Hi,
Even if money is no object and you can afford to build a $2500 machine every two years, there's another reason to avoid bleeding edge. Often the hardware will have some 'teething' problems. A "Rev. B" board wasn't changed just for the fun of it. And drivers seem invariably to take about six months to settle down. So, unless you get as much of a kick playing with your computer as you do playing on it, I think slightly more mature components are a better choice. YMMV. B)
--Pete
Quote:There is an advantage for trying to get as close to the bleeding edge as possible, . . .That is very true. However, there is another way to look at it. Stuff that's about one generation (say 6 months) behind the leading edge will typically run you about 1/2 as much. Now consider, most games are designed for (and on) the machines available when the coding started. So the games designed around today's bleeding edge components will not hit the market for two or more years. During that time, you'll be playing games that were designed on systems older than your one generation back system. Instead of spending $2500 bucks every five years, and having a system that's too far ahead of the curve at the start and too far behind the curve at the end, you can spend $1300 every couple of years and stay right in the zone pretty much all the time.
Even if money is no object and you can afford to build a $2500 machine every two years, there's another reason to avoid bleeding edge. Often the hardware will have some 'teething' problems. A "Rev. B" board wasn't changed just for the fun of it. And drivers seem invariably to take about six months to settle down. So, unless you get as much of a kick playing with your computer as you do playing on it, I think slightly more mature components are a better choice. YMMV. B)
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?