Is this a decent build?

[Creaturemagic]

Hey guys, as you may notice I don't frequent the forums often, however I do like the RPS community. So I was going to ask you all a question. Is the build I list below good enough for what I need? I don't want to max BF3 (or even play it), I just want a constant 60 FPS in most newer titles. I play FPS, RTS and Adventure/Action games mostly. So things like AC and Skyrim, things like Tribes Ascend, Gotham City and Planetisde 2, things like GW2, nearly all indie games, Source games, and any RTS games. So just a good gaming machine to run games, but I don't need anything really beefy because I won't be running BF3 or Crysis 2 or (I will be playing it, but not at all maxing it) the Witcher 2.
I have a Laptop with 2.0Ghz and 256mb graphics card. So I have to run new games on configurations and really low settings. So I'm used to low graphics, so while I'll try to use the power of my hardware as much as possible, I don't mind playing things on medium-low. I think it gives an edge in FPS anyway :P

So, whats this build of mine? Well:
Corsair 4GB Ram (2x2GB) - Linky
Radeon HD6850 1GB GPU - Linky
Seagate 500GB 3.5" HDD - Linky
AMD FX-6100 6 core CPU - Linky
Asrock 970 Extreme 3 Mother Board - Linky
CoolMasters Centurion 5 II with 500W PSU - Linky

So, am I on the right track or is this build too weak?
Thanks guys and gals!

[CMaster]

The AMD hexacores are pretty poor in general for gaming (games normally use 1-3 cores, so how fast each core is is much more important than core count). For slightly cheaper you could get an i3-2120 or 2130 from that site, which is a much better gaming CPU, and pair it up with a ~$100 Z68 mobo like this. IF you could stretch to it, the i5 series processors are significantly better still, with the i5-2500k being the most CPU you need for gaming at this point in time.

Also, if you've currently got a laptop, will you not be needing a monitor?

[Odeon]

Gotta agree with CMaster on the CPU and mobo choices. Until AMD comes out with better gaming-leaning CPUs, you're better off all around going with Intel. The only real benefit of using any CPU with more than two or four cores is if you're going to be doing a fair amount of audio and/or video work or for some other very specialized software packages. And if you can swing the 2500k, you'll be providing yourself the option of some very good, very safe overclocking potential as well.

All of your other hardware should definitely be sufficient, but for overall system responsiveness and usability, I always recommend an SSD over and HDD. Just read the first page of this article for some of the reasons why, then watch the video on this page for a real-world comparison of heavy-duty number crunching. The PC and disk image is the same and for both the HDD and SSD portions of the screen except that one portion of the video shows a sequence of program runs using the HDD while the other shows the same sequence using the SSD.

[Creaturemagic]

Thanks guys! I'll pick the Z68M motherBoard with the Intel i3 2130. Also, I have a monitor, keyboard and mouse. So thats all good :)

[The JG Man]

I would advise against the i3 if possible, for the reasons stated above, but also because in terms of future-proofing, I think the dual-core i3 will become a bottle-neck quicker than anything else you have (that can't be otherwise upgraded easily, such as RAM). See if you can go for the i5.

[CMaster]

I don't think the i3 will be that bad, but yes, there's defintley an advantage if it is possible to stretch the budget to the i5-2400.

Oh also, that motherboard I linked is a bad call - it's a microATX form factor, you want a full ATX one really.

[Creaturemagic]

Okay, so I have now put the Intel Core i5 2400 in my cart with a Gigabyte Z68M motherboard.
Now I'm tossing up graphics card. I had the Radeon 6850 in my cart, but how would a Geforce 550 Ti be? Better or worse. And why is the Geforce 440 1GB so cheap? Is it way old or something?
Thanks :)

[renhoelder]

The 6850 is better compared to the 550 Ti, although the Ti is newer. As far as I know even an overclocked 550 isn't as fast as a 6850.

Here's just some raw numbers http://www.hwcompare.com/9711/geforc...adeon-hd-6850/

For instance, Battlefield Bad Company 2 on the same machine will do ~36FPS on a 550 Ti and 43 FPS on the 6850 (@1080p)

And compared to the 550 Ti the 440 is about half as powerful.

http://www.hwcompare.com/9698/geforc...ce-gtx-550-ti/

[CMaster]

I imaigne that a Gigabyte Z68M is also a micro atx board (hence the M suffix). However, Jeremy says not to worry too much, just be aware that there will be less slots etc for expandability.

This article series is always good for getting a rough hold on what graphics cards you want.

[renhoelder]

Am I blind, or didn't I see what kind of monitor you're going to use? It depends on what resolution you're going to play. For instance if you plan to use a monitor has a max resolution of 1600x900 you wouldn't need a GPU quite as powerful as for what you'd need when gaming @1080p(1920x1080)

[Bungle]

8 gigs of RAM only costs a little more than 4 gigs. I'd recommend getting a kit of 8 gigs.

[Creaturemagic]

Am I blind, or didn't I see what kind of monitor you're going to use? It depends on what resolution you're going to play. For instance if you plan to use a monitor has a max resolution of 1600x900 you wouldn't need a GPU quite as powerful as for what you'd need when gaming @1080p(1920x1080)

The recommended resolution is 1680 x 1050 if that helps.