52 replies to this topic

[Seth Deathstalker]

Although I won't start with this project until late 2012 I have already started with information gathering and planing.
(Since I have to lie down most of the time atm I have not much else to do.)
I read through almost all the topics and threads here in this section. That gave me quite a picture of the current standards and specs. Have been out of touch. And it helped me form some ideas. Some of you guys have very intensive knowledge. I am not going to select all the parts at this time because in half a year much changes.

Let's begin with some then.
Price range in the US will be up to 1'500.- I think. (In Switzerland it will likely amount to 2'000.- because everything is more expensive here.) Hope to stay a bit below that.
After that I don't want to do a complete overhaul for the following three years.
Sure some upgrades, though
Following that thought, I want to get a really good case, PSU (Seasonic) and motherboard.
HDD, SSD (if necessary?), DVD sturdy standard.
GPU... Will wait till the last minute and see what will be a good deal.
One monitor will have to suffice. 23" LED/LCD (that thread was interesting
I am curios about OLED. We'll see.
Since the game will be up and running before I have my rig together I hopefully will have more input concerning controls. Mouse/keyboard, stick/kb, mouse/stick/kb?

What I already put an eye on is the Asus P9X79 deluxe, socket 2011.
Hopefully, price for an Intel core i7 will drop till end of the year...
Yes, I admit it, I am still an Intel man. Sue me :-)
Had a nice stable, dependable and good Asus/Intel/Nvidia layout running, back then.
Will get 8 gig of RAM (2x4gig). Kingston is still good but I am open to suggestions.
Do you think that mobo/CPU setup a good starting point?
As for the GPU... After all the reading AMD comes out tops, I think.
I will have one GPU which should be enough. If it gets to me and I want to go multiple then I could with that board.

That's my starting point atm. I still have some more research to do, I know.
I am open to comments, opinions, advice. I am no professional.
Gee, never thought I would write that much in one go

[Catamount]

You have a fine starting point.


I do think you really should include an SSD in that kind of budget, especially given that the persistently high HDD prices (which, contrary to my expectations, seem to have no interest in coming down again anytime soon) make SSDs a lot more competitive.

An SSD is a small item on any serious budget, and while it won't give you greater framerates, in gaming, not having to wait for loading has its advantages. For one thing, some games are downright painful without SSDs. Battlefield 3 takes so long to get into a server with out, you could brew an entire pot of coffee waiting for it. Being able to get into a server and load a level quickly can sometimes also confer minor advantages (again, in BF3, it means you get priority to switch teams if a spot is open, and for vehicles as well).

Outside of gaming, it's the difference between having a computer that is actually as fast as the computer, or being dragged down and having to wait constantly for a slow component. Trust me, I have two computers that I use every day, one with the SSD and one without, and it's a night and day difference. Having the computer start in no time, and being able to launch programs as soon as the desktop is up, and have them appear right away is something I look forward to being able to take for granted (once I can get an SSD in my laptop).

Right now, 120GB is a good size to shoot for. At that size, it'll be fairly low priced, and have enough space to fit your few most vital games while still holding the OS (I presently use my 120GB Vertex II for TOR, BF3, BF2142, Civ 4, Sins of a Solar Empire, and if you want to count it, Plants Vs Zombies ).

Edited by Catamount, 24 January 2012 - 04:13 PM.

[Damion Wolf]

Whatever you build, you should put guns on it.

[Vulpesveritas]

Get an AM3+ motherboard, an 8 core Piledriver CPU, 8GB 1866mhz Ram, 120/240 GB SATA3 SSD (I recommend Mushkin or Kingston), and a Radeon HD 7970. (or 8970 if it is released early enough for you to get it)

That is just what I'd recommend.

[Fiachdubh]

http://www.custompcguide.com/

Check out the builds here. They have a number of different ones for different budgets and uses. Updated every few months so always reasonably up to date. Good for suggestions on cases, power units, etc. Just wish this computer would start to die so could justify cost of building a new system.

[Kaemon]

Vulpesveritas, on 24 January 2012 - 04:38 PM, said:

Get an AM3+ motherboard, an 8 core Piledriver CPU, 8GB 1866mhz Ram, 120/240 GB SATA3 SSD (I recommend Mushkin or Kingston), and a Radeon HD 7970. (or 8970 if it is released early enough for you to get it)

That is just what I'd recommend.

overkill IMO, you can get by with the AMD FX -6100 6 core, 8 GBs of DDR3 1600 RAM, a 60ish GB SSD (don't bother w/ RAID or cooler for it) and a SATA 3 Data HDD (500 GB are cheap).

GFX you don't need anything more than a XFX 2GB 6950 (overclock to 6970) that with a standard $150-180 case and 750W PS, and 3 23" LEDs will run you about $1500-$1800 (you can shave off some $ by reducing LEDs or GFX, but that's not fun).

Sticks I am looking into these, I loved my Saitek Cyborg 2000 but times have changed and it seems they aren't what they used to be, expect to drop about $50-80 for a decent one.

Without the LED monitors, this would run you about $1200 or so USD.

In 3 years you're upgrading your GFX card and RAM, that's it (in 5 years you're probably dumping this and getting a new rig, but oh well).

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Kaemon, on 24 January 2012 - 09:09 PM, said:

overkill IMO, you can get by with the AMD FX -6100 6 core, 8 GBs of DDR3 1600 RAM, a 60ish GB SSD (don't bother w/ RAID or cooler for it) and a SATA 3 Data HDD (500 GB are cheap).

GFX you don't need anything more than a XFX 2GB 6950 (overclock to 6970) that with a standard $150-180 case and 750W PS, and 3 23" LEDs will run you about $1500-$1800 (you can shave off some $ by reducing LEDs or GFX, but that's not fun).

Sticks I am looking into these, I loved my Saitek Cyborg 2000 but times have changed and it seems they aren't what they used to be, expect to drop about $50-80 for a decent one.

Without the LED monitors, this would run you about $1200 or so USD.

In 3 years you're upgrading your GFX card and RAM, that's it (in 5 years you're probably dumping this and getting a new rig, but oh well).

This is exceptionaly bad advice and almost made me cry.

To take a budget and waste a chunk of it on 3 LED Monitors instead of the actual hardware should result in you being stripped of you money and set out for public flogging.

now, to the OP whilst getting advice on here is good and there have been a few good suggestions already be wary of the bad advice that will pop up.

Intel currently produce the most powerful chips on the market, its why they are in all the build guides you can find that said, they are more expensive than some very good AMD chips (8120,8150).
Other than price Intel has another downside, they do not support their sockets for as long as AMD, and if in the future you wanted to upgrade or had technical issues needing a new CPU, it is likely you will have to buy a new motherboard for a new socket so you will save money going through AMD.

Ram, 8GB minimum 1866mhz for a gaming machine would be perfect.

GPU i would agree that a 7970 would be overkill but if you had the budget spare it will last you 2/3 years longer than the 6950/6990.

Hard Drives 500GB is stupidly small, and you can double that space to 1TB for next to nothing (20-25% more cost) it makes sense to get the 1TB.
Solid State drive again go for 120 or not at all, 60 GB will store nothing and you at least want your Operating System and room for updates, plus your primary games on that drive.

Again do not spend a chunk of your budget on over priced multiple monitors they arent going to improve the performance or longevity of the machine, 1 or 2 LCD monitors will do you just fine for the next 5 years.

[Seth Deathstalker]

Thanks for the input! After that and some more looking around I do have a first list. Not complete, not final.
(Keeping in mind that acquisition and assembly will be around November. Due to funding.)

Zalman Z9 plus (caught my eye. Fancy part. I like it :-)
Seasonic X-760 gold (really solid stuff. Enough power for....?)
Kingston HyperX SSD SATA3 120GB (thanks for the introduction to that piece of hardware, Catamount. It sure made it onto my list.)
Kingston HyperX 8GB DDR3-RAM 1866MHz, 2 x 4GB
Hitachi Deskstar HDD SATA3 750GB (could go for one tera but I doubt that I would ever fully use it.)
Thermaltake Frio for the CPU (hmm, there is that Ninja Wire, additional fixation of heavy heatsinks. Anybody experience with that?)
ASUS LCD/LED 23" (just one

Now for the motherboard/CPU, GPU....
X79 vs. AM3+ I will postpone that decision. You do make me consider AMD, Vulpesveritas and McKenna.
And the GPU... There IS the 7970. Will the price drop till November? When the 8xxx series will be released, then perhaps?
Tempting. Ugh, an evil thought just crossed my mind: maybe I could get another one next year and crossfire them....

Edited by Seth Deathstalker, 26 January 2012 - 05:43 AM.

[Seth Deathstalker]

Damion Wolf, on 24 January 2012 - 04:22 PM, said:

Whatever you build, you should put guns on it.

Nice thought. But here in Switzerland we are a tad more restrictive about fire arms.

Fiachdubh, on 24 January 2012 - 05:06 PM, said:

http://www.custompcguide.com/

Check out the builds here. They have a number of different ones for different budgets and uses. Updated every few months so always reasonably up to date. Good for suggestions on cases, power units, etc. Just wish this computer would start to die so could justify cost of building a new system.

Thanks for that point of reference. Currently, I might be slightly above their high-end pc...

Edited by Seth Deathstalker, 26 January 2012 - 06:03 AM.

[Vulpesveritas]

mkay. well when things get a little closer to you ordering the parts ask then, things will change in six months

[Seth Deathstalker]

Vulpesveritas, on 26 January 2012 - 09:09 AM, said:

mkay. well when things get a little closer to you ordering the parts ask then, things will change in six months

How true. But the waiting *sigh* now that I got a taste.... >;-)

[Catamount]

OP, forget the advice about fast RAM.

Unless you're planning on scoring high in a small number of artificial benchmarks, or plan on using an integrated GPU (Llano loves memory bandwidth, obviously), the difference to you between DDR3-1333 and even DDR3-2400 is the price tag, and nothing more.

Admittedly, the price difference isn't much for DDR3-1866, but why spend $20 more for something that'll make absolutely no difference?


Just look for something cheap that's 2x4GB, that comes from a reputable brand, and is 1.5v (no sense buying overvolted RAM). Something like this will do you fine, or if you're using a clear case and want pretty heat spreaders, maybe something like this,or if you feel like buying DDR3-1600, just because, something like this.

CPUs just don't bottleneck on memory anymore on anything you'd actually be doing as a home user.

Edited by Catamount, 26 January 2012 - 10:18 AM.

[Ashrok]

Intel definitely packs more punch, but AMD is usually the price-to-performance king. I'd vouch for AMD this time around, along with an HD 6950/70. I'd suggest staying off of the 28nm jump for now and let it mature - or wait until nVidia releases their equivalent to get better prices for the 7xxx series.

[Seth Deathstalker]

Yeah, a lot of people see it that way And AMD is better at price/performance.
I have to wait anyway so I will see how it plays out. Hopefully, a little more competition gets us better prices.
The HD 7950 sounds intriguing. I have read that there could come out a 1.5GB version of it as well.
Hmm, what is better for a GPU 3 or 1.5GB? For MWO probably 3gig.

[Ashrok]

Seth Deathstalker, on 27 January 2012 - 06:50 PM, said:

Yeah, a lot of people see it that way And AMD is better at price/performance.
I have to wait anyway so I will see how it plays out. Hopefully, a little more competition gets us better prices.
The HD 7950 sounds intriguing. I have read that there could come out a 1.5GB version of it as well.
Hmm, what is better for a GPU 3 or 1.5GB? For MWO probably 3gig.

You won't need 3GB of GDDRAM unless you're going to go really high res with gaming. (Eyefinity, or a 2560x1440/1600 monitor)

You can get by fine with 1.5GB.

[Seth Deathstalker]

Did some more reading. (Which was followed by new questions and that was followed by even more reading...) Mainly on Tom's Hardware, AnandTech and Wiki.
To be crystal clear about what I want from my new rig i.e my new motherboard:
Longlivety with the ability to upgrade.
The first mainly depends on product quality and intelligent layout. I will stick to Asus in this.
The latter - now there it gets interesting. Two components matter in this regard: CPU and GPU.

About the CPU: there is that rather big difference between AMD and Intel. AMD supports the compatibility between socket and processor for much longer than Intel (You dudes strongly pointed that out). I looked into Intel's socket/chipset/processor-thingie..............
Example: socket LGA 2011 + chipset X79. That socket is currently only for sandy bride-e. Only one family of CPUs - three versions - will fit. Later, ivy bridge-e is said to fit as well. After that, end of line. Fortunately, the X79 chipset will support ivy bridge-e after a BIOS update. (what luck)
Quiet restrictive, I admit. And yes, more expensive.
Correct me if I am wrong or missing something.

But. (I finally get to ask you some questions. )

What is more effective? To be able to upgrade the CPU in one, two or four years - or the GPU?
Which enhances performance more? (We are talking game wise here, of course.)
If the GPU is much more important why not go for an Intel platform with an AMD GPU?
If I settle with an ivy bridge-e and just get better GPUs down the years? (Maybe crossfire two.)
Because atm only sb-e/ib-e with the X79 fully support PCIe 3 x16 (for two cards).
And I got the impression that future GPUs will more and more make use of that bandwidth, right?
Will AMD in this regard catch up later that year? Or is it not that important after all?

Hope I got my point over clearly enough. Again, do tell if I am wrong or missing something.
I am looking forward to your comments, critiques, answers!
As one guy once said: go ahead, make my day.
:-D

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Seth Deathstalker, on 29 January 2012 - 10:45 PM, said:

Did some more reading. (Which was followed by new questions and that was followed by even more reading...) Mainly on Tom's Hardware, AnandTech and Wiki.
To be crystal clear about what I want from my new rig i.e my new motherboard:
Longlivety with the ability to upgrade.
The first mainly depends on product quality and intelligent layout. I will stick to Asus in this.
The latter - now there it gets interesting. Two components matter in this regard: CPU and GPU.

About the CPU: there is that rather big difference between AMD and Intel. AMD supports the compatibility between socket and processor for much longer than Intel (You dudes strongly pointed that out). I looked into Intel's socket/chipset/processor-thingie..............
Example: socket LGA 2011 + chipset X79. That socket is currently only for sandy bride-e. Only one family of CPUs - three versions - will fit. Later, ivy bridge-e is said to fit as well. After that, end of line. Fortunately, the X79 chipset will support ivy bridge-e after a BIOS update. (what luck)
Quiet restrictive, I admit. And yes, more expensive.
Correct me if I am wrong or missing something.

But. (I finally get to ask you some questions. )

What is more effective? To be able to upgrade the CPU in one, two or four years - or the GPU?
Which enhances performance more? (We are talking game wise here, of course.)
If the GPU is much more important why not go for an Intel platform with an AMD GPU?
If I settle with an ivy bridge-e and just get better GPUs down the years? (Maybe crossfire two.)
Because atm only sb-e/ib-e with the X79 fully support PCIe 3 x16 (for two cards).
And I got the impression that future GPUs will more and more make use of that bandwidth, right?
Will AMD in this regard catch up later that year? Or is it not that important after all?

Hope I got my point over clearly enough. Again, do tell if I am wrong or missing something.
I am looking forward to your comments, critiques, answers!
As one guy once said: go ahead, make my day.
:-D

If you choose your CPU well enough, it will last you 3/4 years before it starts to show its age but it will still perform comfortably.
Games today will always hit their limit on the GPU side way before CPU.
If you upgrade your chip to current standards (i5/i7,AMD FX81**) its unlikely you will require a CPU upgrade before either company moves onto their next socket line at least to the point where we know the new sockets are coming anyway (i hope that makes sense).

the plus side to AMD is that while you may not need to upgrade in the next 3/4 years with an 81 series bulldozer, they also have more chips on the way that support this socket type (piledriver etc) so you would still have some upgrade options in a few years that by then wont cost the earth and still be a decent enough upgrade.

I'll be honest im not a massive fan of SLI/Crossfire unless your going to do it with the 2 top end cards, i just do not see the point in buying 2 mid range cards that cost the same as 1 high end card.

[Seth Deathstalker]

Yes. But can you upgrade your AMD board during those four years from PCIe 2 x16 up to PCIe 3 x16?
That larger bandwidth could become needed, could it not? For future GPUs.

Edited by Seth Deathstalker, 30 January 2012 - 09:18 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Seth Deathstalker, on 30 January 2012 - 02:24 AM, said:

Yes. But can you upgrade your AMD boar during during those four years from PCIe 2 x16 up to PCIe 3 x16?
That larger bandwidth could become needed, could it not? For future GPUs.

There are AMD boards out there that support 3x PCI 16x or at least 2x16 and one reduced either 8 or x4 (not great true) but really its more a case of will it really be necessary in the next 4/5 years (will the games industry make best use of it) for you to worry about it? No unlikely.

[Catamount]

DV^McKenna, on 30 January 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

There are AMD boards out there that support 3x PCI 16x or at least 2x16 and one reduced either 8 or x4 (not great true) but really its more a case of will it really be necessary in the next 4/5 years (will the games industry make best use of it) for you to worry about it? No unlikely.

I'm fairly certain that, at this point, there is still no card that meaningfully saturates the PCIE 2.0 bus at 8x, so I'm pretty sure you're right here. It's completely irrelevant.

Besides, even if, down the road, someone bought some absurdly powerful future super-GPU that really needs PCIE 3.0 (some dual-GPU Geforce GTX 990, probably with a 90000000000000000000000000W TDP that Nvidia claims is "300W" to fit into the PCIE spec), and is really spending $500 or $600 on that anyways, an $80 motherboard upgrade to support it isn't going to be a serious setback.

Edited by Catamount, 30 January 2012 - 10:34 AM.