$500 gaming PC

Approximate Purchase Date: over the summer

Budget Range: Under 650

System Usage from Most to Least Important: Gaming

Parts Not Required: keyboard, mouse, monitor, 6gb from older pc

Preferred Website(s) for Parts: Newegg.com or anywhere cheap

Country: America

Parts Preferences: Cheaper is better or anything reccomended

Overclocking: Not needed, but it would be nice

SLI or Crossfire: I might look into it in the future but not necessary

Monitor Resolution: 1920x1080 and maybe eyefinity


This is what i got so far: http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=14346109

I'm looking for anything that can be improved for little cost and please tell me if this is a good build.
52 answers Last reply
More about gaming
  1. I'd get the Radeon 7770 over the Radeon 6850. Same price and stock performance as the 6850, but more overclocking headroom and much lower power usage. Also, don't expect to be able to max out the settings at 1080p in any intense games on these cards. Otherwise, it looks nice, but I'd wait for Piledriver and low end Ivy Bridge before buying, just to have something that isn't using an already three year old CPU.
  2. I'm looking to play Diablo 3, LOL, AVA, and combat arms at 1080p. I currently have a radeon 7690m running diablo at max settings on 1080p. Would the 7770 offer the same performance as my laptop? Also according to thishttp://www.hwcompare.com/11925/radeon-hd-6850-vs-radeon-hd-7770/ the 6850 has higher performance. I'm kind of new so there may be things i'm missing.
  3. hwcompare.com does not use in-game benchmarks and their data is largely useless because of that. Trust me, the 7770 and 6850 are on-par.

    Also, the 7770 is far superior to the 7690M.

    Diablo 3 is one of the lightest modern games. It should have no problem at 1080p.
  4. guerrero said:


    Like I said, the 6850 is not a better card than the 7770. Also, I still recommend waiting before buying because a Pentium is not a future-proofed processor, especially a low end Pentium. It's your money, get what you want, but I'll still tell you that what I've recommended would be a better course of action for these computers. Also, I recommend getting 8GB of RAM instead of 4GB.
  5. blazorthon said:
    hwcompare.com does not use in-game benchmarks and their data is largely useless because of that. Trust me, the 7770 and 6850 are on-par.

    Also, the 7770 is far superior to the 7690M.

    Diablo 3 is one of the lightest modern games. It should have no problem at 1080p.



    Oh, il be looking for gaming benchmarks! As I said im getting this build
  6. blazorthon said:
    Like I said, the 6850 is not a better card than the 7770. Also, I still recommend waiting before buying because a Pentium is not a future-proofed processor, especially a low end Pentium. It's your money, get what you want, but I'll still tell you that what I've recommended would be a better course of action for your computer. Also, I recommend getting 8GB of RAM instead of 4GB.



    Then let's change this pentium for an i3 2120? Isnt the i3 better then the phenom he chose
  7. guerrero said:
    Then let's change this pentium for an i3 2120? Isnt the i3 better then the phenom he chose


    The point is that he should wait until Ivy Bridge and Piledriver are out before buying the computer. Also, the i3 and the Phenom II are fairly close and the Phenom II can be overclocked beyond the i3. At stock, yes, the i3 is slightly better.
  8. I have 6gigs of ram, but i'm not sure what speed. Would 6 gb be enough?
  9. hieumungous said:
    I have 6gigs of ram, but i'm not sure what speed. Would 6 gb be enough?


    Yes. My problem with 4GB is that it is too little, but 6GB is enough. However, it's recommended that we have an equal amount of RAM per RAM module in a kit, so the next step over 4GB (for msot people) is 8GB. Some OEM computers, especially laptops, ignore this, but when building your own computer, it is best not to because unlike with OEM computers, there is no guarantee that it will work or you get your money back.
  10. blazorthon said:
    The point is that he should wait until Ivy Bridge and Piledriver are out before buying the computer. Also, the i3 and the Phenom II are fairly close and the Phenom II can be overclocked beyond the i3. At stock, yes, the i3 is slightly better.


    He's not going to overclock and the 7770 is 128 and the 6850 is 256 bit, a lot of people would choose the 6850 because of the 256 bit and hes not going to overclock at all I suppose. I think he should stay with the 6850 in my opinion and get the i3 and wait for ivy bridge what?
  11. guerrero said:
    He's not going to overclock and the 7770 is 128 and the 6850 is 256 bit, a lot of people would choose the 6850 because of the 256 bit and hes not going to overclock at all I suppose. I think he should stay with the 6850 in my opinion and get the i3 and wait for ivy bridge what?


    Ivy Bridge is Intel's next CPU architecture and Piledriver is AMD's next architecture... Not a big techy, are you (no offense)? Also, the bit width of a card (it refers to the width of the memory interface) does not define it's performance. The GTX 680 is a 256 bit card, but it beats the 384 bit GTX 580 by a huge margin in gaming performance.

    Even without overclocking, the Phenom II is right between the Pentium and the i3 in gaming performance and the 7770 is also right next to the 6850 in gaming performance even without an overclock.
  12. blazorthon said:
    Ivy Bridge is Intel's next CPU architecture and Piledriver is AMD's next architecture... Not a big techy, are you (no offense)? Also, the bit width of a card (it refers to the width of the memory interface) does not define it's performance. The GTX 680 is a 256 bit card, but it beats the 384 bit GTX 580 by a huge margin.

    Even without overclocking, the Phenom II is right between the Pentium and the i3 in gaming performance and the 7770 is also right next to the 6850 in gaming performance even without an overclock.


    I just said that because Ivy Bridge already came out but I didnt see the low end Ivy Bridge and I havent followed any AMD news. Ive read stuff over some cards (256 vs 128) and people say that they would easily get a 256 over 128
  13. guerrero said:
    I just said that because Ivy Bridge already came out but I didnt see the low end Ivy Bridge and I havent followed any AMD news. Ive read stuff over some cards (256 vs 128) and people say that they would easily get a 256 over 128


    Yes, we're still waiting on the low/mid end Ivy Bridge CPUs and that is what I meant by wait for Ivy. If someone chooses a card based purely on the bit width of the memory interface, they don't know what they are doing and should get professional help from a techy before they buy the wrong card, unless they don't mind possibly buying the wrong card.
  14. 4 gig of RAM is not "too little" for gaming . Games are 32 bit programs and cant use much more than 3 gig EVER , even when you have a 64 bit OS .
    Im looking forward to some one presenting a benchmark that shows otherwise .........

    Worse still 6 gig as in 3 x2 gig sticks will force the mb to run the memory in single channel and that will kill half your memory bandwidth and thus REDUCE performance .

    The best budget build IMO
    AMD FX 4100 quadcore $100
    AM3+ motherboard with a 970 series chpset $85
    2 x2 gig of 1600 MHz RAM running at 1.5 volt $29
    500 watt psu $50ish
    Radeon 6870 $150
    CM 430 elite case $40
    dvd $ 19
    500 gig hard drive $75

    ~ $500

    and it will blow away the above suggestions , and has an upgrade path .
    Overclocking increases performance even further
  15. blazorthon said:
    Yes, we're still waiting on the low/mid end Ivy Bridge CPUs and that is what I meant by wait for Ivy. If someone chooses a card based purely on the bit width, they don't know what they are doing and should get professional help from a techy before they buy the wrong card, unless they don't mind possibly buying the wrong card.


    Yeah haha, il get the pentium g620 (5 bucks cheaper lol) and upgrade later to a low end ivy bridge later on (LGA 1155) but he should wait because I think he's getting this through the summer
  16. I've heard a lot about the bulldozer line and I'm not really sure what to expect with it, but if you have experience I'll consider your word for it.
  17. Outlander_04 said:
    4 gig of RAM is not "too little" for gaming . Games are 32 bit programs and cant use much more than 3 gig EVER , even when you have a 64 bit OS .
    Im looking forward to some one presenting a benchmark that shows otherwise .........

    Worse still 6 gig as in 3 x2 gig sticks will force the mb to run the memory in single channel and that will kill half your memory bandwidth and thus REDUCE performance .

    The best budget build IMO
    AMD FX 4100 quadcore $100
    AM3+ motherboard with a 970 series chpset $85
    2 x2 gig of 1600 MHz RAM running at 1.5 volt $29
    500 watt psu $50ish
    Radeon 6870 $150
    CM 430 elite case $40
    dvd $ 19
    500 gig hard drive $75

    ~ $500

    and it will blow away the above suggestions , and has an upgrade path .
    Overclocking increases performance even further


    Doesnt the Pentium beat the FX 4100?
  18. Outlander_04 said:
    4 gig of RAM is not "too little" for gaming . Games are 32 bit programs and cant use much more than 3 gig EVER , even when you have a 64 bit OS .
    Im looking forward to some one presenting a benchmark that shows otherwise .........

    Worse still 6 gig as in 3 x2 gig sticks will force the mb to run the memory in single channel and that will kill half your memory bandwidth and thus REDUCE performance .

    The best budget build IMO
    AMD FX 4100 quadcore $100
    AM3+ motherboard with a 970 series chpset $85
    2 x2 gig of 1600 MHz RAM running at 1.5 volt $29
    500 watt psu $50ish
    Radeon 6870 $150
    CM 430 elite case $40
    dvd $ 19
    500 gig hard drive $75

    ~ $500

    and it will blow away the above suggestions , and has an upgrade path .
    Overclocking increases performance even further


    Wrong. Several games are 64 bit and that's not even why more than 4GB is recommended, it's because of future-proofing and because the game plus Windows plus anything else CAN go over 4GB easily.

    Also, the FX-4100 is slower than the Phenom II 965. In fact, it's the slowest gaming processor that has been recommended in this thread so far.

    No one said 3x2GB to get 6GB. The way to get 6GB is either 1x2GB plus 1x4GB or 2x1GB plus 2x2GB. In fact, I specifically recommended against it, except for OEM laptops. Furthermore, using a 970 chipset motherboard means no Crossfire support.
  19. With the CPUs currently available, what would you recommend?
  20. I'd recommend waiting for low end Ivy Bridge and Piledriver CPUs to come out. Out of current CPUs, I'd recommend either the Phenom II 965 or the Pentium G620 and then upgrading the G620 to either an Ivy Bridge i3 or a cheap Ivy Bridge i5 when they come out.

    For the Phenom II, I'd recommend a motherboard that supports at least two graphics cards in Crossfire or SLI (IE NOT a 970 board) and for the Intel platform, I'd recommend a Z77 motherboard because they also support Crossfire and SLI. This would let you to install a second similar video card when you want to upgrade instead of replacing your current card. I still recommend the Radeon 7770 over the Radeon 6850 too.
  21. Do you have any idea what the price range for the ivy bridges will be?
  22. hieumungous said:
    Do you have any idea what the price range for the ivy bridges will be?


    Roughly the same as where Sandy Bridge CPUs are now, maybe a little cheaper.
  23. blazorthon said:
    I'd recommend waiting for low end Ivy Bridge and Piledriver CPUs to come out. Out of current CPUs, I'd recommend either the Phenom II 965 or the Pentium G620 and then upgrading the G620 to either an Ivy Bridge i3 or a cheap Ivy Bridge i5 when they come out.

    For the Phenom II, I'd recommend a motherboard that supports at least two graphics cards in Crossfire or SLI (IE NOT a 970 board) and for the Intel platform, I'd recommend a Z77 motherboard because they also support Crossfire and SLI. This would let you to install a second similar video card when you want to upgrade instead of replacing your current card. I still recommend the Radeon 7770 over the Radeon 6850 too.


    Which 7770 do you recommend?
  24. guerrero said:
    Which 7770 do you recommend?


    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127664

    I recommend this one.
  25. I'm looking for 8 gb ram for around 40$. Do you have any recommendations?
  26. hieumungous said:
    I'm looking for 8 gb ram for around 40$. Do you have any recommendations?


    What kind? links please lol
  27. blazorthon said:
    Wrong. Several games are 64 bit and that's not even why more than 4GB is recommended, it's because of future-proofing and because the game plus Windows plus anything else CAN go over 4GB easily.

    Also, the FX-4100 is slower than the Phenom II 965. In fact, it's the slowest gaming processor that has been recommended in this thread so far.

    No one said 3x2GB to get 6GB. The way to get 6GB is either 1x2GB plus 1x4GB or 2x1GB plus 2x2GB. In fact, I specifically recommended against it, except for OEM laptops. Furthermore, using a 970 chipset motherboard means no Crossfire support.

    +1 though you did forget:
    at most you may see a 5% performance difference between single an dual channel memory; not HALF the bandwidth decrease.
    though it is not exactly a point of discussion and i'll move along . . .
  28. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220570

    Is $45 okay? It has a free MicroSD card with SD adapter gift.
  29. Anonymous said:
    +1 though you did forget:
    at most you may see a 5% performance difference between single an dual channel memory; not HALF the bandwidth decrease.
    though it is not exactly a point of discussion and i'll move along . . .


    Oh, I didn't mean to say that dual channel doubles the bandwidth. Yes, you're right, it only improves it a little.
  30. guerrero said:
    What kind? links please lol


    There are dozens of ~$40 8GB DDR3 RAM kits. It's a very common price for 8GB.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007611%20600006050%20600006069%204025&IsNodeId=1&name=%2425%20-%20%2450
  31. blazorthon said:
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220570

    Is $45 okay? It has a free MicroSD card with SD adapter gift.


    45$ is fine thank you.
  32. hieumungous said:
    45$ is fine thank you.


    You're welcome.
  33. blazorthon said:
    There are dozens of ~$40 8GB DDR3 RAM kits. It's a very common price for 8GB.


    What do you think of this
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231308

    Vs this
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220570
  34. blazorthon said:
    Oh, I didn't mean to say that dual channel doubles the bandwidth. Yes, you're right, it only improves it a little.

    no you didn't imply that i shojuld have edited to include the post you replied to . .sorry long day at the "office"

    my "office" is doing roofing . .:p
  35. guerrero said:


    Both are great brands, but the Ripjaws is only 1066MHz, so I do not recommend it. The slowest memory frequency that I recommend right now is 1333MHz and even then, 1600MHz is a little better than 1333MHz despite it being almost the same price.
  36. Anonymous said:
    +1 though you did forget:
    at most you may see a 5% performance difference between single an dual channel memory; not HALF the bandwidth decrease.
    though it is not exactly a point of discussion and i'll move along . . .


    lose one of two channels the memory bandwidth is cut in half . You will see a total system performance reduction of bout 7 - 9 %


    And the pentium does NOT beat the FX 4100 .
    The belief that it does is based on a test using bottom ebnd cpu's and a $500 graphics card . Some architectures produced higher fps at lower resolutions . This has no correlation to using a graphics card like a 6870 and a 1080p monitor .
    When Tomshardware compare the FX 4100 with the i3 2100 at a range of resolutions the two were evenly matched . Performance was identical across most titles . A very few performed better with the I3 because they couldnt use more than two cores . Thats less likely to happen with future releases .
    Of course the FX can be overclocked by about 30% even on the stock cooler so the message is pretty clear : It can kick sand in the face of the i3 2100 ..............and since that's stronger than the pentium its easy to conclude that performance and value are better with an FX processor
  37. blazorthon said:
    Wrong. Several games are 64 bit and that's not even why more than 4GB is recommended, it's because of future-proofing and because the game plus Windows plus anything else CAN go over 4GB easily.



    a list of 64 bit games , please
  38. Outlander_04 said:
    a list of 64 bit games , please


    World of Warcraft has a 64 bit version. There are others too.
  39. Check my sig.
  40. $45 ($35 after mail in)
    COOLER MASTER GX 450W RS450-ACAAD3-US 450W ATX12V v2.31 80 PLUS BRONZE
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817171060

    $170
    i5 2500K
    http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0354589

    $30 ($20 after rebate)
    COOLER MASTER Hyper 212
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103065

    $55
    ASRock H61M-DGS LGA 1155 Intel H61
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157315

    $24
    Crucial Ballistix sport 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148419

    $200
    SAPPHIRE 11188-22-20G Radeon HD 6950 2GB
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102987

    $18
    ASUS 24X DVD Burner
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827135204

    $75
    Western Digital Caviar Blue WD5000AAKX 500GB
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136769

    $30
    Rosewill FBM-01 Dual Fans MicroATX Mini Tower Computer Case
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147123

    Total $647 before rebates and shipping.

    *if you need to purchase a copy of windows, swap the 2500k and Hyper 212 for

    $90
    I3 2100
    http://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.phtml?Ntt=i3+2100&submit.x=0&submit.y=0

    which with $100 win7 home would put it at $637 before rebates and shipping.
  41. Outlander_04 said:
    lose one of two channels the memory bandwidth is cut in half . You will see a total system performance reduction of bout 7 - 9 %
    <snip>

    me thinks not. old but very relevant.
  42. Outlander_04 said:
    a list of 64 bit games , please

    Lost Coast
    Bet On Soldier: Blood Sport
    Codename: Panzers (Phase one)
    Colin McRae Rally 2005
    Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay
    Far Cry
    Fahrenheit
    Shadow Ops: Red Mercury
    Unreal Tournament 2004
    WWII Tank Commander
    S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl
    Dreadnought
    Half-Life 2
    Half-Life 2: Lost Coast
    Bet on Soldier: Blood Sport
    Indigo Prophecy
    Shadow Ops: Red Mercury
    Dreadnoughts
    Crysis Warhead
    Crysis
    BioShock 2
    Hellgate: London
  43. Anonymous said:


    Not relevant at all due to it's age. Besides, gaming is generally not as sensitive about RAM performance as other software (which generally still isn't a whole lot). It's also not relevant because it's a synthetic benchmark and does not always reflect what you will see during gameplay.
  44. blazorthon said:
    Not relevant at all due to it's age. Besides, gaming is generally not as sensitive about RAM performance as other software (which generally still isn't a whole lot).

    i might debate the age aspect, granted ddr3 is much faster so the difference *may* be greater though i it think it squashes the 7%-9% POV.

    EDIT:
    also i think it points out that yes, i stand corrected that half the bandwidth is not used in single channel as compared to dual channel; it however is not "needed".
  45. Anonymous said:


    Not at all relevant since you are also talking about the days of DX 9 .
    And gaming performance is one small part of system performance

    Try again
  46. Anonymous said:
    Lost Coast
    Bet On Soldier: Blood Sport
    Codename: Panzers (Phase one)
    Colin McRae Rally 2005
    Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay
    Far Cry
    Fahrenheit
    Shadow Ops: Red Mercury
    Unreal Tournament 2004
    WWII Tank Commander
    S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl
    Dreadnought
    Half-Life 2
    Half-Life 2: Lost Coast
    Bet on Soldier: Blood Sport
    Indigo Prophecy
    Shadow Ops: Red Mercury
    Dreadnoughts
    Crysis Warhead
    Crysis
    BioShock 2
    Hellgate: London


    Im aware of the limited number of 64 bit ports of game titles . These are rare exceptions , and are not going to be on the shelves of retail shops within the lifetime of a computer anyone builds today .

    THERE IS NO POINT IN THAT BEING THE CASE SINCE NO GRAPHICS CARD EXIST THAT CAN MAKE USE OF A 64 BIT GAME .
    Graphics cards have a max of 3 gig of RAM . About the limit for a 32 bit program .

    Gamers dont need more than 4 gig of RAM [ unless they want a browser window with 93 tabs open and are running a huge photo manipulation program and excel all at the same time ......... and seriously do you know anyone who does that? It would have to be a seriously bad game
  47. All I keep hearing is my iPod beep when I get an email, thank you guys lol :fou:
  48. Outlander_04 said:
    Im aware of the limited number of 64 bit ports of game titles . These are rare exceptions , and are not going to be on the shelves of retail shops within the lifetime of a computer anyone builds today .

    THERE IS NO POINT IN THAT BEING THE CASE SINCE NO GRAPHICS CARD EXIST THAT CAN MAKE USE OF A 64 BIT GAME .
    Graphics cards have a max of 3 gig of RAM . About the limit for a 32 bit program .

    Gamers dont need more than 4 gig of RAM [ unless they want a browser window with 93 tabs open and are running a huge photo manipulation program and excel all at the same time ......... and seriously do you know anyone who does that? It would have to be a seriously bad game


    The graphics card's RAM has nothing to do with it. Referring to it shows extreme ignorance of the entire subject. 64 bit has nothing to do with the graphics RAM, it has to do with the main system RAM connected to the CPU. Many games use too much memory for 4GB. That is why 64 bit versions were made. 64 bit or 32 bit refers to the maximum bit width of a memory address in a program and in this case, the program is run on the CPU. The 64 bit refers to the code being run by the CPU.

    Beyond that, that list is not a list of all 64 bit games, just some, and furthermore, it's more than long enough to prove that 64 bit games aren't rare. Most games today have 64 bit versions. 32 bit games (excluding indie games) are less common.

    Also, graphics cards don't have a maximum of 3GB of VRAM. There are several with 4GB (there are several GTX 670s and 680s with 4GB of VRAM and some older single GPU cards also have 4GB). Furthermore, there are 6GB per GPU graphics cards. Some professional graphics cards have even higher VRAM capacities. Many dual GPU cards have more than 3GB of VRAM.
Ask a new question

Read More

New Build Monitors Systems Product