Gaming computers get pumped

A batch of speedy new PC chips is set to lure gamers to high-end computers

By Dean Takahashi, KRT Campus

Illustration courtesy of KRT Campus

It’s almost a perfect time to be shopping for a gaming PC. Computer makers big and small are tailoring selected machines to the tastes of hard-core gamers. Intel and Advanced Micro Devices are battling to produce microprocessors that will edge out the other in performance. Nvidia and ATI Technologies have just launched new graphics chips that can deliver more realistic animations to add an extra twinge of emotion.

The only things missing are the games. Long-awaited titles “Doom III” and “Half-Life 2” weren’t ready for the holidays. They would have stretched game hardware to the limit, making narrow differences between components show up clearly in how games actually play.

But for many serious gamers, that is no reason to hold back. I tried out a few new machines and found there is plenty to get excited about. And there are a lot of games like “Tron 2.0,” “Call of Duty,” and “Halo” that will still show off what you can get for a $2,000 or more gaming computer that you can’t get with a run-of-the-mill $1,000 model.

One of the most interesting new developments for gamers is AMD’s 64-bit chips. The Athlon 64 FX-51 microprocessor has a clear edge over Intel’s Pentium 4 Extreme Edition, a chip many have nicknamed the “emergency edition” because it was rushed out to contend with AMD’s competitive threat. AMD’s chips are cheaper at $733 compared to Intel’s $925 chips, but in a head-to-head comparison by Loyd Case, technical director for computer enthusiast Web site www.extremetech.com, AMD came out ahead for gaming purposes.

The Extreme Edition chip from Intel is a stripped-down version of its 3.2 gigahertz Xeon microprocessor, which has 2 megabytes of extra cache memory. That cache saves the processor from taking a slow cruise to memory chips every time it needs data. Intel says the memory helps in all games, but especially those with expansive environments. Vendors like Dell (www.dell.com), Alienware (www.alienware.com) and Gateway (www.gateway.com) are shipping machines with the Intel chip.

Although there aren’t any games out yet that take advantage of AMD’s 64-bit processing, AMD beats Intel on 32-bit performance and at a lower price. AMD’s chip is faster because it has a built-in memory controller, which allows it to feed data into the processor at rates faster than the Intel chip, Case said. It’s hard to find big-name computer makers with the AMD chip, but many specialty vendors have come up with models.

It’s tough to perceive this difference between Intel and AMD in every game. At least that’s what I found on today’s games. I played LucasArts’ “Secret Weapons Over Normandy” on four different desktops: a Falcon Northwest (www.falcon-nw.com) machine with an Intel Pentium 4 Extreme Edition, a Gateway model with a regular edition Pentium 4 3.2 gigahertz chip (www.gateway.com), an ABS Computers (www.abscomputers.com) machine and a VelocityMicro (www.velocitymicro) machine, both with Athlon 64 FX-51 chips. In general, flight simulators like Microsoft’s Flight Simulator 2004 demand the most from processors. Secret Weapons isn’t as intense on performance requirements. It has arcade-like controls, fast-action airplane duels, pretty landscapes with fog and mirrored water surfaces, and realistic-looking tanks and ships on the ground. You can get into fierce dog fights in the fog and try to shoot down your enemy as your own plane is bursting in flames. Each machine could handle the game pretty well at high resolutions.

I ran the 3DMark03 benchmark, a graphics and system performance test, on each of the systems and the spread of scores wasn’t that wide. The best-performing machine was the Velocity Micro with an ATI Radeon 9800XT graphics chip, while the worst was a Gateway Pentium 4 3.2 gigahertz machine with an Nvidia GeForce FX 5900. The systems all had very different configurations, so I won’t pretend this was scientific. But the AMD machines generally showed better scores on the CPU test and other reviews reinforce that.

Graphics chips still seem to make the most difference in game performance. Games like “Halo” and “Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic” can throw so many enemies together on a single screen that computers can choke on computing the graphics. For those games, the Nvidia GeForceFX 5950 and the ATI Radeon 9800XT really pay off. Case thinks that ATI has a bit of an edge over the Nvidia, but again, the difference isn’t perceptible to someone like me.

The consumer really can’t go wrong with gaming systems even at a range of prices. You can pay $3,299 for a top-of-the-line Dell Dimension XPS with the Extreme Edition processor, or you can settle for a $2,000 machine from Gateway that doesn’t use the fastest components available. Boutique companies like VoodooPC set themselves apart with elaborate cooling systems and hand-painted cases. Typically, gamer machines also come with more expansion slots and bigger power supplies so you can upgrade after purchase. But if you don’t need those luxuries, you can save a lot of money. Hewlett-Packard also has one model of gamer PC and is about to expand its offerings. That should help lower prices even further.

You could buy a high-end machine now to ensure you’ll be ready to run the big games later. But it’s still not known when Doom III or Half-Life 2 will come out. If it’s the middle of next year, there will be a new set of graphics technologies on the market.

Meanwhile, there are still things to pay attention to. You can spend the money you save now to invest in a more elaborate 3-D audio system. And I found that playing games with a regular monitor still beats the flat-panel monitors that are becoming so popular. Most of the flat panels are so slow at displaying images that they experience a ghost effect during fast games. But Case at extremetech.com is impressed with the low refresh rates (i.e. faster screens) on a flat-panel display that Dell sells with its Dimension XPS gaming computer.

I was still disappointed with the performance of the gaming laptops I tried. Alienware, HP, and others are coming out with models with big LCD screens, but the processing power just isn’t there. I loaded Halo onto an Alienware laptop and the colors were all washed out and the movement was slow. I think it will take a few more spins of technology advances to balance the trade-offs of performance with mobility.

Both Nvidia and ATI have new chips coming that promise to turn even the light 5-pound laptops into speed demons on graphics, but that’s still just around the corner.