Looks like it'll rock to me.
2006-12-14 00:35:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by Cruel Angel 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I have to disgree, for only one reason though. Your graphics card is no good. It can play most games at low resolution, but you would be much better off getting at least 7600GT or X1800, and for a top-notch gaming rig, a 7900 or X1900 card.
Don't take my word for it, just see where the cards rate on the graphics card comparison table I've linked to. On Half-life 2: Episode 1, the 7300GS Sli setup gets 14 frames per second, and one 7600GT gets 42 FPS, and a 7900GS gets 62 FPS. FPS is important because it's the difference between a game feeling "smooth" and being too choppy to play. These numbers are at the 1280x1040 resolution, with 4x AA, and 8x AF.
Another note: The performance also varies by the resolution you play at. A high resolution setting looks great when playing, but is more taxing on the graphics card. Lower resolutions are less spectacular, but play smoother because there is less area for the card to process. If you play at low resolution, then a lower end card will do better.
All games demand good graphics cards that can put out high FPS rates, preferably at high resolutions. A typical display only refreshes at 60 Hz, so 60 FPS is the effective limit for a graphics card.
2006-12-14 02:27:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by frenzee2000 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
All these people are tards...
IT ISNT THE BEST, oh shut up, there is no such thing as the best because things are constantly being updated...
HE DIDNT ASK IF IT WAS THE BEST< he asked if it was good for gaming fools...
YES IT PERFECT FOR GAMING, you can always BUY BETTER< but that doesnt mean there are games that support better yet.
2 gigs of ram ddr2 is more than enough. The intel core 2 duo is as good as it gets in CPUS right now.
Your graphx are good...
With your specs you could play any game to date, and probably any game for the next 5 years.
2006-12-14 00:39:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by Danlow 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Looks pretty well set up to me, should be more than adequate for games currently on release, and probably the next "generation" of games that will boosted by a phsyics card.
Yours is prettty much the Intel/NVidia version of mine (ATI/Radeon cross-fire), but I have 3 HDD's as a Raid array, so ner!
2006-12-14 00:46:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by BushRaider69 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Showing off
You could probably have bought a cheap PC and a decent games console for 2/3rds the money
2006-12-14 00:36:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by David Computer Guy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Blimey! Your comp is definitely good for the latest games,100% capable.
I wish I had yours right now... im playing fear extraction point on a p4 3.0,512ram,& 128 gpu & it lags beyond anything.
2006-12-14 00:53:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by abebil 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree you would be much better with one decent graphics card then 2 poor ones. Sli brings its own set of problems.
2006-12-14 05:21:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by SoldierBlue 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
there is a program out there called mark it will test your pc and tell you how good or bad your pc is for gaming, when i tested mine only a pentium 4 2,9 it was not to good out of half a million tests it was better than 130,000 pc if that is a gide line for you i would expect yours to be better than mine hope this has helped you
2006-12-16 23:21:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by alenn g 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
For now it's just fine. You'll find in the future though that you will need to do some upgrades.
2006-12-14 02:07:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by castle h 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes its pretty good for gaming and its fast as long as you don't do a lot of smut slowing down ur PC
2006-12-14 00:36:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Nick R 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
let me say its a bit over priced but otherwise it will last for about 2 years with the latest games.Let me add that i hope your pc will be configurable with VISTA
2006-12-14 00:44:41
·
answer #11
·
answered by frank_schul 1
·
0⤊
0⤋