Just throwing this out there, but a lot of modern games are Windows only. It may be a good idea to dual-boot XP or 7 to prevent those compatibility issues from arising later.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Huan Truong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > I'm thinking of building a new system, which I do relatively rarely. > Since my > > kids are getting older, it would probably be good if it could play games > now > > and in the future. I'm wondering if anyone who's looked into components > > recently has any advice. > > > > I've done some quick searches online and found recommendations for, say, > > Intel Core i5-2500K processor and NVidea GTX 560 ti which seemed to be a > good > > balance between price and power for the range that I'm looking in. I > haven't > > gotten my brain around the choice of motherboards yet. > > > > Any recommendations out there for these or other components, either good > > brands or specific models? I'd also be interested in anyone who's had a > good > > experience with companies that will do the assembly for you---I like the > > assembly, but it's hard with two kids and not a lot of time when they're > not > > awake. > > > > I've always found NVidea more stable than ATI in Linux, but I don't know > if > > that's true any more---I'd be interested in whether anyone had recent > > experience. > If I had a choice, I would go with Intel Integrated Graphics. It always > worked flawlessly since three years ago (with all fancy graphics > acceleration capabilities). ATi seems better than NVidia but is still a > hassle when it comes to multi monitors and hot plugging support (which > might be less of a problem with your desktop, as it's a fire-and-forget > thing). > The new Sandy Bridge has the GPU built-in and you can always plug a card > in later if you find the Intel Graphics too weak so I don't see any reason > to buy a discrete graphics card at the beginning unless you want to do some > CUDA calculation that requires a NVidia card. > If you're looking for processors, this link might be helpful for you. > http://ark.intel.com/products/family/59134 > For the processor, I am currently having a 2100T ( > http://ark.intel.com/products/53423) which has the thermal design of 35 > Watts. For i processors: All the T models consumes about 1/3 what a normal > processor in the same range does, which reduces heat, fan size, and noise > and is not much more expensive, but can neither overclock nor have VT > directed IO. All the K models can over clock but doesn't have > Virtualization for directed I/O which can reduce your performance when you > run virtualization and want the virtual machine to use physical I/O devices > directly (increased performance?). All the naked model can't overclock but > has VT directed IO. > My i3 is plenty fast for my Android compilation (which totaling about 6GB > in code, and the whole thing compiles in < 2hrs for the first time, and 20 > minutes for subsequent compilations). I *personally* think that slower > processor doesn't have that much of an impact compared to a slower hard > drive (SSD all the way. I have an Intel SSD which served me well so far... > almost 2 years!). > My motherboard is the cheapest one I could find on Newegg with decent > ratings and solid caps/whatever capacitors that they advertise that works > with Sandy Bridge, it seems like it's ASUS branded. > > > > > > -- > > Scott Thatcher > > Associate Professor of Mathematics > > Truman State University > > [email protected] > >
