Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Arthur

Mac or PC and specs

Recommended Posts

FireWire

i started out on win95, i've used a couple of mac's but prefer window's 7. i won't touch window's 8 it look's nasty.

 

i sold my last gaming pc to get money toward's building myself a new one. so at the moment i'm using a packard bell laptop running window's 7 64bit, 4gb ram 500gb hdd and intel core i5 2nd gen processor running at 2.30GHz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Willow
i started out on win95, i've used a couple of mac's but prefer window's 7. i won't touch window's 8 it look's nasty.

 

i sold my last gaming pc to get money toward's building myself a new one. so at the moment i'm using a packard bell laptop running window's 7 64bit, 4gb ram 500gb hdd and intel core i5 2nd gen processor running at 2.30GHz.

I agree with the Windows 8 comment. Although I'm warming to it - Chris uses it and it looks...okay! (Believe me, I was not a fan AT ALL to being with!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Arthur
i started out on win95, i've used a couple of mac's but prefer window's 7. i won't touch window's 8 it look's nasty.

 

i sold my last gaming pc to get money toward's building myself a new one. so at the moment i'm using a packard bell laptop running window's 7 64bit, 4gb ram 500gb hdd and intel core i5 2nd gen processor running at 2.30GHz.

I would only use windows 8 on a tablet not on a desktop, really don't like the new windows interface retro. And F you Microsoft for removing start and control panel in 8. My mom upgraded to 8 she hates it so i put 7 back on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ben

I have no idea what any of you are talking about.

 

 

Mind you, i still have a nintendo64 and a saga megadrive lying around somewere. I'm not the most technically savvy guy in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Khasper

I use PC, not owned a MAC, and it started with a really old Monochrome green screen computer with dual 5.25" floppy drives. I then moved to a 8088 and then a 286 running Dos 2 and every other OS that Microsoft made through Windows 8 (Beta tested it, hated it and told my company I will not put that on any computers).

 

My Current setup is, as it changes weekly MSI MS-7596 motherboard, AMD 3300 tripple core, 8GB of RAM, I swap drives depending on what I'm doing, but have about 8TB in drive space if you add all of them up, Blu-Ray player and ASUS ENGTX550 1Gb video card.

 

I have tried Linux and it is good but I'm not a big fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Heather

My family started with an old Amiga computer. :P I used Windows 95 in elementary school, and our first family computer was a Windows ME/Millenium!  We've had all Windows PCs since then.. and my first personal laptop was Vista, and now I have Windows 7.  The only Apple product I own is my iPhone 3GS, which is cool but getting old. :(

 

Specs.. Well I'm going to do my best and find them for you.. I currently have a Dell Inspiron M5030

 

Processor: AMD Athlon ™ II P360; Dual-Core Processor 2.30 GHz; 3.00 GB of RAM (2.75 usable); 64-bit Operating System; Windows 7...

 

Oh and also!  I have used a Mac.. well actually I'm not sure if I used one.. but I've watched other people use them and I guess felt like I have! And also the above poster (Khasper) mentioned Linux too and that reminded me of when I saw some Tech smart guy showing off his Linux computer and what he could do.. it was pretty cool.  I wouldn't get it too.. not tech smart enough and I like my Windows PC :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alex

I recently ordered a new gaming pc from a scandinavian computer store. I got it yesterday (yay!) and it's great! It starts up in about 12 seconds because of the SSD it has.

 

Here are the specs:

 

 

Corsair Carbide 500R Midi Tower Hvid
Silver Power SP-SS500 500W PSU
AMD FX-8120 8-Core Processor
Gigabyte GA-970A-D3, Socket-AM3+
Crucial DDR3 BallistiX Sport 1600MHz 8GB
Sapphire Radeon HD 7870 GHz 2GB GDDR5
Kingston HyperX 3K SSD 120GB 2.5"
Seagate Barracuda® 7200.12 1TB
 

I also ordered a BenQ 24" LED GL2450 screen for the rig.
 
Overall a really strong pc and I'm really happy about my purchase. I quite like Windows 8 but It takes some time to get used to :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whoknows

I started with DOS, in kinder-garden. Then, I've gone into Win 95, 98, 2000, XP, NT Workstation, Milennium Editon, Vista and 7. After my PC got blue-screened by Win 7, I got angry and switched to Ubuntu, which I've fund much user friendly for daily use (yet it still needs improvement in networking and hardware support to any prevent kernel panic). Now, I'm on Win 8, and it's not that bad, yet the UI makes it hard to get used to its environment, so I have to unpin most programs from start and leave the ones I most frequently use. Practically, you're forced to be more organized with your daily needs to make such OS more efficient to you.

 

About my setup, I remember my second PC had 32 MB of RAM, 8 MB GPU with Super Video and DVI integrated so I played Half-Life and UT 99 with no problem, a network card with LAN and phone line onbard and a soundcard for sorround sound.

 

My second PC had 128 MB of RAM, yet I had it increased to 256 RAM to support further versions from AutoCAD, but it made me worry after one year, because GTA SA needed far more than that to run properly and 64 MB of integrated graphics didn't supply the challenge.

 

Through that time, I went to an internet cafe I frequented to the point of frying a video card with Resident Evil 4. After that, computers got better to the point of using Wi-Fi for LAN parties in UT 99, GT 9400 GPUs, flat-screens and personal game controllers.

 

During that time, I had dual-core cpu with AGP video, but the OS drained much of its power (Vista) and 7 didn't do much to help. It lasted five years in my hands and I killed it with Crysis in 2007, after one month with it.

 

That's when I switced to PS3. It's too expensive and inefective to change hardware constantly for the sake of running a program, when a console makes the same with fewer resources.

 

Today, I have an HP envy m6 laptop with onboard video card with hdmi port and VGA with beatsaudio. Most of the setup comes integrated, but it's 64 bits with 8 GB of RAM and a 1 GB and half GPU. Curiously, it runs Wolfenstein 2009 maxed out and without lag at 720p. The main reason I use it for really is to reproduce anime on my 42'' display, since it handles better the Matroska container, in contrast to the PS3.

 

I don't know much about you. Even if I'm a "console peasant", why the "master race" keeps for falling in the same cycle of card iterations and CPUs. Most of Intel's tech is made today from rebuilt versions of Pentium III Xeon and versions earlier than Nehalem architecture, and NVIDIA's and ATI's products only increase their RAM (as their clocks are downgraded to less than half the power of the latest version, from the last series that was released).

 

The problem (particularly with PC) lies with RAM cards. Since components increase their RAM, rather than their speed, there's a vice involved. RAM is actually overpriced, since everyone needs it, like if it was fuel. On that base, it's easy to create an excuse and impose huge profit margins on products that may be 80 percent cheaper to manufature than what they cost in the market. Aside from that, most components that make up a PC are not even from the same manufacturer, but they're outsourced, which depending on the component and the out source may end up more expensive than self-produced. For example, only 5 manufacturers produce laptop screens, since they're expensive and complex to manufacture (something similar happens with RAM, too). If you've got the right programs, you may find where each part of your computer was made in reality, and compare prices.

 

To add, Mac Pros have gotten strangely cheap. I would usually set up 22 000 dollar computers after customization. Now, it's worth 9 000. That, with the company's switch to ATI make me curious, since SLi technology is not really good enough for improving graphics performance on heavy applications other than Crysis or GTA IV. It's sad when PC games are not optimized anymore to take advantage of the tech they have available. Even in consoles, some turn out to be quite glitched.

 

I still find more important for the environment to be functional and eye-candy, rather the buffed-bloated up and graphics-whore. This generation of computers and game consoles has taught me that order and planning serve better for code optimization and studying of new architectures in order to write libraries that can adapt into every equipment, rather than a set of exclusive components. Prove of that are console exclusive games and DOOM III (its code is beautifully ordered and understandable).

 

Stability really helps when it comes to programming. By the way, most programs that exist to this date are not optimized to run on multi-core architecture, since most programmers are not versed in such environment, leading to the program to eat the same amount of resources from your computer or to crash it, since it won't work the same way as single-core. Ironically, both PS3 and XBOX 360 are on the same problem. The first uses a completely different language with six cores for development (part of them wasted in making up for the lacks of the RSX GPU). The 360 uses half, but if the code is not well packed, it may cause unnecesary iterations and more activity than necesary on the processor, for which the console may fry itself (as it has done six months after it was launched). Although its failure comes from poor design, it also requires care and watch, since the only improvements worth mentioning were component miniaturization to 45 nm and a programming troubleshoot that turns off the console if the temperature rises beyond recomended measures.

 

Talking about next gen, I may go for Linux (if it gets better support) or Windows (if Microsft learns about being on the user side of the computer and not the phone). In the console case, I'd prefer to stick with my PS3, since these "next-gen" consoles fall from being promising. Durango doesn't amaze me; my PC has already 8 GB of RAM. Orbis is still a mystery, for which it may be awesome or a complete failure. Wii U is only a touch-screen pad, though it seems interesting. I'd hate Microsoft or Sony for imitating their competitors and releasing the same, as they lousily did for motion controls. They should support their old harware and back catalogs.

 

As for PC, even gaming gets old. Some programs can't even run properly, because they never got the proper support to run modern hardware, and that's frustrating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Chris

I recently ordered a new gaming pc from a scandinavian computer store. I got it yesterday (yay!) and it's great! It starts up in about 12 seconds because of the SSD it has.

 

Here are the specs:

 

 

Corsair Carbide 500R Midi Tower Hvid

Silver Power SP-SS500 500W PSU

AMD FX-8120 8-Core Processor

Gigabyte GA-970A-D3, Socket-AM3+

Crucial DDR3 BallistiX Sport 1600MHz 8GB

Sapphire Radeon HD 7870 GHz 2GB GDDR5

Kingston HyperX 3K SSD 120GB 2.5"

Seagate Barracuda® 7200.12 1TB

 

I also ordered a BenQ 24" LED GL2450 screen for the rig.
 
Overall a really strong pc and I'm really happy about my purchase. I quite like Windows 8 but It takes some time to get used to :)

 

The upgrade to SSD's felt like such a huge performance increase... well, it was*!

 

I really like Windows 8. The Control Panel is just as it was in Windows 7 and there are a couple of third-party options to get the traditional start menu and task bar back. The Metro start screen doesn't bother me, in fact I think I prefer it. I'm yet to use a single metro app yet though, that part of Windows does feel a little clunky and segmented... If I had a Surface I'd probably use app's more on my desktop. Can't wait to get my hands on a Surface Pro. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alex
The upgrade to SSD's felt like such a huge performance increase... well, it was*!

 

I really like Windows 8. The Control Panel is just as it was in Windows 7 and there are a couple of third-party options to get the traditional start menu and task bar back. The Metro start screen doesn't bother me, in fact I think I prefer it. I'm yet to use a single metro app yet though, that part of Windows does feel a little clunky and segmented... If I had a Surface I'd probably use app's more on my desktop. Can't wait to get my hands on a Surface Pro. :D

Yeah - I agree.. I've heard about those third-party options and I think I'll look into that soon :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.