kind of gaming that gaming on the PC and consoles are. However, as time progresses, the two are converging. Consoles are more like PCs than ever, and PCs are more like consoles than ever (in terms of their connectivity to televisions). My family has a great Sony HDTV that has HDMI inputs, for example. I have a PS3 and a 360 hooked up to it currently, but what is interesting is that I can hook up a PC to it as well. Specifically, if I build a gaming rig with a top-of-the line video card, I can connect it to the TV with a HDMI cable. Thus the claims of a different experience is a moot point. You can make a PC like a console with a wireless keyboard and mouse as well as the right video card, just as you can make a console more of a PC-like experience by attaching it to a LCD monitor instead of a TV. In essence the gaming experience can be as different or as alike as you want it to be, although it will most likely be reflected on the price.

b) Games (again)

PCs and consoles have different games. You can find Crysis only on PC, while you can find Mario Kart only on consoles, for example. However there are also games like CoD4 that are on both.

Which would suit you better depends on what kind of games you want to play and what kind of experience you want out of it. Do you want to play FPS games at the absolute highest quality with only opportunities to improve the quality as time goes on? Then go with the PC. Do you want to play RTS games effectively? Get a PC. Do a bit of research to see if the higher cost of PCs are worth it.

c) Usability

I've been strictly looking at gaming so far. However, it is important to note that PCs and consoles can be used for other things as well. However PCs can do everything consoles can and more. In fact, more likely than not you are reading this post on a PC. You can make documents and such on computers, and well... there is just so much I don't know where to start. What about things like Photoshop? You can't use that on a console. Having a great computer will not only help your gaming, but it will make everything else you do with a computer faster, or more efficient. When you build a computer, if you're building it purely for gaming you're getting a bad deal because there are things out there made purely to game - namely, consoles. However, if gaming is only part of what you seek, then the price is more than worth it because you can do so much with a computer.

d) My Thoughts

I am not saying that PC gaming or console gaming is better. I'm simply trying to illuminate the differences and say that they both have their pros and cons, and thus are able to compete on a level ground in System Wars. This level ground is the taste of the gamer.

I'll give you examples. I can't imagine playing Valve games on a console. The Orange Box, for example, is something I would never play on a console simply because I'm used to playing Valve games on the computer. It's partly nostalgia and partly habit, you know? Similarly, I can't imagine playing Halo games on computers because Halo to me is a console experience. It's how I first experienced it and it's how it feels best to me. Just like me, your own feelings towards games will affect what is most worth your money.

Have I missed something? If I have, lemme know and I'll write about that too. Tell me what you think!

I don't agree. I believe hardcore gamers - the most vocal minority of the gaming population - would be satisfied, but for the majority more casual games will be just fine.

If I remember right, wasn't one of the most popular game on the PS2, one of the the biggest reason it was a succes, Madden NFL? Perhaps my definition of "casual" is a bit off, but Madden comes to mind when I think of one of the big reasons the PS2 was so dominant. The hardcore games help, sure, but if only hardcore gamers are satisfied only a few consoles would be sold (relative to how much could be sold if it appealed to the 'casuals' as well).