Originally posted by squallypew is amd really that bad or just the model i got suggested ? btw i told my uncle to get the 7800 not 7850k
Yes, it is really that bad.
As I said before, it is not meant for gaming or desktop computers. It is intended for small factor machines where having discrete graphics card would be an issue because of generated heat.
It is the very same reason why laptops or consoles are not as powerful as desktops.
is amd really that bad or just the model i got suggested ? btw i told my uncle to get the 7800 not 7850k
Yes, it is really that bad.
As I said before, it is not meant for gaming or desktop computers. It is intended for small factor machines where having discrete graphics card would be an issue because of generated heat.
It is the very same reason why laptops or consoles are not as powerful as desktops.
The gap between 7850k and R250 GDDR5 is massive and I was even squeezing in faster version of that same card.
You literaly lost 90 USD on that build
you are not making me happy lol according to that test it doesnt seem that bad though, but the R7 is superior yes.
thats in terms of graphics though, how about in cpu and everything else is that good ? i mean what he suggested to me o: ive never used amd before im currently using a pentium 4 but duh this is old gen so i will feel the difference nontheless but either way i wanna make good use of the money im investing and that i get what i want.
is amd really that bad or just the model i got suggested ? btw i told my uncle to get the 7800 not 7850k
Yes, it is really that bad.
As I said before, it is not meant for gaming or desktop computers. It is intended for small factor machines where having discrete graphics card would be an issue because of generated heat.
It is the very same reason why laptops or consoles are not as powerful as desktops.
The gap between 7850k and R250 GDDR5 is massive and I was even squeezing in faster version of that same card.
You literaly lost 90 USD on that build
you are not making me happy lol according to that test it doesnt seem that bad though, but the R7 is superior yes.
thats in terms of graphics though, how about in cpu and everything else is that good ? i mean what he suggested to me o: ive never used amd before im currently using a pentium 4 but duh this is old gen so i will feel the difference nontheless but either way i wanna make good use of the money im investing and that i get what i want.
I personally would have gone with a Discrete GPU. Even at an extra expense.
Integrated graphics are not "bad" so to speak, just not something I would choose unless I could literally not save the money to get a discrete card better than integrated.
The difference in $ after you factor in the extra cost of the APU and RAM would be something around $50 to get a cpu ( not apu) & discrete card that is considerably better.
An AMD fx 6300 and an R7 250x/ 260x would have been my choice
Squallypew, the boost in integrated GPU performance when going from 2133 Mhz DDR3 ram to 2400 Mhz ram is up to 15%-20% improvement on majority of games.
So please keep in mind when you're looking at any tests using 2133Mhz ram that u need to add about 5-8fps more if it says 40 fps in the benchmark for instance.
That is all of course if you're uncle is gonna get you 2400Mhz ram, which is what Quizzical recommended a few pages back.
Also the cpu itself is better for work, and non-gaming related products than the no hyperthreading dual core Intel G3258. Idk what kind of graphic design and other work you will be doing, but there is a very big chance those programs are multicore optimized.
Also when streaming u can make it so that 2 of your cores are only reserved for the streaming program, and the other 2 for what you're streaming, giving you better overall performance.
A10-7800 is also the better option than the A10-7850k
Originally posted by squallypewyou are not making me happy lol according to that test it doesnt seem that bad though, but the R7 is superior yes.thats in terms of graphics though, how about in cpu and everything else is that good ? i mean what he suggested to me o: ive never used amd before im currently using a pentium 4 but duh this is old gen so i will feel the difference nontheless but either way i wanna make good use of the money im investing and that i get what i want.
What parts exactly did you get at the end?
Regarding CPU, there are some bad news and good news.
Good news: Despite CPU being low end, it will be fairly sufficient for gaming at your level.
Bad news: The platform is dead and there is no upgrade path if there will ever be need for faster CPU.
That is essentially all AMD builds share, AMD is virtually dead when it comes to desktops.
If you could get your money back for that CPU and Memory, you could get this for the same money:
AMD Athlon X4 860K - essentially same CPU you have no but without GPU.
Originally posted by 13lake Squallypew, the boost in integrated GPU performance when going from 2133 Mhz DDR3 ram to 2400 Mhz ram is up to 15%-20% improvement on majority of games.So please keep in mind when you're looking at any tests using 2133Mhz ram that u need to add about 5-8fps more if it says 40 fps in the benchmark for instance.
Stop making up more bs, you and Quizzical already did great deal of damage here.
in the end, wether what he suggested was good or not i did said i wanted it for games and what not, nothing ultimate cause i know i wouldnt be able to do so with that short budget, but i just hope its not that bad, and is also my fault for asking suggestions in here too even if it comes in good faith i should know alittle more about this area if i plan to get something new, either way i still thank Quizzical for taking the time before while mostly no one did in those days erroneous or not.
ssd ? im not getting the drive , the only thing i was buying was the cpu , motherboard, ram and power supply since the video was integrated i wasnt in need for a graphic card thats what i thought at leats at first, so the motherboard he suggested is fine?
Squallypew, the boost in integrated GPU performance when going from 2133 Mhz DDR3 ram to 2400 Mhz ram is up to 15%-20% improvement on majority of games.
So please keep in mind when you're looking at any tests using 2133Mhz ram that u need to add about 5-8fps more if it says 40 fps in the benchmark for instance.
Stop making up more bs, you and Quizzical already did great deal of damage here.
Incorrect, going from 2133Mhz to 2400MHz makes a VERY BIG difference, as can been seen in the tests in this link.
I don't want to remind you, but YOU personally have also said this, just a few posts back replying to Quizzical in this same thread, not me.
You've mentioned how big of a bandwidth difference the DDR3 for video ram and GDDR5 for video ram are, that is one of your key points as to why discrete GPU is better.
And this is also the mechanics of why 2400Mhz ram makes so much difference for an APU.
one thing i wanna leave clear here, i know most of you wont care but i really wanna make a decent computer for gaming , streaming and graphic design stuff with that budget i mentioned i already told my uncle the parts i want im sure he hasnt bought anything yet knowing him so i can still get in contact with him for sure, but the thing is i dont want this topic to be something of bad arguments and stuff the purpose i made this thread was cause i needed assistance, help, guidence not personal opinons in the matter and start clashing with each other so please focus on the help ? i dont wanna make this a waste of your time or mine or my money either, i really worked hard to save this money lol i have alot of expenses so thats why i really wanna make this good, as they have said 8gb should make the difference but im not computer tech , i might not be knowledgeable either but i know some basics at leats.
Originally posted by squallypew ssd ? im not getting the drive , the only thing i was buying was the cpu , motherboard, ram and power supply since the video was integrated i wasnt in need for a graphic card thats what i thought at leats at first, so the motherboard he suggested is fine?
You need understand that neither choices are horrible choices, both what Gdemami and Quizzical recommended are decent choices. There is not a difference that is so big, that will result in you making a big/huge or a colossal mistake.
Gdemami is making unnecessary drama, and making this seem like a mistake of a lifetime, he's got you questioning everything you've decided to do, and u shouldn't make rash decisions now.
You need to decide on this when you're calm and not stressed, when you've looked at all the options, and heard all the advice.
Always whenever you can get a higher quality power supply than you need, power supplies are the most important part in PC build, they give power to everything, they hold life and death over ever all the components in the pc. A great power supply will serve u 5 years, 10 years, you will be able to reuse it and not worry about it taking any other pc components when it dies, when u lose power it will get damaged less and so on.
Also at this low price range, almost every motherboard is good enough, there is not much choice left, it's mostly ignoring some specific asrock models and similar which are known to cause big problems.
Originally posted by squallypew one thing i wanna leave clear here, i know most of you wont care but i really wanna make a decent computer for gaming , streaming and graphic design stuff with that budget i mentioned i already told my uncle the parts i want im sure he hasnt bought anything yet knowing him so i can still get in contact with him for sure, but the thing is i dont want this topic to be something of bad arguments and stuff the purpose i made this thread was cause i needed assistance, help, guidence not personal opinons in the matter and start clashing with each other so please focus on the help ? i dont wanna make this a waste of your time or mine or my money either, i really worked hard to save this money lol i have alot of expenses so thats why i really wanna make this good, as they have said 8gb should make the difference but im not computer tech , i might not be knowledgeable either but i know some basics at leats.
In that case you should get a pre-owned one instead, buy one from a friend that upgrades or something. I upgrade every 3 years and the old ones I have are still good for gaming another 2 years or so. I ain't the only one.
You really can't upgrade some 10 year old crap for 300 bucks into a gaming computer, not even Quizz can do that.
Your useful parts is possibly the case, the harddrive (unless it is IDE) and if you are extremely lucky the PSU. That is the cheap parts.
The graphics card totally suck and you can't get an acceptable for gaming for less than $150. The CPU and rams are ancient and you will need a new motherboard as well. And the operating system is useless as well (even though someone not caring about law and order could use a pirate version).
Still, a gaming cumputer is hard to get under $800 and totally impossible under $500 unless you guy someones old. Second hand computers tend to be cheap, particularly if you buy one from a friend who needs a few more bucks for his/her new one.
Originally posted by squallypew one thing i wanna leave clear here, i know most of you wont care but i really wanna make a decent computer for gaming , streaming and graphic design stuff with that budget i mentioned i already told my uncle the parts i want im sure he hasnt bought anything yet knowing him so i can still get in contact with him for sure, but the thing is i dont want this topic to be something of bad arguments and stuff the purpose i made this thread was cause i needed assistance, help, guidence not personal opinons in the matter and start clashing with each other so please focus on the help ? i dont wanna make this a waste of your time or mine or my money either, i really worked hard to save this money lol i have alot of expenses so thats why i really wanna make this good, as they have said 8gb should make the difference but im not computer tech , i might not be knowledgeable either but i know some basics at leats.
In that case you should get a pre-owned one instead, buy one from a friend that upgrades or something. I upgrade every 3 years and the old ones I have are still good for gaming another 2 years or so. I ain't the only one.
You really can't upgrade some 10 year old crap for 300 bucks into a gaming computer, not even Quizz can do that.
Your useful parts is possibly the case, the harddrive (unless it is IDE) and if you are extremely lucky the PSU. That is the cheap parts.
The graphics card totally suck and you can't get an acceptable for gaming for less than $150. The CPU and rams are ancient and you will need a new motherboard as well. And the operating system is useless as well (even though someone not caring about law and order could use a pirate version).
Still, a gaming cumputer is hard to get under $800 and totally impossible under $500 unless you guy someones old. Second hand computers tend to be cheap, particularly if you buy one from a friend who needs a few more bucks for his/her new one.
im aware i cannot get a powerful gaming computer for this kind of money, but im talking about *decent enough one* that at least gets to play games from this current date at say medium requirements just acceptable you know? now if you say its impossible then i should just forget about the matter.
Nothing is black and white, there is no only right and only wrong, there are many great builds for many price points.
It is very possible to get a gaming computer under $800 unlike mentioned above, and also possible under $500. It's not only possible millions of people are doing it right now.
It's also possible to get a gaming computer under $300, just if u lower you expectations, it won't be a great one, it won't be "perfect", but you'll be able to play games on 1080p@30fps, with low to medium settings.
Nothing is black and white, there is no only right and only wrong, there are many great builds for many price points.
It is very possible to get a gaming computer under $800 unlike mentioned above, and also possible under $500. It's not only possible millions of people are doing it right now.
It's also possible to get a gaming computer under $300, just if u lower you expectations, it won't be a great one, it won't be "perfect", but you'll be able to play games on 1080p@30fps, with low to medium settings.
yeah i know i wont be able to play most of the current games on high but medium to low is enough, nowdays i cant play shit with my computer tha ti have right now but duh its obvious right this is from another era xD , i like your suggestions sadly its strictly to 300 budget max.
Originally posted by squallypew one thing i wanna leave clear here, i know most of you wont care but i really wanna make a decent computer for gaming , streaming and graphic design stuff with that budget i mentioned i already told my uncle the parts i want im sure he hasnt bought anything yet knowing him so i can still get in contact with him for sure, but the thing is i dont want this topic to be something of bad arguments and stuff the purpose i made this thread was cause i needed assistance, help, guidence not personal opinons in the matter and start clashing with each other so please focus on the help ? i dont wanna make this a waste of your time or mine or my money either, i really worked hard to save this money lol i have alot of expenses so thats why i really wanna make this good, as they have said 8gb should make the difference but im not computer tech , i might not be knowledgeable either but i know some basics at leats.
Excellent news you didn't buy anything yet.
I would give one final advice then.
Here is the build I posted before(changed slightly to better fit the discussion and price changes):
PRO: Solid upgrade path. Extreme performance gain from OC if BIOS allows it. Well suited for gaming.
CON: Weaker intensive multitasking - recording, streaming, etc. It is possible that some game titles might have issues in the future. Not guaranteed OC.
I could not squeeze into 280 USD on that AMD but it should be possible if you hunt for some rebate(there is 20USD rebate on graphics card in both builds), use other retailer for better price or change some parts(PSU).
PRO: Stronger multitasking - streaming, recording. Overall more balanced performance. Guaranteed overclocking(albeit might not be very high OC and the gain isn't all that great).
CON: No upgrade path at all. Much higher power consumption. Weak in lower threaded tasks.
Both builds are about same performance, it is just a matter of opinion and it basically boils down to: upgrade path vs balanced performance that might be more future proof.
It is a really tough call.
So now, the most important part:
Take those 2 builds and post it SOMEWHERE ELSE. These boards are terribad to ask for advice, as I can see above, there are more and more blunders and ill advice thrown at to you.
Originally posted by squallypew yeah i know i wont be able to play most of the current games on high but medium to low is enough, nowdays i cant play shit with my computer tha ti have right now but duh its obvious right this is from another era xD , i like your suggestions sadly its strictly to 300 budget max.
Gdemami is on fire. He's writing 100 line per second posts now and recommending people to go elsewhere for advice, which is extremely uncalled for, ...
He is aggressive, insultive and also rushing everything, while Quizzical has been nothing but polite and patient.
His builds don't take into account shipping at all, and he sometimes accounts for rebates and sometimes not.
He can't even make the best combination of the components he recommends, he keeps throwing the 250x around, while I can easily make a build similar to his with a 260x for $305.
Here these 2 are the 2 cheapest builds on newegg that are good enough for $300 :
Again i'll say, both are good, and neither are bad, it's just a choice.
Personally i couldn't do with 4GB myself, and would like to have a better motherboard, and i feel 260x is better but not enough. However I might also choose the other build, as it is also a very decent build.
You will be more than happy with any of these 2 builds, both will be a huge difference to your Pentium IV, and u will not be disappointed no matter which one you choose, enjoy your new pc !
Take those 2 builds and post it SOMEWHERE ELSE. These boards are terribad to ask for advice, as I can see above, there are more and more blunders and ill advice thrown at to you.
If this isn't actively trying to turn away people and make people leave this website like having some agenda, i don't know what is ?
It's like spamming threads repeating same advice over and over again and doing everything possible to make the OP not come back after asking for advice, ...
What kind of way is this to behave in a community and especially towards Quizzical who has helped thousands and thousands of people, and no one ever complained that he gave bad advice, ...
Gdemami is on fire. He's writing 100 line per second posts now and recommending people to go elsewhere for advice, which is extremely uncalled for, ...
He is aggressive, insultive and also rushing everything, while Quizzical has been nothing but polite and patient.
His builds don't take into account shipping at all, and he sometimes accounts for rebates and sometimes not.
He can't even make the best combination of the components he recommends, he keeps throwing the 250x around, while I can easily make a build similar to his with a 260x for $305.
Here these 2 are the 2 cheapest builds on newegg that are good enough for $300 :
Again i'll say, both are good, and neither are bad, it's just a choice.
Personally i couldn't do with 4GB myself, and would like to have a better motherboard, and i feel 260x is better but not enough. However I might also choose the other build, as it is also a very decent build.
You will be more than happy with any of these 2 builds, both will be a huge difference to your Pentium IV, and u will not be disappointed no matter which one you choose, enjoy your new pc !
i even asked in that tomshardward that he suggested and funny thing is that someone replied and said that either are good and theres not much difference, the only thing is that with the intel i can upgrade it later on while with the fm2 socket that the a10 uses wont be able to do so, but im not planning to upgrade anything after this for a really long time so thats not really a problem for me, im not the type of person that upgrades tech every 2 to 3 years anyways. thanks for your help as well! i think my choice is pretty clear.
Originally posted by squallypew my intention for the computer was to stream games (not high end games of course) and well yeah use it for gaming and graphic design etc, but you saying i made a mistake.
There are important trade-offs to consider. On your budget, you can't just get the best of everything.
1) How much do you value reliability? Do you want your new computer to last a decade, or would it be a real problem if it dies in three years? How about if it's painfully obvious that something needs a $100 upgrade in two years?
2) How averse are you to turning down graphical settings? Are you happy with essentially all games being playable, usually at moderate to high settings, or are you the sort of person who won't play a game at all if you can't run it on max graphical settings?
I personally lean toward reliability being very important. I'm willing to turn graphical settings down and put money elsewhere on a build. My recommendations earlier in the thread are based on this, and if your sole goal is to get something that will give the highest frame rates in benchmarks today without any regard for what is likely to happen in a few years, then you can do better elsewhere.
A lot of people are saying you should put more money into a video card. That's not what I'd do, but it may or may not make sense depending on your answer to #2. The difference between the integrated graphics there and a $300 video card is not that some games will be playable on the latter but not the former. It wouldn't be surprising if there aren't any such commercial games at all that launch in the next five years.
Rather, the difference will be that you can play the same games at the same frame rates, but at much higher graphical settings on the $300 card. On integrated graphics, you'll commonly have to turn anti-aliasing down or off. Shadows should be turned off in many games. Any sort of ambient occlusion should be off. Same with depth of field and a number of other fancy lighting effects. But other than anti-aliasing, a lot of the graphical effects you'll have to turn off are things I'd turn off anyway because, in my view, they don't make games look any better.
But that doesn't mean that everything will have to run at minimum settings. It's likely that integrated graphics would let you use higher texture resolutions than a lot of the discrete video cards you'd look at, as that's limited purely by memory capacity. The basic graphical settings that made a huge difference and may be the difference between low and medium settings will be things that you can readily turn up. If you go ahead and get the integrated graphics, it will usually be faster than a Radeon R9 240 or a GeForce GT 640, among other cards; integrated graphics have come a long, long way.
Furthermore, if you do put more money into a video card, that takes away from money that could be put elsewhere. Having only 4 GB of system memory rather than 8 GB is already a problem in some situations today, and it's only going to get worse in coming years. 8 GB probably means you'll be set for the useful lifetime of the machine.
Getting a dual core processor rather than a quad core that comes with the integrated graphics is likely to mean inadequate CPU power in some situations in the future--and possibly the near future. Turning graphical settings down can fix a not powerful enough GPU in many cases, but if a game needs a stronger CPU than you have, you're stuck and likely won't be able to get good frame rates in it at any settings.
And then there is reliability. If you want the new computer to last as long as your previous one did, a good quality power supply helps a lot. So does having lower power parts, which are less prone to overheat. Discrete video cards tend to be clocked nearly as fast as they can handle, which often leaves them more prone to failure than a lot of other computer hardware. If you get the A10-7800, it's very unlikely that it will ever give you hardware problems, as it's not clocked anywhere near what the silicon could really handle. Indeed, it's for the sake of reliability that I'd get the 2400 MHz memory and clock it at 2133 MHz and 1.5 V.
Finally, there is the upgrade path to consider. If, a couple of years down the line, you decide that you do want more graphics performance, you can buy a $100 video card then and have roughly the system that you'd have gotten if you had $450 to spend today. If you cut corners everywhere else to fit a discrete video card today, then upgrading then to what you'd have gotten for $450 today would mean having to replace everything you buy today. Good quality power supplies may be in short supply in El Salvador, but I'd be very surprised if they don't have video cards readily available to buy locally.
Comments
Yes, it is really that bad.
As I said before, it is not meant for gaming or desktop computers. It is intended for small factor machines where having discrete graphics card would be an issue because of generated heat.
It is the very same reason why laptops or consoles are not as powerful as desktops.
Look here or link I provided above:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-a10-7850k_11.html#sect0
The gap between 7850k and R250 GDDR5 is massive and I was even squeezing in faster version of that same card.
You literaly lost 90 USD on that build
you are not making me happy lol according to that test it doesnt seem that bad though, but the R7 is superior yes.
thats in terms of graphics though, how about in cpu and everything else is that good ? i mean what he suggested to me o: ive never used amd before im currently using a pentium 4 but duh this is old gen so i will feel the difference nontheless but either way i wanna make good use of the money im investing and that i get what i want.
I personally would have gone with a Discrete GPU. Even at an extra expense.
Integrated graphics are not "bad" so to speak, just not something I would choose unless I could literally not save the money to get a discrete card better than integrated.
The difference in $ after you factor in the extra cost of the APU and RAM would be something around $50 to get a cpu ( not apu) & discrete card that is considerably better.
An AMD fx 6300 and an R7 250x/ 260x would have been my choice
Squallypew, the boost in integrated GPU performance when going from 2133 Mhz DDR3 ram to 2400 Mhz ram is up to 15%-20% improvement on majority of games.
So please keep in mind when you're looking at any tests using 2133Mhz ram that u need to add about 5-8fps more if it says 40 fps in the benchmark for instance.
That is all of course if you're uncle is gonna get you 2400Mhz ram, which is what Quizzical recommended a few pages back.
Also the cpu itself is better for work, and non-gaming related products than the no hyperthreading dual core Intel G3258. Idk what kind of graphic design and other work you will be doing, but there is a very big chance those programs are multicore optimized.
Also when streaming u can make it so that 2 of your cores are only reserved for the streaming program, and the other 2 for what you're streaming, giving you better overall performance.
A10-7800 is also the better option than the A10-7850k
What parts exactly did you get at the end?
Regarding CPU, there are some bad news and good news.
Good news:
Despite CPU being low end, it will be fairly sufficient for gaming at your level.
Bad news:
The platform is dead and there is no upgrade path if there will ever be need for faster CPU.
That is essentially all AMD builds share, AMD is virtually dead when it comes to desktops.
If you could get your money back for that CPU and Memory, you could get this for the same money:
AMD Athlon X4 860K - essentially same CPU you have no but without GPU.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113379
Crucial Ballistix Sport 4GB - You needed to buy extra 4GB of RAM because that integrated GPU
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148539
MSI R7 250X 1GD5 1GB 128-Bit GDDR5 - finally discrete graphics card!
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127791
All 3 parts total: 200 USD
7800 + 8GB RAM: 212 USD
12 USD saved while getting massive performance boost, yay!
With saved money, you could push your machine even further onto a new level with this GPU upgrade(20-12=8 USD difference):
HIS iCooler H260XFN1GD Radeon R7 260X 1GB 128-Bit GDDR5
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161461[/url]
That card is a total beast! Decent gaming card even for modern games. So, so much faster.
Stop making up more bs, you and Quizzical already did great deal of damage here.
this is what i told my uncle to get:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2160511
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128763
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817182066
in the end, wether what he suggested was good or not i did said i wanted it for games and what not, nothing ultimate cause i know i wouldnt be able to do so with that short budget, but i just hope its not that bad, and is also my fault for asking suggestions in here too even if it comes in good faith i should know alittle more about this area if i plan to get something new, either way i still thank Quizzical for taking the time before while mostly no one did in those days erroneous or not.
It is bad for gaming...I mean very, very bad.
Did you get that SSD drive? You could save about 35USD on that one and get a regular drive:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822236339
That PSU is also quite overpriced for the build.
No need to be thankful, it is your money with you are paying for that ill advice.
Do you plan on returning some parts? Sending back that CPU+RAM combo as suggested above seems like the easiest way to fix this mess.
Incorrect, going from 2133Mhz to 2400MHz makes a VERY BIG difference, as can been seen in the tests in this link.
http://www.eteknix.com/memory-scaling-amd-kaveri-a10-7850k-apu/7/
I don't want to remind you, but YOU personally have also said this, just a few posts back replying to Quizzical in this same thread, not me.
You've mentioned how big of a bandwidth difference the DDR3 for video ram and GDDR5 for video ram are, that is one of your key points as to why discrete GPU is better.
And this is also the mechanics of why 2400Mhz ram makes so much difference for an APU.
2 frames? 5%? "VERY BIG" difference?
Yeah, because the difference between 2133 and 2400 is the same as DDR3 and DDR5...
Just stop.
You need understand that neither choices are horrible choices, both what Gdemami and Quizzical recommended are decent choices. There is not a difference that is so big, that will result in you making a big/huge or a colossal mistake.
Gdemami is making unnecessary drama, and making this seem like a mistake of a lifetime, he's got you questioning everything you've decided to do, and u shouldn't make rash decisions now.
You need to decide on this when you're calm and not stressed, when you've looked at all the options, and heard all the advice.
Always whenever you can get a higher quality power supply than you need, power supplies are the most important part in PC build, they give power to everything, they hold life and death over ever all the components in the pc. A great power supply will serve u 5 years, 10 years, you will be able to reuse it and not worry about it taking any other pc components when it dies, when u lose power it will get damaged less and so on.
Also at this low price range, almost every motherboard is good enough, there is not much choice left, it's mostly ignoring some specific asrock models and similar which are known to cause big problems.
In that case you should get a pre-owned one instead, buy one from a friend that upgrades or something. I upgrade every 3 years and the old ones I have are still good for gaming another 2 years or so. I ain't the only one.
You really can't upgrade some 10 year old crap for 300 bucks into a gaming computer, not even Quizz can do that.
Your useful parts is possibly the case, the harddrive (unless it is IDE) and if you are extremely lucky the PSU. That is the cheap parts.
The graphics card totally suck and you can't get an acceptable for gaming for less than $150. The CPU and rams are ancient and you will need a new motherboard as well. And the operating system is useless as well (even though someone not caring about law and order could use a pirate version).
Still, a gaming cumputer is hard to get under $800 and totally impossible under $500 unless you guy someones old. Second hand computers tend to be cheap, particularly if you buy one from a friend who needs a few more bucks for his/her new one.
Yeah, when gaming is the difference not really noticable, but you will get some increase when compiling stuff. But not really worth the money.
4 channels instead of 2 is a very different matter, there you have a difference.
im aware i cannot get a powerful gaming computer for this kind of money, but im talking about *decent enough one* that at least gets to play games from this current date at say medium requirements just acceptable you know? now if you say its impossible then i should just forget about the matter.
A very good computer can be build for ~$380 : http://pcpartpicker.com/p/JGgvhM
An extremely good computer can be built for ~$540 : http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Dogzilla/saved/gWHbt6
Nothing is black and white, there is no only right and only wrong, there are many great builds for many price points.
It is very possible to get a gaming computer under $800 unlike mentioned above, and also possible under $500. It's not only possible millions of people are doing it right now.
It's also possible to get a gaming computer under $300, just if u lower you expectations, it won't be a great one, it won't be "perfect", but you'll be able to play games on 1080p@30fps, with low to medium settings.
yeah i know i wont be able to play most of the current games on high but medium to low is enough, nowdays i cant play shit with my computer tha ti have right now but duh its obvious right this is from another era xD , i like your suggestions sadly its strictly to 300 budget max.
Excellent news you didn't buy anything yet.
I would give one final advice then.
Here is the build I posted before(changed slightly to better fit the discussion and price changes):
Intel G3258
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117374
MSI H81 MB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130731
Crucial Ballistix Sport 4GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148539
EVGA 500 B 80
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438012
HiS R7 250x
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127791
281 USD total, no rebates or shipping.
PRO: Solid upgrade path. Extreme performance gain from OC if BIOS allows it. Well suited for gaming.
CON: Weaker intensive multitasking - recording, streaming, etc. It is possible that some game titles might have issues in the future. Not guaranteed OC.
and the alternative I just put together above:
AMD Athlon X4 860K
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113379
Crucial Ballistix Sport 4GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148539
GIGABYTE GA-F2A58M-DS2
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128736
EVGA 500 B 80
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438012
MSI R7 250X 1GD5 1GB 128-Bit GDDR5
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127791
294 USD total, no rebates or shipping.
I could not squeeze into 280 USD on that AMD but it should be possible if you hunt for some rebate(there is 20USD rebate on graphics card in both builds), use other retailer for better price or change some parts(PSU).
PRO: Stronger multitasking - streaming, recording. Overall more balanced performance. Guaranteed overclocking(albeit might not be very high OC and the gain isn't all that great).
CON: No upgrade path at all. Much higher power consumption. Weak in lower threaded tasks.
Both builds are about same performance, it is just a matter of opinion and it basically boils down to: upgrade path vs balanced performance that might be more future proof.
It is a really tough call.
So now, the most important part:
Take those 2 builds and post it SOMEWHERE ELSE. These boards are terribad to ask for advice, as I can see above, there are more and more blunders and ill advice thrown at to you.
Use sites like http://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/wiki/builds, http://www.tomshardware.com/ or http://www.anandtech.com/ forums. Post it there, gather input to get a better picture what other people think and make up your own opinion.
Good luck.
Are you sure?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQdlDDJqeog
With some tinkering around, this is what you may get instead of that 7850k.
Gdemami is on fire. He's writing 100 line per second posts now and recommending people to go elsewhere for advice, which is extremely uncalled for, ...
He is aggressive, insultive and also rushing everything, while Quizzical has been nothing but polite and patient.
His builds don't take into account shipping at all, and he sometimes accounts for rebates and sometimes not.
He can't even make the best combination of the components he recommends, he keeps throwing the 250x around, while I can easily make a build similar to his with a 260x for $305.
Here these 2 are the 2 cheapest builds on newegg that are good enough for $300 :
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/sjdy3C This is the build that Gdemami had in mind but lacked skill and patience to optimize.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/RF7tRB This is the build Quizzical recommended.
Again i'll say, both are good, and neither are bad, it's just a choice.
Personally i couldn't do with 4GB myself, and would like to have a better motherboard, and i feel 260x is better but not enough. However I might also choose the other build, as it is also a very decent build.
You will be more than happy with any of these 2 builds, both will be a huge difference to your Pentium IV, and u will not be disappointed no matter which one you choose, enjoy your new pc !
And mods how is this Allowed !!!
If this isn't actively trying to turn away people and make people leave this website like having some agenda, i don't know what is ?
It's like spamming threads repeating same advice over and over again and doing everything possible to make the OP not come back after asking for advice, ...
What kind of way is this to behave in a community and especially towards Quizzical who has helped thousands and thousands of people, and no one ever complained that he gave bad advice, ...
i even asked in that tomshardward that he suggested and funny thing is that someone replied and said that either are good and theres not much difference, the only thing is that with the intel i can upgrade it later on while with the fm2 socket that the a10 uses wont be able to do so, but im not planning to upgrade anything after this for a really long time so thats not really a problem for me, im not the type of person that upgrades tech every 2 to 3 years anyways. thanks for your help as well! i think my choice is pretty clear.
Don't hesitate to get the Gigabyte GA-F2A68HM-H http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128763 Quizzical mentiond instead of the Asrock FM2A78 PRO3+ i mentioned http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157579&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
I was trying to fit in 4 ram slots
Quizzical is $5 cheaper so it if it's over $300 by any chance save the money here if u go for A10
U can even get the little better EVGA 500w power supply with those $5 also : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438016
There are important trade-offs to consider. On your budget, you can't just get the best of everything.
1) How much do you value reliability? Do you want your new computer to last a decade, or would it be a real problem if it dies in three years? How about if it's painfully obvious that something needs a $100 upgrade in two years?
2) How averse are you to turning down graphical settings? Are you happy with essentially all games being playable, usually at moderate to high settings, or are you the sort of person who won't play a game at all if you can't run it on max graphical settings?
I personally lean toward reliability being very important. I'm willing to turn graphical settings down and put money elsewhere on a build. My recommendations earlier in the thread are based on this, and if your sole goal is to get something that will give the highest frame rates in benchmarks today without any regard for what is likely to happen in a few years, then you can do better elsewhere.
A lot of people are saying you should put more money into a video card. That's not what I'd do, but it may or may not make sense depending on your answer to #2. The difference between the integrated graphics there and a $300 video card is not that some games will be playable on the latter but not the former. It wouldn't be surprising if there aren't any such commercial games at all that launch in the next five years.
Rather, the difference will be that you can play the same games at the same frame rates, but at much higher graphical settings on the $300 card. On integrated graphics, you'll commonly have to turn anti-aliasing down or off. Shadows should be turned off in many games. Any sort of ambient occlusion should be off. Same with depth of field and a number of other fancy lighting effects. But other than anti-aliasing, a lot of the graphical effects you'll have to turn off are things I'd turn off anyway because, in my view, they don't make games look any better.
But that doesn't mean that everything will have to run at minimum settings. It's likely that integrated graphics would let you use higher texture resolutions than a lot of the discrete video cards you'd look at, as that's limited purely by memory capacity. The basic graphical settings that made a huge difference and may be the difference between low and medium settings will be things that you can readily turn up. If you go ahead and get the integrated graphics, it will usually be faster than a Radeon R9 240 or a GeForce GT 640, among other cards; integrated graphics have come a long, long way.
Furthermore, if you do put more money into a video card, that takes away from money that could be put elsewhere. Having only 4 GB of system memory rather than 8 GB is already a problem in some situations today, and it's only going to get worse in coming years. 8 GB probably means you'll be set for the useful lifetime of the machine.
Getting a dual core processor rather than a quad core that comes with the integrated graphics is likely to mean inadequate CPU power in some situations in the future--and possibly the near future. Turning graphical settings down can fix a not powerful enough GPU in many cases, but if a game needs a stronger CPU than you have, you're stuck and likely won't be able to get good frame rates in it at any settings.
And then there is reliability. If you want the new computer to last as long as your previous one did, a good quality power supply helps a lot. So does having lower power parts, which are less prone to overheat. Discrete video cards tend to be clocked nearly as fast as they can handle, which often leaves them more prone to failure than a lot of other computer hardware. If you get the A10-7800, it's very unlikely that it will ever give you hardware problems, as it's not clocked anywhere near what the silicon could really handle. Indeed, it's for the sake of reliability that I'd get the 2400 MHz memory and clock it at 2133 MHz and 1.5 V.
Finally, there is the upgrade path to consider. If, a couple of years down the line, you decide that you do want more graphics performance, you can buy a $100 video card then and have roughly the system that you'd have gotten if you had $450 to spend today. If you cut corners everywhere else to fit a discrete video card today, then upgrading then to what you'd have gotten for $450 today would mean having to replace everything you buy today. Good quality power supplies may be in short supply in El Salvador, but I'd be very surprised if they don't have video cards readily available to buy locally.