Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Gaming PC build

Tags:
  • Gaming
  • Corsair
  • Sabertooth
  • Build
  • Components
  • Asus
Last response: in Components
Share
June 27, 2013 7:43:27 AM

My build:

mobo: Asus sabertooth 990fx r2.0
CPU: AMD FX-8350 black edition
PSU: Corsair GS800
WC: Corsair h80i
GC: Gigabyte GTX 770 windforce OC 2gb
SSHD: Seagate momentus XT 500gb
Blu ray drive
Case: Zalman z11 plus
OS: W7 64bit HP


This falls all just exactly on my budget, what would you recommend/change? What do you think?

More about : gaming build

June 27, 2013 7:48:59 AM

It's a decent build, but unless you are going to use you Blue-Ray player a lot it might not be worth it, you could buy a cheap £10 DVD Reader unless you're going to use it a lot then maybe a DVDRW. You might save a few pounds on Windows 8 instead of Windows 7, but it might not be worth it.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
June 27, 2013 7:57:51 AM

what is your budget? do you plan to OC? what is your resolution?
m
0
l
Related resources
June 27, 2013 8:03:14 AM

Windows 8? no sorry... And yeah i guess i could, i watch a lot of blu ray movies though.

My budget is around 1000 pounds. I dont perticularily plan to overclock myself, but on terms of gc's the 770 contains gpu boost 2.0 :)  does it by itself, my resolution is 1920x1080
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:05:32 AM

I would downgrade the motherboard; if you pay more than $125 for a motherboard with the intention of using a single processor/single GPU setup, you're paying for pretty plastic and marketing. Though this is only one data point, I can tell you that I've managed a 1.3 Ghz overclock on my i5-2500k with a $115 ASRock motherboard that has been stable for 1.5 years.

I would hesitate to get a water cooler; they're useful for small builds that cannot fit the huge heatsinks required by good air coolers. You're using a huge mid tower case. Grab a $50 Zalman CPU air cooler that you can install and forget about (pumps in water coolers die long before fans do).

The GPU is awesome. FYI unless you're playing on a 120hz monitor or a resolution higher than 1920x1080, nothing is going to take full advantage of it for at least a year, in which case the 760 might be a smarter buy (it will destroy anything currently on the market, with the possible exception of Crysis 3).

SSHD is a decent choice. I would prefer a 120GB SSD with a 500GB HDD for storage.

Why a blu-ray drive? If you need to make or play blu-ray DVDs, I would expect to see you adding 2TB disks to your build. Almost everything in BluRay is downloadable, so unless you have an extensive library that you need to put onto HDDs (in which case you'd need more HDDs), go for a $20 optical drive.

I don't have a great perception of Corsair PSUs. Check out reviews on newegg. Also, at most you need a 650W model, not an 800W. SeaSonic, Silverstone, Antec, and PC Power and Cooling are the brands that I would recommend.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
June 27, 2013 8:08:23 AM

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor (£168.68 @ Amazon UK)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler (£24.49 @ CCL Computers)
Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Extreme6 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard (£130.05 @ Amazon UK)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory (£61.72 @ Amazon UK)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive (£50.14 @ Ebuyer)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 770 2GB Video Card (£349.99 @ Dabs)
Case: Corsair 200R ATX Mid Tower Case (£47.98 @ Dabs)
Power Supply: NZXT HALE 90 650W 80 PLUS Gold Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply (£110.45 @ Overclockers.co.uk)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 (OEM) (64-bit) (£65.99 @ Aria PC)
Total: £1009.49
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-06-27 16:08 BST+0100)
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:10:08 AM

Okay, thanks. What cpu cooler would you reccomend?
And what size SSD is the smallest i could get to fit the OS on? Basically looking for the cheapest
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:19:01 AM

Josh Brumpton said:
My build:

mobo: Asus sabertooth 990fx r2.0
CPU: AMD FX-8350 black edition
PSU: Corsair GS800
WC: Corsair h80i
GC: Gigabyte GTX 770 windforce OC 2gb
SSHD: Seagate momentus XT 500gb
Blu ray drive
Case: Zalman z11 plus
OS: W7 64bit HP


This falls all just exactly on my budget, what would you recommend/change? What do you think?


I would ditch the SSHD, and get 2 WD Blacks Or Blues for about the same price. I would stay away from the 2tb x 1 setups, they fail more, taking data with them, but the chance of that happening is still really low.

The diffrence between 8350 and a 3570k is quite small, so if you want to stick with AMD, it will work fine.
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:20:12 AM

It looks like this would be a good one, though it seems just a little expensive. There's a $50 model available, but reviews indicate it can be difficult to install on an AM3+ socket board. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

It is difficult to verify whether models work with the AM3+ socket; many only specify AM3. The Noctua NH-D14 is perhaps the best air cooler you can get*, and it is compatible with all sockets, but there's no real need to get one that expensive for gaming (unless you just want the best and intend to OC for fun). Typically you can get what you would need for a gaming overclock for $50 or less and if you are a video editing nut on a 6 core processor, you get the $50+ options.

*Some would argue that Phanteks offers a more desirable model.
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:20:57 AM

Josh Brumpton said:
Okay, thanks. What cpu cooler would you reccomend?
And what size SSD is the smallest i could get to fit the OS on? Basically looking for the cheapest


There is really no place for small SSD's, you would always be fighting low space, considering everything auto installs on the OS's drive. I would do what i stated above, 2 1TB hdd's. And unless you restart your PC every 10 seconds you will not see a difference.

EDIT:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Zalman coolers are really gimmicky, and are more for show... This is still kinda purdy but a whole lot more efficient.
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:25:57 AM

Yes i am sticking with AMD. And I couldn't really afford an ssd and a hdd anyway, so i could only get a 1tb WD black . ??

yes you mention the phanteks, ive heard its massive though?
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:31:20 AM

Master467 said:
Josh Brumpton said:
Okay, thanks. What cpu cooler would you reccomend?
And what size SSD is the smallest i could get to fit the OS on? Basically looking for the cheapest


There is really no place for small SSD's, you would always be fighting low space, considering everything auto installs on the OS's drive. I would do what i stated above, 2 1TB hdd's. And unless you restart your PC every 10 seconds you will not see a difference.

EDIT:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Zalman coolers are really gimmicky, and are more for show... This is still kinda purdy but a whole lot more efficient.


I disagree with your assertion that there is no place for small SSDs. Once I installed Windows 7 on my 128GB SSD, I had 80GB of space left. It is not difficult to redirect Steam/Origin install directories to a second volume nor is it difficult to instruct Chrome/Mozilla/IE to send downloads to a second volume. That said, the smallest SSD I would consider using is 60GB.

I also disagree that one wouldn't see a difference unless "you restart your PC every 10 seconds." The performance benefit an SSD provides is dependent upon what you do with your PC. Everything will load faster, including game levels. Programs start faster. Files are moved, deleted, or saved faster, and the lack of a spinning platter means you get a more instantaneous response from your PC. Though their small capacity limits the impact of their incredibly low Unrecoverable Read Error rate (which is less than a tenth that of HDDs), there is still the fact that they are also more reliable than traditional HDDs.
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:34:22 AM

Josh Brumpton said:
Yes i am sticking with AMD. And I couldn't really afford an ssd and a hdd anyway, so i could only get a 1tb WD black . ??

yes you mention the phanteks, ive heard its massive though?


To be honest, get 2 blues. The space makes up for the slight drop in speed.
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:36:23 AM

Well SSD is out of the question due to budget right now. So basically its 750gb seagate SSHD/1tb HDD wd Black
The space makes up for the speed...? I really think the speed is more important, im not going to use up all my drive before i haev enough to buy another.....
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:39:03 AM

Changing topic- You say i should downgrade a bit on my mobo, what would you recommend ?
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b Ĉ ASUS
June 27, 2013 8:49:38 AM

Josh Brumpton said:
Changing topic- You say i should downgrade a bit on my mobo, what would you recommend ?


Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 :) 
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 8:50:20 AM

The ASRock 970 EXTREME4 AM3+
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

The big difference between this one and the one you listed is the chipset. The above is a 970 chipset and you listed a MoBo with a 990 chipset. The advantage of the 990 chipset is it allows the use of 4 GPUs, which is a terrible idea for any reasonable budget.

edit: check out the difference in 9xx series chipsets here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_900_chipset_series
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 9:02:10 AM

drewhoo said:
Master467 said:
Josh Brumpton said:
Okay, thanks. What cpu cooler would you reccomend?
And what size SSD is the smallest i could get to fit the OS on? Basically looking for the cheapest


There is really no place for small SSD's, you would always be fighting low space, considering everything auto installs on the OS's drive. I would do what i stated above, 2 1TB hdd's. And unless you restart your PC every 10 seconds you will not see a difference.

EDIT:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Zalman coolers are really gimmicky, and are more for show... This is still kinda purdy but a whole lot more efficient.


I disagree with your assertion that there is no place for small SSDs. Once I installed Windows 7 on my 128GB SSD, I had 80GB of space left. It is not difficult to redirect Steam/Origin install directories to a second volume nor is it difficult to instruct Chrome/Mozilla/IE to send downloads to a second volume. That said, the smallest SSD I would consider using is 60GB.

I also disagree that one wouldn't see a difference unless "you restart your PC every 10 seconds." The performance benefit an SSD provides is dependent upon what you do with your PC. Everything will load faster, including game levels. Programs start faster. Files are moved, deleted, or saved faster, and the lack of a spinning platter means you get a more instantaneous response from your PC. Though their small capacity limits the impact of their incredibly low Unrecoverable Read Error rate (which is less than a tenth that of HDDs), there is still the fact that they are also more reliable than traditional HDDs.


He specificly said "Smallest SSD that i can fit Win7 on", that would be about 10 gb. That is to what i am referring.
so
Quote:
Everything will load faster, including game levels. Programs start faster. Files are moved, deleted, or saved faster, and the lack of a spinning platter means you get a more instantaneous response from your PC.

is incorrect, he specifically said only big enough for the OS, and last i checked "Game levels and other programs" are NOT an operating system.

m
0
l
June 27, 2013 9:03:30 AM

Thanks :)  so its fine using a 1tb HDD wd black ? Or does the SSHD make a difference?
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 9:30:00 AM

Josh Brumpton said:
Thanks :)  so its fine using a 1tb HDD wd black ? Or does the SSHD make a difference?


SSHD is a flawed idea in the first place. Get the WD black.
m
0
l
June 27, 2013 10:22:40 AM

Master467 said:
drewhoo said:
Master467 said:
Josh Brumpton said:
Okay, thanks. What cpu cooler would you reccomend?
And what size SSD is the smallest i could get to fit the OS on? Basically looking for the cheapest


There is really no place for small SSD's, you would always be fighting low space, considering everything auto installs on the OS's drive. I would do what i stated above, 2 1TB hdd's. And unless you restart your PC every 10 seconds you will not see a difference.

EDIT:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Zalman coolers are really gimmicky, and are more for show... This is still kinda purdy but a whole lot more efficient.


I disagree with your assertion that there is no place for small SSDs. Once I installed Windows 7 on my 128GB SSD, I had 80GB of space left. It is not difficult to redirect Steam/Origin install directories to a second volume nor is it difficult to instruct Chrome/Mozilla/IE to send downloads to a second volume. That said, the smallest SSD I would consider using is 60GB.

I also disagree that one wouldn't see a difference unless "you restart your PC every 10 seconds." The performance benefit an SSD provides is dependent upon what you do with your PC. Everything will load faster, including game levels. Programs start faster. Files are moved, deleted, or saved faster, and the lack of a spinning platter means you get a more instantaneous response from your PC. Though their small capacity limits the impact of their incredibly low Unrecoverable Read Error rate (which is less than a tenth that of HDDs), there is still the fact that they are also more reliable than traditional HDDs.


He specificly said "Smallest SSD that i can fit Win7 on", that would be about 10 gb. That is to what i am referring.
so
Quote:
Everything will load faster, including game levels. Programs start faster. Files are moved, deleted, or saved faster, and the lack of a spinning platter means you get a more instantaneous response from your PC.

is incorrect, he specifically said only big enough for the OS, and last i checked "Game levels and other programs" are NOT an operating system.



Then you are correct, there's not much benefit to a 10-40GB SSD.

However, I don't think that's a helpful way to look at the question, since $/GB increases so rapidly as the capacity dips below 60GB that there's not a significant price difference between a 32GB SSD and a 60GB SSD (it's about $10 difference), and the latter would allow you to install at least a web browser, some games and programs. So if you're buying a "small" SSD then you're going to be able to fit a few programs on it and thus benefit from better load times. Yeah, you can't have a whole game/media library on a 60GB SSD boot drive, but you can still enjoy the benefits I listed for games/programs on the drive.

And yeah the SSHD is not the greatest concept ever, but for the $70-$100 market it has a lot more capacity than SSDs and a lot more snap than HDDs, so it is a nice compromise for the pricepoint. It is a poor option for power users who will eventually want to repurpose HDDs for other applications (for instance, creating arrays) and 750GB is an odd size, but I view it as an appropriate option for Brumpton's budget.
m
0
l
!