New BUDGET Build!!!

[Nw333]

Still 3 years tops. 7xx series from nVidia come out late 2013, I think. The 8xxx cards are bound to come out probably early 2013. Just guessing here, no confirmed date of release yet.

 

[ProVisionOman]

Still 3 years tops. 7xx series from nVidia come out late 2013, I think. The 8xxx cards are bound to come out probably early 2013. Just guessing here, no confirmed date of release yet.

I changed!! I am going i7 3820. BAYUM! I can now upgrade thanks to the 2011 socket. And my friend is an enthusaist with a workstation. He has a 3960x... So if i can OUTDATED.. well 6 core PWOER HERE I COMME AHHHAAHHA! Thanks anyways! 😀

 

[Nw333]

You wont see a difference between a 3770K and 3820. All you will upgrade to is the 3930X which you cant avoid getting older. Nothing wrong with an old build, just that it might not play everything or do everything modern. You actually wont even use 4 cores when playing, so 6 cores is unnecesary and a waste. (Games probably use 2 cores max.)

 

[ProVisionOman]

You wont see a difference between a 3770K and 3820. All you will upgrade to is the 3930X which you cant avoid getting older. Nothing wrong with an old build, just that it might not play everything or do everything modern. You actually wont even use 4 cores when playing, so 6 cores is unnecesary and a waste. (Games probably use 2 cores max.)

Well... That STUPID INTERNET DUDES is called future-proofing. HAH

 

[Nw333]

Thats what you call Wasting Money, if I so recall. Do what you want with your money, just dont come crying back how your computer is so slow after 2-3 years of use, even if you bought the most high-end parts now, compared to PCs in 2-3 years of similar budget.

You will never get anything now if all you do is plan for the future. If anything, all you will get is a big whole in your pocket in a hopeless effort to future-proof.

 

[ProVisionOman]

Thats what you call Wasting Money, if I so recall. Do what you want with your money, just dont come crying back how your computer is so slow after 2-3 years of use, even if you bought the most high-end parts now, compared to PCs in 2-3 years of similar budget.

You will never get anything now if all you do is plan for the future. If anything, all you will get is a big whole in your pocket in a hopeless effort to future-proof.

Yeah but you see... I cannot upgrade in 2-3 years time you see. My father restricts me to every 5 years. So if I can get second hand 6 core processor after its a common thing (like now as quad cores) I would be set for maybe 4 years! And to be behind all the rich in 2016 for only one year behind (as i am now lol with a core 2 duo) I should be fine unless I turn spoiled (Please not ;D)
Thanks!!

 

[Nw333]

Second hand computer parts isnt a good idea. You have no idea of how much load, repairs, etc. it has been through. By the way, when 6 cores are the norm, 8-core processors will probably be out, just an assumption.

Im telling you now, you will not see any performance boost with a 3930x compared to the 3770K as the extra two cores on the 3930x arent even being used. You'd be set for four years anyway if all you do is gaming, even if you get the i5. 3930x is used for servers, not gaming rigs. Same goes with all the 2011 socket procs.

 

[ProVisionOman]

Second hand computer parts isnt a good idea. You have no idea of how much load, repairs, etc. it has been through. By the way, when 6 cores are the norm, 8-core processors will probably be out, just an assumption.

Im telling you now, you will not see any performance boost with a 3930x compared to the 3770K as the extra two cores on the 3930x arent even being used. You'd be set for four years anyway if all you do is gaming, even if you get the i5. 3930x is used for servers, not gaming rigs. Same goes with all the 2011 socket procs.

But the good thing that's its my TEACHER'S computer. Heh!

 

[Nw333]

Are you home-schooled or something? Why would a teacher want to use a gaming computer? If anything, all hes going to do is search google, show powerpoints, word documents, etc. and make powerpoints, etc.

Post what we actually need to know, not who is going to use it. Will not be of any help.

We arent going to get to anywhere like this.

 

[ProVisionOman]

Are you home-schooled or something? Why would a teacher want to use a gaming computer? If anything, all hes going to do is search google, show powerpoints, word documents, etc. and make powerpoints, etc.

Post what we actually need to know, not who is going to use it. Will not be of any help.

We arent going to get to anywhere like this.

Ok, So as you can see.. Do you have any improvements or anything to add on this build or its as good as its gonna get:
CPU: i7 3820 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115229
CPU Cooler: ThermalTake Water2.0 Performer
Motherboard: ASRock X79 EXTREME4 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157283
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon HD 7950
Case: Cougar Challenger Orange http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811553009
DVD: DVD
HDD: Seagate Barracuda 1.5TB 7200RPM http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148337
RAM: CORSAIR XMS3 16GB DDR3 1600 4x4GB http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233203
PSU: XFX Core Edition PRO850W http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817207011

 

[Nw333]

Once again, you will NOT see any performance gains from the 3820, even the 3930x, compared to the 3770K. The 3770K is unlocked for a reason. I also dont suggest building a gaming rig on the 2011 socket. You dont need the extra features you get, and its very expensive since they are ment for servers.

Get Corsair Vengeance RAM, the low profile ones. They perform better than XMS3.

 

[ProVisionOman]

Ok, say I went with the 3770k ad when 4 cores starts to get a problem... And its not enough I have to change MOTHERBOARD AND CPU because Haswell is on the 1150 socket while if I go 2011 I can go 3930k or my "friend's" 3960x because he has a workstation and he likes to upgrade.

 

[ProVisionOman]

And also.. You say 4 cores is enough and all... But the reason I am buying a new PC is because my Core2Duo is bad for gaming. I cant run BF3... I cant even run MW3 at 1080p!! So yeah...

 

[ProVisionOman]

Once again, you will NOT see any performance gains from the 3820, even the 3930x, compared to the 3770K. The 3770K is unlocked for a reason. I also dont suggest building a gaming rig on the 2011 socket. You dont need the extra features you get, and its very expensive since they are ment for servers.

Get Corsair Vengeance RAM, the low profile ones. They perform better than XMS3.

And yes.. Is it a good idea to overclock RAM??

 

[zolton33]

Couple of things missed. First off buying a new cpu (one of the newest lines sandy/ivy or fx) does not mean they will not work in 5 years (unless you happen to fry yours for some odd reason). And they will still game. My athlon 64 x2 4400+ toledo still plays the latest games although i've personally never tried to go above the lowest settings (eye candy does not matter to me the fun of a game does).

Second off 4 cores will not be obsolete in 5 years. Why not? Since the release of dual cores few games (until recently) utilized them. And almost no games now make full use of quad cores.

Thirdly game companies try to make their products as widely accessible as possible. Meaning they try to keep the system specs low. This is why my old amd dual core is still able to play almost any game (i've not met one yet i could not play but i mainly play mmorpgs or rpgs).

And yes intel does give better performance in games. And you can find countless benchmarks and such that show case the fps gains of an intel chip when gaming. And of course intel will have the best cpu as amd is no longer trying to compete with intel at the high end market. The biggest baddest amd chip was designed to compete with an i5 2500.

If fps gains are your top priority then intel is the way to go.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-3.html

Just to show that at the $125 value the 4170 is a comparable choice for a gaming cpu as a i3 3220. And amd has 2 more cpu releases this year 1 in October and 1 in December. So some of the other fx chips may drop in price soon making them an even better value. And who knows amd may actually have a diamond in the rough in one of their new cpu releases.

Would i recommend an amd cpu over an intel for gaming specifically? No but there are some amd cpu's that are a pretty good value and game well (note i am not saying better). And some of these chips do well in other types of builds where gaming is not the sole focus. But in gaming the gpu has more to do with over all performance gains over the cpu (provided there is no bottle neck).

 

[computernoob29]

Ok, say I went with the 3770k ad when 4 cores starts to get a problem... And its not enough I have to change MOTHERBOARD AND CPU because Haswell is on the 1150 socket while if I go 2011 I can go 3930k or my "friend's" 3960x because he has a workstation and he likes to upgrade.[/quotemsg
my face hurts from all the *facepalms

 

[Nw333]

Ok, say I went with the 3770k ad when 4 cores starts to get a problem... And its not enough I have to change MOTHERBOARD AND CPU because Haswell is on the 1150 socket while if I go 2011 I can go 3930k or my "friend's" 3960x because he has a workstation and he likes to upgrade.[/quotemsg
my face hurts from all the *facepalms

Lol. :lol:

 

[Nw333]

@zolton; correct, although there will be more demanding games out there by that time and im sure the OP will try them, unless he plans on playing the same games for 5 years 😛

My laptop, (running on an old pentium at like 2.8GHz) still plays Dota2 on low, with like 20FPS. Thats okay for me. 😀 (for an oooooold laptop, atleast. Was purchased in like 2007 or so)

 

[ProVisionOman]

Stop mocking me please? Havent you seen my AGE in the first post? So i guess it isnt wrong for me to know get your "MASTER-MIND THINKING" I just want to save as much money without much sacrifice in quality. If i spend more now and less later I guess will be better because I dont know maybe i cant spend less now more later because of life (That's why its a bitch lol). What i mean that if i buy an x79 platform I have an IVB-E easy upgrade path which should perform same as Haswell like SNB-E is now which is performing nearly same as Ivy Bridge. Thanks guys!

 

[ProVisionOman]

Couple of things missed. First off buying a new cpu (one of the newest lines sandy/ivy or fx) does not mean they will not work in 5 years (unless you happen to fry yours for some odd reason). And they will still game. My athlon 64 x2 4400+ toledo still plays the latest games although i've personally never tried to go above the lowest settings (eye candy does not matter to me the fun of a game does).

Second off 4 cores will not be obsolete in 5 years. Why not? Since the release of dual cores few games (until recently) utilized them. And almost no games now make full use of quad cores.

Thirdly game companies try to make their products as widely accessible as possible. Meaning they try to keep the system specs low. This is why my old amd dual core is still able to play almost any game (i've not met one yet i could not play but i mainly play mmorpgs or rpgs).

And yes intel does give better performance in games. And you can find countless benchmarks and such that show case the fps gains of an intel chip when gaming. And of course intel will have the best cpu as amd is no longer trying to compete with intel at the high end market. The biggest baddest amd chip was designed to compete with an i5 2500.

If fps gains are your top priority then intel is the way to go.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-3.html

Just to show that at the $125 value the 4170 is a comparable choice for a gaming cpu as a i3 3220. And amd has 2 more cpu releases this year 1 in October and 1 in December. So some of the other fx chips may drop in price soon making them an even better value. And who knows amd may actually have a diamond in the rough in one of their new cpu releases.

Would i recommend an amd cpu over an intel for gaming specifically? No but there are some amd cpu's that are a pretty good value and game well (note i am not saying better). And some of these chips do well in other types of builds where gaming is not the sole focus. But in gaming the gpu has more to do with over all performance gains over the cpu (provided there is no bottle neck).

Yes.. but you see the frostbite engine (2.0 or 1.5) is utilizing a nice amount of cores and so is Civilization V. And you see the difference of the Core2Quad and say the i5? Its amazing really. Just keep that in mind that the technology is moving faster now and it will continue. Before 4GB RAM was top of the line extreme. Now its barely holding up for 3D and workstations. Now even 16Gb isnt called as high end. 32GB is. 😀

 

[ProVisionOman]

I know that with the same money now I can get a better anything really later.. But it would be more money spent and I don't earn my own money. And this saved up money is from 3 years. I cant wait 2-4 more! LOL!

 

[zolton33]

Yes.. but you see the frostbite engine (2.0 or 1.5) is utilizing a nice amount of cores and so is Civilization V. And you see the difference of the Core2Quad and say the i5? Its amazing really. Just keep that in mind that the technology is moving faster now and it will continue. Before 4GB RAM was top of the line extreme. Now its barely holding up for 3D and workstations. Now even 16Gb isnt called as high end. 32GB is. 😀

Noticing a difference does not mean they are utilizing 4 cores. When dual cores first came out you needed to update the cpu software for most games since they were only use to 1 core. In everquest 2 as an example i had to install software that made it easier for the game to utilize the cores. Imagine just trying to walk forwards 1 step towards some docks and ending up in the ocean. And the longer you played the more faster the cpu would run. Games now can handle the extra cores but back then duals were not as common.

And right now quads are not as common as duals. Although in 5 years that may change. But if game makers tried to make system requirements of a quad core and they are not as common place as a dual cores such as now how much return investment do you think they would make? They try to make games utilizing the most common place cores from both intel and amd and try not to raise system requirements to high to fast to allow for more pc's to be able to play it. And hence creating more customers for their product.

An i3 2100 can game quite well and it is only a dual core. An i5 2500k is a quad and it games circles around most setups. While having a quad core will give you better fps the gpu is far more important for gaming as that is what most games utilize. So if doing a build you will get a much better fps with a high end gpu and a cheaper cpu then if you bought an expensive cpu and a cheap gpu. Only concern to be worried about is if the cpu and gpu will bottle neck each other or not.

And you may think the technology is moving fast and it is on the pc component side of things. But games are crawling along as they have done so for years. An example using a console as a marker would be to look at a systems launch titles and then compare them to games made toward the end of the consoles life. The graphics as well as game play are as different as night and day. Right now games are utilizing dual cores a lot more. But many of the dual core system requirements are really old dual cores technology wise.

And windows xp is the most common used os although windows 7 is catching up. Windows xp 32 bit utilizes a max of 4 gigs of ram. And the sweet spot for games on windows 7 is 8 gigs. Putting more then 8 gigs in your system will not help out in games and will hurt your fps more. Work stations require a lot more multitasking and so the 16 gigs setup would help them in that. Same as having cpu's with more then 4 cores would also help out with high multitasking. Games do not do a lot of multitasking so it will not help in gaming to use more then 8. Right now the highest system requirement game i could find had a max of 4 gigs and still utilized an old dual core cpu setup. Now keep in mind that from the launch of windows xp people could use 4 gigs of ram. Now look at the date of release for xp and see how many years it has been since then.

 

[ProVisionOman]

Noticing a difference does not mean they are utilizing 4 cores. When dual cores first came out you needed to update the cpu software for most games since they were only use to 1 core. In everquest 2 as an example i had to install software that made it easier for the game to utilize the cores. Imagine just trying to walk forwards 1 step towards some docks and ending up in the ocean. And the longer you played the more faster the cpu would run. Games now can handle the extra cores but back then duals were not as common.

And right now quads are not as common as duals. Although in 5 years that may change. But if game makers tried to make system requirements of a quad core and they are not as common place as a dual cores such as now how much return investment do you think they would make? They try to make games utilizing the most common place cores from both intel and amd and try not to raise system requirements to high to fast to allow for more pc's to be able to play it. And hence creating more customers for their product.

An i3 2100 can game quite well and it is only a dual core. An i5 2500k is a quad and it games circles around most setups. While having a quad core will give you better fps the gpu is far more important for gaming as that is what most games utilize. So if doing a build you will get a much better fps with a high end gpu and a cheaper cpu then if you bought an expensive cpu and a cheap gpu. Only concern to be worried about is if the cpu and gpu will bottle neck each other or not.

And you may think the technology is moving fast and it is on the pc component side of things. But games are crawling along as they have done so for years. An example using a console as a marker would be to look at a systems launch titles and then compare them to games made toward the end of the consoles life. The graphics as well as game play are as different as night and day. Right now games are utilizing dual cores a lot more. But many of the dual core system requirements are really old dual cores technology wise.

And windows xp is the most common used os although windows 7 is catching up. Windows xp 32 bit utilizes a max of 4 gigs of ram. And the sweet spot for games on windows 7 is 8 gigs. Putting more then 8 gigs in your system will not help out in games and will hurt your fps more. Work stations require a lot more multitasking and so the 16 gigs setup would help them in that. Same as having cpu's with more then 4 cores would also help out with high multitasking. Games do not do a lot of multitasking so it will not help in gaming to use more then 8. Right now the highest system requirement game i could find had a max of 4 gigs and still utilized an old dual core cpu setup. Now keep in mind that from the launch of windows xp people could use 4 gigs of ram. Now look at the date of release for xp and see how many years it has been since then.

Well I totally agree... But the new consoles will be out and... umm well i think they will use more than two cores and maybe four?? I Just dont know.. Just keep in mind.. I am buying this build and LATER buying the GPU so I can get a 7950 not a 7770 if I buy know with these specs. Thanks!!! And yes.. I have another post can you help me with please? http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/348750-28-which-case.

THANKS!!!

 

[Nw333]

Consoles will never beat PCs. If gaming companies find out a way to utilize all four cores or so in a console, chances are, they will be doing the same with the PC. More units, a bigger map, etc. in PC games dont hurt. 😀

@zolton, more RAM doesnt mean you will hurt your FPS more lol. (Maybe sometimes, but its quite rare.)

 

[loresr97]

I want it under 630$ WITHOUT THE GRAPHICS CARD. Like a 630$ without graphics card because I don't have enough money now.

So you said you had 630$ for the PC, now after reading the posts you say you want an Intel six core processor. You realize they are 600$? Your budget is 630$, CPU is 600$. You will be able to afford the CPU and a stick of RAM maybe?