• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

GAF, have decided to become a PC gamer, games/things I need to know?

The best thing about making the switch? Counting P's, Screen Tearing, shoddy frame rates, and $60 games are all things of the past.
 
TheExodu5 said:
Yeah the mic problem is annoying. What did you upgrade to, if I may ask? I'm looking for a better pair of comfortable headphones, with equal or better audio quality.
I upgraded to the Logitech G35 which are extremely uncomfortable during the first month, but you will get used to them, and they are kick ass.

brain_stew said:
Listen to this advice at your peril, its by far the worst recommendation in this thread. Stay far, far away. There's 9 speakers in them phones, by necessity each one of them has to be absolute trash, and since they're so close together the separation will be shit. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Sound quality has never been an issue for me, but many reviews say they are too soft, so I guess it is a problem with quality control. The only issue with the G35 is that the software acts funny every month or so, and I find myself having to re-install it. It is a PITA.

Other than that, I would recommend these:
http://www.astrogaming.com/products/detail/3/Audio-Systems/

I am getting them definitely during 2010.
 
Wrekt said:
If you've followed the thread, you realize this is a very loaded question. As soon as someone recommends a headset, someone else jumps out and says his equipment is shit. Then someone else comes out and insults his choice as well. Razor, Logitech, Sannheiser, Bose, Plantronics or Turtle Beach are always shit to someone on this board. It's a vicious cycle.

I honestly couldn't tell you the model I use. I'll be the first to admit that I don't listen close enough to tell the difference between some generic earbuds and a pair of $100 headphones. I bought a headset during a woot-off and they've worked out ok. They could be a little more comfortable but my mic never gets any static or feedback and the arm stays put. I went cheap because I hardly used them. Then I bought L4D2 and upgrading my headset has taken priority over upgrading my 4 year old computer.

Except "surround" headsets and Logitech headsets are universally terrible and just really poor value for money. You can always buy a better set of speakers or headphones, but setups specifically marketed at gamers will generally have terrible sound quality as a rule.

Buy something from an actual headphone or speaker manufacturer and you'll get a lot more for your money, trust me, I made the same mistake myself, and it cost me ~ÂŁ50 in the process, don't make that same mistake.
 
godhandiscen said:
I upgraded to the Logitech G35 which are extremely uncomfortable during the first month, but you will get used to them, and they are kick ass.



Sound quality has never been an issue for me, but many reviews say they are too soft, so I guess it is a problem with quality control. The only issue with the G35 is that the software acts funny every month or so, and I find myself having to re-install it. It is a PITA.

Other than that, I would recommend these:
http://www.astrogaming.com/products/detail/3/Audio-Systems/

I am getting them definitely during 2010.

They may be "adequate" but the point is that you can get a whole lot more than "adequate" for that sort of cash. You'll get the same sound quality from a $20 headset.

Your second recommendation is actually decent, though since most sound cards can do the surround matrixing for you, you might as well just buy a better set of headphones rather than wasting some of your budget on that mixamp. A $100 pair of Sennheisers + 3D matrixing from your soundcard will give you the same results but save you $150.
 
I'd get the Astros if they didn't charge like $150 to ship to Canada. Ridiculous.

Meh, I'll probably not switch from my Plantronics 770 until they die. Sound is decent (almost as good as the Sennhsier PC151 I used to have). Extremely comfortable. Even though the mic is super low (as in, below my jaw), it sounds just fine.
 
Here's what I would do.

Take around $1000 and build your tower. Spending any more than that is a waste of money that could be spent on games. Maybe set aside $500 to buy a new vid card, additional hard drive, or additional RAM two or three years down the road if needed.

Depending on how fancy a monitor/sound system you want, spend another $500-1000 on your Monitor, Sound System, Keyboard and Mouse.

Use the remaining $1500-2000 to buy games. Personally I don't even bother with retail games. Between sales on Steam, Impulse, Gamersgate, D2D, GOG.com you could buy more games than you could ever play for $1500.
 
brain_stew said:
I assume this is a joke post? A 360 controller + Saturn USB are essential purchases for a PC gamer in my book.


If he wants to play emulators, sure. Otherwise there is no way that a controller is "essential".
 
TheExodu5 said:
I'd get the Astros if they didn't charge like $150 to ship to Canada. Ridiculous.

Meh, I'll probably not switch from my Plantronics 770 until they die. Sound is decent (almost as good as the Sennhsier PC151 I used to have). Extremely comfortable. Even though the mic is super low (as in, below my jaw), it sounds just fine.

The astro's, as a pure headset, are not worth it. They are 'good' headphones, but at that price you can get headphones that easily trump them. The mic is actually rather good, but I don't think the combo of the two is worth the money. You can do better at the same price by getting seperate headphones and mics.

Paired with the mixamp though they're quite handy. The mixamp is the real star, but being able to use a single cable in that case is rather nice. You still get better sound out of a pair of similarly priced Denons, Sennheisers, or Audio Technicas, but when you subtract the $130 price of the mixamp from the $250 combo price, the headphones effectively become $120 and move into a somewhat more even playing field. Not totally even, but closer.

Point being...Astro headphones by themselves, nice but overpriced. Astro headphones + mixamp, not a bad deal.
 
Druz said:
If he wants to play emulators, sure. Otherwise there is no way that a controller is "essential".
Batman with a controller on my TV is so awesome <3 Sometimes I even forget I'm on a PC aside from the Anti-Aliasing / model / texture quality.
 
Do not skimp on the power supply. I repeat, DO NOT SKIMP ON THE POWER SUPPLY

Get a good one now that you can wack whatever you want on top of it and not have to worry about over burdening it. I'd suggest a high quality 750W by Seasonic, PC Power & Cooling or Corsair.

Also, 4K is bananas. Unless you want to play at 2560x1600, even then it's too much.
 
PjotrStroganov said:
Make smug remarks in multiplatform topics.

.

cv0063.jpg
 
Agree with others, $1k on Tower, $1.5k on monitor, mouse, chair, desk, keyboard, speakers, ect. Save the other $1.5k for games, upgrades, and your next build.

Also go ahead and take advantage of the Steam x-mas sale if you see something you want.
 
Druz said:
If he wants to play emulators, sure. Otherwise there is no way that a controller is "essential".

Of course it is, there's a whole bunch of games that play better on a controller. Why gimp the controls in a game when you don't have to? This isn't console gaming, you get to choose how you play your games on the PC.
 
If you want a good PC, you only need to spend 1k (high end cpu/gpu, one hard drive etc).

If you want a monster PC, you have to spend ~3k.

Unless you have a steady stream of income, or a decent amount of savings, I wouldn't go for the 'monster'.
 
Oh yeah, the other thing you need to do. Develop a thick skin. PC gaming has been "dying" for over a decade and according some of the biggest of outlets, it is slowly marching to "irrelevance" (GameTrailers trolling the PC again today). Whenever you hear all that, just crack and laugh and keep on playing. :D

zon said:
If you want a good PC, you only need to spend 1k (high end cpu/gpu, one hard drive etc).

If you want a monster PC, you have to spend ~3k.

Unless you have a steady stream of income, or a decent amount of savings, I wouldn't go for the 'monster'.

We have threads on this very forum that says otherwise. $500 will get you a good PC (better than console) while $1k will net you the monster if you desire it.
 
Druz said:
If he wants to play emulators, sure. Otherwise there is no way that a controller is "essential".
The Saturn pad is definitely my preferred control method in Street Fighter IV. It's also great with indie games.
 
brain_stew said:
Of course it is, there's a whole bunch of games that play better on a controller. Why gimp the controls in a game when you don't have to? This isn't console gaming, you get to choose how you play your games on the PC.

Because for some of us, a PC game that is best played with a controller is not a proper PC game, but a console port. If the game is properly adapted for the PC, it will be playable with keyboard and mouse. The major PC game franchises (FPS, RTS, RPG, etc) all control better with kb/m. Emulators, particularly console emulators, naturally require a controller.

Racing games should be played with a wheel, of course.
 
zon said:
If you want a good PC, you only need to spend 1k (high end cpu/gpu, one hard drive etc).

If you want a monster PC, you have to spend ~3k.

Unless you have a steady stream of income, or a decent amount of savings, I wouldn't go for the 'monster'.

How the hell do you spend $3k on a PC anyway? And no, buying Intel extreme processors doesn't count, considering a OCed $200 CPU will outperform them by some margin.
 
Scipius said:
Because for some of us, a PC game that is best played with a controller is not a proper PC game, but a console port. If the game is properly adapted for the PC, it will be playable with keyboard and mouse. The major PC game franchises (FPS, RTS, RPG, etc) all control better with kb/m. Emulators, particularly console emulators, naturally require a controller.

Racing games should be played with a wheel, of course.

I'd rather play the game in the best way possible, and if that means using a controller, then I'll use a controller. No amount of "porting" will make some games play better on a m&kb, just as no amount of porting from PC will make some games play better with a joypad. I'll play a multi platform title that I'm interested in on the PC even if its developed primarily for consoles, because I'd rather pay less for it and get more out of it (performance, graphics, online, mods) rather than not play it at all or play it on a console.

I'm quite happy for my PC to double up as a super high end 1080p console when its necessary and it does the job better than any console I've ever owned, that it can play all the distinctly PC games that I like just makes it all the more sweeter. Oh, and I have a wheel ofcourse, but sometimes it can be a pain to set it up, and in them circumstances a pad is a much better alternative than a m&kb setup.

I stand by the assertion that a gamepad is an essential purchase for any serious PC gamer, an Xbox 360 pad specifically.
 
The only way I could see getting up past 3k is some multi-GPU monstrousity with some sort of ridonkulous eyefinity setup. In other words, complete and foolish overkill.

Personally I think OP has it kinda wrong-you get hooked on a game THEN you decide you gotta play other PC games like it and expand from there, not decide one day that you want to game on the PC. The games drive the platform which in turn drives the hardware, in my book. Some people love their gear but it's always a backseat to the software available on the PC, at least for me.
 
Fragamemnon said:
The only way I could see getting up past 3k is some multi-GPU monstrousity with some sort of ridonkulous eyefinity setup. In other words, complete and foolish overkill.

Personally I think OP has it kinda wrong-you get hooked on a game THEN you decide you gotta play other PC games like it and expand from there, not decide one day that you want to game on the PC. The games drive the platform which in turn drives the hardware, in my book. Some people love their gear but it's always a backseat to the software available on the PC, at least for me.

Its about 50:50 for me. :D

Sure games are the primary application that benefits from most of my upgrades and tweaking but that doesn't mean the process itself isn't enjoyable. I've attempted OCs that I know won't give me any actual ingame benefit and that are useless for day to day computing, but that doesn't mean reaching those goals isn't satisfying.

Agreed on the $3k+ setup though, buying parts that deliver the absolute best performance for the dolalr and that can outperform the ultra high end through tweaking and OCing is a very satisfying experience. Much more enjoyable than just buying the "best" of everything, where's the creativity in that! :lol
 
TacticalFox88 said:
Well I'm crossing over to the darkside. I have 4k now to spend. And I've decided to become a PC gamer. Not exclusively, but yeah I want to play every game no matter what platform it comes out on. So yeah, I need help choosing the type of PC and starting games I need. So far only two games are on my mind: Crysis and Company of Heroes. I have 4k to spend and want to spend it wisely, and where I can get my money's worth.
o_0

For $1200 you could put together a ridiculously good system including a pretty decent monitor and speakers/headphones.

That leaves $2800 to spend on games :lol

PC gaming really isn't as expensive as people make it out to be, and since a lot of games are multiplatform and need to keep pace with consoles, upgrades aren't always essential. If your PC can outperform a current gen console, you are set for quite a while.


The system I built last year (dual core CPU, ATi Radeon 4870 1gb, 4gb RAM) is still more than good enough to play anything today at its highest settings WITH AA and AF in most cases, and could be had at the fraction of the cost that I paid for it ($850ish plus my $400 monitor).

I wouldn't call a controller essential, but it is really good to have if you want to play any driving games, or otherwise poorly ported console games. I find that nowadays I use my controller for everything EXCEPT FPS games, RTS games, and RPG games. This includes most third person action games too (Dead Space, Batman AA, Tomb Raider, Gears of War)
 
brain_stew said:
I stand by the assertion that a gamepad is an essential purchase for any serious PC gamer, an Xbox 360 pad specifically.

Wrong obviously, because many "serious" PC gamers are not even interested in the type of games that are best played with a controller (i.e. console ports). Someone who is primarily interested in e.g. FPS or RTS (of which there is an abundance on the PC) does not need a controller.

Some of us don't want to degrade our PCs to become an oversized X-Box. That's what the little set-top boxes are for. Right now the concession for some games is that you will need the controller, but we're already seeing more and more of the console restrictions and bullshit invading PC gaming.
 
Scipius said:
Wrong obviously, because many "serious" PC gamers are not even interested in the type of games that are best played with a controller (i.e. console ports). Someone who is primarily interested in e.g. FPS or RTS (of which there is an abundance on the PC) does not need a controller.

Some of us don't want to degrade our PCs to become an oversized X-Box. That's what the little set-top boxes are for. Right now the concession for some games is that you will need the controller, but we're already seeing more and more of the console restrictions and bullshit invading PC gaming.

So you buy games that play better on a joypad on your console instead? How exactly do you benefit from that? Give me a ÂŁ15 saving on game prices and much better performance and graphics every time. A PC is what you want it to be, and that's why its such a great platform, its the jack of all trades and the master of them all to boot.

Forgetting that, what about the bunch of indie titles that appear up on Steam and the like? Do you just ignore all the ones that play better on a controller, just because? Any 3D title where you move your avatar independent of the camera is prone to playing better on a controller, and I don't think that leaves just console "ports" (that word in itself is rather misleading, anyway).

An ÂŁ18 purchase that will improve your experience in a bunch of games, seems a fair deal to me. If you can justyf a ÂŁ50+ wheel for a single genre, why not a pad?
 
If your spending more than 1k on a build you're probably paying for speed that could be handled by overclocking.

And seriously where is all this pent up angst for 360 controllers coming from? Some games work much better with a pad, especially platformers.
 
brain_stew said:
So you buy games that play better on a joypad on your console instead? How exactly do you benefit from that? Give me a ÂŁ15 saving on game prices and much better performance and graphics every time. A PC is what you want it to be, and that's why its such a great platform, its the jack of all trades and the master of them all to boot.

Forgetting that, what about the bunch of indie titles that appear up on Steam and the like? Do you just ignore all the ones that play better on a controller, just because? Any 3D title where you move your avatar independent of the camera is prone to playing better on a controller, and I don't think that leaves just console "ports" (that word in itself is rather misleading, anyway).

An ÂŁ18 purchase that will improve your experience in a bunch of games, seems a fair deal to me. If you can justyf a ÂŁ50+ wheel for a single genre, why not a pad?

What I object to is the idea that one needs a controller for current PC games. One doesn't or rather, one shouldn't. Only if you use emulators, or if you insist on playing console ports, like you do.

Any properly adapted 3D game will work just fine with kb/m. The fact that PC games sometimes indeed work better with a controller is not an indication of the quality of the controller as an input device, but rather an indication of a lazy developer not wanting to dedicate the resources to implementing different controls. Hence why "port" is entirely the right word. I suspect though that what we consider "playing better" may differ; once you have a controller you're more inclined to use it, even if the game will work just fine with kb/m.

Price is not the issue. A proper PC experience is. I consider the X-Box 360 to be an inferior hardware platform and it irks me that people are encouraging developers to treat the PC as a souped-up 360, thereby dragging the PC down to its level. What I don't want is for developers to assume that a controller is now "standard" for PC gaming. The PC can do better than that. Don't buy console ports if they're substandard work.
 
Scipius said:
What I object to is the idea that one needs a controller for current PC games. One doesn't or rather, one shouldn't. Only if you use emulators, or if you insist on playing console ports, like you do.

Any properly adapted 3D game will work just fine with kb/m. The fact that PC games sometimes indeed work better with a controller is not an indication of the quality of the controller as an input device, but rather an indication of a lazy developer not wanting to dedicate the resources to implementing different controls. Hence why "port" is entirely the right word. I suspect though that what we consider "playing better" may differ; once you have a controller you're more inclined to use it, even if the game will work just fine with kb/m.

Price is not the issue. A proper PC experience is. I consider the X-Box 360 to be an inferior hardware platform and it irks me that people are encouraging developers to treat the PC as a souped-up 360, thereby dragging the PC down to its level. What I don't want is for developers to assume that a controller is now "standard" for PC gaming. The PC can do better than that. Don't buy console ports if they're substandard work.
God, do you suck.
 
Druz said:
If he wants to play emulators, sure. Otherwise there is no way that a controller is "essential".

There are plenty of games - especially ports of games that are clearly designed with console controllers in mind (stuff like DMC4, Assassin's Creed) that don't necessarily control "awful" with a KB/M setup (or something like a N52/M), but should really just be played with a controller. Some cases are more extreme than others, like Dead Space, where they couldn't even be arsed to implement proper mouse support.
 
Fixed1979 said:
Or paying for speed and then overclocking it...

That's all well and good, except when you hit the point that you're already getting 60+ FPS with full IQ settings that speed is totally wasted. By the time games come out that threaten to drop your framerate, your hardware won't be worth a quarter what you paid for it.
 
Scipius said:
Wrong obviously, because many "serious" PC gamers are not even interested in the type of games that are best played with a controller (i.e. console ports). Someone who is primarily interested in e.g. FPS or RTS (of which there is an abundance on the PC) does not need a controller.

Some of us don't want to degrade our PCs to become an oversized X-Box. That's what the little set-top boxes are for. Right now the concession for some games is that you will need the controller, but we're already seeing more and more of the console restrictions and bullshit invading PC gaming.
People who only play two genres don't need a controller. Gotcha.
 
zon said:
If you want a good PC, you only need to spend 1k (high end cpu/gpu, one hard drive etc).

If you want a monster PC, you have to spend ~3k.

Unless you have a steady stream of income, or a decent amount of savings, I wouldn't go for the 'monster'.
I want to see the build for this 3k monster. I'm assuming the largest SSD money can buy + 3D Vision?
 
Scipius said:
What I object to is the idea that one needs a controller for current PC games. One doesn't or rather, one shouldn't. Only if you use emulators, or if you insist on playing console ports, like you do.

Any properly adapted 3D game will work just fine with kb/m. The fact that PC games sometimes indeed work better with a controller is not an indication of the quality of the controller as an input device, but rather an indication of a lazy developer not wanting to dedicate the resources to implementing different controls. Hence why "port" is entirely the right word. I suspect though that what we consider "playing better" may differ; once you have a controller you're more inclined to use it, even if the game will work just fine with kb/m.

Price is not the issue. A proper PC experience is. I consider the X-Box 360 to be an inferior hardware platform and it irks me that people are encouraging developers to treat the PC as a souped-up 360, thereby dragging the PC down to its level. What I don't want is for developers to assume that a controller is now "standard" for PC gaming. The PC can do better than that. Don't buy console ports if they're substandard work.


Work just fine with M&KB does not = works as well as with a controller. Let people have options, what PC gaming is known for, and stop being an elitist asshat.
 
Scipius said:
What I object to is the idea that one needs a controller for current PC games. One doesn't or rather, one shouldn't. Only if you use emulators, or if you insist on playing console ports, like you do.

Any properly adapted 3D game will work just fine with kb/m. The fact that PC games sometimes indeed work better with a controller is not an indication of the quality of the controller as an input device, but rather an indication of a lazy developer not wanting to dedicate the resources to implementing different controls. Hence why "port" is entirely the right word. I suspect though that what we consider "playing better" may differ; once you have a controller you're more inclined to use it, even if the game will work just fine with kb/m.

Sure, but I'd prefer the best controls possible, and surprise, surprise, you can't get that from just one input device. No matter the optimisation, some games will always work best with one control input over another, you admitted as much when you suggested using a wheel for driving games. Why the hell would one want to put up with "just fine" controls when they don't have to? That's against the whole PC gaming ethos, which is choice and tweaking to your personal preference, its at the very heart of an open platform.

I don't insist on playing console "ports" at all, more that with a controller you may find that some traditional console genres actually play better on PC and come with a cheaper price tag to boot. What's not to like? Why must there be such a seperation at all? Why exactly is the fact that the PC can play all of the best of console gaming, better than any console, such a bad thing? Its an added bonus, that's all. May I ask if you play any games on consoles as if you do, I'm seriously struggling to see where your argument is coming from, because those games just play flat out better on a modern PC anyway, who cares if its the "intended" platform, I'll take the cheaper and superior experience, thanks.

Oh, and I must bring up racing games again, because frankly not everyone has the space, inclination, cash or investment in the genre to invest in a pricey, $100+ steering wheel. What do you suggest to these folks? That they never play a driving game on their PC at all, or that they invest $30 in a controller so they, because playing on a keyboard is really not a sensible suggestion, now is it?
 
Make sure you get silent coolers and shit. It's really important if you spend more than an hour per day in front of a PC.

Doesn't really matter if all you do is play games because the game sound environment usually drowns out physical noise with music/sfx. But if you intend to use the same box for working digitally, keep this in mind.
 
Scipius said:
What I object to is the idea that one needs a controller for current PC games. One doesn't or rather, one shouldn't. Only if you use emulators, or if you insist on playing console ports, like you do.

Any properly adapted 3D game will work just fine with kb/m. The fact that PC games sometimes indeed work better with a controller is not an indication of the quality of the controller as an input device, but rather an indication of a lazy developer not wanting to dedicate the resources to implementing different controls. Hence why "port" is entirely the right word. I suspect though that what we consider "playing better" may differ; once you have a controller you're more inclined to use it, even if the game will work just fine with kb/m.

Price is not the issue. A proper PC experience is. I consider the X-Box 360 to be an inferior hardware platform and it irks me that people are encouraging developers to treat the PC as a souped-up 360, thereby dragging the PC down to its level. What I don't want is for developers to assume that a controller is now "standard" for PC gaming. The PC can do better than that. Don't buy console ports if they're substandard work.

Ok, I've been reading your posts in this thread and think I understand what is going on here. You are an idiot.

Now I know what primarily console players are talking about when they refer to PC elitists, they're talking about you. I don't know what your problem is, but stuff like 3rd person action games, racing games, fighting games are always best played with something other than a mouse and keyboard. If you think otherwise, please enlighten me as to what a better control scheme would be for a game like Beyond Good & Evil.
 
Since it's fun to go wild. A build without thinking about budget:

CPU - $289 w/free Avatar game
Core i7 920: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.310899

Motherboard - $269
Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128362

Case + Power Supply - $260
Antec P183 + Antec CP-850: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.298875

Video Card - $410
XFX 5870: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150443

RAM - $140
G.SKILL 6GB (3x2GB): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231223

Main Drive - $300
80GB Intel X-25M SSD: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167023

Storage Drive - $85
1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152185

Optical Drive - $30
LG DVD Burner: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827106339

CPU Heatsink - $75
Noctua NH-U12P: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835608014

GamePad to spite Scipius - $55
Xbox 360 Wireless Controller w/Adapter: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826105081

Monitor - $550
Dell 24" U2410: http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/...etail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-8277

Keyboard - $77
Logitech G15: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16823126034

Mouse - $40
Logitech MX518: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826104178&Tpk=logitech mx518

Operating System - $140
Windows 7 Professoinal: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116758



Total: $2725

Man. There's still more money I could be using here! Add some Noctua case fans? =P
 
I'll make the concession that a controller may not be technically necessary for PC gaming but it sure makes a huge difference for a lot of genres. With that said, for certain genres, it makes a world's difference to play with a gamepad instead of K/M. And it's not a cop out for developers to pull K/M support on PC. That would be ridiculous for them to further narrow their consumer base.

Scipius, you've totally missed the point on what the beauty of PC gaming is. It's an open hardware platform allows the end user to tailor the gaming experiences to his/her demands. Not just graphical output, but also input as well. A gamepad enhances the experiences for certain genres just as much as K/M does for FPS and RTS.
 
Firestorm said:
Since it's fun to go wild. A build without thinking about budget:



Total: $2725

Man. There's still more money I could be using here! Add some Noctua case fans? =P

Switching the GPU for a 5970 should get you close. ;)

You'd still have some cash left over though! :lol
 
Top Bottom