[wise12u123]

Quote

Yikes... The components in this build really show evidence of inexperience.

[wise12u123]

Let's hear you list .

[wise12u123]

Quote

Always SSD my friend, always. 240gb sandisk extreme, will cut load times by half at least! They have come down so much in price, I cannot even imagine building a gaming pc without one. I somehow still see SSDs as a luxury, especially in gaming, where you actually need a lot of storage. The prices did come down, but they are still at 1$/GB more or less, just too damn high for gamers with a budget.

[wise12u123]

If you consider time is a luxury?? A couple of games and you have your solid state drive you gamer, you. You silly, silly gamer, you. SSD's run so much faster. Luxury, really. How about gaming? Luxury or necessitous???

[wise12u123]

Quote

Always SSD my friend, always. 240gb sandisk extreme, will cut load times by half at least! They have come down so much in price, I cannot even imagine building a gaming pc without one. I somehow still see SSDs as a luxury, especially in gaming, where you actually need a lot of storage. The prices did come down, but they are still at 1$/GB more or less, just too damn high for gamers with a budget. The way i see it is an SSD is a good thing to get, but right now the prices are too high and it should be limited to having the operating system/important programs and files. Right now i have 600GB of games and it is sure cheaper to just buy a 1tb HDD for games/music and a small 60 or 120 GB SSD for my operating system.

[wise12u123]

I agree with you. If your library is large, then you are absolutely right about an OS SSD and a HDD library.

[Airpilot]

I learned more from the comments than from the article. Thanks, GamerGeeks!

[sasdas]

I have a question, how would you go about synching save game between pcs, say if youre playing in your room but then decide to play in the living room?

[STANirvanaIND]

Quote

I have a question, how would you go about synching save game between pcs, say if youre playing in your room but then decide to play in the living room?

@sasdas: You could use Ubuntu One to sync the files across your pc, assuming their installed in similar relative locations ie. J:\Program Files\UT2004 on one PC to J:\Program Files\UT2004 on another. You may be able to do more customizing on the config end, I just haven't had a reason to try yet

[AoS48]

Yep, the 24 frames per second thing goes back to the early days of cinema.

For audio reasons, elimination of frequency changes, they standardized the frame rate when talking movies took the lead and they settled on 24 frames per second because, well film was expensive so using as little as was necessary was deemed the way to go.

Even then 24 FPS is not ideal, a cinema showing a film running at 24 FPS would, then have to employ multiple shutters in order to effectively achieve fluidity of motion.

Even to this day the odds are if you're at a theater watching a film on 35mm you're likely watching it through 3 shutters (72 images per second). Technically it's still only 24 unique images that create those 72 frames... but it goes to show how effectively smooth a TRUE 60 FPS experience could be.

Basically 24 FPS is kinda sh!t, it's the low water mark.

[AoS48]

Yep, the 24 frames per second thing goes back to the early days of cinema.

For audio reasons, elimination of frequency changes, they standardized the frame rate when talking movies took the lead and they settled on 24 frames per second because, well film was expensive so using as little as was necessary was deemed the way to go.

Even then 24 FPS is not ideal, a cinema showing a film running at 24 FPS would, then have to employ multiple shutters in order to effectively achieve fluidity of motion.

Even to this day the odds are if you're at a theater watching a film on 35mm you're likely watching it through 3 shutters (72 images per second). Technically it's still only 24 unique images that create those 72 frames... but it goes to show how effectively smooth a TRUE 60 FPS experience could be.

Basically 24 FPS is kinda sh!t, it's the low water mark.

[AoS48]

Quote

Ok you do not need 60 fps. Consoles do not run at 60 fps I do not know where the author got that idea. Anyways your eyes only see at 24 fps so you do not need anything close to 60. I don't know why the author is building such a expensive pc, you simply don't need that expensive of a pc just to play on your tv. You do not need 60fps and you do not need to run on maximum graphics levels. Eh, sorry buddy but you're wrong, the eye sees at 60fps, not 24. The 24fps idea is a myth based on faulty information. Furthermore, if you play a game at 60fps, then at 30, there is a HUGE noticeable difference in how smooth the motion is. You're obviously a console gamer if you don't know about crisp 60fps gmeplay. Anywho, 60fps isn't required, you're right on that. But 60fps feels a whole world better, and it is a very noticeable change.

Yep, the 24 frames per second thing goes back to the early days of cinema.

For audio reasons, elimination of frequency changes, they standardized the frame rate when talking movies took the lead and they settled on 24 frames per second because, well film was expensive so using as little as was necessary was deemed the way to go.

Even then 24 FPS is not ideal, a cinema showing a film running at 24 FPS would, then have to employ multiple shutters in order to effectively achieve fluidity of motion.

Even to this day the odds are if you're at a theater watching a film on 35mm you're likely watching it through 3 shutters (72 images per second). Technically it's still only 24 unique images that create those 72 frames... but it goes to show how effectively smooth a TRUE 60 FPS experience could be.

Basically 24 FPS is kinda sh!t, it's the low water mark.

[D34DProductions]

Without a question of a doubt, anyone with half a brain cell could in theory build the next next gen console.....Oh yeah plus $$$monla

[trentspalmer]

Before you install Windows on it, run Linux for a few weeks to wring out any hardware problems. If you have to replace the m-bo or ssd or something, it will be far easier to wipe and reinstall Linux because all the drivers ship with the kernel.

Then when you're satisfied that all the hardware is right, go ahead and install Windows if you haven't fallen in love with Linux.

[dragonlord12832]

Quote

Yikes... The components in this build really show evidence of inexperience.

I just built a computer more than capable of playing the latest games at 1080p (my television is only 720) and only spent 1/2 that much, literally!

[BulletMagnetEd]

Just a couple of thoughts...
1) $1600+??? Zoinks, before spending that much, I would buy a console, as much as I dislike them.
2) No AMD? Sure they aren't as good as an i7, but you could get a FX CPU or A-Series APU for a whole lot less.
3) SSD - there is no substitute. I'd prefer a Samsung 840 Pro or Intel SSD.
4) I guess a Blu-Ray writer sounds good for a living room entertainment PC, but with iTunes and Netflix and Hulu and Steam and Origin and etc., who uses physical media anymore? The only time I ever use my DVD burner is to burn CDs for my car. (PC - 2 mos. old, car - 11+ yrs. old )

Just my $0.02.

[hawkengrey]

Quote

Ok you do not need 60 fps. Consoles do not run at 60 fps I do not know where the author got that idea. Anyways your eyes only see at 24 fps....<snip>

This post is absolutely false. I've worked in the console game development business for a decade and before that in television for several years. Consoles -- notably PS3 and Xbox 360 -- most certainly do run at 60fps and most action games try very hard to achieve that framerate. Fast moving objects in a game which are reproduced in 30fps will, to most viewers, be "stuttering" slightly in their motion (mostly obvious in diving or sports games).

24 frames per second was simply a compromise in the film world between having just enough fps for the viewer to perceive fluid motion, while not requiring too much film (like actual film stock) for the production to keep costs down.