Building Gaming PC for use on Bravia 32" 3DTV - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 10 Old 12-08-2012, 05:22 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
VampireKillerX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi guys,
My xbox360 broke down and I'm trying to build a Gaming PC.

I have a regular old pc which serves me well for all non-gaming related stuff.

I'll be building a new PC just for games (replacing the xbox)

I currently have a 32" Bravia EX720 3DTV which I'll be using as a monitor for this new PC.

I'm aware that PC's can output more than 1080p, but I play at a distance at which I find 1080p enough. So no multiple monitor or surround 3d for me.

So, I have 3 questions:

1) Since I'm interested on 1920x1080p 3D as the max res of this new pc I was wondering if you could help me draw the line between what's a good enough pc to run crysis 3 with all maxed and when putting more money it's overkill.

my barebone specs: (overkills?)
8GB ram (or 16Gb)
GTX560 (one or two on sli)
i5 (or i7, what model I don't know, since I've been a console gamer for a while I also don't know how many cores are games actually using)
HDD (SSD?)
whatever mobo the core needs

My preferences: fast and stable fps over visual quality.
But since I'll be building from scratch would also like it to run games for the next 3 years.

2) Regarding the use of SSD over HDD, I usually don't play more than 4 games at a time, I'm somewaht bothered by install times since I don't se that on consoles, I don't turn off my pc that much I 99% use sleep, like I said I would only game on this pc. so what would you recommend?

3) I've seen hdmi only supports max 1920x1080@24Hz on 3d, so again that's the most res-wise I'll be using.

(I'm a console gamer trying to convert to pc so don't be to hard on me).
Thanks in advance!
VampireKillerX is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 10 Old 12-08-2012, 03:05 PM
 
darklordjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 93
"I've seen hdmi only supports max 1920x1080@24Hz on 3d"

Gaming at 24hz is so juddery as to be unusable. You'll set it up, play a game for about an hour like that, then never use it again. If you're lucky, your display will support 1080p/30 for 3D, as mine does, but even that is pretty nasty. The blanking out for the second eye makes the 30fps that you are used to on consoles look like a strobe when in 3D. In short, do not make your target 1080p/24-30 3D. A better target that will give you a much better experience is 720p/60. You lose spacial resolution, but the temporal resolution that you gain has a far more impactful positive effect. Thankfully 720p is cheap to render now, and loaded up with a bunch of AA looks pretty good.

"8GB ram (or 16Gb)"

RAM is dirt cheap. The minimum you should run is 16GB. No program will use it all by itself, but Windows pre-caching makes your experience much smoother moment to moment. If you need to cut corners in cost =, then put in a single 8GB stick initially, with a second 8GB stick as soon as you can afford it.
darklordjames is offline  
post #3 of 10 Old 12-08-2012, 03:48 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
VampireKillerX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks a lot for your advise,
Any thoughts on which type of graphics card and cpu type I should use.
What's your stand on SSD?

I will not be cheap on items that are worth it, I just don't want to spend to much in something that will not make much difference.
Thanks.
VampireKillerX is offline  
post #4 of 10 Old 12-08-2012, 05:17 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
VampireKillerX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Do you think I'll better of at 1080i@60hz than 720p, since I have active glasses I guess It wouldn't look that bad.
Which is harder on the rig 720p or 1080i?
VampireKillerX is offline  
post #5 of 10 Old 12-08-2012, 08:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
confidenceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by VampireKillerX View Post

Thanks a lot for your advise,
Any thoughts on which type of graphics card and cpu type I should use.
What's your stand on SSD?
I will not be cheap on items that are worth it, I just don't want to spend to much in something that will not make much difference.
Thanks.
There's a point of diminishing returns on a GPU. In the $200-300 range you start seeing a big jump in price with not a lot of return on performance.

I just built a new PC a couple weeks ago. I bought a HD7870 for $200 (for an i53570K OC'ed to 4.3Ghz). The next step up would be in the $250-300 range but with only a 5-10fps bump on average. Didn't seem worth it to me. It's all about how much you're willing to spend. And since Crysis 3 isn't out yet, it's tough to gauge what will be ideal. They've given ballpark specs, but that's not real world. I would wager you'll see a pretty big bump in performance by just jumping to the next tier of GPUs beyond the GTX500s. And as much as I hate to say it, I agree with darklordjames in terms of targets. 720p@60 is far better than 1080p@30. It really doesn't make much difference at those resolutions, so you may as well aim for better framerates. With my HD7870, I have yet to find a game I couldn't go ultra settings at 720p and not get 60fps. Who knows what Crysis 3 will be like, but so far so good. But if you're willing to go all out, nothing's stopping you from going for two GPUs other than money and power.

For CPU, the 2500K is still more OC friendly and seems to take voltage better than the new intel chips, but I'm happy with my 3570K. No need to go higher than that unless you plan on doing some heavy video processing.

There's still no need to go past 8GB RAM in my experience, but you can if you want. It's cheap these days.

An SSD is really just about loads. It won't affect performance. Most folks just get them to install their OS and still use a standard HDD for everything else. It's your call. As for me, I'm keeping an eye out for a significant price drop or sale. They're still a bit more than I want to pay without a significant enough effect on gaming.

As ever, YMMV.

PSN & XBL ID: drop me a private message
confidenceman is offline  
post #6 of 10 Old 12-09-2012, 02:58 AM
 
darklordjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 93
"Do you think I'll better of at 1080i@60hz than 720p, since I have active glasses I guess It wouldn't look that bad."

I don't think I've seen a TV that does 1080i 3D. If you want 3D, target 720p/60. If you want 2D, target 1080p/60. Keep in mind that steroscopy is about the least important part of human depth perception. 2D 1080p/60 will likely give you a better experience at the end of the day than 3D 720p/60. Either way it costs about the same in terms of rendering. Either twice as many pixels going from 720p to 1080p, or twice as many pixels going from 60fps to 120fps in order to render for each eye.


"There's still no need to go past 8GB RAM in my experience"

I run 32GB in my system. Sitting at the desktop with Chrome open eats 4-10GB of in-use memory. I commonly only have about 3GB free. The other 20GB is stuff that Windows has pre-loaded for me in anticipation of using it, which is far faster to load than even pulling off of an SSD. "In your experience" is starving the hell out of machines at 8GB, requiring crap to be dumped to the pagefile when you want to load any relatively modern game. This means waiting for things to write back out of ram, on top of waiting for things to read in to ram. 16GB is a perfectly acceptable amount that still leaves a healthy portion for pre-caching with minimal pagefile use. 32GB is a touch overkill, but not by much.

RAM is cheeeap. Stop recommending people starve their machines. "Get a $200 video card, but only spend $40 on ram." This is bad advice.


"What's your stand on SSD?"

I run a 128GB Crucial M4 SSD for my system drive and swapfile. Then I have a pair of mirrored 1TB drives for games and media. It's pretty much the happy medium. Fast, fast moment to moment system use due to the SSD, cheap mass storage with the disc drives. The gobs of ram helps with the speed penalty to the HDD, as Windows already has most of Team Fortress 2 loaded before I hit the Play button. smile.gif I am considering a second SSD dedicated to caching of the most commonly used files for the HDD, but I'm not sure if anyone has built a drive-specific caching solution yet, or just a system-wide one.

A $100 SSD with a $100 HDD or two is a great combination.


"Any thoughts on which type of graphics card and cpu type I should use?"

How much do you want to spend? Over $200? Look at the Intel i5 3570 and pretty much stop right there. Under $200? AMD is the way to go on the cheaper scale. The FX-8350 is a great CPU for $200. The FX-6300 gives some great performance for $140.
darklordjames is offline  
post #7 of 10 Old 12-09-2012, 06:08 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
VampireKillerX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks again.
One last question, how long do you think a i5 3570 / gtx560 arrange will be able to stay up to date for thye average games?
VampireKillerX is offline  
post #8 of 10 Old 12-09-2012, 09:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
confidenceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by VampireKillerX View Post

Thanks again.
One last question, how long do you think a i5 3570 / gtx560 arrange will be able to stay up to date for thye average games?
It should do you fine. Not eye-bleeding (for that you'd need a $400+ GPU) but you should be able to get good performance in most games. But you may have to make some visual compromises to hit 60fps in some games. Be sure to bump to the 560ti rather than the vanilla 560. It doesn't cost much more (~$10-20), but you get a relatively significant bump in performance (~10fps on average). You may also want to at least look at the AMD equivalent GPUs (HD7850 and HD7870). You get slightly more bang for your buck in most situations (though not all).

Also, you may want to look at the unlocked version of the i5 3570 (the i5 3570K with an OC-capable motherboard). It's super easy with these things to just get a boost by just bumping a few numbers, and it only costs $0-20 more--depending on the deal you find. To give you a ballpark: I very recently got a combo deal with an i5 3570K and a Z77 board for $300.

Will this last 3 years? Your CPU should. But the GPU is a different question. It will hold up, but not well. You know how these things go. You'd end up spending less money overall by buying a $200 GPU now and then upgrading in a year or two. But as with all things PC-related, it's all about what you're willing to spend. As most PC gamers will tell you, it's not a good idea to "future proof." Buy parts for what you want right now. Prices and tech change too rapidly to try to plan for three years out.

And, of course, YMMV. People get personal about PC parts, so you'll get a variety of opinions.

PSN & XBL ID: drop me a private message
confidenceman is offline  
post #9 of 10 Old 12-09-2012, 11:01 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
VampireKillerX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Yeah I see now that at the end of the day is a matter of personal preference.
At least now with the advise from both of you I know what I should expect and what to target.

I dunno if now is a good time since next year we may see a bump on graphics with the ps4.
How did pc's handled last console transition?
VampireKillerX is offline  
post #10 of 10 Old 12-09-2012, 04:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
confidenceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 37
I'd argue that this past console generation had a hugely positive effect on PC gaming. On the one hand, PC gaming has worked harder than ever to differentiate itself. And on the other hand, consoles have pushed PC gaming to adopt new console-like features. Consoles and PCs are more alike than ever, and I imagine that will only get more true next generation.

So "how did PCs handle last console generation?" It depends on whether you think console parity is a good thing for PC gaming. wink.gif

PSN & XBL ID: drop me a private message
confidenceman is offline  
Reply HTPC Gaming

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off