| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 128909 | 2013-01-23 00:20:00 | Gaming PC Build | LiMiT (16997) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1324495 | 2013-01-23 05:41:00 | Hmmm, TBH, I wouldnt go with AMD at present, the 7xxx series has issues with drivers, especially with older DX9 games..... forums.anandtech.com And really, I would go with an i3 rather than AMD FX......single thread on intel is at least 25-30% better. No need for an SSD for a budget gaming rig....and for me x64 is a must for modern games so 8GB RAM at least! Hi thank you Im liking the look of that one and it would be able to run the lastest games right? What website did you make it on? Blake :) |
LiMiT (16997) | ||
| 1324496 | 2013-01-23 06:15:00 | It will be able to run the latest game for sure but not at their full quality as only the top cards will do that. | Slankydudl (16687) | ||
| 1324497 | 2013-01-23 08:45:00 | @Chill Would go i3 over 6100 (i think thats the M/N?) but would consider a 8350 over a 3570k. Depends how tight the budget is, might get a cheaper amd mobo combo or something. 7xxx series is fine, 660ti is also good but rather pricey. |
icow (15313) | ||
| 1324498 | 2013-01-23 09:39:00 | 8GB is nice, but when you're on such a tight budget, why not just add an extra 4GB in a few weeks. You're not going to ever hit the 4GB if you close all your browser windows while you fire up a game so it's not a HUGE issue. SSD makes a *massive* difference to load times, I'd happily take one of those any day and a slightly lesser spec GPU personally. Dropping load times on LOTRO for example from 55 seconds down to 3 seconds.Hmm, most of the GTX graphics cards utilise system memory as well as their own these days, the GTX670 and 680 both with 2Gb video ram will also reserve and utilise 2Gb system memory (it may not do this if there is not enough memory, I dont know, but systems I have built utilising these cards have also all had 16Gb ram). My old GTX550Ti also used 1Gb system memory from memory. Anyway, the point is, some of your 4Gb is already gone, Win 7 will also suck up 2Gb easily. So I would suggest 4Gb will go nowhere and to say you're not going to ever hit the 4Gb is way off the mark unless you are playing solitare. Additionally, why sacrifice gaming performance for startup time. I would rather put the money into a better CPU or GPU than put it into a SSD. So you have time for a pee while the game is loading, at least you will have an enjoyable game, and not a frustraiting jerky experience that makes you want to biff the box out the window. To the OP, are you hoping for a monitor out of that $1500, or is that just for the box? My opinion only. |
Iantech (16386) | ||
| 1324499 | 2013-01-23 09:52:00 | If I can get a screen in that budget thats cool. But its not a must | LiMiT (16997) | ||
| 1324500 | 2013-01-23 12:04:00 | Hmm, most of the GTX graphics cards utilise system memory as well as their own these days, the GTX670 and 680 both with 2Gb video ram will also reserve and utilise 2Gb system memory (it may not do this if there is not enough memory, I dont know, but systems I have built utilising these cards have also all had 16Gb ram). My old GTX550Ti also used 1Gb system memory from memory. Anyway, the point is, some of your 4Gb is already gone, Win 7 will also suck up 2Gb easily. So I would suggest 4Gb will go nowhere and to say you're not going to ever hit the 4Gb is way off the mark unless you are playing solitare. The only problem I see would be the GPU sucking up RAM, seems stupid. Otherwise, I stand by 4GB being fine: i.imgur.com i.imgur.com ^^ is my PC, with 14 tabs open (As well as several additional persistent background Chrome tabs for Gtalk etc), Steam, Speccy, TeamSpeak and LOTRO. Also, not forgetting LogMeIn and NOD32. 4.2GB total... So yeah 4GB is certainly ample to begin with, especially considering it's easy for them to upgrade to 8GB later if they notice it being an issue. Point is they get as much "bang for buck" as possible out of that initial investment while still making it easy to upgrade in the future. I'd sooner just close all my Chrome tabs than spend money going to 8GB of RAM from my current 6GB though. |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 1324501 | 2013-01-23 18:29:00 | I base my 8GB reccomendation on an article toms hardware a couple years back about how much RAM was Ideal. www.tomshardware.com The conclusions was 8GB was the sweet spot, I don't Imagine two years later we are using less RAM. And also on the fact that the price difference between a 4 or 8GB dual channel kit if you shop around is quite small, less than the price of a 2nd 4GB kit by quite a bit. As for the SSD discussion, I love them and I have one but in a budget Gaming build it's the first thing I'd drop. Sure fast start up times are great but it adds nothing to the gamng performance once you are playing. Yes you can add 4GB of RAM later - you can also add an SSD when you have the money. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1324502 | 2013-01-23 19:34:00 | I'd rather just not have anti-aliasing up so high, and turn off things like advanced lighting effects in the games I play, and have it start up significantly faster... Just personally :D | Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 1324503 | 2013-01-23 21:03:00 | But even a small but of aa make a game look so much nicer. | Slankydudl (16687) | ||
| 1324504 | 2013-01-23 21:15:00 | deleted | SolMiester (139) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||