23 replies to this topic

[laxrules56]

I`m thinking about buying a new PC just for this game and here is the link: http://www.ibuypower...urator/w/123264
tell me what you think..

[Vulpesveritas]

Not what you want for gaming whatsoever. You want a much beefier GPU rather than your CPU.
In a bit I'll send you my recommended build.
ibuypower; http://www.ibuypower...urator/w/123268 (faster option for multitasking)
Cyberpower: http://www.cyberpowe...om/saved/1E901T (Faster option for gaming.)


If you can, I recommend you build your own however.

And just a bit for my advice, for a gaming rig, approximate percentages of component cost which I recommend;
GPU: 35-50%
CPU: 10-20%
Power Supply: 10-15%
Case: 2-10%
Motherboard: 8-20%
Storage: 5-20%
RAM: 2-10%
Other parts: remaining 0-33%

CPU Guide Here; http://mwomercs.com/...asic-cpu-guide/
GPU Guide Here; http://mwomercs.com/...eral-gpu-guide/
PSU Guide Here; http://mwomercs.com/...r-supply-guide/
Case Guide Here: http://mwomercs.com/...endation-guide/

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 19 June 2012 - 09:10 PM.

[Scilya]

what vulpe said ^^

but what is your cash alowance?
and does this build need to include a monitor?
i will post a build as well later

[laxrules56]

Scilya, on 19 June 2012 - 09:10 PM, said:

what vulpe said ^^

but what is your cash alowance?
and does this build need to include a monitor?
i will post a build as well later

1.2k max
no i got one
okay thanks

[Vulpesveritas]

1.2k builds;
ibuypower: http://www.ibuypower...urator/w/123272
Cyberpower: http://www.cyberpowe...om/saved/1E902G

Custom:
Case: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16811146081
PSU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817116014
Motherboard: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16813157266
CPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819106010
GPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814131471
HDD: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16822136769
Heatsink: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16835226051
TIM: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16835426020
OS: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16832116986

And you should be left with enough for shipping, otherwise go with this GPU:
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814127685

That's what I recommend at least, given your budget.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 19 June 2012 - 09:25 PM.

[laxrules56]

Vulpesveritas, on 19 June 2012 - 09:25 PM, said:

Cyberpower: http://www.cyberpowe...om/saved/1E902G

for the site you gave me shouldn't you get at least 675W? Because i don't be alive the 650W wont be to support it (correct me if im wrong)

[Vulpesveritas]

lol. 650w is more than enough to cover it. Their wattage calculator is based on their "standard" i.e. subparpieceofcrap power supplies.
note it here; http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817139020
it has 53 amps on the 12v rail, giving it a power output of about 636 watts on the 12v rail. And it comes with a 5 year warranty.
You can pretty much toss as much as you want onto this PSU up to about 600 watts without it even flinching.

Now see this "700" watt PSU
http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817159107
Where the strongest rail of the multi-rail PSU is 16 amps, or 192 watts. Higher end graphics cards pull more than that. Which would end up killing the PSU.

To see what you have on that build, your CPU eats about 125 watts.
Your graphics card eats about 150 watts.
Your motherboard eats about 20, though can eat up to around 50 or so.
your hard drive eats about 10-25.
your fans eat up to 50 unless your case is made out of them.
your disk drive eats maybe 20.
= ~375-450 watts used.
Far below the minimum for that corsair model, although one of the budget bin power supplies might die under such a workload, not to mention they aren't rated for nearly as high of temperatures as the corsair model.

For more information, please read this guide over here; http://mwomercs.com/...hardware-guide/
And to calculate your actual power consumption, go here; http://extreme.outer...n.com/PSUEngine
the highest peak load I could run with what was there was only 435w without overclocking.

Thermaltake has one here; http://www.thermalta...ision.com/Power

Heck, something I just noticed I missed;
I recommend upgrading that cyberpowerPC build to a Radeon HD 7950, it will eat more power, although it will be fairly faster.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 19 June 2012 - 10:13 PM.

[nsix]

laxrules56, on 19 June 2012 - 09:44 PM, said:

for the site you gave me shouldn't you get at least 675W? Because i don't be alive the 650W wont be to support it (correct me if im wrong)

You don't need a higher wattage PSU for a single GPU (Video Card) configuration. Corsair for the most part makes really solid power supplies and are generally a safe bet. They are one of the brands that hold up well under load.

laxrules56 feel free to be open to Intel Processors/CPUs. Intel vs. AMD.... Intel is king. Toms Hardware recommends them for most if not all of their system builds from budget to extreme. AMD them-self said that they are no longer competing for the performance crowd as they can no longer keep up with the bar that Intel has set.

http://news.softpedi...le-237103.shtml

http://www.tomshardw...,3/Desktops,13/

IMO try looking into the Intel i3, i5 or i7 series. Your $1.2k budget should be able to accommodate one of these Intel series processors comfortably.

As far as Video Cards (GPU) go. The AMD 7950 is a great bang for the buck. At $250 there really isn't any competition. But if you have some change, the Nvidia GTX 670 is an awesome card for $400+. Many of these cards (ASUS Top) are able to overclock past stock Nvidia GTX 680 speeds. For video cards Nvidia is the fastest kid on the block without a doubt.

http://www.hardocp.c...950_gaming_perf

I'll agree with Vulpesveritas that if you could dump the most money on one component, that you let it be the video card. For a gaming machine, the video card makes the build.

Have fun and good luck with your new computer laxrules56. If I could stress anything it would be to expand your research for a new computer beyond these forums. Asking the same question on a hardware forum would go along further in obtaining the feedback that you seek.

Edited by nsix, 19 June 2012 - 10:17 PM.

[Vulpesveritas]

nsix, on 19 June 2012 - 10:15 PM, said:

You don't need a higher wattage PSU for a single GPU (Video Card) configuration. Corsair for the most part makes really solid power supplies and are generally a safe bet. They are one of the brands that hold up well under load.

laxrules56 feel free to be open to Intel Processors/CPUs. Intel vs. AMD.... Intel is king. Toms Hardware recommends them for most if not all of their system builds from budget to extreme. AMD them-self said that they are no longer competing for the performance crowd as they can no longer keep up with the bar that Intel has set.

http://news.softpedi...le-237103.shtml

http://www.tomshardw...,3/Desktops,13/

IMO try looking into the Intel i3, i5 or i7 series. Your $1.2k budget should be able to accommodate one of these Intel series processors comfortably.

As far as Video Cards (GPU) go. The AMD 7950 is a great bang for the buck. At $250 there really isn't any competition. But if you have some change, the Nvidia GTX 670 is an awesome card for $400+. Many of these cards (ASUS Top) are able to overclock past stock Nvidia GTX 680 speeds. For video cards Nvidia is the fastest kid on the block without a doubt.

http://www.hardocp.c...950_gaming_perf

I'll agree with Vulpesveritas that if you could dump the most money on one component, that you let it be the video card. For a gaming machine, the video card makes the build.

Have fun and good luck with your new computer laxrules56. If I could stress anything it would be to expand your research for a new computer beyond these forums. Asking the same question on a hardware forum would go along further in obtaining the feedback that you seek.

While AMD isn't competing in the high performance ($200+) CPU range, they are still highly competitive in the budget and mainstream range (Below said $200 point.) Especially as it is hard to overclock Intel CPUs at this price point, and that they won't overclock as high as an AMD CPU at those price points. Also taking into account the multitasking advantage AMD has with it's greater core count, I tend to recommend AMD here.

GPU wise, you're a bit off. The 670 is great, no doubt, but don't forget it is missing shaders without which even if it is overclocked above 680 speeds, it's still not going to be faster than a 680 without a sizeable improvement. The 7970 is as fast as a 670, but overclocks higher. And for the pricing for these prebuilds, the 7950 is the best bet here.
And as far as $250 goes, I think you are thinking of the 7850.

[Skrapheap]

If you are concerned with PSU wattage use this little tool:eXtreme Power Supply Calculator

The lite version only shows wattage, but it'll at least give you a starting point. BTW the system he listed as the custom has a rough total wattage of 446 watts, which means even overclocked a 650 watt PSU will more than cover it. BTW what memory and optical drive are you going to recommend to him Vulperveritas? Personally I like:

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16827151244

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16820231440

Edited by Wulffemein, 19 June 2012 - 10:31 PM.

[Vulpesveritas]

Oh lol I can't believe I forgot about RAM and an ODD.
I recommend this for RAM: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16820103006
and this for an ODD: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16827135204

Which the price just takes us over to that Geforce GTX 670

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 19 June 2012 - 10:35 PM.

[Skrapheap]

Vulpesveritas next time I am suspending your geek card.

[Vulpesveritas]

Wulffemein, on 19 June 2012 - 10:39 PM, said:

Vulpesveritas next time I am suspending your geek card.

Nooooooezzzz! lol

That aside, yeah I really should sleep more I think...

[nsix]

Vulpesveritas, on 19 June 2012 - 10:25 PM, said:

While AMD isn't competing in the high performance ($200+) CPU range, they are still highly competitive in the budget and mainstream range (Below said $200 point.) Especially as it is hard to overclock Intel CPUs at this price point, and that they won't overclock as high as an AMD CPU at those price points. Also taking into account the multitasking advantage AMD has with it's greater core count, I tend to recommend AMD here.

GPU wise, you're a bit off. The 670 is great, no doubt, but don't forget it is missing shaders without which even if it is overclocked above 680 speeds, it's still not going to be faster than a 680 without a sizeable improvement. The 7970 is as fast as a 670, but overclocks higher. And for the pricing for these prebuilds, the 7950 is the best bet here.
And as far as $250 goes, I think you are thinking of the 7850.

LAX has a budget of $1.2k, that fits well within the budget of an Intel processor.

Yes the GTX 670 lacks a few shaders from it's brother the GTX 680. But the OC versions of the 670 have high clocked cores out of the box that exceed that of the 680, making the 670 just as fast as the 680 out of the box. Since for whatever reason the memory isn't overclocked out of the box, bump up the memory on the 670 and you now have a card that is faster than a stock GTX 680.

Axe the 7970 out of your build for the faster GTX 670 OC and apply the extra $50 towards an Intel CPU

I have this same card and am pushing the same numbers.

http://www.guru3d.co...i-top-review/23

The only other suggestion I would have would be trying to fit a faster HDD into the build. Fitting an SSD into this budget would be tough, but getting a faster WD Black or other drive doesn't seem as impossible.

[Hellgardia]

Vulpesveritas has shown a great config but i too believe that with your budget, an i5 3570k would be more appropriate:


Case:http://www.newegg.co...N82E16811119233
PSU:http://www.newegg.co...N82E16817139020
Motherboard: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16813157293
CPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819116504
Memory: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16820220558
Heatsink: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16835103099
GPU: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814127685
HDD:http://www.newegg.co...N82E16822136769


OS:http://www.newegg.co...N82E16832116986

Total - 1200.91$


Cheers

Edited by Aniquilator6, 19 June 2012 - 10:51 PM.

[Vulpesveritas]

nsix, on 19 June 2012 - 10:44 PM, said:

LAX has a budget of $1.2k, that fits well within the budget of an Intel processor.

Yes the GTX 670 lacks a few shaders from it's brother the GTX 680. But the OC versions of the 670 have high clocked cores out of the box that exceed that of the 680, making the 670 just as fast as the 680 out of the box. Since for whatever reason the memory isn't overclocked out of the box, bump up the memory on the 670 and you now have a card that is faster than a stock GTX 680.

Axe the 7970 out of your build for the faster GTX 670 OC and apply the extra $50 towards an Intel CPU

I have this same card and am pushing the same numbers.

http://www.guru3d.co...i-top-review/23

The only other suggestion I would have would be trying to fit a faster HDD into the build. Fitting an SSD into this budget would be tough, but getting a faster WD Black or other drive doesn't seem as impossible.

Dude.. what have you been reading that says a 670 is faster? The 670 and 7970 are the same speed at stock and the 7970 overclocks higher. And the 7970 overclocks higher in any scenario higher than a 680, why do you think that there are a ton of overclocking world records being broken only with 7970s in both ghz and benchmark scores? That powercolor model is a decent bit faster than a 680 at stock too.
On another note, if that 1.2k budget is including shipping, I would say my build is a better option. Although with a higher budget, the i5 would be faster for gaming.
Beyond that, if MWO is is primary concern from gaming, he will see no real difference between the FX-6200 and that i5, as there is no real difference in multitasking capabiliites or CryENGINE 3 performance, yet he saves $50 on his CPU.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 19 June 2012 - 11:02 PM.

[Laguna]

From my research the Nvidia 670 GTX is stronger than the AMD 7570 as well. Unless you need to Eyefinity off one card, then go with the 670 GTX.
http://www.anandtech...ew-feat-evga/19
http://www.tomshardw...iew,3200-6.html
I love Team Red but I feel at the moment the 7870, 7950, and7970 are overpriced.
Anyways good luck with the build! It is always fun making a new comp =D

Edited by Laguna, 19 June 2012 - 11:22 PM.

[Vulpesveritas]

Laguna, on 19 June 2012 - 11:21 PM, said:

From my research the Nvidia 670 GTX is stronger than the AMD 7570 as well. Unless you need to Eyefinity off one card, then go with the 670 GTX.
http://www.anandtech...ew-feat-evga/19
http://www.tomshardw...iew,3200-6.html
I love Team Red but I feel at the moment the 7870, 7950, and7970 are overpriced.
Anyways good luck with the build! It is always fun making a new comp =D

Yet anandtech had them trade blows with the 7970 ; http://www.anandtech...ew-feat-evga/19
And Techpowerup which has a larger game selection and a more through testing process show them to be even trading blows, and the OC versions being much faster (note the Powercolor version is 50mhz faster than this on the CPU and the same memory clock;
http://www.techpower...7970_X-Edition/



Anyhow.

[Lakevren]

Vulpesveritas, on 19 June 2012 - 11:00 PM, said:

Dude.. what have you been reading that says a 670 is faster? The 670 and 7970 are the same speed at stock and the 7970 overclocks higher. And the 7970 overclocks higher in any scenario higher than a 680, why do you think that there are a ton of overclocking world records being broken only with 7970s in both ghz and benchmark scores? That powercolor model is a decent bit faster than a 680 at stock too.
On another note, if that 1.2k budget is including shipping, I would say my build is a better option. Although with a higher budget, the i5 would be faster for gaming.
Beyond that, if MWO is is primary concern from gaming, he will see no real difference between the FX-6200 and that i5, as there is no real difference in multitasking capabiliites or CryENGINE 3 performance, yet he saves $50 on his CPU.
*JPEG from crappy benchmarking site removed for shorter quote*

This is faster than a GTX 680, or at least ties with it:
http://www.techpower...0_Direct_Cu_II/



So saying the 7970 as you claim is negated. 66.9 FPS vs 67.4 FPS. Does it matter much? Well... it does, on the price. At stock GTX 670 has a better value vs 7970, as it's $400 vs $440 respectively. Now how much is the ASUS GTX 670 that the benchmark shows? $430 at newegg, still lower than a stock 7970.

And Also:



More GPU bound:


Processors still matter, provided it's less GPU bound. If it's a GPU bound one, then the CPU doesn't matter as much. But the CPU bound ones? The Bulldozer is a failure, even when compared to its predecessor the Phenom II. Now is it worth the $50 to 100? Well, that depends on the budget. Granted, even for gaming I'd recommend the i3 2100 over the FX 8150, but only for gaming. For multi-tasking? I really don't know if FX 8150 is worth its deficiency over its multitasking advantage. Most people are looking for a gaming rig, not a multi-tasking rig.

Edited by Lakevren, 19 June 2012 - 11:48 PM.

[Vulpesveritas]

Lakevren, on 19 June 2012 - 11:38 PM, said:

This is faster than a GTX 680, or at least ties with it:
http://www.techpower...0_Direct_Cu_II/



So saying the 7970 as you claim is negated. 66.9 FPS vs 67.4 FPS. Does it matter much? Well... it does, on the price.

And Also:



More GPU bound:

Well, keep in mind the 7970 is also quite a bit faster in GPU computing, and if you do any overclocking it is faster. The 670 is a great card, however I like more options personally... but that's me. In the end, either is fine.

As far as CPUs go, thank you for posting a CPU that is not the one I was using. I was using the 4/4.2ghz FX-6200, which is a faster gaming processor, and slightly faster than the 1100t BE.
Also, thank you for using a couple of nearly four year old games for your benchmarks as well. lol. Keep in mind more and more games take advantage of extra cores, and DX11 reduces the CPU usage of a processor. And that at those settings the CPU didn't really make much of a difference on frames per second in the DX11 title. On the first run, the 1100t, despite being a hexacore, was slower than a quad core based on an older AMD architecture with a slightly higher clock rate, showing that it was not taking advantage of multithreading like most modern titles.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 19 June 2012 - 11:48 PM.