Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Will my Gaming Build handle Next-Gen ?

Tags:
  • Gaming
  • Next Generation
  • Build
  • Intel i5
  • Systems
Last response: in Systems
Share
March 24, 2014 10:37:34 AM

It's my first gaming build. so i'm asking you guys for suggestions or recommendations and if it's gonna handle next-gen games , i'm kinda on budget.

CPU : i5-4670K
GPU: Gigabyte GTX 760
PSU: Corsair CX600M
Mobo : Gigabyte GA-Z77-D3H
RAM : Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4)
Case : Cooler Master N5000 Mid tower case

More about : gaming build handle gen

March 24, 2014 10:48:55 AM

Anas-1 said:
It's my first gaming build. so i'm asking you guys for suggestions or recommendations and if it's gonna handle next-gen games , i'm kinda on budget.

CPU : i5-4670K
GPU: Gigabyte GTX 760
PSU: Corsair CX600M
Mobo : Gigabyte GA-Z77-D3H
RAM : Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4)
Case : Cooler Master N5000 Mid tower case



Good build but it is better to get an amd build and adding that money to get a 770 for increase in performance on most games and be more future proof. And also if u are getting a 770 get a good psu for overclock. Probably 650 watts.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
March 24, 2014 12:16:18 PM

That is a fine system and no Rohit is wrong for the following reasons. Current benchmarks across the board shows the Haswell i3 behind the FX-8xxx, then it is the FX-8xxx, then it is the i5, then the i7. AMD at CES and E3 did not introduce a new FX line, nor anything to challenge the Haswell chipset, only to switchgears and mainly focus on APUs (A4,A6,A8, A10) for the other 90% of the marketspace of PC devices (grandma checking her Facebook).

Given that FX-4/6xxx people were all happy campers during BF3, then became quite upset when BF4, AC4, etc. (2013 games) all made their systems obsolete / unplayable, even if they bought a R9/Titan and tried with that, they all been swapping up to a FX-8xxx to be able to play the 2013 games 'as expected' in performance-wise. Given this trend and the FX-8xxx is the LAST FINAL CPU offered by AMD, honestly how can anyone say "better to get a amd build" when we look at Xmas 2014, 2015 and 2016 games to come (like BF5, AC5 etc are all in development as we speaK), the FX-8xxx will be in the same position as the FX-4/6xxx currently is. Is that 'future proof?', I think not.

Let's take it from another perspective, IF AMD suddenly did release a brand new line of CPUs, Chipset, etc. to radically challenge the Evil Intel Empire, honestly will it be backward compatible with a FX-8xxx motherboard? Or like the APU line, the 750ks, etc. a totally different mobo/cpu needing to replace the entire system anyway? So investment in a FX-8xxx based system, is still a 'dead end'. While anyone with the current Haswell chipset or the 3xxx Chipset can plug in any iCore they want into the system without a issue, today and tomorrow.
m
0
l
Related resources
March 24, 2014 12:26:51 PM

Good build. If you are looking for a computer to last the entire next-gen console, then it is difficult to say. For one, console games are optimize for its full potential. For example, stuffs like memory management and cpu scheduling are fully explore when developing games for console. This is easier to do in the console since the hardware is all the same. While for the pc, hardware is all different so games are no fully optimize for pc.

This is why the PS3 and Xbox 360 lasted for 6-7 years while you can't do that for a pc.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
March 24, 2014 12:40:53 PM

polke45 said:

This is why the PS3 and Xbox 360 lasted for 6-7 years while you can't do that for a pc.


Actually PS3/Xbox were introduced in 2003, and released in 2004-2005 so your talking 10 year, surprisingly. That is TWO full replaced PC systems in the same timespan, AND those systems still have new game releases still playable on them.
m
0
l
March 24, 2014 12:49:57 PM

Tom Tancredi said:
That is a fine system and no Rohit is wrong for the following reasons. Current benchmarks across the board shows the Haswell i3 behind the FX-8xxx, then it is the FX-8xxx, then it is the i5, then the i7. AMD at CES and E3 did not introduce a new FX line, nor anything to challenge the Haswell chipset, only to switchgears and mainly focus on APUs (A4,A6,A8, A10) for the other 90% of the marketspace of PC devices (grandma checking her Facebook).

Given that FX-4/6xxx people were all happy campers during BF3, then became quite upset when BF4, AC4, etc. (2013 games) all made their systems obsolete / unplayable, even if they bought a R9/Titan and tried with that, they all been swapping up to a FX-8xxx to be able to play the 2013 games 'as expected' in performance-wise. Given this trend and the FX-8xxx is the LAST FINAL CPU offered by AMD, honestly how can anyone say "better to get a amd build" when we look at Xmas 2014, 2015 and 2016 games to come (like BF5, AC5 etc are all in development as we speaK), the FX-8xxx will be in the same position as the FX-4/6xxx currently is. Is that 'future proof?', I think not.

Let's take it from another perspective, IF AMD suddenly did release a brand new line of CPUs, Chipset, etc. to radically challenge the Evil Intel Empire, honestly will it be backward compatible with a FX-8xxx motherboard? Or like the APU line, the 750ks, etc. a totally different mobo/cpu needing to replace the entire system anyway? So investment in a FX-8xxx based system, is still a 'dead end'. While anyone with the current Haswell chipset or the 3xxx Chipset can plug in any iCore they want into the system without a issue, today and tomorrow.


Why all this hate towards AMD.. Rohit is actually correct. The main focus should always be on the GPU and not on the CPU first, specially since the difference between the GTX 760 and 770 is not small. The FX-8350 is a perfect alternative for the i5-4670K in this case.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
March 24, 2014 1:25:43 PM

Uhm no hate, just very sad AMD is NOT giving us a alternative. IF your statement was 100% correct then explain this:
http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http--www.gamegpu.ru-im...
http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Action/Battle...

While a upgrading a TON of money for a Titan can take care of more of the needed GPU rendering beinbottlenecked by the lower end CPUs (Fx-4xxx and FX-6xxx), they are still heavily used because the code is doing MORE then pre-2013 games did before. Old games just needed the HDD to pass to the RAM a big enough chunk, fast enough for the CPU to process the data that it just needed to hand it off to the GPU. Bigger GPU, faster HDD (7200 vs 5400), more RAM (4GB vs 2GB) all helped these before, now it isn't true.

You need to understand, games before weren't tapping the CPU to figure out how to make the multiple AI work as a team and 'concentrated fire from behind cover' nor (as it is now) calculating the difference of impact to a cement wall with a .45 handgun as compared to a RPG (old joke in First Person, you can shoot through any wall with just a handgun because it didn't matter if you used a AK47, Rocket Launcher or a handgun, the damage was the same). These calculations have NOTHING to do with the GPU, it's job is rendering the graphics to the screen only.

Further the argument that the 'extra cost' (even if it was just $100) is not justifiable, I would counter, it isn't that expensive now as you can grab off the shelf a Haswell i5 with no separate video card complete system for under $400, a i7 even been sold as low as $549, it isn't the old AMD under $1K Intel over $1K arguments.

Lastly I and the OP are talking gaming in 2015, 2016, 2017, not about today's games only. Looking back at the scores on the FX-4/6xxx and BF3 now compared to BF4 you can see a drastic issue, and LOOK up all the forum posts all by those owners when BF4 was released, they all say the same thing "BF3 works perfectly on ultra what is the problem with BF4", as a example of what I mean. in 2015, 2016 when we talk BF6 and so on, there won't be that problem for a i5-4670K but will be for the FX-8xxx (like the current FX-4/6xxx) would be insufficient. Worse case for the i5-4670K owner, they buy a i5-6670K released (just like a old i5-2xxxx system can take a i5-4670K in it right now today), but sadly AMD is not offering any such 'forward' solutions IF they are even going to offer anything else OTHER THAN APUs. For 2014, a whole year of production, there is no new FX being released. That just signifies AMD is going to profit on the 90% of the market (the rest of the users out there) not the 10% that are gamers.
m
0
l
March 24, 2014 2:18:30 PM

I searched a little more and found something. I can afford an MSI 770, but without and i5-3570K or i5-4670K as I guys said I'm a little bit on budget. i'll replace the i5-4670K with i5-3470 in the other hand i'll get the GTX 770 do you guys think it worth it ?
m
0
l

Best solution

March 24, 2014 2:25:27 PM

Anas-1 said:
I searched a little more and found something. I can afford an MSI 770, but without and i5-3570K or i5-4670K as I guys said I'm a little bit on budget. i'll replace the i5-4670K with i5-3470 in the other hand i'll get the GTX 770 do you guys think it worth it ?


Get the GTX 770 and the i5-3470. It will be a much better deal than a GTX 760 coupled with the i5-4670.

Even when compared to the FX-8350, the i5-3470 is almost identical to it. So if you're not planning to overclock your CPU, get the i5-3470. Otherwise, get the FX-8350 for it's overclockability and better live streaming.
Share
March 26, 2014 4:15:38 AM

Just wanted to add something. If you haven't purchased the PC yet, keep in mind that the i5-3470 uses the old 1155 socket that is no longer used by newer Intel CPUs, unlike the i5-4670 that uses the new socket 1150 that is gonna be compatible with the new upcoming Intel CPUs.

The Gigabyte GA-Z77-D3H is compatible with the i5-3470, but is not compatible with the i5-4670. Also, AMD CPUs use different socket types (AM2, AM3, AM3+, FM2...)
m
0
l
!