most console ppl arguing that they need a 2000+ pc inorder to play game is either they dont know what they are talking about, or they are buying these completely built system from expensive company like area 51, falcon, and huge brand name company. these system are expensive because these company throwing tons of useless software that we'll never use. for $2000 you can basically get a super computer running dual SLI or crossfire mode or maybe a quad SLI or crossfire setup.

you can get a 500+ computer running smoothly on any of the current games.

Ah yes...the obligatory DNF joke.

Realistically, I bet Spore will be out by Christmas next year if development picks up.

I've admittedly lost interest, but when I have less than a year til its release, perhaps I'll get hyped for it again.

BenKenobi88 said: Other than Crysis...there's not a big demand for DX10 computers for a bit yet. It's great to have it, but a good DX9 computer is practically as good for most games this year. Also, you'd have to switch to Vista for DX10...and not too many people want that.

Crysis supports dx9 anyway. Take into account that there are quite a few 360/PC titles and will continue to be into the future, then dx9 support will be around until the 360 is replaced.

Those 500$ computers is not really enough maybe if you want to play games on 1024* resolution and still they will not be that good at the end of 2008. But still its good computer but not for serious pc gamer. Stuff like 1GB DDR2 wont hold it specially if you have Vista you must have atleast 2GB. The graphic card is not that good either. Nobody wants to build a computer and then rebuild it again after a year if you are a pc gamer you better invest in the beginning 500$ is not enough.

Yojimbo said: Those 500$ computers is not really enough maybe if you want to play games on 1024* resolution and still they will not be that good at the end of 2008. But still its good computer but not for serious pc gamer. Stuff like 1GB DDR2 wont hold it specially if you have Vista you must have atleast 2GB. The graphic card is not that good either. Nobody wants to build a computer and then rebuild it again after a year if you are a pc gamer you better invest in the beginning 500$ is not enough.

Yeah, if you read the conclusion, it says that it's best to get 2GB of RAM and a better video card. But they were shooting for $500. It's funny how the most expensive component they chose is the power supply. However, that pc will run any game that's out right now at 1024 easily. Of course, they chose a DX10 compliant card, you can get better performance from a non-DX10 card now and just upgrade when/if DX10 becomes standard (that's what I'm doing). Also, if you can salvage some parts from your current pc (case, power supply, optical drives, hard drive etc.), you can use that cash for other stuff or just save some money. If you made the logical upgrades, it'd be more like $650. Personally, I tend to upgrade my pc about once a year with something or another anyways.

chuckd said: Yojimbo said: Those 500$ computers is not really enough maybe if you want to play games on 1024* resolution and still they will not be that good at the end of 2008. But still its good computer but not for serious pc gamer. Stuff like 1GB DDR2 wont hold it specially if you have Vista you must have atleast 2GB. The graphic card is not that good either. Nobody wants to build a computer and then rebuild it again after a year if you are a pc gamer you better invest in the beginning 500$ is not enough.   Yeah, if you read the conclusion, it says that it's best to get 2GB of RAM and a better video card. But they were shooting for $500. It's funny how the most expensive component they chose is the power supply. However, that pc will run any game that's out right now at 1024 easily. Of course, they chose a DX10 compliant card, you can get better performance from a non-DX10 card now and just upgrade when/if DX10 becomes standard (that's what I'm doing). Also, if you can salvage some parts from your current pc (case, power supply, optical drives, hard drive etc.), you can use that cash for other stuff or just save some money. If you made the logical upgrades, it'd be more like $650. Personally, I tend to upgrade my pc about once a year with something or another anyways.

I was a little curious so I looked up a review of the card at Extremetech and it is pretty horrible.  For example they use 2 gigs of ram and a Intel Core 2 Quad QX6700 @2.66GHz (much faster than the processor in the $500 computer and some games could barely run at 1024x768.  Call of Duty 2 ran at 22fps, with 4xAA 8xAF it ran at 14fps, Supreme Commander ran at 21fps, with 4xAA 8xAF it ran at 14fps.  Of course some games ran fine like Half Life 2 but who wants a system where it's going to be hit or miss if the game will be close to slideshow, imagine Crysis on that PC.*

It's true if you spend the money you can get a PC that blows away the consoles but that's like almost everything else, the more money you have the better you can get.

*Extremetech article: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2151679,00.asp

I spent about 3500-4000$ on a rig last year, in september. It's already starting to show signs of falling a little behind.
I bought everything save for one of the harddrives and the DVD-rom.

PS: I live in Norway, that's why the thing was so damn expensive!! If anyone was curious, it's;
Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4 GhZ
Asus P5B P965
Radeon X1950XTX 512MB
Samsung 20" syncmaster 204b
2 x WD caviar 320 GB HD
Thermaltake Aguila tower and a frickin pile of fans!
Hiper 670W with an 80 mm fan for power supply
Corsair Twin2X 6400 DDR2 2GB for ram
No sound card (using the P5B onboard, which is just fine)
No software whatsoever.

PPS: I don't know the how the prices fare in the US, but here in Norway you'll get nearly nothing for 500$ (especially with the dollar being it's weakest in a decade).
My graphics card alone cost around 700$ when I bought it, and it was not the best card available either!

BenKenobi88 said: You probably won't need a high end computer for Spore...but I guess a new PC at the time of Spore's release will be a good PC indeed...considering Spore is on track for a fall release in 2056.

I'm sure it won't run great on my 1GHz 128MB P3.

Legend11 said: chuckd said: Yojimbo said: Those 500$ computers is not really enough maybe if you want to play games on 1024* resolution and still they will not be that good at the end of 2008. But still its good computer but not for serious pc gamer. Stuff like 1GB DDR2 wont hold it specially if you have Vista you must have atleast 2GB. The graphic card is not that good either. Nobody wants to build a computer and then rebuild it again after a year if you are a pc gamer you better invest in the beginning 500$ is not enough.   Yeah, if you read the conclusion, it says that it's best to get 2GB of RAM and a better video card. But they were shooting for $500. It's funny how the most expensive component they chose is the power supply. However, that pc will run any game that's out right now at 1024 easily. Of course, they chose a DX10 compliant card, you can get better performance from a non-DX10 card now and just upgrade when/if DX10 becomes standard (that's what I'm doing). Also, if you can salvage some parts from your current pc (case, power supply, optical drives, hard drive etc.), you can use that cash for other stuff or just save some money. If you made the logical upgrades, it'd be more like $650. Personally, I tend to upgrade my pc about once a year with something or another anyways. I was a little curious so I looked up a review of the card at Extremetech and it is pretty horrible. For example they use 2 gigs of ram and a Intel Core 2 Quad QX6700 @2.66GHz (much faster than the processor in the $500 computer and some games could barely run at 1024x768. Call of Duty 2 ran at 22fps, with 4xAA 8xAF it ran at 14fps, Supreme Commander ran at 21fps, with 4xAA 8xAF it ran at 14fps. Of course some games ran fine like Half Life 2 but who wants a system where it's going to be hit or miss if the game will be close to slideshow, imagine Crysis on that PC.* It's true if you spend the money you can get a PC that blows away the consoles but that's like almost everything else, the more money you have the better you can get. *Extremetech article: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2151679,00.asp

 That might just mean that the video card is running into a bottleneck because it's only so good (hence why it was made) and it can't keep up with how fast the CPU is going. A Core 2 Quad Qx6700 would be better paired with the best ATI or Nvidia cards, not their low end ones.

You can build yourself a fairly decent computer for $500. Unfortunately, it won't last you more than 1 or 2 years before the newest games begin to run sluggishly. If you don't want to have to upgrade in 2 years, you do need to spend $1000 or more.