$200 To Blow On Computer Stuff

General Discussion

Agree. Get the largest monitor with highest resolution that you can. I've been using 3x 24" 1920x1200 Dell Ultrasharp LCDs in Eyefinity. Just upgraded to 30" 2560x1600 Dell Ultrasharp and 1 24", plus two other 24" displays on a 2nd computer.

What a MASSIVE waste of money. Please ignore him and get a normal 1920x1080 TFT panel LCD. IPS are not made for gaming, and you won't see any differences in-game.

Most ignorant statement of the year. I've played plenty of games on 1920x1080 TN-film TFT, and if you're talking about ghosting, it doesn't exist on the 2560x1600 30" Ultrasharp. I've tried to see it - doesn't exist. And 60Hz is plenty as long as you're not trying to get 3D gaming.
Get an SSD hard drive, best upgrade u can make for that money and your system.
JUST my opinon. you need to double that ram. and upgrade that PSU.. 550. $ 200 to spend depending on your cooling situtation i pick out a beter airflow case+PSU (least a 750), and ram is cheap upgrade it. or if the case is good for airflow. get a coolermater tx3 or a hyper 212 get a extra fan for it. PSU and ram. and maybe slightly overclock your cpu even tho its not needed. but either way. i highly doubt your getting your computer full potential with that small 550. but if im wrong a bigger moniter wouldnt hurt either. im aiming to get the 10mil to 1 24inch off new egg like $179 with a $20 mail in rebate.

HAF 932 self modded case.
AMD phenom II x4 3.2ghz (sometimes i OC to 3.7ghz)
Zalman 9900nt
12 gig's of ddr3 1333hz
biostar TA880 bg+
XFX 5770 1gig custom cooler and OC to a 900mhz core clock 1400hz memory
750 ultra PSU

55inch 240hz phillips 2mil to 1
37inch vizio 120 hz 1mil to 1
and a 20inch proview POS i got form walmarts few years back.

yes i run all 3. depending if family wants to watch something i just click and drag what they want to watch to the correct view station.

and yes i game on all 3.
Just save the damn money.

$200 from what you have seems pretty pointless to me. If you can do a massive upgrade later this year, why even get a throwaway monitor? Put the $200 towards something nice like a Dell U3011. 2560x1600 is the single most noticible difference you can make value-per-dollar and will blow you away. This replaced my 55" Sony LED TV for gaming and I haven't looked back.

For those suggesting a bigger PSU.. extra unused power is extra unnecessary power. If the system is stable under load, leave it alone.

I wouldn't bother upgrading your tower until the nVidia 600 series cards at the earliest.
Just save the damn money.

$200 from what you have seems pretty pointless to me. If you can do a massive upgrade later this year, why even get a throwaway monitor? Put the $200 towards something nice like a Dell U3011. 2560x1600 is the single most noticible difference you can make value-per-dollar and will blow you away. This replaced my 55" Sony LED TV for gaming and I haven't looked back.

For those suggesting a bigger PSU.. extra unused power is extra unnecessary power. If the system is stable under load, leave it alone.

I wouldn't bother upgrading your tower until the nVidia 600 series cards at the earliest.

Amen. I was one of the first of those I knew to step up to 24" 1920x1200 about 7 years ago. Upgrading to 2560x1600 felt like a much larger improvement from 1920x1200 than the 1920x1200 felt over the 22" 2048x1536 Mitsubishi 2060u Diamond Pro I was using back in 2004.
Anyone who says IPS displays are a waste of money don't like their eyes.

I love my u2410, and if I'm going to be staring at something for anywhere from say, 5 to 15 hours in a day, I want it to look good. I can't stand regular displays with color and light distortion, it's extremely annoying.

I'd love to upgrade to the 30", but I'm broke, and then I'd have to settle for the framerate hit unless I upgraded to a superbeast graphics card setup. But man, if I had the money for both, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
Anyone who says IPS displays are a waste of money don't like their eyes.

I love my u2410, and if I'm going to be staring at something for anywhere from say, 5 to 15 hours in a day, I want it to look good. I can't stand regular displays with color and light distortion, it's extremely annoying.

I'd love to upgrade to the 30", but I'm broke, and then I'd have to settle for the framerate hit unless I upgraded to a superbeast graphics card setup. But man, if I had the money for both, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Exactly. The only drawback (other than price) to IPS over TN-film is a slightly slower gray to gray refresh rate. Guess what? There's virtually no noticeable difference between 7ms and 2ms - you don't see ghosting with either. Refresh rate is a marketing gimmick over more important other factors today, like color depth. It's like people thinking megapixels on a camera are the main factor of determining quality. Anyone who knows anything about DSLRs know this is a marketing joke. My ancient 24" (Dell 2405FPW Ultrasharp from 2004) was around 20ms, and it had SLIGHT ghosting. My IPS 2408, 2410, and 3011 Ultrasharps have NO visible ghosting, and ALL have better color representation than TN-film displays.

Edit:
Just compare Hz rate to gray to gray refresh rate. 60Hz is 16.67 ms per refresh. 75Hz is 13.33 ms per refresh. This further demonstrates that gray to gray refresh rates under about 7ms have no impact on visible refresh rates in the 60-75Hz range. Personally, I'd rather have a constant 60Hz (60fps) on a much better color depth, viewing angle, and contrast ratio at 2560x1600 than to wash out my picture on a cheap TN-film display with higher (and completely useless) refresh rates while also having worse picture quality.
I only sugested a larger PSU becuase with the set up he/she has there system is limited. personally i couldnt care less. about how nice a monitor is. everything i run on is 60fps or better. i dont like being limited. and planon going to a 1200w PSU soon myself. decpite i dont need it. i rather make sure i have enough power / or ram for future. friend of mine that has a gaming machine i built in 1999. still runs and only thing thats changed is grafix card. i built to last. not burn up in some useless epic contest of who can see what better.
Well, with your setup, I might invest in a 64gb SSD. Or upgrade my ram to 8gb (unless yer running a 32-bit OS, which is strange because you have a quad-core) So if you don't have windows 7, then maybe you should get that ;)
you don't have much to spend, so new cpu.. is out of the question.. i'd say spend it on a SSD
10/09/2011 03:27 AMPosted by Teklow
and upgrade that PSU.. 550. $ 200 to spend depending on your cooling situtation i pick out a beter airflow case+PSU (least a 750)


No. Case maybe, but PSU is fine.

10/09/2011 01:56 PMPosted by ViNtaGeRiFF
Well, with your setup, I might invest in a 64gb SSD.

Why do people insist on saying "invest" when it comes to spending money on computer hardware for gaming that will be worth less in 6 months? That' not investing. That's spending. Your mentality is that of politicians who say "invest" when they simply mean "spend."
Im waiting just a little long b4 i get a SSD . but thats new stuff i never really considered and im very interested in it. but as to witch brand is good ehhhhh not sure yet. leaning towards the Gskill brand or kingston or patriot. My other computer i have has a 550w PSU from coolermaster thats approx 6 years old. still works. i upgraded to the 750 becuase i knew i was getting a new case with larger and more fan's and the custom mods im doing will be power consuming. but nothing wrong with a little over kill. using only my 20inch monitor for now. other computer is my media computer. and now with all the upgrades im getting to this case and computer in near future its all in preps for this game. i had 4gig's of ram. bought another 8 for $60.. didnt realize 12 is too much for my needs. but i guess it doesnt hurt.

better to have it and not need it then need it and not have it =)
10/09/2011 02:11 PMPosted by Zandantilus
Well, with your setup, I might invest in a 64gb SSD.

Why do people insist on saying "invest" when it comes to spending money on computer hardware for gaming that will be worth less in 6 months? That' not investing. That's spending. Your mentality is that of politicians who say "invest" when they simply mean "spend."


Okay Mr. Politico, let me break it down for you.

Invest is defined as :
1)Expend money with the expectation of achieving a profit or material result by putting it into financial schemes, shares, or property, or...: "getting workers to invest in private pension funds"; "the company is to invest $12 million in its new manufacturing site"

2)Devote (one's time, effort, or energy) to a particular undertaking with the expectation of a worthwhile result.

Now, if the only definition of it was 1), you'd have a case, but 2) is where you fall short. By investing in an SSD (devoting one's time/effort at work, thereby allowing $200 to be available to spend), he will have superior load times (the worthwhile result, thereby effecting his gaming experience, etc). Now you could argue that investing in such a trivial endeavor as upgrading one's computer isn't a great investment at all and go on to state your reasons, but everyone has their hobby (and you would also be using our new word of the day; invest).

Furthermore, your argument seems to lean more towards "why buy that today when something better will replace it tomorrow" (in essence, also dropping the price of said product). If this is true, I find it hard to believe you are even able to snipe my curious placement of the word invest because in order to do so, you would of had to invest in a computer that by based on the rationale above, was outdated the second you bought it.

Politicians do in fact throw the word invest around, but they *usually* do it when using the above 1) definition of invest. Cash for clunkers and the ethanol program sure turned out to be great investments.. not.

Bottom line is, you can invest in a lot of things and it doesn't have to literally mean spend money to make money. You can invest time into a relationship, MONEY into a hobby, or money into a 401k (and thus pleasing YOUR definition of investment).

If you're not buying a monitor i think you should be good with those settings already, i have a similar one, slightly worse even and i can run games pretty nicely. And it won't be outdated, because games are starting to stay static. This is happening mostly because the consoles are not taking it anymore for quite a while already and there won't be a new generation in at least a year and a half. That's why the 8800gt lasted so long as a solid gpu. Because PS2 was already outdated. And that's what i think is occuring now. So i would say you should either buy the monitor you want or just save the money for something else or this even if i am wrong. But i don't think i am.
Well, with your setup, I might invest in a 64gb SSD.

Why do people insist on saying "invest" when it comes to spending money on computer hardware for gaming that will be worth less in 6 months? That' not investing. That's spending. Your mentality is that of politicians who say "invest" when they simply mean "spend."


you're right and you're wrong. investing means, as i understand it, spending to get a return. so if the benefits you get from spending money on something outweigh the money for you (ie. you buy a SSD.. !@#$ goes faster... you save time.. your time is worth more to you than money), then there is no problem calling it investing.
10/09/2011 01:45 PMPosted by Teklow
I only sugested a larger PSU becuase with the set up he/she has there system is limited. personally i couldnt care less. about how nice a monitor is. everything i run on is 60fps or better. i dont like being limited. and planon going to a 1200w PSU soon myself. decpite i dont need it. i rather make sure i have enough power / or ram for future. friend of mine that has a gaming machine i built in 1999. still runs and only thing thats changed is grafix card. i built to last. not burn up in some useless epic contest of who can see what better.


It's not limited by the PSU unless it crashes under load. What you mean to say is he may not be able to upgrade components much without a bigger PSU. It's stupid to get a PSU just in case you upgrade components months down the road - save the damn money and get the PSU you require then. You don't even know if they're going to have the same cable/sockets at that time!

Getting a 1200w PSU when you don't need it is a bloody waste of money and has nothing to do with making a computer last longer. By waiting until you need the components you get better components for equal or less money. And a computer that still works from '99 isn't all that impressive - that's what, just prior to the P3-800's and ill fated RAMBUS I think - and can't do squat today.

The only time I would upgrade a PSU in a system w/out additional components that need a new one is if I can trace a system instability to it or have reason to believe it's about to die and take my components with it. And I would get the most economical PSU that provides enough stable power that I can find taking into account my upgrade plans in the next 6 months (no more - things change too quick).
10/08/2011 12:59 AMPosted by Chrisco
I'm definitely convinced about getting a larger monitor. Now I'm torn between a 23" and 24" LED. There's a $50 price difference, and I'm not so sure if the 1 inch is worth that much to me.


I'd take the one with a smaller bezel (either that, or the one that can be easily modified later down the road to have a smaller bezel). Smaller bezel = no downside (that I know of), and is nice for Eyefinity/Surround setups :p

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum