Which comp to choose?


In Runtime

I've been searching the internet for pre-built desktops with parts and stuff in them to upgrade from my dying sony vaio laptop. Im a real heavy gamer but Im just kind of confused here lately about which setups are better. I prefer nvidia cards because I hear ATI's drivers get messed up a lot and Ive always used nvidia. Also I like AMD processors because in my experence, my AMD of lesser quality can perform as good or better as intel. So I'm going to be gaming, I havent had the pleasure of playing crysis, crysis:warhead, fallout3, bioshock or age of conan. I've played WoW a bit and my FPS on it was usually about 10-25 in non crowded areas with my laptop. Im looking for a built PC that will have 60+ FPS easily with max settings and I get mixed reports on video cards and processors.

Here is the first computer im leaning towards, the only bad thing is that it doesn't have a side panel window to let me see in. Tell me what you think, and what FPS in the above mentioned games it'll get.


Here's my second choice..


I've done some research on the 9800gtx+ card and it doesn't seem to be too bad but when its always getting compared to the GTX260 in the first computer, it makes you want to buy it. The biggie on this one it seems is the 6GB of ddr3 ram... Will that make a LOT of difference in the FPS of games?

If you guys know any other place that has better built computers that come put together, please let me know. My parents are buying me this for college and they don't want to risk 1000$ on me being a newbie putting the computer together by ordering seperate parts. Thanks for the help!


Fully Optimized
For strictly gaming, I would go with a high end dual core. You'll get way better FPS than on a quad. The GTX 260 Core 216 destroys the 9800GTX+. What size monitor are you playing on? The first model only offers the 192 version of the 260. More RAM might only make a fraction of a difference.

Better quad.

Just go on their website and customize a personal one. It's going to cost the same.


In Runtime
My monitor is a 22" with a maximum res of 1680x1050 @60Hz.

As to the reasoning of getting better FPS from gaming on a dual core, why? I thought when you have 4 cores at the same speed, you'd definitely get a better use and more future viability? It seems that in order to keep a computer that will last me 2-3 years, I should go with the newer quadcore and GTX 260.. Is this wrong? Im not arguing just trying to figure out what the best bang for the buck is, not necessarily for budget reasons, but so I don't buy something and then find out that I could have had something way better. I've done that before on laptops and Its got me here at this stage.

When you talked about the GTX260 core 216, is that in favor of the first machine i listed with the AMD quad core and GTX260? or in favor of the intel with the 9800gtx+? I think you're saying the first one but just checking. I've checked a lot of hardware reviews of GPUs and on my available resolution the GTX260 has one of the best FPS for my price range. I'm willing to soak up the knowledge, but I don't know where to start and Im kind of confused.

What is the hierarchy of graphics cards right now? Seems that GTX260 is kind of on top below the other top GTXs right?

I would build my own but it's not my money im buying it with, its my parents. My parents don't want me putting my first 1000$ computer together on their money. Regardless of how easy or simple it can be, I want to respect their decision and im very thankful of their willingness to drop a 'G' on me for this luxury. Thanks for all the comments by the way, I really do appreciate it!