BF2S Forums Anyone know if Acer computers are decent or not?

not really, how much will it cost?

Yeah, Dell ftw.

$400 isn't bad.

12/f/taiwan wrote:

forget it, its for my sister(lol inb4 virus?) aka youtube/limewire/gmail. ill prolly being using it to play bf2 once in a while and since a 6800 seemed to run ok for me on bf2 im assuming a 8200 should do just fine.

Oooh, no.

No, no, no, no, no.

Just plain no.

OK, when looking at graphics cards model numbers, the most important digit in the number is not the first digit - it's the second one.

There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, but in general an -800 beats a -200 no matter what generation the card is (the first digit indicates the generation).

Differences between generations (eg 6000 series vs 8000 series) are minor feature differences (e.g. shader 2.0 vs shader 3.0), but the difference between models (e.g. -200 vs -600) is huge (this number indicates the underlying power/performance of the card).

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

12/f/taiwan wrote:

forget it, its for my sister(lol inb4 virus?) aka youtube/limewire/gmail. ill prolly being using it to play bf2 once in a while and since a 6800 seemed to run ok for me on bf2 im assuming a 8200 should do just fine.

Oooh, no.

No, no, no, no, no.

Just plain no.

OK, when looking at graphics cards model numbers, the most important digit in the number is not the first digit - it's the second one.

There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, but in general an -800 beats a -200 no matter what generation the card is (the first digit indicates the generation).

Differences between generations (eg 6000 series vs 8000 series) are minor feature differences (e.g. shader 2.0 vs shader 3.0), but the difference between models (e.g. -200 vs -600) is huge (this number indicates the underlying power/performance of the card).

another example, my old 7900GT will rape an 8800GT.

Jenspm wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

12/f/taiwan wrote:

forget it, its for my sister(lol inb4 virus?) aka youtube/limewire/gmail. ill prolly being using it to play bf2 once in a while and since a 6800 seemed to run ok for me on bf2 im assuming a 8200 should do just fine.

Oooh, no.

No, no, no, no, no.

Just plain no.

OK, when looking at graphics cards model numbers, the most important digit in the number is not the first digit - it's the second one.

There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, but in general an -800 beats a -200 no matter what generation the card is (the first digit indicates the generation).

Differences between generations (eg 6000 series vs 8000 series) are minor feature differences (e.g. shader 2.0 vs shader 3.0), but the difference between models (e.g. -200 vs -600) is huge (this number indicates the underlying power/performance of the card).

another example, my old 7900GT will rape an 8800GT.


:P

you wish

Freezer7Pro wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

8400GS is about as good as 6200

8200 is IGPU and, well, utter shit.

8400GS = 6600GT.

And Acer is shit.

No, they're not.

You pay for what you get. Acer are good for their money. If people want better, they pay more.

I've got an Aspire One from Acer it's pretty good (Though I've only had it about a month and a half).

My friend has had two Acer laptops so far, and the first only started to shit up after 2 years of constant use/carrying round etc.

His new one's quite cool...

My neighbour has a desktop Acer and it runs fine. My mother has a desktop Acer and that too works well.

Acer is shit. All the ones I've seen break after a couple of months. Also their warranty department sucks

FFLink13 wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

8400GS is about as good as 6200

8200 is IGPU and, well, utter shit.

8400GS = 6600GT.

And Acer is shit.

No, they're not.

You pay for what you get. Acer are good for their money. If people want better, they pay more.

I've got an Aspire One from Acer it's pretty good (Though I've only had it about a month and a half).

My friend has had two Acer laptops so far, and the first only started to shit up after 2 years of constant use/carrying round etc.

His new one's quite cool...

My neighbour has a desktop Acer and it runs fine. My mother has a desktop Acer and that too works well.

My last HP laptop lasted for four years of daily carrying around and use as the only computer for the CEO of a multi-million dollar food chain by my uncle, two drops down stairs, and finally almost year of me carrying it around in school, before being sold off for 200€. The hinges on the screen hadn't even gone sleazy. Two years is nothing.

I'm not saying Acers will break after a month, they might hold up for a while, and except for their special and/or "top-end" products, they even radiate "cheap" in a mile's radius.

normally i'd say custom build.. but for $400 that isn't bad. and Acer.. well it's not the best but there is much much much worse (like HP, Compaq, Medion....).. o and stay away from ACER laptops.. they are the blowies... (i was a computer tech for years and used to fix all these brands... keep that in mind and take my advice for what it's worth)

adv3rsary wrote:

normally i'd say custom build.. but for $400 that isn't bad. and Acer.. well it's not the best but there is much much much worse (like HP, Compaq, Medion....).. o and stay away from ACER laptops.. they are the blowies... (i was a computer tech for years and used to fix all these brands... keep that in mind and take my advice for what it's worth)

Compaq-branded stuff is lol. Why HP ever bought them is beyond me.

And what's so bad about HP? Except for being fucking horrid to disassemble, I've never had an issue with any of their computers.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

adv3rsary wrote:

normally i'd say custom build.. but for $400 that isn't bad. and Acer.. well it's not the best but there is much much much worse (like HP, Compaq, Medion....).. o and stay away from ACER laptops.. they are the blowies... (i was a computer tech for years and used to fix all these brands... keep that in mind and take my advice for what it's worth)

Compaq-branded stuff is lol. Why HP ever bought them is beyond me.

And what's so bad about HP? Except for being fucking horrid to disassemble, I've never had an issue with any of their computers.

lets seeeee... where to begin
1. they are the only computers messed up enough to a ever give you an error called "Code purple"
2. they are the only computers that ever need something so stupid called "tatooing" that you have to do to your motherboard about 50% of the time when you change a major piece of hardware just to make your "recovery discs" work
3. they are loaded with junk software no one ever needs that just makes the mfr money. they took 3-4gb of windows and somehow bloated it into 14GB of recovery discs.. just crap.
4. identical spec computers. 1 hp and 1 say acer.... the hp takes an extra 1-1.5 minutes to boot into windows
5. they have the highest DOA of any manufacturer's computers i have had the displeasure to work on
6. they are the only manufacturer i have seen ship computers with MISSING hard drives, MISSING ram.... (no quality control)
7. they over charge for parts from their part ordering center.. $400 for a 320gb hard drive? i dont think so.. i cant get it for about $70
8. the reps they sent to "assist" in stores are the most ill-prepared and stupid people i have ever seen
9. they only allow you to burn 1 set of recovery discs which is retarded considering their recovery disc creator program creates discs that are corrupt about 25-50% of the time and tells u they were created successfully.. and i dono in what world it should take 3 hours to burn 3 regular dvds of data.. except in the HP world.. (there is a trick around this btw.. look for and delete hpcd.sys from all hds in your computer and you can re-burn the discs as many times as you want. they are hidden files so make sure u can see hidden files before u search for it)

i can keep going but i think you get the point

Last edited by adv3rsary (2008-10-16 14:51:20)