What does it take to be a PC Gamer?

[Skott]

Check out the following thread: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2192841

It's a thread about mid-range (~$1,000) builds based on current prices that mfenn updates once a week.

If you do decide to build, I would suggest making a thread in General Hardware, where hard working fellow members will do what they can to get you the most for your money.

^This is what I would do if I were stepping into pc gaming and know what I know. A good mid range pc is a great way to start or get back into pc gaming.

 

[cbrunny]

Thanks for the input. I'm really torn on whether or not to plunge to pc gaming. I have a feeling it is going to come down to whether or not the ps4 is going to be competitive with higher-end pc gaming graphics, and that is something that we likely won't know for a while. I mean, we know about the ps4 hardware now, but the console optimization is a big question mark for me.

I'm looking primarily to game at 1080p in the medium term. I have a 104" 1080p projection, and ideally I'd be using that for the pc gaming. I don't think I can justify a higher resolution monitor ($$) until my current one craps out (vintage: 1280 x 1024). Plus, I really enjoy gaming on the big screen. Currently heavily invested in the ps3.

I will probably continue to go around in circles between the ps4 and a decent pc rig for the next several months....

 

[cbrunny]

I suppose one of the advantages to pc gaming is that if the experience is ever not satisfactory you can usually throw money at the problem to make it go away. Can't do that with console gaming unfortunately, but on the other hand console gaming is substantially less expensive....

 

[BrightCandle]

Console gaming is only less expensive if you buy less games. Most PC games are £30 and most console games are £50 at launch. Given a PC being £200 more expensive you are looking at getting that back within 10 games, not to mention the sales that can make that even faster.

The ps4 will be obsolete the day it's released. Its going to be based on an apu, something no PC gamer would consider as reasonable today. Its barely entry level graphics. There is no way the ps4 on launch would come close to the PC in graphically fidelity, its just not possible. Whatever gain they have by working on the hardware directly is normally relatively minor. What makes games look better after time is tricks that allow them to reduce quality on other aspects such that overall it looks better.

The grand majority of xbox360 and ps3 games were not rendered in HD, you could easily simulate that on a PC and have ridiculous frame rates comparatively. But its not a trade off a PC gamer would make, because clear and sharp with less pretties is normally better in motion than fuzzy but more bells and whistles.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Thanks for the input. I'm really torn on whether or not to plunge to pc gaming. I have a feeling it is going to come down to whether or not the ps4 is going to be competitive with higher-end pc gaming graphics, and that is something that we likely won't know for a while. I mean, we know about the ps4 hardware now, but the console optimization is a big question mark for me.

I'm looking primarily to game at 1080p in the medium term. I have a 104" 1080p projection, and ideally I'd be using that for the pc gaming. I don't think I can justify a higher resolution monitor ($$) until my current one craps out (vintage: 1280 x 1024). Plus, I really enjoy gaming on the big screen. Currently heavily invested in the ps3.

I will probably continue to go around in circles between the ps4 and a decent pc rig for the next several months....

Personally, for me it is not really about the graphics. I just prefer a mouse and keyboard control system. I also like the idea of having only one system to use to play games and do some light productivity work when the occasion demands.

 

[HeXen]

All gamers are PC gamers.

A computer is a general purpose device that can be programmed to carry out a finite set of arithmetic or logical operations. Since a sequence of operations can be readily changed, the computer can solve more than one kind of problem.

personal computer is a microcomputer designed for individual use

 

[sandorski]

PC + Games + Playing Games on PC = PC Gamer

 

[power_hour]

Might help to list the games you want to play first. Youtube is great for this. Watch some replay, read the comments. You will get a feel for what you want. And what resolution you plan to play on it is critical. A rig for 1080p can be very reasonably priced.

Don't buy the hype either. No game will play perfect with even the most powerful hardware. Drivers are only so good and often the law of diminishing returns kicks in. Throwing money at a problem is only good if you have money to burn.

 

[chalmers]

Youtube is great for this. Watch some replay, read the comments.

God no, Youtube comments make any intelligent person want to blow their brains out.

 

[power_hour]

God no, Youtube comments make any intelligent person want to blow their brains out.

Your making the OP sound like he just arrived here from another planet.
Youtube is a great resource but like anything else you gotta know how to use it. Just like this forum or any other.

peace

 

[shortylickens]

Console gaming is only less expensive if you buy less games. Most PC games are £30 and most console games are £50 at launch. Given a PC being £200 more expensive you are looking at getting that back within 10 games, not to mention the sales that can make that even faster.

The ps4 will be obsolete the day it's released. Its going to be based on an apu, something no PC gamer would consider as reasonable today. Its barely entry level graphics. There is no way the ps4 on launch would come close to the PC in graphically fidelity, its just not possible. Whatever gain they have by working on the hardware directly is normally relatively minor. What makes games look better after time is tricks that allow them to reduce quality on other aspects such that overall it looks better.

The grand majority of xbox360 and ps3 games were not rendered in HD, you could easily simulate that on a PC and have ridiculous frame rates comparatively. But its not a trade off a PC gamer would make, because clear and sharp with less pretties is normally better in motion than fuzzy but more bells and whistles.

Dont forget GOG and Steam which have a buttload of old classics dirt cheap.

Actually I think the Wii Online, Xbox Live and PSN also have that, so maybe its not an advantage any more.

 

[Newbian]

Console gaming is only less expensive if you buy less games. Most PC games are £30 and most console games are £50 at launch. Given a PC being £200 more expensive you are looking at getting that back within 10 games, not to mention the sales that can make that even faster.

The ps4 will be obsolete the day it's released. Its going to be based on an apu, something no PC gamer would consider as reasonable today. Its barely entry level graphics. There is no way the ps4 on launch would come close to the PC in graphically fidelity, its just not possible. Whatever gain they have by working on the hardware directly is normally relatively minor. What makes games look better after time is tricks that allow them to reduce quality on other aspects such that overall it looks better.

The grand majority of xbox360 and ps3 games were not rendered in HD, you could easily simulate that on a PC and have ridiculous frame rates comparatively. But its not a trade off a PC gamer would make, because clear and sharp with less pretties is normally better in motion than fuzzy but more bells and whistles.

Don't forget how consoles charge you extra for all the dlc for a game you can get for free with a pc version such as map updates or even to play online with the xbox.

 

[BrightCandle]

Don't forget how consoles charge you extra for all the dlc for a game you can get for free with a pc version such as map updates or even to play online with the xbox.

Yes and they overprice their retro games and provide no alternative suppliers for anything which keeps prices high.

About the only thing I would say that really gets me down as a PC player is the DRM 'game'. I loose this game more often than I care to count and its downright annoying. Plenty of games I own can no longer be played after the publisher went under or the publisher removed support and now its gone never to be played again. That isn't going to happen on a console, the chain of security is within the console itself and don't have to rely on online activation and always online schemes to keep you going. Which means when you move house and all you have is your PC plugged in (first thing you setup surely?!) you may find that you can't even get steam to open let alone play a game without the internet. Its more than an inconvenience sometimes, you do occasionally have to walk away or wait weeks for support to fix the problem before you can play a game. That just doesn't happen on the console, but then Minecraft or Prison architect and their continuous alphas can't appear on the console either.

I own both a 360 and a PS3 and I have not touched either in over a year, the hardware is ancient and the PC game is just better. The few exclusives to console are often good games but rarely genre defining like we see on PCs.

Not to mention that in the end the PC works out a lot cheaper for more performance and you can put even more performance in it and get that in your old games as well as the new ones.

 

[spaceman]

multicore cpu /apu
dedicated video card
some windoze os
ya semantics but pc gamer for 17yrs
neverhad topshelf stuff
always bought midd tier stuff and always been very pleased
i game w. alot of ppl who have comparatively ancient stuff
and u know they have a blast

 

[cbrunny]

I'm a fan of the RPG genre generally. It is the genre that I play most often. JRPGs - not so much, but I was a fan of Ni No Kuni fwiw. ARPGs, e.g. Dungeon Siege type games as well. Skyrim, if that fits into that category too. I stumbled on a thread about Path of Exile & it looks very interesting as well.

I also like games that use RPG elements in other ways, e.g. Mass Effect series (one of the few that wasn't totally dissatisfied with the ending of #3), Borderlands series, I'd like to play Far Cry 3. Crysis series didn't really catch my attention, somehow. But I had fun with Just Cause 2 as well.

I'm hoping that a pc version of GTA V is confirmed, as I far preferred the PC experience in GTA IV over the ps3 version.

Also still playing Warcraft 3 on occasion, but I can play that with my current onboard just fine so that is the least of my worries.

 

[BurnItDwn]

a "real" PC gamer isn't the type of person who spends $3000 on a PC. Those are the hardware extremists. You're perfectly fine with an i3, or if you want to splurge an i5, and if you plan on just running a single 1080P display, any $150-200 video card should do the trick.

If you want to play with 3 x 1080p displays, or you want to play with one of those 30 inch ones that has a higher resolution, then either 1 $300+ card, or Crossfire/SLI of a couple of midrange cards.....

That said, realisticly, any A8 or A10 with integrated video will outperform all the existing consoles in terms of graphics and compute capabilities.

 

[thm1223]

I find it interesting that this thread alludes to the general feeling by "non-PC gamers" that becoming a PC gamer is both prohibitively expensive and a slightly elite status. As someone who has played PC games all his life, but has never been particularly interested in consoles, I wonder why this is?

 

[homercles337]

For "future proofing" i tend to spend on the mobo and psu. All other things are easily upgraded. In fact, about 6 months ago i went from a core i7 920 (OCed) to a 980x. I am also running SLIed 460s (1GB). That will be my next upgrade, 680/Titan.

 

[cbrunny]

For "future proofing" i tend to spend on the mobo and psu. All other things are easily upgraded. In fact, about 6 months ago i went from a core i7 920 (OCed) to a 980x. I am also running SLIed 460s (1GB). That will be my next upgrade, 680/Titan.

This makes sense. But, aren't new sockets coming with Haswell or IB-E? If so.. it would make sense to wait until these are released.

Did some poking around the interweb... looks like socket 1150 is coming soon, and is going to be around for Broadwell. Based on this roadmap: http://www.pcper.com/category/tags/ivy-bridge-e it looks like IB-E is of the i7-3930k series, which I am confident will be cost-prohibitive for me.

By June when Haswell is better known and possibly for sale, and the ps4 is better known, sounds like I'll be shopping!

 

[BrightCandle]

I don't think haswell is especially worth waiting for. Theoretically it'll have twice the floating point performance of todays CPUs but in practice it wont get used for years and when it does finally get used your CPU is likely to be too slow to really benefit. So the general microarchitecture improvement expected to be around 10% is all you can really expect from Haswell to be useful for gaming and you don't need that 10%.

I don't think it is worth waiting, IB is a decent CPU and more than enough for gaming over the next 6 years. It might be worth getting a SB-E with 6 cores because the PS4 and Xbox 720 should bring an age of higher thread count games, it might even make the 8350 turn out to be the best gamer CPU at some point. But knowing the answer to that one requires a crystal ball that I left in my other coat. We wont know the full answer to this until probably next year.

 

[cbrunny]

But Haswell is supposed to share a socket with Broadwell, meaning that if I were to wait three months I could get a mobo that is upgradeable to the next next gen cpu.

 

[BrightCandle]

But Haswell is supposed to share a socket with Broadwell, meaning that if I were to wait three months I could get a mobo that is upgradeable to the next next gen cpu.

Are you honestly going to upgrade a CPU for 10% improved performance? Even I don't do that and I upgrade every year or two depending on what is on offer that proves significantly better. 10% is going to be imperceptible and I doubt broadwell will honestly be a big jump, it will just be the haswell architecture on a smaller process, it might show no performance benefits at all.

In the 3 months you waited you could have played games, and when the CPU currently matters so little for gaming getting a slightly newer and faster one really doesn't matter much. We are expecting nothing for graphics until the end of the year, so I don't think you are going to get a bad deal there compared to waiting.

For years I have been advising to not worry about upgradeability, because for the last 15 years its always been true that by the time the upgrade is worth it (2x performance) the platform you are on is long obsolete. In theory you get more upgradeability from haswell, in practice you will likely never use it as you will keep the machine until the next platform comes out and then there will be little point upgrading in your existing one as its left long behind. If you are waiting for haswell because you think it might last longer, you might be right but its not going to be that much. Unless somehow Intel is currently sitting on a monster jump that no one is expecting.

 

[Maximilian]

In addition to everything in this thread you must teabag at least 5 noobs, post pics for proof.

 

[cbrunny]

In addition to everything in this thread you must teabag at least 5 noobs, post pics for proof.

uh, what?

 

[Red Storm]

uh, what?

He's making fun of those hardcore online gamers that feel the need to do that stuff.