If your gaming PC has the following hardware .......

OS - win xp
CPU - dual core under 2.7ghz
ram - 2GB
GPU - 8800GT 512mb or equivalent
HDD- 250GB or under
res - 1280 x 1024

then you are the average gamer!!...or at least on STEAM

STEAM gaming stats for the month of May, always fun to look at

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

Can't believe people still run 1280x1024.

Hey! I love my 1280x1024, even though I do have bigger monitors.
Why?

1. Counterstrike Source, CS1, and older games look their best at 1280x1024, or 1024x768...any larger
resolution and the images feel stretched.

2. CSS source sometimes gives me a headache if I go to larger resolutions than 1280x1024. I also find that my playing abilities are the best around 1024x768.

3. You can actually run Crysis at 1280x1024 at nearly maxed out without a $400 GPU

Those are pretty funny. It's amazing what some of those numbers say about the hardware of the gaming community on steam

Wow, I'm almost exactly that.

OS - Win XP
CPU - Brisbane X2 @ 2.6Ghz
RAM - 2Gb
GPU - Hd 4670
HDD - 250Gb
Res - 1440x900

Creepy...

Its one word, but it is plural

rice is nice on any day

yeah... Go 1280x1024 right?? ehh i wish not but they're good enough. I'm surprised gamers are still on 2gb. It makes sense but i tend to also think pc gamers are synonymous with $2000 computers i guess.

So you can fill that RAM with a bunch of programs and have them all waiting while one finishes a task? Even with half the RAM, the hypothetical quad setup you mentioned should be faster (assuming Windows and a page file on an average or better hard drive).

loser noob

i light 1440x900 more than 1280x1024. I thought most people were at 1680x1050 or above that already lol. 8800gt holy crap wtf is that cause most games would lag at 1920x1200.

I think it shows as others have said how many CRT's are still out there.

There's another important factor (at least for me): the screen refresh rate. Until not so long ago choosing a bigger LCD was a stupid move as they were limited to mere 60Hz. I much more prefer 75Hz offered by 1280x1024 LCDs, although now with introduction of 120Hz screens I'm considering making the move to 1680x1050. If I only had the money...

I'm a peasant, I guess

^^^Oh well, we're toast then

Apparently no one on steam has tri-fire. I found that surprising.

Who thinks the "undetermined" optical drive is BR? Less than 2%, whatever it is.

Oh. And I like 1920x1200. And I like working with 3840x1200. Gets more done if you can see more stuff. Had to put off building my new desktop because of the 24" panel, though....but I had to have it. My other desktop had dual 1280x1024. So I contributed there.

none of those comments are trolling

just one person who believes his $2k PC makes him better then other people, sadly it really is just compensation for him lacking in many other areas.

+1 to Suc_t ,did it again

wow my system wasnt much better than that before lst novemeber
acer aspire t180
amd athlon 3500+ 2.2GHz, single core
2gb ram (upped from 512)
onboard graphics
vista
160gb hdd

now i bought all new pieces overtime untill i had a new comp

amd phenom II 940 BE quad 3.0 GHz (ocd to 3.6)
4gb 1066mhz ram
radeon 4850 512 (upgrade needed)
windows 7 x64
1000gb (500 x 2 in RAID0)

also 4gb of ram is a lot better because what windows does for me is it takes the half that it isnt using (~2000mb, right now 1700) and caches all the programs in it. so it stores programs i open often (lets say photoshop) and keeps all the info cached. so next time i open it, it can actually skip the splash screen, which otherwise would take 15 sec to start up

ps id have to be an idiot to spend over 2000 euros on this (3000USD id say), cuz even though companies like alienware can build the nicest computers they overcharge you like crap, extra 150$ to get 4gb as opposed to 2? good choice buddy. i built mine for little over 1000, and slowly over the course of a year, plus i like my 24", since i got it on clearence.

Err...your previous system was much better than the one the poster you quoted had and also the average steam user. If you want me to be excited about your new rig just say so otherwise you look a bit of a knob trying to pass off a good system as poor.
AC

P.S. A Q6600 system with crossfired 4770's is known around the world as the optimal system for gaming which is why I have that and not a Q9550 based system, so don't compare my system to poo-ness thankyou.

So are cup noodles.

I have a 24inch so I do need it tbh and I play at higer res cos it looks better before my 24inch I had a 17ich CRT I tell ya visuly its awsome O_O

No offence mate, but I do not like your set-up it is to miserable.

lol i went from below average to averageish i guess

from A64 3200 Venice s939 @ 2.4 Ghz
2 Gb DDR
7900GS

to

I7 920 D0 @ 4Ghz
6 Gb DDR3
same 7900GS (Dx11 is just too close for me to drop the 600 dollar bombshell)

The e-peen-i are about to put out my eye.

Now look at my sig... You know you want to.

£500 is cheap but whats the point on spending more than that when 6 and 8 core will be following soon, all will be updated. as for the chair its a folding chair what saves space, how can my monitor be crappy, 19 wide screen, must be crappy eh! i like to keep my eyes in good condition, desk is fine aswel, another space saver, custom made to fit(Not cheap unless you would make it, probs out of cardboard.)
toodles