I've wanted an XBox 360 for at least a year now. Lately i've been debating whether to get a new PC. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages. For one, I won't have to upgrade with an XBox 360...just wait a few years and there will be a new system perhaps. Then there's a PC...which needs upgrading to stay in the "new" every 6 months to a year. Already, there is going to be a new line of CPUs from AMD and from Intel.

Basically for a decent gaming PC, it will cost me between $2,00 to $3,000...one that will play the next generation of games like Bioshock, UT3, Crysis and Far Cry 2. The computer I have right now, which is four years old, wont play those games as the system requirements are starting to exceed what I have (AMD FX 51 (2.2 ghz), 1 gb of PC 400mhz RAM with a 256 MB GeForce 5950 Ultra) and will continue for years to come. The XBox 360 has been around for almost two years and still going strong. To me, getting an XBox 360 is more economical than a PC, but I can do more on a PC like word processing, audio editing and high end gaming. I also need to get a small LCD monitor, as the Plasma TV we have at my house..is mostly my parent's, not mine (wouldn't have much time to play). Just need input from people..but I am starting to lead towards getting an XBox 360.

when you mentioned that thread about getting a new PC for school + gaming, i was thinking about just flat out recommending an xbox360 Use the geezer box for research/internet/notepad.exe and use the 360 for your gaming needs.
it's become quite a force in terms of software companies looking towards it for cross-platform revenue. I'm pretty sure Microsoft is adding more support for keyboard+mouse combos, plus you can you can get yourself a snazzy HD-DVD drive with HDMI-out on your 360Elite

___________________
Everything is beautiful. Let the music carry you. Baby I will follow you forever. Nowhere else I'd rather be when you're lying next to me. Let the music carry us together.
anti-JennyPie Alliance
SuspicionVandit: Are you God?
Paul Van Dyk 09-24-2009: No, but I can sign your sleeve under that name if you let me!

But my dad really wants a new PC...they could just get one that will still be good for games (around $2,000 I think is their budget) and I get for around $1000 an Xbox 360 and an LCD TV?

PC games give me a headache because they constantly need upgrading, patchesm, have compatibility issues. Yeah they may look nicer but you don't need to worry about that with Xbox 360.

Last edited by Spirit5 on Aug-23-2007 at 05:21

i'll get flamed, but i dont care. console games are generally dumbed-down to appeal to a much wider audience. PC games are simply better. but youre right, consoles are far more user friendly.

here's what you do.

make a list of all the great games (current and coming soon) that you want to play. work out how many are on the 360, how many are on the PC. go with whatever platform has the most titles you wish to play.

___________________

Games I wish to play...

Unreal Tournament 3
Bioshock
Prey
F.E.A.R.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
Fary Cry 2
Quake 4 (I can probably play that on my current one fine)

The only one I am not sure on is STALKER, but I am pretty sure Far Cry 2 will come out for it. I have Half Life 2 and it works fine on my current PC. I am mostly into FPS and I do prefer the Mouse + Keyboard approach vs. the Game Pads but SuspicionVandit says that they will be coming out with that combo for it.

If my parents budget is indeed $2,000 they could get a computer with a Q6600 and a GeForce 8800 GTX, giving me the ability to play new games that are PC only. The biggest thing why I gave up on gaming a few years back was due to games constantly forcing you to upgrade...like every year or so when Nvidia comes out with new cards, or every few years with Intel or AMD and CPUs.

if you love your FPS then id definitely stick with a PC. especially since i am unaware that many of those titles have made it to the 360? not that i would know obviously... UT3 is going to PS3 a year before xbox.

basically, PCs get most of the other big titles you see on the other platforms- companies are less threatened by the PC market. so you get the best of both worlds more often.

if you buy hardware that is popular you have much less chance of getting issues with things running. yes, it does happen but thats the chance you take. the added bonus is PC games are much more scalable- ie if something isnt running as well as you'd like you can make changes in the options. far too many console shooters ive seen/played suffer from bad performance in certain areas, and theres fuck all you can do about it.

you can also upgrade PCs slowly...theres no need at all to buy something new every 6 months, thats just silly. my old PC i had for 5 years and it ran beautifully, only upgrading the vid card twice. i know it would play all those games you listed, even if they ran a bit uglier.

having said all that the 360 is cheaper. but get your dad to chip in for the PC since he's the one that wants it.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN if you love your FPS then id definitely stick with a PC. especially since i am unaware that many of those titles have made it to the 360? not that i would know obviously... UT3 is going to PS3 a year before xbox. basically, PCs get most of the other big titles you see on the other platforms- companies are less threatened by the PC market. so you get the best of both worlds more often. if you buy hardware that is popular you have much less chance of getting issues with things running. yes, it does happen but thats the chance you take. the added bonus is PC games are much more scalable- ie if something isnt running as well as you'd like you can make changes in the options. far too many console shooters ive seen/played suffer from bad performance in certain areas, and theres fuck all you can do about it. you can also upgrade PCs slowly...theres no need at all to buy something new every 6 months, thats just silly. my old PC i had for 5 years and it ran beautifully, only upgrading the vid card twice. i know it would play all those games you listed, even if they ran a bit uglier. having said all that the 360 is cheaper. but get your dad to chip in for the PC since he's the one that wants it.

Well all good points. I really want my own TV eventually. As far as chipping in, they are (my parents). My dad was going to set me up with a 8800 Ultra and a 320 gb Raid 0 (160 x 2) setup, but it makes the computer almost $3,000 (from Dell). With only a 250 gb HD (and a 500 gb External we have) it would bring the price of the computer down to $2,120..quite a good deal IMO.

Also I have no idea what the motherboard is, so I have no idea in the future if it is something a new CPU will work with. The computer only has the $299 Q6600, as the QX6700 or QX6800 are both like $950 and $1,200 more. I am going with Dell because I can get a 10% student discount on it, saving me a few hundred. But $2,989 for the Raid 0 set up is a bit excessive to me. Dunno if we really need it.

And still deciding if the 8800 Ultra is really worth it, esp cause the processor itself isn't top of the line and the GTX is just slightly less than the Ultra. I can get the GTX, save some money and next year get a better card perhaps, or get the Ultra and probably wont need to upgrade for a few years. Basically I want a computer that will not force me to upgrade shortly after.

no, according to anandtech the ultra is definitely not worth it. the GTX regular is what you should go for if you can.

as for dell, im not a fan of buying brandnames, you can save a shitload of cash if you buy the parts online. some companies should piece together a PC for you if you cant do it yourself.

all current core 2 duos and quads use the same motherboard. if they change chipsets then the board will most likely change, but thats the price you pay when the companies do that. but really, PCs are so fvcking fast at the moment, i cant see myself upgrading for a very, very long time.

my whole unit cost me only $2000 AU, so you should be able to do much better than that, considering i bought mine in feb.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN no, according to anandtech the ultra is definitely not worth it. the GTX regular is what you should go for if you can. as for dell, im not a fan of buying brandnames, you can save a shitload of cash if you buy the parts online. some companies should piece together a PC for you if you cant do it yourself. all current core 2 duos and quads use the same motherboard. if they change chipsets then the board will most likely change, but thats the price you pay when the companies do that. but really, PCs are so fvcking fast at the moment, i cant see myself upgrading for a very, very long time. my whole unit cost me only $2000 AU, so you should be able to do much better than that, considering i bought mine in feb.

I can do that however I don't want to go through the hassle of that. I just like having a 10% discount on a computer that is upgradable. Yeah I can save a few hundred perhaps but the parts haven't depreciated that much. And the Ultra...(I read the review on Anandtech) might not be worth it now, but what about in the future? I am trying to put together a PC that will not force me to upgrade many of the components shortly after.

I've suggested waiting, but my dad is not sure on that...cause we may have to wait till next summer then, when more PCs will be coming with new graphics cards and CPUs. I'd rather wait and have a PC now and when the new graphic cards and CPUs become common place..I will get them. Dual Core + 8800 cards are just now starting to have games that make use of them. So Quad Core will be ahead of the game by about a year.

I know this sounds crazy, but I kinda trust a company like Dell more than some mom and pops place that pieces together PCs for you. It's almost like what CyberPower does, but they just aren't trustworthy. We were about to go with them, then I read some pretty bad reviews on their customer service and faulty parts they were given. Dell has had a reputation as well for poor customer service, but I have read reports stating they have improved, both the build of their computers and their customer service.

This will help..is having Raid 0 really worth it for games? I don't really use high level apps, just maybe audacity for recording or MixMeister for mixing, but they aren't that higher level. Basically MS Word, Power Point, 3D games (FPSs mostly) and WinAmp, Windows Media Center etc. There's enough slots on this computer for that option in the future, it just adds $400 (with a 10,000 RPM HD) on Dell's 720-Black that I am configuring. I have a Raid 0 setup on this computer, but I had no input on the configuration of it, since I didn't pay for it. I'm paying for like $1,000 of this computer.

My dad doesn't play many 3D games, so he really is going way off getting some extreme PC. He really wants to play games, but I keep telling him that his games are not ones that require even the components on this four year old PC. Most of them are strategy/war games that may require at least a 16 or 32 mb graphics card..64 mb recommended.

no RAID arrays are not worth it for games. if your PC is making use of the hard drive during a game youre in trouble i have had many friends with RAID and they've given their users nothing but issues. and these are guys that know far more about computing than i do.

tell your dad all about "supreme commander" and that'll mean he makes use of the new PC

quad cores are great, games like supcom (with some tweaking) do take full advantage of them. and theyre great to "future-proof" your PC. ive got just a dual core though and couldnt be happier.

if your dad is helping with the system i would def go PC so many great titles coming out....

___________________

Well four years ago it seems like Raid 0 were used as the GPUs were not as good as they are now. So probably it's not worth it...what about a 250 gb HD (7,200 RPM) with a 160 gb HD (10,000)? That's my set up...a little less. Or just one 250 gb HD with a 500 gb external..

Last edited by Spirit5 on Aug-23-2007 at 06:18