"Budget Gaming" Mini-ITX with upgrade path

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

AMZN

Reputable
Nov 24, 2014
1
0
4,510
I am planning on replacing my i3 laptop with a new mini-itx build do to space issues.
I will be using the Silverstone SG-05 case, 8GB 2133 RAM 450w 80+ gold PSU (cost $200 US)
(I have all the peripherals and SSD and HDD)

I have priced out two builds, and am looking at two upgrade paths.

AMD A10 + gigabyte A88 mb = $170 at microcenter
i5 4690k +gigabyte z97 = $300 at microcenter

Question is: is the extra $130 dollars today, worth it in the end if I were to upgrade to gigabyte's new mini-itx gtx970. It probably would not be for quite a while, I have no problem playing games on low with integrated graphics (I am on the laptop) so does the i5 or a10 differ that much at the beginning?
 
Solution
Rammy
I don't think I really understand what you are trying to do. The two options you are comparing do vastly different things at vastly different price ranges.

Out of the box (ie without a graphics card) those systems are hugely different. Both have integrated graphics but the Intel integrated graphics are pretty hopeless for gaming whereas the AMD version has some potential at certain price points.
The problem with the AMD platform is that the genuinely good APUs (like the A10-7850K) are too expensive to be viable in most builds as you can pair a 860K (or at least a 750K/760K/G3258) with an entry level graphics card and destroy the graphics performance for very similar money while matching the CPU.
The Intel option doesn't make much...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Rammy

Rammy

Honorable
Sep 3, 2012
2,492
0
12,960
I don't think I really understand what you are trying to do. The two options you are comparing do vastly different things at vastly different price ranges.

Out of the box (ie without a graphics card) those systems are hugely different. Both have integrated graphics but the Intel integrated graphics are pretty hopeless for gaming whereas the AMD version has some potential at certain price points.
The problem with the AMD platform is that the genuinely good APUs (like the A10-7850K) are too expensive to be viable in most builds as you can pair a 860K (or at least a 750K/760K/G3258) with an entry level graphics card and destroy the graphics performance for very similar money while matching the CPU.
The Intel option doesn't make much sense either though. The sole function of a K-series i5 and a Z-series ITX motherboard is overclocking, and in an SG-05 you either won't be doing this at all, or are going to be limited by the cooling potential of the case. You can do an i5+ITX motherboard combo for as low as $200, though realistically you probably want to spend $250 or so.


Also the term "ITX graphics card" is mainly marketing nonsense. Most ITX cases have support for much larger graphics cards and while it's nice to see shorter cooler cards (as that's all they are), they aren't necessary for most cases. Generally they offer worse performance/cooling/noise levels than their conventional rivals so only make sense when you are limited to sub 200mm of graphics card clearance.


Basically, if you plan on using integrated graphics for any timeframe, AMD is by far the better option but it's highly unlikely that's the best solution for you. Pairing a cheaper CPU with an entry level card is a much better solution if you won't be spending more money any time soon. If you went with something like a Haswell Pentium or i3 then you'd still have $150+ to spend on a quality graphics card which would give you solid out of the box gaming performance and give you an upgrade path on both CPU and graphics.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom