You'll want a decent amount of RAM - no less than 4GB, you probably won't need more than 8GB. As for processor, people suggest multi-core processors, and they are cheaper, but the problem is that most games simply aren't optimized to use all of your cores. I have a quad core 2.2GHz processor, but I feel like I could have saved $100 and stuck with a 2.4 dual core and been off just as well.



When it comes to video cards, I'm not as knowledgeable, but I can definitely tell you: get an Intel processor, and an Nvidia video card. Some people will tell you AMD cards are better (pricewise anyway), but most people use Intel/Nvidia, they're optimized to use each other, more reliable (in my experience) and much easier to get tech support for.



What else... don't get a sound card, they're basically always built in to your motherboard, you don't really need an integrated chip with your dedicated video card (but it does help if you plan for using the comp for things other than gaming). Do NOT get Windows 8, stick with Windows 7 (it's cheaper and better), and... if you have other questions, just ask

For a good mid-end gaming PC, you're looking at somewhere around 900$ from a place like CyberPPC. I'd personally suggest doing it all yourself, and I'd offer my assistance but I'm in the other part of the world - So I've a configuration and made the assumption that you are not planning to overclock, but allow for it at minimal cost. And I've thrown in every available free game that comes with the chosen parts.



http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/saved/1FATKT (It will expire in 7 days, so be sure to print, save or otherwise save the configuration so it doesn't go away)



Quick summary of the parts:



Note: This is just the machine - no monitor or notable accessories.



Case: The default one for the setup. It's a question of personal taste and weight.

CPU: Intel i5 4670K (The newest generation of Intel processors - I picked a "K" model which is slightly pricier, but allows for overclocking down the line. Also has better re-sale value)

GPU: I went with an ATI 7870, which has served me well these past six months with great performance. It is also in the mid range, pricewise)

Cooler: The default option is a closed circuit water cooler (Basically it runs like your typical air cooler - no maintenance required aside from a dusting off every so often)

RAM: 8GB "Brand Name" RAM (Basically means it comes from a known brand that works for gaming purposes)

HDD: 1TB Drive (No mention of which one, but frankly it doesn't matter - You can always buy a new one with moe space later on, or an SSD)

PSU: Standard Corsair brand Power Supply at 500W, which should be plenty for the system and for more harddrives. I wouldn't put another 7870 graphics card in it though, hehe.

OS: I've chosen Windows 7 64Bit, but you can pick Windows 8, 64Bit for the same price should you want to (Again a question of personal taste - either will run equally fast with games)



Others: Motherboard is a smaller model of the one I have, which runs a bigger machine, overclocked. Network Card and Sound are both Onboard, since you don't really need either unless you're an enthusiast. There's a 4 dollar mouse included, but you can swap it out, as well as add a keyboard should you choose to.

Fen - thanks.



Mansen - No cooling fans? aka extra case fan upgrade?

Why i5 and not an i7?

Why the 100 ddr3 ram and not the 1866 or 2133?

Windows 8 is bad?



Your config came out to $890, yea?

Nasarog wrote:
Windows 8 is bad?

It depends on who you ask, but 97% of them will say it's bad. The other 3% are people using tablets.



Windows 8 is designed for computers with touch screens, not for desktops. It's more of a hassle than it needs to be if you're just running videogames.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
It depends on who you ask, but 97% of them will say it's bad. The other 3% are people using tablets.



Windows 8 is designed for computers with touch screens, not for desktops. It's more of a hassle than it needs to be if you're just running videogames.

Oh, I didn't know that. I use OSX, so yea.



Win7 ultimate 64 bit or something like that is what I need then.

Nasarog wrote:
Oh, I didn't know that. I use OSX, so yea.



Win7 ultimate 64 bit or something like that is what I need then.

"something like that" Win7 64bit will do



As for why he chose the i5, there are a lot of reasons why you might want to do that (one might be "not getting more than what you need"), but he's clearly more experienced in this than I am so if he wants to elaborate I'll let him explain in better detail than I could.



He also selected liquid cooling as opposed to fan cooling, if that answers your other question.

Nasarog wrote:
Fen - thanks.



Mansen - No cooling fans? aka extra case fan upgrade?

Why i5 and not an i7?

Why the 100 ddr3 ram and not the 1866 or 2133?

Windows 8 is bad?



Your config came out to $890, yea?

1. No additional cooling fans, no. They are most likely overpriced in that shop (I actually didn't check) and incredibly easy to buy yourself and install. And besides I don't know that specific case or how well it ventilates air.



2. i5's are for gaming. An i7 doesn't do anything for your gaming performance, UNLESS you are into Twitch.tv streaming, or recording videos of yourself playing. Or of course, the machine is also used for video editing or 3D rendering tasks. So unless you're doing any of that, you might as well save the money and stick with the i5.



3. Same as above really - Games won't really run any better with higher memory frequencies. It is yet another thing for "work stuff" tasks. So again a question of saving a bit of money.



4. A lot of people hate Windows 8's new user interface - I personally don't mind it anymore (Just re-installed Windows 8 on my gaming machine last night in fact). Functionally for games they are the same, and will be for years to come. Microsoft is working towards making the next DirectX updates Windows 8 only, but we're talking 5 years before game developers make it mandatory (and by then we'll have a Windows 9)



5. Yes it came out to 889$ in my link - Before any shipping costs and all that. This includes the games bundled with it.

Fen -



Mansen - I see. I've been buying macs for projects and limited personal use, so I usually buy the latest and greatest and run that machine until it can't hang with the software I need. This usually lasts me about 6-7 years before the machine shows it's age.



This machine would be strictly for gaming. Would do ing a similar set-up from component pieces like tiger direct cost about the same? Are the CPP labor costs negligible? I would love to mess with a build ( I haven't in forever and a day), but just don't have the time and space.



How long do you think this machine will stay viable for?

Hey guys, care to give a hand here?



I've been playing ES on my macbook, and I either need a much more powerful macbook pro, or a gaming pc.



I am looking at this website, cyberpowerpc.com to build my gaming rig, but I have been out of pc gaming for a very long time and I have no clue what I am looking at when I look there. Can anyone help?



Thanks.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
It depends on how you want to enjoy your games. If you want to play all games over the next few years at the absolute max settings possible, you'll need to upgrade sooner, but games like Endless Space will not run any worse five years from now, and new games in five years will still probably run on the machine (at lower settings, of course). So if graphical fidelity and frames per second aren't your biggest priority in upcoming years, the only real limiting factor is the MTBF of the selected components, which you can see for yourself.



And, with that said, it's easier (as I understand) to repair a PC than a Mac - if your video card burns out over the next few years, you can replace the singular component instead of replacing the entire PC.

I agree with a laptop or imac, but with a tower, the macs are flawless. I've upgraded added components easily, but the main processor and mother board are married to the system. THose aren't upgradeable at all. But a proper mac tower starts around $2600 and keeps going up.



I like $900 much better when it concerns gaming. That's why I was curious about the i7. Would that processor have better longevity? because you can always add ram, HD and video cards.

Nasarog wrote:
I like $900 much better when it concerns gaming. That's why I was curious about the i7. Would that processor have better longevity? because you can always add ram, HD and video cards.

This is not something I can answer from experience or research, but I can suggest you look at i5 and i7 models and check the MTBF (Mean Time Before Failure) on the different types. My guess is probably not, since the i7s are newer, but I can't say for sure.

Fenrakk101 wrote:
This is not something I can answer from experience or research, but I can suggest you look at i5 and i7 models and check the MTBF (Mean Time Before Failure) on the different types. My guess is probably not, since the i7s are newer, but I can't say for sure.

Hmm, I've only really had HD's and cd/dvd drives eat it on me. Okay, not true, also a couple of lcd's on a laptop (toddler troubles), and one mother board, but other than that, I've had good luck.

Nasarog wrote:
Would do ing a similar set-up from component pieces like tiger direct cost about the same?

Without knowing the American market in detail I can't comment on that for sure - We're probably talking 5-10% difference on either side depending on your luck and postal costs (Sometimes you get a better deal by buying from several websites, but the postage eliminates the saving).



It depends on what you consider similar - The thing with websites such as CPP is that they give you rebates and freebies (Typically games and minor upgrades to hardware). The reason I personally pick parts and assemble my own machines is choice - I can pick specific parts that might be 5-10% better or cheaper than if I would let a third party do it for me. (I can try and compare with a self-built machine later today - I doubt it'll be a great difference though)

Nasarog wrote:
How long do you think this machine will stay viable for?

That's a tough question to answer - It depends mostly on how demanding you are. Of course it won't be able to pull off 60FPS in the coming generations of games at the same settings as now, but with how the hardware market is now, the only thing you're looking at to be upgraded a couple of years down the line is the graphics card. (Intel hasn't managed to improve the CPU performance in the past couple of years for games) - Aside from additional harddrives (SSD) and such.



If all that matters to you is being able to run games comfortably (With increasing reduction in quality as years go by), I'd make a guess and say that it is good for at least 5 years, after which you're looking at a new CPU, RAM and Graphics card for an overhaul.

Nasarog wrote:
I like $900 much better when it concerns gaming. That's why I was curious about the i7. Would that processor have better longevity? because you can always add ram, HD and video cards.

The CPU can be swapped out as well - But regarding the i7 question I doubt it. The thing with processors and games is that games right now, can't really use more than a single core or two (diminishing returns), which leaves most of your processor idle at all times. It's all about how fast each core is - not the number. i7s aren't noticeably faster than the i5s, but they have more cores and hardware features that are useful for multitasking (Such as streaming or recording your gameplay)



So the question is - All play and no work? Or some work? Unless you're serious about photo/video editing, 3D processing or other CPU intensive tasks, it's basically just money out the window for you. For video games, a second graphics card running in a Crossfire/SLI setup would get you more performance in a video game (Which also varies as not all games are equally good at using this)

Fenrakk101 wrote:
This is not something I can answer from experience or research, but I can suggest you look at i5 and i7 models and check the MTBF (Mean Time Before Failure) on the different types. My guess is probably not, since the i7s are newer, but I can't say for sure.

I wouldn't worry about processor death unless you're doing some serious liquid nitrogen level overclocking as an enthusiast - Your Power Supply is more likely to give up before that. They slowly lose power over time and stability which is why you always buy a little more than you need and of a quality brand to ensure it stays stable. A good brand PSU like Corsair usually have a 5year lifespan if you use the PC for gaming every day if not more (And they are a fairly cheap replacement overall)

I have a question too - is there a way to set programs to run on specific cores, or is that done automatically? For example, if I want to have a light game and a browser open, would a single core handle the work if it can or does it delegate to idle cores first?

Fenrakk101 wrote:
I have a question too - is there a way to set programs to run on specific cores, or is that done automatically? For example, if I want to have a light game and a browser open, would a single core handle the work if it can or does it delegate to idle cores first?

It's possible to force a program on specific cores - But Windows also does this by itself automatically quite efficiently. Usually you'll only want to do this for older games that can't handle multiple cores.

Mansen wrote:
It's possible to force a program on specific cores - But Windows also does this by itself automatically quite efficiently. Usually you'll only want to do this for older games that can't handle multiple cores.

Alright, thanks for answering

All play and no work. This gaming rig and the work computer will be in different parts of the house.



Hmm, now I am going to look at your build again, because it looks interesting.



I do not play racing games, FPS, or 3rd person anything on my pc. I have a PS3 for that. I like 4x games, simcity, DoW, and everything in between.