- Jun 29, 2014
- 95
- 0
- 4,640
The post is a bit long, so I've separated the different concerns into bold text ("CPU, "GPU", etc), and if any of you would like to help with any of them, please do, it would be greatly appreciated!! BTW, I'm trying to stay within $1000 or so, but going over a bit isn't TOO bad.
So for a while now, I've been looking into building a PC. I'm progressing as far as choosing components, but I'm stuck on a few things... I plan to use the build for a decent amount of video editing, gaming (BF4, Metro series, GTA IV, as well as older (less demanding games) like New Vegas, GTA:SA, GTA: Vice City, which obviously won't be a concern... Um, maybe a bit of Cryptocurrency mining (haha), and that's all I can really think of at the moment. But really, tasks that would revolve around maybe, a "moderate" power-user. N
CPU: One concern is Intel vs AMD. I originally was going to go with an FX-6300, but decided that for the money, the performance of the FX-8320 was a better increase for the money. I'm looking mostly at the passmark scores, which I know is not the set in stone way of judging performance, but I guess it's a good way to ballpark how a CPU will perform, I'd think... the 6300 scores 6359 on passmark. The 8320 scores just over 8000 for $40 more, and I felt that increase was worth the money. But when you look at the 8350, for $20 more, it scores 9000 with the same power draw, etc, though same number of cores and stuff.
But as of late, I'm thinking maybe I should go with Intel. I was like "damn, I should go with an i5 or i7. Performance-wise, compared to power draw, is significantly better than AMD. But I don't want to get too hung up on that, because within the lifespan of the PC, you'd never see the difference in your power costs. Not for the higher price of the Intel processors. AMD CPU's seem to give higher price/pcmark and are just better for the money, at the cost of a little more power draw, which is negligible. But if you really want to get "up there" performance-wise, you'd need to go Intel, it seems.
However, even the i5's going into the $200 range don't have hyperthreading. Not the lower-end ones. Many also score lower on Passmark, like significantly. I know the FX processors (8xxx) are marketed as 8-core, though I believe they are 4 with hyperthreading (8 virtual?). I think that 4 cores, vs 4 with hyperthreading, would be an improvement for video editing, as far as that's concerned. I think for gaming, hyperthreading is negligible. I believe the more common higher end i7's are also 4 with hyperthreading, and I guess single core performance would just be significantly better all around. Apparently, you don't start getting into 6 (12 virtual), etc until you go to the Xeon series, which doesn't apply here. So this is my main issue of choosing what to pick. I know that even if I go with an 8xxx, it will still be future-proof for years to come, but would a higher end Intel be a better investment? For the money, I could just buy an updated FX, as I'd need to replace motherboard anyway? I edit 720p video on an AMD Turion 64x2 TL-60, though not easily. So in that sense, any FX Series will be a welcome upgrade, no matter what I go with. Tell me why you went with either. I feel tempted to go overkill, as I think many are, but I don't want to, really.
RAM: This is simpler, but there's still a lot to choose from. For my needs, 8GB RAM seems good. Apparently, "faster" RAM doesn't do much, as LinusTechTips showed, so I decided to go with an 1866, because it seemed to be the highest performing in those tests and others. Great... But how much do I really need? I've been running 2GB RAM on this old laptop, and it's been alright. I feel like since I don't "multitask", and I more just do one thing at a time, like video editing, gaming, (obviously), even 4GB would be enough, which is why I wanted to go with 8 to future proof myself. But as I said before, overkill is tempting, and I was thinking 16GB. What would be my best option? Prices seem to vary wildly. I was thinking of going Kingston HyperX Blu 4x2, which would set me back less than $100. It seems to be pretty good stuff. What RAM would you recommend?
GPU: So for this, I actually have two Asus R9 270's lined up. But after some recent research, I was a but disappointed with it's performance in Metro: Last Light, at only about 25fps consistent. I know turning AA off and turning down the settings a bit will increase performance. I can always crossfire as well, but I was looking to use only one of them for gaming. I think they'll be fine, especially with a decent overclock, and for the money I got them for, they really don't have much competition. Maybe I'm just overthinking. They do seem to perform very well on games like BF4, though surprisingly are only average in GTA IV (worst freakin' port ever done, apparently)...
Obviously motherboard and case will be adjusted, but right now I'm looking to do a Thermaltake Chaser MK-I. I know, I'm a showy noob, but the thing looks sick! For an HDD, I'm looking at a WD Black 1TB. I do have another USB 3.0 1TB HDD for backing up and stuff, so I think that 1TB will be good, especially for the price. I know many say to install OS on an SSD, but that always kind of confused me, so I'll just do it the "typical" way for simplicity.
But I think that's about it... You can see how I'm torn between some of these decisions, but it's mostly CPU that's messing me up... Hope you guys can help me! Thanks so much!
So for a while now, I've been looking into building a PC. I'm progressing as far as choosing components, but I'm stuck on a few things... I plan to use the build for a decent amount of video editing, gaming (BF4, Metro series, GTA IV, as well as older (less demanding games) like New Vegas, GTA:SA, GTA: Vice City, which obviously won't be a concern... Um, maybe a bit of Cryptocurrency mining (haha), and that's all I can really think of at the moment. But really, tasks that would revolve around maybe, a "moderate" power-user. N
CPU: One concern is Intel vs AMD. I originally was going to go with an FX-6300, but decided that for the money, the performance of the FX-8320 was a better increase for the money. I'm looking mostly at the passmark scores, which I know is not the set in stone way of judging performance, but I guess it's a good way to ballpark how a CPU will perform, I'd think... the 6300 scores 6359 on passmark. The 8320 scores just over 8000 for $40 more, and I felt that increase was worth the money. But when you look at the 8350, for $20 more, it scores 9000 with the same power draw, etc, though same number of cores and stuff.
But as of late, I'm thinking maybe I should go with Intel. I was like "damn, I should go with an i5 or i7. Performance-wise, compared to power draw, is significantly better than AMD. But I don't want to get too hung up on that, because within the lifespan of the PC, you'd never see the difference in your power costs. Not for the higher price of the Intel processors. AMD CPU's seem to give higher price/pcmark and are just better for the money, at the cost of a little more power draw, which is negligible. But if you really want to get "up there" performance-wise, you'd need to go Intel, it seems.
However, even the i5's going into the $200 range don't have hyperthreading. Not the lower-end ones. Many also score lower on Passmark, like significantly. I know the FX processors (8xxx) are marketed as 8-core, though I believe they are 4 with hyperthreading (8 virtual?). I think that 4 cores, vs 4 with hyperthreading, would be an improvement for video editing, as far as that's concerned. I think for gaming, hyperthreading is negligible. I believe the more common higher end i7's are also 4 with hyperthreading, and I guess single core performance would just be significantly better all around. Apparently, you don't start getting into 6 (12 virtual), etc until you go to the Xeon series, which doesn't apply here. So this is my main issue of choosing what to pick. I know that even if I go with an 8xxx, it will still be future-proof for years to come, but would a higher end Intel be a better investment? For the money, I could just buy an updated FX, as I'd need to replace motherboard anyway? I edit 720p video on an AMD Turion 64x2 TL-60, though not easily. So in that sense, any FX Series will be a welcome upgrade, no matter what I go with. Tell me why you went with either. I feel tempted to go overkill, as I think many are, but I don't want to, really.
RAM: This is simpler, but there's still a lot to choose from. For my needs, 8GB RAM seems good. Apparently, "faster" RAM doesn't do much, as LinusTechTips showed, so I decided to go with an 1866, because it seemed to be the highest performing in those tests and others. Great... But how much do I really need? I've been running 2GB RAM on this old laptop, and it's been alright. I feel like since I don't "multitask", and I more just do one thing at a time, like video editing, gaming, (obviously), even 4GB would be enough, which is why I wanted to go with 8 to future proof myself. But as I said before, overkill is tempting, and I was thinking 16GB. What would be my best option? Prices seem to vary wildly. I was thinking of going Kingston HyperX Blu 4x2, which would set me back less than $100. It seems to be pretty good stuff. What RAM would you recommend?
GPU: So for this, I actually have two Asus R9 270's lined up. But after some recent research, I was a but disappointed with it's performance in Metro: Last Light, at only about 25fps consistent. I know turning AA off and turning down the settings a bit will increase performance. I can always crossfire as well, but I was looking to use only one of them for gaming. I think they'll be fine, especially with a decent overclock, and for the money I got them for, they really don't have much competition. Maybe I'm just overthinking. They do seem to perform very well on games like BF4, though surprisingly are only average in GTA IV (worst freakin' port ever done, apparently)...
Obviously motherboard and case will be adjusted, but right now I'm looking to do a Thermaltake Chaser MK-I. I know, I'm a showy noob, but the thing looks sick! For an HDD, I'm looking at a WD Black 1TB. I do have another USB 3.0 1TB HDD for backing up and stuff, so I think that 1TB will be good, especially for the price. I know many say to install OS on an SSD, but that always kind of confused me, so I'll just do it the "typical" way for simplicity.
But I think that's about it... You can see how I'm torn between some of these decisions, but it's mostly CPU that's messing me up... Hope you guys can help me! Thanks so much!
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram