Gateway Intel Core 2 Quad-A decent Gaming system?

[warden30]

I'm considering my options as far as purchasing (or building) a budget gaming desktop for under $1000. One system that caught my eye, and would constitute the easy route, is a Gateway system for about $830.00.

Gateway Intel Core 2 Quad 8200 2.33GHz
RAM 8GB DDR3 SDRAM
Hard Drive Speed/Capacity 1TB SATA
Optical Drives 18x DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti Drive
Video Memory 1GB
ATI Radeon HD4650


What sort of performance could i ecpect out of this system. I would consider myself to be an entry-level gamer looking for high-end settings for online mmrpg's mostly.

[ebackhus]

I sure wouldn't buy it.

It's better to build your own because it can cost you less with the benefits of better internals.

[dwalk1989]

If I was going to buy a pre-built one I'd buy one of the i7 models that HP have, or something from the Dell Outlet.

[ebackhus]

Two more brands I wouldn't ever buy.

[dwalk1989]

warden30, ebackhus just prefers to build custom computers for himself, which is fine. There isn't anything wrong with pre-built computers from companies such as Gateway, you just have to know what you are getting into.

I'm pretty sure you can get an i7-processor computer for about that much, though, so I'd look around a bit more.

[ebackhus]

Even if I didn't have the choice of building myself I'd avoid those brands. 16 years of experience ought to count for something.

[warden30]

Thanks for the advice, looks like I have some research ahead of me before I jump and buy anything.

As far as videocards go, I was looking at another system with a Sapphire Radeon HD4890 iGig card. I could probably save about $100 if I went with a HD4850 1Gig. Considering I will be playing mostly current and upcoming inline mmrpg's, you're advice is that What I would not see any difference in fps performance?
These games do require high levels of graphic texture, shading, water effects ect. Would'nt it make sense to go with the higher-end card, and avoid me having to look at an upgrade a year from now?

[koala]

Go for the 512mb HD4850. It's cheaper than the top-of-the-range HD4890, but still very capable of playing games at high settings with good framerates. You only need the 1gb card if you play on a large monitor at extremely high resolution. The extra memory is only used for hi-res textures, so going for the 512mb card will be cheaper and will have no impact on performance.

It's difficult to say how long a card will last before it needs to be upgraded for new games. In just a few weeks time there will be new DirectX 11 cards available that will outperform both the 4850 and 4890. Then a few months later there will be faster cards with more features that will supposedly mean we all have to upgrade again. It's a constant battle to keep up to date, so the best advice is to buy the card that will let you play current games for the next year or so, and then upgrade when you feel your card is no longer satisfactory.

I still use a 512mb 8800GT. I've been meaning to upgrade it for the last 12 months, especially after reading all the reviews for the new high-powered graphics cards, but it still plays all the latest games at high resolution, high graphics settings with all the bells and whistles turned on with no lag at all. The HD4850 is better than my 8800GT, so I think you'll be ok with it for quite a while before you need a new one.

[warden30]

By going with a 512 mb card I will save $150, and that makes me very happy.

I have my eye on a Phenon based system that is offered with a X3 720 2.8GHz 7.5M, a X4 940 3.0GHz 8M, and X4 955 3.2GHz 8M with a $100 to $200 differance. How important would it be to go with the to X4 CPU than the X3 in you're oppinion?

[Mcninjaguy]

I don't think many games use triple core CPU's. I would either stick with a Dual Core or go for a quad. Just rember the new Phenom II's are very overclockable so you should be able to get a Phenom 2 X4 940 at 3 ghz to around 3.6 ghz or maybe higher.