Question Was looking for some input on this build, if you wouldn't mind

Subidoo

Distinguished
Jan 3, 2011
157
0
18,680
0
PCPartPicker part list: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/yG8nRJ
Price breakdown by merchant: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/yG8nRJ/by_merchant/

CPU: Intel - Core i5-9600K 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor ($264.99 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: Noctua - NH-D15 82.5 CFM CPU Cooler ($89.95 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: MSI - MPG Z390 GAMING EDGE AC ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($189.99 @ Amazon)
Memory: Corsair - Vengeance RGB Pro 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-2666 Memory ($114.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital - Blue 1 TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($127.19 @ Amazon)
Video Card: EVGA - GeForce RTX 2080 8 GB FTW3 ULTRA GAMING Video Card ($849.99 @ Amazon)
Case: Thermaltake - View 71 TG RGB ATX Full Tower Case ($174.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: SeaSonic - FOCUS Plus Platinum 750 W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($119.99 @ Amazon)
Operating System: Microsoft - Windows 10 Home OEM 64-bit ($106.05 @ Amazon)
Case Fan: Thermaltake - Riing 14 RGB 3-Pack 51.15 CFM 140mm Fans
Total: $2038.13
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-03-25 15:53 EDT-0400

I will be playing WoW, Overwatch, thinking about trying Anthem and mostly steam games. I prefer to max game settings out, but will settle for close to ultra. :)
 

Eximo

Titan
Herald
I would probably up the memory speed to 3200Mhz.

I personally don't see a need for a full tower. Unless you have plans for lots of expansion. Get a more reasonable mid-tower and put the money into a faster SSD or an additional SATA SSD for larger stuff. Or jump up to the i7-9700k

You could look at comparable gold rated power supplies and save about $20, but platinum is cool.
 

Subidoo

Distinguished
Jan 3, 2011
157
0
18,680
0
I would probably up the memory speed to 3200Mhz.

I personally don't see a need for a full tower. Unless you have plans for lots of expansion. Get a more reasonable mid-tower and put the money into a faster SSD or an additional SATA SSD for larger stuff. Or jump up to the i7-9700k

You could look at comparable gold rated power supplies and save about $20, but platinum is cool.
I thought the same, but the Girlfriend bought it for my Bday already, she thought it looked really cool, Lol, so i'm just gonna make the best with it :) Im welcome to spending a little more if it's reasonable for gaming and what not.
 

WildCard999

Polypheme
Herald
Have not picked out a monitor yet.
Without that it makes it somewhat difficult to say if it's a good build or not. You play a wide variety of games that some are fine at 60-75hz while others you'd want to play at 144hz. If you were to go 1440P/144hz I'd drop the GPU down to the 2070 and grab the 8700K or 9700K instead of the 9600K (I think the 6 cores is going to be a limiting factor sooner then later). Everything else looks good.
 

Subidoo

Distinguished
Jan 3, 2011
157
0
18,680
0
Without that it makes it somewhat difficult to say if it's a good build or not. You play a wide variety of games that some are fine at 60-75hz while others you'd want to play at 144hz. If you were to go 1440P/144hz I'd drop the GPU down to the 2070 and grab the 8700K or 9700K instead of the 9600K (I think the 6 cores is going to be a limiting factor sooner then later). Everything else looks good.
I most likely will use my TV for the moment,
CL 43S405 43-Inch 4K Ultra HD Roku Smart LED TV
120Hz refresh rate
 

WildCard999

Polypheme
Herald
I most likely will use my TV for the moment,
CL 43S405 43-Inch 4K Ultra HD Roku Smart LED TV
120Hz refresh rate
Nice TV, I have the 49" version of it.

So while it says 120hz that the motion interpolation, the TV is 60hz. Also it is one of the better TV's for gaming but compared to a monitor your still going to have a slight delay due to the higher response time which won't be a issue on WoW or Anthem but maybe noticeable on Overwatch. If your sticking with 4K then keep the 2080 but I'd swap the 9600K to the Ryzen 2700 or even 2600. With such a high resolution at only 60hz you really don't need a beefy CPU as the game load is more on the GPU.
 

Subidoo

Distinguished
Jan 3, 2011
157
0
18,680
0
Nice TV, I have the 49" version of it.

So while it says 120hz that the motion interpolation, the TV is 60hz. Also it is one of the better TV's for gaming but compared to a monitor your still going to have a slight delay due to the higher response time which won't be a issue on WoW or Anthem but maybe noticeable on Overwatch. If your sticking with 4K then keep the 2080 but I'd swap the 9600K to the Ryzen 2700 or even 2600. With such a high resolution at only 60hz you really don't need a beefy CPU as the game load is more on the GPU.
Heard good things about AMD, but years ago i had bad experiences with them so i always stuck with intel. Is AMD better for gaming now? If i plan to use a VR setup down the line, is this possible with the current build?
 

WildCard999

Polypheme
Herald
The build your going for will handle VR but AMD this time around with Ryzen has really pushed performance at a much lower cost. Before I got my Ryzen 2600 I was building a budget build using a G5400 as a placeholder for the 9600K however when I was saving up I did a bit more research and saw that price to performance the 2600 was a better option especially with AMD using the AM4 socket into 2020 (or at the very least late 2019) so it's a better upgrade path. Either AMD 1600 or Intel 8400 would work well with VR, speaking of which I'm waiting for the Vive Cosmos, looks great. There's also the Oculus S which looks good and should be coming out this spring. I had the original Oculus (had to sell for quick cash) and it was amazing, Skyrim VR (modded) was an incredible experience fighting dragons.
 

Subidoo

Distinguished
Jan 3, 2011
157
0
18,680
0
The build your going for will handle VR but AMD this time around with Ryzen has really pushed performance at a much lower cost. Before I got my Ryzen 2600 I was building a budget build using a G5400 as a placeholder for the 9600K however when I was saving up I did a bit more research and saw that price to performance the 2600 was a better option especially with AMD using the AM4 socket into 2020 (or at the very least late 2019) so it's a better upgrade path. Either AMD 1600 or Intel 8400 would work well with VR, speaking of which I'm waiting for the Vive Cosmos, looks great. There's also the Oculus S which looks good and should be coming out this spring. I had the original Oculus (had to sell for quick cash) and it was amazing, Skyrim VR (modded) was an incredible experience fighting dragons.
I've been drooling over Skyrim VR for a year now. I'll def check into the AMD now, appreciate that :)
 

Eximo

Titan
Herald
AMD isn't better for gaming, just more cost effective. Intel still holds its clock speed and IPC advantage over AMD.

They narrowed the gap a lot, and the upcoming 3000 series should complete the work there until Intel releases their next actual generation instead of optimizing for four, possibly five, generations in a row.

For maximum possible FPS the i7-9700k or i9-9900k are the picks. They are much much more expensive though. So when you can get 80-90% of that with an AMD chip at one third the cost they make a lot of sense.

At 4K it doesn't really matter though, pretty much all falls back on your GPU's performance.
 

Subidoo

Distinguished
Jan 3, 2011
157
0
18,680
0
AMD isn't better for gaming, just more cost effective. Intel still holds its clock speed and IPC advantage over AMD.

They narrowed the gap a lot, and the upcoming 3000 series should complete the work there until Intel releases their next actual generation instead of optimizing for four, possibly five, generations in a row.

For maximum possible FPS the i7-9700k or i9-9900k are the picks. They are much much more expensive though. So when you can get 80-90% of that with an AMD chip at one third the cost they make a lot of sense.

At 4K it doesn't really matter though, pretty much all falls back on your GPU's performance.
Are the i7's better for gaming vs the i5's?
 

Eximo

Titan
Herald
Generally yes, but that depends on which CPUs exactly and which games you are trying to play. Some games only need a few CPU cores, others will use all the threads they can get their hands on.

6 core i5 from the last two generations are very good for gaming and not too expensive. But AMD has advantages in thread count for the same cost, as well as some socket longevity as mentioned above. AMD makes a better multipurpose processor which is why it is the current common recommendation. Coupled with cheaper overclockable motherboards and overclocking for all the Ryzen branded CPUs they are very popular choices.

K class i5 can be clocked quite high (~5Ghz), and the high clock speed is still good for high frame rates. So if you are targeting 100+ FPS you will start to see a gap between AMD and Intel, but if the GPU can handle 200 FPS you aren't going to notice a huge difference between 200 and 220 FPS. So for people getting into 144hz, 180hz monitors it doesn't matter all that much as long as the CPU gets them to their goal.

And it scales up in both performance and cost from there. The i7-8700k has 6 cores and 12 threads just like the R5-2600. But it has much faster cores and can be overclocked to ~5Ghz whereas most AMD chips now will hit 4.1-4.2Ghz.

Then you have the i7-9700k which is just a straight 8-core, and the i9-9900k which has 8 cores and 16 threads (like the R7 models) but again faster clock speeds.

Not much point in looking at older 6th and 7th gen Intel chips that are quad cores. Still potent, but the cost difference is minimal.

The difference though is in the hundreds of dollars. Fancy Z class motherboards, So for an optimal gaming machine where graphics detail or resolution is the priority, CPU speed doesn't matter all that much so you can take the money you would have spent on Intel and put it into the GPU. When you look at high FPS or competitive gaming, you'll still want to look at Intel.

But if your main plan is a 4K TV, the AMD chips should be fine.
 

Similar threads


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS