Building a gaming PC

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

Intel has no match for Ryzen's 8 core / 16 thread processors, not on price especially. I'm quite satisfied with Ryzen 7 2700X. Compilation times for something like Mesa or Wine are a breeze.

Single threaded performance is a bit lower only if you compare it to overclocked Intels. For non overclocked scenarios it's close, plus it's less important for properly designed applications that use all cores.

For better IPC, you also need good RAM with Ryzens (3200 MHz or the like), since IPC performance there depends on memory frequency.

On GPU side, I wouldn't use Vega 64 - it's too power hungry. Vega 56 has good performance comparable to GTX 1070 so if that's enough for you - Vega 56 is an excellent option.

 

[eskiMoe]

It's also worth pointing out that, (if I have understood correctly) the security issues Intel's been having will affect at least their upcoming Core 9000 series since it uses the same architecture as their previous models (Coffee Lake?).

So if you need to upgrade right now, Ryzen might be the better option until Intel can bring a new architecture to the table (2019/2020 maybe?).

I'm still holding onto my 4790K (& 2400MHz DDR3 memory). It still gets the job done well enough.

 

[jervi]

Intel has no match for Ryzen's 8 core / 16 thread processors, not on price especially. I'm quite satisfied with Ryzen 7 2700X. Compilation times for something like Mesa or Wine are a breeze.

Single threaded performance is a bit lower only if you compare it to overclocked Intels. For non overclocked scenarios it's close, plus it's less important for properly designed applications that use all cores.

For better IPC, you also need good RAM with Ryzens (3200 MHz or the like), since IPC performance there depends on memory frequency.

On GPU side, I wouldn't use Vega 64 - it's too power hungry. Vega 56 has good performance comparable to GTX 1070 so if that's enough for you - Vega 56 is an excellent option.

If the Ryzens were not plagued with AMD-specific issues then I would be more inclined to agree at the top end. And one of those issues is that not all software is properly designed for multithreading despite multi-core systems being ubiquitous for years now. That and the necessity for DDR4 changes the price equation a bit.

I'm not sure about the Vega 56. If I'm paying 1080 prices I want something considerably better than a 1070.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

That and the necessity for DDR4 changes the price equation a bit.

Yeah, good RAM can cost more than the motherboard I had to pay quite a bit for G.Skill Flare X to get 3200 MHz, and that was just for 16 GB. To get 32 is already prohibitive.

I'm not sure about the Vega 56. If I'm paying 1080 prices I want something considerably better than a 1070.

Prices were inflated until recently, now they normalized somewhat. You can get Sapphire Pulse Vega 56 for around $475. But pricing wise Nvidia wasn't any better - prices were crazy in general because of the cryptocurrency rush.

 

[jervi]

Prices were inflated until recently, now they normalized somewhat. You can get Sapphire Pulse Vega 56 for around $475. But pricing wise Nvidia wasn't any better - prices were crazy in general because of the cryptocurrency rush.

I've seen 1080s cheaper, and 1070s much cheaper though.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

I've seen 1080s cheaper, and 1070s much cheaper though.

It's still above normal I think. But much better than it was a few months ago, when such Sapphire cards were almost $750.

 

[Hoplite_22]

Yeah, good RAM can cost more than the motherboard I had to pay quite a bit for G.Skill Flare X to get 3200 MHz, and that was just for 16 GB. To get 32 is already prohibitive.



Prices were inflated until recently, now they normalized somewhat. You can get Sapphire Pulse Vega 56 for around $475. But pricing wise Nvidia wasn't any better - prices were crazy in general because of the cryptocurrency rush.

it was launched at retail a year ago for $400, is it mental that it is still above RRP. should be more like $325 for a year old card.

and yeah, you still see Nvidia cards above retail too, but they never went quite as far above.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

@Hoplite_22: I agree, that Sapphire / AMD card is still overpriced, just not as crazy overpriced as before AMD cards are more commonly used for mining, so their prices were more inflated.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

Recent benchmarks for AMD vs Nvidia GPUs (on Lunux, focusing on OpenGL and Vulkan).

AMD is clearly very competitive.

 

[ArthurFrisk]

Seriously , It's better to use a LGA1151 mother board.
because you might need to change your processor or mend you mother board in the future.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

I'm using AM4 motherboard, and I was able to change from Ryzen 1700X to Ryzen 2700X just fine keeping the same MB. It's actually something that wouldn't have been possible with Intel in similar situation.

 

[lelxrv]

What GPU is enough to play modern games at 60 FPS in 1080p resolution with maxed out setting (maybe outside AA)?

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

Probably depends on the games. Even at such resolutions, some games can be very demanding if you push them to maximum settings.

Roughly, I'd say you can get one model lower than top GPUs. I.e. something like AMD RX Vega 56 or Nvidia GTX 1070 should be OK for it.

 

[LethoTheSlayer]

I suggest Asus Rog Strix 1050TI it is very good , i7 is not bad at all , but if you want a gaming pc i suggest Ryzen , but if you want ryzen you will need to change motherboard . Im not sure Windows 8 is good option for gaming , take Windows 7 or 10 . I also heard that Nvidia is paying to developers of games to make their component better than AMD also with intel , intel is better for media "things" , you know films , microsoft , 16 GB ram wont be bad in one stick , so you can upgrade more if you need , i hope you will take what you want , and will be enjoyed ;D

Good luck.

 

[LethoTheSlayer]

Hi, everyone
I bought PC in september last year , I done a little mistake, I took weak CPU , It is Pentium G4560 3,5 GHz which is like i3 , I mean it is not that bad , but i need better , one.
My GPU : Asus Rog Strix 1050TI DDR4 4GB (1920x1080@60Hz)
RAM : 16 GB Single - Channel 1200 MHz
Motherboard : Gigabyte H110M- DS2 - CF (U3E1)
Hard disk : 1TB Toshiba DT01ACA100 (SATA )

I was looking to buy this CPU :
Intel Core i5-8500 Processor
price is about 250 Euros , a little bit higher .

Is this best solution for my PC right now , if not feel free to advice me .

Thank you .

I bought my PC at this shop ------> https://www.didakta.ba/

 

[4meg]

I hate to say it, but if you're going to play games on a PC you must have the latest generation of i7. I have an early i7 that still outperforms i5s.

That said, I would wait until we get some specs on the game to start building anything for CP2077. Once CDPR makes those specs available you can then overbuild for that so you won't be disappointed.

First rule in boxen building is work up a budget. Then double it. And expect to spend 10% more.

 

[Suhiira]

Yep, no real point worrying about CP2077 yet.

But if you're just looking at a gaming PC another issue is to make sure it's at least a quad core and investing in an SSD as your 'C' drive is damn useful. I use a small (256 Meg) SSD and keep ONLY the operating system and drivers on it. I have a large (4 TB) regular hard drive that I put everything else on. Some folks will claim you need SSD's all around but the improved performance is minimal. Most of the time your system is accessing the operating system and drivers, and they're on the SSD. Games are usually already optimized for efficient loading so you don't gain much. ALSO, one problem with SSDs is they have a limited life when it comes to writing new data onto them, your operating system and drivers seldom change so all it's doing 95% of the time is reading.

 

[JMFruitSalad]

Alright. Firstly SSD's are awesome, but they are only going to effect load times, during loading screens the game engine moves all the necessary data from storage to RAM and VRAM, where the CPU and GPU can access it quickly. Some games do stream from the risk, but they are heavily optimised for worst case scenario read times. No game is yet to require an SSD. TLDR; you are on a budget, so forget SSD, it will only decrease loading screen times.

Now as for i7 vs i5. This is a very complex subject. I will keep it simple. The i5 has higher clock speed, but fewer threads compared to i7. What this means is that, if you have a game that can only utilise 4 threads or less, the i5 will be FASTER, because each thread is running on a higher clocked core. MOST games are heavily dependent on single core performance. There are few game engines out there (keep in mind that RED engine is one) that will scale very well across extra threads, however the performance gain will still be limited because CPU is rarely the bottleneck. Especially if you have a lower tier GPU or a 60hz monitor preventing you from achieving higher frame rates. TLDR; you should get the fastest i5 you can afford, your board supports 6th and 7th generation, so you should aim for a 7600k or used 6600k. It may support 8th generation chips but you are going to have to confirm this somehow, probably be looking at firmware updates for your board to see if any of them offer support for 8th gen. If you are not technically minded I can try and assist you with this.

Your RAM could be a limitation, can you confirm the exact model? Is it DDR4 2400MHZ? If so it's fine

Keep in mind, Intel 9th generation chips are going to be released in October. This will increase the value tremendously. i5 will have 6 cores. i7 will have 8 cores. If you can save until October (assuming your board supports the new chips) you may want to wait for the i5 9600.

Post automatically merged: Aug 11, 2018

You might also consider selling you motherboard and cpu together on eBay, and buying a Ryzen motherboard and chip, this is much more cost effective for people on a budget

 

[jervi]

What GPU is enough to play modern games at 60 FPS in 1080p resolution with maxed out setting (maybe outside AA)?

If you INSIST on maxed out settings for every game then you really have no choice except to pony up for a 1080Ti, and you'll probably still complain until the 1180Ti

If you don't mind turning down details a notch so that it looks practically the same when you're moving but sitting still and taking a magnifying glass to your display will reveal that the reflection of the ripples in the puddle over there are a little off, then a 1070 will more than do it, and a 1060 might even do the trick.

If High is good enough for you though, even a 1050Ti will do 60FPS@1080p in most games.

 

[brandon.esbach]

Ok... I'm going to be that guy and totally go against some of what's been said here.

1. You DO NOT need an i7. Actually, you don't even need an Intel processor to make a truly awesome rig. Yes, you need a decent i5 or equivalent, but to say you need an i7, that's simply not accurate.
2. You DO NOT need a stupid amount of Ram. You need around 8Gb on Win10 or 8.1 to be comfortable, 16Gb is better, anything more is waste. Make sure you get the fastest you can for your board though.
3. You DO need as good a graphics card as you can afford. My rig cost me $650 (excluding monitors) 2 years ago, the graphics card was around $300 of that. It currently runs new VR with full capacity and I get 1440p on pretty much everything except the most punishing games, and those I'm getting very solid performance at 1080p. If anything, I might beef up my graphics card next
4. You do not need to spend stupid money to make a good gaming rig; even for VR. You simply need to be intelligent about how you chose to build it.

Here's a site I strongly suggest you look at before taking any action: https://techguided.com/best-cheap-gaming-pcs/
My rig is based on an older build with an upgraded video card, and as I said above is over 2 years old. I run current games - Hellblade, Vampyr, etc. - as well as old games like Witcher 3, Hitman, etc. I'm seriously not having any issues at all. I strongly advise that you read up a bit and perhaps take a look at that link before deciding your next steps.

Can you buy something big and gorgeous? Sure... if you want. If money isn't an option I can recommend a ludicrous build for around $1400-$2k that will rock your socks. But you don't need it.

Source: I've worked in IT for over 25 years. I built my own rig for VR with a target of $700 excluding the headset, and beat it (barely ).