Gaming Build 1200pounds

rusk4

Prominent
Nov 27, 2017
6
0
510
0

What do you say about this build ? Its relevant ? It should be 1200+- build mainly for gaming. I would like to now if between 2666 MHz and 3000 MHz RAM is some visible difference. Thank you
 
For gaming, you should go with Intel... http://www.pcgamer.com/intel-i5-8400-review-the-best-new-gaming-cpu-in-years/

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel - Core i5-8400 2.8GHz 6-Core Processor (£173.67 @ BT Shop)
Motherboard: MSI - Z370-A PRO ATX LGA1151 Motherboard (£99.98 @ Ebuyer)
Memory: Team - Vulcan 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 Memory (£149.99 @ Overclockers.co.uk)
Storage: Crucial - MX300 525GB 2.5" Solid State Drive (£131.97 @ Amazon UK)
Video Card: Gigabyte - GeForce GTX 1080 8GB Turbo OC Video Card (£484.80 @ Aria PC)
Case: Corsair - SPEC-01 RED ATX Mid Tower Case (£48.13 @ Amazon UK)
Power Supply: Corsair - CXM (2015) 450W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply (£48.15 @ Box Limited)
Optical Drive: Asus - DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer (£20.59 @ Amazon UK)
Total: £1157.28
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-11-27 17:31 GMT+0000
 

anonymous_boi

Prominent
Nov 27, 2017
25
0
540
3


Personally, I do not use AMD, but I definetly don't agree about the - "For gaming, you should go with Intel...". The Ryzen series is quite good for gaming on the lower end.
 

g-unit1111

Titan
Moderator


Especially when the i5-8400 isn't an overclock friendly CPU. In that area, the Ryzen wins. The Intel i5-8400 is a 6 core / 6 thread CPU. The Ryzen R5-1600 and R5-1600X are 6 core and 12 thread CPUs. In terms of performance, for gaming, they're about even. And this is the first time that's ever happened. In the past Intel has won out for gaming performance and in a lot of areas they still do. But this is the first time AMD has ever released a competitive CPU that can compete with the best that Intel has to offer. You might get a couple of extra FPS by going with Intel, but really, there's absolutely no discernible difference between 51 FPS and 53 FPS.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_8400/
 


First... http://www.pcgamer.com/intel-i5-8400-review-the-best-new-gaming-cpu-in-years/
I thought when i linked this you will take a look at it. Apparently you didnt. Scroll down a bit and check the fps difference.
Second... And for gaming specifically, the boost clock the 8400 boasts, blows away the 1600 out of the way.

Apparently the difference is much more than liquidated.

Now, i am not taking away anything from 1600 as its a pretty awesome gaming second and multitasking/workstation first chip, but, and there is a big but mind you, when it comes to gaming first, Ryzen cant make the cut as Intel still rules.
Right now, its couple of fps apart, but down the line, Ryzen will show age. Your call mate.
 

g-unit1111

Titan
Moderator


There is ZERO, repeat, ZERO difference between 51 FPS and 53 FPS, which is what most articles I've seen benchmark the Ryzen and Intel i5 CPUs at, respectively. If you think there is a difference, you are kidding yourself because on a standard 1080P 60Hz screen, it will make no difference. If you start getting into higher resolutions and refresh rates, then you can start arguing. I don't know what PC Gamer's testing methods are, I will have to research those, but it seems they use more of a proprietary benchmark testing engine than they do real world gaming benchmarks, and that seems kind of sketchy. Not that I don't trust PC Gamer, but I would definitely need to read more on their testing methodology before I would really trust their methods.
 
First, their testing methodology is fine.
Second, cpu has minimal impact on refresh rate.
Third, you are discounting the IPC and clock speed factor which is still relevant for a lot of games.
Fourth, I did mention its couple of fps apart right now, but Intel can take the lead down the line due to the above point.
 

g-unit1111

Titan
Moderator


But is there a difference when the FPS rate is only +-2? I don't think there is. Is it worth paying the extra money just to get those 2 extra FPS? In the long run will it really make that much of a difference? I would ask those questions. I'm not encouraging buying AMD over Intel but when the difference is that minimal you can honestly go either way and come out fine.
 

Rexper

Respectable
BANNED
Apr 12, 2017
2,142
0
2,510
386
If we're looking at FPS specifically, and OP's refresh rate is 60hz, the argument is pretty moot as both CPUs can perform at least 60FPS in most games.

Here are some other trustworthy reviews:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-coffee-lake-core-i5-8400-cpu,5281-5.html
https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3086-intel-i5-8400-cpu-review-2666mhz-vs-3200mhz-gaming/page-4

"I would like to now if between 2666 MHz and 3000 MHz RAM is some visible difference. "

Higher ram speed will only have an impact in games when the CPU is the limiting factor (Source). Though in reality, the Ryzen 5 1600/i5 8400 can already perform atleast 60FPS in most games anyway.
So unless your monitor's refresh rate is higher than 60hz, or you're playing a rare game where the CPU isn't performing to 60FPS, the ram speed upscaling won't be noticeable.
Don't forget you can manually overclock the ram as well. Increase the voltage to ~1.3V, aswell as timings, and a 2666MHz ram kit could probably run atleast 3000MHz.
 
In the long run will it really make that much of a difference?
I think for one, the IPC difference will come into effect sometime in the foreseeable future. Currently its good enough to override most processing needs but Ryzen will age faster for sure compared to Coffee Lake, specially in gaming.
But if the build is for 2-3yrs then it will hardly make any difference.
 

g-unit1111

Titan
Moderator


Your SSD is out of stock, you might want to choose a drive they have in stock.I'd also get G Skill Trident Z or Corsair Vengeance - much better RAM.
 

rusk4

Prominent
Nov 27, 2017
6
0
510
0


Intel Core i5-8600K 3.6GHz (Coffee Lake) Socket LGA1151 Processor - Retail

Team Group Vulcan T-Force 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 PC4-24000C16 3000MHz Dual Channel Kit - Grey (TLGD416G30 £158.99 *

Palit GeForce GTX 1070Ti Twin X2 8192MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card £409.99 *

Crucial MX300 525GB SSD M2 2280 6Gbps 3D Nand Solid State Drive (CT525MX300SSD4) £149.99 *

WD Blue 1TB 7200rpm SATA 6Gb/s 64MB Cache HDD - OEM (WD10EZEX) £41.99 *

EVGA Supernova G2 650W '80 Plus Gold' Modular Power Supply £99.95 *

LG 24x DVDRW SATA Rewriter - OEM (GH24NSD0) £13.99 *

MSI Z370-A Pro Intel Z370 (Socket 1151) DDR4 ATX Motherboard £109.99 *

NZXT Source 340 Midi-Tower Case- Black Window £69.95 *

Cryorig H7 Single Tower Heatsink with 120mm Fan £34.99 *

Should be 1300+- for gaming and i will be using monitor benqxl2430 with it.

 

rusk4

Prominent
Nov 27, 2017
6
0
510
0


they will do have tommorow and those rams are 50quid more expensive

 

Rexper

Respectable
BANNED
Apr 12, 2017
2,142
0
2,510
386


Nearlly all consumer ram comes from three OEMs, so the performance difference in those rams are hardly going to be noticeable, given the frequency and timings are similar. Really only difference is aesthetics and customer support, and IMO that isn't worth $50...
 

g-unit1111

Titan
Moderator


Not true - G Skill Trident Z uses Samsung B-Die which is a much higher quality IC than a lot of other brands use, which makes it better for Ryzen overclocking. *THAT* is where the extra money goes. If you are going with a Ryzen system, you do not want to go cheap on RAM. And also for a Ryzen rig, you do not want anything less than DDR4-3200.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS