Well these are the specs for my computer, I can barely play Skyblock which is barely any blocks let alone play on a full world. I want to explore technic pack so bad but I can't play. Shouldn't this computer be running minecraft well?
Manufacturer: Dell
Model: Inspiron 1525
Processor: Intel (R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T5750 @ 2.00GHz 2.00GHz
Memory (RAM): 3.00 GB
System Type: 32bit Operating System.
I don't know where to find other specs for my computer. I was thinking I have so much crud on my computer that that's what might be the problem for my computer not running Minecraft well, so I was thinking of restoring my computer to what it was like right out of the factory. Would that be a good choice? Or is my computer just garbage?
All of these include a monitor, keyboard, mouse, and OS, but you can remove them if you already have one.
All of these will run Minecraft well. The more expensive you get, the longer they will last and the better results you will be getting. However, if all your playing is Minecraft, and your not doing any other system intensive programs, the $750 one will be all you need, and will last you a good while.
Note that all of these are not prebuilts, so you would be building them yourself. If you don't know how to do it, heres a good link to teach you:
Don't worry, its not that hard. I'm 13 and I've built a couple:)
Keep in mind gaming laptops will always cost quite a bit more then gaming desktops...
That being said, Asus (G55VW ~$1100) and Alienware(read Dell) (M14x also around $1100) both make very nice gaming laptops.
Your best bet as others have pointed out is a desktop machine. newegg.com has ALL the parts you need to build a really nice system (around $700 for the box, monitor/mouse/keyoard/speakers extra... you normally have those on upgrade).
The main advantage is upgradeability when you build your own. My case is now 6 years old. I just upgrade motherboard/cpu/memory/video/hard disk as nessacery. Without getting into a war, the above poster seems to prefer Intel CPU's and ATI Video cards, you can save quite a bit more money by going with AMD, and I personally prefr nVidia for graphics (more Linux friendly).
Basically to start out in the world of home built computers you need:
$30+ Case: pick what you want to look at (even if it comes with a crappy power supply)
~$75 Power Supply: A lot of cases come with really cheesy power supplies
~$100 Motherboard: This is really the MAIN part, it is the heart of a system
~$125 CPU: Minimum quad core, around 3GHz
~$60 Memory: 4GB is fine, 8GB is even better, get the highest speed utilized by your motherboard.
$125+++ Video card: This will be the most costly component for gaming, the more you spend here the better.
~$100 Hard Disk: These days I would say the bigger the better, larger generally = faster, get one with a large cache... 64MB is nice.
~$20 CD/DVD burner: any LG,ASUS,Lite-On will do.
If you already have monitor/mouse/keys/speakers... around $700 will get you a very nice PC, and the more you spend will help to futureproof your investment. After that, try to invest like $300 a year upgrading the machine, this should keep you fairly current without having to drop a lump sum on basically a whole new machine.
My current machine
-------------------------------------------
AMD FX-8150 3.6GHz 8 Core Processor
ASUS M5A99X EVO 990X Motherboard
Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer 8GB DDR3 1866 Memory
ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 Video
Western Digital VelociRaptor 1TB 10000 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Disk
Windows XP 64-bit
$30+ Case: pick what you want to look at (even if it comes with a crappy power supply)
Cases are rarely as cheap as $30, but even then I would say spend $40-50 MINIMUM. You get what you pay for.
~$75 Power Supply: A lot of cases come with really cheesy power supplies
PSUs should never be rated based on their price. Only by their ratings and performance.
~$100 Motherboard: This is really the MAIN part, it is the heart of a system
Wouldn't the heart be the PSU and the mobo be the spinal cord? Even then, again, like PSUs you can't judge mobos based on price.
~$125 CPU: Minimum quad core, around 3GHz
Erm why? GHz and cores don't matter at all. Even then the dual core i3 at 2.8GHz is better than the quad core phenom at 3.2GHz due to having a better architecture. You need to look at it's performance, not anything more or less.
Even then, 99% of all programs and games only use 1-2 cores and 1-2 threads, so there is no point in getting anything more even for a few years in the future.
~$60 Memory: 4GB is fine, 8GB is even better, get the highest speed utilized by your motherboard.
$125+++ Video card: This will be the most costly component for gaming, the more you spend here the better.
Not really.
~$100 Hard Disk: These days I would say the bigger the better, larger generally = faster, get one with a large cache... 64MB is nice.
Size has nothing to do with speed. All hard drives read/write at similar speeds, to get anything more you would need an SSD.
HDD cache means absolutely nothing and does nothing for performance. HDDs cannot fully utilize SATA II or SATA III (let alone SATA I) and thus they cannot even utilize the full 16MB or 32MB of cache most drives have.
~$20 CD/DVD burner: any LG,ASUS,Lite-On will do.
Should be less. $11ish with $25 being the absolute max.
For home computers, most people can get by on a $250-300 budget if it is not for gaming.
For gaming, the minimum for anything passable would be around $350-450.
That being said, Asus (G55VW ~$1100) and Alienware(read Dell) (M14x also around $1100) both make very nice gaming laptops.
Alienware should never be recommended, neither should Dell, HP, Gateway or any other brand like that. This goes for desktops and laptops.
Keep in mind gaming laptops will always cost quite a bit more then gaming desktops...
That being said, Asus (G55VW ~$1100) and Alienware(read Dell) (M14x also around $1100) both make very nice gaming laptops.
Your best bet as others have pointed out is a desktop machine. newegg.com has ALL the parts you need to build a really nice system (around $700 for the box, monitor/mouse/keyoard/speakers extra... you normally have those on upgrade).
The main advantage is upgradeability when you build your own. My case is now 6 years old. I just upgrade motherboard/cpu/memory/video/hard disk as nessacery. Without getting into a war, the above poster seems to prefer Intel CPU's and ATI Video cards, you can save quite a bit more money by going with AMD, and I personally prefr nVidia for graphics (more Linux friendly).
Basically to start out in the world of home built computers you need:
$30+ Case: pick what you want to look at (even if it comes with a crappy power supply)
~$75 Power Supply: A lot of cases come with really cheesy power supplies
~$100 Motherboard: This is really the MAIN part, it is the heart of a system
~$125 CPU: Minimum quad core, around 3GHz
~$60 Memory: 4GB is fine, 8GB is even better, get the highest speed utilized by your motherboard.
$125+++ Video card: This will be the most costly component for gaming, the more you spend here the better.
~$100 Hard Disk: These days I would say the bigger the better, larger generally = faster, get one with a large cache... 64MB is nice.
~$20 CD/DVD burner: any LG,ASUS,Lite-On will do.
If you already have monitor/mouse/keys/speakers... around $700 will get you a very nice PC, and the more you spend will help to futureproof your investment. After that, try to invest like $300 a year upgrading the machine, this should keep you fairly current without having to drop a lump sum on basically a whole new machine.
My current machine
-------------------------------------------
AMD FX-8150 3.6GHz 8 Core Processor
ASUS M5A99X EVO 990X Motherboard
Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer 8GB DDR3 1866 Memory
ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 Video
Western Digital VelociRaptor 1TB 10000 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Disk
Windows XP 64-bit
Most of what you said is good, but I would like to correct you on just a couple areas.
1. Alienware is awful, NEVER recommend them. They do not make good gaming laptops, the don't even make bad laptops. They make garbage laptops. For gaming laptops I would recommend Sager and Asus.
2. ATI doesn't exist anymore, they were bought by AMD so now both the graphics cards and processors use the AMD name.
3. You don't always need a quad core processor. The majority of computer users could probably make due with a Pentium G620 since most people just browse the web and type documents.
4. The motherboard is the spine, the power supply is the heart
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from TheFieldZy »
Nobody's perfect, so neither is Hannah Montana Linux, but it's pretty great.
Quote from BC_Programming on Operating Systems »
They all suck. They just suck differently. Sort of like prostitutes.
That being said, Asus (G55VW ~$1100) and Alienware(read Dell) (M14x also around $1100) both make very nice gaming laptops.
Alienware is terrible, terrible cooing and terrible parts balance, as well as a terrible price tag.
Your best bet as others have pointed out is a desktop machine. newegg.com has ALL the parts you need to build a really nice system (around $700 for the box, monitor/mouse/keyoard/speakers extra... you normally have those on upgrade).
$700 for a tower will get you something good, but adding in all those peripherals will not.
The main advantage is upgradeability when you build your own. My case is now 6 years old. I just upgrade motherboard/cpu/memory/video/hard disk as nessacery. Without getting into a war, the above poster seems to prefer Intel CPU's and ATI Video cards, you can save quite a bit more money by going with AMD, and I personally prefr nVidia for graphics (more Linux friendly).
Really? Here is two similarly priced CPUs, one from intel and one from AMD. Let's see how they stack up (the FX-8150 vs the i5 2500K):
$30+ Case: pick what you want to look at (even if it comes with a crappy power supply)
Worst advice you can follow. Buying a crap PSU and it failing will bring your whole computer down with it. $30 with a PSU is probably not going to provide much in terms of features.
~$75 Power Supply: A lot of cases come with really cheesy power supplies
That's not very specific.
~$100 Motherboard: This is really the MAIN part, it is the heart of a system
More like the skeletal system, holds all the organs in place. The PSU is the heart.
~$125 CPU: Minimum quad core, around 3GHz
Cores and clock speed don't mean better performance. An i3 2100 provides more than enough performance for gaming.
~$60 Memory: 4GB is fine, 8GB is even better, get the highest speed utilized by your motherboard.
Really? Lets see if speed is equal to performance:
~$100 Hard Disk: These days I would say the bigger the better, larger generally = faster, get one with a large cache... 64MB is nice.
Bigger == better and 64MB caches perform equal to 32MB caches
If you already have monitor/mouse/keys/speakers... around $700 will get you a very nice PC, and the more you spend will help to futureproof your investment. After that, try to invest like $300 a year upgrading the machine, this should keep you fairly current without having to drop a lump sum on basically a whole new machine.
Future proofing doesn't exist
My current machine
-------------------------------------------
AMD FX-8150 3.6GHz 8 Core Processor
ASUS M5A99X EVO 990X Motherboard
Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer 8GB DDR3 1866 Memory
ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 Video
Western Digital VelociRaptor 1TB 10000 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Disk
Windows XP 64-bit
Pretty bad machine. 1866 RAM performs equal to 1333 RAM. Velociraptors are overpriced. And windows XP for whatever reason.
Really? Here is two similarly priced CPUs, one from intel and one from AMD. Let's see how they stack up (the FX-8150 vs the i5 2500K):
If cryptography is your bag, then the Intel AES benchmark is the way to go.
AMD X4 versus X2 is like $10 difference, and an equivalent Intel is twice as much (again, to each their own... it's a Ford vs. Chevy type argument)
For laptops, I would personally spendmy money on an Asus, my buddy has a few year old Alienware and he's still happy with it.
And it's still basically and ATI vs. nVidia war (another Ford vs. Chevy thing), just ATI is now AMD... for now I still prefer nVidia.
Cases are cases if your not overclocking/running multiple drives/multiple video cards... put fans where they need to be and route cables correctly and all is good.
Cases that come with a power supply, the 1st thing i do is relegate it to the parts bin and put a good Antec in.
And finally... yea, I still use XP mainly... I have 4 machines here at my desk, my main one tri-boots XP/Linux/7. A netbook that has 7. A mini-itx that is currently running Windows 8 (1GHz 1GB Ram 1TB drive, and it actually runs quite fast to my suprise). And lastly an older single core machine that I "play" with OS's on... currently running ReactOS.
XP can do things that 7/Linux can't for me... like run my Nintendo DS download play server that I can't virtualize as it requires a specific wireless card with different firmware.
If my machine sucks, whatever... 12w27a @ 200FPS and Skyrim with HD textures on max settings runs great then I guess it sucks At 44 years old and been doing this since adding my 1st JiffyDOS chip to my Commodore 64... I aint in it for the arguing... to each their own
Both are within $10 of the other, while the phenom has more cores and is clocked higher, the i3 performs better with it's 2 cores (compared to 4 on the phenom) and a lower clock speed (3.1 compared to 3.4) due to the architecture being so much better at pretty much everything.
For laptops, I would personally spendmy money on an Asus, my buddy has a few year old Alienware and he's still happy with it.
My mom is happy with her "new" $280 dishwasher too, even though it doesn't clean anything, clogs up and leaks every wash.
Being happy with something doesn't make it good or even decent.
And it's still basically and ATI vs. nVidia war (another Ford vs. Chevy thing), just ATI is now AMD... for now I still prefer nVidia.
No it still isn't ATi vs. Nvidia, ATi has not existed since 2006.
There isn't even a vs. here, they both give equal performance at equal price tiers. The differences are minor and anyone saying otherwise is just being a fanboy. There is no difference between the two brands.
It's nothing like ford vs. chevy, it's really more like hardcover books vs. softback books.
Cases are cases if your not overclocking/running multiple drives/multiple video cards... put fans where they need to be and route cables correctly and all is good.
Cases are NOT just cases. A terrible case can short your entire system if a piece of metal is off, or it doesn't allow you to use motherboard standoffs. If airflow is bad, expect parts to fail. Build quality too, a cheap case will often break fairly easily, especially during shipping.
Cases that come with a power supply, the 1st thing i do is relegate it to the parts bin and put a good Antec in.
This was exactly our point. Although not necessarily Antec.
And finally... yea, I still use XP mainly... I have 4 machines here at my desk, my main one tri-boots XP/Linux/7. A netbook that has 7. A mini-itx that is currently running Windows 8 (1GHz 1GB Ram 1TB drive, and it actually runs quite fast to my suprise). And lastly an older single core machine that I "play" with OS's on... currently running ReactOS.
Why are you using an 11 year old operating system? That would be like using windows 95 at the launch of the core 2 quads.
XP can do things that 7/Linux can't for me... like run my Nintendo DS download play server that I can't virtualize as it requires a specific wireless card with different firmware.
Erm, 7 can do everything XP can do, and then some. The same can be said for Linux. The software you are using is likely only compatible with XP (horribly coded), in which case, you should be using a VM for when you need to use that software and 7 for everything else. But even then, have you tried compatibility mode with certain settings enabled/disabled? I guarantee it will run.
Hell, we are getting to the point where games don't even support DX9 any more and won't even run on XP machines (just cause 2 being an example). A large amount of new software coming out also doesn't support XP any more, and if detected that you are trying to install under XP, it will simply not run.
If my machine sucks, whatever... 12w27a @ 200FPS and Skyrim with HD textures on max settings runs great then I guess it sucks At 44 years old and been doing this since adding my 1st JiffyDOS chip to my Commodore 64... I aint in it for the arguing... to each their own
If you are going to go this route then I HIGHLY suggest you update yourself with current standards and practices, as well as current benchmarks and tiers of processing power.
Things have changed quite a lot even in just the past 12 months, if you do not keep up to date, you end up misinforming people to a large degree like you did in that post. RAM speed matters absolutely nothing right now. Zilch, Zero, nada, nothing. The difference between the highest and lowest speed DDR3 is measured in 1/10ths of 1 FPS in a game, or nanoseconds in terms of computing. Cores and GHz mean nothing as well. Everything is about architecture now.
The AMD FX 6 core chips do not even come near to the i5 2500k (4 cores) in terms of performance until overclocked to 6GHz! Comparing GHz and cores is about as meaningless as comparing a 60Hz LCD monitor to a 75Hz LCD monitor. Or for a better analogy, it's about as meaningless as choosing an OS based on the max amount of RAM it supports. It doesn't matter.
You also mentioned RAM fast enough for the mobo, but the memory controller was moved into the CPU, like, 14 years ago....
The field is no longer "check the updates every so often to see what is lined up", things are changing every 6 months or sooner, and if you are not up to date you can make some serious missteps.
If you had said the bulldozer architecture would completely bomb to us a year ago, we would have laughed you out of here. But now that it has failed, everyone's views changed drastically.
If you had told us only 3 months ago that Ivy Bridge would use thermal paste directly on the die rather than fluxless solder we would have called you crazy. But it actually was like that.
For what it's worth, I've been building computers for almost 5 years now and had my own business (yes, taxes and everything, not one of those kids who claims they run a business when they do nothing but fix family computers) fixing/building them for almost 4. I'm fairly certain my views are about as neutral as they can get when you have serviced so many different platforms and hardware setups.
This bugged me its a fairly old out of date benchmark even if its still pretty much 100% correct still bugs me that its old.
Here are some newer ones you can use.
However this is for Intel who uses an older Memory controller limited to 1333mhz.
AMD put a newer faster on in its CPU.
Well no different basically 1-3 fps is within the margin of error.
Apparently I still ain't alone as of June, 2012. Like I said, I have my main machine triple booting Linux(Slakware), Windows 7 Ultimate, and XP... So far I have had one app (a no dvd crack to a game) that wouldn't run on XP (finally found another that would). XP does what I need it to, until that changes it will be my primary OS, even after 2014 if need be. I have an ASUS RT-N16 router running a custom linux firewall (Tomato USB-MOD) without a resident AV program (I use jotti to scan dubious files)... so MS's main reason to upgrade, security, means little to me. I still work with some very old hardware, C64 X1541 cable, DS server, original XBOX moddng apps, my old HP scanner (which also plays music ), and drivers are NOT available for Windows 7 and the apps don't work in Linux.
And I just got tired of trying to make games like Fallout 3, or most of the Command and Conquer Collection... many more older games I still enjoy just work on XP... not so much on 7. That's just games... can't count how many times I've tried to restore someones backup and the recovery software doesn't run under 7... I do a lot of backup data recovery, I even have a Win98 machine that I've had to boot a few times in the past year to fire up the Colorado tape backup
So, I'll use XP until it no longer serves me to do so
You do realize ~80% of that 40% is the enterprise market, which uses software that either is not supported, or does not work under 7/vista (since a large chunk of it depends on IE6 and how it is integrated into XP's explorer), correct?
I am just saying, you are needlessly opening yourself to a HUGE number of security holes for no reason......
You do realize ~80% of that 40% is the enterprise market, which uses software that either is not supported, or does not work under 7/vista (since a large chunk of it depends on IE6 and how it is integrated into XP's explorer), correct?
I'm sure it is, I also know many people who still run XP like myself... I just see no great reason to upgrade just yet, when i NEED to I will.
I am just saying, you are needlessly opening yourself to a HUGE number of security holes for no reason......
Knock on wood... but the last virus I nearly had was the ILOVEYOU virus... sent to me by a dumbass bosses computer who opened ALL e-mails... Thu, 4 May 2000 - Subject: ILOVEYOU... original source minus attachment in spoiler Good thing i read emails in plain text and scan attachments with jotti.
I've never been scammed, hi-jacked, or anything else bad... Anyone with half a brain can prvent malicious stuff from happening on their own machine (the ILOVEYOU wasn't "my" machine... but a work controlled one, my terminal if you will)
My browser is still current(Firefox with no-script, greasemonkey, and adblock), my e-mail app is current(Thunderbird, only viewing e-mail as plain text)... Just be smart and all is good.
From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 10000000
X-Mozilla-Keys:
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 17429 invoked by uid 0); 4 May 2000 14:55:45 -0000
Received: from www.tinkertronics.com (HELO webserver.onr.com) (207.13.84.222) by mail4.wlv.netzero.net with SMTP; 4 May 2000 14:55:45 -0000
Received: from tinker (207.13.84.194) by webserver.onr.com (Worldmail 1.3.167) for [email protected]; 4 May 2000 09:56:50 -0500
Reply-To: <[email protected]>
From: "Clifford Scott" <[email protected]>
To: "Bill" <[email protected]>
Subject: ILOVEYOU
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 09:55:31 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_07EC_01C4AA26.8DF83670"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_07EC_01C4AA26.8DF83670
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
kindly check the attached LOVELETTER coming from me.
------=_NextPart_000_07EC_01C4AA26.8DF83670
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
name="LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.TXT.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.TXT.txt"
I'm sure it is, I also know many people who still run XP like myself... I just see no great reason to upgrade just yet, when i NEED to I will.
Knock on wood... but the last virus I nearly had was the ILOVEYOU virus... sent to me by a dumbass bosses computer who opened ALL e-mails... Thu, 4 May 2000 - Subject: ILOVEYOU... original source minus attachment in spoiler Good thing i read emails in plain text and scan attachments with jotti.
I've never been scammed, hi-jacked, or anything else bad... Anyone with half a brain can prvent malicious stuff from happening on their own machine (the ILOVEYOU wasn't "my" machine... but a work controlled one, my terminal if you will)
My browser is still current(Firefox with no-script, greasemonkey, and adblock), my e-mail app is current(Thunderbird, only viewing e-mail as plain text)... Just be smart and all is good.
From - Mon Jan 1 00:00:00 1965
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 10000000
X-Mozilla-Keys:
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 17429 invoked by uid 0); 4 May 2000 14:55:45 -0000
Received: from www.tinkertronics.com (HELO webserver.onr.com) (207.13.84.222) by mail4.wlv.netzero.net with SMTP; 4 May 2000 14:55:45 -0000
Received: from tinker (207.13.84.194) by webserver.onr.com (Worldmail 1.3.167) for [email protected]; 4 May 2000 09:56:50 -0500
Reply-To: <[email protected]>
From: "Clifford Scott" <[email protected]>
To: "Bill" <[email protected]>
Subject: ILOVEYOU
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 09:55:31 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_07EC_01C4AA26.8DF83670"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_07EC_01C4AA26.8DF83670
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
kindly check the attached LOVELETTER coming from me.
------=_NextPart_000_07EC_01C4AA26.8DF83670
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
name="LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.TXT.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.TXT.txt"
Currently I'm only playing Morrowind/Oblvion/Fallout/Skyrim, Duke Nukem Forever, Empire Earth AOC, Angry Birds... none of which require DX10 or 11. Read some stuff that said Skyrim is actually more stable on DX9... dunno, ain't fired up the Windows 7 partition to try, works great under XP.
I ain't a fanboy of ANY one OS... I can within minutes fire up just about any OS ever made on one machine or another here... I use what gets the job done and feels the most comfortable. If I find something that doesn't work on my most comfortable OS (XP), I'll boot into 7, 8, Win98, DOS 6.22, Linux, OS/X, C64 Basic V2... whatever
All of these include a monitor, keyboard, mouse, and OS, but you can remove them if you already have one.
All of these will run Minecraft well. The more expensive you get, the longer they will last and the better results you will be getting. However, if all your playing is Minecraft, and your not doing any other system intensive programs, the $750 one will be all you need, and will last you a good while.
Note that all of these are not prebuilts, so you would be building them yourself. If you don't know how to do it, heres a good link to teach you:
Don't worry, its not that hard. I'm 13 and I've built a couple:)
Hope I helped!
I've been looking for a good gaming computer in the price range of 650$ The one you suggested, will that get me atleast 70fps+ If im running and recording minecraft?
Overall looks good, but I'm not too sure about the Antec One Hundred. It lacks quite a few features considering it's $50 price tag (drive mounting support, USB3, better cable management support, etc), it may be better to get the Antec One instead. Of course this does boil down to personal preference, but just worth considering. Also 430w for the first rig is overkill, 350w is more than enough.
The Asus 6770 you posted is a passively cooled card, which really isn't ideal considering temperatures tend to be quite a bit higher than a normal card. It may be worth spending slightly more on something like this instead.
I'm honestly a bit unsure about the H61 MSI board to be honest. 32% of the reviews on newegg are 1-star, mostly DOA. While customer reviews generally are to be taken with a grain of salt, I do think there is an underlying trend in terms of reliability there. It may be worth spending another $5 for this instead.
Lastly, I know the OP is not going to get the $1000 build, but I really wouldn't recommend the P67 Fata1ty board. It seems to have features that aren't exactly nessesary at that budget (PATA, eSATA, dual PS/2 ports and such), but lacks features that may be (SLI/Crossfire support, internal USB 3 headers, etc).
Switched to the Antec One, but I don't want to make it seem like this is concrete. OP, if you don't like this case, choose one you like the look of.
Your right. Switched to the Graphics Card you recommended.
Switched motherboards. I should probably have new egg open too while looking for parts. Seems that PCPartPicker and Newegg conflict a lot.
I've been looking for a good gaming computer in the price range of 650$ The one you suggested, will that get me atleast 70fps+ If im running and recording minecraft?
To be honest, a good gaming computer will be more than $650, but this is the best you can get for that. I made some minor changes that christoi suggested, and came up with this:
While recording and playing Minecraft, I would expect about 70, but generally I'm not very good with estimating fps, you may want to wait for another person to estimate for you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Computer Specs: 4GB 1333 Mhz DDR3 RAM- 320GB 5400RPM Hard Drive- Dual Core Intel Core i5 2415M @2.3 Ghz- Intel HD 3000 Graphics- Only $1200! Yeah, I got a Mac, because I'm stoopid. Scratch that: Intel i5 2500k, 1TB 7200RPM Seagate Barracuda, Gigabyte Z68-D3H-B3, 8GB 1333Mhz DDR3 RAM, Radeon HD 6850, Running OSX.
Manufacturer: Dell
Model: Inspiron 1525
Processor: Intel (R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T5750 @ 2.00GHz 2.00GHz
Memory (RAM): 3.00 GB
System Type: 32bit Operating System.
I don't know where to find other specs for my computer. I was thinking I have so much crud on my computer that that's what might be the problem for my computer not running Minecraft well, so I was thinking of restoring my computer to what it was like right out of the factory. Would that be a good choice? Or is my computer just garbage?
The computer as a whole is 5 years old and you cannot upgrade laptops. You will need a new computer.
edit: fixed that, confused it with another model Dell.
Anyways, your laptop has Intel integrated graphics, they are garbage for playing games.
No you can not upgrade your laptop.
EDIT: Someone beat me to the punch.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/chn9
Heres one for $750
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/czIL
Heres one for $850
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/chhX
Heres one for $1000
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/cqdX
All of these include a monitor, keyboard, mouse, and OS, but you can remove them if you already have one.
All of these will run Minecraft well. The more expensive you get, the longer they will last and the better results you will be getting. However, if all your playing is Minecraft, and your not doing any other system intensive programs, the $750 one will be all you need, and will last you a good while.
Note that all of these are not prebuilts, so you would be building them yourself. If you don't know how to do it, heres a good link to teach you:
Don't worry, its not that hard. I'm 13 and I've built a couple:)
Hope I helped!
Computer Specs: 4GB 1333 Mhz DDR3 RAM- 320GB 5400RPM Hard Drive- Dual Core Intel Core i5 2415M @2.3 Ghz- Intel HD 3000 Graphics- Only $1200! Yeah, I got a Mac, because I'm stoopid.Scratch that: Intel i5 2500k, 1TB 7200RPM Seagate Barracuda, Gigabyte Z68-D3H-B3, 8GB 1333Mhz DDR3 RAM, Radeon HD 6850, Running OSX.That being said, Asus (G55VW ~$1100) and Alienware(read Dell) (M14x also around $1100) both make very nice gaming laptops.
Your best bet as others have pointed out is a desktop machine. newegg.com has ALL the parts you need to build a really nice system (around $700 for the box, monitor/mouse/keyoard/speakers extra... you normally have those on upgrade).
The main advantage is upgradeability when you build your own. My case is now 6 years old. I just upgrade motherboard/cpu/memory/video/hard disk as nessacery. Without getting into a war, the above poster seems to prefer Intel CPU's and ATI Video cards, you can save quite a bit more money by going with AMD, and I personally prefr nVidia for graphics (more Linux friendly).
Basically to start out in the world of home built computers you need:
My current machine
-------------------------------------------
AMD FX-8150 3.6GHz 8 Core Processor
ASUS M5A99X EVO 990X Motherboard
Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer 8GB DDR3 1866 Memory
ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 Video
Western Digital VelociRaptor 1TB 10000 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Disk
Windows XP 64-bit
Cases are rarely as cheap as $30, but even then I would say spend $40-50 MINIMUM. You get what you pay for.
PSUs should never be rated based on their price. Only by their ratings and performance.
Wouldn't the heart be the PSU and the mobo be the spinal cord? Even then, again, like PSUs you can't judge mobos based on price.
Erm why? GHz and cores don't matter at all. Even then the dual core i3 at 2.8GHz is better than the quad core phenom at 3.2GHz due to having a better architecture. You need to look at it's performance, not anything more or less.
Even then, 99% of all programs and games only use 1-2 cores and 1-2 threads, so there is no point in getting anything more even for a few years in the future.
~$60 Memory: 4GB is fine, 8GB is even better, get the highest speed utilized by your motherboard.
Not really.
Size has nothing to do with speed. All hard drives read/write at similar speeds, to get anything more you would need an SSD.
HDD cache means absolutely nothing and does nothing for performance. HDDs cannot fully utilize SATA II or SATA III (let alone SATA I) and thus they cannot even utilize the full 16MB or 32MB of cache most drives have.
Should be less. $11ish with $25 being the absolute max.
For home computers, most people can get by on a $250-300 budget if it is not for gaming.
For gaming, the minimum for anything passable would be around $350-450.
Alienware should never be recommended, neither should Dell, HP, Gateway or any other brand like that. This goes for desktops and laptops.
Most of what you said is good, but I would like to correct you on just a couple areas.
1. Alienware is awful, NEVER recommend them. They do not make good gaming laptops, the don't even make bad laptops. They make garbage laptops. For gaming laptops I would recommend Sager and Asus.
2. ATI doesn't exist anymore, they were bought by AMD so now both the graphics cards and processors use the AMD name.
3. You don't always need a quad core processor. The majority of computer users could probably make due with a Pentium G620 since most people just browse the web and type documents.
4. The motherboard is the spine, the power supply is the heart
Alienware is terrible, terrible cooing and terrible parts balance, as well as a terrible price tag.
$700 for a tower will get you something good, but adding in all those peripherals will not.
Really? Here is two similarly priced CPUs, one from intel and one from AMD. Let's see how they stack up (the FX-8150 vs the i5 2500K):
Worst advice you can follow. Buying a crap PSU and it failing will bring your whole computer down with it. $30 with a PSU is probably not going to provide much in terms of features.
That's not very specific.
More like the skeletal system, holds all the organs in place. The PSU is the heart.
Cores and clock speed don't mean better performance. An i3 2100 provides more than enough performance for gaming.
Really? Lets see if speed is equal to performance:
Bigger == better and 64MB caches perform equal to 32MB caches
Future proofing doesn't exist
Pretty bad machine. 1866 RAM performs equal to 1333 RAM. Velociraptors are overpriced. And windows XP for whatever reason.
Thinking about coming a mod to simply not moderate.
If cryptography is your bag, then the Intel AES benchmark is the way to go.
AMD X4 versus X2 is like $10 difference, and an equivalent Intel is twice as much (again, to each their own... it's a Ford vs. Chevy type argument)
For laptops, I would personally spendmy money on an Asus, my buddy has a few year old Alienware and he's still happy with it.
And it's still basically and ATI vs. nVidia war (another Ford vs. Chevy thing), just ATI is now AMD... for now I still prefer nVidia.
Cases are cases if your not overclocking/running multiple drives/multiple video cards... put fans where they need to be and route cables correctly and all is good.
Cases that come with a power supply, the 1st thing i do is relegate it to the parts bin and put a good Antec in.
And finally... yea, I still use XP mainly... I have 4 machines here at my desk, my main one tri-boots XP/Linux/7. A netbook that has 7. A mini-itx that is currently running Windows 8 (1GHz 1GB Ram 1TB drive, and it actually runs quite fast to my suprise). And lastly an older single core machine that I "play" with OS's on... currently running ReactOS.
XP can do things that 7/Linux can't for me... like run my Nintendo DS download play server that I can't virtualize as it requires a specific wireless card with different firmware.
If my machine sucks, whatever... 12w27a @ 200FPS and Skyrim with HD textures on max settings runs great then I guess it sucks At 44 years old and been doing this since adding my 1st JiffyDOS chip to my Commodore 64... I aint in it for the arguing... to each their own
Lets compare these two processors shall we?
Phenom II x4 retails at $110
i3 2100 retails at $120
Both are within $10 of the other, while the phenom has more cores and is clocked higher, the i3 performs better with it's 2 cores (compared to 4 on the phenom) and a lower clock speed (3.1 compared to 3.4) due to the architecture being so much better at pretty much everything.
My mom is happy with her "new" $280 dishwasher too, even though it doesn't clean anything, clogs up and leaks every wash.
Being happy with something doesn't make it good or even decent.
No it still isn't ATi vs. Nvidia, ATi has not existed since 2006.
There isn't even a vs. here, they both give equal performance at equal price tiers. The differences are minor and anyone saying otherwise is just being a fanboy. There is no difference between the two brands.
It's nothing like ford vs. chevy, it's really more like hardcover books vs. softback books.
Cases are NOT just cases. A terrible case can short your entire system if a piece of metal is off, or it doesn't allow you to use motherboard standoffs. If airflow is bad, expect parts to fail. Build quality too, a cheap case will often break fairly easily, especially during shipping.
This was exactly our point. Although not necessarily Antec.
Why are you using an 11 year old operating system? That would be like using windows 95 at the launch of the core 2 quads.
Erm, 7 can do everything XP can do, and then some. The same can be said for Linux. The software you are using is likely only compatible with XP (horribly coded), in which case, you should be using a VM for when you need to use that software and 7 for everything else. But even then, have you tried compatibility mode with certain settings enabled/disabled? I guarantee it will run.
Hell, we are getting to the point where games don't even support DX9 any more and won't even run on XP machines (just cause 2 being an example). A large amount of new software coming out also doesn't support XP any more, and if detected that you are trying to install under XP, it will simply not run.
If you are going to go this route then I HIGHLY suggest you update yourself with current standards and practices, as well as current benchmarks and tiers of processing power.
Things have changed quite a lot even in just the past 12 months, if you do not keep up to date, you end up misinforming people to a large degree like you did in that post. RAM speed matters absolutely nothing right now. Zilch, Zero, nada, nothing. The difference between the highest and lowest speed DDR3 is measured in 1/10ths of 1 FPS in a game, or nanoseconds in terms of computing. Cores and GHz mean nothing as well. Everything is about architecture now.
The AMD FX 6 core chips do not even come near to the i5 2500k (4 cores) in terms of performance until overclocked to 6GHz! Comparing GHz and cores is about as meaningless as comparing a 60Hz LCD monitor to a 75Hz LCD monitor. Or for a better analogy, it's about as meaningless as choosing an OS based on the max amount of RAM it supports. It doesn't matter.
You also mentioned RAM fast enough for the mobo, but the memory controller was moved into the CPU, like, 14 years ago....
The field is no longer "check the updates every so often to see what is lined up", things are changing every 6 months or sooner, and if you are not up to date you can make some serious missteps.
If you had said the bulldozer architecture would completely bomb to us a year ago, we would have laughed you out of here. But now that it has failed, everyone's views changed drastically.
If you had told us only 3 months ago that Ivy Bridge would use thermal paste directly on the die rather than fluxless solder we would have called you crazy. But it actually was like that.
For what it's worth, I've been building computers for almost 5 years now and had my own business (yes, taxes and everything, not one of those kids who claims they run a business when they do nothing but fix family computers) fixing/building them for almost 4. I'm fairly certain my views are about as neutral as they can get when you have serviced so many different platforms and hardware setups.
This bugged me its a fairly old out of date benchmark even if its still pretty much 100% correct still bugs me that its old.
Here are some newer ones you can use.
However this is for Intel who uses an older Memory controller limited to 1333mhz.
AMD put a newer faster on in its CPU.
Well no different basically 1-3 fps is within the margin of error.
Operating System Market Share
Apparently I still ain't alone as of June, 2012. Like I said, I have my main machine triple booting Linux(Slakware), Windows 7 Ultimate, and XP... So far I have had one app (a no dvd crack to a game) that wouldn't run on XP (finally found another that would). XP does what I need it to, until that changes it will be my primary OS, even after 2014 if need be. I have an ASUS RT-N16 router running a custom linux firewall (Tomato USB-MOD) without a resident AV program (I use jotti to scan dubious files)... so MS's main reason to upgrade, security, means little to me. I still work with some very old hardware, C64 X1541 cable, DS server, original XBOX moddng apps, my old HP scanner (which also plays music ), and drivers are NOT available for Windows 7 and the apps don't work in Linux.
And I just got tired of trying to make games like Fallout 3, or most of the Command and Conquer Collection... many more older games I still enjoy just work on XP... not so much on 7. That's just games... can't count how many times I've tried to restore someones backup and the recovery software doesn't run under 7... I do a lot of backup data recovery, I even have a Win98 machine that I've had to boot a few times in the past year to fire up the Colorado tape backup
So, I'll use XP until it no longer serves me to do so
I am just saying, you are needlessly opening yourself to a HUGE number of security holes for no reason......
I'm sure it is, I also know many people who still run XP like myself... I just see no great reason to upgrade just yet, when i NEED to I will.
Knock on wood... but the last virus I nearly had was the ILOVEYOU virus... sent to me by a dumbass bosses computer who opened ALL e-mails... Thu, 4 May 2000 - Subject: ILOVEYOU... original source minus attachment in spoiler Good thing i read emails in plain text and scan attachments with jotti.
I've never been scammed, hi-jacked, or anything else bad... Anyone with half a brain can prvent malicious stuff from happening on their own machine (the ILOVEYOU wasn't "my" machine... but a work controlled one, my terminal if you will)
My browser is still current(Firefox with no-script, greasemonkey, and adblock), my e-mail app is current(Thunderbird, only viewing e-mail as plain text)... Just be smart and all is good.
How's the lack of DirectX 10/11?
Thinking about coming a mod to simply not moderate.
Currently I'm only playing Morrowind/Oblvion/Fallout/Skyrim, Duke Nukem Forever, Empire Earth AOC, Angry Birds... none of which require DX10 or 11. Read some stuff that said Skyrim is actually more stable on DX9... dunno, ain't fired up the Windows 7 partition to try, works great under XP.
I ain't a fanboy of ANY one OS... I can within minutes fire up just about any OS ever made on one machine or another here... I use what gets the job done and feels the most comfortable. If I find something that doesn't work on my most comfortable OS (XP), I'll boot into 7, 8, Win98, DOS 6.22, Linux, OS/X, C64 Basic V2... whatever
I've been looking for a good gaming computer in the price range of 650$ The one you suggested, will that get me atleast 70fps+ If im running and recording minecraft?
Switched to the Antec One, but I don't want to make it seem like this is concrete. OP, if you don't like this case, choose one you like the look of.
Your right. Switched to the Graphics Card you recommended.
Switched motherboards. I should probably have new egg open too while looking for parts. Seems that PCPartPicker and Newegg conflict a lot.
Came up with this:
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/cG0k
To be honest, a good gaming computer will be more than $650, but this is the best you can get for that. I made some minor changes that christoi suggested, and came up with this:
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/cG0k
While recording and playing Minecraft, I would expect about 70, but generally I'm not very good with estimating fps, you may want to wait for another person to estimate for you.
Computer Specs: 4GB 1333 Mhz DDR3 RAM- 320GB 5400RPM Hard Drive- Dual Core Intel Core i5 2415M @2.3 Ghz- Intel HD 3000 Graphics- Only $1200! Yeah, I got a Mac, because I'm stoopid.Scratch that: Intel i5 2500k, 1TB 7200RPM Seagate Barracuda, Gigabyte Z68-D3H-B3, 8GB 1333Mhz DDR3 RAM, Radeon HD 6850, Running OSX.Castration is always fun by over heating alienware laptops