A good pc for gaming and a question regarding ssd.

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
V

Vineet Rughwani

Honorable
Feb 5, 2014
2
0
10,510
Hey all..

First time in here and I hope i don't mess it up .

Well below are the few parts I have my mind set on. Im building this pc for gaming and simple office works used at home tho.


mobo : asus maximus VI hero
CPU : intel i7 4770k
GPU : GTX 560 ti ( already have this )
RAM :
CASING :

Well I'm looking for a good casing not too pricy which has good airflow and spacious if ever I wanna upgrade or add parts in the future. Please advise if I should get a watercool ready case?

I would really appreciate some inputs on some builds or if my mobo is too less or cpu too high for gaming ? Need ideas for other parts which I haven't input yet.

The games I'm going to play COD ghosts Diablo titanfall etc.

regarding storage. Ive been reading and mostly users are recommending a SSD storage .. im just confused whether this is used for the OS and games or just the games. As I was looking for a 1TB hdd.. please advise as a 120gb storage just wont suffice.

I apologize for my poor english and if anything isnt clear.. hehe please help. Going to shop day after :)







 
Solution
S
I'd recommend going with the 4760k if you want to save some money. My personal favorite cases are the BitFenix Ghost and Antec 1100. The Corsair Obsidian series are good too. An SSD is mainly used for OS as it speeds up boot time and application start times. It is not a necessity for gaming. Games will load slightly faster, but in game performance will otherwise be unaffected, where the graphics card (and to some extent CPU) makes the most difference.

Also, you might consider dropping the CPU for something like the FX-6300 and instead get a better graphics card since the 560 Ti is a mediocre card for newer games like Ghosts.
 


Your english is pretty good, but I believe grammar nazi's should be shot unless I'm being GRADED or something...LOL It's good enough for me IF I can fully understand your points and I do so don't apologize. Nazi's go away :)

I would not listen to anyone telling you to buy an AMD cpu if you already have a budget that can afford a $200 board and $340 cpu (you're clearly not broke or wouldn't consider the 2 parts you chose). I'm assuming you are planning to overclock with a 4770K and that board choice. So check out this for COD Ghosts to see how badly AMD hurts in the OP's comment on FX6300.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/call-of-duty-ghosts-pc-performance,3683-10.html
Do you want an AMD 28% perf hit for $220 off cpu (far worse in some games)? 4770k at even 3.9ghz will beat this old 2500k model even at 4.2ghz they OC'ed it to so it's worse than shown here vs. AMD. This gets worse later every time you upgrade your GPU too as the cpu then is able to run all out and Intel dominates more and you won't get much more than an fx8350 as an upgrade on AMD's side so you're never going to get much faster. But you would be able to pop in a Broadwell K 14nm on S1150. Neither side has much of an upgrade path, but if I was going to chop anything off the cpu I'd drop to i5-4670. Save that money ($120?) for a maxwell 20nm later this year and ride your GTX 560TI until then sell it for $50-100 ($160 on google shopping right now new) and you got more towards a 20nm card. GTX 560 TI is fine probably for Titanfall (source engine not too demanding I'd think) and Diablo 3 is seen here as fine with anything above GTX 460 for even 2560x1600.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/diablo-iii-performance-benchmark,3195-5.html
Lowest price on a GTX 660 is $189 at newegg. So saving $220 on a cpu will not dominate your 560TI. You'll have to add more to that, and you'd be far better off waiting for 20nm which should be a HUGE increase in performance over 28nm.

But people forget you have to live with that cpu decision for ages if you go AMD and a ton of games are FAR slower on AMD, while buying Intel is far faster and OC'ed to 4.5+ etc is a nice boost one day when you say it's slow (sure AMD OC's too, but clock for clock Intel is faster already so both OC'ed to the same will get more on INTEL). You probably won't need a new cpu before your board dies or you want a cpu in a different socket at say 10nm) if you buy 4770k.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/neverwinter-performance-benchmark,3495-9.html
FX8350 even vs. old ivy i5-3550 here blown away, so haswell 4770K would eat this for breakfast. I can show game after game with 25%+ deficits.
"Only Intel's Core i5-3550 demonstrates a significantly better result, and we have to assume that higher-end Core processors are really what it takes to let AMD's single-GPU flagship achieve its best showing."
So 4770k will really up the ante as they assume correctly even here for 7970. So maxwell will even benefit more vs. 8350/6300 which are pretty similar. No point in buying AMD unless you're broke, which your cpu/board picks & WATER mention say you aren't AMD style broke :)

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performance-benchmark-gaming,3451-8.html
ivy i5-3550 again stomping AMD's FX8350 which again is slower than 4770K obviously so in Crysis 3 expect AMD be blown away even more than IVY here at 31fps vs AMD 21fps. OUCH, not playable at 1080p on AMD with mins like 21fps.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2013-vga-gpgpu/06-Crysis-2-DirectX-9-B-Performance,2947.html
You can check other charts but as you see here you are pretty comparable to a GTX 660 regular which score almost identical in manyy cases. So you should be above 30fps in 1080p even in COD Ghosts as the toms link testing COD Ghosts shows (couple links up) where GTX 660 got 41fps min. Playable. You can easily limp to Maxwell etc (20nm is the important thing, pick either AMD or NV) on your GTX 560TI.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231314
I wouldn't buy memory that is over 1.5v and 9-9-9-24 1600 (they have two heatsinks styles on GBRL or GBXL). I own these and Corsair also have Adata which ran great for year, and have sold many brands previously in business. If you know how to set manual timings you can get nearly anything to work barring compatibility issues that is - pick a brand you like. There is no need for anything faster and all you get buying those is overvolted or overclocked memory that is basically the same stuff as this just with a higher price. The point of the 1.5v (or even 1.35, but 1.5v is norm) WITH lower timings is that you can overclock it yourself then to much higher with looser timings anyway, which just ends with you back where DDR 2400 etc is anyway after overvolting it to 1.65 etc. No point in paying a memory maker to slap a faster label on it with reduced timings screwing you out of cash. You can find a great article below showing not much difference between tight 1333 and really loose DDR3 3000! At least when considering price $100 vs. $800 for 8GB, 8x more expensive for 10% or less? Only 2% in games or less with discrete on all their game tests. I would want faster ratings maybe with an APU but you're not going there and I still think you can OC/OVolt to get there for the most part usually without the cost:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7364/memory-scaling-on-haswell/7
Scaling article from 1333 to 3000.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226184
Another memory choice but 1.35v, so you can run here or 1.5v at 8-8-8-21 or maybe lower at 1600.

IF you don't have money for an SSD+HD you might think about just getting a hybrid Seagate or something 2TB is like $119 and will at least load games faster, level changes etc. You only install it once (WRITE which full SSD are good at), but you load it (READ-hybrid works good here) many times over playing each game. 1TB at newegg (hybrid) is only $20 cheaper at $99, so why not go 2TB? $20 for twice the size I go 2TB.

LG Bluray burner is nice (I love mine, works great with imgburn etc), and works great with cheap discs like Optical Quantum OQBDR04LT-50 on amazon for $25 (nice price great quality burns with LG), and I've used hundreds of them, only one error with spot checking a ton of them and I had pars on that disc anyway...LOL. Playing a movie wouldn't be affected as they just play through usually (artifact on screen maybe but that's about it).
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827136250
$68 or $8 more for 16x but pointless, you'd rather save cash with 4x unless you burn all day but even 6x were ok for me and only a few bucks more.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004VS8VA8/ref=gno_cart_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A1LUEAWPR8WQ6

If you have money for a 2nd drive I don't use my bluray burner for much more than burning, rarely reading and games are installed then cracked to avoid discs if needed (gamecopyworld etc). Don't want to wear out your $70 burner when you can buy $20 dvd player that covers most game discs. Liteon, LG, Samsung, Asus etc all pretty good.

Other than that...Not many suggestions unless you tell more about what you need (do you need a monitor or not etc) and what you have that you can salvage from the old box. Casing is too much preference based for many (looks are important to some not to others and tastes vary greatly). I usually find a look I like then see if it fits my needs for cooling, drives etc in reviews.

PSU, I like alone (not part of the case) and fully believe in a HIGH quality part (this is NO place to skimp if OCing). I prefer PC Power & Cooling and my whole family has for years. ZERO dead and in 8yrs of selling them I had ONE go bad, but I'll not I never sold below a 350w which back then were the line between crap and REAL quality which they built their name on. I own a 750w silencer RED to match my vid card 5850 AMD, memory red also...LOL. I still have a 350 running in the family that was from over 10yrs ago...ROFL. Kept clean they seem to last forever (seasonic who makes them mostly, also great of course). My dad has an Seasonic X series 750 but would have probably went PCP&C except it was great price on seasonic at the time. I would rather have bought a better model with 1% regulation but they didn't have a red one when I bought (now seems turbocool are 1.5% but that's tight too, were 1% years ago, but most are 3%). These babies are ROCK solid with voltage that you won't even see budge in the bios etc even stressed and loaded out with drives etc while heavily OC'ed everywhere. They are nearly all marked far lower than their actual watts and are marked very conservative vs. real Peak. IE the 860 Turbocool hits 930w peak and still wouldn't crack. They are built for serious stress. My current one (750CF red) has been running since 2007 basically 24/7. Runs totally cool. I expect it to get me through my next PC probably if it's workable for broadwell and some board (crosses fingers...LOL). IF not I'll just plop it into my server or keep it as a backup. It was $90 on a great sale so I got my money out of it already. With these, if you have any issues you can almost guarantee you look at your PSU last. They are that good. People don't realize how much this boring part is worth in a STABLE build. I never had PC's come back over PSU's but I always pushed customers to high end models explaining WHY they are worth it and at worst went Enermax/Antec. I would not sell you a PC with a junk PSU. I was small and not capable of fixing tons of junk. I wanted to not see you again until your next build :) That quality starts right here with the PSU. If they were too cheap for a great one, I'd pitch cheapening the case itself or something to get a better PSU in. Sometimes the difference between crap and Ok is just $20. My 2cents on PSU's (ok, a whole buck? :)).

No need for watercooling usually, as a high end air cooler is tough to beat already. Again with your cpu/mb selection and talking water on top, I don't understand the other guy suggesting a cheapo AMD 6300 (or even FX 8350, both the same junk basically for games and for the poor only these days) to buy a slightly better gpu. i5-4670 and saving for Maxwell maybe OK, but AMD for cpu? Not with you already apparently being able to afford $540 for MB/CPU and knowing performance getting KILLED by Intel forever in these sockets. There is no such thing as cpu overkill BTW if you have the cash for whatever you want buy top end :) Semi strapped for cash, drop to 4670 to allow future broadwell which AMD has no chance of catching without excavator (and maybe not then) and that won't be in the same socket as 8350/6300. You'd be buying a dead end, and AMD may not even make a performance desktop core next time, might go all APU only. Intel at least has a path to 14nm and who knows maybe 10nm.

One more point (or a few...LOL), if you don't plan to seriously overclock, you can go a little cheaper on the board and still hit 4.5ghz+ easily. IF you don't plan on buying dual gpus (never worth it to me, I'll wait for shrinks to get that power or better gpus), you can knock pretty much $100 off your board (still with ALL SOLID CAPS) which coupled with 4670 that's $220 saved for Maxwell etc 20nm gpus. Or if you'll have money later for a gpu anyway by xmas etc, you can get a lot of extra stuff for the $220 now (mem can come from this, burner too). OR you spend it on an SSD for the boot 240GB/256GB, and a HD for main storage so best of both worlds. I could go on and on...LOL. Happy hunting. I can't go back to HD as my boot drive now that I've experienced SSD (and I don't even have near the fastest - Crucial M4 128GB). I have a hybrid also for laptop and it really is quick (momentus 300gb) compared to a faster spinning 7200rpm (WD scorpion 120 if memory serves) with lower platter density. So a hybrid can make things seem quick overall in a pinch if you can't afford SSD/HD combo. I was impressed and the laptop got a major speed boost. Very easy to see it. Windows loads quick, games load quick. Only installs are kind of normal as regular HD would be.

Hope that helps, good luck.

Wish I had more time to answer these kinds of posts 🙁 Sorry if it's TLDR but hopefully it will benefit others too in similar buying situations. Hope this is all clear to you.
 
Solution
The improvement over an FX-6300 is completely negligible, what difference is 120 FPS over 80 FPS? Obviously the Ivy Bridge and Haswell CPUs are better, but the price is the deciding factor. Since OP is from India, prices are extremely different than here in the States and in Europe. If OP can afford it, he should go for the Haswell i5 as I suggested, as the 4770k is unnecessary for almost all games except a select few such as Battlefield 4.

http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Call_of_Duty_Ghosts-test-ghost_proz.jpg


 
vineet nice to c u here just wanted to give an advise if ur monitor has a refresh rate of 60 ghz per sec than u will never need to waste ur money an intel processor because u will never get higher than 60 fbs no matter how powerfull ur system is just get a really powerful gpu so it will be future proof for games of the next generation and save ur money and buy an amd processor like the fx 8350 or the fx 8320 and put ur money on the gpu and the psu
 


The difference in 6300 vs. Haswell is you'll be under 30fps as soon as the next gen games come with more advanced graphics while the guy with an extra 50% horsepower just plays on and on above 30fps for much longer. Completely negligible? Did you look at the benchmarks I gave? or even your own? You're acting like games will never advance past COD ghosts (some already are more taxing) and this guy already budgeted a $200 MB, $340 cpu, and talks water (so at least has another $100 in his pocket on top). 6300 is out of the question with apparently $650 in this guy's pocket as PRICE is NOT a factor for anyone pitching these as purchases with water. Why buy a dead end that will likely be slow next year? I already showed 6300 not playable where haswell is. It might be 80 vs. 120 in a particular game, but it's 20 vs. 30-40 in another. That's the difference between playable and NOT in many things. Do you want to live CPU limited from day 1 in anything on a brand new build (out of the question if I have money to NOT be limited)?

You act as though he doesn't know the prices of the products he's about to buy wherever he lives (said he'd purchase the next day, so clearly at least has whatever is needed wherever he'll buy it). He clearly did his homework at least a bit, as he chose top end hardware and both exceptional products. How do you know he's in India? We have MANY indians living in USA. They run every 7-11 type market in my area. Thank god, they have the best drink selections with oddball juice drinks, coconut water, teas etc that others don't carry :) Is it racist to like someone for their drinks? ROFL. Reverse racism? If someone has a russian name, I don't assume they are IN russia. Do all chinese people live in China? NOPE.

I made no comment about your i5 statement. I said the same thing (though I think you meant i5-4670 not 4760) even expanded on it adding how to spend the savings a few different ways. You are wrong on the 4770, as sooner or later it will be slow just like everything else. I have never bought a computer cpu or gpu that at some point I didn't say "this is a piece of crap today"...LOL. I'm currently saying that about my Xeon 3110/radeon 5850. A 3ghz dual core that easily runs 3.6 cool was great when I bought it, but it's a turd now in many games and if I buy a maxwell I'll be limited the second it gets in the door. The extra 4 threads is becoming more and more handy and will even further as we move forward with 6-8 cores etc becoming norm soon (FX6300 already 6 core, 8350 is 8, we're moving above 4 shortly across top end for both sides). Intel plans to add more cores not more mhz (has an 18core broadwell 14nm planned, on top of 8-10 core models as mainstream). Those threads are especially handy if you do more than just GAME on your PC such as ripping, packing, rarring, photo or video editing etc etc. Programmers will be forced to use it or get passed by someone who's app DOES use the threads. There will be no more perf to be had by more mhz so they'll have to get threaded like it or not at some point.

If he has the money as you say, he should buy 4770 unless he plans on upgrading to a broadwell at some point. If I bought i7-4770k I'd just OC to make broadwell a moot point once I thought my haswell was slow and wait for 10nm and a new board. You'd likely only need to buy a new gpu 1/2 through the PC's life unless you're just a prolific upgrader or have cash to burn. Today you get more from delaying a cpu upgrade and opting for the next great board tech/chipset+a die shrunk cpu (IE, new DDR4 coming, probably usb3.1 if not in chipset then added by another chip, thunderbolt 2, new Sata express, etc etc in the next chipsets). You can get 5yrs easily out of a near top chip ($300 range) that can OC easily to make the next rev pointless.
 


ROFL. In how many games? Mantle? Toms wouldn't even publish the scores because they were so bad on Radeon 265 just this week. "results were not what we expected"...So they excused it as beta. Well it shouldn't be beta but whatever. It won't garner much support when people find out you get nothing from high-end combo parts. Don't say CF now, that's pointless and only in <2% of the machines out there (we're not talking SLI users either so just AMD side probably 1% of users). Not many will benefit even if that comes out to be a great scenario for it at some point. Most of us have trouble coming up with enough for ONE high end card.

Intel's chips have multiple cores and if he bought the chip he was planning to buy it has 8 threads! You're selling a pipe dream that could take YEARS to get anywhere near true. AMD cpus should be avoided by this guy, or he'll wait forever for your mantle hopes to come true finally making his cpu "not a BAD choice". :) I hope he just bought what he was already planning which was a GREAT choice. If he didn't have the money to buy what he was suggesting originally he would have pitched an i5-4670 (saving $120 or so) and a motherboard that cost $100 less, and wouldn't have mentioned water at all ON TOP of his top end cpu/mb. $220 could have been saved right there, no need to strap yourself to a dead end AMD solution cpu/motherboard wise.

Just stop, you're reaching so far now, you're no longer on our planet. I mean, "maybe one day mantle will be in at least 2 games that work fast, and your chip will be kinda good then - for maybe two games"...OR at least fast enough that Tomshardware will publish their results...Whatever. I'm not forgetting anything, I'm advising him to buy what is GREAT now and always will be. INTEL. You're advising a chip (and still defending it) that maybe one day might not be too bad if the stars align, pigs fly, blah blah...

I'll believe unicorns exist when I actually SEE one. :) Buy intel, not the unicorn.

Name a game AMD wins in cpu vs. 4770. Nothing? so what am I forgetting? I could say physx will take over the world so just buy Nvidia gpus now, never AMD. I'd be selling the same dream as you with Mantle and 6-8 cores maybe becoming useful before his cpu is dead...LOL. But then he has 8 threads with 4770k so we're really only talking Mantle here and that's not going well at all. Most games will be aimed at 4 cores for a long while (well until intel is shipping mainstream 6core+ which seems next year or later) especially since those are faster than AMD already. AMD owns less than 20% of the desktop market in cpus and how much of those are 6 core+? How many of Intel's 80%+ are 4770k and up with 8 threads+? Most games will not bother threading for this stuff until years down the road as they become more mainstream (it's more work so won't be done until we get there in mass units). Until the sales are there for consoles most devs are ignoring NEXT GEN consoles. The same happens in PC's at the high-end. They program for far below 4770k/780Ti. Diablo3 etc doesn't require either and not many games do. The FX6300 will NEVER reach 4770K performance no matter how much praying you do to mantle/threading gods. 😉

I'll go out on a limb and say you won't see more than 10 games in the next 12 months running mantle (the only one we have is still BETA - actually I'd guess 5 or so each year like physx, tressfx etc). For you to be anywhere near correct here, it would need to be in 90% of the games this year. If it's 10% instead of 90% it's the exception for a game to run mantle, not the rule that mantle works and as such won't be helping him catch i7-4770k much right? With consoles not using it at all, a bad start (BF4 results toms won't even publish they're so bad still on most hardware), needing extra coding for every game etc, not many will do this and only when paid by AMD who can't afford many $8mil optimization sticker prices like BF4. These types of features are BONUS reasons you buy a product not THE reason to buy as they don't show up much. The occasional game that uses physx, tressfx, Mantle, etc are bonus features that show up in a game, not "now in every game made"...Get it? A few big PAID titles per year is all we'll get from either side on proprietary tech especially from the SMALLER firm in gpus. Gamers buy cards, and 65% of those buy NV which is why they had a great quarter on GPUS.
 


You are still completely missing the point. I never said the 6300/8350 was better than the 4770k. What I did say is that the 6300/8350 is more than enough for gaming. The 4770(k) is about 40% more expensive than the 8350 and about 70% more expensive than the 6300. If he has the money, go for it. If not, the 6300/8350 is more than adequate.

The reason budget is so important to begin with is that he is running a 560 Ti. Sure he can get a 4770k, but what is the point if he doesn't have a graphics card to pair it with?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom