building a PC and I have some questions...

Ares

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
42,470
Liked Posts:
35,196
In all seriousness MT.... when you decide on a build I would be interested to see the specs on it.

I have never tried building on such a budget, if I build I always just wait until I have the money I want to build what I want.

Cases can be expensive.... have you found a cheap case?
 

Monsieur Tirets

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 8, 2012
Posts:
8,682
Liked Posts:
4,309
In all seriousness MT.... when you decide on a build I would be interested to see the specs on it.

I have never tried building on such a budget, if I build I always just wait until I have the money I want to build what I want.

Cases can be expensive.... have you found a cheap case?

Yeah, theres a number of cheap cases that I dig. Especially in the mitx form factor, if I go the intel route. its to bad there arent any any AM socket motherboards in that FF. They make like one matx mobo for that socket but I hear its not very good. Theres some decent mid towers though, so its all good if I go amd atx.

Ill probably be building it in the next few weeks or so. Might as well wait until after the first week of august when skylake is supposed to be released and see what happens. Hell even if I cant go for a skylake cpu/board it might result in some last gen intels going on sale.
 

Ares

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
42,470
Liked Posts:
35,196
Yeah, theres a number of cheap cases that I dig. Especially in the mitx form factor, if I go the intel route. its to bad there arent any any AM socket motherboards in that FF. They make like one matx mobo for that socket but I hear its not very good. Theres some decent mid towers though, so its all good if I go amd atx.

Ill probably be building it in the next few weeks or so. Might as well wait until after the first week of august when skylake is supposed to be released and see what happens. Hell even if I cant go for a skylake cpu/board it might result in some last gen intels going on sale.

Yeah that is what I would look for if I were in your shoes...
 

Monsieur Tirets

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 8, 2012
Posts:
8,682
Liked Posts:
4,309
If I could get into a i5 and mobo for around $150 it would be a done deal, no questions asked. lol

edit: I just noticed that microcenter is offering a fx 8320e and an asus m5a97 for pretty much the same price as that board with a 6300. Anyone know if theres any difference between the regular fx chips and the e versions other than lower stock clock speed? if not it should be relatively easy to oc it up to around the stock speed of the 8350. and 4gz 8 core with mobo for under 150 bucks might be too good to pass up.
 

AussieBear

Guest
If I could get into a i5 and mobo for around $150 it would be a done deal, no questions asked. lol

edit: I just noticed that microcenter is offering a fx 8320e and an asus m5a97 for pretty much the same price as that board with a 6300. Anyone know if theres any difference between the regular fx chips and the e versions other than lower stock clock speed? if not it should be relatively easy to oc it up to around the stock speed of the 8350. and 4gz 8 core with mobo for under 150 bucks might be too good to pass up.

the 8320e is suppose to consume less power compared to the 8350, but it actually comsumes the same power as the 6300. cost to performance the 6300 >= the 8320e.

as crystallas said, an amd godavari build may be the way to go for 400. ive seen some decent builds

im wanting to build a new rig but im holding out for all the new stuff to come out so i can see where the older stuff goes cost wise vs the newer components and whether i should just build a rig that'll be decent enough for 2-4 years before upgrading again or if i should just shell out for the newer stuff.

a cheap 2014 Kaveri build that looks like it will do the job..
[video=youtube;Cv57qDXpEPU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv57qDXpEPU[/video]
 

Monsieur Tirets

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 8, 2012
Posts:
8,682
Liked Posts:
4,309
the 8320e is suppose to consume less power compared to the 8350, but it actually comsumes the same power as the 6300. cost to performance the 6300 >= the 8320e.

as crystallas said, an amd godavari build may be the way to go for 400. ive seen some decent builds

im wanting to build a new rig but im holding out for all the new stuff to come out so i can see where the older stuff goes cost wise vs the newer components and whether i should just build a rig that'll be decent enough for 2-4 years before upgrading again or if i should just shell out for the newer stuff.

a cheap 2014 Kaveri build that looks like it will do the job..
[video=youtube;Cv57qDXpEPU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv57qDXpEPU[/video]

For the same price is there any reason not to go with the 8320e over the 6300? The fx chips might be older but I think they offer greater value/performance than going godvari which is an equally dead end rendering the new vs old angle irrelevant really anyway. Hell even going 1150 intel is a dead end since its a dead socket as well with skylake coming.

In the end Ill still probably just wait until after skylake hits shelves, if it indeed does so when expected, and go from there. Might buy the gpu now though so I can get a good deal on the 280 before they are phased out.
 

botfly10

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
32,905
Liked Posts:
26,050
So, it's time for a new PC, to function as an average everyday desk top/gaming rig, and I thought I'd give a go at building my own. The original thinking was to build a budget mitx that could do some okay gaming. I decided on a x4 860k for the cpu since it was cheap, had 4 cores and going forward I think additional cores/threads will be more advantageous than any single thread advantage a dual core intel might offer that seems likely to go unnoticed in actual everyday use.

I then realized for around the same price, due to certain deals, I could build a fx 6300 based rig and though that sounds like a good way to go in terms of bang for my buck I am a little leery of buying into a four year old platform. But my knowledge is limited and I'm no expert, so, I was wondering is there anything about that that could suddenly render the rig obsolete? I know it wont have ddr4 like the upcoming skylake boards or even pcie 3.0 since am3+ mobos dont, but beyond that anything to be concerned about as long as the processing power is there to get the job done? A number of people seem to recommend an i3 over the fx, but like I said Im having a hard time seeing the advantage over a fx 6300 going forward with more and more games moving in a multithreaded direction. Of course there's the upgrade route to an I5 but I rather just build the best PC I can for the money now, plus the cheapest i5 with the cheapest mobo still costs a good bit more than a 6300 with a solid mobo, or even a 8320, and to be honest, watching benchmarks, especially in recent games, it doesnt seem like the i5 is really worth the price premium, again especially if moving forward devs start utilizing more than four cores regularly. And that seems likely with both current consoles being based on 8 core amd cpus.

Anyway, some of you seem rather knowledgeable when it comes to PCs and I'd appreciate any input. FYI my budget is around $400(without os/peripherals). Thanks.

I personally wouldn't worry about ddr4 at this point at all. I would worry about getting dissatisfied with that processor really quick. I personally would be way more inclined to get a budget mobo and a i5 4690. Thats a great processor that should last up to a decade without pissing you off.
 

botfly10

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
32,905
Liked Posts:
26,050
[video=youtube;3jDXbYuNf_s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jDXbYuNf_s[/video]
 

botfly10

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
32,905
Liked Posts:
26,050
[video=youtube;vbDiSMQ_L_k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbDiSMQ_L_k[/video]
 

Monsieur Tirets

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 8, 2012
Posts:
8,682
Liked Posts:
4,309
I personally wouldn't worry about ddr4 at this point at all. I would worry about getting dissatisfied with that processor really quick. I personally would be way more inclined to get a budget mobo and a i5 4690. Thats a great processor that should last up to a decade without pissing you off.

Yeah, Im not too worried about ddr4. I dont think itll make a big difference anytime soon. Like you a number of people suggest going with intel rather than the Fx series, and I am seriously considering it. If I do itll probably be a i5 4590 since its far cheaper than the 4690 and locked there doesnt seem to be much difference anyway. It would allow be to build a mitx like I originally wanted to, but may also mean going with a lesser gpu than the 280. And Im still not sure the single thread advantage, that in the real world seems like itll go unnoticed when comparing a i3/5 vs a fx, is worth sacrificing the advantage that I believe having 6+ thread may be going forward. Especially when I can get the 6300 and a solid mobo, overclock the fx to a 6350, all for less than the cheapest i5 and cheapest MB. Is giving up threads, with more and more things being multithreaded, worth going with intel, for more cost at that?

Its a fucking dilemma. lol I didnt think Id have this hard a time choosing components when I first decided to build a new PC. If I had the money Itd be really easy... high end intel, but alas...
 

botfly10

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
32,905
Liked Posts:
26,050
Yeah. I hear you man. But if it was me, and knew I could not afford a higher end cpu, I would at least push hard for a socket that could accept a better cpu in the future so you won't be forced to buy both a mobo and cpu if you want to upgrade.

Also, keep in mind that comparing raw cpu specs doesn't necessarily translate to performance. Old cpus may look the same as newer ones on the spec sheet, but advances in efficiency can result it way better real world performance.

All of that said, if I had to make a tradeoff between spending on your gpu and cpu, I would prioritize the gpu every time, always and forever.

This is a very good video:

[video=youtube;GLSPub4ydiM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLSPub4ydiM&index=47&list=PLQMVnqe4XbictUtFZK1-gBYvyUzTWJnOk[/video]
 

botfly10

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
32,905
Liked Posts:
26,050
[video=youtube;H4ryOzIZvpQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4ryOzIZvpQ&index=65&list=PLQMVnqe4XbictUtFZK1-gBYvyUzTWJnOk[/video]
 

Monsieur Tirets

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 8, 2012
Posts:
8,682
Liked Posts:
4,309
Yeah, like I said I am leery of going fx due to not being hot on the idea of buying into such dated tech, but at the same time when it comes to everyday desktop computing the fx would be fine regardless and I fear that if I go intel all of a sudden future games are going to start running much better on the older less efficient 6-8 fx cpus than 4 thread I5s due to current consoles being x86 based and running on amd cpus with 8 weak cores.

In the end I can go with the same gpu regardless, I just have to decide on cpu and its a *****. I love the idea of going intel so I can build a tiny mitx rig, I love the FF, but as stated above Im afraid Ill go intel just too have spent more money in order to **** myself over... but like you said, at least theres an upgrade path.

goddam it. lol
 

Crystallas

Three if by air
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 25, 2010
Posts:
20,016
Liked Posts:
9,558
Location:
Next to the beef gristle mill
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
Its a fucking dilemma. lol I didnt think Id have this hard a time choosing components when I first decided to build a new PC. If I had the money Itd be really easy... high end intel, but alas...

There is a dual concern for components now that did not exist a short while ago. When a single standard shift happens, it creates havoc, especially in the middle of that switch over. Memory bus is never a real concern, and DDR4 is here by spec. It is NOT one of those 2 standards. But things like data encryption stacks(which rob performance) are being challenged constantly, to the point where new software updates and operating systems are applying more resource eating solutions. Since the stacks are hardly standardized, there is little ASIC hashing standardization. Which is why you have users with 7 year old AMD 4-physical core CPUs running today just fine because of the well designed architectures to maximize 4th core efficiency and a push with opencl implementations(but they take the hit on slower memory and lack of faster expansion standards in newer PCIe/USB standards which is a nightmare for non-real world performance like benchmarking). Then you have UHD as a standard(and not as potential capability or supported feature, HUGE difference in words) taking shape. Four competing display interface standards, 3 with some interchangeable support for each other if a user needs to convert, are also fighting it out. Two standards shifts that are totally messing up upgrade paths for about 16 months for low/mid budget builds.

Then on top of that, the last 4 years also features a CPU arms race for adopting more ARM convertibility in software IDEs(including gaming engines), while x86 optimizations have been lacking. So then you have companies like Intel that have clear cut faster CPUs at launch, die for die, but taking a considerable amount of time longer for optimizations to actually sift through all of the 3rd party developers hands to place and test them into products, outside of using compatible compilers which only do so much. AMD hurts even more here(in the last 7 years or so), but you'll notice being the david in a david and goliath competition, they release solutions to account for this after the fact(so basically with a lot of older software techniques in consideration, opposed to focusing on future). Two different philosophies which are standing in front of a fork in the road, to decide if and how ARM hybridization with x86 will screw up x86 or make x86 better. The ARM architectures are not only distracting from x86 improvements, but stripping out development internally from the x86 manufacturers to see what they can do on a wafer, all working with many OS developers to also include methods of such hybridization(which is a key reason why Windows 8 went into the direction it did with a shared code-path being introduced into the main OS for the first time, despite PPC and ARM support beforehand for special versions of windows in the past).

But yeah. If you're waiting on price drops, and don't mind being behind on the 4K second phase of adopters, even GPU prices should come down for 1080p and maybe 2K hardware all around(asuming A) the high end cards are purchasable, and B) competition queues with high end hardware improves as yields increase). I hate the waiting game, but I've been saying it for over a year. Sometime around September 2015 is going to be a special time for budget builds(or maybe just the beginning). If you can't buy that 280 that you have your hopes on, you'll be able to get a 380 or 970 or something for what you expect to pay now, but in a better price later. For a budget build in this market scenario, IMO it's still the best solution. Also don't let me get into the other standards changes that are in place but immature. I've explained those and the bottleneck before. Skylake will be the first architecture to address at least half of those concerns in a very unique transition cycle that compares only with the 32bit transition and 64bit transition.
 

Monsieur Tirets

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 8, 2012
Posts:
8,682
Liked Posts:
4,309
That was often far too technical for me to grasp, but I was able to gain some insight from it. lol


As of right now Im leaning towards a i5 4590, 8G, r9 280(or equivalent) mitx build. But ive been flip flopping back and forth for weeks. Anyway, Im not concerned with 4k, hell, I dont even have a 1080p monitor yet... just let me game decently at 1080p while taking care of everday pc bs and Im good.

Youre obviously far more knowledgeable than I am, so, whats your take? will the console hardware effect the pc side of things with 6-8 cores being preferable or will 4 core i5s hold there own going forward?

And itll be awesome if the release of skylake drops some prices. Or who knows, mirocenter has some crazy deals, maybe theyll do something with skylake bundles. Is it still on track for the first week of august? Ive read it may be delayed?
 

Crystallas

Three if by air
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 25, 2010
Posts:
20,016
Liked Posts:
9,558
Location:
Next to the beef gristle mill
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
Sorry, I did it again. I've been working with electronics and computing for thirty-some years outside of just loading software and going. I have a hard time knowing how far someone understands their hardware sometimes.

Number of cores only matter when the total processing power can both be taken advantage of, and user habits support affinity priorities(basically delegating tasks to cores for whatever reason). In theory, a single core cpu of the same die area of a dual core CPU is still faster, because you have performance drops on each core after the first in a series of threads. But from a design perspective, when we're talking about a number of transistors that are impossible with current resources to optimize at that same die size, it's simply easier to control the design and architecture in smaller bite size cores, and then combine them. This statement is true now, and will be true until the end of time.

You have chips that have half of the total die area disabled because of whatever issues found. So intel makes a 4 core CPU, and those wafers produce a 50% yield, that means another 50% could be salvageable and resold as perfectly good CPUs to users, if they disable part of the CPU. Thus the total yield could increase to the full 100% for each wafer. But if you had a well designed single-core CPU design, then you might have to lose 50% of the potential chips that can be made off a single wafer. Thus why multi-core and even multi-die CPUs are far superior to reduce costs and bring faster CPUs onto the market.


If all things are equal, a single core CPU design(so not a dual core with a disabled bit of silicon to make it a single core) with an optimized design vs a dual core CPU with an optimized design, the single core is still better and more efficient. Even with multitasking. At sub 100nanometers, such a single core CPU would be a pipe dream.


Oops, I did it again.... too technical. But it should still make sense.
 

botfly10

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
32,905
Liked Posts:
26,050
Boss, that sounds like a very reasonable setup to me that is gonna run everything with mostly high/ultra settings. It will destroy the cRPGs that I know you like. I would spend the extra $40 for a 4690k so you can overclock but whatever. The 4590 will be fine for all gaming, though it might start to max out with mmo's or 64 person battlefield maps. You are absolutely fine with 4 cores if your primary use is gaming and entertainment type shit.

Only thing is that going to a micro or mini itx will actually increase the price on your mobos while reducing the features they come with. And it also takes the option away to add a 2nd graphics cards down the line. I am personally very attracted to the form factor of micro and mini atx or itx cases but keep coming back to the lack of expandability and potential heat issues as a deal breaker for me. And increased overall price.
 

Monsieur Tirets

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 8, 2012
Posts:
8,682
Liked Posts:
4,309
Boss, that sounds like a very reasonable setup to me that is gonna run everything with mostly high/ultra settings. It will destroy the cRPGs that I know you like. I would spend the extra $40 for a 4690k so you can overclock but whatever. The 4590 will be fine for all gaming, though it might start to max out with mmo's or 64 person battlefield maps. You are absolutely fine with 4 cores if your primary use is gaming and entertainment type shit.

Only thing is that going to a micro or mini itx will actually increase the price on your mobos while reducing the features they come with. And it also takes the option away to add a 2nd graphics cards down the line. I am personally very attracted to the form factor of micro and mini atx or itx cases but keep coming back to the lack of expandability and potential heat issues as a deal breaker for me. And increased overall price.

I would love to go k series but with a micro center deal on the 4590 its more like a 70-100 buck difference between the 4590 and 4690, plus then Id need a z series board rather than the cheap 40 dollar asrock mitx(dont think ill find a cheaper mobo even if going full atx), plus a cooler, so in all it would raise the cost by close to $150-200 bucks. plus as you mentioned, heat would then be an issue going mitx.

As for the features, im good with what a mitx board offers. plus look at this sexy little *****...
sg13b-34right-top.jpg


I also really dig the cooler master 110 but despite cooler master proclaiming that it supports "standard length" gpus, itll olny accommodate a card 8.5inches or less.
 

Monsieur Tirets

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 8, 2012
Posts:
8,682
Liked Posts:
4,309
Damn, seems like a pretty great deal

check out these cases too:

fractal design node 304
bitfenix prodigy
ncase m1
Cooler Master Elite 110 or 120
Xigmatek Nebula
Corsair Obsidian 250D

I really like that m1
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Cases-...-Case-Review/Building-System-SFX-Power-Supply

yeah, like I said, its really too bad the 110 cant fit bigger cards.

anyway, check out this build in the sg13(the case I posted above). they stuff a 18 core xeon in there with a titan. lol

[video=youtube_share;MjDJNwAANwA]https://youtu.be/MjDJNwAANwA[/video]
 

Top