Gaming build. First build I'll ever do.

[Amaroq]

My current computer is really, really old and crappy. I put it in my profile for all to see. I got it used for like, fifty bucks, which is a good deal I guess, but I'd like something that can game decently. (6 FPS on World of Warcraft isn't very good. And that's the best I can get outdoors. It's generally 1 - 2 FPS.)

So I came into some money recently, and I've decided that I am going to build my own gaming rig. I spent all day yesterday doing research and looking through parts, mostly on newegg. Here's what I've decided on so far.

This should be my public wishlist. It has the things I've thus far decided on.
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/wishlist/PublicWishDetail.asp?WishListNumber=9137408

My budget is about $1200, but I would like to try and not use it all up if I don't have to. This gaming rig I'm going to build will probably never see Vista. I will probably be dual-booting 64 bit editions of both windows XP and Linux. Probably Gentoo.

As far as I can tell by the research I've done, I've got a pretty good set of choices so far. The video card has GDDR4 memory. The processor is an AMD quad-core with AM2+. The motherboard, if I'm not mistaken, supports both AM2+ and that particular series of video cards. Right now, I'm currently trying to find a good set of RAM chips. I'll probably opt for dual channel RAM at 2x 2Gig (since the memory cap is 8 Gigs and it has four slots) at 1066Mhz to take advantage of the AM2+ capabilities. I would have liked to go with DDR3 for the RAM, but the motherboard only supports DDR2, and I can't find a board that supports both AM2+ and DDR3.

Everywhere I look for 2x 2Gig 1066 Ram chips, their latency is 5-5-5-15, at best. There's even some at 5-5-5-18. Is 5-5-5-15 the best that exists for this kind of RAM?

Before yesterday, I would not have understood one word I just said. This entire post would have been a foreign language to me. computer.howstuffworks.com is a godsend, I tell ya.

So the reason I'm posting this is this: I'm curious about whether I've made wise choices so far. Does anybody see any mistakes I'm making or have any tips for me? I haven't bought any of the parts yet. I'm still shopping around for the ones I want.

 

[mihirkula]

DDR3 isn't quite worth it atm.....This is a much, much better setup than the wishlist....

CPU: Intel E8400: ~200

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L : $85

RAM: 2GB DDR2 800 Crucial Ballastix : $29

GPU: 8800GT 512mb: $160

Hard Drive: 500GB Seagate 7200.11 : $85

Monitor: SAMSUNG 920NW Black 19": $199.99

PSU: Corsair 550vx : $65

Cooler: XIGMATEK HDT-S1283 : $36.99

Total: $860.

 

[rsetter1]

Do you need a case too?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129018
How about 2x2GB Ram
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122

 

[robertito]

Monitors are relatively cheap so bumping it up to a 20" would only be about $30-$50. Also If your buget fits it the 8800GTS G92 is an excelent card, dual slot too so it stays cooler.

DS3L is a rock solid board and the E8400 is awsome and overclocks easily.

 

[jevon]

I have to agree with buying something like the E8400 or Q6600/Q9300. AMD's processors right now generally will get the job done, however Intel's offerings still simply perform better as well as overclock waaay better. It's unfortunate that AMD's processors are what they are right now because I think their motherboards and graphics cards are great (esp when considering Crossfire).

So with an Intel processor in mind, I'd second the Gigabyte P35-DS3L for a cheap solid board that will overclock. If you do this, I'd also recommend one of the above nVidia cards as they have the best single-card solutions right now.

If you wish to stick with the ATi card, I'd recommend you look at getting a X38 motherboard (ASUS P5E is a good place to start) because it will allow you to one day add a second ATi card that will run at full x16 speeds; on a P35 board, the second card would only run at x4 speed/electrical, slowing it down.

Good luck!

 

[Amaroq]

Ah, I must say I didn't quite expect to be told to switch not only everything, but to use different brands for everything too. I'd heard that AMD was slightly better for gaming than intel, and that ATI was the best kind of cards you could get, so I wanted to build a system with AMD / ATI stuff that works well together. Nothing bottlenecking any of the other parts, etc.

Exactly what particulars would I look at when choosing parts if I want to make sure everything is running optimally with each other? For example, I picked a motherboard that has a potential for 1066MHz RAM and a procesor that can take advantage of that 1066MHz. Wouldn't 1066 be universally faster than 800?

I don't really plan on overclocking, if that matters. I'll browse around for some more processors since the GHz of the one I chose isn't exactly the fastest, even if it is a quad-core.

 

[bpogdowz]

Hi: Intel slaps AMD in the face in gaming and every other thing that uses the CPU. 1066 is factory over clocked 800. There's no performance difference between 1066 and 800 really.

 

[dagger]

Ah, I must say I didn't quite expect to be told to switch not only everything, but to use different brands for everything too. I'd heard that AMD was slightly better for gaming than intel, and that ATI was the best kind of cards you could get, so I wanted to build a system with AMD / ATI stuff that works well together. Nothing bottlenecking any of the other parts, etc.

Exactly what particulars would I look at when choosing parts if I want to make sure everything is running optimally with each other? For example, I picked a motherboard that has a potential for 1066MHz RAM and a procesor that can take advantage of that 1066MHz. Wouldn't 1066 be universally faster than 800?

I don't really plan on overclocking, if that matters. I'll browse around for some more processors since the GHz of the one I chose isn't exactly the fastest, even if it is a quad-core.

You should not decide on hearsay. Go by benchmarks instead.

Graphics:
http://www.guru3d.com/category/vga_2/
http://www.guru3d.com/category/vga_3/
http://www.guru3d.com/category/vga_4/
http://www.guru3d.com/category/vga_5/

CPU:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/common_cpus.html
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

 

[grieve]

Amaroq my avise to you is to be patient, do a lot of reading.... No need to rush.

-Intel is #1 by far, if you are going to buy a quad and spend $240 you definatly want intel q6600
-go for DDR2, DDR3 is a waste of cash right now.

mihirkula had a nice build listed above... swap the CPU for a q6600 and get 4 gigs ram (its so cheap right now) Also get a 22" monitor

 

[topper743]

Hi Amaroq, I have that same MB. There is a new BIOS out for it 1002. It has worked great with no problems I like and use the wifi feature. A thing good about the mb is the ease of overclocking. It can be done from the bios with just a couple of clicks and the mb will sort out all of the various settings not to the ragged edge mind you. Manually you can adjust it more extreme if you like. The cpu should work great for you also. If you want AMD those parts will be the top of the line and will work great.

Give a look at the intel offerings. Many good mbs out there and wide choice of chips. Mentioned above the q6600, q9300, q9450, e8400 and the e8500. The quads are just coming into their own. Most would say that a quad in not necessary at this moment. Since you are buying now a quad to me does make sense. It is possible to clock a e8500 higher than a q6600 but a quad will do more in apps that support it. The q9450 looks especially good to me but is damn'd hard to find and pricey.

RAM is cheap now. Since you are looking at newegg check out their 2x2gb kits the do have some ram that will run at 4 4 4 12. I have 4gb installed. http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010170147+1052315794+1052108080+1052416064+1052508081&name=4
I have not used win xp pro 64, I use the 32 bit. It should work fine although the games you speak of are 32 bit along with their drivers that might take some more research along with the other componets of your system, printer etc.

I have a hd3870 at the moment I want a second one to crossfire. I game online and the server limits the fps to 85 so really I don't need it as I max that out, sometimes we just want something. Consider the hd 3870x2 since you are looking at ATI. Nvidia has some great choices also. I think one issue that no one will argue with is that ATI has better display quality. Nvidia might throw more polygones and prehaps a few more fps but ATI has the better picture. Since this is TH forums I'll probably get flamed for that. IMHO.

I don't know if you are looking to get a new LCD but my mail box is getting flooded with deals on new monitors. You can now get a pretty good 22' LCD for less than $200.

I am wanting to do the same thing as you I want a phenom quad and will get one soon to replace the 5000+be cpu I am using.

PM me if you have any questions about the mb.

 

[frozenlead]

I would go with an e8500 and an 8800 gts 512mb card. You don't have much use for a quad core, and the higher clock speeds of the dual will serve you well, especially since you won't be overclocking. You can skip the cpu cooler if you want, the stock will do okay if you aren't overclocking...but if I were you, I'd still get it. DDR2 800 ram is the industry "standard" sort of...1066 is just overclocked 800. Really, you won't notice a difference between the two. 800 is cheaper.

 

[smalltime0]

I would have liked to go with DDR3 for the RAM, but the motherboard only supports DDR2, and I can't find a board that supports both AM2+ and DDR3.

Thats because the memory controller on AM2/AM2+ CPUs don't support it, its going to be a new feature in AM3.

I personally have a Phenom 9500, (I got one virtually when it first came out ) and I am quite pleased with it. Its fine price/performance against intel if you do not factor in overclocking. The other reason I bought it was at the time my local PC shops (and even some not so local) sold the intel motherboards at high prices (I got a DS5 for a little more than the intel DS4 virtually).
Would I recommend it? Probably not, but they are still solid CPUs if your interest isnt overclocking.

Now I personally have a 3870 XT. They are great, I have mine stably running at 825/1201 (factory 775/1125) and it is still pretty cool. I could probably bump it up a bit more, bit I dont need it ATM so I won't. Not saying if you got one it would OC to that, but it is something to keep in mind.

 

[doomsdaydave11]

Everywhere I look for 2x 2Gig 1066 Ram chips, their latency is 5-5-5-15, at best. There's even some at 5-5-5-18. Is 5-5-5-15 the best that exists for this kind of RAM?

In my own humble opinion, unless you're a way hardcore gamer, getting fast RAM is not an issue. If you find 4GB of DDR2-800 for $70 or something then go for it. Even DDR2-400 performs almost as good as DDR3-1600. I doubt there is even a 3 FPS difference between the two, and no more then a 1 FPS difference between 5-5-5-18 DDR2-800 and 4-4-4-12 DDR2-1066 (if there is such a thing ). You will be happy with DDR2-800, trust me. Concentrate on spending extra $$ on a better graphics card or processor. It is just not worth it unless you're building an expensive system, where you're looking for every way to get better performance!

 

[doomsdaydave11]

Ah, I must say I didn't quite expect to be told to switch not only everything, but to use different brands for everything too. I'd heard that AMD was slightly better for gaming than intel, and that ATI was the best kind of cards you could get, so I wanted to build a system with AMD / ATI stuff that works well together. Nothing bottlenecking any of the other parts, etc.

Exactly what particulars would I look at when choosing parts if I want to make sure everything is running optimally with each other? For example, I picked a motherboard that has a potential for 1066MHz RAM and a procesor that can take advantage of that 1066MHz. Wouldn't 1066 be universally faster than 800?

I don't really plan on overclocking, if that matters. I'll browse around for some more processors since the GHz of the one I chose isn't exactly the fastest, even if it is a quad-core.

It isn't 2005 anymore! The sad truth (coming from an AMD fanboy) is that Intel is dominating AMD. Also, I would get a 22" monitor. I got a 19" and regretted it. Fortunately I was able to sell my 19" at an excellent deal (only losing about $25 from the time I bought it) and get a 22" Acer AL2216Wbd for $220 shipped, and it's fricken huge compared to the 19 incher. I highly reccomend getting 22" over 19", at newegg, this unit: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009094 fluctuates in pricing a lot. Watch it daily for free shipping or a price change. That right der is the most expensive I've seen it. You can also find that same unit @ buy.com for $232 shipped (their shipping is really slow though).

 

[rsetter1]

Do you think I'd be laying in tall grass with a big smile on my face if I
had bought AMD?
I think NOT!