First Gaming PC Build On Budget

Hi,
1) Forget what you've heard about Intel CPUs "burning out fast". Simply not true.
2) Your only other option is Intel. AMDs are fine, but I only ever recommend them for strict budgets. Whilst they boast high clock speeds and more cores for less money, their single core performance is poor, so what appears on the surface to be a better CPU than an Intel one costing nearly double more, is in fact much worse.

Tell us your budget, and what you want to do with this build
 


My Budget is around $550 for hardware. My goal for this build is to build a decent gaming PC that is fairly cost friendly. I want to be able to run games like Arma 2
 


http://pcpartpicker.com/p/zwGpwP

There you go! Went $17 over budget but definitely worth it for the extra performance. This should be fine for medium to ultra 60fps 1080p gaming
 
The FX 6300 is a far more powerful processor than intels in the same price range [ and costing way more ] . Its supposed weaknesses are that some software only uses one core and then it might be slower .
This is rare for software and intensive games and will barely make a difference when it does have an effect .
Neither intel or AMD have a problem with burning out . But the intels are overpriced .

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($89.99 @ Newegg)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($19.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill Sniper Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1866 Memory ($34.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Crucial BX100 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($85.00 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 960 4GB Video Card ($179.99 @ Newegg)
Case: Antec Three Hundred Two ATX Mid Tower Case ($51.00 @ SuperBiiz)
Power Supply: Silverstone 500W 80+ Gold Certified ATX Power Supply ($64.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $574.94
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-29 14:30 EST-0500

Is a decent budget gamer with all quality hardware .
You could add a hard drive for extra storage , or just swap the SSD for a hard drive which would save money and bring you very close to $550 .
No similarly priced intel build will perform as well in online maps with a large number of players
 


Thank you very much BennCon. So with this basic setup what other things would help with the improve the performance?
 


http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4460-vs-AMD-FX-6300
 


Benchmark performance using all cores [according to your link]
intel = 7.5
AMD = 6.4

And then its so easy to overclock the AMD using AMD's own software . Lets say 4.2 GHz because I have never seen an FX that wont do that , and 4.6 GHz is too hot for comfort .
So yeah

AMD @ 4.2 Ghz = 7.68
The intel meanwhile can not be overclocked = 7.5 [ still ]

and the AMD build I suggested is higher quality of mb , case , power supply and graphics card , and includes the SSD which really will make the pc feel much sharper
It games better too thanks to the extra VRAM
 


Maybe, however as a consequence of going AMD, you lose your upgrade path. Want to upgrade the Intel? Easy, i7 4790K. If OP spends a little more on a Z97 board, you've got overclocking immediately following your upgrade. When OP wants more performance, what does he upgrade the AMD to? A PC should be an investment
 


So what would the ADM-6300 offer over the Intel Core i5 4460 or vice versa beside cost?
 


I like both view points. But why cant you upgrade the AMD?
 
DirtyJesster said:
I like both view points. But why cant you upgrade the AMD?
You can, but AMD don't really make any truly high end CPUs, whereas Intel do. If in the future you wanted to upgrade your CPU to keep up with the times, Intel would be a much easier option. And if you want to change from AMD to Intel to upgrade you'd need a new motherboard. I admit the AMD might achieve slightly better performance on a few online games with larger maps and lots of players. However everywhere else you'll find the Intel performing better. Remember that you should consider your PC as an investment not just for now, but for the future. Upgrading is important
 

I would have to agree im not looking for just now. To me it makes more sense to me to go with something you can upgrade easily something more compatible with todays world with technology developing so rapidly

 


The difference is not great .
Basically the AMD build is better quality and has more options , but the suggested intel mb works and would be fine for your purpose too
Here is an interesting review of the FX processor
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-fx-8350-8320-6300-processor-4300-performance-review.html
On page ten you see two games . One favors the intel cores and does much better . Except that it really doesnt because a monitor only ever refreshes at 60Hz/60 fps so all the extra frames never appear on the screen .
In crysis where the game is using all cpu cores you see how very small the difference is .

Neither has an upgrade path particularly since both chips are obsolete . Intel have moved to the new skylake processors and AMD are close to an entirely new family of processor which will also not be compatible .

If you want to have any upgrade path then an intel i3 on an H170 mb and DDR4 . I havent looked at prices particularly but they will be in the same range . Performance will be less [right now] though .

 


By far the majority of games will be better on the Intel. And whilst it's a bit behind, if they want immediate game performance with some upgrade path, the Intel is definitely the best bet. However, I do agree that for an upgradable build a Skylake i3 would be best.

Outlander_04 said:
a monitor only ever refreshes at 60Hz/60 fps so all the extra frames never appear
If you assume OP has a 60hz monitor, when many higher options are available. I use 144hz. Disregarding performance increase because someone might not be able to use them currently is pretty stupid. It means they can still increase other settings if they can't (ie AA)