.

[Ocelot4894]

.

[LIGISTX]

1 minute ago, Clawkikker said:

So i was thinking about the 10 gamers 1 pc and i was like, what would be better or more economical (and if its worth the headache) to have 1 pc with all the gamers and only 1 build, or have 5pcs for each gamer. Because i was thinking of maybe making a small lan center or a place to play games with friends(obviously not during covid) and whatnot. I just want to get opinons about it thats all.

All of the potential issues and headaches with the VM approach would be aggravating at best, a huge waste of money at worst. Also, if the machine decides to have a bad day, every PC is broken...

 

Honestly, its a cool concept. But in practice it would be a fantastic headache. 

[Bombastinator]

Completely ignoring hardware costs the whole VM  thing would be an utter nightmare.  Also don’t forget all the high speed connections.  It would likely cost more too.

[ARikozuM]

5 PC so those darn whippersnappers can get the fuck off my lawn!

[appr3ntic3]

I think 5 different device would be better.

[Ocelot4894]

.

[Ocelot4894]

.

[harryk]

It will always be more expensive to do a combined build; the high-end parts just cost more. The CPUs alone cost half as much.

 

5x Ryzen 3600 @$175 each = $875 for 30 cores

1x Threadripper 3970x = $1900 for 32 cores

[Bombastinator]

 Big iron is dead amongst simple users for a reason.  Back in the 90’s it made some sense though it was already dying.  even one decently sized cpu core was ridiculously expensive.  There would be thin clients and mainframes.  What you effectively want to make is a 5 user mainframe.

[Blue4130]

1 hour ago, Clawkikker said:

Wait, what if I rack mount them and use like an ethernet or fiber optice cable the transfer audio, display, and input

What is on the other end of the fiber cable? A low spec computer?  That works, but you can also do it wirelessly. 

[Ocelot4894]

.