First time building - Gaming desktop

[Zzeke]

Hi all,

I've always used the family desktop computer for gaming, but recent games like GW2 seem to put too much stress on it. Frankly, I do not know much about the inside of a computer; I've always simply installed and played games on it. I've researched it a bit in the past few days, but I'm still having a hard time understanding how significantly components differ in quality and performance.

I'm looking to buy or build a computer for myself, that can handle games up to or around Final Fantasy XIV in quality. Not necessarily on the absolute highest settings, but decently high without issue. This is going to be a complete new desktop for me, so I need to buy all the peripherals as well. (If anyone has suggestions for those as well, please let me know)

For just the computer part of it, though, I'm looking to spend around $800. (U.S.)

I have been looking at Marest's 800 build here on the forums:

MoBo: MSI Z68A-G43 (B3) – $99.99
CPU: Intel i5 2500k – $219.99
RAM: G.Skill 1600MHz 2x4GB – $39.99
GPU: Sapphire Radeon 7850 – $239.99
HDD: Samsung Spinpoint F3 500GB – $79.99
PSU: XFX ProSeries 450W – $62.99
Case: NZXT Tempest 210 – $54.99

But, my brother tells me not to get a Radeon graphics card because they have "bad drivers". I was wondering if anyone could explain that, or if they have any other GPU suggestions for me.

Also, he told me to look at SSD, but is that an addition, or a replacement?

Thanks for the help in advanced, I'll be checking this post frequently.

[eldaveo]

I've used Radeon graphics cards for the better part of the decade (I'm on my third Radeon card now) with no issues. There may have been some driver issues in the past I never encountered, due to them being situational or due to conflicts with certain combinations of hardware/software, but at this point in time, I would say there isn't really much benefit to getting an nVidia GeForce card over AMD Radeon apart from personal preference. Someone correct me if I'm wrong though, I don't make a point of keeping up to date with the bleeding edge of technology.



SSD is a very fast type of hard drive that uses semiconductor memory rather than magnetic spinning platters for storage. The pro is that it is very fast. The cons are that it is still rather expensive, and the capacities are MUCH lower than "regular" (magnetic) hard drives are capable of.

Basically, the tradeoff is speed vs capacity. Optimally, you'd want your operating system on the SSD, along with games, depending on the capacity, and a large regular hard drive for storing all your stuff.

[hapylol]

snip

Pretty much what Eldaveo said. AMD cards are perfectly fine these days so please ignore that part.

I wouldn't recommend an SSD drive on a $800 budget, but if you get into the 1200's it would be wise. They load 5-10x faster then standard HDD's and will improve everything about your computer.

[Zzeke]

Alright, thanks for the advice.

[Fluffygong]

If you go into run (windows key + R) and type DXDiag that will give you some basic information about what hardware is in your PC.

[chazus]

But, my brother tells me not to get a Radeon graphics card because they have "bad drivers". I was wondering if anyone could explain that, or if they have any other GPU suggestions for me.

I've used Radeon graphics cards for the better part of the decade (I'm on my third Radeon card now) with no issues.

Three cards, eh?

Having tested about well over 500 cards and done troubleshooting with more games than I can count on both hands and feet three times, Radeon cards definitely do have software and driver problems. Does this mean that AMD/ATI cards are bad? No.. not really. Is the chance that you'll run into frustration later higher than an nVidia card? Yes. That doesn't mean you WILL have problems, it just means the chances are higher.

I would personally never buy an AMD/ATI video card, even if it had better price or performance. The risk of having to deal with driver crap (and AMD later saying 'yeah, we're just not gonna fix that this software revision, sorry') isn't worth it.

[Lilbruz]

If you ask the "nVidia vs ATI" question, you will have fans on both sides, so if you really wanna know whats considered best, you need to look at benchmarks and such.

For me, I have always been a nVidia fan...just never had a problem with any of the card I have had (had PC since 93), and I just continue to buy that brand. I dont really care if one card is 2.45 frames faster than another - I just go with what I think I wanna spend, and find the best card from nVidia that I want

I have an ATI card in my old laptop, and that started crapping out on me when I tried to install Windows 7...looks like the card didnt support it, but its an old-ish laptop, so I wouldnt call the card "broken" as such.

Basically, if you dont need to nerd out and fap over benchmark tests and fps, you have two really good brands of cards, and you will do well with either. There will always be bad eggs on both sides too ofc

btw, I would suggest you get a bigger PSU. It will run your system fine, but you dont want to save on PSU power - ever

Better more than you need than risking having to upgrade it if you want to add another card or something

[eldaveo]

Three cards, eh?

Having tested about well over 500 cards and done troubleshooting with more games than I can count on both hands and feet three times, Radeon cards definitely do have software and driver problems. Does this mean that AMD/ATI cards are bad? No.. not really. Is the chance that you'll run into frustration later higher than an nVidia card? Yes. That doesn't mean you WILL have problems, it just means the chances are higher.

I would personally never buy an AMD/ATI video card, even if it had better price or performance. The risk of having to deal with driver crap (and AMD later saying 'yeah, we're just not gonna fix that this software revision, sorry') isn't worth it.

Barring being a hardware tester, which I'm guessing you might be, I'd say three graphics cards over about seven years is a fairly decent track record for the average gamer.