Marest's Sample Builds

[noteworthynerd]

I assumed the main reason was the fact that they're so recyclable, but a lot of people still have IDE CDROMS... As for USB drives, while that is true, it can be a hassle, especially if you've never done it before and don't have a PC to use to put stuff onto the USB.

[Deleted]

I venture as far as claiming a very high % of people on this forum or people in general have an optical drive in their PC. Optical drives just don't have any impact on system performance and you generally just wanna buy the cheapest you can find $20ish.

[DeltrusDisc]

I venture as far as claiming a very high % of people on this forum or people in general have an optical drive in their PC. Optical drives just don't have any impact on system performance and you generally just wanna buy the cheapest you can find $20ish.

Well, they are by far the slowest part of your computer usually, installing a game onto your SSD via optical drive is still going to be slow because of the slow read of the optical drive. Download speeds don't help to fix this issue typically.

[noteworthynerd]

I know, but like I said in my first post, I often quote Marest's builds (with a few tweaks) and almost always forget to include a CD-Rom. It isn't a big deal, I was just wondering if it was something that could be added when Marest gets the time. =P

[Cyanotical]

I might do that Xuvial (perhaps as a separate thread even to get some proper feedback). I do have a ton of stuff on my to-do list and with a new job to get into I might just push the peripherals list a bit. It will get done though... eventually, as it is something I believe people using this thread could benefit from as there's a lot of mediocre and horribly priced gaming merchandise and computer peripherals out there.

it would have to be a heavily watched thread, most of us know that the N*** mouse by R*** company is overpriced and mediocre quality, but it might bring that wrath of a thousand koolaide drinkers into the thread to scream that it is number one, or that they have "never had a problem" and therefore a "cons" list on that item should not exist

i really like the idea of a peripheral thread, but i dont want to see it get torn apart by fanboyism

[KeirAdish]

Alright, regarding the Gaming 900 and the Gaming 1000 builds...

What will the approx difference in performance be, and is the difference large enough to make it worth it to spend the extra couple hundred for the 1000 over the 900?

I already have an HDD and looking at the prices I'm lookin at about 800 or 1k...
so I could be spending that extra money on the two new monitors I plan on getting with it to go with my current one monitor...
that is assuming the difference isn't a huge gap...

I will be playing things like WoW, SWTOR, LoL, LFD2, and quite a few other games...

and then one thing I would like to know it how each would run if say I had WoW on one screen (preferably on high or close to high settings)
LFD2 on another again preferably on higher settings
and Skype, Vent, and internet on the other screen...
Basically running multiple things at once...

[Deleted]

If you have the cash for the 1000 build go for it. It is most definitely worth it.

The 1000 build (compared to the 900) offers:
- Better upgrade path with Z68 and PCI-E 3.0.
- Better GPU performance with about 15-20% (stock clocks). Compare 6950 with 6970.
- It also natively contains a heatsink which allows for higher overclocks (lower temperatures).

If you don't need the HDD, swap it out for a SSD. The Corsair Force GT 128GB is currently $150 after MIR on Newegg.

[Lindseysig]

I have a question about the 400 build, how well would that run Wow on mid setting and would it run other games at mid settings too say star wars? if not what changes would you need to make to that build to get it to play those games?

thanks

[Xuvial]

I have a question about the 400 build, how well would that run Wow on mid setting and would it run other games at mid settings too say star wars? if not what changes would you need to make to that build to get it to play those games?

thanks

It would so *alright*, the GPU is definitely up to the task of WoW...the CPU not so much, your FPS will get extremely choppy under stressful situations like 25mans or crowded cities. Grab an i3 2100 + H67 motherboard (like what the 550 build has done) to get a solid setup for WoW and most other games.

[Deleted]

Well, at least jump up to the 450 build as WoW tends to benefit hugely from a better/faster CPU. The improvement over the G530 will most definitely make a difference in WoW. The G840 is essentially a lower clocked i3 2100 without HT (i.e. it will do very well in WoW). And if you have a budget of ~400, it isn't impossible to stretch it another ~$50, especially if you can hunt down some nice deals.

[Lindseysig]

tyvm for the info

[sandmoth12]

There's a problem with the $400 and $450 builds. You don't need that powerful a GPU for those builds unless you plan to upgrade processors later. The 6770 will be bottle necked very easily by the celeron and pentium. I suggest GT 430 and Radeon 6570 for the celeron build and the GT 440 and Radeon 6670 for the pentium build. This should lower the price even more with nearly the same graphic performance for those 2 processors.

But if you plan to upgrade your CPU's later I say pay the extra for the beefy video card now and get a core i3 later.

[Xuvial]

You can't just say "X will be bottlenecked by Y" in such generic terms, it completely depends on what you're doing. The graphic performance will not be the same in the majority of games, try playing e.g. Crysis and you will see a solid difference between 6570 and 6770. The original Crysis only demands a dual core CPU, the rest falls completely on the GPU - which brings us back to the whole "it depends what you're doing" thing.

There is a note at the top saying that those builds are not rule-of-thumb builds, they're guideline builds - by far the best thing to do is mix and match according to your needs. I.e. if you're smart enough to say "hey this poses a bottleneck for what I do!" then you most likely don't need those guideline builds to help you

[Deleted]

Adding to what Xuvial said:

If your intentions are to play World of Warcraft, the i3 2100 is a solid choice and if you can fit it in your budget together with an alright GPU that's the route to go - for WoW. However, for most other games the better and faster CPU will do very little compared to the increase in GPU power. The CPU can't punch out more frames; it simply has a certain amount of calculations, X, that it needs to do in a certain amount of time, Y.

Also, looking over the recommended requirements for some of the modern games on the market it becomes apparent that the G840 and the G530 will handle most modern games just fine. Besides, the G840 is essentially a lower clocked i3 2100 without the hyperthreading. There really isn't that much separating these two processors (as with the 2500 and 2600). Unfortunately I haven't been able to find any reliable benchmarks on these two CPUs, but on paper they seem very promising considering the price; for ~$50 the Celeron G530 offers a dual core Sandy Bridge CPU at 2.4GHz - that's hard to beat. I'm also fairly certain that people buying a gaming rig for ~$400 knows it wont perform flawlessly in all titles.

And... why are you even hinting at the GT 430 and the 6570? These are cards computer-stores tries to lure you to buy "for gaming". In short: they are awful. The 440 is a step in the right direction but honestly, for someone buying brand new today, the GTS 450 is the lowest you should ever go - and even that is debatable.

[sandmoth12]

Adding to what Xuvial said:

If your intentions are to play World of Warcraft, the i3 2100 is a solid choice and if you can fit it in your budget together with an alright GPU that's the route to go - for WoW. However, for most other games the better and faster CPU will do very little compared to the increase in GPU power. The CPU can't punch out more frames; it simply has a certain amount of calculations, X, that it needs to do in a certain amount of time, Y.

Also, looking over the recommended requirements for some of the modern games on the market it becomes apparent that the G840 and the G530 will handle most modern games just fine. Besides, the G840 is essentially a lower clocked i3 2100 without the hyperthreading. There really isn't that much separating these two processors (as with the 2500 and 2600). Unfortunately I haven't been able to find any reliable benchmarks on these two CPUs, but on paper they seem very promising considering the price; for ~$50 the Celeron G530 offers a dual core Sandy Bridge CPU at 2.4GHz - that's hard to beat. I'm also fairly certain that people buying a gaming rig for ~$400 knows it wont perform flawlessly in all titles.

And... why are you even hinting at the GT 430 and the 6570? These are cards computer-stores tries to lure you to buy "for gaming". In short: they are awful. The 440 is a step in the right direction but honestly, for someone buying brand new today, the GTS 450 is the lowest you should ever go - and even that is debatable.

Yeah Marest you and Xuvial are correct I should have stated it depends on what your doing when you select a video card. So if your gonna play very high detail high graphic game stick with a good GPU and a fair CPU. Alternatively, if you are playing wow and swtor I would stick with a less powerful GPU and a stronger CPU.

However, I do disagree with you on the GT 430 and Radeon 6570. Those cards are fine and plenty capable of bottle necking the celeron in wow. In fact I would go far enough to say the G530 + GT 430 combo is just as powerful as AMD's highest APU setup (without a crossfire video card) and I know that runs wow fine on good settings.


/extends hand to shake in agreeance

EDIT: Personally I just use my xbox for graphic intense games like battlefield, crisis and dirt.

[Gunz]

Why would you buy a graphics card with the same performance as your integrated graphics on the CPU.

[sandmoth12]

Why would you buy a graphics card with the same performance as your integrated graphics on the CPU.

Because that's a fabricated lie. The GT 430 is far superior to Intel intergrated HD 2000 graphics for gaming.

[jmacphee9]

The GT 430 is far superior to Intel intergrated HD 2000 graphics for gaming.

thats a lie....

[sandmoth12]

thats a lie....

Here read these benchmarks and stop feeding peoples heads full of crap that you need a overpriced graphics card to have fun in a game.

http://www.anandtech.com/print/4263

[DeltrusDisc]

thats a lie....

.... Really? Integrated graphics, especially Intel integrated graphics, have never been very good, as far as I know. The GT430 is a dedicated graphics card and it's pretty apparent based on benchmarks it far exceeds the performance of the Intel HD 2000 graphics...