Buying PC

[STM1993]

the first one is overpriced rubbish

you serious bro? it can f*** up even xbox one's or ps4's so called sh*t in a few seconds.... they can't even stand up in the comparison...
About lenevo, idk, my bro. bought a lenevo laptop (not a cheap lenevo duffy) and it rocks as hard as hell, though he never encountered any superfish or whatever
...My bro.'s lappy i was talking about

Appendix, you might want to tell your brother to check for that Superfish.
"A report by Myce from January said the adware was found on Lenovo Y50, Z40, Z50, G50, and Yoga 2 Pro laptops. If you’ve recently bought a Lenovo laptop, there’s a good chance your PC has Superfish pre-installed." - Source.

Either way, I wouldn't trust Lenovo again.

As for Alienware, first off the comparison you used isn't fair - a PC against a console when the discussion is between different PCs.
Secondly, the main problem is that you can buy the same parts Dell uses and fix it up yourself for a significantly lower cost, or just build everything custom from scratch and also get something with comparable or better specs. I've also heard horror stories about pre-built PCs having shoddy quality, can't open the case to fix minor issues/perform upgrades yourself since it'd void the warranty, plus bad customer service. Dell itself is okay; just not Alienware.

tl;dr: Build your own desktop PC, it is a lot cheaper.

[Hellblazer]

Yeah desktop pc is a WIN. you can get a good cpu and get other things assembled cheaply.
EDIT:

Appendix, you might want to tell your brother to check for that Superfish.

tyvm. ill inform him.

[MH-LABEEB]

Also, avoid "Alienware" and "Lenovo" - the first one is overpriced rubbish, the second one the company installed "Superfish" adware inside their computers.

I Need A Desktop.
Really Good For Gaming high lvl,Using all supportable all softwares.
Hmm.....Gaming For playing new Generation games...like. GTA 5. etc.

Core i7 Will be better.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/p...essor.html
I Don't know what is Ghz...Choose what is best.....

Intel® Core™ i7-5550U Processor (4M Cache, up to
3.00 GHz)
4.0 MB
2.00 GHz
2/ 4
15
DDR3L-1333/1600 LPDDR3-1600/1866
Intel® HD Graphics 6000
Intel® Core™ i7-5557U Processor (4M Cache, up to
3.40 GHz)
4.0 MB
3.10 GHz
2/ 4
28
DDR3L-1333/1600 LPDDR3-1600/1866
Intel® Iris™ Graphics 6100
Intel® Core™ i7-5500U Processor (4M Cache, up to
3.00 GHz)
4.0 MB
2.40 GHz
2/ 4
15
DDR3L-1333/1600, LPDDR3-1333/1600
Intel® HD Graphics 5500
Intel® Core™ i7-5600U Processor (4M Cache, up to
3.20 GHz)
4.0 MB
2.60 GHz
2/ 4
15
DDR3L-1333/1600, LPDDR3-1333/1600
Intel® HD Graphics 5500
Also need to know the Really high lvl good graphics.
And I am now using Dell.
I don't know which Brand is good.But My Uncle told me that dell is good.But Still I need to find Out Which Is good.

[A-Man]

GHz is the clock rate; basically the amount of instructions (very low-level ones) a processor can do in a second (in order of 10^9). It is probably the main thing you should be looking at when you're buying your processor. The number of cores in a processor has to do with the number of "threads" a computer program is allowed to make. Most average games use 1 for its logic, one for the sounds stuff and one for networking stuff, so a good core i5 processor (4 cores) should often suffice. The Cache memory is another important thing you've to look for. 4MBs are usually just enough.

Don't know much about graphic cards. Just make sure you get one that supports "OpenGL", as there has been few ones out that doesn't support that.


Would be cool if Someone else would take the liberty of explaining those in more detail XD.

[Som1Lse]

GHz is the clock rate; basically the amount of instructions (very low-level ones) a processor can do in a second (in order of 10^9). It is probably the main thing you should be looking at when you're buying your processor.

Not really and no.
It is the clock rate, but it doesn't really necessarily relate to instructions that can be executed per second.
First of all different instructions take different amounts of clock cycles, and second of all the amount of clock cycles a single instruction takes can vary from processor to processor.
Looking at GHz is not the main thing you should look at, as it does not necessarily relate to how much a CPU can actually do.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLSPub4ydiM

The number of cores in a processor has to do with the number of "threads" a computer program is allowed to make. Most average games use 1 for its logic, one for the sounds stuff and one for networking stuff, so a good core i5 processor (4 cores) should often suffice.

Not entirely true. For one thing the number of cores doesn't really have anything to do with the amount of threads a process can run. It is entirely possible to have a multiple threads run on the same core. That said a well-written demanding program, will use multiple cores for its threads, also a game can easily (and will often) split its workload into multiple cores. That includes splitting the logic.

The Cache memory is another important thing you've to look for. 4MBs are usually just enough.

Seems right. I want to point out that there are different kinds of cache though. Namely L1, L2 and L3 though L1 and L2 is mostly constant across modern CPUs.

[Jernemies]

I would say build one yourself, or have someone build it for you. You'll save a truckload of money. I'm not a technical expert, but I have built my own rig, no complaints so far.

That said, if you insist on buying a manufactured computer, here are some important notes from the top of my mind:

• DO NOT buy a computer without a dedicated graphics card. All Intel GPUs are integrated into their more powerful processors, and those things suck. How to check: If the GPU is an Intel, don't even consider it if you want to do gaming. If it does have a card by some other manufacturer (mainly Nvidia or AMD), that's already a plus.
  
• While Intel GPUs suck, their CPUs are leading the market right now. Look for an i5, or if you can afford it, i7. Basically i3=budget, i5=good performance for the money, and i7=power.
  
• If you are looking at none of those, try googling around to compare.
  
• If you can't google, just make sure it has 4 cores. Please do the googling though
  

[MH-LABEEB]

i7 is the power That I will buy.
Just Say Which Graphics Card Is Good,I will buy that. And I have already told you all that core i7 is the best.
And There is my Parts in Cpu.Just post The Highest lvl mode parts in here....Like ..Not good Post Best.
Thanks.

---

And while googling I found this http://graphics-cards-review.toptenrevie...eview.html

[A-Man]

Not really and no.
It is the clock rate, but it doesn't really necessarily relate to instructions that can be executed per second.
First of all different instructions take different amounts of clock cycles, and second of all the amount of clock cycles a single instruction takes can vary from processor to processor.

Are you sure the clock rates don't relate to the numbers of instructions? I haven't got my information from anywhere directly; I just noticed a property of ASM instructions in multiple documentations and articles called "cycles". For instance, take a looks at this. The "MOV address1, address2" ASM instruction requires 2 cycles to complete. Doesn't this mean that a processor with 2.0 GHz could complete 1*10^9 "MOV address1, address2" instructions per a second? If so, then isn't this direct evidence that the clock speed, or its' frequency to be precise, what mostly makes a processor faster at processing processes?

Not entirely true. For one thing the number of cores doesn't really have anything to do with the amount of threads a process can run. It is entirely possible to have a multiple threads run on the same core. That said a well-written demanding program, will use multiple cores for its threads, also a game can easily (and will often) split its workload into multiple cores. That includes splitting the logic.

Definitely one can do as much threads as he likes, but they would only cause the increase in performance if each is run independently in one core. As far as I know, if a program uses more threads than the cores available, then the CPU would just run the different threads as if they were separate processes in the same core. This shouldn't cause any increase in performance, but further worsens it with the extra semaphores and syncronization stuff.

Seems right. I want to point out that there are different kinds of cache though. Namely L1, L2 and L3 though L1 and L2 is mostly constant across modern CPUs.

Sounds interesting. Just to make sure I got the idea of the cache memory right; I assume this is where the variables and stuff you don't store in a heap go? (I remember when I first started C++, my program threw a Buffer Overflow because of a non-new allocated array that slightly began to exceed 4MBs in size).


Edit:
@Labeeb: Are you seriously ready to pay 500$ for a graphics card? You can get 2 decent laptops for that price.

[MH-LABEEB]

Please Answer my questions.
thanks

[STM1993]

i7 is the power That I will buy.
Just Say Which Graphics Card Is Good,I will buy that. And I have already told you all that core i7 is the best.
And There is my Parts in Cpu.Just post The Highest lvl mode parts in here....Like ..Not good Post Best.
Thanks.

---

And while googling I found this http://graphics-cards-review.toptenrevie...eview.html

NVidia GeForce GTX980 is really good, but do you REALLY need that much power? Between the GTX980 and GTX970, the difference isn't particularly huge, and I get the impression that you are not planning on running more than 1 GPU. Are you willing to spend an extra $200 just for a slight improvement that you probably won't be using?

edit: If you really want the best of the best GPU, you can look at the NVidia GTX Titan Z... but honestly, you won't need something so ridiculously powerful and expensive.

Btw, I am personally running i5 with one NVidia GeForce GTX760 (I bought it before the better 900 series came out), and I can already run pretty much any game just fine.