Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

[HELP] $2000 Gaming PC

Last response: in Systems
Share
May 29, 2012 11:41:31 PM

Approximate Purchase Date: In the next few months

Budget Range: $2000 before rebates but can take some after

System Usage from Most to Least Important: Battlefield 3 maxing on ultra preset 64 player conquest map overlooking all the mayham and remaining 100+ fps >.>

Parts Not Required: OS, Moniter

Preferred Website(s) for Parts:Newegg

Country: USA

Parts Preferences: Want the most powerful GPU setup possible in $2000. Want to use the Rosewill Thor v2 White case.

Overclocking: Maybe

SLI or Crossfire: Yes

Monitor Resolution: 1920x1080

Additional Comments: Must use Thor v2 white case by rosewill, must MAX BF3 by my standards (64 player conquest looking over all the mayham 100+ fps) and last a bloody long time.

Honestly im not really going for a ton of overclocking, i listed the 1000w PSU is because i might upgrade to a 3 or 4 card sli/crossfire config LATER when the PC is sort of out of shape. I want it to last long and future proof itself. I also need to include the accessories listed there for it. (definitely BF3, kb / mouse (wireless) and headset (wireless) and an extra 120mm case fan (blue), I also don't need an SSD because I have like 10 of them

This is what ive chosen so far:

More about : 2000 gaming

May 29, 2012 11:55:26 PM

Drop the TIM. The Cooler comes with paste tube of MX-4.
m
0
l
May 29, 2012 11:56:17 PM
Related resources
May 30, 2012 12:00:51 AM

Just go with two 680s and that would put you at around 1900 if you use the rest of HouseBoratheon's build... the i5 3570k is amazing and the 680s will blow you away. If you want to spend more cash you could also do the Corsair AX 850 PSU.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 12:01:54 AM

What House^ said. The most important thing to note if BF3 domination is your goal is that 2x 670 will trash 2x 7970 for $200 less.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 12:05:03 AM

Bones2525 said:
Just go with two 680s and that would put you at around 1900 if you use the rest of HouseBoratheon's build... the i5 3570k is amazing and the 680s will blow you away. If you want to spend more cash you could also do the Corsair AX 850 PSU.
I agree 2x680>2x670 but A. 670s are easier to obtain and B. 2x680s on a 1920x1080 is just a waist IMO. if the op will do a multi monitor setup in the future I would support the 680s though
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 12:16:30 AM

I pretty much disagree with most that has been said thus far.

I have two 6970s that are approximately 40%-50% weaker than two 670s (depending on the game and various scaling) and 50%-60% weaker than two 680s. I game on a single 1080p monitor and deeply regret spending the money on a second 6970.

The 670/680 SLi solution is significantly faster than the 6970 crossfire, and unless you have a 120Hz monitor and/or plan on using 3D Vision or even 3D surround, a dual 680/670 solution at this point and time would be incredibly foolish.

Such foolishness is compounded further once you consider that the 2GB framebuffer will likely provide a nasty bottleneck long before the card's architecture becomes dated.

I recommend putting your money into a nice 80+ Platinum PSU (something that you can build around for years), a couple of SSDs in raid, a nifty case with plenty of room, and other goodies. Pick yourself up a couple of 7870s and enjoy the best of 1080p gaming for the next few years.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 12:26:38 AM

PCgamer81 said:
I pretty much disagree with most that has been said thus far.

I have two 6970s that are approximately 40%-50% weaker than two 670s (depending on the game and various scaling) and 50%-60% weaker than two 680s. I game on a single 1080p monitor and deeply regret spending the money on a second 6970.

The 670/680 SLi solution is significantly faster than the 6970 crossfire, and unless you have a 120Hz monitor and/or plan on using 3D Vision or even 3D surround, a dual 680/670 solution at this point and time would be incredibly foolish.

Such foolishness is compounded further once you consider that the 2GB framebuffer will likely provide a nasty bottleneck long before the card's architecture becomes dated.

I recommend putting your money into a nice 80+ Platinum PSU (something that you can build around for years), a couple of SSDs in raid, a nifty case with plenty of room, and other goodies. Pick yourself up a couple of 7870s and enjoy the best of 1080p gaming for the next few years.
well 2x 670s are only $80 more expensive than 2x 7870 and are better so I do not see any logic here. Also if you worried about bottleneck than get the 680 4gb ftw single http://www.evga.com/products/moreInfo.asp?pn=04G-P4-368... 600 Series Family&sw=
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 12:34:59 AM

Houseboratheon said:
well 2x 670s are only $80 more expensive than 2x 7870 and are better so I do not see any logic here.

Don't worry, there was no logic to be seen. OP wanted to destroy BF3, and any thinking person knows that SLI 670s are the prescription for that fever.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 2:19:24 AM

He said he wanted the best graphics setup and stay in the 2000 dollar budget... so that's what i did :I
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 2:21:56 AM

Bones2525 said:
He said he wanted the best graphics setup and stay in the 2000 dollar budget... so that's what i did :I

Oh, you're great, was just saying that AMD (especially second tier stuff) doesn't fit the bill.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 2:29:39 AM

cuecuemore said:
Don't worry, there was no logic to be seen. OP wanted to destroy BF3, and any thinking person knows that SLI 670s are the prescription for that fever.

There is logic for the logical.

To be blunt, "destroying Battlefield 3" is a particularly base and childish way for you to look at it, born of an endeavor that indicates ignorance and immaturity in the light of actual facts and hardware statistics. Considering the performance level of dual 7870s, which meet or exceed the OP's stated goal of 100fps in BF3, spending considerably more for a graphics solution that would not only be extreme overkill for 1080p, but would likely provide a VRAM bottleneck long before the architecture is dated (a bottleneck that would be exposed in a dual card configuration), would be incredibly stupid.

Not to mention that 100fps is a goal I call into question once you consider that the OP made absolutely no reference to the 1080p monitor's refresh rate, whereas anything over 60fps (without a 120Hz monitor) would merely result in screen tearing and unnecessary taxation of hardware resources, while yielding virtually no visual improvement whatsoever.

Two 670s/680s are simply the wrong choice considering the OP's desired specifications provided in the above descriptions. It is a fact that is self-evident (for the informed PC enthusiast) to the point that I will no longer grant your insanity credibility by debating with you further.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 2:32:57 AM

Bones2525 said:
He said he wanted the best graphics setup and stay in the 2000 dollar budget... so that's what i did :I

Yea I Totally support your build I don't personally know whether he wants the keyboard and mouse and games included in that budget though, so I just went with the 670s to give him more headroom for accessories. But if he wants them separated then yes I support the 680 decision
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 2:37:07 AM

PCgamer81 said:
There is logic for the logical.

To be blunt, "destroying Battlefield 3" is a particularly base and childish way for you to look at it, born of an endeavor that indicates ignorance and immaturity in the light of actual facts and hardware statistics. Considering the performance level of dual 7870s, which meet or exceed the OP's stated goal of 100fps in BF3, spending considerably more for a graphics solution that would not only be extreme overkill for 1080p, but would likely provide a VRAM bottleneck long before the architecture is dated (a bottleneck that would be exposed in a dual card configuration), would be incredibly stupid.

Not to mention that 100fps is a goal I call into question once you consider that the OP made absolutely no reference to the 1080p monitor's refresh rate, whereas anything over 60fps (without a 120Hz monitor) would merely result in screen tearing and unnecessary taxation of hardware resources, while yielding virtually no visual improvement whatsoever.

Two 670s/680s are simply the wrong choice considering the OP's desired specifications provided in the above descriptions. It is a fact that is self-evident (for the informed PC enthusiast) to the point that I will no longer grant your insanity credibility by debating with you further.

and I said that if you want to take in to account the possibility of a 2gb VRAM bottleneck in the future then just to go with a 680 4gb ftw which is about $100 cheaper than dual 7870s.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 2:42:11 AM

TLDR, but no, there isn't, not for anyone who's seen BF3 benchies on 670/680 vs AMD.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 2:57:47 AM

I would also like to point out that the OP is asking for advice on a gaming PC. The emphasis of this build is not on graphics cards alone. Loyalty to Nvidia and/or "the particular graphics card you have" yields the OP no logical advice whatsoever.

There are plenty of other facets of a gaming machine that are relevant to this thread. Building a balanced gaming machine in light of the OP's stated aspirations and budget should be the primary goal of any helpful poster in this thread.

OP: I would recommend that you go with your current choices with a few changes.

Drop the i7 2600k (which provides no real advantage in gaming) in favor of the i5 2500k.

Drop the double 7970 in favor of two 7870s.

Drop the Hyper 212+.

Use the extra money on a better CPU cooler (perhaps a water cooling system) for better and more stable overclocking to meet the demands of two high end cards. Choose a better motherboard (if possible with dual x16 PCI-E slots). And grab yourself an an SSD for your OS.

Not only will you be able to experience BF3 at an exceptionally high framerate, but such a build is balanced well and will afford you an overall better gaming experience for your situation and price range.



m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:00:09 AM

At $350, the 7870 is not good price/performance. He'd be better off with CF 7850 and OCing them.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:01:14 AM

PCgamer81 said:
I would also like to point out that the OP is asking for advice on a gaming PC. The emphasis of this build is not on graphics cards alone. Loyalty to Nvidia and/or "the particular graphics card you have" yields the OP no logical advice whatsoever.

There are plenty of other facets of a gaming machine that are relevant to this thread. Building a balanced gaming machine in light of the OP's stated aspirations and budget should be the goal of any helpful poster in this thread.

OP:I would recommend that you go with your current choices with a few changes.

Drop the i7 2600k (which provides no real advantage in gaming) in favor of the i5 2500k.

Drop the double 7970 in favor of two 7870s.

Drop the Hyper 212+.

Use the extra money on a better CPU cooler (perhaps a water cooling system) for better and more stable overclocking to meet the demands of two high end cards. Choose a better motherboard (if possible with dual x16 PCI-E slots). And grab yourself an an SSD for your OS.

Not only will you be able to experience BF3 at an exceptionally high framerate, but such a build is balanced well and will afford you an overall better gaming experience for your situation and price range.

Lol I'm not pointing out gpu alone. I gave him my advice on a well balanced build several posts ago.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:02:40 AM

azeem40 said:
At $350, the 7870 is not good price/performance. He'd be better off with CF 7850 and OCing them.

Normally, I would agree.

But I have to take into account his desired goal of "100fps or more" in BF3. As such, the 7870 crossfire is the best solution for his particular situation in light of his budget.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:04:35 AM

I missed that part about running at 100+ fps. Ignore my comment then lol. :p 
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:10:43 AM

azeem40 said:
I missed that part about running at 100+ fps. Ignore my comment then lol. :p 

It happens to me a lot, too. :p 
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:20:19 AM

Houseboratheon said:
Lol I'm not pointing out gpu alone. I gave him my advice on a well balanced build several posts ago.

Balanced?

A $2000 build with a CPU that runs hotter than a Sandy Bridge and cannot be overclocked as well, a second rate cooler, an overpriced motherboard with dual x8 PCI-E slots, and a PSU that barely cuts the mustard.

Balanced?

No. You fanboi'd that one in, that's what you did. You "made room".

That's a no no when it comes to good advice on Tom's Hardware, especially when you take into account crossfire scaling of 7870s, which when paired will cost about $150 less while yielding performance comparable to dual 670s. Not to mention that the day is fast approaching when the 2GB framebuffer will stick out like a sore thumb on SLi'd 670s, while the 4GB version just isn't logical considering it's price hike.

You need to go to bed, and when you wake up in the morning, pack a lunch before you come at me with anymore of that nonsense. :non: 
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:22:28 AM

I disagree with you on your first point. From reviews, you can see that Ib only needs 4.2 Ghz OC to match 4.5 GHz on SB.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:24:16 AM

PCgamer81 said:
Balanced?

A $2000 build with a CPU that runs hotter than a Sandy Bridge and cannot be overclocked as well, a second rate cooler, an overpriced motherboard with dual x8 PCI-E slots, and a PSU that barely cuts the mustard.

Balanced?

No. You fanboi'd that one in, that's what you did. You "made room".

That is a no no when it comes to good advice on Tom's Hardware, especially when you take into account crossfire scaling of 7870s, which when paired will cost about $150 less while yielding performance comparable to dual 670s. Not to mention that the day is fast approaching when the 2GB framebuffer will stick out like a sore thumb on SLi'd 670s, while the 4GB version just isn't logical considering it's price hike.

My build was $1600 but nice try, and if you think that you cannot OC a i5 3570k to 4.2ghz with a hyper 212 evo and remain in cool temps than you are reallllly screwed up.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:26:21 AM

azeem40 said:
I disagree with you on your first point. From reviews, you can see that Ib only needs 4.2 Ghz OC to match 4.5 GHz on SB.

With good cooling the SB can approach clocks the IB simply cannot. There isn't any doubt which microarch' is superior when it comes to gaming.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:26:51 AM

PCgamer81 said:
Balanced?

A $2000 build with a CPU that runs hotter than a Sandy Bridge and cannot be overclocked as well, a second rate cooler, an overpriced motherboard with dual x8 PCI-E slots, and a PSU that barely cuts the mustard.

Balanced?

No. You fanboi'd that one in, that's what you did. You "made room".

That's a no no when it comes to good advice on Tom's Hardware, especially when you take into account crossfire scaling of 7870s, which when paired will cost about $150 less while yielding performance comparable to dual 670s. Not to mention that the day is fast approaching when the 2GB framebuffer will stick out like a sore thumb on SLi'd 670s, while the 4GB version just isn't logical considering it's price hike.

You need to go to bed, and when you wake up in the morning, pack a lunch before you come at me with anymore of that nonsense. :non: 

Also how does a 750w for 670s in sli barely cut the mustard? You are literally insane, 750w is more than enough for sli 670s and OCing to 4.2ghz
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:27:18 AM

Houseboratheon said:
My build was $1600 but nice try, and if you think that you cannot OC a i5 3570k to 4.2ghz with a hyper 212 evo and remain in cool temps than you are reallllly screwed up.

Are you really desperate to the point that you have to resort to pounding on a straw man?
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:29:06 AM

PCgamer81 said:
With good cooling the SB can approach clocks the IB simply cannot. There isn't any doubt which microarch' is superior when it comes to gaming.

Well he did say this was a gaming build and anything above 4.2ghz ivy will not show any noticeable performance boost
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:30:33 AM

Houseboratheon said:
Also how does a 750w for 670s in sli barely cut the mustard? You are literally insane, 750w is more than enough for sli 670s and OCing to 4.2ghz


A PSU is most effective running at about 40%-60% load.

At 250w a pop (not to mention other components), a shoddy, 80+ nuthin' 750w PSU is inexcusable considering the OP's budget.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:31:02 AM

You fail to get that any OC above SB 4.5 GHz gives negligible performance boosts. I have seen many people on overclock.net get good temps at 4.5 GHz on IB with a Hyper 212 EVO.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:37:12 AM

PCgamer81 said:
A PSU is most effective running at about 40%-60% load.

At 250w a pop (not to mention other components), a shoddy, 80+ nuthin' 750w PSU is inexcusable considering the OP's budget.

You do know that bronze, silver, gold, and platinum are the same in performance correct? The 80 plus is only for energy bill savings so that was a worthless point,
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:49:58 AM

Efficiency and power saving is not the same thing. The ratings refer to how much of the total load the PSU pulls from the wall.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 3:58:47 AM

The psu baratheon posted isn't that great. I'd go for a bronze rated (preferably gold) or above 80+ ~800W psu from corsair, seasonic or xfx.

The cooler doesn't need switching, but that depends on the OC. If comparing the performance between SB and IB, IB will do more at a lesser clockspeed. So IB 4.8 GHz roughly equal to SB 5.0 GHz. But for moderate OC's the temps won't be much hotter than that of a 2500K.

And i do agree that sli 670 is overkill for a single monitor solution at that res. CF 7850/7870 is the better solution.

Also, the mobo isn't that bad. While it is a bit overpriced, it having 2 x8 lanes of pcie 3.0 is pretty standard. Having 2 x16 lanes won't give any noticeable increases in performance anyways :p 
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 4:03:58 AM

bennaye said:
The psu baratheon posted isn't that great. I'd go for a bronze rated (preferably gold) or above 80+ ~800W psu from corsair, seasonic or xfx.

The cooler doesn't need switching, but that depends on the OC. If comparing the performance between SB and IB, IB will do more at a lesser clockspeed. So IB 4.8 GHz roughly equal to SB 5.0 GHz. But for moderate OC's the temps won't be much hotter than that of a 2500K.

And i do agree that sli 670 is overkill for a single monitor solution at that res. CF 7850/7870 is the better solution.

Also, the mobo isn't that bad. While it is a bit overpriced, it having 2 x8 lanes of pcie 3.0 is pretty standard. Having 2 x16 lanes won't give any noticeable increases in performance anyways :p 

The psu was bronze rated, 750w is enough and it has a 5 star rating.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 4:58:17 AM

PCgamer81 said:
Are you really desperate to the point that you have to resort to pounding on a straw man?

It's an ad hom, not a straw man, and he's still right. About everything. Please OP, just get 670s (or 680s) on a 750w PSU. Chart at the bottom of this page should show you all you need to know:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/asus-geforce-gtx-670-dire...

Edit: Wow, just too much we have to correct you on. They're not 250w a pop, 170w stock, won't hit 250w even heavily overclocked.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 9:00:28 PM

Honestly im not really going for a ton of overclocking, i listed the 1000w PSU is because i might upgrade to a 3 or 4 card sli/crossfire config LATER when the PC is sort of out of shape. I want it to last long and future proof itself. Honestly i find it that I can always upgrade CPU and RAM but I need my GPUs to last. I also need to include the accessories listed there for it. (definitely BF3, kb / mouse (wireless) and headset (wireless) and an extra 120mm case fan (blue), I also don't need an SSD because I have like 10 of them :p 
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 9:02:14 PM

By the time that happens, a single card solution will run without many issues. :) 
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 9:26:44 PM

Well there is no CURRENT single card solution cept the 690...
and boy the 690... never. in. stock.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 9:31:22 PM

Not what I meant. :p 
I mean that there will be a single GPU upgrade that is more worth it than adding CF/SLi in to the mix.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 9:31:46 PM

So do you want the accessories you listed? or do you want us to include amazing accessories also.
m
0
l
May 31, 2012 10:09:31 AM

Nvidia fanboys make me sick.

Loyalty should NEVER cause one to give advice contrary to the facts.
m
0
l
May 31, 2012 10:19:01 AM

cuecuemore said:
It's an ad hom, not a straw man, and he's still right. About everything. Please OP, just get 670s (or 680s) on a 750w PSU. Chart at the bottom of this page should show you all you need to know:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/asus-geforce-gtx-670-dire...

Edit: Wow, just too much we have to correct you on. They're not 250w a pop, 170w stock, won't hit 250w even heavily overclocked.

Ad-hom is when someone marginalizes someone's credibility in regards to whatever he/she is contending and for a totally unrelated fact.

Beating on a straw man was exactly what he was doing. Boy, you sure do want to be smart, don't you?

Well, you're not.

Anyone who would contend that a 670/680 in SLi is a reasonable choice for the OP's build @ 1080p has no place on Tom's Hardware and if I were the mods I would ban you now lest the credibility of my tech forum be damaged by the fools.
m
0
l
May 31, 2012 12:23:17 PM

PCgamer81 said:
Ad-hom is when someone marginalizes someone's credibility in regards to whatever he/she is contending and for a totally unrelated fact.

Beating on a straw man was exactly what he was doing. Boy, you sure do want to be smart, don't you?

Well, you're not.

Anyone who would contend that a 670/680 in SLi is a reasonable choice for the OP's build @ 1080p has no place on Tom's Hardware and if I were the mods I would ban you now lest the credibility of my tech forum be damaged by the fools.

If you dont like my advice then fine, but it is not your place to assume whether my advice is reasonable or not. In an case the people who should not be on tomshardware are the peoplewho say what I never said. I never once said 680s sli for the op so nice job making up lies.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 7:11:12 PM

Why must it become a rage thread =/
Im fighting between Dual 7970's and 670's
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 9:59:41 PM

He is a forum member, and it is our job to criticize other's builds if it is unreasonable. He is right; SLIng a GTX 670 at 1080p is ridiculous. One GTX 670 will get him the results he needs.
m
0
l
June 2, 2012 12:24:30 AM

Thank you azeem.
m
0
l
June 2, 2012 12:28:48 AM

Now that I can finally think clearly, let me ask...

What is the refresh rate on your 1080p monitor?

If it is 60Hz, then anything over a 7850 would be utterly retarded for 1080p.

If it is 120Hz, than 7870 Crossfire would be the way to go, and maybe even 7850 crossfire (which would save you a bit of $ for other things).
m
0
l
June 2, 2012 2:16:25 AM

I posted before, its a 120hz dell, and I mostly want the MOST future proofing possible, I want this to last atleast 8 years, like like current build with a 7600gt :s
m
0
l
June 2, 2012 6:03:38 AM

Then I would recommend dual 7870s.

You will not be future proofed with 2GB of VRAM, even at 1080p. And the 4GB version of 6xx series cards are atrociously priced.

Go with a couple of 3GB 7870s and an i5 2500k. Maybe get a water cooling system.

Get yourself one helluva nice PSU. I have a Seasonic Platinum 1000. You get a PSU like that and it will be the last one you will ever have to buy, I promise you that.

Don't go boratheon your $2000 away on obsolete, here today gone tomorrow components. Build yourself a balanced machine and be proud of it.
m
0
l
June 12, 2012 2:29:50 AM

I have actually decided to do 3 monitor 1200p gaming =/ What are your suggestions now?
m
0
l
!