Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New Build: $1100 Budget

Last response: in Systems
Share
February 16, 2012 4:02:48 AM

Approximate Purchase Date: Now

Budget Range: $1100

System Usage from Most to Least Important: Gaming and Surfing the web.

Parts Not Required: keyboard, mouse, monitor, speakers, Windows 7 Pro

Preferred Website(s) for Parts: NewEgg

Country: USA

Parts Preferences: Look at Link below.

Overclocking: Maybe

SLI or Crossfire: No

Monitor Resolution: 1920x1080


http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx...

I would like to know if the i3-2120 would be okay with the GTX 580?
From the research I have done, unless the game is programmed for Hyperthreading Tech, then more powerful CPUs only improve fps by a small margin. I may be wrong? I believe the biggest improvement in fps is the GPU, so I put my money where it counts.


More about : build 1100 budget

February 16, 2012 4:27:36 AM

You don't want a dual core (i3) for gaming. You want a quad core (i5). The 2500K if you plan on over clocking sometime in the future, or if not then look at the i5 2400.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... $104.99
ASRock Z68 PRO3 GEN3 LGA 1155 Intel Z68 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
m
0
l
February 16, 2012 4:29:33 AM

Why don't I want a dual core for gaming?
m
0
l
Related resources
February 16, 2012 4:40:16 AM

MechSoup said:
Why don't I want a dual core for gaming?

Because a quad core beats a dual core hands down in gaming and by a significant margin at that. Google: 1155 i3 vs 1155 i5

i3 = dual core

i5 = quad core

i7 = quad core w/hyper threading
m
0
l
February 16, 2012 4:49:22 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kd4dvLJQP4

8150 @ stock
Metro- min-27 max-60 avg-43
BFBC2- min-45 max-94 avg-65
Crysis2- min-42 max-91 avg-58
Lost Planet2- avg-33
Dirt3- min-75 avg-99
Cinebench- 5.84

i5 2500K @ stock
Metro- min-27 max-59 avg-43
BFBC2- min-44 max-97 avg-65
Crysis2-min-36 max-88 avg-62
LostPlanet2- avg-34
Dirt3- min-79 avg-105
Cinebench- 5.12

Looks like BD fx - 8150 and i5 2500k are pretty similar in terms of gaming performance add in the additional average cost of an Intel platform and slightly higher cost of the 8150 chip and looks like AMD and Intel offer up pretty even results on average as far as gaming as I have outlined and double certified above with link provided.
m
0
l
February 16, 2012 5:07:49 AM

Boopoo said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kd4dvLJQP4

8150 @ stock
Metro- min-27 max-60 avg-43
BFBC2- min-45 max-94 avg-65
Crysis2- min-42 max-91 avg-58
Lost Planet2- avg-33
Dirt3- min-75 avg-99
Cinebench- 5.84

i5 2500K @ stock
Metro- min-27 max-59 avg-43
BFBC2- min-44 max-97 avg-65
Crysis2-min-36 max-88 avg-62
LostPlanet2- avg-34
Dirt3- min-79 avg-105
Cinebench- 5.12

Looks like BD fx - 8150 and i5 2500k are pretty similar in terms of gaming performance add in the additional average cost of an Intel platform and slightly higher cost of the 8150 chip and looks like AMD and Intel offer up pretty even results on average as far as gaming as I have outlined and double certified above with link provided.

AMD isn't even in the same ball park as Sandy Bridge and it's going to get worse for AMD when Ivy Bridge is released this spring. That cpu you suggested retails for $240 and that's for the OEM version. It's a poor over clocker, a power hog, and it's on yesterday's technology.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review... <----- try those benchmarks.
m
0
l
February 16, 2012 5:25:01 AM

Why_Me said:
AMD isn't even in the same ball park as Sandy Bridge and it's going to get worse for AMD when Ivy Bridge is released this spring. That cpu you suggested retails for $240 and that's for the OEM version. It's a poor over clocker, a power hog, and it's on yesterday's technology.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review... <----- try those benchmarks.

No it's new tech and I had my 8150 OCed stable @ 5ghz so they overclock well and 24/7 stable @ 4.6ghz for 6mon always on.
m
0
l
February 16, 2012 2:17:58 PM

Why_Me said:
Because a quad core beats a dual core hands down in gaming and by a significant margin at that. Google: 1155 i3 vs 1155 i5

i3 = dual core

i5 = quad core

i7 = quad core w/hyper threading


http://www.gamefront.com/pc-gaming-101-is-quad-core-bet...

It seems that games are making a shift toward taking advantage of using more cores. This doesn't mean that all games support multicores. I guess that answer to the question is: what games do I want to play? At this point you can decide if its worth the extra bucks.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/cpu-scaling-in-games-with...

Although this link above came about almost 4 yrs ago, it confirms that Dual Core gaming is not obsolete, its just that games are shifting toward multicores.

My thought with getting the GTX 580 is that the increase in the fps would be more substantial (say over a GTX 560 Ti) with a dual core vs a quad core with a lower performing GPU (say a GTX 560 Ti)?
m
0
l
February 16, 2012 2:53:18 PM

Want to play games?

Stick to this list: Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: February 2012
Reference: Picking A Sub-$200 Gaming CPU: FX, An APU, Or A Pentium?

Usually some people talk about "in the future shall be good" when talking about the FX line.
TODAY games are starting to use more than 2 threads (2 cores), a punchload of games still not use more than this.
The first quad-core for consumer was release in november, 2006, more than 5 years ago. If the main purpose was to play games, the owner waited more than 5 years to REALLY start using it nicely. And when he started to use, there's in the market some much better cpus to use.

You can think in the future, but don't expect to developers heavily use many cores in their applications, this isn't easy.
Want a "bulletproof" cpu with awesome performance now? And OC like hell to increase performance as needed?
i5-2500k is the answer.

But if don't have the money, i3-2100 is a very nice one! (again, check the reviews and see that sometimes this cpu loses in a few games by a minor margin, and sometimes is faster by a nice margin..)

Boopoo posts a video that performance are equal between FX-8150 and i5-2500k.
He's right, the performance are equal in these softwares/games, but check more reviews, you gonna see that in games usually i5-2500k exceed at games, and sometimes FX catch him..
m
0
l
February 16, 2012 6:50:31 PM

vitornob said:
Want to play games?

Stick to this list: Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: February 2012
Reference: Picking A Sub-$200 Gaming CPU: FX, An APU, Or A Pentium?

Usually some people talk about "in the future shall be good" when talking about the FX line.
TODAY games are starting to use more than 2 threads (2 cores), a punchload of games still not use more than this.
The first quad-core for consumer was release in november, 2006, more than 5 years ago. If the main purpose was to play games, the owner waited more than 5 years to REALLY start using it nicely. And when he started to use, there's in the market some much better cpus to use.

You can think in the future, but don't expect to developers heavily use many cores in their applications, this isn't easy.
Want a "bulletproof" cpu with awesome performance now? And OC like hell to increase performance as needed?
i5-2500k is the answer.

But if don't have the money, i3-2100 is a very nice one! (again, check the reviews and see that sometimes this cpu loses in a few games by a minor margin, and sometimes is faster by a nice margin..)

Boopoo posts a video that performance are equal between FX-8150 and i5-2500k.
He's right, the performance are equal in these softwares/games, but check more reviews, you gonna see that in games usually i5-2500k exceed at games, and sometimes FX catch him..

Mosts games the FX CPUs perform great in but the games that are broken like Batman AC need help its just buggy games that hold back hardware that goes for Intel as well.
m
0
l
!