Why wait to game?

[Misanthrope]

I never recommend to wait out of elitism. I recommend to wait because it makes more financial sense to do so: people thinking about a budget system often mention something like a 750 or 750ti, however if you go up one or two product tiers (in this example, a 760) the performance gains are exponentially better and hence the system will not only play games now but it will be useful for a longer time. I built my system in 2008 with a GTX 260 and it still plays all 2013 releases on medium or low and only this year I'm starting to see games that are flat out not even compatible with minimum requirements. If I had gone with a cheaper card it would have been pretty unplayable a lot sooner.

There is a very real and very tangible sweet spot and most people doing budget builds are usually coming just sort of that sweet spot and can often be attained by either saving just a little bit more or sacrificing some other nice things that are not that important to performance (or important at all) like a bit less ram, a slower processor, a less fancy monitor, a generic mouse, a membrane keyboard, etc. 

[TheRetiredSlave]

I don't really know what elitism you're talking about.. I have never seen anyone on this forum look at a thread in which someone asks for an $800 build and someone replies by saying "No, save up a bit more and spend $2K on this baller rig".

The only times when I've seen people recommend saving up for a more expensive rig is when the build is at the extremely low end of the market, where tiny increases in price can have massive increases in performance. If you were trying to decide between a GT 640 and a GTX 750, it makes more sense to spend the extra tiny bit of money on the 750, because the performance increase is very large.. Likewise, if spending $20 was the difference between a Pentium G3430 and and i3-4130, it makes sense to spend the $20 because the performance increase in multithreaded games and other tasks will be more than worth the money.. Looking at HDD prices, there's only a $5-10 difference between the 500 GB WD Blue and the 1 TB version, so it just makes sense to spend the five buck up front to double your storage space..

Like you say, if the person is happy with their rig's performance, no one else really has the right to insult their rig. However, I haven't really seen anyone here do that, so I don't really know what you're talking about..

[LogicalDrm]

$500 is budget range in GPUs? Granted that is one part which is upgraded fastests in system I feel that its still over budget term. In here I can get reasonable GPU (280X) for €300. That would still over be what I consider budget. I got this GPU what I'm running now for €230 (560Ti) when it was almost just released.

 

I would always instruc getting balanced build within budget over one piece being high end or low end.

[PsychoticEpisode]

To everyone that keep saying "I have never see that on this forums"  here is an example from the same day I made this topic.

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/141949-extreme-budget-gaming-pc/ 2nd comment telling him to save up, after he was told the budget is $300.

[the21robot]

I remeber the Slam guy telling me that it was impossible that a $160 GPU can run BF3 maxed out

[PsychoticEpisode]

I do not really understand the point of this thread, here on LTT and OCN, i have never seen anything like you have described, i have seen recommendations to save money, this is usually when the budget will not allow for anything acceptable to the users needs and wants.

If you don't understand the point try reading the comments before you wast our time posting. The point of a forum is to discuss topics not complain because you don't  like the topic.

 

 

I do agree that the next best thing is not needed, but for those few who are competitive, and enjoy trying to improve their skills in a certain game, will need a good PC to accomplish these wants properly.

You mentioned BF games, it is only right that people do pOint to a quad core CPU, it is middle ground for all games out there, a 2 core will bottleneck most cards out there that can deliver decent performance, to me this is a terribly balanced PC with no real thought on efficiency.

 

When did competitive gaming require high end parts to play? They don't they need skill and if you have skill you can win in competitive games with a low end pc.  So you must lack that very skill if you THINK need a "good PC to accomplish these wants properly" With a PC if it get the job dune it dues not mater if it is good or cheep.

 

I could go on another 7 pages of how absurd your point is, but my bastard finger is now aching banging my fucking iphone screen, please do not make this thread again, it only wounds those with proper intelligence.

 

Your best comment of all you attempt to "show how absurd your point is" but all you do is show your own lack on knowledge and skill in PC building and games.  You wast time commenting on things you no nothing about, do us all a favor and sit in the corner playing flapyy birds.

[dalekphalm]

To everyone that keep saying "I have never see that on this forums"  here is an example from the same day I made this topic.

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/141949-extreme-budget-gaming-pc/ 2nd comment telling him to save up, after he was told the budget is $300.

In this case honestly, that 2nd comment isn't harmful at all. He has a great point. If that person could wait another say 4 months and save up another $100 Euro, then their system would be exponentially better performance wise. That's an EXTREMELY tight budget. Granted, the OP has actually chosen very well for the components within the budget, and it is quite balanced for the price. The issue is that it's still going to perform pretty badly in any new game. The user won't be able to go above Medium settings and hold 30 FPS in most AAA games. Of course, it's entirely up to the user of the computer to determine what is acceptable performance, which was not specified. Ideally the OP would have let us know what kind of resolutions, frame-rates, and quality settings (Medium, high, etc) they were looking to achieve.

 

If you don't understand the point try reading the comments before you wast our time posting. The point of a forum is to discuss topics not complain because you don't  like the topic.

 

 

When did competitive gaming require high end parts to play? They don't they need skill and if you have skill you can win in competitive games with a low end pc.  So you must lack that very skill if you THINK need a "good PC to accomplish these wants properly" With a PC if it get the job dune it dues not mater if it is good or cheep.

 

 

Your best comment of all you attempt to "show how absurd your point is" but all you do is show your own lack on knowledge and skill in PC building and games.  You wast time commenting on things you no nothing about, do us all a favor and sit in the corner playing flapyy birds.

 

No offense meant, but I think you're disregarding everyone's counter-arguments in regards to your topic. As for @Recon-UK, you're belittling him and throwing name calling out at him now because he disagrees with you? That's not a proper attitude to have and will only cause people to be even more against you and your opinions. You should analytically dissect and discuss his points, not say that he "must lack that very skill". In regards to competitive gamers, he does have a slight point in that an actual competitive gamer will look for every edge (That even includes some of them using CRT monitors to reduce input lag and response times). Having a low powered computer will lose you that edge because of decreased view distances, potential for stutter or screen tearing that could be the difference between life and death when an unexpected enemy jumps around a corner and your screen tears just as you spin around, blocking the view of precisely where he is, etc.

 

I'm not saying you need a beast-mode computer to play competitively, but there IS a tangible benefit for getting a high powered one in that particular case.

 

To get back to my original point, often times saying "You really need to save up more" IS the correct and most logical answer. I don't see anyone in that thread you linked giving any stupid advice like "Save up and get a GTX 780". All the advice regarding saving and getting better is aimed at boosting that budget PC closer into the sweet spot of value/performance.

 

Obviously sometimes saving up just isn't an option. Maybe they NEED that PC right now, for school or work or whatever the case might be. In that case, the OP should then just politely inform the thread that they cannot wait to save up more as it is needed ASAP. The other suggestions in that thread for tweaks to the gaming system were mostly quite good (Aside from maybe the guy who suggested an A10 APU - we're not quite there yet for APU's). The proposed alternative Athlon 750 build for example was an excellent alternative in case they wanted a little extra multithreaded performance.

 

The whole point of these type of threads is:

#1 To make sure the OP isn't doing anything drastically, horribly wrong that will offend the #PCMasterRace gods

#2 Give them alternatives that maybe they never thought of, and to give them a little choice to pick from

 

And I can confidently say after looking at the first page of that thread that both of those points were satisfied. Personally I don't think "waiting for the next big release" is a valid answer either, so I agree with you on that point (because there's ALWAYS a big new release coming so you'd be waiting forever), but waiting to save up a larger budget is ALWAYS a valid alternative to consider. By deriding the people who suggest saving up for a bigger budget, you're being just as inflexible as the people you think are degrading the budget build experience.

[PsychoticEpisode]

 

No offense meant, but I think you're disregarding everyone's counter-arguments in regards to your topic. As for @Recon-UK, you're belittling him and throwing name calling out at him now because he disagrees with you? That's not a proper attitude to have and will only cause people to be even more against you and your opinions. You should analytically dissect and discuss his points, not say that he "must lack that very skill".

 

I think you missed they part where he said

 

I could go on another 7 pages of how absurd your point is, but my bastard finger is now aching banging my fucking iphone screen, please do not make this thread again, it only wounds those with proper intelligence.

So far I have simply debated others with ok points, I just try to give them the other side. However when some one like this start making insulting comment and 1 size fits all statements it will not help the anything.

I have not disagree with everyones comment , the ones that are good I leave them be to see if anyone else can add to it.  So far yours have been some of the best you understand that its not always possible to save up. You also understand that in some cases you may want better parts.  I read every comment and I like good debates, what I don't like is the elites/insulting/disregarding attitudes that some ppl online take when they don't like ppl talking about topics they don't like.

[PsychoticEpisode]

Just for some real world numbers I looked up Steam hardware survey.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/cpus/

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

[dalekphalm]

I think you missed they part where he said

 

So far I have simply debated others with ok points, I just try to give them the other side. However when some one like this start making insulting comment and 1 size fits all statements it will not help the anything.

I have not disagree with everyones comment , the ones that are good I leave them be to see if anyone else can add to it.  So far yours have been some of the best you understand that its not always possible to save up. You also understand that in some cases you may want better parts.  I read every comment and I like good debates, what I don't like is the elites/insulting/disregarding attitudes that some ppl online take when they don't like ppl talking about topics they don't like.

You do have a point in which he does go a weee bit too far, with the insults as well which are completely unhelpful and unwanted on the forums, no matter how justified either party feels. I must have overlooked that part.

[Recon-UK]

I will firstly apologise to the OP, so here, i am sorry for my offensive nature portrayed in my writing. I get cranky when i am tired, i am in a much more positive mood right now.

Back to this topic.

I will firstly explain, skill is a mental ability of a human, there is however
only so much the eye and brain can take in, when this is interrupted at any
point, we immediately notice it, like a split second pause.
A PC needs to be able to offer the user a smooth and stutter free experience, this is far more crucial to people wanting to be on top of their game, it is a maticulous thing for competitive players.

I will like to mention that i was rather competitive in BF3, though any real E-sport in BF is a running joke currently. Now i did not have a beast PC, i had a fi ely tuned workhorse that delivered as good as i could get with what i had.

My 2500k was my CPU with a single GTX 480, not the most baller PC even at release of BF3.
Now this is where some people differ, my monitor was overclockable via NV drivers ( i knew about OC'ing monitors before it went sort of
mainstream)
I managed 75hz which give quite a big difference over 60hz.
My CPU got clocked to hell to maintain a constant data feed to the GPU regardless of processes running.
I finally went all out on the GTX 480, stock cooler removed, custom made bios to allow copious amounts of voltage, and tweaked phases.

So we have here a PC that is not so expensive, but being pushed for absolute efficiency.

Game settings were never set to max, as anything below 60fps will throw me off, even at 75hz.

Now, if i had the money, which i did, do you think i would go buy a GTX 680? These were the best at that time afterall...

To put my point forward more, here is some performance numbers from that GTX 480.
http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/69448-ungine-valley-benchmark-top-30-scores/page-37#entry1895430

That's right, fastest air cooled GTX 480 on OCN, yet cost for tweaks? £50.
My card was hitting near even some stock 7950's in valley.

How does it perform in game? How are visuals? See for yourself....
Remove the m. for the link to work, or copy and paste it into google.

I am not the best player, but enjoy getting better and constantly testing myself, this is basically what a competitive players mentality is like.

Now, this is why i really dislike your thread, it does nothing for those who actually get the most from their hardware, you seem to be hooked to, anythi g can work on any budget ki d of theory, it simply does not work that way.

As much as this is a long post, i hope something sunk into your mind here. By the way, my R9 290 replaced my 480 after it's phases blew, it lasted 4 years, but better hardware would have been a more efficient route than adding on top of the 480's initial cost, and i could have sold it to a happy customer, giving me some money back.


Think before you type.

[Wano97]

Just for some real world numbers I looked up Steam hardware survey.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/cpus/

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

Just to comment on your other posts, they are trying to HELP the people, playing skyrim or black ops won't cut it with a 750ti for higher quality. We know that the experience isn't ideal with those low-end parts. Well you can't expect more from a £300 build though. Sure you could play those games on the lowest to mid settings but for me personally that wouldn't do it

You were also talking about competetive gaming, what does competetive gaming have to do with this

They are just giving the OP options, if the OP doesn't want to wait he/she will say that and they will get the best option recommended which stays in their budget range