![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
So I have over 100 games and want to play them. But considering I sold my i7-920/6GB/x58/GTX295 for $1350, and most of my 19x12 monitors to gain some cash for other needs, I was left with about $600 and a bunch of these games to play.
I tried the Mac Mini 2009, but I couldn't swallow down the 2.26 dual core proc, or even worse, the 9400m video chipset. So I put together a build that I felt could play games with most eye candy on and a decent enough resolution. I'm not too picky about widescreen, but still felt that gaming at 1280x1024 is the bare minimum you should go in this day in age.
So my friend sold me his Dell 1907fp 19" 1280x1024 monitor. I felt this was a good enough monitor for the price of $80. It was in mint condition and barely used. I know, some people would consider playing in non-wide-screen sacrilege these days. Not me, though. I was thinking that if I only have to power 1280x1024, then I wouldn't need as powerful (expensive) of a rig.
The next requirements were that it run multiple threads (so no single core systems), and that it would run the CPU at least at 3.6GHz (with or without overclocking). This is considering that most recent tests from the tech sites show that CPU scaling pretty much eliminates itself to an advantage for gaming when going over 3.6GHz. DirectX 10 was a requirement since it would have to run Windows 7 64 bit (for 64 bit gaming), but DirectX11 was not, since I don't feel I'll be missing out TOO much by not having DX11 for the next year.
See the next post in this thread for my build.
I tried the Mac Mini 2009, but I couldn't swallow down the 2.26 dual core proc, or even worse, the 9400m video chipset. So I put together a build that I felt could play games with most eye candy on and a decent enough resolution. I'm not too picky about widescreen, but still felt that gaming at 1280x1024 is the bare minimum you should go in this day in age.
So my friend sold me his Dell 1907fp 19" 1280x1024 monitor. I felt this was a good enough monitor for the price of $80. It was in mint condition and barely used. I know, some people would consider playing in non-wide-screen sacrilege these days. Not me, though. I was thinking that if I only have to power 1280x1024, then I wouldn't need as powerful (expensive) of a rig.
The next requirements were that it run multiple threads (so no single core systems), and that it would run the CPU at least at 3.6GHz (with or without overclocking). This is considering that most recent tests from the tech sites show that CPU scaling pretty much eliminates itself to an advantage for gaming when going over 3.6GHz. DirectX 10 was a requirement since it would have to run Windows 7 64 bit (for 64 bit gaming), but DirectX11 was not, since I don't feel I'll be missing out TOO much by not having DX11 for the next year.
See the next post in this thread for my build.
Just don't expect much from it (ie. don't upgrade the vidcard nor OC anything). While it may be working right now, I'd try to replace that thing ASAP.
