Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dell/Alienware Introduce Linux Gaming PC

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by Zakhar View Post
    Yes and no...

    What's good is that, for once, we can compare real prices, and compute the price of Windows pre-installed.

    But then, as usual, it is a scam (for high end machines)

    1st configuration : Ubuntu is 100$ less
    2nd configuration : Ubuntu is 50$ less due to the "savings" on the Windows model
    3rd and 4th Ubuntu configuration don't have the equivalent Windows configuration.

    But we can see that the 3rd configuration for Windows is the same as the 4th Ubuntu config, but with a 2TB disk instead of a 1TB, and at the same price due to "savings" -200$- again on the Windows config.

    So, scam again... because if you need that 4th Ubuntu config and have 1049$ to spend, you'd better buy the Windows version and remove the useless O.S. (or get it refund if your country laws allows -France for ex.-) because you get an extra 1TB of disk for free.

    As already said above, good gesture from Dell, but we expect better... or should we from an enterprise that accepted a big "loan" from Microsoft?

    P.S.: note that all these Windows config are advertised with Windows 7. Glad to see how W8 is successful!
    Well previously we have seen them having either same or even higher prices on the Ubuntu models compared to the one with Windows.

    But a shame about the 4th config still being in this boat.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
      Mentioning that "it's not even needed in the first place" would have an even better effect...
      You'd think, but you'd be surprised how many people are so conditioned to the idea that "a computer MUST have antivirus or horrible things happen"... even on some Linux forums there are people asking about which antivirus they should install, even though those programs only catch windows viruses. Try telling them that the antivirus isn't needed and they'll just stare at you blankly, or whatever the equivalent is in the online world...

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
        I'm pretty sure it's much over 25, unless they are not counting indie games.
        Just to name some game counts that are current as of this moment:
        Steam: 97 games
        Desura: 268 games
        Ubuntu Software Center: 753 games

        Comment


        • #44
          I'm pretty sure it is the Steam count from just around the release.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by AJenbo View Post
            I'm pretty sure it is the Steam count from just around the release.
            Steam for Linux was around 80 or so games when it was officially released. Even back in early Jan. it was already over 40 games. Hard to think when they could of picked that number out of the air, maybe when the beta was first started? I think when I got in the beta back in early Dec. it was already well over 25 games.

            It could be it possibly comes with 25 games pre-installed, random free stuff and/or maybe demos from the repos.

            Comment


            • #46
              I have the i7 with the 660 GTX. I opted for the 660 instead of the 680 for price.

              Comment


              • #47
                I was in the secound closed beta so could just be my faulty memory, but would be cool if it came with preinstalled games.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by Pallidus
                  99.9% of them suck ass
                  Most of the Steam titles I own and have played have been pretty solid and fun (roughly half of what is currently available for Linux). Desura has a lot more crap I couldn't be bothered with, and USC even more so, but each have a good selection of worthy titles for those willing to dig around a bit.

                  look the windows one is on sale so it costs pretty much the same as the linux one

                  lol fail
                  The real fail would be buying from Dell in the first place.

                  r u sure u should be betting on games to hype linux to the people

                  WWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONN NNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGG

                  how about 'hey no longer needing to run shit like eset or symantec or having to deal with trojans/virus/malware and be able to go online and feel relatively safe' ?
                  Who's hyping? Listing game availability numbers to a primarily Linux using readership hardly counts as Linux evangelism.

                  Surfing the web on Linux can still offer plenty of opportunities for the stupid and gullable to have their system compromised; just using Linux isn't enough to make your system bulletproof, though it is an easy first step towards that goal.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by dee. View Post
                    You'd think, but you'd be surprised how many people are so conditioned to the idea that "a computer MUST have antivirus or horrible things happen"... even on some Linux forums there are people asking about which antivirus they should install, even though those programs only catch windows viruses. Try telling them that the antivirus isn't needed and they'll just stare at you blankly, or whatever the equivalent is in the online world...
                    Well, everyone that I told about Linux not needing anti-virus software were amazed at the idea.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by iniudan View Post
                      Then why did you point to energy needed for the idle and low load to counter the average power consumption ? Cause it make no sense considering you latest argument.

                      And remember that at the start start of all this I was speaking of power efficiency, not performance, has I was comparing a 55W TDP 2.7Ghz celeron, which to be about the intel product you can get for about $50 (since he was suggesting a pentium, but they start around $65), to a $75 35W TDP 2.6Ghz Pentium, which I think was more worth it if you were trying to save money, for a lowest end gaming PC, has it would more then likely consume both less energy while idle and under load.

                      The best really depend on whatever you spend most of system spend most of it time in idle/low load or in heavy load, which most home computer don't, including a gaming PC, has it most likely see it fair share internet, video and lot of game that are mostly GPU load not CPU. So I am mostly always gonna suggest the higher priced lower TPD CPU over the lower price higher TPD CPU of somewhat close performance, and if the guy got real money to invest, suggest undervolting the best cpu he can buy instead, if want to save power. (but that last case don't really apply when speaking of Celeron and Pentium =p)
                      Correct graph with comparison of power consumption has to be done in way that you can deduce total power consumption in Watt-hours during constant time e.g. 8 hours while doing same tasks.
                      You can compare total consumption if you know that machine is idle 3 hours and 5 hours is used for video watching.
                      Average power consumption graph at silent PC is assuming 50% of time on heavy load. If fast CPU encodes videos 4 hours it will encode more videos than slow CPU.
                      If same tasks are done slow CPU spend more % of time on heavy load than fast CPU which means constant split 50:50 is wrong.

                      $75 35W 2.6Ghz Pentium G2100T and G2020T are tray/OEM only which means limited availability and warranty.
                      You can get 35W CPU by underclocking and undervolting of 55W CPU, but it will mean 1W / 2W / 3W lower power in idle / low load / full load in average.
                      2W lower power means about $2 lower bill per year.

                      Hand Brake encoding in 1 hour on slower CPU
                      2100T - 100% load (64 W) = 64 Wh
                      2100 - 81.25% load (74 W) + 18.75% idle (38W) - 74*0.8125+38*(1-0.8125) = 67.25 Wh
                      http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1202-page5.html

                      55W 2.6 GHz Celeron G1610 - $50
                      55W 2.7 GHz Celeron G1620 - $60 - 0.88V
                      55W 2.9 GHz Pentium G2020 - $65 - 0.976V
                      Celeron has lower voltage than Pentium, which means lower power at full load.
                      http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...bridge_12.html
                      Last edited by JS987; 04-07-2013, 12:19 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X