Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

A Good <$900 Build

Last response: in Systems
Share
January 1, 2014 10:32:19 PM

I'm new to all of this so I'm trusting the veterans here. I need a net card for wifi, because the router's in another room. No height requirements. Capable of light video editing and up to date video games. Thanks y'all!

More about : good 900 build

January 1, 2014 10:34:22 PM

Do you need an OS and monitor?
m
0
l
January 1, 2014 10:34:52 PM

lucasz said:
Do you need an OS and monitor?


Only an OS
m
0
l
Related resources
January 1, 2014 10:35:37 PM

Alright one sec
m
0
l
January 1, 2014 10:37:04 PM

as you wish :) 
i5 haswell
GTX 760

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-4440 3.1GHz Quad-Core Processor ($179.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: ASRock B85 Pro4 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($81.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: Team Vulcan 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($69.98 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 760 2GB Video Card ($239.99 @ Microcenter)
Wireless Network Adapter: Rosewill RNX-N250PCe 802.11b/g/n PCI-Express x1 Wi-Fi Adapter ($20.99 @ Newegg)
Case: Cooler Master K280 ATX Mid Tower Case ($42.81 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply: Corsair Builder 600W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($37.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Lite-On iHAS124-04 DVD/CD Writer ($17.98 @ OutletPC)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 (OEM) (64-bit) ($88.98 @ OutletPC)
Total: $840.67
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-01-02 01:37 EST-0500)
m
0
l
January 1, 2014 10:48:42 PM

Here if your willing to go with a AMD build, I would suggest this. It gives you a great GPU which will give you more performance than a 760 or 270x. Also put on one of the better PSU brands and it's semi modular so less wires in your case

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($109.99 @ TigerDirect)
Motherboard: Asus M5A97 LE R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($74.99 @ Microcenter)
Memory: GeIL EVO Veloce Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($72.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.99 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 770 2GB Video Card ($334.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Wireless Network Adapter: Rosewill RNX-N250PCe 802.11b/g/n PCI-Express x1 Wi-Fi Adapter ($20.99 @ Newegg)
Case: Antec One ATX Mid Tower Case ($29.99 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply: Antec High Current Gamer 620W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($16.99 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - OEM (64-bit) ($94.98 @ OutletPC)
Total: $875.88
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-01-02 01:47 EST-0500)
m
0
l
January 2, 2014 11:14:18 PM

Abscent said:
Here if your willing to go with a AMD build, I would suggest this. It gives you a great GPU which will give you more performance than a 760 or 270x. Also put on one of the better PSU brands and it's semi modular so less wires in your case

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($109.99 @ TigerDirect)
Motherboard: Asus M5A97 LE R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($74.99 @ Microcenter)
Memory: GeIL EVO Veloce Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($72.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.99 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 770 2GB Video Card ($334.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Wireless Network Adapter: Rosewill RNX-N250PCe 802.11b/g/n PCI-Express x1 Wi-Fi Adapter ($20.99 @ Newegg)
Case: Antec One ATX Mid Tower Case ($29.99 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply: Antec High Current Gamer 620W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($16.99 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - OEM (64-bit) ($94.98 @ OutletPC)
Total: $875.88
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-01-02 01:47 EST-0500)


I'm not a huge graphics guy (console gamer originally) so I was wondering if the 760 was a huge dropoff from the 770
m
0
l
January 2, 2014 11:19:56 PM

It's a decent sized drop but the 760 is still a solid card
m
0
l
January 2, 2014 11:26:22 PM

760 is still a good card just if you are able to fit a better GPU into your build then I would suggest it. You will get slightly longer life expectancy out of it.
m
0
l
January 2, 2014 11:34:20 PM

moonstripe11 said:

I'm not a huge graphics guy (console gamer originally) so I was wondering if the 760 was a huge dropoff from the 770


you should ask another question, how FX 6300 performs compared to intel i5
m
0
l

Best solution

January 2, 2014 11:39:14 PM

I am quoting a Jook-D on this, he did an excellent response to this question, so any thanks should go to him if it helps you decide.

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.

For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 (might as well get the 8320, it's an 8350 clocked lower at stock which you can change) [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have caught up in performance and in some cases deliver better performance than the intel's for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks between the FX 83xx series and the i5/i7's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have to disagree with one thing though CTUrbo, the FX 8xxx are on par or better than the i5 k (even some i7, see links above :)  ) series in some games, but the i5's are definitely better in single-threaded/older ones. But yes, the bulldozer sucks so hard.

For OP, I'd say it depends on what you're planning to play. Could you list some games you're looking at? I'd recommend the FX over a locked i5 anyway.
Share
January 19, 2014 10:13:01 PM

Abscent said:
I am quoting a Jook-D on this, he did an excellent response to this question, so any thanks should go to him if it helps you decide.

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.

For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 (might as well get the 8320, it's an 8350 clocked lower at stock which you can change) [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have caught up in performance and in some cases deliver better performance than the intel's for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks between the FX 83xx series and the i5/i7's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have to disagree with one thing though CTUrbo, the FX 8xxx are on par or better than the i5 k (even some i7, see links above :)  ) series in some games, but the i5's are definitely better in single-threaded/older ones. But yes, the bulldozer sucks so hard.

For OP, I'd say it depends on what you're planning to play. Could you list some games you're looking at? I'd recommend the FX over a locked i5 anyway.

Total War: Rome II, Skyrim, Planetary Annihilation
m
0
l
!