Opinions on this build?

[ThinkGames]

Here are the components I plan to build my PC with. It will be used for gaming and I want to know your guys' opinion.

Intel Core i7-6700k 4.0 GHz LGA 1151
Nvidia GeForce GTX 960 4GB GDDR5 Overclocked
16GB ram DDR4 2800 Non-ECC Ram (x2 8GB)
Intel Z170-PRO LGA 1151 ATX Motherboard
1TB SATA III 6GB-s Internal Hard Drive
120GB SATA III 6GB-s Solid State Drive
Command MS-I Snow ATX Mid-Tower Case
Air Series AF120 Quiet Twin Pack (Planning to buy 2 [In total 4 fans])
Silent Intel LGA 1156/1155 CPU Cooler (With thermal paste)
LG DVD/CD Read-Write Drive
CX Series CX600M 600 Watt ATX Power Supply


Total cost of build : $1,200
Cost of build including a 24" LED HDMI Monitor: $1,320.

 

[quilciri]

PSU?

 

[rgd1101]

get an i5 and then a better gpu.

 

[Onefurrybanana]

I wouldn't buy the cx600m personally i would look at something like a evga 600g2 its a much higher quality. Me and many other people have had problems with the cx series power supplies and they have been known to destroy other parts.

 

[jhall18]

That PSU is not suitable for anything even considered a "gaming pc". Switch to something better like the evga g2 series or a psu from seasonic.

 

[daily1994]

I second staying away from the CX series power supplies. I've been through two of them. I currently have a HXi series psu from corsair which I've absolutely loved, but they are pretty pricey.

 

[twarlof]

get an i5 and then a better gpu.

I agree. I5 is currently better for gaming, and the extra money you can put towards your GPU will be nice, possibly throw in a little more and get a 970.

Not a bad build though.

 

[quilciri]

That PSU is not suitable for anything even considered a "gaming pc". Switch to something better like the evga g2 series or a psu from seasonic.

indeed, specifically: EVGA SuperNOVA G2 550W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($79.99 @ Amazon). Acc. Johnnyguru, that is the best 550w PSU in existence.

Anything made by Seasonic or Superflower will be good (this includes many high end PSU's from other vendors). You're safe with any model from XFX as well, as all their PSU's are made by Seasonic.

 

[R_1]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438053&cm_re=evga_supernova_g2-_-17-438-053-_-Product
69.99 after rebate

 

[Karadjgne]

The i5 isn't better for gaming, the i7 is. Apart from Lcache, the i7 has hyperthreading, so in games like bf4 multi-player it'llake better use of 8 threads. The only reason to opt for an i5 over an i7 is budget, at which then the i5 is a better option if the budget is limited.

To maintain the budget close to what it is now, I would drop the i7 in favor of the i5 and also drop the gtx960 and opt for a r9 390 instead. This would also necessitate throwing consideration of the cx600 in the trash and following advice about the Evga 650w GS or G2

 

[quilciri]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438053&cm_re=evga_supernova_g2-_-17-438-053-_-Product
69.99 after rebate

yeah...that's the same thing I linked. I list out-of-pocket price. MIR's can be hit or miss, and can also be a PITA besides.

Also, it's $5 shipping.

 

[ThinkGames]

I think I'm still going to stick with the i7
I changed the PSU to this: http://www.microcenter.com/product/457337/SuperNOVA_G2_650_Watt_80_Gold_Modular_ATX_12V_Power_Supply
I think I want a slightly better GPU but nothing over 300. Any suggestions?

 

[twarlof]

The i5 isn't better for gaming, the i7 is. Apart from Lcache, the i7 has hyperthreading, so in games like bf4 multi-player it'llake better use of 8 threads. The only reason to opt for an i5 over an i7 is budget, at which then the i5 is a better option if the budget is limited.

To maintain the budget close to what it is now, I would drop the i7 in favor of the i5 and also drop the gtx960 and opt for a r9 390 instead. This would also necessitate throwing consideration of the cx600 in the trash and following advice about the Evga 650w GS or G2

Most game do not make us of the 8 threads available. Maybe 2 years down the road they will, but by then it upgrade time if bought now.

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/pc-mac-linux-society-1000004/what-are-the-gaming-benefits-of-an-i7-over-an-i5-31603230/

Here you can see that the I5 does nearly the same as an I7 but cost $100 less. Which in my opinion makes it better.

 

[Remixex]

Don't stick to the i7 unless you play a lot of MMOs and emulation.
i5 has a much,. much better price/performance

 

[Karadjgne]

The $100 is only initial outlay of funds. Break that down over a time period like 3.5yrs (average upgrade period) and it boils down to around 8¢ a day. Do you have 8¢?

 

[quilciri]

I think I'm still going to stick with the i7
I changed the PSU to this: http://www.microcenter.com/product/457337/SuperNOVA_G2_650_Watt_80_Gold_Modular_ATX_12V_Power_Supply
I think I want a slightly better GPU but nothing over 300. Any suggestions?

I strongly recommend the I5 as well. There are *very* few games that can make use of more than 4 threads. There aren't likely to be may games that make good use of 8 threads in the near future, either (i.e. the lifetime of the machine).

This conversation has been on the forums for at *least* the last 5 years, back when Sandy Bridge and first FX processors hit the market. In those 5 years, we've gone from 2 games that can make good use of more than four threads to about 5 1/2 games now.

In short, unless you doing a lot of video/audio editing, or running virtual machines, get the I5 and put the money towards a better video card. You will get better game performance in the vast majority.

 

[ThinkGames]

Ok I've decided to switch over to an i5 6600K 3.5GHz LGA 1151 (All things should still be compatible since its 1151) I will probably overclock to get closer to the 4.0GHz of the i7

 

[twarlof]

Ok I've decided to switch over to an i5 6600K 3.5GHz LGA 1151 (All things should still be compatible since its 1151) I will probably overclock to get closer to the 4.0GHz of the i7

Solid choice on processor. For overclocking, higher frequency doesn't mean better performance, I would try to see how it works for you as is (which i think it will work just fine) and don't overclock it if you are satisfied.

 

[ThinkGames]

I also want a better GPU than the GeForce GTX 960. My price range for the GPU is around 400-450

 

[quilciri]

For 1080p, I recommend the 970 @ $300.

It's a significant jump over the 960, while the 980 isn't much faster than the 970 (The 980-ti is out of the price range)

If you were gaming at 1440p, I might suggest stretching your budget a bit for the Fury (non-X).

 

[Karadjgne]

The r9 390 will handle 1080p easily, and will run with 1440p just fine, with obvious exceptions like Witcher 3. It's also usually cheaper than the gtx970. Downside is that minimum recommended psu is 650w.

 

[jhall18]

For 1080p, I recommend the 970 @ $300.

It's a significant jump over the 960, while the 980 isn't much faster than the 970 (The 980-ti is out of the price range)

If you were gaming at 1440p, I might suggest stretching your budget a bit for the Fury (non-X).

R9 390, outpaces the 970 and gives the 980 a run for it's money.

 

[quilciri]

Acc. To most reviews, including the ones on this site, the 970 performs better at 1080p. The 390 pulls ahead at 4k, but at that point you need a stronger card than either anyway.

 

[Karadjgne]

Ehh. The 390 and 970/980 go head to head. In games where the 390 is better, there's a sizable lead over the 970. In games where the 970 wins, its a smaller margin of victory. Where the 980 wins it's a good margin, where the 390 wins, its barely a victory. You really can't trust 'most' reviews as they all use the same games. BF4, Metro last night, tomb raider, Batman: Arkham, etc. If 10 reviews all say the 970 wins in 5 out of 8 games, and they are all the same games, it doesn't really mean much, one review as good as the rest. 1 review testing 30 games and the 970 wins 20 would mean a whole heap more.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1565555/r9-390-vs-gtx-970-the-final-conclusion

 

[quilciri]

Ehh. The 390 and 970/980 go head to head. In games where the 390 is better, there's a sizable lead over the 970. In games where the 970 wins, its a smaller margin of victory. Where the 980 wins it's a good margin, where the 390 wins, its barely a victory. You really can't trust 'most' reviews as they all use the same games. BF4, Metro last night, tomb raider, Batman: Arkham, etc. If 10 reviews all say the 970 wins in 5 out of 8 games, and they are all the same games, it doesn't really mean much, one review as good as the rest. 1 review testing 30 games and the 970 wins 20 would mean a whole heap more.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1565555/r9-390-vs-gtx-970-the-final-conclusion

I'm sorry, but that's just nonsense.

You're implying that individuals on a forum, most of which don't have both cards to compare against each other, don't have all of the games used in the benchmarks you're talking about and don't use any kind of standardized testing that you can base a comparison on are somehow more trustworthy than the majority of professional review sites simply because those sites have overlap in the games they use to benchmark.

The reason some games show up in multiple benchmarks is because they are good measures of a card's performance. You'll notice most sets include at least one game that heavily favors AMD cards, one game that heavily favors Nvidia cards, one game that is more CPU bound, one game that pushes the cards as hard as possible, etc.

You are also exaggerating the overlap in games used to test. Between these three reviews, there are only a few games that overlap.

Incidentally, the Techpowerup review benchmarks 22 different games and concludes that the 970 is a bit faster than the 390.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_390_PCS_Plus/35.html
http://hardocp.com/article/2015/12/22/asus_r9_390_strix_directcu_iii_video_card_review#.VsxsD_krK70
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/powercolor-radeon-r9-390-pcs-8gb-review,1.html