Good PC Builds

gpu technology performance is getting more curved and yet...cpu performance is disapoinment. like how many games out there cpu heavy? its like sandy bridge is pretty much viable even after 5 years of release.
 
Hassknecht said:
I had an HD7850 before, the game actually ran ok, but since it only had 1GB VRAM it crashed all the time and didn't load half the textures because Bethesda is good at optimisation like that.
Decided to get a new one because why the hell not.
Click to expand...
I didn't have crashing issues... but I also didn't play much before I got fed up and bought the new one. The 730 was 2GB so no problems there, it's just the 64bit architecture and low clock speeds that killed it. The 960 is a 4GB and 128bit, so that handles things rather better.
 
I would be tempted to wait until the new set of GPU's is released. That way you can see if the performance is improved enough to be worth it and if not then the previous generation cards will likely be cheaper, allowing you to spend more in other areas.
 
Irwin John Finster said:
I would be tempted to wait until the new set of GPU's is released. That way you can see if the performance is improved enough to be worth it and if not then the previous generation cards will likely be cheaper, allowing you to spend more in other areas.
Click to expand...
polaris is gonna release on end of this month, tho it aims for mid-tier gaming/higher performance to price.
 
eissa said:
gpu technology performance is getting more curved and yet...cpu performance is disapoinment. like how many games out there cpu heavy? its like sandy bridge is pretty much viable even after 5 years of release.
Click to expand...

I guess it's because creating a game that puts a great load on cpu is difficult as that entails complex rules, physics and interactions. Also the more complex your game is, the more potential for bugs. I'm trying to think of games that are radically different in any area other than graphics from the games in the 90', and i can't really think of one.
 
Eh, I guess I will wait with my new PC till the new GPUs come out. If the price isn't to high, I might get one of those or at the very least the other ones will be cheaper. Either way I sure can wait 1 or 2 more months.
 
Crni Vuk said:
Eh, I guess I will wait with my new PC till the new GPUs come out. If the price isn't to high, I might get one of those or at the very least the other ones will be cheaper. Either way I sure can wait 1 or 2 more months.
Click to expand...

In the meantime you can plan out the best bang for the buck build (i'd advise to build it yourself, as you can save a lot of money and it's pretty fun too).
 
Irwin John Finster said:
I would be tempted to wait until the new set of GPU's is released. That way you can see if the performance is improved enough to be worth it and if not then the previous generation cards will likely be cheaper, allowing you to spend more in other areas.
Click to expand...
If? No if about it, the new nVidia high end card has something utterly insane like 4096bit architecture. The current Titan cards iirc are something like 386bit. The jump in performance will be equally crazy lol
 
There are important things to decide before you go designing and building a gaming pc, mostly in terms of your expectations:

What kind of games do you intend to play?

Do you want to do 1080, or 4k res? VR?

Do you want to simultaneously do other things with it while gaming, like stream or record?

Do you want good smooth performance with reasonable or medium/high settings, or the highest possible video settings and good performance?

If you are building it yourself, and shooting for nice middle ground visual settings, and reasonable resolution like 1080 in every game, you will want something like a 960/970 geforce card and a good i5 cpu but you won't need to buy the very best ones.

If you have any expectations above that, shoot for an i7 4790k or better, and a higher end 900-1000 series geforce card. Instead of 8 gigs of budget ram, throw in 16gb and get something with higher clock speeds like 1600+mhz from a well known manufacturer like corsair.

If you already have peripherals and monitor, you can expect to build a good i7 powered 1080p rig that runs everything pretty well for around 1000-1500 usd depending on your OS cost, video card and if you used SSDs. For those that can't afford that for a desktop, i5 processors and something like the gtx 770 (or a 960) will suffice for a while, at least until game developers start upping the ante on vid card requirements.
 
whirlingdervish said:
If you are building it yourself, and shooting for nice middle ground visual settings, and reasonable resolution like 1080 in every game, you will want something like a 960/970 geforce card and a good i5 cpu but you won't need to buy the very best ones.
Click to expand...

I think the maxwell cards are terrible choices looking ahead to directx 12/vulkan gaming, as they were designed and optimized to be very efficient in directx 11. If buying an old card now, i think the r9 380 would be a better choice (considering its price/performance ratio), but the most reasonable choice is to wait for the new gpus from nvidia and amd.
 
There is no 'if you used SSDs'. EVERY rig should have an SSD now, they're well within range of basically everyone at this point, and the performance gains from a fast one of those outdoes literally any other upgrade you could make. SSDs really are that much of a game changer.
 
AskWazzup said:
In the meantime you can plan out the best bang for the buck build (i'd advise to build it yourself, as you can save a lot of money and it's pretty fun too).
Click to expand...
That's the idea of it anyway, I will use various websitesto for building a PC, and see where I can get the cheapest price for the individual parts. That's how I build my last PC as well some 10 years ago - yeah ... it is really about time that I update that fucker!
I am going to spend something between 1000 and 1400 euros on it. However, it's really the uper limit. But I am not sure if I should get the I5 or the I7 as CPU. However, I am going for 16g or Ram and SSD. I am fucked up of this slow computers ...
 
Crni Vuk said:
I am going to spend something between 1000 and 1400 euros on it. However, it's really the uper limit. But I am not sure if I should get the I5 or the I7 as CPU. However, I am going for 16g or Ram and SSD. I am fucked up of this slow computers ...
Click to expand...

The i7 is a better long term investment as it has multihreading (it better utilizes the workload of the cpu cores) and that may pay dividents as more and more software is taking advantage of more threads.
 
true, since the SSDs dropped well below about 1usd/gig it is really hard to justify not getting one for the OS at least.

a second one to handle higher resource using games makes a nice difference in loading times and seems to help with texture pop-in and such. I have one just for my newer steam library games and a spinning drive for the older/simpler games.

I saw a samsung evo 850 500gb on amazon the other day for about 150usd. That's just phenomenal compared to what I paid for mine a little while back.
 
AskWazzup said:
The i7 is a better long term investment as it has multihreading (it better utilizes the workload of the cpu cores) and that may pay dividents as more and more software is taking advantage of more threads.
Click to expand...
Mhmm, yeah that's my thought as well, a better long term investment, it might be easier to update a GPU, if you really have to, instead of buying a new CPU. And you really don't want the CPU to be your bottle neck either. Also, changing a CPU, is a shit town of work :/ always hated!
I will probably go for the I7.
 
AskWazzup said:
I guess it's because creating a game that puts a great load on cpu is difficult as that entails complex rules, physics and interactions. Also the more complex your game is, the more potential for bugs. I'm trying to think of games that are radically different in any area other than graphics from the games in the 90', and i can't really think of one.
Click to expand...
Ashes of Singularity
 
Is this okay to ask here? What do you guys do with your PC case fans? Do you keep at say 70% or is there something else you do? Just installed a new fan and fan controller but I need some help since I'm not good with the fan stuffs.
 
some general fan stuff:

If you are not having any cooling issues I would set speed controlled case fans to whatever level you find reasonable in terms of sound output. You will still get a cooling effect even with them on fairly low.

There's no reason to have the rig humming away loudly if it is not reaching temps that are degrading performance, and most machines could make do with minimal air intake or even passive intake in the form of large vent areas on the case. Most of what you will get out of case fans is just a lowering of ambient case/mobo temp and if they are lined up to blow across it you may cool your RAM a bit by directing air thru the heat dissipating sinks they put on the memory chips these days. Same goes for your HD bays, if the case is aligned for it your front fans may give a slight cooling effect to your hard drives as they take cool outside air and blow it across them.

Putting one in the back to exhaust hot air in the case is fairly common, just make sure that you have filters on your case vents if you have a push/pull kind of setup (fans in front drawing with fans in the back exhausting) or you will draw a lot of dust into the rig.

The layout of your case and the size and make of your fans can have pretty big consequences when it comes to the sound levels they generate, so generally I shop for a fan in the size I want that is specced out as being reasonably low decibel for the cfm it can push.

It is also a good idea to get some anti-vibration rubber washers or a grommet for the whole fan body so that you can mount them tightly and not make the metal bits of the case vibrate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top