This is the classic debate. Are you more focused on price when purchasing your new gaming hardware upgrade, or is it a hunt for the pinnacle of performance? Most people will say they look for the sweet spot between these two key indicators. But thats far too easy. One of them drives you a little more than the other. Dig deep and lets see which one it is that pushes our gaming community.

So when you upgrade, are you the sort of person who says, I only do this once every 3 or 4 years, so I want the absolute best performance so money is not really a problem. Gaming is a passion for a lot of us and although a decent computer can cost a lot of money, if the PC will offer us our main form of entertainment for the coming 4 years then why not splash out a bit and get the best. You want to see your games in as Ultra settings as you can for as long as you can, otherwise whats the point in gaming anyway?

Or do you feel like prices can get stupid fast. The more top end you go the higher the dollar price per benchmark point returned. Surely it always makes more sense to pay $200 for a solid new graphics card rather than gaining an extra 30-40% performance for a $500 graphics card. With that in mind, why not upgrade every year or two instead, but hit the best price to performance ratio each time. You may not run 1440p at Ultra settings on all the latest games, but you will certainly be enjoying high graphics settings at 1080p on them.

So where do your hardware purchasing choices normally come from, the head or the heart? Its easy to say both, but when you are put in a corner, which one pushes your decision making the hardest, price or performance.