GameBanshee Forums

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:40 pm**

I have just spent about an hour torturing myself by looking at iMacs and the upcoming Leopard OS... *sigh*
After doing a lot of research, I've determined that were cash not an issue whenever I'm able to upgrade (I *really* hope this is soon

), I would just love to get a 24-inch iMac equipped with a Nvidia GEForce 7600 GTgraphics card. Yes, I know PCs still have the edge in gaming, but for my overall needs this setup would be just ideal.
Only one problem.... I'd be looking at over $ 2000 US...

However, were money not an issue, when my chance comes...... that is my personal dream computer.
I mean, my 6-year-old Dell P3 has been really great.. but... I'm feeling its age. *sobs*

OK, on to you, what system (custom built included) would you like to get your hot and sweaty little mitts on were finances of no concern?

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:44 pm**

Area-51 ALX system from Alienware.......:laugh:

Intel 3.2 GHz Extreme Edition Processor
ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe Motherboard
1 GB PC3200 DDR System Memory
ATI Radeon 9800 XT 256MB
(2) Seagate Barracuda 160 GB 8MB Cache Serial ATA Hard Drives
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Pro
Samsung 52/24/52/16 CD-RW/DVD Combo Drive
Plextor PX-708A 8x DVD±RW

of course money being no object..!!!

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:48 pm**

BlueSky wrote:Area-51 ALX system from Alienware.......:laugh:

From their site: "With up to 4 terabytes of storage you’ll never have to worry about storage space."

I probably don't want to know what you are planning on doing with 4 terabytes of storage....

:laugh:

lol! And I thought I was being extravagant

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:49 pm**

dragon wench wrote:From their site: "With up to 4 terabytes of storage you’ll never have to worry about storage space."

I probably don't want to know what you are planning on doing with 4 terabytes of storage.... :laugh:

lol! And I thought I was being extravagant

You did say dream machine....

:laugh:

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 7:01 pm**

Well, with this question, therein lies a problem, for whatever I could realistically say "win" in a contest of some sort would be obsolete in ten years.

So, like a man who would wish he'd always have exact change in his pocket for anything he buys, I would want a computer that automatically stays state of the art forever.

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 7:09 pm**

"Good afternoon, gentlemen. I am a HAL 9000 computer"...:laugh:

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 7:26 pm**

BlueSky wrote:"Good afternoon, gentlemen. I am a HAL 9000 computer"...:laugh:

ROFL

I can see the Newspaper headline now....
Man from "Over there" vanishes without a trace following his win of Super Computer. Investigators suspect foul play may be involved......" :laugh:

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:35 pm**

Hmm, not sure I get that joke actually....
Probably a reference to something I haven't seen, read, or heard of before.

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:39 pm**

Maybe this will help.

2001: A Space Odyssey (film - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2007 10:35 pm**

Recently bought a E6600, 4 Gig RAM, Geforce 8800 GTS w. 512MB RAM, Creative XFi soundcard and so on......
Not my "dream machine", but is decent enough and should last me a couple of years (cost about the equivalent of 2500$).
Bought Vista 64 bit and Office 2007 along with it, as well.

I do not have unrealistic dreams, but if money were no obstecal, I'd properly just have faster CPU, the graphics card in SLI (heh, as if the card needs to run in SLI

) and a couple of additional monitors, and some better RAM then the one I have.

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 12:05 am**

Those high end systems mentioned at tech sites such as [url="http://www.tomshardware.com/"]Tom's Hardware[/url] or [url="http://www.anandtech.com/"]Anandtech[/url] (Look at their guides and you know what I mean). More for longevity rather than for eye candy, in my opinion. I don't know why Gamespot advised against doing that, though. Their reasoning is that high-end systems are for those who want to play games at the highest settings. Don't ask me why. That's their point of view. Not mine.

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 2:43 am**

I must be easy to please because right now my dream computer would be the one I have now, except with a motherboard that has PCIexpress slots, a top of the range graphics card and another 1.5gb RAM

(I currently own a 4 year old Dell with a P4 processor, Intel Extreme graphics, 512mb RAM and 80GB storage space)

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:53 am**

I'd have this one:

SLI Rig of the Month - March

Not least because it is 100% silent and looks extremely cool.

Also, I respect him for combining two raptors in raid 0. That is true connoisseurship!

I should add that I recently bought a computer, which satisfies me immensely, for about 1/10 of the price of his.

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:03 am**

My feelings are similar to mr_sir's, except for one difference. I want a computer that can comfortably handle the tasks I want it to perform (without annoying pauses and wait times) while consuming as little electricity as possible. I underclock and undervolt most of my components, so it would be self-defeating for me to acquire more powerful components unless they're so efficient that they use even less power than the components I have now. Right now my biggest dilemma is whether I should buy a single core processor that only uses 35W or buy a dual core processor that uses 45W. I simply have no need for the fastest gaming/scientific modeling/video editing/etc computer and/or server in the world. And if I had one, I would get rid of it before I started spending my time trying to find new ways put it to use. In other words, the last thing I need to do right now is to spend all my free time playing cool but ultimately pointless games.

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:44 am**

VonDondu wrote:My feelings are similar to mr_sir's, except for one difference. I want a computer that can comfortably handle the tasks I want it to perform (without annoying pauses and wait times) while consuming as little electricity as possible. I underclock and undervolt most of my components, so it would be self-defeating for me to acquire more powerful components unless they're so efficient that they use even less power than the components I have now. Right now my biggest dilemma is whether I should buy a single core processor that only uses 35W or buy a dual core processor that uses 45W. I simply have no need for the fastest gaming/scientific modeling/video editing/etc computer and/or server in the world. And if I had one, I would get rid of it before I started spending my time trying to find new ways put it to use. In other words, the last thing I need to do right now is to spend all my free time playing cool but ultimately pointless games.

Have you considered a Mac Mini or equivalent? Last I read it used ~25W when idling.

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:17 am**

dragon wench wrote:I have just spent about an hour torturing myself by looking at iMacs and the upcoming Leopard OS... *sigh*

There isn't a morrowind version on the mac. That would be silly.
I suppose I'd just get the best of the best. 4 gig of RAM, Core duo etc. Computers are evolving to quickly to have a dream one. What's great today is peanuts tomorrow.

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:36 am**

Magelord648 wrote:There isn't a morrowind version on the mac. That would be silly.

Yes, I'm well aware of that,
*cough* It's called Apple - Boot Camp

And the 24-inch G5 can run a fairly decent video card too. No, it's not screaming top of the line, but it will do very nicely for my needs. When I buy computers gaming is only one issue I look at, and as I said in my first post, I have done my research, and a Mac will suit my overall needs extremely well.

I would also consider a MacPro, seeing as it's only $500 more than the 24 inch, and if I'm going to drop 2 Gs on a computer....
Plus, the MacPro is quite upgradeable, so it might be the more intelligent choice in the long run.

Further, the new Leopard OS looks like it will be very good....

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:07 pm**

I wonder why any gamer, or anybody for that matter, would want a Mac... As far as I know, lots of games don't run on them.

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:11 pm**

GawainBS wrote:I wonder why any gamer, or anybody for that matter, would want a Mac... As far as I know, lots of games don't run on them.

Check my link above. Boot Camp allows you to run Windows programmes on a Mac.

Anyway, I didn't start this thread as a Windows vs. Macs type of thing; IMO each system has its good and bad points. I just want a Mac next time round for a number of different reasons, I don't just use a computer to game and a Mac would deliver very well on my general needs.

EDIT
Incidentally, I just got off of the phone with a friend who is a casual gamer, and it transpires that he too is considering an Intel Mac as his next computer, so it's not just me

Posted: **Mon Jun 18, 2007 2:18 pm**

GawainBS wrote:I wonder why any gamer, or anybody for that matter, would want a Mac... As far as I know, lots of games don't run on them.

Macs are very powerful and if the game is available on it, it will run it well, but as DW said this isn't Windows vs Mac so this is the last I'm going to say about it.

Back to the subject.
I wouldn't mind a Mac myself. They're just pretty expensive and seeing as my paper round only earns me £7 a week I'm stuck with my measly Red Ten. If money were no obstacle I'd probably get a mac and upgrade a few things because when I looked up on them they didn't seem to come with the most powerful things.

GameBanshee Forums

The Computer you'd love to acquire were cash no obstacle

The Computer you'd love to acquire were cash no obstacle