Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Budget PC build
I have a budget of 800-850 dollars to work with for this build. Supper fast loading of the OS or games is not a priority for me so I plan on skipping on a SSD. I will be reusing my old DVD-R drive and if my case is good enough for the mobos in use now.
The case is old as is the PC I am using now. My current PC I built in late 2007 and it sports the awesome intel Q6600 OC to 3.0ghz with a gigabyte mobo and the very old Geforce 8800gt.
The case is http://support.thermaltakeusa.com/Product.aspx?C=1433&ID=1405 Yes the case is as big and heavy as an solid oak end table!
This is what I have put together so far http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3ay4D Is this a good budget build?
I do not plan on OCing right away but when I do what would be a good after market cooling unit.
FUncom putting the FU in fun since 1993.
Comments
All good i would go with a different mobo something like http://www.newegg.com/GIGABYTE/BrandStore/ID-1314 . built my $2000 rig last week its tearing up benchmarks specially the uniengine
for your overclocking cooling, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835181031
One more thing of note, i would upgrade the psu to this one for any future mods and the juice for it http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139020
I originally was looking at thishttp://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128671 but that put me over my budget with the other parts I have selected.
I really cant go over 850 dollars for this build. I am married with four kids and the first one started college this year and another one will be in two years.
FUncom putting the FU in fun since 1993.
Might be best to go with this GPU. It will run about the same, but there will probably be a slight performance increase.
MSI R270
You're paying extra for a 4670K so that you can overclock it. And then you're going with the stock cooler, and overclocking on the stock cooler is a very bad idea. I'd change one of those, e.g., by getting a $30 aftermarket cooler.
The power supply is decent, but that's too much to pay for it. You can get something substantially better for about the same price:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151136
That's way too much to pay for that video card. Either save a bunch of money while getting something nearly as fast:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202081
or else pay slightly more to get something much faster:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127756
How does it look now ? http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3aLK7
Is my choice of a motherboard a good choice? I have never had a ASRock the only mobos I have used in the past were Gigabyte and Asus.
FUncom putting the FU in fun since 1993.
For good reason i wouldnt go with an asrock imho. thats why i linked the gygabyte i used ultra durable.
PLEASE use this gpu instead THE GPU YOU HAVE LISTED IS AMD AIMED GPU USE THIS GPU INSTEAD http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130830
or save with this here http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130795
cant beat evga
Just look on newegg gygabyte, asus. read the reviews make sure its an lga1150 socket for the mobo.
The problem is that you're looking at the brand name, but not considering price or performance. The first card you link is much slower then the Radeon R7 260X, yet also much more expensive. The second is a low end DDR3 card whose only real reason to exist is to sell to suckers who think that all that matters is video memory capacity and not the GPU itself.
Thats what happens when your on a budget. No need to be toxic your the one trying to sell him on a saphire(lol) thats designed for amd when hes using an intel i5...
Those gpus will push most games to high settings no problem they are fine.
You can go to a review from a purchaser who used the hardware.
AsRock motherboards tend to be cheaper for a reason, as AsRock goes cheaper on build quality than Asus, Gigabyte, or MSI. For example, the motherboard will be thin and feel flimsy in your hands. It will probably work fine, but it's more of a risk than other brands. The question is whether that risk is acceptable to you, and reasonable people can disagree here.
If you wanted to go with a cheap motherboard from a major brand, you could try one of these:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128599
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130695
Don't plan on getting much of an overclock out of either of those, though. If you're willing to pay more for a nice motherboard, this should do pretty well for you without being outlandishly expensive:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130693
You do realize that the CPU and GPU are independent choices, don't you? You can pair a video card from either vendor with a CPU from either vendor and it will work. PCI Express is an industry standard and all of the significant vendors support it.
but designed for different cpus you will lack some features im not going to argure on a hardware thread lol. Its not all cut and dry he can make the decisions there are many choices final input:
cards will work nicely for what you want.
suggest 2 cards he can sli or crossfire.
But you seem to be the unnoficial mod for this side of the forum so i will butt out.
I have a great system i built that works perfect and has some of the highest benchmarks without overclocking it. Different people do things differently ones word isnt god.
GL with your build good sir.
You are giving bad advice. He isnt being toxic or modding the forums.
Choosing an intel CPU and an AMD GPU does not miss out on any features. If you personally want to pair nvidia and intel then thats your choice. But giving bad advice and being called out on it is what happens
Isn't bad advice. There is usually not bad advice in hardware unless you do not know what your doing at all. Ask any of my friends who i built their pcs, (some even custom cases since i weld and fabricate) they will tell you thier systems are running great and the ocing they are doing is amazing.
Like i said not all cut and dry dont bash members cause quizz said something else.
I would choose either of the two other gpus and thats preference not bad advice.
Like i said i will butt out, quizz can handle the builds from here on sorry i had input thought thats what forums was about guess not on this side.
personally i think amd technology works good with amd intel with intel technology. I don't like mixing things i will say that now.
Quizes card will work also.
Not to be rude but it is bad advice to link a less powerful and more expensive GPU based on your preference for Nvidia and claiming the OP will be missing features if he buys an AMD gpu with an intel cpu.
That is your choice as well as any of your friends and I can respect that, but for all that it is a preference only and has zero impact on performance.
Because of the effective memory clock? inform us so we understand why one is better than the other instead of being rude. Noone is learning anything here
Its just price vs performance.
The GTX 650 ( EVGA ) is $149
The R7 260x ( Sapphire ) is $119 before a $10 MIR and $109 after.
Performance comparison.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1044?vs=1125
On a limited budget where dollars matter the AMD is the better choice. Unless he just wants to buy Nvidia because of the brand alone.
If he were looking in the $300-$400 or more range for GPUs an Nvidia card very well may be a better buy. At the $100-$150 Range a 260x is a great deal at $119
I would like to thank everyone who has responded to my post, thank you.
This is my current build http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3aYKC with the sale and mail in rebate on the video card it brings the cost to under $840.
If I can talk the wife into letting me spend up to $900 this is what I am looking at http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3aVmt
What do you all think about the builds? Any changes I should look to make on them?
On the windows should I get windows 7 instead of 8.1?
FUncom putting the FU in fun since 1993.
Speaking from experience... Sapphire or EVGA for AMD or Nvidia, those two you can rely on to give you a good card (my old desktop still packs a 6950 from Sapphire and it, even to this day, can still manage to run a game like Metro Last Light to near full and the 8800GT 512 Mb from EVGA I had on my previous rig was equally impressive in its day) so going with MSI is a risk. I would just stick with the AMD GPU , ignore the guy taking his opinion as fact and stating it to you and pretty much calling those who point it out as rude btw , and later on when it starts giving you issues, getting surpassed by gaming demands, just buy another one dirt cheap and crossfire it.
Edit: Windows 7 is good, it will be a cold day in hell when Dx 11.1 starts being a industry minimum (christ it is just barely jumped to Dx 10 finally because of the new gen consoles).
Your build looks good.
2 coments: Overclocking your CPU requires some knowledge (less nowadays than before, but still), so if you're asking for advice on builds, you might want to consider getting non-overclocking oriented CPU. You will not see the difference.
Meanwhile, If you save some cash on CPU (e.g. take normal i5 instead of "K"), you could maybe afford SSD HDD, which will benefit you much more in everyday PC usage than overclocking your CPU.
My 2 cents.
Windows 8.1 isn't really that different from Windows 7. Some people don't like 8 because Microsoft stupidly took away the start button, but there are third-party programs that you can get to add it back.
Windows 8.1 will boot faster than 7, and it will be supported 3+ years longer before Microsoft decides to pull the plug. Windows 7 has about 5 1/2 years of support left, which is still quite a bit, but a computer you build today could easily have a useful lifetime longer than that.
I don't really see why you would not go onto Windows 8.1. There are some headache things like some older or less updated applications needing workaround like setting up the firewall instead of it happening automatically. Also once more developers start creating Windows 8.1 certified apps the process of updating and getting certain applications will be easier for the end user. Only real gripe I have is that the applications for modern UI and desktop UI are separate where it need not be.
For your GPU I would definitely get at least an R9 GPU if you are going AMD, or a NVidia 660 / 760. The prices should be hovering around $200 for those and most of a games requirements are its graphics. I already linked one for around $180. There are definitely places you can trim to get those in budget without a real performance hit like the processor and mobo. The Processor is what I would use in a $1200 system, same with the mobo. They are not really required for the majority of PC workloads except for executing Super Pi.
Windows 7/64 is still the most stable version though, the biggest problem i had with windows 8, is the way microsoft has integrated the windows store into the primary interface, whether windows 8 actually boots faster is questionable, because until you have booted up into desktop its not really fully booted anyway. Windows 8's 'metro' interface, is really just a cash shop interface where they try to sell you different apps or programs, most of which are really better off being on a tablet pc or mobile phone. The other issue is not so much that they 'nerfed' the start button, but that they introduced more steps in just trying to do the same things you could do in Windows 7. As Windows 8 hasn't actually caught on either commercially or privately, its more likely that Windows 7 will outlive it anyway which if you look at what has happened with XP, which still has a significant part of the OS market worldwide, then its not impossible that Win 7 could be supported still long after Win 8 has 'passed on'. It would not surprise me at all if Microsoft is not already working on a 'Windows 9' just because Windows 8 didn't gain acceptance on a meaningful level, sales of Win 7 are after all still higher than 8, which pretty much says it all.
If you like revisiting older titles W8 is terrible.
If you need IE7 compatibility W8 dosent work.
If you care about hard drive longevity W8 is terrible. The cache thrashing is unnerving.
IMO it is terrible. MS added a ton of crap to the OS that is uninstallable. The networking stack is worse than W7. Customizability is worse. No OS boot options.
I cant recommend it ATM. I did have high hopes for W8 but after extended use it was too frustrating.
Do you have verifiable sources for all of this?
"Cache Thrashing" wouldn't affect HDD life - read/writes don't affect the life of a platter HDD, only run-hours. That, and caching occurs in RAM...
The network stack is realtively unchanged from WIndows 7. In fact, all of the old control panels from Windows 7 are still there if you prefer to use them. THere have been some updates to some protocols (SMB, DHCP, etc), but the drivers and underlaying network "stack" are the same.
True, F8 during boot goes away with WIn8 (because it boots much faster and there is no longer a pause there to wait for it). There are several other methods to accomplish that though: http://pcsupport.about.com/od/windows-8/a/open-advanced-startup-options-windows-8.htm -- easily searchable if you needed it.
And customization - the same as Windows 7. Perhaps even more so, because you have the option to use Metro on Win8, plus everything you could do on Win7 in the first place. http://www.classicshell.net/
You can not like Windows 8, that's fine, just don't make crap up trying to justify it to everyone else and "convince" them to follow you, when you don't really know what your talking about.
Phry's rundown just above yours - I can't argue against that, those are semi-valid points, except to say you can bypass Metro and the App Store entirely if that's the crux of your concerns.
If I were forced to buy a new OS today... I would take whichever I could get for less money - Win7 or Win8. If they are both priced equally, I would get Win8 for the extended lifecycle and support. MetroUI/Optional AppStore/made up boogiemen wouldn't really influence that purchasing decision.