You're very welcome! I will try to give some thoughts on each of your follow-up q's/comments, just for additional info:
Haysmt228 :
1. Note: this is the SSD that I purchased. I don’t know if any of the spec or anything is relevant. http://www.bestbuy.com/site/pny-cs1311-120gb-internal-sata-solid-state-drive/4825603.p?skuId=4825603
Your SSD is a bang-for-the-buck storage ideal for entry-level builds. It's
not the best out there but, certainly, it's also
not the worst. If buying new, most recommend to use ~240GB capacity (and faster) SSDs to be used as their system drives (such as the Samsung 850 EVO 250GB or the Crucial MX300 275GB), but, since you already have that one, you can still use it in your upgrade if budget is too tight. I have a 120GB SSD as well (an old Samsung 840 EVO), bought years ago when prices of SSDs were too high. I wished I got the 240GB instead (a few bucks more) for my particular storage needs.
Haysmt228 :
2. You often mention my resistance to overclocking in a way that has me wondering if perhaps I’m coming off a bit ignorant (haha I don’t take any offense if so cause its true lol). I was always told by others that if you don’t know what you are doing with overclocking (i.e. not IT specialized kind of guy), then don’t bother or you will break it (similar to going into the registry). Of course, this was told to me over ten years ago when I first started gaming and building my computer so perhaps times have changed. Do you feel I’m being a bit foolish to be so resistant of overclocking? I.e. do you think I should not make no overclocking a preference and be more open minded to overclocking?
No offense meant, just had to emphasize the specific PC parts for a system built for overclocking and a system built for non-overclocking in my previous reply
Most of the queries I have encountered are focused on
physical compatibility of the parts, for example, having a non-OC'able CPU/MB/RAM can be
physically compatible with an OC'able RAM/MB/CPU. Reason for highlighting what is overclockable and what is not is to ensure that you also get
performance compatibility (not only does the parts physically fit, but you will be able to use such features that you paid for -- depending on your build/upgrade intention).
Overclocking is
not a necessity (so being resistant to OCing is
not at all foolish), especially if you pick the correct parts that suits your particular needs and complements the other parts in your system. More often than not, users only turn to overclocking for 1) want to squeeze every inch of performance they can get out of their system to see how far their system can go/benchmarking; or 2) system is relatively weak to run at stock speeds and cannot cope with recent/newer/more powerful components or higher gaming/application system requirements.
In the
AMD Ryzen platform,
all Ryzen CPUs available as of this date are
unlocked CPUs (i.e., can be overclocked). So, if you decide on getting such platform, the option to OC is
always available to you,
provided, you are using a B350 or X370 motherboard that supports OC - which are very common. There are only a selected few AMD Ryzen motherboards in the market that does not support OC at all (these are the A320 motherboards which costs just slightly lower than the B350's). The AMD pairing of CPU+MB, as of today, is much simpler than the Intel's.
In the
Intel 7th-gen (Kaby Lake) platform, it's a more daunting decision balancing costs and determining if you would ever want to OC or not.
Most Intel CPUs are
locked CPUs (i.e., cannot be overclocked but costs a bit less) and
only a couple of CPUs are
unlocked (which costs a lot more than their locked counterparts). This means careful planning of how you will use the Intel system in the long run is critical as you do
not want to spend
less only to hinder its longevity years from now; and you also do
not want to spend
more for something that you probably won't ever use now or in the future.
Still on the Intel platform, things can get complicated on the motherboard pick. Unlike AMD Ryzen's mobos, which mostly are overclockable, the Intel motherboard's have
more mobo model selections
for non-OC systems (using a B250 or H270 motherboard) and
for OC systems (using a Z270 motherboard). There is a big price difference between those motherboards, thus, like the Intel CPU selection, careful planning is required for such.
RAM part selection on both AMD and Intel platforms also is dependent on your choice of an OCable or a non-OCable system. AMD Ryzen supports up to 2666MHz speeds while Intel 7th-gen supports up to 2400MHz speeds in
non-OC'd platform. Both platforms
can support higher RAM speeds,
provided, the MB is also OC'able.
Long and short of it:
Choosing an
AMD Ryzen platform would most likely have overclocking available to you even if you don't intend to.
Choosing an
Intel 7th-gen platform, you have to decide if you will or will not overclock, to get the proper parts.
Haysmt228 :
3. I have been doing what research I can and it seems more often than not single thread processors are best for gaming. Is hyperthreading better than single thread for gaming? Or am I totally misunderstanding how this works.
Most games were/are coded for single thread (you may have found that some older games even works "better", produces higher fps, when hyperthreading is disabled), but nowadays, newer (and future) games are
starting to use more threads. Game developers are now trying to utilize what the CPUs of today can offer - and that is more cores and more threads.
Thus, in the Intel platform, the Pentium G4560 (a 2-core CPU with hyperthreading) can still be capable of being a "gaming" CPU, esp. if most games that you will play only utilize such number of threads/cores. But how far such low-cored/low-thread CPU can go? Only time will tell. Most builders nowadays veer away from the Intel i5's (4-core/4-thread with no hyperthreading) and opt for the more expensive i7's (4-core/8-thread) or the Ryzen 5 CPUs for better price/performance and longevity (multi-threaded). This is
in anticipation of the future games using such higher thread counts.
Haysmt228 :
4. I’m sure this is hard to say, but with the budget I presented, what would you say the effective useful life would be? I.e. when might I face this situation again where my computer is very much so outdated? Lol it makes me feel less guilty spending a lot of money if I know I’ll get say 5 years of quality gaming from it.
Honestly, yeah, it's quite hard to predict such longevity, but to give you a perspective, some of the old Intel 2nd/3rd-gen i7 OCable CPU's (released 5-6 years ago) can still handle powerful GPUs and games of today.
In a typical build, more often than not, the GPU/video cards tends to have a
shorter "lifespan", i.e., gets updated more often than any other components. So, in 5 years time, you should probably expect that you may have upgraded your GPU once or twice if you wish keep up playing the more demanding games to be released at that point in time.
The CPU will take a
longer time to get upgraded (if it ever does, depending on your initial CPU pick). If you get some of the most powerful OC-able CPUs of today, expect it to last 5-6 years like those old 2nd/3rd gen Intel's.
The motherboard is
rarely upgraded (unless you damaged it for some reason), thus, it's a critical component as it tells you which CPUs you can use or upgrade to, which in turn, which GPUs can complement such system without the CPU "bottlenecking" it.
RAM is the
most flexible part to upgrade, but still, it is recommended to make a conscious effort in determining (now and in the future) how much capacity you need, how much speed is supported, and how much RAM sticks you can plug in your system. It is
highly recommended getting a
pair of sticks at the onset, to
enable faster dual-channel memory speeds and to
eliminate incompatibility issues when adding another stick later on which was not sold/tested to work as a pair. 8GB (2 x 4GB) is the minimum RAM capacity in this day and age, while 16GB (2 x 8GB) is the recommended specs for "future-proofing".
Haysmt228 :
5. I don’t recognize some of the sites listed in the two scenarios you gave me. I’m sure this is obvious, but are they good sites like trust worthy and good customer service? I’ve only ever used newegg.
The pcpartpicker website lists the most affordable price of every part you select, but you can override it to only show which specific stores you want to purchase such part from. I am not based in the US, so, I have no experience ordering from specific stores there (only in BestBuy, Amazon, and Newegg some time ago, but through a third party). Based on other comments I have seen, those websites listed in pcpartpicker are legit, however, I have read that some selected stores are not good at returns/warranties, and some are only pick-up/in-store purchase, and others list the price excluding delivery/shipping costs.
If you prefer Newegg, here's an updated price list of the two scenarios I posted before (with some minor changes due to unavailability of certain parts in Newegg), for your reference:
Option 1*: AMD Ryzen Build (overclockable)
PCPartPicker part list /
Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1600 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor ($215.98 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: ASRock - AB350M Pro4 Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard ($77.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($85.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: EVGA - GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB GAMING Video Card ($304.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $684.93
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-19 04:56 EDT-0400
*Changes Made:
- Gigabyte GTX 1060 6GB G1 ($328.10 @ PCM) is out-of-stock in Newegg and was changed to EVGA GTX 1060 6GB ($304.98 @ Newegg)
Option 2**: Intel 7th-Gen Build (non-OC, lower costs intended to upgrade to an i7-7700 later on)
PCPartPicker part list /
Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel - Pentium G4600 3.6GHz Dual-Core Processor ($86.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Asus - PRIME B250M-A Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($67.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($118.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: EVGA - GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB GAMING Video Card ($304.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $578.94
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-07-19 05:04 EDT-0400
**Changes Made:
- Intel Pentium G4560 ($78.89 @ B&H) is not available in Newegg and was upgraded to Intel Pentium G4600 ($86.99 @ Newegg)
- Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 16GB DDR4-2400 ($112.42 @ Newegg) have increased price to ~$155 and was changed to G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 16GB DDR4-2400 ($118.99 @ Newegg) for lower price
- Gigabyte GTX 1060 6GB G1 ($328.10 @ PCM) is out-of-stock in Newegg and was changed to EVGA GTX 1060 6GB ($304.98 @ Newegg)
Haysmt228 :
6. For option 2, I just wanted to make sure I understand the CPU correctly. With this build, I would purchase it and in the near future (however long it takes me) I would just switch out the CPU for the i7 later. If I were to later on get the i7-7700 would all other components be compatible with it?
Yes, that's correct. The Pentium G4560 in option #2 (which was upgraded to Pentium G4600 in the updated Newegg-only parts list) will just be simply replaced by the i7-7700. All other components will be compatible with that i7.
Yes, those are the correct links to the Cryorig H7 and the Cryorig M9i, respectively. These suggested CPU coolers have different physical heights and cooling capabitilities. As for the height, check if the case that you will use will fit such CPU coolers. The Cryorig H7 is 145mm high while the Cryorig M9i is only 125mm.
As for the cooling capabilities, as an emphasis only (in relation to my previous post), the Cryorig H7 is recommended for an OC'able Intel CPU, such as the i5-7600K or the i7-7700K, because such OC'able Intel CPU has high TDP and doesn't come with a stock cooler out-of-the-box. On the other hand, if you choose a non-OC'able Intel CPU, those already come with a stock cooler, albeit, mediocre (and noisy/not-so-good-looking). Thus, the smaller Cryorig M9i can be used as a replacement for that so-so stock cooler of a non-OC'able Intel CPU, as it only has a low TDP.
If you decide on getting an AMD Ryzen CPU, specifically, the recommended Ryzen 5 1600, it already comes with a decent, beefier, and aesthetically-pleasing stock cooler out-of-the-box. You don't have to get those Cryorig's for the Ryzen.
Haysmt228 :
8. It seems Intel is best for gaming and AMD is better for well rounded/non game play work on the computer, does this sound about right or not that simple?
Generally, yes, but not specifically. It also may be dependent on the particular Intel or AMD CPU model, it's specific power and OC capabilities, and, how specific games can use such specific CPU features like multi-threading.
Some workstation/CAD applications still works best with an Intel i7 4-core/8-thread CPU than an AMD Ryzen 7 8-core/16-thread. Some games benefit more from an AMD Ryzen 5 6-core/12-thread than from an Intel i5 4-core/4-thread.
Haysmt228 :
9. I was wondering, with all this new hardware and quality as well, do I need to consider either now or near future of upgrading my power supply? I just found out I bought it back in 12/2013, so it is indeed old.
Depends on your power supply's quality and reliability, as well as the amps it can provide (esp. at the +12V rail) to power your rig. The two scenario/builds I posted only needs a good-quality 450W PSU to run. But, considering future usage and possible upgrades to more powerful GPUs (as well as possibility of OC'ing), most recommend a good-quality ~550W PSU as more than sufficient for a typical single-GPU setup.
Most of the better-quality PSUs available today offer 7-year and 10-year warranties on their units (an indication of the PSU's reliability). Highly recommended PSU models are the EVGA SuperNova G2 550 (7-year warranty) and the Corsair RM550x (10-year warranty), though, both costs a lot compared to other models. If budget is a concern, you can also get the good-quality but affordable Seasonic M12II-520 EVO (5-year warranty) or the Corsair CX550M (5-year warranty), as alternatives.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram