System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: $600 Gaming PC

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]rechauffe[/nom]Hey guys, I'm in need of a new desktop gaming machine and have a strict budget - we have a baby on the way in October. This will likely be my last toy for a while Is it worth upgrading to a 7870 and 8GB of RAM both to add a little future proofing, or would you stay with the setup as-is?[/citation]


use the FX 6300 , 970 chipset mb , and a 7870

Its the same price as this build and games better , but ideally spend a little more on a decent case and psu so they last
 

I wouldn't buy any Amd gpu that wasn't a His, XFX, and Sapphire, And I try to stay away from Asrock mobo's , Gigabyte should always be the number one choice for your mobo, and the 7870 XT is basically a 7930.
 


The build has a $600 price limit .

Im not a fan of MSI either , but the TwinFRZR cooler on the 7870 is a decent unit. More importantly it was available for a better price than any other 7870 with a non-reference cooler
Asrock motherboards are generally a little cheaper but they are good value and they work . That model was chosen as the cheapest acceptable board with a 970 series chip set


And importantly that set up will game better than the suggested i5/7850 build
 
[citation][nom]Outlander_04[/nom]The build has a $600 price limit . Im not a fan of MSI either , but the TwinFRZR cooler on the 7870 is a decent unit. More importantly it was available for a better price than any other 7870 with a non-reference cooler Asrock motherboards are generally a little cheaper but they are good value and they work . That model was chosen as the cheapest acceptable board with a 970 series chip set And importantly that set up will game better than the suggested i5/7850 build[/citation]
Ah, but in steps Crysis 3, a shooter even. Are you sure all the FX-6 or i3 + more graphics suggestion (which yes I agree with) will still outgame i5+7850? Only time will tell, but I'm guessing it might even vary by levels within the game, and FX-6 may need voltage, OC, and more cooling to seal any victory. And will locked-down i3 ever catch up?
 

If you play at max settings and and a 7870 Xt along with a fx 6300, the one with the better gpu will always outperform the one with the better Cpu and and less expensive GPU, unless you are not playing on anything less then high and on a lower res then 1080, then the one with the better cpu will outperform the one with the fx 6300.
 
[citation][nom]pauldh[/nom]Ah, but in steps Crysis 3, a shooter even. Are you sure all the FX-6 or i3 + more graphics suggestion (which yes I agree with) will still outgame i5+7850? Only time will tell, but I'm guessing it might even vary by levels within the game, and FX-6 may need voltage, OC, and more cooling to seal any victory. And will locked-down i3 ever catch up?[/citation]

There are benchmarks out there showing the FX 6300 out performing a 2500K in Crysis 3 . The game is responding to cores as much as the individual power of a core .
Of course, like all benchmarks, they are very specific to the machines they built , the detail settings , and the resolution they were gaming at so its not reasonable to say the FX 6300 is abetter gamer than than the i5 .... but Im even more sure Im right that the FX is the budget $600 cpu champion
The intel dual cores pretty much flatlined in those same benches .
 
[citation][nom]Intel_shills_uncovered[/nom]... And I try to stay away from Asrock mobo's , ...[/citation]

This merely shows how little you know about modern Asrock mbds. Sheesh...

Ian.


 
[citation][nom]Intel_shills_uncovered[/nom]All these Intel fanboys downvoting amd positive posts.[/citation]
Yes thats exactly what it is .

A reasonable discussion with them is very hard , and will be till they stop crying about wasting money on intel dual cores
 

Agreed 100%
 
[citation][nom]Intel_shills_uncovered[/nom]Agreed 100%[/citation]
While it's possible what you say is somewhat true, I'd think the vote downs are more for three reasons.

1) First you said "always" out game, which it absolutely false. More GPU + Less CPU will not ALWAYS out game. It is simply untrue. More often than not, typically, most likely... would have been fine. But not "always". It may be true for most of C3.

2) Many folks have zero tolerance for trolling or fanboy attitude, either direction. Your name, plus your post, is bound to be jumped on.

3) Past posts from others here, who seemed to not even read the article. This wasn't a pure gaming PC, and it won overall (barely) as intended. Yet some suggestions for 6300 + Tahiti LE were not even close to budget (by the rules), and still not the build's purpose anyway.

All this said, I like FX-6300+ Tahiti LE for gaming, even more so if the budget allows voltage and aftermarket cooling. FX-6300 vs. i3 is a real interesting head to head moving forward. Of course, pricing is not equal, esp. factoring cooling/power demands. Very curious which will look better now and down the road in C3 alone even.

 


As you yourself pointed out previous builds have been pretty much solely gaming focused

and the title of the article is
"System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: $600 GAMING PC "


My opinion is that you had to change the focus of the article to justify the inclusion of the i5 quad because you clearly didnt build the best possible $600 gamer .

To assert that a more gaming focused build is the result of fanboyism seems quite counter intuitive in these circumstances

So I repeat my challenge .
Build the AMD system . It does meet the criteria of the $600 build .
If you can use discounted parts in the intel build then I see no difference to using parts that which have rebates in the AMD build

In short build a GAMER . or change the title of this article
 
[citation][nom]Outlander_04[/nom]As you yourself pointed out previous builds have been pretty much solely gaming focused and the title of the article is "System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: $600 GAMING PC "My opinion is that you had to change the focus of the article to justify the inclusion of the i5 quad because you clearly didnt build the best possible $600 gamer .To assert that a more gaming focused build is the result of fanboyism seems quite counter intuitive in these circumstances So I repeat my challenge .Build the AMD system . It does meet the criteria of the $600 build . If you can use discounted parts in the intel build then I see no difference to using parts that which have rebates in the AMD build In short build a GAMER . or change the title of this article[/citation]
No, sorry Outlander, you are totally mistaken! We didn't change the purpose to justify i5, quite the opposite. I'll explain this one last time.... SBMs have always been an attempt to do all things well at your budgets, in essence to win. This time I finally had enough budget to game well and possibly win at the same time, but ONLY if I grabbed a big CPU. And it's not like I picked a sub-$100 graphics card, 7850 @ $165 is pure beast for the money!

Oh, I even made an effort to change the low-budget build's name way back, but it's been dubbed the "Gaming PC" since long before I started building them back in 2008.

And no, $140 FX-6300 + $260 Tahiti LE was not an option for me, not even close. That's $55 more for the GPU and CPU alone. Then you'd need more power, and I'd want a better CPU cooler to push voltages/clocks. Such a build would be a nice $700 high-res gaming machine, but one that would have taken a distant back seat in value come day 4.

edit: And Outlander, since I will not build the same basic rig twice at $600, not even to win, who knows what you'll see next time. It depends on pricing/availability, and if we again put an extra special emphasis on value by keeping the budgets tightly grouped. At this 600/800/1000 theme, we'd learn far less on day 4 if one builder bows out of the competition to seek a different specialized goal.
 
[citation][nom]pauldh[/nom]Such a build would be a nice $700 high-res gaming machine, but one that would have taken a distant back seat in value come day 4.[/citation]Sounds like a good excuse to change the budget again...
 
[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]Sounds like a good excuse to change the budget again...[/citation]
Can't say there were any overwhelming favorite budget levels appearing within the comments. We all may need a change. Time will tell.

At $600, same goal, it's likely this same PC yet again. A more game-focused build based on FX-6300 would certainly be a lot more fun than repeating i5+7850. If I'm already not shooting for a day 4 value win, then it may be time to cheat a bit... embrace these flexible budgets and go 5% over if need be. 😀
 
I am building a system for a friend based on your setup. I can't find Enabling "Non-K-Series Overclocking" in ASROCK BIOS and can only set the CPU multiplier to 33X max. This board is supposed to support "non-K oc." You seem to have been able to set it to 37x. Any advice would be welcome. Did intel change something, or do you think an older BIOS would help?

CPU: Intel i5-3350P
MOBO: ASROCK H77 Pro4-M Bios Version 1.70
GPU: EVGA GTX 660
Memory: G.Skill DDR3 PC1600 4Mb x2
OPTIC: LG 24x Super Multi GH24
PSU: Cooler Master Glite400w Old one hanging around the house.
Windows 7 64.
 


I could be wrong, but I think that the four extra bins are only offered on the non-K edition versions of CPU SKUs that have K edition offerings such as the i5-3570, i5-2500, etc. The others such as the i5-3350P can still be overclocked through manipulation of the Turbo frequencies and a little through the BLCK. Around 4GHz should be an easy mark to hit. That's how I've overclocked those i5s that don't have K edition offerings with the same model number with no trouble.
 
Thanks for the quick reply... You are absolutely correct. I had planned on upping the BLCK to 105 and up the max turbo multipliers to 35 or 37. Seems like a stable 3.9 to 4 GHz should be achievable.

I just can't do this with the ASROCK BIOS... There is supposed to be an enable "non-K OC" feature. I can't find it. I loaded Intel's Extreme Tuning Utility, and it says the chip is not able to perform Turboboost overclocking. Very strange.
 


Hello, the problem is you have an H77 Express chipset, and not enthusiast class Z77 / Z75 chipsets. Your H77 board won't have the non-K series OC option. =(
 

h77 does not allow cpu overclocking of any kind. if you want to oc your 3350p, try getting a z77 mobo. better, try getting an asus or gigabyte z77 motherboard. even their cheaper boards (e.g. z77 ud3h, p8z77-m pro etc) support a sneaky little auto-overclocking feature called 'multicore enhancement' which applies maximum single core turbo clockrate to all 4 cores regardless of the workload. all you have to do is enable x.m.p. for the ram.
http://hardocp.com/article/2012/07/30/asus_p8z77m_pro_microatx_motherboard_review/7
http://hardocp.com/article/2012/06/14/gigabyte_z77xud3h_motherboard_review/7
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6214/multicore-enhancement-the-debate-about-free-mhz
i can't yet confirm if their lower end boards have this feature, but it's quite possible. afaik, asrock has something like this too, but on their higher end boards.
disclaimer: overclocking any component voids warranty. mileage always varies so don't expect consistent results.
 


Lol plebian
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom