Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

My Final Build -- Looking for any last minute input

Last response: in Systems
Share
October 11, 2012 3:54:38 AM

Just looking for any cross analysis before I pull the trigger on all of this. My budget is MAXED.

CPU: i3-2100 @ 3.10ghz $82
MOBO: ASRock H77M Micro ATX $70
RAM: G.SKILL Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) $34
GRAPHICS: HIS Radeon HD 7850 1GB $165
HDD: WD Caviar Blue 500GB $55
SSD: SAMSUNG 830 Series Sata III MLC 128GB $80
Case: NZXT Source 210 Elite $35
MONITOR: Acer 20" WS LED (1600x900) $75
PSU: CORSAIR CX430 V2 $25
OPTICAL: Lite-On iHAS124-04 $16

Total/Shipped: $637

Best solution

October 11, 2012 4:01:39 AM

get this motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
and this gpu
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
The 1gb and 2gb versions don't really benchmark any differently now, but soon 1gb ram will probably be a bottleneck. I would understand if you stayed with the 1gb though.
EDIT
If you are making a build on a budget I would get rid of the ssd. That will add $80 to your budget. Which you could buy a 7870 with instead.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Trust me, a 7200 rpm hdd is fast enough.
Share
October 11, 2012 4:08:19 AM

lt_dan_zsu said:
get this motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
and this gpu
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
The 1gb and 2gb versions don't really benchmark any differently now, but soon 1gb ram will probably be a bottleneck. I would understand if you stayed with the 1gb though.


Thanks for your input.

I need a board that has SATA 6Gb/s for the SSD. I don't believe that one does. And even though it's only $20-30 more, I'm going to stick with 1Gb, I'm at my MAX budget.
m
0
l
Related resources
October 11, 2012 4:09:58 AM

lt_dan_zsu said:
If you are making a build on a budget I would get rid of the ssd. That will add $80 to your budget. Which you could buy a 7870 with instead.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Trust me, a 7200 rpm hdd is fast enough.


At 1600x900 resolution, do you think I need an even more powerful card?
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:10:26 AM

That looks pretty good for the price. Personally, I would look into getting a slightly better monitor though. That Radeon HD 7850 should be able to handle 1920X1080 without too much trouble.
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:12:25 AM

Dan, I just realized -- I'm calling this a 'pure budget' build, and you are giving me advice on how to make it a better 'budget build'.

The problem is, I should have never called this a 'pure budget' build. My bad. lol
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:14:31 AM

I don't know if you saw my edit but I think that you should get rid of the ssd and get a 7870 instead. That is way better, and 7200rpm is fast enough. here is the 7870
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Also even if you still get the ssd, that ssd is only 550mbps, which is really fast for an ssd. I don't even think ssds are aproaching 1gbps yet. this build will game a lot better too.
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:14:47 AM

JKatwyopc said:
That looks pretty good for the price. Personally, I would look into getting a slightly better monitor though. That Radeon HD 7850 should be able to handle 1920X1080 without too much trouble.


Do you think it's worth the $45ish in price difference from 1600x900 to 1920x1080 (referring to a monitor that supports higher resolution).
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:22:06 AM

lt_dan_zsu said:

Also even if you still get the ssd, that ssd is only 550mbps, which is really fast for an ssd. I don't even think ssds are aproaching 1gbps yet. this build will game a lot better too.


I'm sorry, I am new to this stuff. There's a special kind of SATA3 or something needed to take full advantage of the SSD and I don't think the motherboard you referenced has it. Also, the motherboard you referenced doesn't have USB 3.0, which is another technology I kind of want to pay a little extra for.
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:28:49 AM

I couldn't possibly know what you are talking about. It is true that it is lacking usb 3.0. And to answer your other 1920x108o has 1.44x more pixels than 1600x900. So you don't NEED a 7870, but you might want to upgrade at some point.
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:41:15 AM

lt_dan_zsu said:
I couldn't possibly know what you are talking about.


From what I've read/heard, SSD runs faster/better on SATA3.
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:57:54 AM

Both have sata 3
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 5:10:33 AM

That really makes one think .. is USB 3.0 worth $20?? Hmm...I do transfer a lot of very large files to a USB 3.0 external hard drive...but is it worth $20? OR would that $20 be better spent towards a 1920/1080p monitor??

decisions decisions...
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:37:43 PM

crabapple said:
Do you think it's worth the $45ish in price difference from 1600x900 to 1920x1080 (referring to a monitor that supports higher resolution).


Yes, I think it is, however, what I was refering to was the fact that the Radeon HD 7850 is probably overkill at that resolution since it can handle much higher without any trouble. Just a suggestion.
m
0
l
October 11, 2012 4:48:18 PM

JKatwyopc said:
Yes, I think it is, however, what I was refering to was the fact that the Radeon HD 7850 is probably overkill at that resolution since it can handle much higher without any trouble. Just a suggestion.


What graphic card would you recommend then that is more compatible with 1600x900?

I posted a thread in the graphics/displays section asking this very quesition, and even with 1600x900 resolution (as I pointed out in that thread) everybody still *heavily* recommended the Radeon HD 7850 1GB.
m
0
l
October 18, 2012 1:33:41 AM

Best answer selected by Crabapple.
m
0
l
!