I currently have an eMachines and this thing sucks. it's dying and has been for a while now. For one thing, the computer cannot use sleep or hibernation. it will just shut down when attempting. It also will not turn back on after it has been shut down, you have to un-plug it and try turning it on again until it finally goes on. (i usually just keep it on, haven't shut it down in about a year now)
We have sent the thing back to the manufacturers 3 times now to fix it and they tried to fix it twice, then gave us a new one. same problems over and over again. so the point of the story is, this computer sucks and i will never buy from eMachines.the monitor (which came with the computer) is also horrible. it's the smallest resolution i've ever seen for an LCD. it only supports 16-bit and the resolution is 1024x768. if you keep the brightness over 50% the images bleed onto the monitor for a few hours. (ghost images)anyway my budget: $ 200 ~ 500 (no higher)i've been looking at a Dell Studio XPS Desktop for a while now. i'm really loving the specs and the price. i've had Dell machines in the past and never had a problem with one.my current specs on this PC are:AMD Anthlon 2.1ghz (dual core)dedicated nVidia card (can't really do anything)2gb RAMWindows Vista 32biti need something a little stronger than this. i can't play any modern games at all with this. i want a powerful system for a reasonable price that won't fail on me. suggestions anyone?p.s. thoughts on the banner? (i'm not too great with graphics)
IMO forget 32-bit.
It limits ram and we are all going to switch to 64-bit eventually. Plus this is 64digits, not 32digits.IMO you don't need more than 2GB for basic gaming, 4GB for special cases. Unless you're trying to run a rendering farm for Pixar, you do not need 64bit.
lol yeah i'll go with Win7 64-bit for sure. i have a Win7 laptop and it's pretty sweet. too weak for gaming though of course.
i think my HDD is okay so if i can build a computer that's compatible with this one than i'll definitely keep it.as for a CPU i've always liked AMD more. cheaper and effective. i think Intel's are always over-doing it. i have no desire for a Quad-core either =P a fast dual-core will fit my needs.well like others have said, once you build a PC once, you'll feel good about it and be able to do it again with no problem so i'll just push forward xDYeah, building a PC's just like building a lego model, except with screwdrivers and more delicate parts. Follow the instructions and you'll be fine.
yeah i would go with 4gb. especially with some of the bigger games that have been coming out lately. though it's rare that a game would EVER require more than 1gb, i think it's not really a waste of money since it's just a few extra bucks.
what point would there be in a Quad-core? it's too expensive for something i probably can't use for another 5 years. nothing uses 4 cores, no games and no software that i use. mine as well buy a solid gold toilet paper roll while i'm at it.Def. build a PC. As long as you have all the parts it's kind of hard to build it wrong, honestly.
Just keep away from the wire cutters, the hammer and the saw.yeah 2gb would be fine but sometimes i do tap near the max and since 4gb is very cheap, it wouldn't hurt to get it. especially since i'll probably be using this new PC for about 4~5 years. after that i can assume PC standards will again raise and i'll need a new one or just upgrade if possible.
Minor point re: RAM, any modern OS will aggressively cache data in RAM, so get as much as you reasonably can, because your OS will use it all efficiently, for a pretty decent speed boost. Note, though, that "modern" does not include XP, which is 8 years old. Give it up, already, guys.