New custom Computer: Need advice- Windows7 64bit

[SensePhoto]

Once you try Mac you'll never go back.

Yeah because you'll likely end up shooting yourself.

But seriously re-read the OP's requirements and you'll see Mac's are just totally not suited for his needs. No one buys a mac to play videogames and run Windows 7.

i disagree, i have 27" iMac with i7 processor 1gb graphics card, and app store started releasing more and more games like call of duty 4 and the quality is amazing. I have windows 7 professional running on it as well. Cant go wrong with a mac.

 

[Buckster]

Saying that it's a waste of money is a narrow minded onion.

As opposed to a broad minded pepper.

 

[Vinny]

It may be a narrow minded opinion but lets face it - it's just a machine! All it does is sit there and compute. So Windows opens up 14 seconds faster or IE, Photoshop or whatever is 2 seconds faster, I don't see the big deal. Upgrading to a newer, faster computer is something that I agree with but having an I7 vs I5 or getting 32 Gb of ram when most times you don't use anywhere near that much is useless and of course it is just my opinion.

I'm not a gamer so I don't need a expensive GPU; I'm not a professional photographer so I don't need a ton of memory to shave seconds off of Photoshop processing; I don't need to compete with Cray or IBM for the fastest and most powerful computer as I'm sure that most people don't. Yes, going from a 2.4 GHz Celeron processor with 1.25 Gb shared memory to the 2.8 GHz I5 processor which can get to 3.33 GHz if it needs to with 6 Gb memory and a 512 Mb video card is a huge difference. 6 years from now I'll buy the next middle of the road computer and probably be amazed at how speedy it is then as well.

Lets face it for what most people use their computers for you don't need a WOW computer.

Building a super computer is a waste of money IMO. In a couple of months all the components will be replaced by something else. I have an I5-760 processor thats 6 months old tops and it has been replaced by I5-2300 with slightly better specs.

My new computer has 6 Gb memory and a 512M video card. Although I don't use it for extreme anything it's plenty fast for me even using Photoshop. Everything I've read is that you need more than 4 Gb for Photoshop to run faster, I would load it with at least 8 Gb if you have the money (and obviously you do) and for gaming you need a good video card with a fast processor and a lot of memory.

As far as finding life somewhere, whatever you buy will be more powerful than what you had 3 years ago.

I have an i7-920 OC'ed to 3.8ghz and a 1gb gpu that's over two years old. It's still a lot faster than most computers out there. Those parts were basically new when I purchased them. Saying that it's a waste of money is a narrow minded onion.

 

[Vinny]

I have to ask this.

I understand being a MAC fan but what I never understood is why Apple people load Windows onto their machines - why? I would think that most if not all applications are available for both platforms.

Once you try Mac you'll never go back.

Yeah because you'll likely end up shooting yourself.

But seriously re-read the OP's requirements and you'll see Mac's are just totally not suited for his needs. No one buys a mac to play videogames and run Windows 7.

i disagree, i have 27" iMac with i7 processor and app store started releasing more and more games like call of duty 4 and the quality is amazing. I have windows 7 professional running on it as well. Cant go wrong with a mac.

 

[Buckster]

Lets face it for what most people use their computers for you don't need a WOW computer.

Let's face it, we're not "most people". People who use RAM and CPU-intensive memory-hog graphics applications processing seriously large files in a multitasking environment need all the help they can get. Photographers quite often fall into that category.

If you don't, good on you.

Me? I like to work in a fluid, intuitive manner, not stop and start hiccupping fits of the computer giving me the old "just a second" routine.

YMMV

 

[dnavarrojr]

My biggest problem with switching to a Mac is the added expense of having to repurchase over $10,000 worth of software because software companies license them separately and don't do trade-ins.

The biggest reason for spending money on the latest/greatest/fastest is longevity. Sure, it will be outdated in a few weeks or months, but a faster system today will last longer than a slower system. And you never know when your interests might change... just because you're not editing video today, doesn't mean you won't be infatuated with it tomorrow and wishing you had something that could keep up.

 

[Ken Rockwell Fan]

Where do you get your information from? Just because there are becoming less and less Pc Games on the Shelfs dosent mean there arent any games being made for pc. The Companys out there that are producing games found that us pc gamers prefer to download the games,meaning,when we format our drives or build a new Pc we can download the games over night,and they'll auto install.Not only that,i prefer the higher quality graphics you get on a pc comapred to your Xbox or playstaion.

How about NPD, Tom's Hardware, IGN, Here's a good article from Tony over at Gamers Hell PC Gaming is Dying - ( Review, Preview, Article, Interview, Q&A ) - GamersHell.com

Here's the numbers breakdown.....

U.S. retail sales of video games, which includes portable and console hardware, software and accessories, generated revenues of close to $19.66 billion, an 8 percent decline over the $21.4 billion generated in 2008. Retail sales in the PC game software industry also experienced declines, with revenues down 23 percent, generating $538 million in 2009. The total console, portable and PC game software industry generated $10.5 billion, an 11 percent decline vs. the $11.7 billion generated in 2008.
“December sales broke all industry records and underscores the incredible value consumers find in computer and video games even in a down economy,” said Michael D. Gallagher, president and CEO of the Entertainment Software Association, the trade group which represents U.S. computer and video game publishers. “This is a very strong way to transition into 2010. I anticipate these solid sales numbers to continue upward through 2010 with a pipeline full of highly-anticipated titles.”
Aside from portable hardware which experienced a 6 percent increase in revenue in 2009, all video game categories experienced declines, with the largest decline coming from console hardware (-13 percent). Console software and portable software both experienced declines of 10 percent, while video game accessories experienced a 1 percent decline.

"When we started the last decade, video game industry sales, including PC games, totaled $7.98B in 2000," said Anita Frazier, industry analyst, The NPD Group. "In ten years, the industry has changed dramatically in many ways, but most importantly it was grown over those years by more than 250 percent at retail alone. Considering there are many new sources of revenue including subscriptions and digital distribution, industry growth is even more impressive."

$500 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the 10 billion that consoles generated in 2009. GL with that overpriced SLI rig. Been there done that. The ability to download games doesn't change the fact that every year less and less new titles are being released on PC because gaming companies understand that consoles are the better vehicle for making money.

 

[SensePhoto]

I have to ask this.

I understand being a MAC fan but what I never understood is why Apple people load Windows onto their machines - why? I would think that most if not all applications are available for both platforms.

I use Microsoft Money and microsoft office in general, plus y not? This way you have best of both worlds

 

[Vinny]

As I stated I am not a professional and my new computer works quickly enough with Photoshop. It may not be the fastest, so far it hasn't hiccuped nor does it get bogged down. I am also not processing 200 photos and do understand the need for those of you who actually do need to have that type of computer. I would imagine that quite a few people who visit this site are not in the category of what you are describing.

Lets face it for what most people use their computers for you don't need a WOW computer.

Let's face it, we're not "most people". People who use RAM and CPU-intensive memory-hog graphics applications processing seriously large files in a multitasking environment need all the help they can get. Photographers quite often fall into that category.

If you don't, good on you.

Me? I like to work in a fluid, intuitive manner, not stop and start hiccupping fits of the computer giving me the old "just a second" routine.

YMMV

 

[Buckster]

...do understand the need for those of you who actually do need to have that type of computer.

Cool.

I would imagine that quite a few people who visit this site are not in the category of what you are describing.

Can you also imagine that quite a few ARE? Can you also imagine that the person who asked for advice MIGHT even be one of them?

And, as has been pointed out by others, it's not just about what it can do today, or what we do with it today. Which will be an effective boat anchor sooner, as more memory and CPU intensive applications come out that we want to use? As our interests change? As our needs change?

And finally, what's it to you if someone wants to drive a BMW while you're satisfied with a Yugo?

 

[table1349]

I have to ask this.

I understand being a MAC fan but what I never understood is why Apple people load Windows onto their machines - why? I would think that most if not all applications are available for both platforms.

A Mac machine is nothing special in the hardware world. Granted Apple uses quality components, but it is a still a computer. What makes it special and different is the OS. It is Unix based, a simple, secure, versatile, and stable system that can run virtually any platform along with it. There are some applications that companies, like Microsoft, have not written in Mac code. Publisher for one and until recently Outlook. Outlook is now available with Office 11, professional for Mac.

I run Windows XP on my 17" MPB along side Snow Leopard, just for Publisher as I will not pay for Quark. While Quark is the premiere publishing software, at $799.00 for Quark Express and upwards of $12,000.00 for the full blown Quark Publishing modules, it is more expensive than I am willing to pay. :mrgreen:

Plus with a simple emulator I can run them side by side and take work from one to the other, such as something typed up on Word for Mac and copy and paste it into Publisher running under XP.

 

[CCericola]

I'm a Mac, but it is mostly because macs were what we used in college and all my adobe software is mac. My husband is a software developer and he's a PC. He even bought a Microsoft jumper for our newborn so I countered with a white "iPood" t-shirt.

It doesn't really matter which system you buy, It all comes down to what YOU like. If you don't mind spending the money for the best and fastest go ahead, more power to you.

My only recommendation is RAM. If you are using Photoshop get as much RAM as possible. Photoshop uses insane amounts of it.

 

[Vinny]

Yep, I can imagine a lot of things. And you are 100% right it is no concern of mine what anyone else gets. And next time you get stuck in traffic look around, all brands of cars are there with you!

...do understand the need for those of you who actually do need to have that type of computer.

Cool.

I would imagine that quite a few people who visit this site are not in the category of what you are describing.

Can you also imagine that quite a few ARE? Can you also imagine that the person who asked for advice MIGHT even be one of them?

And, as has been pointed out by others, it's not just about what it can do today, or what we do with it today. Which will be an effective boat anchor sooner, as more memory and CPU intensive applications come out that we want to use? As our interests change? As our needs change?

And finally, what's it to you if someone wants to drive a BMW while you're satisfied with a Yugo?

 

[table1349]

I'm a Mac, but it is mostly because macs were what we used in college and all my adobe software is mac. My husband is a software developer and he's a PC. He even bought a Microsoft jumper for our newborn so I countered with a white "iPood" t-shirt.

It doesn't really matter which system you buy, It all comes down to what YOU like. If you don't mind spending the money for the best and fastest go ahead, more power to you.

My only recommendation is RAM. If you are using Photoshop get as much RAM as possible. Photoshop uses insane amounts of it.

While Ram is important, just as useful is having a second, fairly free hard drive to use for you scratch disk.

 

[JustAnEngineer]

With a modern 64-bit operating system and 64-bit applications, you can have oodles of RAM available. This lets you keep the data that you're working with in memory instead of constantly swapping out to disk. With 2x4 GiB of quality DDR3 memory going for just $70, there's no reason to shortchange yourself on RAM.
$70 with free shipping