# Gaming PC



## zxspectrum (Jul 2, 2015)

I plays a few games on my laptop, even though that's not what i was planning on doing with it - it's just a happy bonus!

However Laptops aren't really ideal and I do get concerned, perhaps unjustly, over CPU temperatures when playing. You can only do so much to address this with a laptop.

I'm playing games that, buy today's standards are old. The newest game is Rome 2 which I can juuuuust about play (would love to have a goat Atilla but that ain't going to happen). I'm playing Starcraft 2 (spawn more overlords) and Dawn of War 2 (spawn more chaos) and some Civ 5 (best game series ever).

So anyone know where I could find a cheap desktop pc that can run those games without needing to be super modern and thus really expensive, because I've no idea where to begin looking for such a thing. How much would a reasonable price for such a machine even be?

Thanks.


----------



## Jackobi (Jul 2, 2015)

You could probably pick up a low-spec, gaming desktop for a couple of hundred quid, although adding in a monitor and other peripherals might be a push at that price.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Jul 2, 2015)

You don't need much CPU or more than 4GB of RAM (8GB would be nice but not mandatory). A cheap GPU should be ok, they aren't that new.

If you're technically minded you can build your own. Or there are some places (not many) that have sensibly balanced gaming machines. Don't believe the hype, an i3 is a great gaming chip, an i5 is more than you need for AAA titles and an i7 is a waste.


----------



## zxspectrum (Jul 2, 2015)

I don't know where to find what I need. That's why I'm asking


----------



## Quartz (Jul 2, 2015)

What is your budget? Building your own is very easy and gives great satisfaction, but at the low end you'll likely get more for your money by buying a ready-built system simply because the companies pay much less for their Windows licenses. At the high end, it's cheaper to build it yourself.

Do think about things like size and noise. Not everyone has the space for a big ATX case, and if you're sharing a room, then others may object to a noisy PC.

I'd go for an Intel i5 with 8 GB and a modest GPU. Games these days are increasingly console ports and expect multiple cores and 8 GB RAM.

Looking at ebuyer.com and going for cheapness without cutting too much on quality:

RAM: 8 GB DDR3 RAM: < £40
Case: Coolermaster Elite 110: £34 (ITX)
Motherboard: Asrock or MSI ITX ~£50
CPU: Intel i5 £130+ or i3 £80-£100 or Celeron < £50
Monitor: 21.5" ~£75 or 24" ~£100
OS: Windows 7 £70
GPU: short Geforce 750 Ti ~£100
PSU: Seasonic 430W  ~£40
HDD: 1 TB ~£40

Add in keyboard, mouse, and possibly external optical drive, though you can install Windows off a USB key. 

That's around £500-600 all told. If you have an extra £150 go for the Geforce 970 (note that you'll need a short one to fit in that case). Or you can splash out on a top of the range AMD Fury X GPU for £650 or so.  I built a box based on the above for my nephew as a home server and Minecraft server (no monitor, no GPU, different Windows license).

I would advise you to not scrimp on the PSU: the rest of the PC depends upon it and a no-name POS will bite you in the longer term.


----------



## zxspectrum (Jul 2, 2015)

Bob_the_lost said:


> You don't need much CPU or more than 4GB of RAM (8GB would be nice but not mandatory). A cheap GPU should be ok, they aren't that new.
> 
> If you're technically minded you can build your own. Or there are some places (not many) that have sensibly balanced gaming machines. Don't believe the hype, an i3 is a great gaming chip, an i5 is more than you need for AAA titles and an i7 is a waste.



Ironically my laptop had ask the specs/I just can't help fretting about how hot it gets! That cost me £250 and I'm not in s position to spend more.... Maybe I should look again at one of these new fangled consoles even though I can't play the games I mentioned


----------



## zxspectrum (Jul 2, 2015)

Quartz said:


> What is your budget? Building your own is very easy and gives great satisfaction, but at the low end you'll likely get more for your money by buying a ready-built system simply because the companies pay much less for their Windows licenses. At the high end, it's cheaper to build it yourself.
> 
> Do think about things like size and noise. Not everyone has the space for a big ATX case, and if you're sharing a room, then others may object to a noisy PC.
> 
> ...


Thanks but that's more than i can spare and i have no experience building hardware.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Jul 2, 2015)

zxspectrum said:


> Ironically my laptop had ask the specs/I just can't help fretting about how hot it gets! That cost me £250 and I'm not in s position to spend more.... Maybe I should look again at one of these new fangled consoles even though I can't play the games I mentioned


The main difference between a normal machine and a gaming machine is the graphic card. The CPU and RAM can be a problem if they are really low but its the GPU that matters.


----------



## zxspectrum (Jul 2, 2015)

Bob_the_lost said:


> The main difference between a normal machine and a gaming machine is the graphic card. The CPU and RAM can be a problem if they are really low but its the GPU that matters.


Indeed. But i've noticed a lot of games use the cpu a lot more than perhaps they ought.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jul 2, 2015)

zxspectrum said:


> So anyone know where I could find a cheap desktop pc that can run those games without needing to be super modern and thus really expensive, because I've no idea where to begin looking for such a thing. How much would a reasonable price for such a machine even be?
> 
> Thanks.



Fierce PC on EBay sell some good value machines.

This would handle some serious gaming:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Fierce-Z1...736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item2330696480

Only catch is no operating system or monitor. But it's not that hard to find a cheap copy of windows and monitors are cheap as chips these days.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 2, 2015)

Wolveryeti said:


> This would handle some serious gaming:



Not with an Nvidia GT 640 it won't. A GTX 750 (not Ti) is about the minimum I'd recommend for enjoyable HD gaming.



zxspectrum said:


> Indeed. But i've noticed a lot of games use the cpu a lot more than perhaps they ought.



This is a good thing.


----------



## zxspectrum (Jul 2, 2015)

Quartz said:


> Not with an Nvidia GT 640 it won't. A GTX 750 (not Ti) is about the minimum I'd recommend for enjoyable HD gaming.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a good thing.


Maybe so, but all i know is that on my laptop the GPU termperature is way lower than the CPU.


----------



## zxspectrum (Jul 2, 2015)

Wolveryeti said:


> Fierce PC on EBay sell some good value machines.
> 
> This would handle some serious gaming:
> 
> ...


I use my tv for a monitor when gaming since it has hdmi.

not sure about windows. pissing about with pirate versions is always a pain.

Good catch though, thoguhi notice it doesn't have wifi.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jul 2, 2015)

zxspectrum said:


> I use my tv for a monitor when gaming since it has hdmi.
> 
> not sure about windows. pissing about with pirate versions is always a pain.
> 
> Good catch though, thoguhi notice it doesn't have wifi.


WiFi dongles are mad cheap tho. And I was thinking OEM version of windows not pirate.

Or this place - offers downloadable isos of windows and a product key for 25 quid

http://itrevive.co.uk/windows-7-hom...P7wNrGkhiGHfmNpHW-pIq6gVe_S_mFnn98RoCp8rw_wcB


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Jul 2, 2015)

zxspectrum said:


> Maybe so, but all i know is that on my laptop the GPU termperature is way lower than the CPU.


That means almost nothing. In fact there's a good chance that your GPU is IN your CPU if you're using an i3. Temperature is not a measure of performance or load.


----------



## Epona (Jul 2, 2015)

Quartz said:


> Not with an Nvidia GT 640 it won't. A GTX 750 (not Ti) is about the minimum I'd recommend for enjoyable HD gaming.



Indeed, one only needs look at the Passmark benchmark charts (I find these a pretty useful guide when comparing performance and cost) to see that the GT 640 is way way down the list.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GT+640

I think a lot of people don't realise that the numbering is not always sequential, and think something with the number 640 must be only slightly not as good as something with a slightly higher number, when in fact they are in different dimensions in terms of gaming (there has been similar confusion with AMD/ATI number sequences too).


----------



## zxspectrum (Jul 2, 2015)

Bob_the_lost said:


> That means almost nothing. In fact there's a good chance that your GPU is IN your CPU if you're using an i3. Temperature is not a measure of performance or load.


Surely greater load = greater temperature?


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Jul 2, 2015)

zxspectrum said:


> Surely greater load = greater temperature?


Yes, if all other things are equal. However GPUs and CPUs are either different sections of the chip, or more commonly different chips entirely. The position of the thermistor that measures the temperature of each are different and the thermal limit for the chips vary heavily. You can't compare CPU and GPU temperatures and say which is the limiting factor. For that you need other measures.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 2, 2015)

If your on a tight budget you can get second hand gaming PCs on eBay that are a few years old, but still much more powerful then the average laptop due to much better GPUs.


----------



## Quartz (Jul 2, 2015)

Epona said:


> Indeed, one only needs look at the Passmark benchmark charts (I find these a pretty useful guide when comparing performance and cost) to see that the GT 640 is way way down the list.



Here's a comparison of the 640, 750, and 750 Ti.



> G3D Mark 1287 3248 3688



The 750 Ti is almost 3x as fast, and the 750 is about 2.5x as fast.


----------



## zxspectrum (Jul 3, 2015)

Thanks, but I think i might stick with my laptop for now. I've set the power management to maximum saving which seems to have eased the load on the cpu without affecting my ability to spawn more overlords or be molested by tyranids in dawn of war 2.

Maybe if i saves up me pocket money I might be able to afford something super duper.

Or just wait till console prices stop being ridiculous.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 3, 2015)

Tbf for the style of games your talking about, PC is a better choice


----------



## zxspectrum (Jul 5, 2015)

Global Stoner said:


> Tbf for the style of games your talking about, PC is a better choice


Sadly, true.

And it would be nice to have a machine, one day, that can play Total War Warhammer.


----------



## Epona (Jul 5, 2015)

zxspectrum said:


> Sadly, true.
> 
> And it would be nice to have a machine, one day, that can play Total War Warhammer.



If you eventually want a gaming PC but can't afford one as good as you would like right away then just put a bit of cash away towards it now and again.
I'm by no means well off (some tough months and some OK, financially speaking) but as PC building/upgrading and gaming is both my and my husband's pretty much only hobby that requires any cash, it works out as a cheap hobby over the long term compared to some interests.  Bonus is that with Steam sales and Humble Bundles you can often buy games a lot cheaper than for consoles (even taking into account used game sales for consoles), so over a period of time the cost kind of evens out, even if a PC requires slightly higher initial outlay.  

It is definitely worth learning a bit about how to build and maintain/upgrade a PC yourself, it is usually a lot cheaper to do work on it yourself and can be quite rewarding


----------

