what other games apart from quakelive are you going to play? Because except for that, I don't see why you'd want to get a normal PC instead of a laptop (unless by movies, you mean something VERY special).

about the games dunno, some recent stuff, but i'm quite stuck with the quake series ;-)

laptop or pc: isn't a laptop more expensive than a pc, both having the same caracteristics?

yes, but you might not need the power. Listen to the guys that say what's going to be cheap when, tho :)

Wait a few months until the 6 core intels are out.
If they price them sensibly it should lower the prices for the existing 920's or you can buy one and have 6 cores. they use the same chipset as the i7 920. Around 20,000 in cinebench and close to 24k with a safe overclock (my estimate). Bit of a beast.

Either that or just spend about a 3rd of that budget and get yourself a nice Core 2 Q9950 setup and it'll probably do you well.

Baically now isn't a good time maybe 2 months, core 2 stuff will drop in value and so will the i7 920.

thanks

about what should i care most: processor? RAM? graphic card?

Well you'll need 6 gig of ram for the i7 series to get the best out of it. Normally ram isn't that important after the 3 gig mark, but like I said you HAVE to have 6 to get access tri channel mode.

Its not a huge dif, but seems stupid to skimp on such a minor component.

CPU and GPU are equally as important, BUT they are both only as good as the software.

If you want to buy a really good PC then like I said hang on until the 6 cores come out, assuming its priced at a sensible option, it should be possible for your budget. If not you'll get a nice i7 920 and plenty of change.

But if you want a good core 2 quad pc now (that will still do you well in games and multi media), go for the q9550.

The reason I'm suggesting a core2 setup and not an i5/amd setup is because the i7 uses the X58 chipset which is compatable with the upcoming 6 and no doubt 8 cores.

So if you buy ANYTHING but core 2, make sure its X58, that way in the future you can sell your i720 and add some cash and get a free upgrade, without having to replace motherboards.

If you buy a core 2, its not going to lose a lot of money.
In other words, you can sell it and still get a good price.

So either get a good cheap core 2, or hang on and go the whole hog.

make a nice ballance of those 3 components :)

could you give an example of a q9950 setup for a 3rd of that budget? sounds interesting, was thinking about getting the usual i5 etc setup but as you said the time might not be the best.. I need a pc though.

And Hi Goth4m :>

q9550 (150)
3 gig ram (50)
case + PSU (50)
HD 5770 GPU (130)
Samsung F3 1 TB (60)
P35 or p45 motherboard (60)
Arctickc cpu cooler (20)

you could save 60 on the GPU and get a hd4850 and save a further 50 on the CPU and get a E8400 (dual core) or even a Q6600 and not lose much performance. Minus 30 on the hard drive for a smaller one. That's already 150 off and I not really tried.

I was abit ambitious with the 3rd of the cost, but not to far off.

Also even if you used the cheaper components, you would probably struggle to tell the differecne as you can easily OC the q6600 to match q9550 performance or thereabouts and the Hd4850 is already handling crysis pretty well.

one half, it's the new third.

sounds like the PSU should be more expensive for such a system though. i mean, the PSU seems often overlooked but a bad one can destroy your system, or make your components operate improperly.

Case + PSU for 50? Do you want his box to get fried by the first power fluctuation/surge? And why change the stock cooler for another shitty one?

And you build PCs for a living? I really rarely laugh that hard.

Yep invest in a decent case and psu. Anyone who knows a first thing about hardware would tell you this.

Anyone who knows a first thing about hardware is trying to sell you an expensive set of plastic box, metal casing and a bunch of wires would tell you this.

build urself or premade?

premade for the moment

look for something with Intel i7 cpu or Intel Q9xxx series, (Q9550 is good value), 4gb ram should be enough (ram is very cheap so can upgrade)

gpu is imo most important for gaming

google gpu chart 2009 or something for performance charts of gpu's

useless to invest in a dead socket with no upgrading options

1156 or 1366 is the way to go

i7 = 1366

:-D

and Q9xxx isn't :)

i have q9550 n its awsum

dats y i recomend it :(

yeah it's not bad but it's on a dead socket (775) and intel won't be updating the socket with new cpus so he's better off investing in a socket that will last awhile so he'll be able to upgrade without having to change mobo and possibly memory sticks

yes u r right

every time i used that as an argument, I never ended up putting a better cpu in that socket, it just cost me more money for the same performance.

It's a valid argument at this time considering intels roadmap regarding new sockets is empty, it's going to be 1156 and 1366 for awhile (32nm just came out) and that leaves room for an upgrade. This is not always the case but at the moment it certainly is.

selling parts which match the current socket will always give him better second hand value aswell - that's why everyone should be up to date with hardware launches, upgrading/selling is generally a matter of timing :)

upgrading/selling is generally a matter of timing :)

it's also very much a matter of preference. No matter if it's feasible or not, many people just don't bother with upgrading.

Which is why I still find it amusing that noone who proposed a system actually bothered to ask goth4m whether he plans to upgrade or not :)

Don't bother with more than 2gb of ram, as it's still more than enough for just about everything you could want to do. 4gb if you want to be future proof for a good 4 years, but any more than that is just pissing away money.

For a video card, save your money for now, and don't get more than the minimum of what you need. A geforce 8800 is less than $100 right now, and should be more than enough. When newer games come out, they'll need DX11 support, and you can get a nice DX11 card when they're out.

2.5-3.0ghz dual core is all you'll need for quite a while.

Windows 7 can easily replace Windows XP.

300 euro comp can do everything you want

- wait 1, 2 months for the 32nm intels, then buy a 32nm quadcore around 200-300$. dont buy a 45nm CPU now, when 32nm is at the door
- p55 board
- 8gb ddr3
- hd5850 or hd5870, maybe even a fermi (nvidia) based solution if they turn out to be good for the price, or exceptionally fast/practical etc. just be careful, reference design video cards are loud nowadays, you might want to go for an aftermarket cooling solution like vapor-x
- for the soundcard just take an x-fi gamer, unless you have audiophile standards in which case i'd take an x-fi derivative like the auzentec x-fi's
- some hdd, or even a ssd for OS and hdd for data combination
- a decent power supply from a good brand, and some case, monitor, keyboard and mouse i guess


just dont buy what jamerio says, it basically will enhance your e-penis on certain sites (on ESR not really) but not really be a good system for your money

on ESR buying what jamerio adivses will definately decrease your e-penis to an infinitely small size, even if he did by random chance pick a good setup.

Hi I build computers for a living, look, I think we established you're a dumb German who I insulted and since then you keep trying to troll /rubbish me with one liners because you're bruised ego never quite got over it.

Its quite shocking this site has so many cluelessss admins like you.

And the fact that you took your name from a bottle of beer to try and hide the the fact you're probably another boring unoriginal nerd on the internet with nothing to offer is beyond me. German too.

Look at me, "I drink beer", "beer is cool". I get what you did there but its ultimately flawed.

You're an admin here right, I would be more than happy to have a live discussion on the topics most associated with this site, but without a search engine to consult, you would end up looking as stupid as I know you are.

Have another beer. Beer is cool. Beer is manly. Hell yeah.

funny thing is I never asked to be an admin, just thought I'd help when I was asked to.
So sorry if that hurt your feelings.


But interesting that you build computers for a living now, truly an innovative career, especially for someone who bought his first computer in 2004. 8 years later than clueless people like me :P

Btw, in any sales business it usually helps to listen to what the customer says, in this case he said that he used his previous laptop for five years and also that he doesn't care whether it is a laptop or a desktop.
This is a sign, that he might not intend to ever upgrade. Which in real business case should always trigger the question whether he wants a system with good upgradability or not.

Instead you assume we wants that because you would. Ergo, if customer contact is part of your job you really suck at it.



P.s: I find it very amusing that you toned you statements from "I own you at everything" to "I own you in topics on this site".

PP.S.: If those beer remarks of yours are serious they really make you look dumb. Everyone with half a brain can see how serious I am about that. i.e. neither tourist nor vedic ever chose to react to that ...

I don't drink alcohol, so I wouldn't make the connection.

This is all he has left since he can't use his "I WERKT @ RARE" argument anymore.

and here I was, ready to admit you had half a brain :)


aren't you supposed to have me on ignore anyway?

I only made an ignore list when I was trying to be productive and do SC coverage. It was a lot of work, and I'm really only going to be on the site until QL dies (shouldn't be long now), so I stopped.

Want to fight? or point and laugh at Jamerio some more?

point at jamerio by all means.

I trust we'll be arguing soon enough anyways :P

Is Becks well known in USA even among beer drinkers?

From TV/Films you get the impression they just drink Budweiser/Corona or maybe Heineken.

Last time I checked (in 2002) if available in most supermarkets, but it was quite expensive and judging by stored amounts other brands sold more. Heineken certainly being bigger. I'll have a fresh look in march.

But looking at it world-wide, from my experience I'd say Heineken, Becks and Carlsberg are the brands that are available in most places, like Jägermeister.

What are the topics most associated with this site?

well, i think common knowledge is that most people who build pcs for a living are fucking not able to do it

now that could be because a) they have no brains or dont want to use them, thus gaining their entire "knowledge" from intel ads and selling you utterly overpriced crap b) they are actually smart people and for that reason will only sell you what's good for their pockets, meaning also utterly overpriced crap


alone to recommend an aftermarket CPU cooler/fan discredits you completely. i assume if you build PCs for a living you know nowadays' boxed fans. long story short: they cool good, they are silent, you wont ever need an aftermarket cooling solution if you dont plan on overclocking to 4ghz+
i ran an 65nm e2140 with a boxed fan at 2,8ghz completely stable without problems, and now run a 45nm e5200 at 3,7ghz stable, and that at 1,28v (only 10% over standard voltage at 2,5ghz). those fans just work very very well

also, what's the deal with recommending waiting for 6cores? name 1 application where the guy will benefit from anything more than a quadcore or even a dualcore

Have another beer. Beer is cool. Beer is manly. Hell yeah.

first sense you've ever spoken

Stupid people giving advice on the internet.

Ah you have to love it.

So for the sake of 100 quid, these peopl will get you to buy a motherboard with no big upgrade potential and advise you to buy a slower CPU.

The only difference between a i5 and i7 setup is the small cost between the mobo and cpu.

And given the fact that it brings extra performance and upgrade potential that the the p55 chipset DOES NOT, its laughable that some of dorks go on record and say I don't know what I'm talking about.

jamerio: there WILL be new CPUs for socket 1156

buy a mac. sure thing you'd enjoy it.

why go for overpriced second rate hardware? :(

because its OS is so amazingly and you dont have to care if a pc program would stop working sooner or latter, you just have to enjoy it. trust me i bought a macbook and since i bought even playing high fashioned games the laptop just seems that nothing is happening like if you were typing on a notepad or something, just seems so good that is quite ridiculous :)

you can get a twice as good pc for the same prize and still run osx on it :)

I don't know any laptops like that. They're all pretty much identical in price and hardware and they're all terribly cheap and bulky.

Anything pre-built is expensive and not as good as building one for yourself, nothing unique to Apple.

OSmac doesnt fit at any kind hardware, it needs specifics patterns :)

http://www.pearc.de/products/en/PearC-Advance...anced.html

quad-core starts at 1000€

http://store.apple.com/de-business/browse/hom...ly/mac_pro

quad-core starts at 2299€

dude i know how do you feel about when you see it.. i just bought my macbook 1 week ago, trust me.. if you use mac just for a while.. you`ll understand what im talking about.

The first time I got to use a mac was at a friends house, it must have been around 1990, sure it was better than my 8086 but probably cost 50 times more.

Then my mother bought he first mac around 1998. I had to use for internet for about 9 months until I moved out. It crashed just as much as any Win95 pc.
She now has a macbook. It's ok, but I can't see that she has less problems with that OS than with the pc at her gallery. e.g. I have to set up her internet etc.

On the other hand my father, who only very reluctantly and therefore rarely uses pcs just bought a laptop with Windows 7 (he had never seen it before) and suprised me by calling only to ask the Wireless password at their place. Didn't need any other help in setting it up, even though before now that was always done either by me or service people at his company..


It probably depends a lot on the user, but I can't say that Macs have ever impressed me.
Unlike for example some linux setups which run well on very old machines.


So no, I will never pay twice the normal amount for some design stuff. I'll rather invest the money in a painting to hang on my wall.

honestly i stopped reading at: 1990s

so in short: I had lots several encounters with macs and they never really impressed me and still don't.

Therefore, I see buying one as a waste of money.

Old Macs were trash, I remember when all the UK primary schools bought them and it was a total waste of money.

But really, they're much better now. OSX is great and the hardware quality is fine etc.

thing is, my parent'Ss friends who persuaded my mother to buy one, an lawyer and a doctor, where saying the very same things people are saying today: better looking design, more stable, so easy to use.


And you have to admit, windows, too, has come a long way since Win95.

W7 is pretty good, got it on bootcamp/vmware and on my Desktop.

Prefer OSX though and my macbook pro is way better build quality than any other laptop.

dude, you gonna discuss with him something that he cant see the point we are talking about.. totally pointless and no thick argument

"i just bought my macbook 1 week ago"

you bought a new gadget, therefore it has to be cool/best etc. but it's not. it's an overpriced piece of shit as you will slowly realize.

i never even considered that

lol

:D

mac advantages:

photoshop
looks
no viruses (same goes for Linux)


everything else is just marketing bullshit

ya have no idea what you are talking about hahahah

no comprende puta madre! bad english troll

wasnt about your english you asswhole HAHAHAHA and by the way my mother language is portuguese. :P

ah yeah, and by the way.. YA means = YOU in urban english :P so you miss understood the whole thing.

where do you know his woman from?

Are you aware that there is a 64-bit version of Photoshop which is only available for windows? The older versions of the CS suite work (if at all?) horribly on new intel-based Macs which basically means you have to upgrade your software which in the end will quadruple the already expensive hardware.
CS3/4 versions just like the OSX for mac are complete bloatware because at this point they have to support both powerpc and intel hardware.

Long version:
Looks like people are either trolls or trying to scam you. You won't be needing a 6 core Gulftown for years and you will probably not be able to efficently use all cores for a long time. Software developers are still trying to catch up with 4 cores and they're doing terrible for applications and regarding games they're even worse. It's become a selling argument but doesn't reflect the actual performance in the vast majority of sofware you'd be running.

32nm cpu's are interesting as they run cool and handle overclocking marginally better but performancewise Intel's Clarksdale won't be offering more - although it would probably lower the prize of the i5 750 slightly <- might be worth waiting 2-3 months but there are alot of other factors that can change this. AMD's roadmap for 2010 doesn't offer any competition for Intel so they will most likely not lower the prizes alot.

While having a ~2-3 year futureproof PC in mind there's three options for you at the moment when it comes to cpus:

1) i7 920
2) i5 750
3) Phenom II X4 965 BE

- i7 920 has Hyperthreading with handles applications faster but has statistically shown that it's worse for games. 920 has triple channel support which also helps a bit in applications.
- i5 750 is just as good as the i7 920 for games but slightly slower in applications. Dual channel memory.
- 965 BE matches the i5 750 in games but is slower in applications. Dual channel memory controller.

If you're not going to be encoding videos or use photoshop heavily i wouldn't recommend buying the i7 920.

i5 750 is in the same price range as 965 BE so it's a given choice at the moment considering it's better. With a good cooler ( NOCTUA NH-U12P) you can easily get it up to 4GHz with air by slightly increasing the vcore a bit. If you're into that :)

Short version:
CPU: Intel Core i5 750 2,66GHz Socket 1156
Mobo: Asus P7P55D Pro
Memory: Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 MHz 4GB
HDD: Samsung SpinPoint F3 HD103SJ 32MB 1TB
PSU: Corsair CMPSU-550VX 550W
Case: Antec Three Hundred

Graphic card depends entirely and what you're aiming for. A Radeon HD5770 overclocks good and supports DX11 if you want to play some newer games. If you want more FPS you buy another 5770 and use it in Crossfire and you're getting about the same performance as a Radeon HD5870.

Memory - 4GB is generally enough for most users unless you're using a shitload of applications at the same time

Don't bother with a soundcard until you've tried the built in soundcard first. They're alright for most people.

Windows 7 64-bit is what you should be running.

The parts above +a HD5770 1GB should be about €800-900 euros depending on where you live. That leaves a little room for other stuff the future might bring or a HD5850/5870 instead of the HD5770 :)

What to get next:
-120hz screen (Samsung 2233RZ or Viewsonic VX2268WM8 or the new Full HD one coming out in ~march)
-Intel X25-M G2 80GB (system drive)

this

although I'd probably change the PSU to something made by Seasonic, eg. Antec Truepower New TP-550

That's really shitty advice you're advising on the i5 because when he wants to upgrade the CPU he will have to buy a new motherboard.

Secondly, the guy said he wants a pc for multi-media, so its not out of the question to think he meant programs like Video Editing/photoshop given any pc relesed over the last 6 years has been fine for traditional multi media.

Of which these threaded applications DO USE THE FULL POWER OF THE CPU. You're just talking about it from a gaming POV.

The only real COST difference between a i5 setup and a i7 (assuming entry level cpu) setup is the cost of the motherboard and CPU.

That cost is around 60 pound difference for CPU and a 30 pound difference for the motherboard.

SO.

Given the extra performance that the i7 would bring AND the fact that he would then have the motherboard that would allow him to drop in a big processor towards the end of the year, it makes perfect sense.

For the sake of £75-100 yiou would have to be an IDIOT to not go for the extra performance of the i7, plus the knowledge that in 8-12 months time you can sell that CPU, add a bit of cash to it and drop in a 6 core one with no extra hassle if you need it.

The upgrade potential and performace boost alone vs a little extra outlay make it worth doing.

No.

Yes.

The simple fact is the difference between an i5 and i7 setup in less than 100 pounds.

For that you get less performance and no upgrade potential.

You can disagree all you want. But all you're saying is...

For the sake of 90-100 pounds I would rather have a motherboard with no upgrade potnetial and as slower system.

You're right, I can. Still no.

Oh I get it, 3am and a failed marriage isn't quite cutting it.
Sorry would love to play but shit to do.

5AM, and we're watching live SC matches.

Have fun at McDonalds.

Have fun with your "wife".

Way ahead of you.

Freddy Kruger knickers. Nice.

I wish I had that many AMD 64 stickers...

crystal meth or make up?

wtf nice looking people only

Vedic is back in a new form!

when a cpu that significantly improves performance over this comes out, he will have to change his mobo anyway. he will have to change the whole computer most likely. the upgrade options are just marketing to scam more money from idiots(you).

People who upgrade constantly really are retards, it's rarely needed (Like if your job depends on then ok that's understandable).

Got to laugh at people who are always buying new CPUs and GFX cards, I've had my desktop for almost 5 years now and it's still doing a more than acceptable job with the latest games (Nor do I see that drastically changing too soon, so it might last me another few years yet).

the only thing important is that your cpu is not a bottleneck for your graph card, other than that buying a 3 times more expensive cpu will bring you a total benefit of 3 fps.

that's a personal preference

personally i upgrade quite often and i'm getting alot of money from my old parts back since i tend to sell parts while they match the current socket just before a new socket gets out - that in turn gives good second hand value

generalising and saying that upgrading is a waste depends entirely on what needs you have and they're most likely not the same as yours

investing into dead sockets or buying the latest stuff is probably the worst way to spend your money

going mainstream and selling at the right time wins o/

Pretty sure I covered all that with rarely.

At least you were.

Having the option to place a significantly more powerful CPU into your motherboard, vs one that that you cannot is a no brainer for most normal people.

Especially when the costs involved are less than a 100 pounds and you get a more powerful CPU to begin witih and the comfort that if you want more power, you will have the option to do so.

it isn't a marketing ploy you useless scrub.
So why don't take your paranoid delusions and desperate attempts to disagree else where.

hardware companies approve of wales.

I specifically use my computers for threaded apps, but I understand you're used to hanging around with people who generally do nothign but play games, so its only natural you would base the entiry of your argument on playing computer games.

its probably why one of us made a few 100k out of games and the other didn't,

is that before or after you won 500 motocross races?

That was before he owned a PC though.

my bad

and even then you simply assume goth4m will also need his machine for threaded apps even though he doesn't even care if it's a laptop or desktop.

You're a real fucking genius. (That was sarcastic)

Go away.

This is a thread about hardware and games.

On the related matter, my opinion is worth more than yours.You're just disagreeing and being pedantic because I have stepped on you so many times you're permanently at a loss.

I'm quite rightly saying that IF he's going to buy an i5 setup, he might aswell spend a bit more and go for the i7.

It's that simple and its advice that anyone with a clue will tell you.

On the related matter, my opinion is worth more than yours.

thanks for making ma laugh once more :D

more on-topic though:

If he never intends to upgrade the thing, paying 90 pound more is a bad choice.
As anyone with a clue about money and technology, i.e. not you, will tell you.

exactly so why the fuck bring up i7 920?

people are turning off HT in bios to bench 3dmark and he's not aiming for 5870 4-way, genius

man, stick the more powerful cpu up your arse and save us the marketing bullshit

if i buy a pc, im gonna use it for 5 years and then throw it away, not upgrade it every half a year with a 10% better cpu for 30% the original cost

i see a no brainer but it is not 'upgrade you will never use'

Yeah, there's even less point now that hardware is advancing much faster than software.

^this!

so you want him to spend some extra cash now to get the i7 and then still be paying out more in 12 months for another new cpu? i dont see how thats sound advice

No, you pay a little more now for the i7 because you get extra performance now AND if your computing needs grow, you have the option of selling that CPU, adding a bit on and upgrading.

With the i5, you have much less upgrade potential, unless intel make their faster cpu's work on the p55 chipset.

THEY WON'T.

I'm not disputing the i5 is a bdchip.

I'm saying if someone is going to spend THAT MUCH MONEY on a new rig now, they might aswell spend a little bit more and not only get a faster CPU, but get the motherboard that will allow them to keep their system upto date for a long time.

literacy doesn't approve of wales:

"3/ the computer is aimed at a) playing video games (especially quakelive) b) multimedia stuff (music, movies, internet, etc etc)"

sorry for bumping this thread but whats the difference between 32nm and 45nm cpu's? and did you mean that the 32nm will be cheaper or that when 32nm cpu's are released they will lower the 45nm's price? also I might do 3d work/animations in the future so is the i7 recommended for me? and about video cards, can the hd5xxx series keep up with the gtx 3xx series or do you think that dx11 games will demand better gpu's?

e6750 with arctic cooler freezer 7 pro + 2gb crucial ballistix ram + 8800gt with accelero s1 heatsink with akasa amber 120mm attached + 500gb western digital hdd + corsair hx520 PSU + antec p182 case + 3 akasa amber 120mm fans inside case

£250 to you!
what kinda price do you guys think this is worth?
gonna go for laptop/netbook route as dont really play any games anymore

Aint worth much, il take it off ur hands for £200

:)

we'll see, probably going to look in selling soon
looking around on ebay should be able to get nearer 300 still, all quality components too.

omg have you grown up to :(


xbox much?

i have xbox and ps3, i dont play on them that much but i dont really need a big pc anymore. most games are coming out on the consoles now anyway. just want a laptop for internet really
been thinking about it for a while, now more so

u got rid or thinking of?

Yeah i got an xbox and dabble in console games sometimes

Pc gaming is pretty much dead now and finding the time to play for ages.

Rage is coming out eventually but i think i'll get on a console.

Only thing that slowed me down was the daft no mouse and keyboard. Everyone else is in the same boat tho when u play fps so its fine to have shit accuracy :P

WoW alone keep PC gaming in the lead, without even counting other games.

i forgot about that. I know blizzard has a money printing machine with that.

what i meant pc gaming as in the platform for the most cutting edge games.

Sucks to be honest

you are also not counting all the flash games and of course solitaire for 40+ women

amd vs intel breakdown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dz8DJ9DYKgE

What the fuck is that.

I hear he doesn't do a lot of gaming tho

Wow, his next pc is gonna be da boooooooooomb

ps3 for games and a notebook for appz, cheapest and most fun

b-b-but... PS3 has no gaemz?! :D

lol???
have a look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_3_games
atm there are "only" 558 Games

* worth playing

I'm afraid you got trolled :'(

I'm afraid someone did say something although he didn't have any clue and after his argument was confuted, he couldn't take the loss and instead tried to mask his nonsense as a "troll", so he is a winner instead of a loser ... hehe

Console + laptop like others have said. If u still go for a PC then to keep under your 1000e budget I'd go for the AM3 platform.

Phenom II x4 3GHZ (110e)
4GB DDR3 e.g. G.Skill (about 80e)
Radeon HD 5850 (maybe 230e)
AM3 Motherboard e.g. MSI 770-C45 (60e)
500w PSU e.g. OCZ stealthXtreme (60e)
1TB sata HDD e.g. samsung spinpoint F3 (around 70e)
Viewsonic VX2268wm 120hz (around 220e)
ATX case e.g. Thermaltake M9D (around 60e)
Intellimouse 3 + slim keyboard (35e)
use onboard sound unless you're an audiophile of course.

With delivery of parts this should end up underneath your budget

This system will beat down an i7 coupled with a HD5770 or similar under every modern game.
You will be able to simply drop in a 6 core AM3 CPU as soon as they are available, and u won't need to any time soon. Do not bother with SLI / Xfire

"This system will beat down an i7 coupled with a HD5770 or similar under every modern game."

Feel free to show us some benchmarks on that ;)

I7/i5 has more IPC (instructions per cycle) so at the same speed they outperform PII X4 965 BE.
i5-750 or i7 920 (C0 chiptype) easily overclocks to ~4GHz. 965 runs slightly faster (4.2GHz) overclocked but it's still behind i5/i7 in benchmarks.

If you're not overclocking the 965 might be a good choice since it runs @ 3.4GHz stock vs i5 750 and i7 920 which run at 2.66GHz.

Considering how easy it's become to overclock it's just not a valid choice unless you desperately want to support AMD.

you're talking about cpu vs cpu. it's obvious that i'm suggesting a better gpu is a more effective purchase than a better cpu where 3D games are concerned. You want proof that a top gpu will beat a mainstream gpu, in a game environment where the mainstream gpu has a better cpu behind it? It should've been obvious but here u go. It's interesting to note that even an athlon x2 5000 will give u almost the same fps as an i7 under crysis warhead where the same gpu is being used :) and the other games show an fps discrepancy that in no way is comparable to the price difference between the two platforms for gaming. Here's more. Pay especially close attention to the negligible fps increases on the q6600 going from stock 2.4ghz to OC 3.2ghz running under the same GPU. In addition the AM3 socket will accomodate 6 core cpu's as and when they arrive; it's a no brainer.

Picking a game where it's been proven over and over again that the cpu is somewhat neglectable might not be the best choice.

Why are you even talking about the q6600 oc? Kentfield uses a quite different architecture compared to Lynnfield and therefor it's IPC is not similar and vastly improved.

You won't be needing more cores as long as the games are not engineered to effeciently use them - which they won't in a long awhile. Additionally 1156 is most likely going to support 32nm quadcore clarkdales in the future and seeing as they are in the same price range as AM3 (or cheaper) it's a a given choice. 965 is being outperformed by Intels mainstream cpu in applications and on par in games.

"Picking a game where it's been proven over and over again that the cpu is somewhat neglectable might not be the best choice" feel free to dismiss almost all other games too since most modern titles are more gpu heavy than cpu heavy. Just look through the links i've given u please.
Disregarding the whole Core 2 line up of cpu's? Even if u want to do that, which I think serves little purpose, since it doesn't help your stance at all, as I've given u the link on i7 vs amd. Now it's nice of u to keep going on about IPC, but price/performance ratio is monumentally more important when his budget is 1000e.
Speculating that in the future Intel will be cheaper (or the same) than AM3? You're either being optimistic, horribly misinformed or disingenuous in order to "win". Show me some graphs of an i7 coupled with a mainstream gpu, owning a phenom II coupled with a top gpu in a game environment. u won't find it, because it can't happen unless u find a title that's way more demanding of the cpu than the gpu. Haven't seen one of those engines for 10 years

:)

By not writing a comment there you have accepted defeat..

Shame, it was quite an interesting conversation.

posts should've stopped after the links in #113. here's an i7 not being able to pull ahead of core 2 quads under various games where the same GPU is used. IPC IPC IPC yo

Read your link, please elaborate on their conlcusion:

Another conclusion: The Core i7 will do better with newer games than older ones. That's a good trend; while Nehalem is no slouch on older games, it's the new generation of multithreaded titles that will benefit from Core i7's enhancements the most.

did u look at the bar graphs? tell me how u interpret the graphs on all of the game benchmarks. I'm not being trolled am i?

look, I would think that the guys who did those tests know a bit more about those results than I. I can't say, if you know more or less than they do.

But their opinion in that quote seems to be that the i7 is the better cpu for newer games, crysis which you keep mentioning is not a newer games.

So I ask you, why do you think the Quad will be on par with the i7s (in the future) even though the authors write something else.

"why do you think the Quad will be on par with the i7s"
because that's exactly what the graphs are showing. As for the future, I predict (lol, like it even needs prediction) that gpu's will continue to be the bottleneck, especially when hw physics becomes ubiquitous which is already happening

way to not answer my question.

i'm sure it was important and would've made me think differently about something. alas

You're turning this into your own personal GPU-test performance thread.

You might be amazed that some people actually do something else than play games.

Really, think of it: he's going to play quake and watch movies so HT is out of the question. That leave us with 965 or i5 750 which have the same prize.

He's going to get the same gaming performance from both systems but the intel i5 750 will be marginally faster in applications.

Your argument is that he can later upgrade to a 6 core CPU on the same mobo which he never will be able to use efficiently for watching movies and quake anyway?

Instead he can pick the i5 750 for the same prize, get the same gaming performance, run applications faster and eventually invest into a 32nm quadcore which runs cooler and has a lower thermal design power value. 1156 is here to stay for awhile and considering his needs it's a good pick.

Unless, of course, you can't overclock one slight bit and just feel the need to support AMD and even then i5 offers the turbo function and that's where to IPC comes in. "IPC IPC IPC yo"

phenomII 3ghz is 110e, i5 750 is 160e, plus another 20e for intel motherboard. this might take gotham over his budget, and it's needless since his needs are: "3/ the computer is aimed at a) playing video games (especially quakelive) b) multimedia stuff (music, movies, internet, etc etc)". dunno if it's worth posting this much :/

well, we all know that his demand can be easily met with 500€
and it's black jack and hookers for the rest \o/

Sorry I've been busy working and I just haven't had the time to reply. The smiley was just a placeholder and still is.

He makes a rant about picking a mobo which will eventually support 6 cores cpu's while stating that price/performance is an important factor for a budget of €1000. The day games are actually written to support 6 cores there's a reason to pick it but the guy is going to watch movies and play quake - that's it. 965 and i5 750 are in the same prize and the i5 750 outperforms the 965 so it's a given choice.

The guy asking for advice is not going to be encoding h/x264 or compress files heavily thus he won't be needing 6 cores - and by the time AM3 supports 6 cores and they're down to a decent prize Intel will already have 32nm quadcores on 1156 - which is everything he'll need for the next years.

Bringing up crysis is the first mistake people when posting a benchmark trying to prove something. It's originally a GPU-test and nothing more. Also crysis has been known to differ alot in tests compared to other games and there's a whole bunch of tests showing the same thing. If he'd hang out on xtremesystems or any other hardware forum he'd know about it.

but it's not just crysis, it's virtually all modern titles that are gpu and not cpu bottlenecked. why do u disregard all the benchmarks? why do i care?

"Why are you even talking about the q6600 oc?" because it clearly demonstrates that a better cpu doesn't usually translate to an appreciable increase in fps; not nearly as much as changing the gpu. i hate to point out the obvious, but the obvious is escaping u right now :(

EDIT: the graph is self explanatory

No one ever stated that investing in a better GPU isn't going to give you a better performance on a GPU-test, like Crysis, is known to be.

he wants to run quake live, not NASA simulations

if you're going to play just quakelive, go get one at a garage sale

I doubt it that you need to spend more than 700 euros to get an awesome PC that plays all the latest games just fine..

in fact, it's probably better to spend 500 now for a PC and spend another 500 in 2,5 years. (Though I really doubt you'll have to, lol)