Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is this a good gaming PC?

Last response: in Systems
Share
June 28, 2011 5:28:13 AM

Hi all, I'm new here.
I just purchased a new PC from a local shop with the following spec :

Athlon II X3 3.0Ghz--- unlocked
MSI 870- G45--- solid caps
Avexir 2GB 10600
WDC 500GB 7200
XFX HD 5770
Enermax NAXN 450W--- dunno if it's 80+ certified or not
Case Deluxe Firestorm
LED Philips 19"--- max res is 1366x768
DVD afterburner, keyboard, Jerry the mouse...
for roughly $600.
Is it a good low-end gaming PC build?

This is my first time building a new PC, so I don't know much. Too bad I've ordered it before asking you in this forum. Regardless, I want to know your opinions about the spec above. Odd enough, the motherboard is more expensive than the processor. Is that alright? Ideal? I thought the HD 5770 would be too much for that small resolution, but considering it a future proof DX11-ready gpu, I bought it. And I think I need more RAM.
Can it play any latest games like Crysis 2 or Black Ops? I'm not an enthusiast gamer by the way, so I don't overclock.

Sorry for my English. Correct if I'm wrong.

Thanks.

More about : good gaming

June 28, 2011 5:51:29 AM

i3-2100 and H61 motherboard is a much better choice for gaming at similar cost. The 2100 outperforms AMD's fastest CPU, the Phenom II X4 980, at $120.

The 5770 is more than enough for that resolution.

Enermax makes good power supplies and 80+ is all BS anyways since it's at 23 degrees Celsius when normal operating temps are 30-40 degrees Celsius within a case.

You don't need more RAM but it would certainly be nice for multi-tasking.

Black Ops looks terrible and runs on a 4 year old engine, anything can run it. For games like Crysis 2 the 5770 is more than sufficient to max it out at that resolution but I think the CPU will slow you down somewhat on CPU dependent games (not sure about C2). SC2 will definitely be slower on the X3 than the i3 I mentioned above.

You're not really going to be using DX11 features with the 5770 since it's a budget card and relatively slow.
June 28, 2011 5:57:43 AM

Hi there,welcome to the forums.

That is a pretty good system for $600! Not one I would have picked, but not a bad deal.

You might wanna get 2GB more ram, and then you are set! It can play the latest games at that res. It won't max them, but it will play them on high.
Related resources
June 28, 2011 6:08:01 AM

Technically the processor is much less of a bottleneck at higher resolutions when more of the graphics load is shifted to the video card. At a low resolution like the one mentioned it will probably bog down in CPU heavy games like SC2 and Supreme Commander.
June 28, 2011 6:09:03 AM

Since it's an X3 unlocked to a quad, it should be ok.
June 28, 2011 6:15:25 AM

browsingtheworld said:
i3-2100 and H61 motherboard is a much better choice for gaming at similar cost. The 2100 outperforms AMD's fastest CPU, the Phenom II X4 980, at $120.

The 5770 is more than enough for that resolution.

Enermax makes good power supplies and 80+ is all BS anyways since it's at 23 degrees Celsius when normal operating temps are 30-40 degrees Celsius within a case.

You don't need more RAM but it would certainly be nice for multi-tasking.

Black Ops looks terrible and runs on a 4 year old engine, anything can run it. For games like Crysis 2 the 5770 is more than sufficient to max it out at that resolution but I think the CPU will slow you down somewhat on CPU dependent games (not sure about C2). SC2 will definitely be slower on the X3 than the i3 I mentioned above.

You're not really going to be using DX11 features with the 5770 since it's a budget card and relatively slow.


Yeah I thought of i3 2100 and H61 combo, too, but it's too costly. It's about 30-40 more bucks. Well, for that tight budget I thought I should go for AMD. Also, many said that quad core is more future proof than dual core for gaming purpose.

Huh, no DX11? Is HD 5770 that slow even for 1366x768? That local shopkeeper said it can run well with tessellation enabled. Isn't DX11 is faster than DX10?
June 28, 2011 6:20:37 AM

Tessellations will kill the 5770. DX11 is hardly implemented it and is mostly marketing hype by M$ and the GPU industry. Crysis 2 looks fantastic in DX9 compared to many DX10 games.

The problem isn't how many cores but how fast each core is. Just about every game requires one really fast core even if it's multi-threaded.
June 28, 2011 6:22:16 AM

The 5770 is sufficient for your resolution. It is somewhat slow, but it's ok.

Yes it will run DX11! It takes more horsepower than DX10, but you should run it fine as long as you aren't trying to max games out.
June 28, 2011 6:25:35 AM

browsingtheworld said:
Tessellations will kill the 5770. DX11 is hardly implemented it and is mostly marketing hype by M$ and the GPU industry. Crysis 2 looks fantastic in DX9 compared to many DX10 games.

The problem isn't how many cores but how fast each core is. Just about every game requires one really fast core even if it's multi-threaded.

Have you compared the Crysis 2 DX9 screenshots to the DX11 ones? There is a difference. And The original Crysis looked better.

Not sure where the heck you got the idea that you only need 1 core... But it's obviously not from a credible source. You try and run BFBC2 on a 4.5GHz single core, and then run it on a 2.8GHz quad. Try and tell me then that you only need 1 core.
June 28, 2011 6:30:26 AM

Running the DX11 API is different than using any of the advanced features. Considering the HD 5770 will struggle to do AA and AO at the same time even at that resolution I doubt he's going to be using any of the advanced features of DX11.

Like I said above the 5770 is more than sufficient for that resolution. Just don't expect to turn on every bell and whistle especially with that slow CPU. The lower the resolution the more of the load is shifted to the CPU which is not a good thing in your case as your GPU is better than your CPU.
June 28, 2011 6:30:57 AM

striker410 said:
The 5770 is sufficient for your resolution. It is somewhat slow, but it's ok.

Yes it will run DX11! It takes more horsepower than DX10, but you should run it fine as long as you aren't trying to max games out.



For his resolution it should be plenty IMO. Games like Homefront & Dirt3 with 4x AA is a definite possibilty, unless he wants 60+ fps.
June 28, 2011 6:37:22 AM

striker410 said:
The 5770 is sufficient for your resolution. It is somewhat slow, but it's ok.

Yes it will run DX11! It takes more horsepower than DX10, but you should run it fine as long as you aren't trying to max games out.


So it can run DX11? Well, the thing that makes DX11 special is the tessellation feature. But as you and browsingtheworld said, perhaps I just should run on DX9 or 10 so I can max out settings without getting slow. Max settings plus more fps is more noticeable than DX11 right? Knowing that before, perhaps I should've downgraded my gpu and gave the extra bucks on the cpu. Too bad.
June 28, 2011 6:41:23 AM

The other poster does not know what he is talking about. Your system is just fine! It will play most games on high/max! You have a lovely system so don't worry about it!
June 28, 2011 6:45:12 AM

pratyaksa said:
Max settings plus more fps is more noticeable than DX11 right?


Wrong! I never understood this attitude. I'd play a game at 35fps on better looking settings (i.e Dx11) than 50fps on lower settings any day.
June 28, 2011 6:46:10 AM

The DX11 (D3D11) API will run on any DX11 card like the HD 5xxx series but you might not be able to use all the features. For example the HD 5570 can hardly use any DX10/11 features since it's such a slow card.

I would suspect that to get the best visual quality such as 4X AA and 16X AF you might have to forgo certain options like AO (ambient occlusion).

The GPU was fine but you could have built a better computer online sans OS.

The CPU isn't terrible it's just a bit weaker than you'd probably like for that GPU at that resolution. It'll still be able to max out many games and play many more at high/medium settings.

For the post above depends on what settings and what game; for a competitive online shoot you want as many FPS as you want regardless of quality. For many games like SC2 you would want higher quality if the frames are not too low. It's all a tradeoff and what's acceptable to you. Oh yeah vertical sync is must for anyone with a discerning eye.

For $550ish you can get a i3 + 4GB + better video card/everything online if you didn't need an OS.

People need to stop being defensive and read my constructive critiques which OP asked for :lol: 
June 28, 2011 6:54:15 AM

striker410 said:
The other poster does not know what he is talking about. Your system is just fine! It will play most games on high/max! You have a lovely system so don't worry about it!

There is a hope! Then can I play crysis with at least high settings on DX11? SC2 and any RTS are cpu dependent games, so I think my 3.0GHz quad cpu should run them fine.
Oh and the 450W PSU is sufficient, isn't it?
June 28, 2011 6:56:56 AM

Yes, you should rock the crysis just fine. And yes, your CPU is fine. The CPU can handle much tougher cards than that, so no worries about a bottleneck.

Yup! The 450w Enermax will do just fine.
June 28, 2011 7:08:56 AM

browsingtheworld said:
The DX11 (D3D11) API will run on any DX11 card like the HD 5xxx series but you might not be able to use all the features. For example the HD 5570 can hardly use any DX10/11 features since it's such a slow card.

I would suspect that to get the best visual quality such as 4X AA and 16X AF you might have to forgo certain options like AO (ambient occlusion).

The GPU was fine but you could have built a better computer online sans OS.

The CPU isn't terrible it's just a bit weaker than you'd probably like for that GPU at that resolution. It'll still be able to max out many games and play many more at high/medium settings.

For the post above depends on what settings and what game; for a competitive online shoot you want as many FPS as you want regardless of quality. For many games like SC2 you would want higher quality if the frames are not too low. It's all a tradeoff and what's acceptable to you. Oh yeah vertical sync is must for anyone with a discerning eye.

For $550ish you can get a i3 + 4GB + better video card/everything online if you didn't need an OS.

People need to stop being defensive and read my constructive critiques which OP asked for :lol: 

I don't really mind AA stuff. I heard it will cut fps by two-digits percent. Haven't tried yet, though.
Huh, $550 for i3-H61-4GB-better gpu? Well, yes, I could get them for $550 by sacrificing my monitor. It's over budget, unfortunately.
June 28, 2011 7:20:20 AM

Keep in mind that the best games are usually coded very well to run on multiple systems like old C2Ds and *shakes head* consoles since developers want to sell it to as many people as possible.

I'm just trying to say don't get hung up over DX11, it's mostly marketing hype.
June 28, 2011 7:37:27 AM

browsingtheworld said:
Keep in mind that the best games are usually coded very well to run on multiple systems like old C2Ds and *shakes head* consoles since developers want to sell it to as many people as possible.

I'm just trying to say don't get hung up over DX11, it's mostly marketing hype.

But the differences between DX9, 10 and 11 are noticeable and significant. Who cares if it's marketing hype or not. It's all about performance and fps. Should I run certain heavy games on DX9 and other on DX11 as long as it won't drop fps below 30?
June 28, 2011 7:43:01 AM

Put on vsync and try both with whatever settings you like and see what you like better. Either wait your games should look good. Relative to consoles it should be amazing.
June 28, 2011 7:58:56 AM

Okay, I will when I've picked up my PC.
So with that spec, what's your suggestion? Any advice?
June 28, 2011 10:19:29 AM

well since you've already bought it there isn't much to suggest :)  only I'd get another 2 gb of ram if you can afford it.
June 28, 2011 6:46:13 PM

I think you jumped the gun a little bit. You've purchased an overall nice system. You are likely feeling uneasy and second guessing yourself a bit. That's ok. I've second guessed myself so much I've still put off upgrading to a whole new system.

My suggestion is wait until you pick up your new rig and get your games installed. Make sure everything is up to date, and start playing those games and playing with the games' settings.

If after this you feel a particular game is not running as you'd expect, I'd then open a new thread about that game and of course listing your hardware specs and any settings you've used in the game. This will better focus the forum readers to a specific issue you are having.

Don't worry. Once you get the system fired up and running all of this uneasiness about your decision will seem silly.
June 28, 2011 11:28:44 PM

Yeah, thanks. I feel a bit uneasy, but I think that build is good for my budget. Except that perhaps I should've chosen GTS 450 instead and give the extra bucks on i3 2100 plus cheap ASRock H61 motherboard.
One problem, I need a DVI cable. The vga cable inside monitor box doesn't fit 5770. Dang!
June 28, 2011 11:45:09 PM

DVI to VGA cables are cheap. You can pick one up at best buy/fry's/radioshack.

And the 5770 just edges out the 450 in performance. So no worries there.
June 29, 2011 6:08:40 AM

AMD Athlon 64 X2 QL-65 2.1 Ghz
ATI Radeon HD 3200
4GB RAM, and i can play FIFA 11 (with a cooling pad) (Helps a lot)

It runs very smoothly so i would think you may be able to play them games.
Also if you already have this PC, then just google "systemrequirementslab" and go into Can you Run It and then just select the game you want to test. The site scans your your computer (safe) and then matches it up with your game. Its very good. Or you can download the demos to them games and check if they do work.
I also would'nt recommend you getting Medal Of Honour. Its not a great game but you can choose yourself. And yes it can run NFS Hot Pursuit, FIFA 11 i think.
I hope i have helped.
July 3, 2011 3:52:28 PM

Everything seems good, except that it crashes randomly and reboots and says 'hyper transport sync flood error... '. I have searched google about it and many said it's because of the msi motherboard, memory lack of voltage, bios update etc.Luckily I can return and replace it with a new one from local shopkeeper. Somehow I want to fix it myself.

Any idea?
July 3, 2011 6:20:26 PM

Without getting into technical detail, I'd like to point out that you paid a guy to build it and on principle alone, he should have to fix it. Have you contacted the builder yet with the issue? No ideas from me sadly... havent used AMD since athlon64 4000+ hehe.
July 4, 2011 12:03:41 AM

Okay, perhaps I should just return it and let the shopkeeper repair it. I have contacted him about this issue, and they said they could replace it.

Thanks.
!