PDA

View Full Version : Getting a new gaming PC



sopabuena
29-03-2013, 01:56 AM
It's that time again, I'm ready to replace my current PC wich gave 4+ years of solid gaming for a new gaming rig.
I have to big concerns: I'm absolutelly ignorant of which are today's standars and, secondly, with the next-gen consoles around the corner I would like a PC that can play most of those games for the comming years.

Looking around the website from the guys I got my last PC from I found the following machine, what do you guys think?

MB: Gigabyte GA-277-DS3H
RAM 8 GB Kingston Hyper X
Intel Core i7-3770
ATI Radeon HD 7870

Of course most of the parts are upgradable, but it's already quite pricey at it is. What would you swap?

Sakkura
29-03-2013, 03:58 AM
I would downgrade the CPU to a Core i5-3570K if possible.
The RAM is fine if it's DDR3-1600 or above, and runs at less than 1.65V.
The graphics card is good, though if they offer an upgrade to a 7870 XT it may be better to take that upgrade. Assuming pricing is sane down there; the 7870 XT shouldn't cost much more.

Make sure you're getting a decent power supply, it's the easiest place for them to cut corners, and it's where it can cause you the most grief.

Grizzly
29-03-2013, 10:22 AM
here you can see what kind of power supply you'd need (http://images10.newegg.com/BizIntell/tool/psucalc/index.html).

db1331
29-03-2013, 02:30 PM
I'm not trying to be that "HURR JUST BUILD ONE" guy that appears in all of these threads, but I'm genuinely surprised by the amount of people on here that buy pre-built machines. It's just a bit strange to me, like a car enthusiast who doesn't like to work on his own vehicles. It would be interesting to know the price of what you are looking to buy, and then see how much the parts sell for individually, just to see how true the old "You can save hundreds by building yourself" line really is. Again, I don't mean to rip you, and I understand that some people just don't have the know how, time, or desire to build. I'm just surprised to see so many of them.

Grizzly
29-03-2013, 03:07 PM
I'm just surprised to see so many of them.

Well, I think the main reason for that is that the people who build their own PCs usually do not need help. They already know from other sources what the best hardware for their budget is, and if they do need help, they usually ask for advice on forums which are dedicated to the subject, such as Tom's Hardware or overclocking.net (or whatever it was called). So you don't find them on this forum.

You actually find very few people on this forum, now that I think of it. It's got like five regulars.

slick_101
30-03-2013, 06:36 PM
I would say don't do it yet. Haswell is round the corner aka June this year and they're going to LGA 1150 which means LGA 1155 is a dead socket.

Sakkura
30-03-2013, 07:46 PM
On the other hand, Haswell will only barely be a bigger upgrade than Ivy Bridge was.

Grizzly
30-03-2013, 09:34 PM
I would say don't do it yet. Haswell is round the corner aka June this year and they're going to LGA 1150 which means LGA 1155 is a dead socket.

By the time you need to upgrade your haswell, LGA 1150 will most likely be a dead socket as well. Look at the sandy bridge chips: They are almost identical to ivy bridge performance wise, and a i5-2500K is nowhere near outdated.

sopabuena
31-03-2013, 12:20 AM
Well I did I use to be into building my own PCs back in the time.
The thing is that I'm completely clueless about today's stadards. And time is an important factor, I'm on my second year of medical residence and I just want to come home and be able to play a game I want.

Thanks for all the replies.

Also I've never had an ATI card before, just nVidia, what would be the equivalent nVidia card?

Sakkura
31-03-2013, 01:45 AM
The 7870 is slightly faster than the Geforce GTX 660 (on average, it varies from game to game).

fohria
12-04-2013, 12:31 AM
I would suggest downgrading that processor to i5-3570k (or even lower) and put more money into the graphics card.

Before New Years, I still used a Core2Duo E6600. It was six years old. Or something like that. It was paired with a Geforce GTX 460. Now, granted, I'm only playing in 1680x1050 but that rig could play anything i threw at it. Mostly. With the latest shooters coming out these past six months, when lots of things happened on the screen, the CPU just couldn't handle it.

So shortly after New Years, I bought an i3570k. I'm a bit upset about not being able to play Crysis 3 at the absolute maxed out settings without getting below 30 fps, but I think the ol' GTX 460 deserves some credit. It is old by now, like two years or something, and it can't quite handle it no more. I was thinking of getting a monitor with higher resolution anyway. Why not a new graphics card as well? yay!

Long story short: You can buy an i3 and still have to replace the graphics card before the CPU. Put more money into graphics.

L_No
12-04-2013, 10:47 AM
Long story short: You can buy an i3 and still have to replace the graphics card before the CPU. Put more money into graphics.

I'd agree with fohria, the CPU usually doesn't seem to be the bottleneck (unless it's really old or slow).

MeltdownInteractiveMedia
17-04-2013, 08:37 PM
Get an SSD, will change your life.

Vicious
18-04-2013, 01:34 AM
I decided on an i5-3550, the premium for the 3570k at the time didn't seem worth it.

Also, the Newegg PSU calculator seems way - it's suggesting 483w for an i5 3550, 8gb ram, dvd-rw, 7870 and 3 HDDs.

Anandtech tested three different 7870's (stock and max overclock) with an overclocked i7 3960x, 16gb RAM, a high end SLI mobo and an SSD and even overclocked, the total system power consumption didn't break 350w.

People tend to overspend and overbuy on PSU's, unless you're running SLI/CF you're unlikely to need more than 450w.

Vicious
18-04-2013, 03:01 AM
Speaking of, I just installed a new PSU, a third HDD and a DVD-RW (previously running an OCZ 450w modstream PSU, an SSD, a 2TB HD and no optical drive).

Idle @ desktop with 0% hdd/cpu usage with OCZ 450w PSU: 62.9w
Furmark burn in test: 230w

Idle @ desktop with 0%hdd/cpu, extra HDD and DVD-RW with Antec EA Platinum certified 450w PSU: 51w
Furmark burn in test: 197w

mashakos
18-04-2013, 03:58 PM
I decided on an i5-3550, the premium for the 3570k at the time didn't seem worth it.

Also, the Newegg PSU calculator seems way - it's suggesting 483w for an i5 3550, 8gb ram, dvd-rw, 7870 and 3 HDDs.

Anandtech tested three different 7870's (stock and max overclock) with an overclocked i7 3960x, 16gb RAM, a high end SLI mobo and an SSD and even overclocked, the total system power consumption didn't break 350w. So that 350w might not be the absolute limit, the CPU could push it to 400w or 450w if taxed hard enough.

People tend to overspend and overbuy on PSU's, unless you're running SLI/CF you're unlikely to need more than 450w.
The most expensive PSU's out there have a guaranteed 85% efficiency, as in the most expensive 450w PSU will provide a stable 382.5W of power, after that it will either fry your motherboard or just implode.

FYI: overclocked cpu's don't draw power at a sustained rate, they pull below 50w on idle but can suck in up to 200w for short bursts on load.
From experience, I don't go below an 80w PSU if I am planning to serious overclock the PC. The 800w PSU is not for the wattage but rather the extra cooling and redudancy built in due to the higher cost - cheaper PSU's have none of that and with overclocking raising ambient temps inside the case it's better to be safe than sorry.

Sakkura
18-04-2013, 04:18 PM
The most expensive PSU's out there have a guaranteed 85% efficiency, as in the most expensive 450w PSU will provide a stable 382.5W of power, after that it will either fry your motherboard or just implode.
That's not how it works.

A 450W power supply running at 85% efficiency - which is NOT the guaranteed efficiency of the most expensive PSUs - will provide up to 450W sustained power to the components (plus typically another 10-15%, but that's beyond what you're promised), while drawing ~529W from the socket. PSUs are rated by the power they deliver to components, not the power they draw from the wall.

The highest-rated PSUs are the ones that are 80+ Titanium certified. This means they're at least 90% efficient at loads ranging from 10% to 100%.

Overloading a PSU will not make it fry your motherboard or implode, unless it's a bad power supply. Good ones will simply shut down once they sense that the current (or power) drawn is too high.

Using a higher-wattage PSU means efficiency will be LOWER, which isn't going to help you at all when overclocking or when trying to make a quiet system. Plus a poor 800W PSU will often fall short of what a quality 500W PSU can deliver. It is important not to focus blindly on wattage; quality is much more important.

mashakos
18-04-2013, 04:33 PM
That's not how it works.

A 450W power supply running at 85% efficiency - which is NOT the guaranteed efficiency of the most expensive PSUs - will provide up to 450W sustained power to the components (plus typically another 10-15%, but that's beyond what you're promised), while drawing ~529W from the socket.
you just flipped the numbers around. While it will draw about 529W from the socket, it will be pushing highly unregulated 450w to your components. Guess what happens when irregular voltage goes to your motherboard and components? Voltage spikes and hence, frying.

This happened to me before, with an Enermax 500w.

Sakkura
18-04-2013, 04:41 PM
you just flipped the numbers around. While it will draw about 529W from the socket, it will be pushing highly unregulated 450w to your components. Guess what happens when irregular voltage goes to your motherboard and components? Voltage spikes and hence, frying.

This happened to me before, with an Enermax 500w.
Yes, I flipped the numbers to the CORRECT orientation. You had it backwards. A PSU rated for 450W is rated to provide 450W to the components. So it won't go out of spec unless it's a crappy PSU. Most quality PSUs will even go at least 10% over their spec while still providing clean power to components (within the ATX specification limits).

mashakos
18-04-2013, 05:09 PM
Yes, I flipped the numbers to the CORRECT orientation. You had it backwards. A PSU rated for 450W is rated to provide 450W to the components. So it won't go out of spec unless it's a crappy PSU. Most quality PSUs will even go at least 10% over their spec while still providing clean power to components (within the ATX specification limits).

quick question: have you done any serious overclocking - above 4.0GHz, 4.5Ghz - on an intel dual core or quad core in the past 6 years?

Sakkura
18-04-2013, 05:25 PM
quick question: have you done any serious overclocking - above 4.0GHz, 4.5Ghz - on an intel dual core or quad core in the past 6 years?
Yes. I've also overclocked a few graphics cards. Overclocking graphics cards (typically) adds more to overall power consumption than overclocking CPUs, and is also more likely to stress a PSU with a poor power distribution.

Vicious
18-04-2013, 05:27 PM
Sorry mashakos, in this case Sakkura and I are correct. A PSU rating is what it's rated to DELIVER, not consume. As such, it's guaranteed to deliver at least 450w to the internal components, while consuming 450w +~8%

I'm also not sure where 'unregulated' power comes from, all PC PSUs are regulated. As well, only ridiculously heavily overclocked i7 920's ever drew near 200w peak, the new LGA1155 are much more efficient - even when running at 4.8ghz.

mashakos
18-04-2013, 05:31 PM
Yes. I've also overclocked a few graphics cards. Overclocking graphics cards (typically) adds more to overall power consumption than overclocking CPUs, and is also more likely to stress a PSU with a poor power distribution.
so it's a no then.

mashakos
18-04-2013, 05:34 PM
I'm also not sure where 'unregulated' power comes from, all PC PSUs are regulated. As well, only ridiculously heavily overclocked i7 920's ever drew near 200w peak, the new LGA1155 are much more efficient - even when running at 4.8ghz.

oh well, here's LMGTFY:
https://www.google.ae/search?q=psu+voltage+regulation+dangers&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=KXY&hl=en&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&sclient=psy-ab&q=bit-tech+psu+voltage+stability+explained&oq=bit-tech+psu+voltage+stability+explained&gs_l=serp.3...2768.4333.3.4750.9.9.0.0.0.0.410.360 0.3-4j5.9.0...0.0...1c.1.9.psy-ab.LYNCdvLK_wI&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45373924,d.bmk&fp=5e2f9d156cef3961&biw=1920&bih=1098

Vicious
18-04-2013, 05:35 PM
Voltage stability /=/ unregulated voltage. I see you're doing your usual stunt of posting half assed information and then completely ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

Sakkura
18-04-2013, 05:37 PM
so it's a no then.
Tell that to my E7200. I didn't measure power consumption myself, but I've seen articles where it gets a system power consumption of less than 200W in Prime95 when overclocked. There are graphics cards that draw more than that at stock.

Moraven
18-04-2013, 07:34 PM
I think 2 PCs ago I skipped on upgrading my PSU, since it was right at the ceiling and to save on upgrading. It lasted 2 years until it died probably to the stress of the power hungry GPU.

Hard to think as we advance in computing power a lot of work is done in staying at the same power consumption or less.
It does not hurt to pay the extra $10-$20 to be over some to be on the safe side.

spacein_vader
18-04-2013, 08:37 PM
oh well, here's LMGTFY:
https://www.google.ae/search?q=psu+voltage+regulation+dangers&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=KXY&hl=en&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&sclient=psy-ab&q=bit-tech+psu+voltage+stability+explained&oq=bit-tech+psu+voltage+stability+explained&gs_l=serp.3...2768.4333.3.4750.9.9.0.0.0.0.410.360 0.3-4j5.9.0...0.0...1c.1.9.psy-ab.LYNCdvLK_wI&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45373924,d.bmk&fp=5e2f9d156cef3961&biw=1920&bih=1098

I'd recommend some of the really depth PSU reviews at Silent PC Review. SPCR takes them to pieces & finds the vendor and type of the caps etc as well as the quality of the soldering & regulating circuitry. Focused mainly on efficiency (as their aim is silence,) it really goes into depth and I definitely concur that a good 500W PSU is enough for any single GPU system using a modern desktop Intel or AMD CPU.*

Their primer article on the basics of how PSU's work is here. http://www.silentpcreview.com/article28-page1.html


*Unless you're doing something bizarre like 14 HDDs in a RAID array.

mashakos
18-04-2013, 08:44 PM
Tell that to my E7200. I didn't measure power consumption myself, but I've seen articles where it gets a system power consumption of less than 200W in Prime95 when overclocked. There are graphics cards that draw more than that at stock.

Never seen a gpu overclock provide any real performance gains, the best attempt I've personally seen (a complicated process involving solder irons) netted a total gain of none to a 10fps increase in some games. If you didn't overclock your E7200 to above 4GHz for extended use it doesn't really count. Those tiny 500mhz overclocks are automatically achieved on default "safe" motherboard profiles nowadays.


Voltage stability /=/ unregulated voltage. I see you're doing your usual stunt of posting half assed information and then completely ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

it was just one of those terms I tend to mix up when I talk about something I haven't researched heavily in years. Of course, technically speaking, all power from a PSU is regulated. The best way to ensure voltage stability is to get a PSU with enough headroom (and enough individual rails for gpu,cpu and remaining components) to ensure that you don't end up testing it's efficiency in a way that might lead in damaged hardware.

I'm especially familiar with the results of instability since I overclock all my PCs, if you aren't seriously overclocking you can ignore this.

Vicious
18-04-2013, 08:54 PM
And 450w is plenty of headroom for a system with a maximum power drain of 300w, even under full load.

Let's remember, you stated that a 450w will only provide 385w, and you stated that an 800w PSU isn't for extra power, it's for extra cooling(?, both my 450w PSUs had 120mm fans) and redundancy, and then somehow linked higher power PSU to having higher quality components somehow.

Again, you do this all the time. You give out poor and misguided information, and when challenged on it, go off on random tangents.

Sakkura
18-04-2013, 08:57 PM
Never seen a gpu overclock provide any real performance gains, the best attempt I've personally seen (a complicated process involving solder irons) netted a total gain of none to a 10fps increase in some games. If you didn't overclock your E7200 to above 4GHz for extended use it doesn't really count. Those tiny 500mhz overclocks are automatically achieved on default "safe" motherboard profiles nowadays.



it was just one of those terms I tend to mix up when I talk about something I haven't researched heavily in years. Of course, technically speaking, all power from a PSU is regulated. The best way to ensure voltage stability is to get a PSU with enough headroom (and enough individual rails for gpu,cpu and remaining components) to ensure that you don't end up testing it's efficiency in a way that might lead in damaged hardware.

I'm especially familiar with the results of instability since I overclock all my PCs, if you aren't seriously overclocking you can ignore this.
GPU overclocks are just as good as CPU overclocks, or in a world of mainly GPU-limited games actually better.
What's your obsession with how high I've overclocked my CPUs, and why do you keep moving the goalposts? 4 GHz is already more than a 50% overclock, which is far beyond what's feasible with current-gen CPUs.

The best way to ensure stable voltages - both in terms of regulation and in terms of ripple - is not to get a PSU with excessive headroom, but to get one with high-quality components. A 500W PSU with good capacitors etc. is much better than an 800W PSU with Su'scon crapacitors. The number of individual (12V) rails is not that important, since each component doesn't need a separate rail. The rail(s) just need to provide ample amperage for what they're going to supply.

Boris
19-04-2013, 08:06 AM
oh well, here's LMGTFY:
https://www.google.ae/search?q=psu+voltage+regulation+dangers&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=KXY&hl=en&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&sclient=psy-ab&q=bit-tech+psu+voltage+stability+explained&oq=bit-tech+psu+voltage+stability+explained&gs_l=serp.3...2768.4333.3.4750.9.9.0.0.0.0.410.360 0.3-4j5.9.0...0.0...1c.1.9.psy-ab.LYNCdvLK_wI&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45373924,d.bmk&fp=5e2f9d156cef3961&biw=1920&bih=1098

I like how you're completely condescending while also being wrong about the term you're using.

Konstantinov
20-04-2013, 11:16 AM
GPU overclocks are just as good as CPU overclocks, or in a world of mainly GPU-limited games actually better.
What's your obsession with how high I've overclocked my CPUs, and why do you keep moving the goalposts? 4 GHz is already more than a 50% overclock, which is far beyond what's feasible with current-gen CPUs.

The best way to ensure stable voltages - both in terms of regulation and in terms of ripple - is not to get a PSU with excessive headroom, but to get one with high-quality components. A 500W PSU with good capacitors etc. is much better than an 800W PSU with Su'scon crapacitors. The number of individual (12V) rails is not that important, since each component doesn't need a separate rail. The rail(s) just need to provide ample amperage for what they're going to supply.

Without stoking this thread (I'm the new guy and I'd rather not make enemies at the moment), I agree with the need for quality over quantity. A high quality 600watt power supply will do much more justice than a "cruddy" (subpar capacitors, etc.) 850watt power supply any and every day of the week.

Mctittles
23-04-2013, 06:27 AM
I think that newegg power supply calculator is a little exaggerated (probably because they want to sell more). Here is one that's a little more accurate:
http://extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp

Power supplies have to be the most annoying component to buy for a PC. So many false values listed. Pretty much though if your pc doesn't shut down it's enough power. I'm running a brand new system right now on a 300W supply and it's doing fine.

sabrage
23-04-2013, 08:28 AM
I'd recommend some of the really depth PSU reviews at Silent PC Review. SPCR takes them to pieces & finds the vendor and type of the caps etc as well as the quality of the soldering & regulating circuitry. Focused mainly on efficiency (as their aim is silence,) it really goes into depth and I definitely concur that a good 500W PSU is enough for any single GPU system using a modern desktop Intel or AMD CPU.*

Their primer article on the basics of how PSU's work is here. http://www.silentpcreview.com/article28-page1.html


*Unless you're doing something bizarre like 14 HDDs in a RAID array.
This site is beautiful, and it's going to be the blueprint for my next build. Whenever that may be.

spacein_vader
24-04-2013, 09:09 PM
This site is beautiful, and it's going to be the blueprint for my next build. Whenever that may be.
It and its forums have been helping me spec every build I've made for years. Very well written and tonnes of depth on the subjects they cover.

mickygor
03-11-2013, 03:35 PM
It's a reasonable PC, but personally I wouldn't pay 665 for it because the first thing I'd do is replace both the GPU and the CPU. There's no point paying for the FX-4300 when the FX-6300 is all but the same price. I've also heard that a 7850 doesn't really have the grunt for a multi-monitor setup, but then that's not exactly a necessity for gaming.

Also, rather than spamming threads with this message, reach the post requirement with on topic replies (there's a good list here (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/showthread.php?20-Some-Forum-Feedback&p=369705&viewfull=1#post369705) with threads to post in) and post a thread for yourself.

Sakkura
03-11-2013, 04:04 PM
Huh? Did someone delete their post?

mickygor
03-11-2013, 09:55 PM
Or had their post deleted, yea.