or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › HTPC Gaming › Time to build a new PC!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Time to build a new PC! - Page 2

post #31 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post


The 560Ti should be able to do exactly that without any issue at all.

I know that, I just have to find a decent PC that I can slap it into without needing a new psu and cpu.
post #32 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post


I know that, I just have to find a decent PC that I can slap it into without needing a new psu and cpu.

That's the big advantage of building one lol. But I'll look around online and local stores to see if there is any PSU with a decent PSU in it to run a card like that. I'd imagine there should be no problem.
post #33 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

I know that, I just have to find a decent PC that I can slap it into without needing a new psu and cpu.

If you're on a budget, try to find a decent PSU inside something with an i3-2100. Finding the PSU is the tricky part, but i3's are a dime a dozen in the budget desktops and they perform better in games than any non-overclocked AMD. Plus, you can upgrade to an i5 in the future if the upgrade bug hits you.

If you are looking to save money on a GPU, a 6870 is pretty close to 560 Ti and it's about $40 cheaper. If you want even cheaper, I'll have a 6870 for sale as soon as my 670 is delivered.

Anyway, I think an i3 plus a 6870 would be more than enough to give you what your looking for.
post #34 of 67
I'd never buy a used PC component. EVER.
post #35 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

I'd never buy a used PC component. EVER.

I don't blame you. I'm just throwing that out there with my 6870 recommendation.
post #36 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmwatkins View Post


I don't blame you. I'm just throwing that out there with my 6870 recommendation.

Isn't BF3 and Skyrim an nVidia based game?
post #37 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Isn't BF3 and Skyrim an nVidia based game?

I'm not sure what you mean. With my 6870, I can play the BF3 campaign on medium settings at 1080p at 60fps. On High settings, I can get around 45. Not sure about Skyrim, but I'm sure it would be similar results.
post #38 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmwatkins View Post

I'm not sure what you mean. With my 6870, I can play the BF3 campaign on medium settings at 1080p at 60fps. On High settings, I can get around 45. Not sure about Skyrim, but I'm sure it would be similar results.

BF3 is an nVidia driven game. So their cards tend to do a little better. Same way AMD has a few titles that run better with their cards.
post #39 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

BF3 is an nVidia driven game. So their cards tend to do a little better. Same way AMD has a few titles that run better with their cards.

Here's some benchmarks for Skyrim. The 6870 and 560Ti are pretty even. Either card is a good way to go and it looks like he could run Skyrim at 1080p with great results if he wanted to. The 6870 is just a great card for the money.
http://www.techspot.com/review/467-s...nce/page6.html
post #40 of 67
Stick with Nvidia. I have a ATI 6870, and while the hardware is fantastic, the drivers are utter garbage. I run in to problem after problem with these damn things. First it does a terrible job at remembering multi-monitor setups, and now it can't remember to not underscan resolutions when hooked up to my plasma. I spent a good hour of my gaming time last night on trying to figure out why Deus Ex would 1:1 pixel map to my screen at 1080p60, but when I dropped down to 720p/60 or 1080p/30 for 3D it would suddenly show up with giant black bars framing the image. Turns out, ATI doesn't listen when you tell it 0% overscan. It wants you to set overscan for every single resolution individually. What. The. Hell?

On the other hand, I was surprised to find 1080p/30 to work for HDMI 1.4 3D. Everywhere I see it mentioned, it's always stated as 1080p/24 as the limit. It's like nobody ever said to themselves "Twice the frames? I wonder if half the refresh works?". 720p/60 3D at a perfect 60fps was still a better experience, but it was nice to see 1080p/30 work.
post #41 of 67
I have an i5 650 @320GHz quad core with 8gigs of RAM running Windows 7. I have 70 bucks. What Nvidia card should I get? HDMI and gaming should be a priority.

I had a GT 440 suggested and it seems to fit my needs. I would assume it would let me play The Witcher 1/2 maybe STALKER as well. I'm not feeling the next gen console itch and want to get back into PC games for a bit. There's quite a catalog I've missed since the 360/PS3 came out.
post #42 of 67
$70 for a GPU? What do you plan on playing?
post #43 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

I'd stay away from AMD. They just aren't what they used to be....

Kinda late to the party but I'll disagree with you on this. I've seen little to no real world performance differences between my previous 965BE or my current FX-8120 builds and any similarly priced i5 builds out there. My experience of course but that leads me into the next quote...

Quote:
Originally Posted by darklordjames View Post

"...Stick with Nvidia. I have a ATI 6870, and while the hardware is fantastic, the drivers are utter garbage. I run in to problem after problem with these damn things. First it does a terrible job at remembering multi-monitor setups, and now it can't remember to not underscan resolutions when hooked up to my plasma. I spent a good hour of my gaming time last night on trying to figure out why Deus Ex would 1:1 pixel map to my screen at 1080p60, but when I dropped down to 720p/60 or 1080p/30 for 3D it would suddenly show up with giant black bars framing the image. Turns out, ATI doesn't listen when you tell it 0% overscan. It wants you to set overscan for every single resolution individually. What. The. Hell?..."

Again, a highly subjective opinion based on a personal experience. Hardly a reason to "stick to Nvidia" outside of an emotional response. I've been with AMD now since the 5770 and my current 6950 and while there have been a few hiccups here and there with driver issues (which happens with both vendors) I've never run into serious system crashing issues that cannot be resolved with the help of a clean reinstall and driver sweeper. I get that people have bad experiences and that's what gets reported (why complain when things are going good?) but these blanket statements have always mystified me. Nvidia and AMD have driver problems at times but really for the most part both have been pretty consistent for awhile now. YMMV of course but keep a proper perspective on the situation.
post #44 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcweber111 View Post

Kinda late to the party but I'll disagree with you on this. I've seen little to no real world performance differences between my previous 965BE or my current FX-8120 builds and any similarly priced i5 builds out there. My experience of course but that leads me into the next quote...



Again, a highly subjective opinion based on a personal experience. Hardly a reason to "stick to Nvidia" outside of an emotional response. I've been with AMD now since the 5770 and my current 6950 and while there have been a few hiccups here and there with driver issues (which happens with both vendors) I've never run into serious system crashing issues that cannot be resolved with the help of a clean reinstall and driver sweeper. I get that people have bad experiences and that's what gets reported (why complain when things are going good?) but these blanket statements have always mystified me. Nvidia and AMD have driver problems at times but really for the most part both have been pretty consistent for awhile now. YMMV of course but keep a proper perspective on the situation.

I guess we just have to agree to disagree. Even though it's been proven that the bulldozer line up was just flat out bull****.

I've had AMD all my life. I just made the switch to Intel. I'd never go back to AMD after seeing how well they perform.
post #45 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcweber111 View Post

Nvidia and AMD have driver problems at times but really for the most part both have been pretty consistent for awhile now. YMMV of course but keep a proper perspective on the situation.

The probm is not the eventual drivers, how ever down the road that might be. It's in when a game is released. In the majority of the cases Nvidia will have the driver up and running when a game is release. With AMD in many cases you will have to wait, some times a long wait before they get it done or right. Then there is SLI vs Xfire. SLI in many cases is support and xfire might be eventually...maybe.
post #46 of 67
I have a list as long as my arm of things that are broken or poorly functional in the AMD video drivers. Anything related to Eyefinity is a horrible kludge that disappoints at every turn. Once you get in to a game though? The hardware works great!

Moving away from that, here's a simple reason to pick Nvidia today. Adaptive v-sync is bloody brilliant. The fact that AMD have not already stolen that idea and integrated it in to their drivers is retarded. Adaptive v-sync, all by itself is an extremely solid reason to pick green over red.
post #47 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by darklordjames View Post

I have a list as long as my arm of things that are broken or poorly functional in the AMD video drivers. Anything related to Eyefinity is a horrible kludge that disappoints at every turn. Once you get in to a game though? The hardware works great!

Moving away from that, here's a simple reason to pick Nvidia today. Adaptive v-sync is bloody brilliant. The fact that AMD have not already stolen that idea and integrated it in to their drivers is retarded. Adaptive v-sync, all by itself is an extremely solid reason to pick green over red.

Adaptive V-Sync is my favorite feature of these new Kepler Cards. Love it.
post #48 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthrsg View Post

I have an i5 650 @320GHz quad core with 8gigs of RAM running Windows 7. I have 70 bucks. What Nvidia card should I get? HDMI and gaming should be a priority.

I had a GT 440 suggested and it seems to fit my needs. I would assume it would let me play The Witcher 1/2 maybe STALKER as well. I'm not feeling the next gen console itch and want to get back into PC games for a bit. There's quite a catalog I've missed since the 360/PS3 came out.

No way should you get a GT440 when you can get a HD5670/HD6670 in that price range. Those are far better cards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

$70 for a GPU? What do you plan on playing?

Two years ago I bought my son a Gateway with a 1st gen i3 and 6 gig of DDR3 ram. Installed a HD5670 and it plays S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: COP, Skyrim, Deus EX:HR, Witcher 2, and plenty of other games on med to ultra settings on a 22" 1680x1050 monitor. I'm going to upgrade it this summer. I'll increase ram to 12 gig and replace the HD5670 with a HD7750. Should last another couple of years without any problems.
post #49 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

$70 for a GPU? What do you plan on playing?

I want to run Microsoft Clear Type like a boss.

I really want to go through the last few years of titles I missed on PC. I fully intend to drop a couple hundred in the next couple of years. Console gaming is losing its edge for me.
post #50 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhufnagel View Post


No way should you get a GT440 when you can get a HD5670/HD6670 in that price range. Those are far better cards.

Two years ago I bought my son a Gateway with a 1st gen i3 and 6 gig of DDR3 ram. Installed a HD5670 and it plays S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: COP, Skyrim, Deus EX:HR, Witcher 2, and plenty of other games on med to ultra settings on a 22" 1680x1050 monitor. I'm going to upgrade it this summer. I'll increase ram to 12 gig and replace the HD5670 with a HD7750. Should last another couple of years without any problems.

Thanks for the advice. I'm looking at those now.
post #51 of 67
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...w_bottom_links

I think I will order one of these if I decide to go PC. If the CPU falls short of what I want it to do (Skyrim with a few graphics mods, Dolphin emulator at 720p) then I will grab an i5 2500k for an upgrade.
post #52 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...w_bottom_links

I think I will order one of these if I decide to go PC. If the CPU falls short of what I want it to do (Skyrim with a few graphics mods, Dolphin emulator at 720p) then I will grab an i5 2500k for an upgrade.

Ouch on the AMD. But I imagine what you plan to do shouldn't be to bad. Side note though. If that PC doesn't work out for you. It isn't as easy as just buying an i5 and throwing it in.

You'd have to buy a new motherboard and cpu. Which is why I always tell people it's always cheaper to get what you know will work and want the 1st time around.

CPU scaling on AMD is just flat out horrible. More cores doesn't mean better PC. AMD has shown that
post #53 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post


Ouch on the AMD. But I imagine what you plan to do shouldn't be to bad. Side note though. If that PC doesn't work out for you. It isn't as easy as just buying an i5 and throwing it in.

You'd have to buy a new motherboard and cpu. Which is why I always tell people it's always cheaper to get what you know will work and want the 1st time around.

CPU scaling on AMD is just flat out horrible. More cores doesn't mean better PC. AMD has shown that

Figures. It would cost $300 more to build it with an i5 on their website. (get a 1tb hdd as an upgrade)

Why is it so hard to find a prebuilt machine with a nvidia gpu and intel cpu?
post #54 of 67
PEN - Going AMD, go for four cores, but at a faster clock speed. Contrary to what people in this thread keep saying, AMD CPUs work just fine. They just focus on the lower end of the market, but in that lower end they match up just find price-to-performance compared to Intel. The Bulldozer design is a tad bit slower clock-for-clock than the previous core architecture was, but by no means is it garbage. Games still struggle to use more than three threads these days, so getting a 6-8 core machine is pointless for anything other than extensive video editing.

Given the choice between say 6-cores at 3.3ghz, or 4 cores at 3.5ghz, pick the four cores. It will run the three threads that games are asking for faster.

Dollar to dollar, at the end of the day you'll be better served with four AMD cores at 3.5ghz or faster plus a beefy video card, than you would be with a more expensive Intel CPU with a cheaper video card.
post #55 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by darklordjames View Post

PEN - Going AMD, go for four cores, but at a faster clock speed. Contrary to what people in this thread keep saying, AMD CPUs work just fine. They just focus on the lower end of the market, but in that lower end they match up just find price-to-performance compared to Intel. The Bulldozer design is a tad bit slower clock-for-clock than the previous core architecture was, but by no means is it garbage. Games still struggle to use more than three threads these days, so getting a 6-8 core machine is pointless for anything other than extensive video editing.

Given the choice between say 6-cores at 3.3ghz, or 4 cores at 3.5ghz, pick the four cores. It will run the three threads that games are asking for faster.

Dollar to dollar, at the end of the day you'll be better served with four AMD cores at 3.5ghz or faster plus a beefy video card, than you would be with a more expensive Intel CPU with a cheaper video card.

You do know you can build an intel PC just as cheap as you can an AMD? Before I built this PC I had debated building an AMD set. Do you know how much the total price difference was between the two? $45 to go to an intel based PC vs AMD.

He's better off getting an i3 then AMD. Which btw. An i3 ( dual core ) beasts even an AMD quad core.

Bulldozer got the nick name bull**** because of its performance. Not rumors. Not talk. Actual owners. The architecture in the bulldozer line up is pure garbage.

I've owned both. I stuck with intel because they were better. I could care less about the name.
post #56 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post


Figures. It would cost $300 more to build it with an i5 on their website. (get a 1tb hdd as an upgrade)

Why is it so hard to find a prebuilt machine with a nvidia gpu and intel cpu?

It shouldn't be. What's your budget? I'd be more then happy to help you stay within your budget and get the best bang for buck.
post #57 of 67
"He's better off getting an i3 then AMD"

You seriously just said cheap Intel dual core beats anything AMD puts out. I guess we know about how far we can throw your opinion on this subject.

PEN - Your decision should not be based on the input of fanboys.
post #58 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by darklordjames View Post

"He's better off getting an i3 then AMD"


You seriously just said cheap Intel dual core beats anything AMD puts out. I guess we know about how far we can throw your opinion on this subject.


PEN - Your decision should not be based on the input of fanboys.

You speaking in 3rd person? Your correct. He shouldn't base his decisions based on the input of fan boys. So let me ask. What is it you are trying to do?
Quote:
You seriously just said cheap Intel dual core beats anything AMD puts out.

No, I didn't. Read it again. I said even an i3 beast the performance of AMD quad cores. Maybe I am saying that now?

PEN- Instead of others fighting their opinions as facts. I will show you facts no opinions.

Feel free to click HERE.

Then click HERE.

You'll notice that yes. Even an i3 puts AMD to shame. AMD just has bad architecture.. Funny thing is. The CEO himself stated they are not out to beat Intel. As they know Intel is just faster.

As for Dark. DO a little research before throwing around insults. As far as I'm concerned. The only fan boy I've seen in here is you.
post #59 of 67
I found a prebuilt with a 2gb560 (not ti) and a i7 2600 (no k) for $1099, I have it on backup but I am still leaning towards the lanwarrior 2 for much less. The Wii U dropped the ball, so I am seriously considering a PC, especially with how sparce the PS3 lineup is this year and how PC games drop in price so much quicker.
post #60 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

I found a prebuilt with a 2gb560 (not ti) and a i7 2600 (no k) for $1099, I have it on backup but I am still leaning towards the lanwarrior 2 for much less. The Wii U dropped the ball, so I am seriously considering a PC, especially with how sparce the PS3 lineup is this year and how PC games drop in price so much quicker.

Awe man. I wish I knew you had been willing to try that much out before. Dell had a CRAZY deal on a rebuilt PC not to long ago. It had an i7 2600K and came wilth an ultra sharp Dell 30in monitor for about $1000. It was without a doubt one of the best deals I've ever seen seeing as the monitor alone is normally about $800. I'll have to look around and see if I can find you a decent deal within your budget.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HTPC Gaming
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Home Theater Gaming › HTPC Gaming › Time to build a new PC!