Get an i3- 2100 3.1 Ghz for about £90, a Gigabyte Z68AP-D3 for about £70 and some DDR3 (4G about £20).
If you can save up a bit for an i5 3570K (unlocked so you can rinse it) and an Asus Maximus V Gene you won't regret it
Ditch AMD, it's false economy in the long run.
Pretty weird hardware choice there. No reason to go Z68 with a Core i3, at least when SLI/Crossfire isn't on the table.
And the Asus Maximus V Gene is overpriced.
You're right. I'll have a quick loo at amazon.co.uk:Originally Posted by TechnicalBen
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B007OCJWTM/ - i3 3220, £92
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B008F65MO0/ - ASRock H77M, £65
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00A3VOA3O/ - Corsair 2x4 GB, £37
So £194 altogether (I think they include VAT). Pricier, indeed! A different shop might sell that (or w/ equiv RAM) for a lower price but I'm not sure.
If I was putting together the absolute cheapest-possible 720p or lower-resolution gaming/general use PC, I'd use an AMD APU. But once one's out of rock-bottom budgets (or moves into 1080p or higher resolutions) Intel with a discrete GPU becomes the better choice. Now, if you're not the average user and you do a bunch of work in multithreaded applications, AMD's FX-4300 or 6300 might suit you better at this price range.
Last edited by Jambe; 31-03-2013 at 08:57 PM.
You could save a few pounds with an Asrock B75 Pro3. And I'd recommend RAM that runs at 1.5V instead of 1.65V, like this Patriot kit.
Sakkura's Patriot kit is a better choice than what I linked (derp, didn't pay attention to voltage in my hasty search!). The Kingston kit would probably do 1600 at 1.5 V and certainly 1333, but why bother if a 1600mhz 1.5 V-rated kit is just £39?
The motherboard's good as long as your case can support an ATX board (the OP's linked board is mATX but he hasn't stated his case's form factor).
/edit: That Patriot kit is actually rated for 1866 mHz. It may be unstable at that speed at default timings but you can just set it to 1600 and it'll be fine (if your board doesn't do that automatically).
Last edited by Jambe; 01-04-2013 at 08:40 PM.
How can something get rated for a certain speed when it is not stable at that speed? That seems rather counter-intiutive./edit: That Patriot kit is actually rated for 1866 mHz. It may be unstable at that speed at default timings but you can just set it to 1600 and it'll be fine (if your board doesn't do that automatically).
I think he originally read it as DDR3-1600 CL9. It's actually a DDR3-1866 CL9 kit, but not CL9 in the sense that most DDR3-1600 kits are (9-9-9-24). Its rated timings at 1866 are 9-10-9-27, so 9-9-9-24 would be asking for more than it's rated for.
Nah, it's not even that. It's just that my experience with cheaper high-speed DIMMs leads me to be a bit wary of them. There's even a person on the Amazon page mentioning he had to set his down to 1600. Personally, if I got a pair (at that price) and they wouldn't work at the rated 1866, I wouldn't return them even though RAM vendors have pretty nice replacement programs. The difference in speed is negligible and unnoticeable to the vast majority of users; not worth the bother to me.
/edit: couple more people reporting the same thing at the kit's Newegg page, and it's the same for pretty much all such kits, especially the cheaper ones. Just a slower module slipping through the binning process or some emergent electrical issue or whatever. Although I imagine some percentage of those just don't know how to use their motherboards.
Last edited by Jambe; 07-04-2013 at 01:45 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
