Desktops forum

General discussion

New Gaming Computer

by shlomo705 / September 29, 2007 5:10 AM PDT

I am looking to buy or maybe build a new gaming computer, and have no idea where to start. I realize that with building a computer, I will save some money, but I have no experience in computer building and am not sure that I have the time. I would really like not spend more than $1400-$1500, while still being able to play most new games. Any suggestions for a prebuilt computer or computer building specs?

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: New Gaming Computer
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: New Gaming Computer
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
how bout some links?
by ozos / September 30, 2007 4:43 AM PDT
In reply to: New Gaming Computer

This is a tad older:

But easily new enough to give you more than the basics, the included videos get a little tacky but demonstrate the general process. The whole build takes between 2 and 4 hours depending on how fast you are with tools, how meticulous you are with wire management, etc (truth be told you can throw it together in about 30 minutes, but I really don't suggest doing that your first time, check and double check everything just to be safe).

Some other links:

I'd look for parts:

Members here will be more than happy to help you out with advice on specific parts, I'd suggest at least watching through the tutorial on HowStuffWorks and then reading the article from Xoxide on how to choose a power supply, going to newegg or ZZF and picking out some hardware for your new system, posting back, getting some feedback, seeing what goes from there (either changing parts, or going with what you've got).

As a rough list of parts you should consider in that price range:

Intel Core 2 Duo
Intel Core 2 Quad (almost everyone on the internet will push you buying this processor, be forewarned, nothing is wrong with the Core 2 Duo or any other suggested processor, the Quad is just the "hot" item of today)
AMD Athlon64 x2 (Socket AM2 only though, avoid Socket 939)

2GB in 2x1024MB configuration, no question in my mind about it

Depends on what you need, I'd suggest going with a 250-400GB disk (about $80 at most), SATA or SATA II (doesn't really matter, to be entirely honest)

Something compatable with your processor selection (Intel will need LGA 775, AMD will need Socket AM2, look at: Asus, ASRock, DFI, Biostar, MSI, Abit, eVGA, and Gigabyte (brands of mainboards))

Video card:
A point of major contention in a gaming system, most people will tell you to get an 8800GTS because its *only* $300, I'd suggest looking at all of the following, and deciding based on price and performance (Tom's Hardware has a great VGA comparison chart, as well as a monthly article on what they think the best card in a given price range is (usually worth considering at least)).

From nVidia:
GeForce 8600GT, GeForce 8600GTS, GeForce 8800GTS
GeForce 7600GT, GeForce 7900GS

From ATi:
Radeon HD2600Pro, Radeon HD2600XT
Radeon X1650Pro, Radeon X1650XT, Radeon X1950GT, Radeon X1950Pro

The top line of cards (GeForce8/Radeon HD) are DirectX 10 compatable, the second line are DirectX 9.0c compatable, generally DirectX 10 doesn't really matter for a few reasons:

A) nothing uses it
B) nothing that claims to support it can actually run it decently
C) only Windows Vista supports it software wise (and Windows Vista isn't at all reccomended for a gaming computer due to incompatability with most everything on the market, look for XP Professional or XP Home for your new computer)

I'd generally look around, see whats available, etc, get a feel for prices and what you'd like to buy, and remember that many members here are willing to help, we just need something more concrete to work with.

Collapse -
Quad vs. Core 2 Duo
by shlomo705 / October 6, 2007 2:47 AM PDT
In reply to: how bout some links?

I'm debating on whether to get a Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 running at 3ghz or a Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 running at 2.4ghz. The system will be used almost exclusively for gaming and I do not plan on overclocking. I can get them at the same price at Newegg. Also, I want to be as future-proof as possible. So for pure gaming, which is better?

Collapse -
by ozos / October 6, 2007 4:08 AM PDT
In reply to: Quad vs. Core 2 Duo

honestly they're going to be about equal, I'd go with the quad core just to give yourself a little more piece of mind, but generally theres no more or no less future proofing offered by the Kentsfield over the 6850

Collapse -
by shlomo705 / October 6, 2007 4:53 AM PDT
In reply to: well

I'm almost done figuring out what parts I'm going to get. I'll post them here when I'm done.

Collapse -
Quad all the way!
by revert101 / October 24, 2007 5:18 PM PDT
In reply to: Quad vs. Core 2 Duo

Ive got a quad core 6600 (Q6600) ordered for gaming atm. I did a fair bit of research and in my opinion the quad is definately the one to go for.
this is why:

1) its one of the latest on the market
2) The latest games are beginning to ulitize the power of quad which is why u want one if ur into running ur games as best u can.
3) while its a slightly lower end cpu than that of other quad core cpus (eg. Q6700, Q6850) IMO it is still MORE THAN ENOUGH for people not willing to spend a kings fortune to go all the way on their gaming machine.
4) its supposed to have pretty good over-clocking potential. (so even if it isnt good enough for you, *which i doubt*, you still have the oportunity to make it faster :D)
5) i dont think there will be a game it wont play for quite a while. LOL

look i dont know all the specs, for it im sorry but if ur in the market for a gaming pc, a Q6600 while definately be lovely to play on. JUST MAKE SURE U GET A DECENT GPU TO GO WITH IT!!! (im getting the nvidia XFX 8800gtx which is a bit excessive but i would recommend it. if not in ur price range maybe go for the 8800 gts 320 or 640mb versions.


ps. happy gaming

Collapse -
well for gaming
by Quad Core Man / November 18, 2007 8:59 AM PST
In reply to: Quad vs. Core 2 Duo

this is easy as pie....
you totally want 4 processing cores against two for gaming. thats easy cause with 4 processing cores its like having 4 guys for one job. Also multitasking is amazing with these. I personally have the q6600 and i love it. Defedidently the q6600....

Collapse -
alright, some holes in your logic
by ozos / November 18, 2007 12:50 PM PST
In reply to: well for gaming

while it may look like a 400% performance increase with new technology and what not, the Q6600 is essentially two Core 2 Duos bolted together, its a multi-core module, which means its tech is IDENTICAL to the Core 2 Duo

furthermore, a guy named Gene Amdahl gave us Amdahl's law which defines scalability of an application mathematically, and shows us that 4 cores WILL NEVER realistically = a 4x performance increase:'s_law

with that said, the Core 2 Duo is just as good for gaming if money is an issue, although the quad core isn't a bad buy, i just wanted to put some facts straight in the thread if people were using it as a reference

Collapse -
Your right but....
by JCitizen / August 3, 2008 3:27 AM PDT

If you application/game is capable of splitting tasks between cores, and actually utilizing their advantage, you literally have four "computers" in one, to run one application. There is no way you cannot realize a performance gain.

Why do you think web-data base servers use this same technology to get information out on the web so fast?

The problem is a lot of code writers are not taking advantage of this, in fact they haven't even caught up with the 64bit RAM and data bus technology that is already there.

Collapse -
by repete_smile / August 3, 2008 10:06 PM PDT
In reply to: Your right but....

quad core computer when playing game
core 1 game
2 OS
3 half the unimportant stuff
4 the other half
dual core
1 OS and half the junk
2 game and half the junk
single core
1 OS, game, junk
I use a dual core system, Anyone know a way to put the junk + OS on one core and leave the other core to play game

Collapse -
by shaunchris / October 2, 2007 12:11 AM PDT
In reply to: New Gaming Computer

Hey I understand you on that, Im not a system builder myself but my experience with has been more than great... there are just so damn personal and as long as they maintain this level of service they will be at the top. They have really good prices and offer pretty much anything u could want at any budget. good luck

Popular Forums
Computer Help 49,613 discussions
Computer Newbies 10,349 discussions
Laptops 19,436 discussions
Security 30,426 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 20,308 discussions
Windows 10 360 discussions
Phones 15,802 discussions
Windows 7 7,351 discussions
Networking & Wireless 14,641 discussions


Free trip to the Grand Prix

Don't miss your chance to win a trip to the Formula 1 Grand Prix in Monaco for you and a plus-one.