Affordable Gaming Build

[Lathais]

Op gave 2 options, I gave my advice on those two, not sure what's hard to understand.

And he posted that build way after my post in question at that point there weren't any other builds.

You mean no other builds other than the one Kost posted right below the op? that was there way before you came in to the thread

[draykorinee]

You mean no other builds other than the one Kost posted right below the op? that was there way before you came in to the thread

You're just being belligerent now, the guy asked for advice on two I said which I'd go for, you jumped at the chance to stroke your ego and it backfired so now you're getting as picky as you can.

[chazus]

They are offering other options because both those builds are sub-par to what is available. If it were a choice between two pre-built systems, I would understand. But since they are building it, there are zero reasons not to consider alternate, better, cheaper parts.

[draykorinee]

They are offering other options because both those builds are sub-par to what is available. If it were a choice between two pre-built systems, I would understand. But since they are building it, there are zero reasons not to consider alternate, better, cheaper parts.

Yes that much is obvious.

[Bran]

Well, the $760 build is more expensive not because of the CPU, it's more expensive because it has a better GPU and double the RAM. So the, go with intel if you can afford it is stupid because he CAN afford it if he compares 2 comparable builds. Go with intel if you can afford it makes it sound like it's out of certain budgets to go for intel when intel outperforms across all budget levels.

- - - Updated - - -

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-4160 3.6GHz Dual-Core Processor ($109.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: Asus Z87-A ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($79.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($59.98 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($44.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 960 2GB Video Card ($209.99 @ Amazon)
Case: Corsair 200R ATX Mid Tower Case ($56.98 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: XFX 550W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($44.99 @ NCIX US)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - 64-bit (OEM) (64-bit) ($91.75 @ OutletPC)
Total: $698.66
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-04-08 12:13 EDT-0400

There is a build that will play pretty much any current game with good FPS at Med-Ultra settings(really depends on the game) and 1080p@60hz. Under $700. If you want more affordable, but lower settings, drop to a 750ti. A little more affordable go to a G3258(which will still play all those games that supposedly "require" quad-core).

Thanks everyone for your responses and alternative builds. Couple questions about this build- Do you think it would be worth it to invest in a stronger CPU and weaker GPU? Perhaps upgrade to an i5? And is the 960 worth it for the price? I'd rather not spend substantially more than what I've already stated but I do want to make sure I purchase parts that will last a while.

[Lathais]

You're just being belligerent now, the guy asked for advice on two I said which I'd go for, you jumped at the chance to stroke your ego and it backfired so now you're getting as picky as you can.

No, when people started giving the guy bad advice, I can in and corrected it. That is all. My ego has nothing to do with it. I want to see every person that posts here for help get something that will do what they want without over-spending to do it. That is all. You can in and told him to pick a poor build with wording that made it sound as though intel was overpriced. Bad advice. I came in with information showing how the AMD is a bad choice and why intel is better at any price point. This also went hand in hand with the build Kost posted, showing that a balance between the two proposed builds is likely the best bet, sticking with intel but dropping some of the unnecessary budget killers.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks everyone for your responses and alternative builds. Couple questions about this build- Do you think it would be worth it to invest in a stronger CPU and weaker GPU? Perhaps upgrade to an i5? And is the 960 worth it for the price? I'd rather not spend substantially more than what I've already stated but I do want to make sure I purchase parts that will last a while.

Well, you could, but then you'd be getting a 750ti which is not really an enjoyable experience to game on IMO. Your moving the part that won't last from the CPU to the GPU and you'll be having to upgrade at about the same time anyway.

The 960 is a great card for the price. It runs everything I have thrown at it on Ultra well at 1080p. Unless you are going above 1080 you really don't need more than a 960.

[JForny]

No, when people started giving the guy bad advice, I can in and corrected it. That is all. My ego has nothing to do with it. I want to see every person that posts here for help get something that will do what they want without over-spending to do it. That is all. You can in and told him to pick a poor build with wording that made it sound as though intel was overpriced. Bad advice. I came in with information showing how the AMD is a bad choice and why intel is better at any price point. This also went hand in hand with the build Kost posted, showing that a balance between the two proposed builds is likely the best bet, sticking with intel but dropping some of the unnecessary budget killers.

- - - Updated - - -



Well, you could, but then you'd be getting a 750ti which is not really an enjoyable experience to game on IMO. Your moving the part that won't last from the CPU to the GPU and you'll be having to upgrade at about the same time anyway.

The 960 is a great card for the price. It runs everything I have thrown at it on Ultra well at 1080p. Unless you are going above 1080 you really don't need more than a 960.

All you do is berate people for having a difference of opinion than yours... Why do you want everyone to buy intel? Because of performance? You act as if AMD can't play games. Well than, talk to Microsoft about xbox and playstation about ps4... Both use AMD and play games rather well if you ask all who bought them. No need to be a jerk.

[Bran]

<img snip>

Infracted. Don't post image spam. Contribute or don't post. - Cilraaz

[Lathais]

All you do is berate people for having a difference of opinion than yours... Why do you want everyone to buy intel? Because of performance? You act as if AMD can't play games. Well than, talk to Microsoft about xbox and playstation about ps4... Both use AMD and play games rather well if you ask all who bought them. No need to be a jerk.

Who gives a fuck what consoles use? The simple fact of the matter is while yes, AMD will play games on a PC "just fine" for the same amount or less you can put together an intel build that will perform better. Not being a jerk, just stating a simple fact. I am not stating my opinion at all. Just giving facts.

[pancakebuddy2]

i would highly recommend going with the 280 and not the 270, difference is worth far more than 40 bucks.

[draykorinee]

You can in and told him to pick a poor build with wording that made it sound as though intel was overpriced. Bad advice. I came in with information showing how the AMD is a bad choice and why intel is better at any price point.

I said the second one "would be my preference", I never once said he should buy it nor that he shouldn't look elsewhere, I didn't even give advice except state my preference, your inability to read English is as alarming as your desire to flash around your rather big head and ego in as abrasive and know it all manner as possible, you're an insufferable bore, good day.

[Kagthul]

All you do is berate people for having a difference of opinion than yours... Why do you want everyone to buy intel? Because of performance? You act as if AMD can't play games. Well than, talk to Microsoft about xbox and playstation about ps4... Both use AMD and play games rather well if you ask all who bought them. No need to be a jerk.

Ummm.. im not sure you're using a good example here. Both of those machines can barely put out 1080p - and in many cases, CAN'T put out 1080p.

So.. yeah. You're sorta proving HIS point, not yours.

[Deleted]

Well, you could, but then you'd be getting a 750ti which is not really an enjoyable experience to game on IMO. Your moving the part that won't last from the CPU to the GPU and you'll be having to upgrade at about the same time anyway.

The 960 is a great card for the price. It runs everything I have thrown at it on Ultra well at 1080p. Unless you are going above 1080 you really don't need more than a 960.

Because the obvious step down from a 960 would be a 750ti....
You can get a 270x for 10-20 bucks more than a 750ti, which would be a lot better. After that is the 280 with similar performance as the 960, while being cheaper.
And I just saw this 280x on newegg

You could go for this instead
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 3.2GHz Quad-Core Processor ($178.89 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: ASRock B85 Anniversary ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($59.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($59.98 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($44.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon R9 270X 2GB WINDFORCE Video Card ($152.98 @ Newegg)
Case: Corsair 200R ATX Mid Tower Case ($57.99 @ Micro Center)
Power Supply: XFX 550W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($44.99 @ NCIX US)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - 64-bit (OEM) (64-bit) ($91.75 @ OutletPC)
Total: $691.56
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-04-08 16:52 EDT-0400

Upgrade CPU to i5, downgrade the GPU to 270x.

Me personally, I would not get a dual core even if it has 4 threads for a gaming PC. The 270x is not as good as a 960, but I dont think the 960 is worth it anyway.

[Lathais]

Because the obvious step down from a 960 would be a 750ti....
You can get a 270x for 10-20 bucks more than a 750ti, which would be a lot better. After that is the 280 with similar performance as the 960, while being cheaper.
And I just saw this 280x on newegg

You could go for this instead
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-4460 3.2GHz Quad-Core Processor ($178.89 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: ASRock B85 Anniversary ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($59.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($59.98 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($44.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon R9 270X 2GB WINDFORCE Video Card ($152.98 @ Newegg)
Case: Corsair 200R ATX Mid Tower Case ($57.99 @ Micro Center)
Power Supply: XFX 550W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($44.99 @ NCIX US)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - 64-bit (OEM) (64-bit) ($91.75 @ OutletPC)
Total: $691.56
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-04-08 16:52 EDT-0400

Upgrade CPU to i5, downgrade the GPU to 270x.

Me personally, I would not get a dual core even if it has 4 threads for a gaming PC. The 270x is not as good as a 960, but I dont think the 960 is worth it anyway.

The i5 and the i3 will perform nearly identically in gaming. Unless you are going for a K and Overclocking or using the PC for more than gaming all you are doing by dropping the 960 to pick up an i5 is actually giving up performance.

How is the 960 not worth it? It plays everything I throw at it on Ultra and 1080p@60hZ without breaking a sweat. The 270 is larger and uses much more power, meaning creates much more heat as well. Being so new, there are not good benchmarks for the 960 yet, but it performs slightly better than the 770 so look a this benchmark:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1080?vs=1037

- - - Updated - - -

Ummm.. im not sure you're using a good example here. Both of those machines can barely put out 1080p - and in many cases, CAN'T put out 1080p.

So.. yeah. You're sorta proving HIS point, not yours.

Huhm did not know that, I am so far out of the console loop these days. Seriously though? Some console games have to be played at 720p due to console hardware limitations? Lol. Silly console gamers.

[Deleted]

How is the 960 not worth it? It plays everything I throw at it on Ultra and 1080p@60hZ without breaking a sweat. The 270 is larger and uses much more power, meaning creates much more heat as well. Being so new, there are not good benchmarks for the 960 yet, but it performs slightly better than the 770 so look a this benchmark:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1080?vs=1037

It isnt better than a 770



But mainly because you can get a 280 for less, and a 280x for a bit more money. And it seems newegg is clearing their stock of 290s, I can see you can get one for 230 bucks.... For me, at the moment the 960 just isnt a good buy. Unless you only want to get an Nvidia card.

And yeah, the 270x uses much more power....

[Lathais]

It isnt better than a 770



But mainly because you can get a 280 for less, and a 280x for a bit more money. And it seems newegg is clearing their stock of 290s, I can see you can get one for 230 bucks.... For me, at the moment the 960 just isnt a good buy. Unless you only want to get an Nvidia card.

And yeah, the 270x uses much more power....

Ok, then using your own numbers, it performs slightly better than the 670 so we'll look at that benchmark:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1080?vs=1349

Still getting much better frames than the 270.

So your recommendation is still to get an i5 over the i3, which will have little to no effect on gaming and drop the 960 to a 270 which will hurt FPS? Or are you saying to get a 280/280x? I am not quite sure what your recommendation is.

The 280 and the 960 is an actual competition. The 280 performs better in some games but the 960 performs better in others, kind of a toss up there, unless the game you play favors one or the other, then it's a no-brainer(WoW favors nVidia). The price is similar, with the 960 being slightly more expensive. They really are pretty close, but I prefer nvidia. I guess you could replace the 960 with a 280 if you wanted to go with the AMD camp though, not going to make a huge difference.

[Deleted]

So your recommendation is still to get an i5 over the i3, which will have little to no effect on gaming and drop the 960 to a 270 which will hurt FPS? Or are you saying
to get a 280/280x? I am not quite sure what your recommendation is.

You were asking why I did not think the 960 is worth the money. I responded by saying the 280 has similar performance but costs less, the 280x has better performance but costs slightly more. And even the 290 is quite cheap at the moment.

As for the i5 build, OP asked if it was worth it. I suggested an i5 build, even saying the 270x will be weaker than the 960. Although, both gpu's should be plenty for WoW.

[Kagthul]

Huhm did not know that, I am so far out of the console loop these days. Seriously though? Some console games have to be played at 720p due to console hardware limitations? Lol. Silly console gamers.

If they cant make 1080p, its usually been 900p or something close. No instances that im aware of on the new consoles of them being forced to run 720p.

And that's 1080p/30. Not 60fps.

The "new generation" consoles are a joke; they were weaker than low-midrange PCs when they were announced, much less when they actually shipped.

Look up "resolutiongate" for some hilarious anecdotes and info.

[Lathais]

If they cant make 1080p, its usually been 900p or something close. No instances that im aware of on the new consoles of them being forced to run 720p.

And that's 1080p/30. Not 60fps.

The "new generation" consoles are a joke; they were weaker than low-midrange PCs when they were announced, much less when they actually shipped.

Look up "resolutiongate" for some hilarious anecdotes and info.

Well, I bought a PS3 when they first came out, one of the originals with the 80GB HDD(I think it was 80, may have been 60, whichever the largest at release was) that played PS2 games. It died on me after about 18 months. Have not looked at consoles since. There are very few games not ported to PC nowadays anyway and a lot of the time they look better on PC or there are third party add-ons/patches that either make them look better or add neat stuff. The PC experience is just so much better. Glad to see I am not really missing anything. I'll stick to my 1080p/60+.

EDIT: Ok, I did look up some stuff. Apparently, the XBoxOne DOES have some games that are only at 720p. Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Call of Duty: GHOSTS, Metal Gear Solid V:Ground Zeroes, Pro Evolution Soccer 2015. A lot of other games are only 900p, AC4, DA:I, Evolve, Lords of the Fallen, Middle-earth, Shadows of Mordor, Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare, Shadow Warrior, The Evil Within, The Witcher 3, Thief 4....the list goes on. That's pretty shitty. The PS4 does quite a bit better having many more titles at 1080p(probably 30FPS though, blech!) though some titles, like BF4 and Watch Dogs are still only 900p.

Keep your AMD consoles that can't handle 1080p/60FPS.

As always, I challenge anyone to put together and AMD build that will outperform an intel build of equal price in gaming. Show me the build and I'll counter with an intel build. No one ever takes my offer because it's not really possible. Not when a G3258 can hang with an FX-8350, even in games that supposedly require quad-core. Whatever AMD/MoBo combo you throw out there is a intel/MoBo Combo that costs the same or less and perform the same or better. That's just a fact at this stage. In understand there are a lot of you out there that bought AMD before you knew this and feel you have to defend your purchase. It's like when my aunt cut her hair short and it looked ugly so she got my step-mom and all her friends to cut their hair short and look ugly too. You just want to drag others to waste their money and have less performance so you can feel better about it yourself.

[Deleted]

As always, I challenge anyone to put together and AMD build that will outperform an intel build of equal price in gaming. Show me the build and I'll counter with an intel build. No one ever takes my offer because it's not really possible. Not when a G3258 can hang with an FX-8350, even in games that supposedly require quad-core. Whatever AMD/MoBo combo you throw out there is a intel/MoBo Combo that costs the same or less and perform the same or better. That's just a fact at this stage. In understand there are a lot of you out there that bought AMD before you knew this and feel you have to defend your purchase. It's like when my aunt cut her hair short and it looked ugly so she got my step-mom and all her friends to cut their hair short and look ugly too. You just want to drag others to waste their money and have less performance so you can feel better about it yourself.

That's a valid point; that doesn't mean, however, that there simply isn't a viable low-end AMD build that can reasonably compete with the G3258 in other arenas, too. For pure gaming, though, you are likely right. The closest I can come is getting an 840 (which is the same price as the G3258) which still lags slightly in dual-core-optimized games. I would still argue that the 860k is the best current CPU on AMD's side for quad-core processing, and that it should be at least considered, dependent on additional workloads.