The TR Hardware Survey: What’s in your main PC?

We’re unveiling a new feature today, the TR Hardware Survey. As its name suggests, this feature’s goal is to give both us and you, the reader, an idea of what lurks inside (and immediately outside) the main PCs of those who frequent TR—from die-hard gerbils to first-timers who just happened here by accident. The survey is based on our brand-new poll engine, and it includes 15 questions pertaining to anything from your primary computer’s processor and chipset type to your main operating system and the aspect ratio of your monitor.

Without further ado, here come the questions. Note that the survey applies only to your primary PC, but that the questions are valid for both notebooks and desktops PCs. In other words, if your primary PC is a laptop then you can still participate. Also please note that, because of the way our poll system works, you’ll have to hit "vote" after answering each question. The poll is dynamic, though, so voting won’t refresh the page, and you can keep right on answering questions.

Comments closed
    • Mr Bill
    • 12 years ago

    I’ll bet some vendors would pay for these statistics. You should market this to help pay for TR’s bandwidth.

    • wnstitw
    • 12 years ago

    How exactly do 25% of the voters run 1280×1024 resolution but only 7% use a display with 5:4 ratio (at the time of posting). Are people running 1280×1024 on non 5:4 displays? If so, why?

      • indeego
      • 12 years ago

      A better questions is why are there more than four separate threads about thisg{

    • shank15217
    • 12 years ago

    there is no reason to use windows xp 32-bit with xp 64-bit available. Try it, its one of the most stable oses you’ll ever use.

      • Majiir Paktu
      • 12 years ago

      Ever consider that not every computer has a 64-bit capable processor?

        • Krogoth
        • 12 years ago

        I think the OP was referring to current system builds. I am incline to agree with him.

        There is very little reason to go with a 32-bit OS with an modern build unless you *[

          • indeego
          • 12 years ago

          Still a few client AV apps that don’t support full features on 64-bit OS. Symantec Endpoint Protection I’m thinking here.

          While I agree 64-bit has merits, (it should be on every server period built new at this point,) it’s not quite the end-all be-all for client installations in all businesses yetg{<.<}g

      • maxxcool
      • 12 years ago

      But I only have 2 gigs of ram… theres no benefit for me to use it ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • ssidbroadcast
    • 12 years ago

    Dang why is Mac OS so few?

      • Windogg
      • 12 years ago

      At TR, many readers of DIYers and tweakers. Apple being a mostly closed platform does not have the same appeal. Plus many here are gamers and there is simply more choice on MS OSes. Yes you can run OSX on generic x86 hardware but that takes some work.

      My primary laptop is a Macbook but the majority of what i do is on my desktop which runs Vista x64.

    • Lazier_Said
    • 12 years ago

    I am surprised there are so few large (>24″) displays in the midst of all this other high end hardware.

    15% spent $400+ on a video card, but only 5% are running a big screen with it.

      • maxxcool
      • 12 years ago

      me too, after tossing 1500$ or more, 24″ws is not to far fetched…

      • indeego
      • 12 years ago

      In retrospect I regret getting the higher end card (which I played games in fall/winter but doesn’t get much use now) and I should have invested in a better monitor or two. There’s always next fiscalg{

    • thermistor
    • 12 years ago

    What would be most interesting for the data is to statistically clump users together. For example:

    1) Average system spec, say 2yr old dual core, 1-2 Gb mem, etc. + 8800GTS/GTX/Ultra or ATI 3870 card…see if there is a statistical significance. Call this crowd (if they exist) the “budget gamers”, the crowd that invests heavily in the GPU and neglects other less-important parameters for gaming.

    2) High end processor (Q6xxx or better), 3+ Gb mem, monster storage, say 750Gb plus…call this group the “media enthusiast”, people who put $$ into machines for video/audio/photo manipulation.

    TR puts their hardware and editorial expertise behind making recommendations for many different groups…what I’d like to know is if buying patterns (as witnessed by system specs) reflect these recommendations. I don’t think the data, as collected, can tell us that. This is not a complaint at all, it is still a valuable and fun survey.

    • LoneHowler
    • 12 years ago

    I am slightly miffed that there is no Secondary Optical Drive category. My DVD Burner is my secondary optical drive. The DVD drive is the primary.

    • squeezee
    • 12 years ago

    So apparently we can’t have 8GB of ram, just 7.99GB or more than 8GB… >.>

    • DrCR
    • 12 years ago

    I’m surprised so few of us use *nix as our primary OS.

    I’ve been using Linux as my primary OS for a good three years now. Sure, I have a XP install, but I just use that for gaming; why else would I want to use it over Linux? Maybe I just simply found a distro that clicks with me or some of you guys do a lot more gaming or non-wineable WinOS app usage?

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      Well, a good majority of the voters have gaming-class GPUs. It would be safe to say that would also be on Windows-based OS of some flavor for gaming reasons.

      *nix’s gaming support isn’t exactly stellar. Wine, VMware can only do so much and no native DX support for *nix does not help either.

        • spacemanspiff
        • 12 years ago

        My UNIX machine sits next to me. A good old Ultra-80 that’s fully loaded with a 711 to boot.

      • supercromp
      • 12 years ago

      Because i can just use windows.

        • A_Pickle
        • 12 years ago

        Exaaaaactly…. thank you…

    • continuum
    • 12 years ago

    Not bizarre… just cheap. Cost-cutting, mostly. And smaller 17″ 1280×1024 monitors are harder for students to hide behind than 19″ or 20″ or later monitors. The cost delta between 15″ and 17″, OTOH, is pretty small.

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      More like you are a “t3h master at t3h pr0n1!” ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • Tamale
    • 12 years ago

    haha.. I loved voting for being clinically insane. I love my 4 monitors and projector ๐Ÿ™‚

      • continuum
      • 12 years ago

      I’m not clinically insane, but 5TB of disk space should qualify, no? ๐Ÿ˜‰

      • gerbilspy
      • 12 years ago

      I chose clinically insane too. Because I AM.

    • absinthexl
    • 12 years ago

    More dual-monitor setups! I can’t work with just one anymore, even though the second is an old 19″ CRT.

    • lucas1985
    • 12 years ago

    #154,
    Couldn’t agree more. The tools are there, but people don’t use them. Vista provides most of these security enhancements right out of the box.
    In the end, any OS can be secured if you spend a little time. And XP SP2 is a fine OS.
    #161,
    Expensive way of getting optical output, eh? I call it the “Creative tax” ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • TRS-80
    • 12 years ago

    I’ve got a Linux install with a 64bit kernel (so I can use my 4GB of RAM) but a 32bit userland (same install I’ve had since 2000), so I clicked 32bit.

    • lucas1985
    • 12 years ago

    #139
    q[

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      Not by default, that is the big difference.

      XP is fine as itself, but don’t pretend that it never had any major security issues.

    • ssidbroadcast
    • 12 years ago

    Wow Asus is cleaning house!!

      • green
      • 12 years ago

      which is one of the reasons they can start making things
      eee, crossbow proof lcd’s, external graphics cards, bittorrent routers, etc

      i’m also wondering what the 8 ‘other’ primary optical drive types are….
      sacd? sony’s double sided cd attempt? mini-disc?
      hang on i’m seeing a pattern here…

      • palisade
      • 12 years ago

      I own an ASUS Striker Extreme, worst mobo ever made. I RMA’d it to newegg four times already, its fried three sets of OCZ RAM (all RMA’d as well) and now my internal NIC has gone bad and websites are getting corrupted. I’m going to have to RMA it directly to ASUS this time, and I’m going to ebay it and just buy another mobo. Worst buy I’ve ever made, I really regret it. And, I’ve been a long time ASUS mobo buyer, all my previous systems save one have used ASUS (the other was MSI).

      This time around I’m thinking of getting the Intel BadAxe2.

        • Krogoth
        • 12 years ago

        Wow, that is a string of bad luck. Did you by chance overvolt the memory or the motherboard itself deliver the wrong current? The former is just business of playing with fire, while the latter is WTF.

        I never had an integrated NIC died or go bad on all of the motherboards that I ever purchase which had them. The closest thing was infamous broken hardware-firewall with Nforce 3/4.

        • Ubik
        • 12 years ago

        I refuse to buy ASUS after one of their Athlon XP motherboards killed all the data on my main drive and rendered my secondary drive completely inoperative back in 2003. That was thanks to a defective IDE controller, but I went through two more iterations of the same motherboard (A7S333) with various other problems before finally switching to an ABit NF7 that’s been chugging away ever since.

        Then again, that might have been more the fault of the SiS chipset, which we thankfully don’t really have to worry about anymore.

    • lucas1985
    • 12 years ago

    #134,
    q[

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      Well at least it streamlines them instead of relying on third-party applications and tools.

      • BenBasson
      • 12 years ago

      I don’t think anyone would make the argument that it’s impossible to lock down XP, the real argument is that they shouldn’t have to put an unreasonable amount of effort into doing so – especially with Linux has had this sorted for what seems like forever.

      Besides, the problem isn’t people who want to secure their OS but can’t, the problem is people that don’t know that they should and therefore don’t.

    • bhtooefr
    • 12 years ago

    Core 2 Duo, integrated graphics, i965GM, OEM board, 2 GiB RAM, 120 GB hard drive, DVD burner, integrated sound, one 12.1″ 4:3 1400×1050 LCD, running XP32 Tablet.

    • Cannyone
    • 12 years ago

    I just wish you had asked “how many of us that now use XP had tried Vista”!

    Then again some members, like *[

      • Convert
      • 12 years ago

      Hah, awesome. I rather like that, “aero-glass house”.

    • lucas1985
    • 12 years ago

    #112,
    q[

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      Vista does offer a decent ROI solely for its superior security features in the IT world. It will become more apparent once Server 2008 gets into gear.

        • indeego
        • 12 years ago

        Vista’s ROI only seems advantageous after SP1 and with S2008 in place.

        Without SP1 how many hours are wasted troubleshooting Vista for MS? The SP alone can take an hour’s worth of time to installg{<.<}g

    • Starfalcon
    • 12 years ago

    Well, I had to vote other for my rig since I am still running a NF2 with 2500+ XP in it. If I am able to get the 3850 in AGP I will probably keep it for another year. I am hoping that by then I will have enough money put away to do a full upgrade.

    • Tairc
    • 12 years ago

    No way for those of us who are clinically insane to note 4 out of 5 monitors on our main system are in portrait mode? I’m disappointed that out of all those resolutions, you listed things like “1280×1024” but no “1024×1280”. Especially since polls like this inevitably impact site layout in the future – portrait mode forever!

    • Jeffery
    • 12 years ago

    The beast within:

    Intel Pentium II OCd to 0.35Ghz!
    448MB SD RAM @66Mhz
    i440LX mobo
    Voodo 2 SLI, baby… powering xtreme gaming on my CRT @ 1024 x 768
    PC Power & Cooling Silencer 250W PSU

    • spuppy
    • 12 years ago

    I can’t believe how many idiots still use XP.. The whole “Vista Sucks” myth lives on I guess. Amazing.

      • NeXus 6
      • 12 years ago

      Someone still using XP is an idiot? Maybe they just haven’t found a reason to move to Vista or are waiting for Vista SP1. Could that be possible?

        • Mithent
        • 12 years ago

        Yeah, I think calling people idiots is a bit much. I was presumably an idiot until December, because I was still using XP on my old machine? I like Vista, but I wouldn’t upgrade an XP machine to Vista either.

          • d2brothe
          • 12 years ago

          I’d agree…vista tends to get a bad wrap that isn’t entirely deserved…but using XP isn’t a bad proposition still…and unless you have a fairly up to date computer, running vista would be idiotic/impossible anyways.

      • duffy
      • 12 years ago

      I can’t believe how many Vista users still comment on people who don’t share their interest in crap.

      • PetMiceRnice
      • 12 years ago

      Obviously an inflammatory post. Personally, I use XP because it does everything I want and works well. I have no reason to change operating systems, pure and simple.

      • VILLAIN_xx
      • 12 years ago

      :o)

      So……. If you were sitting at burger king and eating their newest humburger but it had beetles (but you still ate it), you would still call use idiots if we ate our standard burger with no beetles?

      I dont see why you would, and just like vista, we want it Bugless and leaving a great taste in our mouth. (please dont try licking your computer)

      I choose to use XP since it has the only softmod driver for my X1800xt 512mb to be a FireGL V7300. Softimage XSI and Zbrush dont require DX10 yet, so i can use my modified workstation card that soars in content creation.

      So….. yeah, there you go.

      Beetle breath.

      • enzia35
      • 12 years ago

      Vista is nice, but my tv tuner doesn’t work now ๐Ÿ™

      Small price to pay.

      • palisade
      • 12 years ago

      I’ve upgraded to XP. I used Vista for 3 months and the bugs, performance issues, and UAC finally got to me. I’m a developer, I couldn’t get Visual Studio .NET to install at all on Vista, I tried so many different ways. I find that really shocking, users follow developers, its called mindshare, MS knows this.

      I finally end up having to use the Visual Studio 2008 beta at the time, and it was really in bad shape. I couldn’t develop a simple GUI app because the windows forms designer would take a dump. Not only that, but if I did succeed in compiling an application UAC would ask me about 3 times if I really wanted to allow the compile, then it would ask me 2 times if I really wanted to allow the debugger to hook the executable, then it would ask me 1 more time if I wanted the exe I had just made run. Basically, it got really tedious to even just compile an app, and this was after lowering UACs defenses as low as they could go (you can’t turn it off, MS doesn’t want people doing that so they didn’t even allow it.)

      So, no, I’m actually quite intelligent to be using XP. You have no idea what a relief it has been to move back to XP, its like, “ahh.” Everyone who uses Vista and thinks its great should try going back to XP sometime, you’ll be really suprised how good it feels. Your boot times are faster, moving files is blazing fast, its rock solid stable, all your devices are supported, no annoying popups, all your software works, etc. When Vista grows up, I’ll revisit it.

        • MattMojo
        • 12 years ago

        I use Vista as my primary OS at home — I have it in my main machine (see my post in this thread for it’s specs) – It runs my HTPC and it runs on my Dell XPS laptop – Every issue I have ever had has been because I was attempting to run legacy software and usually legacy software (XP) didn’t even follow MS rules then and now Vista actually enforces those rules -> hence the “annoying” UAC popups (admin access to program files usually the culprit) — Vista does exactly what is was design to do, nothing more, nothing less. It works and btw you CAN turn off UAC.

        At work I still use XP primarily (we do have a couple of Vista boxes) only because we have no plans on deploying Server2008 yet and there is really no advantage to use Vista until then.

        And I must say Vista64 Ultimate + my main machine = the best computer I have ever built and used …. EVER!

        Mojo

      • Kaleid
      • 12 years ago

      Pay money for poorer framerates? Grand idea!

      • BeowulfSchaeffer
      • 12 years ago

      I’m waiting for Win7 ๐Ÿ˜‰ Why bother with Vista?

      • Ubik
      • 12 years ago

      I use XP because Vista’s “wonderful” new audio kernel would utterly break all my professional music production software. It may have increased performance for gamers and home theater enthusiasts, but musicians really got shafted on this one.

      • maxxcool
      • 12 years ago

      Why would I use vista? I have 2 gigs of ram. Xp does what it I need it to do. Hell I am not even using 64bit xp (also because i have 2 gigs of ram)

      Vista has no compelling reasons for me to switch…

      Built in picture/media tools ??? So what ? Are you too lazy to download your own? Are you too confused?

      UAD? … Are you dumb enough to click on the magic banner and need something to keep your system from being ownd?

      Pretty UI? …. Why oh god do people ohh and ahh or a little shader 2.0 magic. Are you that entertained by transparent menus ??? Ya know there are tons of Vista theme rip-offs that work great to emulate Vists without breaking my hardware and force me to use crap like a Alchemy wrapper.

      Huh…. ran out of features to make fun off… imagine that, from the Os that took years and years to build to only have half its original specs removed before shipping…. yah where is my Newcastle filesystem?

      Did you buy a Millennium too ?

    • herothezero
    • 12 years ago

    Wow…for an OS that ostensibly sucks, Vista has a strong showing.

      • d2brothe
      • 12 years ago

      *sigh*…I’m so sick of people bashing vista for no good reason….

    • lucas1985
    • 12 years ago

    #98,
    q[

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      Vista does offer better control over processes, services, access privileges over XP.

      It is MS’s first successful attempt to mimic *nix crowd at those areas.

        • indeego
        • 12 years ago

        /[

          • Krogoth
          • 12 years ago

          Well, I do agree that UAC could have been done a lot better from an UI stand-point.

          It is a big step in the right direction though.

            • charged3800z24
            • 12 years ago

            UAC is so easy to turn off…. whats the big deal about it? I run both Vista an XP on the same system. I prefer both.

            • strikeleader
            • 12 years ago

            One word, Security

            • charged3800z24
            • 12 years ago

            I know it is for security.. I am saying why do people have a big problem with it. If you don’t like it.. turn it off.. That is what I was saying…

    • BoBzeBuilder
    • 12 years ago

    You know you can clear cookies and vote again. It wasn’t like that before.

      • indeego
      • 12 years ago

      I flew across the country just to vote againg{<.<}g

        • BoBzeBuilder
        • 12 years ago

        And Bush was re-elected. Thanks indeego.

    • sluggo
    • 12 years ago

    This is good. I feel less unworthy now about my nforce 4 motherboard, seeing as how one in six are in the same boat. What bugs me most now is that the system I put together last month for less than $150 whips it’s arse.

    • danny e.
    • 12 years ago

    wow.. i didnt expect us ATI owners to be so outnumbered..

      • Pettytheft
      • 12 years ago

      If you would have taken this before the 8800’s came out I’m sure it would have been different.

        • Nitrodist
        • 12 years ago

        Welcome to 2 years ago ๐Ÿ˜€

    • lucas1985
    • 12 years ago

    #71,
    With that track record at infecting machines in such a short time, you could try to break OpenBSD. The odds favour you.

      • Meadows
      • 12 years ago

      I prefer using an OS that does what I want it to do. This is exactly where Vista excels for me and it’s where XP couldn’t.

      I’m a Microsoft fan anyhow.

    • dragmor
    • 12 years ago

    Anyone else bought a new PC and then sold it and stuck with their old PC?

    I’m currently running an 3500+ with 6600GT, I bought a E4300@3ghz with the 7950GX2 I won. It was ok, better on newer games, the same on older games, in the end it was just wasted money. I never really moved everything across because the old PC was more than enough. So I sold the C2D box to a friend. There just wasn’t enough difference and my old PC was quieter and used less power.

      • Kurotetsu
      • 12 years ago

      Thats interesting.

      My old setup was very similar to yours, a 3000+ with a 6600GT, and my current setup was also similar to the new one you briefly had, E4500@3ghz with a 8800GT. Except my experience was totally opposite. The difference in speed was such that I now dislike going back to the old one to transfer files. By comparison, programs loaded much slower on the old one, the CPU ran much hotter and it didn’t overclock nearly as well. The new system is also MUCH quieter than the older one.

    • TurtlePerson2
    • 12 years ago

    I didn’t realize so many people had X-Fis. I only have mine because I record music, why does everyone else have it?

      • NeXus 6
      • 12 years ago

      Games. Restored EAX via ALchemy. Works great under Vista.

      I also prefer the sound quality of it over integrated. I’ve never been happy with that Realtek/ADI garbage.

        • Meadows
        • 12 years ago

        ADI is quite fair. But yeah, integrated sound chips don’t have the performance and clarity that discrete cards give. If I had money for things like these I’d get myself an Oxygen HD for content creation.

      • jackaroon
      • 12 years ago

      I have one because I am (or was) literally too ignorant to realize that it makes no significant difference. I have a typical 2:1 setup and everything sounds pretty much the same as the onboard sound in my old system. There MIGHT be some sounds in WoW that never used to play (like they were just left out, maybe?) but I’m pretty sure I could have fixed that with a much cheaper card. Also, TR told me to buy it in the system guide.

      As you can probably infer, I’m still pretty ignorant about sound cards, I’m just a little disillusioned.

        • NeXus 6
        • 12 years ago

        Your speakers must not be that great. I have the Logitech Z5500s and I can hear a significant difference in quality between the X-Fi and integrated. In fact, the clarity is better on the X-Fi over my older Audigy 2 ZS. The X-Fi Crystalizer really makes a difference.

          • crazybus
          • 12 years ago

          Funny, because I bought my Z-5500’s specifically so I wouldn’t have to buy a sound card.

          • jackaroon
          • 12 years ago

          I hadn’t been using the crystalizer – I just figured it was a cheesy equalizer preset built up to be something more. I’ve been giving it a go, for a few hours now, and I haven’t heard a song that sounds worse (or just “wrong,” either) with the crystalizer on, so I suppose I just wasn’t giving them enough credit. I wonder what exactly it’s doing to improve the sound (but if I had an answer, I probably wouldn’t understand it). Thanks for the tip.

            • DancingWind
            • 12 years ago

            ๐Ÿ˜€ it basically gives a boost to low and high freq sounds – as in sounds sharper. Well it is quite nice on normal-high q traks but if the track is not good it could worsen (chirping at high freq.)

            Another good function in Xfi is Sound volume control – quite traks are played louder loud are quiter so that all traks are played on the same level … although sometimes if there are no sounds playing in the background SVM can elevate noise to audiable levels.

        • indeego
        • 12 years ago

        I have a pair of crappy headphones and I noticed an immediate difference compared to onboard. That ain’t sayin’ much, but stillg{<.<}g

        • Meadows
        • 12 years ago

        Sound diversity and clarity increases greatly with that over the onboard audio. Any 2.1 system is enough to notice.

        You may have set World of Warcraft to use the high number of sound channels (or the game configured itself) and probably hardware acceleration is enabled too, so you may hear more sounds at once and they get better. If not, then you should set it that way. (Don’t forget to check the reverb option to the left among those other settings.)

      • Ubik
      • 12 years ago

      I hate to sound rude, but why on earth do you have an X-Fi if you record music? There are far, far better units out there – for /[

        • Kurotetsu
        • 12 years ago

        FYI, the XtremeGamer sells for $80 right now.

        I can’t comment on audio production, but for music, movies and games the XtremeGamer has been very nice for me. I updated from a Soundblaster Live! 5.1 and noticed a huge difference right away. In particular, music that was suffered from snap, crackle and pop suddenly sounded brand new. Also, I’ve been spoiled by the Crystalizer feature. Suddenly, I can’t listen to any of my music without it (even though it only seems to increase the volume).

          • JustAnEngineer
          • 12 years ago

          There’s also a $30 MIR, bringing it down to $50AR.

          • Ubik
          • 12 years ago

          The thing is, any audio production card will do all those just as well – the only things it won’t do are EAX acceleration and (usually) 7.1 surround processing. In exchange for those, you get far higher sound quality, ASIO performance and a good selection of I/O ports for anything you might be recording from (or to). I won’t deny that 99% of people won’t need those things, but I was mostly responding to TP2’s statement that he uses an X-Fi for recording when it’s one of the worst options for doing so.

          Also, the “crystallizer” is essentially just a volume and EQ setting – you’re not getting anything you couldn’t get from the settings in your MP3 player.

        • TurtlePerson2
        • 12 years ago

        I play games too and I got the X-Fi for a very attractive price at the time. Since I have a 5.1 system and a bunch of games that support EAX, I got an X-Fi Platinum. The front panel is nice to have and very useful plus when I saw it selling for half off, I just couldn’t resist.

        • insulin_junkie72
        • 12 years ago

        Creative owns E-MU , too (and has since the early ’90s), so you’re still making money for Creative ๐Ÿ˜›

          • Ubik
          • 12 years ago

          Yeah, but at least E-MU products sound and perform better than the rest of Creative’s lineup. Hell, they’re better than M-Audio in a lot of cases.

      • astrotech66
      • 12 years ago

      I have an Auzentech sound card that uses the X-Fi chip, so I answered “other” since that didn’t really fit any of the choices given. I use mine for gaming and listening to music, mostly. I have some nice Logitech speakers, so I figure I ought to use a decent soundcard with them.

      • kitsura
      • 12 years ago

      I got my X-Fi Elite Pro because I needed the optical output options for my speakers.

        • aatu
        • 12 years ago

        … How about next time you’re buying a new motherboard, you try integrated audio with optical out instead of discrete audio? After that you can sell your X-Fi to someone, who uses only analog output.

      • fpsduck
      • 12 years ago

      I/O Drive (X-Fi Fatal1ty)
      I’m too lazy to connect my headphone @ the back panel.

      • Kaleid
      • 12 years ago

      Ever since my first Live! card I have enjoyed EAX reverbs in games (especially Dark Engine games, Thief 1,2 and System shock 2)
      For pure audio there has been better cards out there but I have to make a compromise for games.

    • willyolio
    • 12 years ago

    22% have 1280×1024 displays, while only 6% have 5:4 monitor aspect ratios?

    looks like 16% need to learn their math.

      • ssidbroadcast
      • 12 years ago

      I polled for my intel Macbook, but wasn’t sure what to put down for the Chipset. I know this one has a GMA950 for the display adaptor, so I just winged it with the 9xx series.

        • bthylafh
        • 12 years ago

        945 chipset. I’ve got the same for my work computer.

      • Lord.Blue
      • 12 years ago

      I agree. Seems that people don’t know that 1280×1024 is 5:4, and not 4:3. Oh well.

      • aatu
      • 12 years ago

      … I think the question “Main display aspect ratio” is about the MONITOR’s aspect ratio, not the resolution aspect ratio, because everybody can see the latter from the next question, so there wouldn’t be any point asking it twice.
      For example, my CRT is 4:3, with a resolution of 1280×1024…

        • havanu
        • 12 years ago

        That seems rather silly, using a 5:4 aspect ratio on a 4:3 monitor.
        Resolution confusion: when circles become ovals.

          • aatu
          • 12 years ago

          I don’t think it really matters in general use. If I were to do some professional (or even hobby) photo-editing, or something else that requires better geometry matching, then yes – that would be stupid…
          But with just surfing, writing documents, etc, I really couldn’t care less. And for gaming I naturally change the resolution.
          Now, it could be a whole different situation if I used a 16:9 resolution, but with 5:4 vs 4:3, there isn’t that big of a difference.

    • StashTheVampede
    • 12 years ago

    Vista’s representation is REALLY good! Look at how cheap 4GB is and your options for a Microsoft OS for 64bit and Vista is a very compelling choice.

    • Corrado
    • 12 years ago

    Looks like other than Video card (x800 GTO since I really dont game anymore on my PC) I’m right in the middle of the bell curve for almost all hardware using a Gigabyte 965, C2D 2.13ghz, 750GB with 4gb of ram.

    • ozymandias
    • 12 years ago

    I do miss the cheese options.

    Too bad nobody lists my 1600*1024 display ๐Ÿ™

      • d2brothe
      • 12 years ago

      Seconded…

    • jobodaho
    • 12 years ago

    Well my votes might not represent the majority because my laptop is now my primary machine.

    • mafropetee
    • 12 years ago

    *facepalm* I should have known it was 16:10. Just one area that I’m not too keen on >.<

    There should be another one of these, but only for the non-computing parts, such as the case, fans, cooling, PSU, etc.

    • ludi
    • 12 years ago

    That few people using an AthlonFX? Looks like all the hot action around here is at dual-core. I’m tempted to upgrade but I really don’t want to change mobos, and if I reinstall XP again I’ll have to explain to a nice Microsoft Indian why I need a license reset again…

    • Deli
    • 12 years ago

    Great poll!
    How about one for Graphic Card and Memory Brand as well?

    • donkeycrock
    • 12 years ago

    I love my PC, it plays most all new pc games at 100 fps(except crysis), it’s quiet, small, light, heavily OC’ed, custom heat sinks for the video card and cpu, 4 120 mm fans @ 1000 rpm, 1000 W power supply with 1400 mm fan. I added up the entire thing cost 1500 bucks including the table and chair.

    • Hattig
    • 12 years ago

    Is my new computer now 9 months old?! I haven’t used it nearly enough, and by the time I’ve moved house it’ll be 15 months old. Whaah. I’ll treat it to a new hard drive and Linux install to make up.

    I didn’t count my G4 iBook even though I am on it the most, because that would have been “other” all the way through.

    Nor my work computer, heh, although that is >8 hours a day (Core 2 Duo though, shame it’s Dell and feels like a C3 at times).

    • Vrock
    • 12 years ago

    Windows XP is still the most common OS among TR readers? I’m genuinely surprised, especially given that majority of readers own DX 10 class graphics cards.

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      Not surprised at all.

      Just because you have DX10-class GPU does not imply that you would use it solely for its DX10 capabilities.

      The majority of voters still are running first-generation C2Ds, X2s, A64s, even P4s. They probably also have only 2GB of memory. It just makes sense to use XP for those systems.

      I bet that practically all of the Vista 64 users have at least 4GB or greater using C2Q or a higher-end (stock or overclocked) C2D of some shape or form.

        • Vrock
        • 12 years ago

        Sorry, were you talking? All I heard was a faint buzzing sound.

        • packfan_dave
        • 12 years ago

        I’m using Vista 64 (@home; work is still XP) with a C2D T7200 (2 GHz/4MB cache Merom) and 3GB of RAM. Granted, that’s only because I can’t quite figure out how to take off the keyboard so I can install the other DIMM and get it up to 4GB…

        • Meadows
        • 12 years ago

        It makes sense to use Vista 64 even on the rigs you pointed out. On the flip side, not all Vista 64 machines cost 2000 dollars.

        I run Vista 64 on a mainstream X2 with an 8800 GT and 4 gigs of DDR2-667. It didn’t cost the earth (especially as it has not been bought in one piece but upgraded over the course of a year now, can’t do that often with intel).

        • JustAnEngineer
        • 12 years ago

        Athlon64 X2 4600+, RS482 Socket-939 motherboard, 2GiB PC3200, and Windows Vista 64-bit Home Premium, here. Oh yeah, Radeon HD3870X2 and Dell UltraSharp 3007WFP, too.

      • Ubik
      • 12 years ago

      Windows Vista’s audio kernel would break all my music production software. Screw that noise.

      • Meadows
      • 12 years ago

      Do you know what really scares me Vrock? Not the XP choice, but rather “Other”.

        • Krogoth
        • 12 years ago

        That only leaves UNIX, BSD and a few other OS.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 12 years ago

          Windows 98 ftw!

      • enzia35
      • 12 years ago

      I used xp till I bought Vista for $10 through the school.

      • Entroper
      • 12 years ago

      Given the widespread Vista hate, I was surprised that its share was as high as 35%. I was equally surprised that 64-bit outnumbers 32-bit (but not by much).

        • willyolio
        • 12 years ago

        it’s practically split even for vista users. i’m planning on going straight to vista 64 when i upgrade, since i haven’t had any issues with xp64.

      • paulWTAMU
      • 12 years ago

      I had an real need to upgrade my GPU to do what I want (play games). I don’t yet need to do that with my OS. I’m not ragging Vista, just saying that there isn’t the same reason to upgrade that as there is hardware for me, and probably most of us. The big reason I got an 8800GT wasn’t that it was DX10–it was that COD4, Witcher, STALKER, etc. ran like crap at my monitors native rez with my prior video card.

      • mad dog
      • 12 years ago

      you’d be surprised when M$ is going to back-port DirectX10 for XP because of the userbase …. muahahahaaaa … humiliation

        • Krogoth
        • 12 years ago

        Not possible.

        DX10 cannot work with older NT driver model.

          • palisade
          • 12 years ago

          Some rogue developer already started porting it.

      • absinthexl
      • 12 years ago

      oops

    • slot_one
    • 12 years ago

    Opteron 185 overclocked to 3.0GHz (Socket 939)
    SLI GTS-640, both flashed to 630/1500/2000
    nForce 4 SLI with 32 lanes
    Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe
    4GB PC3200
    500GB+250GB=750GB total
    BluRay/HD-DVD combination drive+20x DVD burner
    X-Fi
    Single 24″ Samsung monitor
    1920×1200, 16:10
    Windows Vista 64-bit

    My Baest. Yup, Baest. That’s his name.

    • indeego
    • 12 years ago

    Impressive XP representg{

      • duffy
      • 12 years ago

      Vista rules….NOT!

        • Krogoth
        • 12 years ago

        Actually, Vista 64 is now better than XP. The maturity of drivers, hotfixes and upcoming SP1 have bridged the gap and got rid of some original complaints.

        The crux of the problem is still stupid PR FUD and majority of XP users still have not run into 4GB problem.

        I suspect at the point once 2GB does not cut it anymore is where those enthusiast are going to make the jump or even opt for “7”.

          • donkeycrock
          • 12 years ago

          i just switched from vista 64 back to xp. i have never had so many program crashes with vista, and a noise hard drive also. it was clunky and slow, file transferring sucks, and the shut down blows. i get atleast 20 more fps with xp also.

            • Meadows
            • 12 years ago

            20 more fps how. In what. Under what conditions.
            Your *[

            • indeego
            • 12 years ago

            /[<"I have probably had 2 malware infections in the past 10 months (I occasionally check with a free tool),"<]/ Yikesg{<.<}g

            • Meadows
            • 12 years ago

            That used to be 10 times as much with XP at the very least. My browsing habits are not safe.
            ๐Ÿ˜ฎ

            • indeego
            • 12 years ago

            get noscript + firefox. It’ll be safeg{<.<}g

            • DreadCthulhu
            • 12 years ago

            Or for the really paranoid, get Virtual Box, and browse potentially dangerous sites from within a virtual machine.

            • Meadows
            • 12 years ago

            Protected Mode IE7 looks to be enough. I never did like Firefox much. Got used to IE’s interface too much as well, I guess.

            • Plinth
            • 12 years ago

            I have quite an old/unsupported box (nForce 3 Ultra, 6800GS, Athlon 64 3200+, 1.5GB RAM), and I also got at least 20fps more in XP vs. Vista in the games that I tried, which were F.E.A.R and a whole bunch of Source games including TF2. Even though this hardware is quite old, it is not particularly uncommon, meaning many people could have similar framerate problems. It runs everything else in Vista fine.

          • Byzantine1453
          • 12 years ago

          I have vista 64 on both my desktop and laptop and i never want to go back to xp after using it all. Applications imo seem to actually work better on vista then they did in xp!

          • continuum
          • 12 years ago

          For 98% or 99% of users, I agree– Vista is a viable choice, including Vista x64. That definitely wasn’t the case 8 months ago or even 5 months ago, but sometime this fall it got quite good.

          XP x64 does have its uses– and til 5 months ago I would be happy to use it instead of Vista… but at this point now, it depends on the user and the hardware/software.

          Me personally? I keep encountering the 1% of hardware/software that’s a royal PITA to get working in Vista. ๐Ÿ™

    • Usacomp2k3
    • 12 years ago

    I’m betting most of the 16:9 people are actually 16:10 and don’t know any better.

      • gat0rjay
      • 12 years ago

      #30.Yeah, probably 9/10 of them.. The other 1/10 probably have an HTPC hooked up to a high def tv…

        • Usacomp2k3
        • 12 years ago

        There were 9 votes for 1920×1080 and 84 for 16:9

        • glynor
        • 12 years ago

        I’m one of those 16:9, 1920×1080 people, and yes… It is hooked up to a 42″ HDTV.

      • zqw
      • 12 years ago

      Yup the matching resolutions don’t add up to the 16:9 percentage.

        • reactor
        • 12 years ago

        I use my TV as a monitor, maybe others do too?

          • ChronoReverse
          • 12 years ago

          I bet some people put down 4:3 aspect for their 17″ LCDs too. Only CRTs and smaller LCDs are 4:3 =(

            • Krogoth
            • 12 years ago

            There are larger LCDs that have 4:3 ratio (native resolution = 1600×1200) however they are pretty rare to find. It seems that widespread models with 16:10 and native resolution of 1650×1050 have taken their place.

            • Mr Bill
            • 12 years ago

            Good 19 inch CRT’s are also native at 1600×1200.

      • enzia35
      • 12 years ago

      Only reason I know the Samsung SyncMaster 906BW is 16:10 is because of CS:S in the options.

        • sroylance
        • 12 years ago

        You’re right, mine is a 1680×1050 LCD and I voted 16:9 without doing the math

          • newbie_of_jan0502
          • 12 years ago

          me too. doh!

          • stonedagain
          • 12 years ago

          how dissappointing is this poll? it’s useless as most of the people voting obviously need to go back to school if they can’t do basic division even with a calculator built in to the OS, which leads me to believe they don’t know anything about whats in their comps either… come on people, what are you all aged? i’m pretty sure that would of been in exams we have here in the uk at age 12! Must be alot of very young people on this site then.

            • Hdfisise
            • 12 years ago

            As long as TR use this to check the most popular resolutions to test video cards in then I don;t think the cock ups on the aspect ratio will matter that much.

            • JustAnEngineer
            • 12 years ago

            I started a thread in the forums after a round of graphics card reviews back in November.
            ยง[<https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=54988<]ยง TR's recent reviews have had an excellent mix of 16:10 resolutions (e.g.: 1280x800, 1680x1050, 1920x1200, 2560x1600). If this poll is to be believed, those are the most important ones for the site's readers.

            • echo_seven
            • 12 years ago

            lol, I screwed up the aspect ratio question too (1440×900). And I did the poll while at work….at an engineering firm….

    • krisia2006
    • 12 years ago

    This is only our main system. Some of us have many more systems…

    • Ruiner
    • 12 years ago

    Whip out your e-penOr and put it on the bar graph!

    • Krogoth
    • 12 years ago

    It looks like the users here change their GPUs very frequently and typically hold onto their CPUs for a lot longer.

    In other words, there are a bunch of gamers here.

    Edit: Damage, at least you were not cruel enough to throw a curveball and use xiB numerical convention for total storage capacity.

    • provoko
    • 12 years ago

    For the 2 people that have *[

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      It could be that their main rig is just a server box that is only access via remote desktop/VNC.

      It could also be that they have more then 4 monitors look up to their main rig. (Yes, it is quite possible)

      • nagashi
      • 12 years ago

      Projector most likely. Or maybe tv. I realize that one could argue that projectors use LCDs, but there’s a hell of a difference between using a 20″ lcd monitor and an LCD projector on a 20 square foot section of wall. Different enough to put other I’d say. The same goes for TV/CRT I’d say. They may be similar hardware wise, but functionally they’re very different.

        • DreadCthulhu
        • 12 years ago

        They might also be using a DLP TV, those are not too uncommon. Or maybe someone has one of those little OLED TVs that Sony released last year and is using that for a monitor for some reason.

          • BKA
          • 12 years ago

          Well my display is an Sharp Aquos HDTV but I guess I could have chosen LCD but that’s not what it really is so I choose other. Which is also why I choose other on the resolution since 1360X768 wasn’t a choice.

    • lyc
    • 12 years ago

    go go xp64!

    q6600 / 4gb / 320gb / dvd burner / gigabyte / gf8800gts 640mb / single 24″ dell / 1920×1200

    didn’t answer gpu price because i have no idea how much it would cost converted to $us, in america (bartered in south africa in exchange for about 7 cows, 3 geese and my sister)

    • maxxcool
    • 12 years ago

    No clock speed polls !???

      • ReAp3r-G
      • 12 years ago

      haha…now that you mentioned it XD

      • derFunkenstein
      • 12 years ago

      Pentium4 forever clocksped king!

      • provoko
      • 12 years ago

      Clock speed doesn’t really tell a lot. Neither does MB brand though, haha.

        • Krogoth
        • 12 years ago

        Motherboard brand tells a lot about choices that enthusiast prefer.

        It would be seemed that ASUS and Gigabyte take top notches.

    • MattMojo
    • 12 years ago

    My MonsterPC:

    Asus KFN32-D SLi/SAS | 2x Opteron 2220 | 8 Gig ECC RAM | 2x BFG 8800 Ultras w/ DangerDen watercooling | Soundblaster X-Fi elite pro | Samsung 24″ LCD (Black) | Logitec X560 5.1 speaker system | good ol’ Microsoft basic keyboard (black) | Razor Diamondback mouse | Thermaltake Armor case (black) | Thermaltake 1200W PS | Thermaltake Bigwater liquid cooling system | Vista x64 Ultimate Edition

    Best computer I have ever used to date. I brag only because it has taken quite some time to amass my masterpiece and I am proud of it!

    Mojo

      • kuraegomon
      • 12 years ago

      Oh well, since the brags are coming out:

      C2 Q6600 G0 (OC to 3.2 GHz), 4x1GB Corsair PC2-6400C4, 2×8800 GTX (OC), Asus Striker Extreme, AMCC/3Ware 9650SE-8LPML hardware RAID, 4xWD Raptor (Raid 0 – OS). 2x 500GB Seagate 7200.10 (RAID 1). 2x Asus SATA 18x DVD burner, Silverstone Temjin TJ-09, Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme + Scythe S-Flex SFF21F. Dell 3007 WFP LCD.

      And, I know the feeling about taking some time to put together a monster, lol

        • kuraegomon
        • 12 years ago

        And Thermaltake Toughpower 1200. OS is Vista Ultimate x64. And even with the PS running at 87 % efficiency, my rig pulls over 0.5 KW at IDLE. Lord, I’m embarassed even to say it. Really need the real Nvidia 9800 at 65 nm to drop my power consumption.

          • MattMojo
          • 12 years ago

          Yeah I forgot to mention 3x WD Raptor 150 in RAID0… doh!

          Mojo

            • kuraegomon
            • 12 years ago

            There you go. I thought that storage subsystem was sounding a little weak. Clarified. So what you pull at the wall? The OC’ed Ultra’s are probably making up for my extra drives, but my RAID card definitely pulls some juice …

            • MattMojo
            • 12 years ago

            Yeah, lets just say when I power it up my power meter outside goes on a flat spin even Maverick would be proud of.

            Mojo

      • indeego
      • 12 years ago

      I’ll brag also:
      I haven’t paid for a single PC or internet access in 7 yearsg{<.<}g

        • maasenstodt
        • 12 years ago

        In all honesty, I think that’s worth a lot more bragging points than having shelled out big bucks for a high-end gaming rig.

      • SecretMaster
      • 12 years ago

      I’m just waiting for Leor to respond.

    • packfan_dave
    • 12 years ago

    My main PC is a laptop, almost always docked. So I counted the external monitor as the only display, the external hard drive as part of the storage, and the ~$100 Dell charged to have low-end non-integrated video rather than integrated video.

    • glynor
    • 12 years ago

    Primary PC? What does that mean?

    I gave stats for my HTPC because (a) it is the machine I probably spend more time in front of than any other, and (b) because it is currently my most powerful machine other than my MacPro… I did not vote for: my laptop (MacBook Pro), my home office desktop PC (Opteron 175), my wife’s office desktop (Athlon XP-M), my workstation at work (Pentium D), or my video editing workstation at work (Mac Pro).

      • alex666
      • 12 years ago

      Same with me, I chose my HTPC because it’s my best system by far though my home-office system is where I spend most of my time (unfortunately).

    • nagashi
    • 12 years ago

    athlon 3000/1 gig ddr/gigabyte nforce3/2.4tb/dvd burner/gefore 5600 + matrox millenium/3 lcds (1680×1050, 1280×1024, 1024×768)/xubuntu 7.10

    I use it for gaming (Ragnarok Online/playstation&neogeo emulation), work, and video watching (that’s the 2.4tb in storage :D). It’s meeting my needs pretty much perfectly and I don’t really see the need to update it for the next 2 years. If I could upgrade it to emulate a ps2 for <$200, I’d probably do that though.

    Just about the only limitation I’ve ever run across is that it can’t really play 1080p matroska files. I’ve only downloaded 3-4 movies at that resolution so far, so it’s not a huge deal. Most of the tv shows I dl are at 1280×720 and those play just fine.

    • eh?
    • 12 years ago

    optical storage section needs clarification – it only had blu-ray/HD-DVD reader or blu-ray/HD-DVD burner – is that asking if it burns to blu-ray and HD-DVD, or would that include a drive that can read blu-ray and HD-DVD and burn DVD? (like the LG combo drive) – I put mine down as a blu ray and HD-DVD reader, but it also burns to DVD.

    • DrDillyBar
    • 12 years ago

    Good poll that

    • alloyD
    • 12 years ago

    ๐Ÿ™ my Athlon XP wasn’t in the list. I think I’ve squeezed this thing for all its worth.

    • Vrock
    • 12 years ago

    Hmm, the number of people with 4:3 monitors doesn’t seem to correlate right, given the responses to the resolutions and display type categories….

      • excession
      • 12 years ago

      I would surmise that people are forgetting/not realising that 1280×1024 = 5:4…

        • cobalt
        • 12 years ago

        D’oh! Count me in for jumping on that 4:3 bandwagon without thinking. I’m so accustomed to having to choose between 16:9 and 4:3 that I didn’t even notice there were other options….

          • yogibbear
          • 12 years ago

          me too… damn it…

          i feel stupid now.

      • Krogoth
      • 12 years ago

      Yep, 1280×1024 and 5:4 votes do not match. ๐Ÿ˜‰

      Every 1280×1024 vote should also be 5:4 one as well.

        • SNM
        • 12 years ago

        Aren’t a lot of 1280*1024 LCDs physically 4:3? I’ve definitely got a couple of games that class 1280*1024 as a 4:3 resolution.

          • bthylafh
          • 12 years ago

          I don’t see how. Divide 1280 by 1024 and you get 1.25, 5/4. Probably whomever programmed that part of your game(s) was innumerate.

          Math is hard!

      • indeego
      • 12 years ago

      People run at a different resolution than their LCDg{

        • MBIlover
        • 12 years ago

        Yup I see that with most of my coworkers. I once made the mistake of changing it for someone having PC problems and they hated the native res because the “letters were too small”.

          • Mithent
          • 12 years ago

          I’ve got in trouble for ‘fixing’ someone’s computer to use its native LCD resolution. They preferred it at 1024×768, even though an LCD at non-native resolution is unbearably fuzzy for me.

            • Zhaine
            • 12 years ago

            Ever computer at every school/Uni I’ve seen since LCDs became commonplace has had 19″, 5:4 ratio, 1280×1024 native res screens set to 1024×768 (or even 800×600. . . seriously). It’s bizarre.

        • Vrock
        • 12 years ago

        That might explain 9% of the discrepancy, if this were a website for old people/computer noobs. Well, maybe not: how many of them know or care what their screen resolution is, or aspect ratio for that matter?

        No, it’s far more likely that people just messed up and picked 4:3 by mistake.

      • spartus4
      • 12 years ago

      I would have to agree. I don’t think that some of the people that are taking the survey are in the know. If you look at some of the other polls in this, it just doesn’t make sense.

    • excession
    • 12 years ago

    Heh, this has persuaded me that it’s really time to be upgrading from my Athlon XP ๐Ÿ™
    About the only place where I’m keeping up is with my 2GB of RAM and 1280×1024 resolution ๐Ÿ˜›

      • Longshot099
      • 12 years ago

      Heh. I still have an Athlon XP as well, so I had to vote ‘other’. Planning on upgrading soon tho! Probably sometime in May.

        • hermanshermit
        • 12 years ago

        Err, the fact some of my hardware doesn’t have vista drivers?

        The fact file copy performance is still extremely bad?

        The fact that it would cost $200 to upgrade and not offer me anything at all as I don’t like Aero and don’t ‘need’ DX10 as I don’t game?

        Jeez, you’re right, I must be an idiot.

        Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think Vista is bad, the word I’m looking for is “unnecessary”.

      • Peldor
      • 12 years ago

      Same here. At least tomorrow I will move up on the screen size poll (birthday present ftw).

      Interesting how strong integrated sound has become.

      I can’t feel too bad though. We probably need to take up a collection for the two poor souls with less than 512MB of memory.

        • excession
        • 12 years ago

        A collection to upgrade from <512MB? Ye Gods! I can get a 512MB DDR2 DIMM for seven quid, about the price of two pints (of beer…) in London!

      • indeego
      • 12 years ago

      My /[

      • kitsura
      • 12 years ago

      I’m using an Athlong XP 3200 too so you’re not alone. Didn’t find a need to upgrade since all I’m using my PC for is surfing, email and some basic office apps.

      • Delphis
      • 12 years ago

      Oh good, it’s not just me with an Athlon XP on my ‘gaming’ machine ๐Ÿ˜€ .. 128MB Radeon 9500 Pro. Still plays Half Life 2/Ep1/Ep2 nicely at 1280×1024 on the LCD though. 1.5GB RAM. Some time I’ll devote funds to it. Right now I’m looking for a new digital SLR.

      It is hard to answer this because the ‘primary PC’ on the home network is a 2Ghz Athlon 64 based file server (Linux, SATA drives RAID) that runs my internet connection, mail, websites and the wireless. My wife’s ‘primary PC’ is a Thinkpad T60 (C2D 2Ghz).

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This