Need Help Completing A New Budget Gaming Build

Wolf Rawrrr

Reputable
Mar 26, 2015
15
0
4,510
Hi. So I've been trying to assemble a new budget gaming rig for 2 days now through a ton of researching and looking up online and stuff. It also doesn't help that I live in Croatia and am buying locally so I have to cross reference all the prices and compare them to the situation over here and it all takes a lot of time but I am about halfway done I reckon. I just need help with a couple components (arguably the two most important ones).

Note 1: Keep in mind that the goal of this upgrade is to be able to run new games like Witcher 3, Fallout 4, Lords of the Fallen etc. at 1080p 30fps with at least medium settings as the first half of this article claims is perfectly plausible: (link)
Note 2: I would prefer to have something that works as-is, so that I may optionally overclock if I want a better experience. I understand that overclocking would mean investing in a non-stock cooling system which I cannot cover at this time (maybe later this year).
Note 3: Finally, this build should last me at least 3 more years before I need to upgrade again.

So far I got this: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/g6Wbqs

Just to illustrate the prices in Croatia - this combo of CPU+RAM+HDD that supposedly goes for about $200 I can't get under $250. And that's after extensive searches on local equivalents for Newegg and such. Still, I would rather buy locally for certain reasons. Since I already have a good case and PSU (Scythe Stronger 700W), what I still lack are the motherboard and graphics card.



First Question - Motherboard

I tried googling stuff like "best motherboard for FX6300" but surprisingly this has left me just as confused as I was. I have no idea how to choose one besides that it has to support my chosen AMD CPU, support DDR3 RAM, and most likely a PCI Express 3.0 too because the graphics card will most likely state that. I heard about some possible backwards compatibility when it comes to 3.0 vs 2.0 but if my budget allows it I would prefer to get as good as I can, which also means AM3+ support as well instead of just AM3. Other than this, I don't know how to choose. A friend recommended his Gigabyte model (he has an FX8350 I think) but I also heard some Gigabyte boards have been causing voltage problems with AMDs CPUs.

Can you please recommend me a couple motherboards that would work best for me? My budget allows for a $100 motherboard and I am looking to spend as much if it means getting something solid. So let's say $75-$100. Thank you.

Second Question - Graphic card

This is probably more difficult. Right now I am leaning towards nvidia but that is probably because the card used for the Witcher 3 article was a GTX 750Ti. AMD on the other hand seems to have more options out there which threw me off for a bit. I just don't see the difference between many of those cards when both are 2 GB of memory and similarly clocked, yet the price can fluctuate quite a bit. Why? Is there something else important that I am forgetting? Once again, I am looking to get the card that will perform best as-is, so if one can be overclocked higher then that is not a deciding factor for me. I may or may not try oc'ing later on when I can afford the cooling upgrade.

Potential nVidia choices:

Gigabyte GTX 750Ti GDDR5 2GB OC
This is the one that was used in the article. For now I am leaning mostly towards this one, after having looked at Asus and EVGAs variants (namely FTW). A few votes were tipped in EVGAs favor but it is not immediately available here and I do need to upgrade as soon as possible and if it is such a small difference then I am fine with Gigabyte's card. I can buy it here for about $170.

Gigabyte GTX 950 GDDR5 2GB OC
This looks to me like a bit of an upgrade from GTX 750Ti. The only actual differences that I can tell is that the core clock values are slightly higher both on base and oc modes, as well as what appears to be significantly higher when it comes to memory speed. The only thing that I don't like in fact is that it only has 1 fan, but then again I have always had 1 fan cards so I suppose for as long as it keeps cool it isn't a downside really. Only looks that way when you compare it to 2 fan cards. Maybe it doesn't need two fans because it's kinda small for a video card? Or am I wrong? My budget might leave just enough space to go from GTX 750Ti to this, so I'd like to do that if it means a significant improvement. This card I can buy here for $200.

And potential AMD choices:

MSI R7 370 Gaming 2G
Now, at first I was drawn to this most likely because of the fancy packaging and big GAMING label across, but I know that by itself doesn't mean anything. I would have skipped on it, but it seems to be very close to the GTX 750Ti so I was wondering if it's a contender. It has slightly faster memory speed and another thing it does better is being 256bit compared to both above GTX cards that are only 128bit. I googled and some people say it's just to sell better and doesn't have a big impact, while others say it has just as much impact as the other specs... I understand that if two cards were unique, then the 256bit would outrank it but otherwise it may not. This card here costs $185.

???
I don't really have many. If anyone can recommend something on par with GTX 750Ti and GTX 950 I would take it into consideration. AMD is supposed to deliver the same thing a bit cheaper, so maybe there is a card out there that I can buy for the same money or a bit more to get something significantly better? Otherwise I guess my choice will be between the two nvidia cards most likely (unless there is a yet another nvidia you guys recommend :D)





So that's basically it. I need a motherboard and graphic card to complete the build. The CPU, RAM, and HDD I have already chose after extensive searching but if you see a problem feel free to criticize those as well, maybe even recommend something else. For example it was a hard choice between Kingston and Corsair (and Crucial was close too). Still not sure if Kingston's HyperX Fury is a better choice than Corsair Vengeance.

Well that is all for now, ask me for more info if you need it. I would like to say thanks in advance for the time and effort put into helping me out. This community is always my first place to go to not just when posting questions but also for reading and learning more about IT - like these last two days... I don't think I did anything at all with my free time but sit and research this new build. I learned a lot and understand way more than before but still need help. Hope it gets sorted out soon with your help.

*woof*
 
Solution
Okay, for mobo click on the link for 4 different variably priced mobos under $100 USD.

http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/compare/asus-motherboard-m5a99xevor20,gigabyte-motherboard-ga970aud3p,msi-motherboard-970aslikraitedition,msi-motherboard-970gaming/

My personal choice would be the Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0, gives you a 990X chipset over the 970's and is well reviewed. Will have no problems overclocking a FX 6300 processor.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4157/asus_m5a99x_evo_amd_990x_motherboard_review/index.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/M5A99X_EVO/
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-2384013/motherboard-tier-list-990x-chipset.html

For GPU whether AMD or Nvidia is the choice is often a question of driver optimization...
Okay, for mobo click on the link for 4 different variably priced mobos under $100 USD.

http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/compare/asus-motherboard-m5a99xevor20,gigabyte-motherboard-ga970aud3p,msi-motherboard-970aslikraitedition,msi-motherboard-970gaming/

My personal choice would be the Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0, gives you a 990X chipset over the 970's and is well reviewed. Will have no problems overclocking a FX 6300 processor.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4157/asus_m5a99x_evo_amd_990x_motherboard_review/index.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/M5A99X_EVO/
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-2384013/motherboard-tier-list-990x-chipset.html

For GPU whether AMD or Nvidia is the choice is often a question of driver optimization and how well they work with the games software framework. Not entirely sure but it seems Nvidia is winning the battle with regards to Witcher3.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2015/05/21/amd-is-wrong-about-the-witcher-3-and-nvidias-hairworks/#2fb268b06660
http://lifehacker.com/pc-graphics-card-showdown-nvidia-vs-amd-1742203529

For considering comparisons of GPU's, this is great resource.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html

Although the 950 is not in this list after looking at some other benchmark sites we end up with the 950 and 370 being about equivalent but both better than the 750 Ti.

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-R7-370-vs-GeForce-GTX-950

Notice how the synthetic benchmark testing is better for the 370 but the gaming benchmarks for BioShock Infinite and Crysis 3 is better for the 950. There's that driver optimization thing.

Seems the way to go for you is the GTX 950 because it is Nvidia but I think your decision will come down to the money more than the performance.
 
Solution

Wolf Rawrrr

Reputable
Mar 26, 2015
15
0
4,510
Thank you for a very detailed and helpful response, imsqam.

Those boards all look great, except that the Asus and MSI Gaming ones would both cost me close to $150 here, while the Gigabyte one is right on target at $105. It also happens to be the one that my friend bought so I think I will be going with this one and disregarding the rumor about voltage problems (since it was just 1 guy somewhere who said it anyway). Can you just confirm if this is the same board here (as this is the actual store where I'd be going to get it most likely): LINK

My other friend went and got a similar Gigabyte board that is slightly more expensive at $125 like so: LINK

Question: If you were choosing between those two, which one? Is it even worth paying more for the better Gigabyte if the only difference is a newer chipset? If that's the only reason then I might just go with the cheaper one and not stretch my budget. I mean, is it a bad thing if my chipset is 970 instead of 990?



As for the graphics card, at the end of the line I think the GTX 950 is a winner for me. I think it's worth it to pay $30 more and get that instead of 750Ti, since it is noticeably better, so just to be safe. Right? My friend said he didn't like it because it's so short. Size has nothing to do with it, right? lol

Also, if I go GTX 950, is Gigabyte the right one? EVGA offers a slightly better, I think, equivalent for $20 more. But I dunno. Gigabyte's looks fine and besides I am getting a Gigabyte board too, though that may not net any benefits after all.



And one last extra question about the RAM. Corsair's Vengeance or Kingston's HyperX Fury? (both 2x4GB 1600 MHz). Corsairs costs about $5-7 more and the only difference seems to be that theirs is CL9 while Kingston's is CL10. I chose Corsairs exactly because of that. But is it worth it for 1 point increase in latency? I understand both companies are respected and dependable.
 
It is not a newer chipset, it is a better chipset with better power handling capability. This is very important to overclocking and affects mobo stability/longevity. When you overclock you stress the system so you have to have better quality components.

Having said that all the boards listed in the comparison should be good to OC the FX 6300 so if the $105 Gigabyte is in your price range then go for it. But the extra money is buying you a better board.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-2384024/motherboard-tier-list-970-chipset.html

For GPU, size does and does not matter. Faster, more heavily factory modified (factory overclocked) cards tend to have more cooling and longer boards but that doesn't mean shorter cards are of poorer quality. Its just like comparing a regular car to a luxury car, they serve different purposes.

Really hard to compare the two cards without knowing the exact models, tweaks here and there can make a difference.

For the RAM, Kingston vs Corsair to me is not as important as CAS 9 vs 10, 9 is faster.
 

Wolf Rawrrr

Reputable
Mar 26, 2015
15
0
4,510
Alright, I think I got it now: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Zr2Wxr

I will mark your first post as the solution and start hunting down them parts. If you can, additionally, just please address my last two points.



What I meant when I asked about the longer/shorter video card thing was if it's length meant a drawback. For example, would the single fan+shorter size make you choose the GTX 750Ti solely because of that? You say that better cards tend to be longer, but that doesn't mean they have to be. The GTX 950 still has the specs it has and it's size doesn't mean it is less good solely on account of that?

And about the motherboard, I cannot find the GA-990XA-UD3 R5 on the pcpartpicker website so I went with the closest result which is the same thing only without the R5. I don't know what the R5 stands for but I want to know if this difference makes a difference, since now my compatibility check is no longer as accurate. The R5 version has a product page on Gigabyte's official website and it is definitely being sold in my country though I cannot find it on Amazon - and the visual is a match. When I look at pictures of the same board but without R5 then it looks slightly different (blue) then the R5 (black). Is this just a cosmetic difference?



And thank you. You've been really helpful ;) *woof*
 
Yes, quality of the build does not depend on the size of the card. Longer cards tend to be faster though as they are factory overclocked and to do this, the vendor uses components that have been tested to run at those higher speeds/voltages.

The R5 seems to be a small variant of the plain UD3, some changes to connector and USB configuration. Get the plain if you can, otherwise I think the R5 will be fine.

http://www.gigabyte.com/products/comparison/list.aspx?ck=2&pids=5293,5366