Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Looking for help on a new build

NightCloakNightCloak Member UncommonPosts: 452
I have a new build for a gaming PC with a price cap of $800. Basically need everything but the mouse.
I am thinking Intel i5 and AMD R9 380 and possibly going ATX micro for mobo to save cost (wont be upgraded for a very long time if at all).

Problem is, having trouble jamming a monitor and everything else to stay under budget. Any suggestions on where I can cut corners without dropping much performance or what would be a good build?
«1

Comments

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,531
    On that budget, you really should go AMD on the CPU to save money.  You basically have to give up some performance as compared to what you were hoping for, and you just have to live with it or get a larger budget.
  • jonp200jonp200 Member UncommonPosts: 457
    Not a big fan of AMD CPUs these days relative to Intel but I can't fault Quizzical's logic given your budget.  Looks like a great bang for the buck combo.

    Seaspite
    Playing ESO on my X-Box


  • NightCloakNightCloak Member UncommonPosts: 452
    I appreciate it much! I dont know anything about that processor though.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,262
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited March 2016
    If you can squeeze this in

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125792

    youll be quite set :)

    thats +125$ to the build

    For windows you can check locally for some promotions or if there are still some cheapo leftovers of W7/W8, you still get free upgrade to W10.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,531
    I appreciate it much! I dont know anything about that processor though.
    Basically, take AMD's best APU, disable the GPU in it, clock it a little lower, and you have the CPU I linked above.  It's a quad core with four Steamroller cores with turbo up to 4 GHz.  It's about as fast as it would be if you bought the Core i5-6600 that you were likely hoping for, then reduced its clock speed to about 2.5 GHz or 2.7 GHz or so.  So yes, it's slower than Intel, but $800 including peripherals isn't a "buy the best of everything" budget.

    Even so, a quad core with turbo to 4 GHz isn't terrible, and a decent CPU plus a decent motherboard for $100 total saves you a lot of money for other things.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    edited March 2016
    Quizzical said:
     It's about as fast as it would be if you bought the Core i5-6600 that you were likely hoping for, then reduced its clock speed to about 2.5 GHz or 2.7 GHz or so.
    You say a lot of unfounded, flawed stuff but this is your master piece...
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,531

    Gdemami said:
    For the original poster, Gdemami likes to link stupid things and see if he can get people to buy them.  This is his patented "Core i3 with a memory channel vacant" build.

    To make a cleaner price comparison, his build is $782 if you include shipping as I did in mine.  For that price, you get no keyboard, no surge protector, no speakers, no optical drive, and no SSD, all of which were included in my build.

    You also get a TN monitor with poor image quality rather than the IPS monitor I linked.  You get a two CPU cores rather than four, though they are faster cores.  And you get considerably less memory bandwidth, in spite of getting DDR4 rather than DDR3, because he's leaving a memory channel unused, which cuts your bandwidth in half.  And you pay $84 more for that.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,262
    edited March 2016
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    edited March 2016
    To be fair Passmark scores on the i3 6100 and the AMD FX X4 860K are not much different. 5499 for the i3 and 5598 for the AMD FX. The AMD is the better option as Quiz said imo it does draw much more power but is a better solution for your budget.

    Which is why I suggested an FX 8350 which has a Passmark of 8949 Yet it does add to the amount listed.

    No, it isn't. For the price of i3 +cooler is a must for AMD, you could get FX-8300, which is SIGNIFICANTLY faster than 860k, yet i3 is better option even over FX with 8 cores. 860k is simply no go.

    http://www.techspot.com/review/1087-best-value-desktop-cpu/page4.html

    He has no clue what he is talking about, he only makes paper stat assumptions as always...

    AMD CPUs are very poor performers in games.

  • makasouleater69makasouleater69 Member UncommonPosts: 1,096
    edited March 2016
    I have a new build for a gaming PC with a price cap of $800. Basically need everything but the mouse.
    I am thinking Intel i5 and AMD R9 380 and possibly going ATX micro for mobo to save cost (wont be upgraded for a very long time if at all).

    Problem is, having trouble jamming a monitor and everything else to stay under budget. Any suggestions on where I can cut corners without dropping much performance or what would be a good build?
    Always go with a cheaper processor, than a cheaper graphics card. The 380 is basically a 7950, which is really old. Look at it this way. I have a i5 3570k, which is like 10 percent slower than a 6600, and a 7950. My friend has a old amd 1100t 6 core processor and a 970 gtx. I get 45-60fps in dying light, he gets 60-80fps in dying light. A processor for gaming is almost totally not important as long as you has a recent cpu. Go with a 980 TI, and find a used cheap amd mother board and ram on ebay. You will be getting triple the fps than some one who bought a i5 and a 380. Basically your i5 and 380 wont get you any better fps, than my 3 year old i5 and 4 year old7950, and since my 7950 is OCed to the extreme, I would say you would get less. 

    At the very least get a 970. I had a 390, which i took back because its a heat box, and is utter garbage, Amd failed hard core this time around. The 970 gets better fps, and run at half the temp, and uses half the power. 

    If you are going for a 380, you mise well just wait till the new GPUS come out, because buying that is not a good idea, since its no better than a 4 year old computer. 

    • 1 × AMD FX-6300 Vishera 6-Core 3.5 GHz (4.1 GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 95W FD6300WMHKBOX Desktop Processor
      Item #: N82E16819113286
    • 1 × BIOSTAR TA970 Ver. 5.3 AM3+ AMD 970 + SB950 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard with UEFI BIOS
      Item #: N82E16813138372
    • 1 × HyperX Fury Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model HX316C10FK2/8
      Item #: N82E16820104448
    • 1 × WD Blue 1TB Desktop Hard Disk Drive - 7200 RPM SATA 6 Gb/s 64MB Cache 3.5 Inch - WD10EZEX - OEM
      Item #: N82E16822236339
    comes to 227 

    ASUS DRW­24B1ST/BLK/B/AS Black SATA 24X DVD Burner ­ Bulk ­ OEM Standard Return Policy Send this item as a gift 1 IN STOCK LIMIT 10 $19 .99 J
    OIN TODAY Corsair Carbide Series 200R Black Steel / Plastic compact ATX Mid Tower Case Standard Return Policy 1 IN STOCK LIMIT 5 $69.99 $59 .99
    Card GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 980 4GB WINDFORCE 3X OC EDITION Replacement Only Return Policy 1 IN STOCK $499.99 $479 .99 Save:
    Density Polysynthetic Silver Thermal Compound AS5­3.5G ­ OEM Consumable Product Return Policy Send this item as a gift 1 IN STOCK LIMIT 99 $11.99 $6 .99 Save: 41.70%

    Which comes to like 790, you lack a power supply, but thats like 50 bucks so save up. As for if a monitor use your tv. Or switch the 980 to a 970 and buy a monitor. As for a keyboard they are 10 bucks. 

    That computer with the 980 would get almost triple the fps over the one you built. Switch to a 970 you would get over double in some games.

    As for a operating system, if you are giving dirty Microsoft money your doing it all wrong. And i dont mean linux.  And i warn you, windows 10 is a pain. You better pay close attention to what your doing with it, or your gonna find out that windows is using your internet to torrent windows updates to the world, and sending all your information to them, and to top it off if you set up windows defender, it will max your hard drive up searching through your files any time your idle. 

    As far as wasting money on a ssd, I wouldn't recommend it with a budget. It serves almost no purpose, other then costing more, braking faster, and having little space. Yep youll load up faster, but i mean if you have a budget is the 8 seconds you save worth it. 

    If you are hell bent on a i5 for other reasons, there are reason for them. Such as if your favorite game is Civs, then you want to get a i7. Go on ebay and buy a 100 dollar 7970 or 7950, which is the same thing as a 380, infact the 7970 will end up being faster than a 380. If you go with a 290 or 390 better get your self a 150 dollar water block, and a 200 dollar water cooler, those things throw off so much heat, you better have a air conditioner sitting next to it. 

    Also plan on a increased electric bill if you game alot, the 390 will use something like 350 watts per hour. Add in the 1500 watts the air conditioner uses to cool it down haha, its just not worth it. 

    So to sum up, go with the cheap amd, and a 970 and you can get a cheap 21 inch 1080 monitor. 


  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,262
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,531
    To be fair Passmark scores on the i3 6100 and the AMD FX X4 860K are not much different. 5499 for the i3 and 5598 for the AMD FX. The AMD is the better option as Quiz said imo it does draw much more power but is a better solution for your budget.

    Which is why I suggested an FX 8350 which has a Passmark of 8949 Yet it does add to the amount listed.

    (Not that Passmark is the be all end all for comparison. Just saying. I use an i7 personally. I figure, spend heavy on a CPU and I do not have to worry about it for a long time. I can always upgrade other parts at other times but the CPU you should future proof as best you can)

    What's going on there is that the Core i3 has faster cores, and hyperthreading, which gives some benefit if you scale to more than two cores, while the AMD chip (which isn't actually an FX series) has more cores.  In programs that scale well to at least four cores, that typically makes the two CPUs about even.  Obviously, there are exceptions, such as that the Core i3 will win by a lot in something coded to heavily use AVX2 (which games won't, as the computations that would benefit will be done on the GPU).

    Where the Core i3 wins is in games that need a lot of CPU power but aren't threaded to scale well to several CPU cores.  In other words, in badly coded games.  Obviously, you'd prefer that games where the programmers can't optimize code very well run well, too.  But that's what you'd gain by spending an extra $100 to go Intel.

    Expand the budget by $400, and of course you get a Core i5-6600 and don't have to worry about such compromises.  But on a budget of $800 including peripherals, that $100 difference is a lot.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    blueturtle13 said:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html

    Tom disagrees with you as do I

    AMD X4 860K is their pick for best budget CPU for good reason

    AMD usually has multiple unlocked multipliers. Nothing wrong with an i3. At all.
    You are just looking at more money.
    Did you even read the link you quoted...? There is no disagreement, nor there are any benchmarks.

    860k was slow at release 2 years ago, putting it into a gaming machine today would be just silly.
  • NightCloakNightCloak Member UncommonPosts: 452
    I have a new build for a gaming PC with a price cap of $800. Basically need everything but the mouse.
    I am thinking Intel i5 and AMD R9 380 and possibly going ATX micro for mobo to save cost (wont be upgraded for a very long time if at all).

    Problem is, having trouble jamming a monitor and everything else to stay under budget. Any suggestions on where I can cut corners without dropping much performance or what would be a good build?
    Always go with a cheaper processor, than a cheaper graphics card. The 380 is basically a 7950, which is really old. Look at it this way. I have a i5 3570k, which is like 10 percent slower than a 6600, and a 7950. My friend has a old amd 1100t 6 core processor and a 970 gtx. I get 45-60fps in dying light, he gets 60-80fps in dying light. A processor for gaming is almost totally not important as long as you has a recent cpu. Go with a 980 TI, and find a used cheap amd mother board and ram on ebay. You will be getting triple the fps than some one who bought a i5 and a 380. Basically your i5 and 380 wont get you any better fps, than my 3 year old i5 and 4 year old7950, and since my 7950 is OCed to the extreme, I would say you would get less. 

    At the very least get a 970. I had a 390, which i took back because its a heat box, and is utter garbage, Amd failed hard core this time around. The 970 gets better fps, and run at half the temp, and uses half the power. 

    If you are going for a 380, you mise well just wait till the new GPUS come out, because buying that is not a good idea, since its no better than a 4 year old computer. 

    • 1 × AMD FX-6300 Vishera 6-Core 3.5 GHz (4.1 GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 95W FD6300WMHKBOX Desktop Processor
      Item #: N82E16819113286
    • 1 × BIOSTAR TA970 Ver. 5.3 AM3+ AMD 970 + SB950 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard with UEFI BIOS
      Item #: N82E16813138372
    • 1 × HyperX Fury Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model HX316C10FK2/8
      Item #: N82E16820104448
    • 1 × WD Blue 1TB Desktop Hard Disk Drive - 7200 RPM SATA 6 Gb/s 64MB Cache 3.5 Inch - WD10EZEX - OEM
      Item #: N82E16822236339
    comes to 227 

    ASUS DRW­24B1ST/BLK/B/AS Black SATA 24X DVD Burner ­ Bulk ­ OEM Standard Return Policy Send this item as a gift 1 IN STOCK LIMIT 10 $19 .99 J
    OIN TODAY Corsair Carbide Series 200R Black Steel / Plastic compact ATX Mid Tower Case Standard Return Policy 1 IN STOCK LIMIT 5 $69.99 $59 .99
    Card GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 980 4GB WINDFORCE 3X OC EDITION Replacement Only Return Policy 1 IN STOCK $499.99 $479 .99 Save:
    Density Polysynthetic Silver Thermal Compound AS5­3.5G ­ OEM Consumable Product Return Policy Send this item as a gift 1 IN STOCK LIMIT 99 $11.99 $6 .99 Save: 41.70%

    Which comes to like 790, you lack a power supply, but thats like 50 bucks so save up. As for if a monitor use your tv. Or switch the 980 to a 970 and buy a monitor. As for a keyboard they are 10 bucks. 

    That computer with the 980 would get almost triple the fps over the one you built. Switch to a 970 you would get over double in some games.

    As for a operating system, if you are giving dirty microsoft money your doing it all wrong. And i dont mean linux.  
    Though I like your thought process on this, I'm looking at a $800 cap because that is the budget, not all that can be afforded. The idea isn't to squeak out max FPS on every game for $800. The computer is replacing an old Asus G73 gaming laptop that is dying.

    I like where Quizzical is headed since it includes everything within the budget. That is, nothing is left. As for the operating system, sorry, Microsoft is a must and so is keeping it legal. It is a budget build and the idea is to get as good as you can within the budget. If I wanted a max-fps machine, I'd go grab a few rum and cokes and drop 2k.

    I, personally, know where the pieces fall and pricing/performance for the higher end equipment, but sub-1000 for a full build I need the help to make sure I don't shoot myself into a bottleneck.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,262
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    edited March 2016
    I, personally, know where the pieces fall and pricing/performance for the higher end equipment, but sub-1000 for a full build I need the help to make sure I don't shoot myself into a bottleneck.
    ...in that case stay away from 860k.

    FX-6300/8300/i3 is the absolute minimum you do not want to go below.

    760k/860k is just too slow:
    http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/1911-gta-v-cpu-benchmark-4790k-3570k-9590-more
    Post edited by Gdemami on
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    I did but it is a solid CPU for the money spent. Or in this case not spent. People need to understand that rarely do they need as much Computer that they end up buying. That CPU is fine for his budget. No arguing that. The i3 is a solid choice. No doubt about it. I would go cheaper on the CPU and spend the extra on a better GPU ;)

    http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/143/AMD_Athlon_X4_860K_vs_Intel_Core_i3_i3-6100.html
    http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i3-6100-vs-AMD-Athlon-X4-860K

    http://www.pc-specs.com/cpu/comparison-versus/2410/2160/core-i3-6100-3-7ghz-vs-athlon-x4-860k

     pc-specs even compares the gaming performance. Not much difference between the two.
    But the i3 is more money and the OP is on a budget
    Erm...no.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,531
    Though I like your thought process on this, I'm looking at a $800 cap because that is the budget, not all that can be afforded. The idea isn't to squeak out max FPS on every game for $800. The computer is replacing an old Asus G73 gaming laptop that is dying.

    I like where Quizzical is headed since it includes everything within the budget. That is, nothing is left. As for the operating system, sorry, Microsoft is a must and so is keeping it legal. It is a budget build and the idea is to get as good as you can within the budget. If I wanted a max-fps machine, I'd go grab a few rum and cokes and drop 2k.

    I, personally, know where the pieces fall and pricing/performance for the higher end equipment, but sub-1000 for a full build I need the help to make sure I don't shoot myself into a bottleneck.
    There's certainly nothing wrong with having other priorities in life where you'd rather spend money than on gaming.

    However, you may want to consider expanding the budget a little to fit that Core i5.  In 2011, both Intel and AMD released new CPU architectures substantially different from what came before.  Intel won that round soundly, as Sandy Bridge was really good and Bulldozer was terrible.  AMD will roughly catch up to Intel with Zen later this year.  But since 2011, CPU improvements other than reducing power consumption have been really slow.  Nothing on the horizon makes it look like a huge jump in CPU performance is coming, outside of having more CPU cores.

    Thus, if you get a Core i5-6600 today, it will still be a decently nice CPU four years from now.  If you get a Core i3 or an AMD CPU, it won't be so nice four years from now--and what you upgrade to them won't be much better than the Core i5 you could have bought today.  So buying that Core i5 could extend the useful life of the machine considerably.

    Another consideration to remember is that, to upgrade the CPU in the future, you'll need to replace the motherboard, too, and that also means a new OS license.  It's not like a video card or monitor where you can upgrade just one component and be done.

    Getting Sky Lake also means going with DDR4 instead of DDR3.  So you can replace the CPU/motherboard combo and memory in my build above with:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2750055
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232241

    That would put you about $120 over your stated budget.  It's not something recommend running large credit card balances to buy, or other sorts of debt.  But if you've got the money available, it will be quite a bit better than what fits your stated budget, and may extend the useful life of the machine by years.

    That said, my build above would be quite an upgrade over the Asus G73 laptop you've got.  Not only is the CPU substantially faster, but you'd also be getting about four times the GPU performance.  Having an SSD also helps a ton.  And, of course, the desktop form factor is massively nicer than a laptop for basically everything except portability.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,262
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • HrimnirHrimnir Member RarePosts: 2,415
    Quizzical said:
    Though I like your thought process on this, I'm looking at a $800 cap because that is the budget, not all that can be afforded. The idea isn't to squeak out max FPS on every game for $800. The computer is replacing an old Asus G73 gaming laptop that is dying.

    I like where Quizzical is headed since it includes everything within the budget. That is, nothing is left. As for the operating system, sorry, Microsoft is a must and so is keeping it legal. It is a budget build and the idea is to get as good as you can within the budget. If I wanted a max-fps machine, I'd go grab a few rum and cokes and drop 2k.

    I, personally, know where the pieces fall and pricing/performance for the higher end equipment, but sub-1000 for a full build I need the help to make sure I don't shoot myself into a bottleneck.
    There's certainly nothing wrong with having other priorities in life where you'd rather spend money than on gaming.

    However, you may want to consider expanding the budget a little to fit that Core i5.  In 2011, both Intel and AMD released new CPU architectures substantially different from what came before.  Intel won that round soundly, as Sandy Bridge was really good and Bulldozer was terrible.  AMD will roughly catch up to Intel with Zen later this year.  But since 2011, CPU improvements other than reducing power consumption have been really slow.  Nothing on the horizon makes it look like a huge jump in CPU performance is coming, outside of having more CPU cores.

    Thus, if you get a Core i5-6600 today, it will still be a decently nice CPU four years from now.  If you get a Core i3 or an AMD CPU, it won't be so nice four years from now--and what you upgrade to them won't be much better than the Core i5 you could have bought today.  So buying that Core i5 could extend the useful life of the machine considerably.

    Another consideration to remember is that, to upgrade the CPU in the future, you'll need to replace the motherboard, too, and that also means a new OS license.  It's not like a video card or monitor where you can upgrade just one component and be done.

    Getting Sky Lake also means going with DDR4 instead of DDR3.  So you can replace the CPU/motherboard combo and memory in my build above with:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2750055
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232241

    That would put you about $120 over your stated budget.  It's not something recommend running large credit card balances to buy, or other sorts of debt.  But if you've got the money available, it will be quite a bit better than what fits your stated budget, and may extend the useful life of the machine by years.

    That said, my build above would be quite an upgrade over the Asus G73 laptop you've got.  Not only is the CPU substantially faster, but you'd also be getting about four times the GPU performance.  Having an SSD also helps a ton.  And, of course, the desktop form factor is massively nicer than a laptop for basically everything except portability.

    I agree with this post.  Consider this is something you'll likely have for 2-3+ years, an extra $120 if its not gonna break the bank to help future proof you is absolutely worth it.

    "The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."

    - Friedrich Nietzsche

  • AlumicardAlumicard Member UncommonPosts: 388
    On this point I am with some others. If you can hold out a bit and safe the extra money for an i5-6600 then do yourself a favor and do it. If things keep going as we have seen in the past years then CPU needs won't increase that much over time.

    It's always easier and often cheaper to increase one part of the PC but to do so you need a solid foundation which in this case is the cpu (+mobo,ram). If you will never upgrade the PC then never mind but if you want to play stuff in 2-3+ years then take the easy route: wait a month or three, buy a good CPU now and in the future only upgrade the GPU if necessary. 


  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited March 2016
    Actually, if he wants to wait its best to wait for AM4 platform which is on its way as it will able to house few generations on AMD CPUs (just like AM2/3 did) where Intel needlessly changes its platform every year or so.

    THATS solid foundation.

    But if were honest, what Quiz put together, along with R9 390 will be just fine, 95%+ of games out there are GPU bound and DX12 moves that boundary even further. So yeah, buying expencive CPUs is just throwing money away.
Sign In or Register to comment.