Opinions on this build?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

ThinkGames

Reputable
Jan 20, 2016
45
0
4,530
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.


 
Solution


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.
From your guru 3d link.
Quote:
Performance & drivers

Any Radeon R9 390 in most scenarios will be performing roughly at GeForce GTX 970 upwards to the 980 performance wise, 
End quote.
In other words, it performs in most scenarios between a 970 and a 980. Win for r9 390.

Hard OCp :no clear winner, back and forth Asus STRIX 390 vrs msi Gaming 4G (one of the wimpiest 390's vrs one of the strongest 970's, doesn't say much for that 970 at all)

Techpowerup : 22 games tested. R9 390, 11 wins avg 5-10fps over 970. Gtx970 11 wins avg 1-5 fps over 390.
Quote: Power Color only increased the clock speeds by 10 MHz over reference, with memory clock unchanged, so the gains are quite small, roughly 1%. Compared to the GTX 970, we see slightly lower performance of around 3% when averaged over our benchmark suite, and the card is effectively the same 3% behind the GTX 780 Ti. I would recommend the R9 390 for gaming at up to and including 1080p, where it will deliver good framerates with full details set in-game.
End quote.
Relative performance :
R9 390: 100%
Gtx 970: 93%

And thats with a 390 that's only 10MHz over reference? Imagine if it was a real card with a decent factory OC. Those 970 wins would be dusted as there was 5 wins with 5 or less fps.

Don't send me links unless you are gonna actually read them. The r9 390 sits on average somewhere between the 970 and the 980. As your 'trustworthy professional reviewers' all seem to agree.

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

Yeah, you may wanna actually read the article and look at the games. You got that statement all backwards. Just saying.
 
Your reading skills completely failed you. Make sure you actually understand the sentence you read before you try to throw it back in someone else's face.

Quick lesson: The phrase "Compared to the GTX 970" means the subject of the sentence is not the 970.

i.e. the 390 has 3% lower performance than the 970.

The Guru review tested all games at 1440, not 1080. I'm just illustrating the failing of your earlier groundless argument against review sites..
 
Dude, the 390 beat the 970 in every single game tested, even beat the 980 in a few, had higher passmark scores than the 980, higher firestrike scores. Has relative performance of 100% compared to the gtx970 93%.
And notice the comma? Compared to the 970, the subject of that sentence Is the 970, which had lower performance in every single benchmark. I'll give you that it's badly worded, but there's no way you're gonna pull off the 970 being the better card in anything but power requirements. At 1080p, it either ties or beats the 970,at 1440p it stomps the 970 and goes head to head with the 980.
 
You're not reading the benchmarks or the conclusion right, then, or you're forgetting we're targetting 1920x1080 for Thinkgames with a *possible* upgrade later to 1440. 4k is not being considered.

Also, that got out of hand. I pointed out the bad logic in comparing heresay to standardized methods. That made you defensive and I let you bait me into anger. I'm sorry about that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.