granitemoose16 said:What would you guys think if I followed Intel's direction instead? i.imgur.com/2zpdOsW.png
The layout is fine, but you're looking at nearly four sockets here—where does the monitor fit into this equation? Also, given your budget, I wouldn't sink that much cash into a high-end case. Stick to something like a Zalman ZM-T3 or T4 if you want micro, or maybe a Z3+
Those two Athlon chips are essentially identical; you won't notice a real difference, except the 760k comes with a higher factory clock speed.
First off, an Intel Core i5 costs nearly as much as an Intel Core i7, so picking that would be pure madness. Secondly, you just don't have the budget to build a high-quality LGA 1150 platform properly.
Look, if you’re planning on going with a single 8GB stick, a board with just two slots is plenty. For this 1155 socket era, you can easily find budget-friendly boards with four slots available.
If you have the choice, go with the ATX (that second one). It looks much cleaner in an ATX case, and having that extra breathing room makes the whole building process a lot easier.
For example, the 1150 options tend to be a bit pricier.
Just check around different retailers and see which one fits your needs best.
If your son really gets serious about this, he should definitely look into getting an SSD down the road.npr. Aside from being great for productivity work, it will make the entire PC feel snappier and significantly cut down game loading times if they're installed on it.
There isn't a massive performance difference between 1333 and 1600 MHz RAM, and since memory prices have skyrocketed recently—nearly double what they were last year—it's really not worth the premium for those faster 1600 sticks. That speed boost is mostly beneficial for people relying on integrated graphics since they don't have dedicated VRAM.
You really can't go wrong with either option. From what I've heard, that Intel Core i5-3570K performs better for Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects due to its architecture, though I can't speak from direct experience since I've never used those programs myself—I just never had much interest in them. There are so many different apps in that Adobe suite anyway.
The Best benchmark site for Premiere Pro is http://ppbm5.com/ If you are going to edit HiDef you need an i7 or for standard def video at least an i5 The Intel lacks some of the special firmware instructions that PPro uses, so will always be slower than Intel If you are looking at a laptop, read http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1069742 -and http://forums.adobe.com/message/4578948
That FX 6300 has less efficient cores, but it does have two extra ones and can boost performance through overclocking—so that helps bridge the gap. I don't think the Intel Core i5-3570K has a massive lead, especially if the software or game is well-optimized for multiple cores (which most are these days). In practice, I doubt you'd even notice a difference in processing speed unless you were actually timing it; the margin is slim.
In my opinion, the Intel Core i7-3770K would be the superior choice for heavy-duty video rendering and 3D work, though it'll definitely be the pricier route.
EDIT
Regardless of which one you pick, you won't be needing an upgrade in a year; you should be set for a few years.
Look, XFX isn't Seasonic. For example, Corsair's VS series is lower tier, using the cheapest capacitors you can find—it's a budget unit. The CX430 or CX500 series are manufactured by CWT; they're decent enough, but they aren't Seasonic. On the other hand, an older CX400 might actually be Seasonic, and then you have the AX series, which represents Corsair's high-end lineup.
It all really comes down to the specific model. Check this out — there are plenty of sites like this, some even better.
I’m not quite sure what you mean by "a power supply for gaming." A PSU is a PSU. You just have better ones and worse ones. It comes down to build quality—things like the capacitors, the fan, and overall construction—whether it's modular or not, and its efficiency rating, whether it's Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze, and so on.
Units rated above 500-550W are generally intended for more serious Crossfire or SLI configurations (though those weaker units might handle low-power Crossfire/SLI setups). However, for 99% of PCs, a solid 400-500W unit is more than sufficient.
Even those legendary XFX and Corsair models can't compete—go with a real Seasonic though there are plenty of other solid brands out there making great power supplies too.
Dana Peterson39 said:it was a complete setup but if I buy this now, what’s the actual benefit? Is it a real solution, and will it actually speed up my data transfers?
Well, you'll have USB 3.0 speeds once you plug things in. 😁
It's just a controller that plugs into a PCI slot on your motherboard, and then your USB ports are located on the back.
crimsonstag84 said:To VG3 motherboard looks more like an ITX board to me.😬
I’d go with the H61-P20 instead; you get a 3-year warranty and it doesn't look like a Lego brick.😁
It might look like it, but it isn't.😬
Just so you don't run into any trouble—not all H61 Ivy Bridge processors are supported right out of the box. The VG3 definitely supports them, and I'm pretty sure those MSI boards ending in G3, like the H61M-P20-G3, work too.
That way you won't have to hunt someone down just to flash a BIOS update.
You could actually go with an older i5 3350p instead. Performance-wise, it’s basically neck-and-neck with an i5 4430 or an Intel Core i5-4440—I’d say there’s maybe a negligible 5% difference, so they're essentially the same thing to you.
The i5 3350p would run perfectly fine even on some of the cheaper motherboards like this one: http://www.diskont24.com/product.php...cat=568&page=1 The only catch is that those budget boards are a bit stripped down—they lack USB 3.0 and SATA 3 connectors. So, if your budget allows, I’d suggest sticking with that B75 board mentioned above.
Just as a heads-up so you don't run into any headaches: that i5 4440 won't fit in these specific boards. It uses the LGA 1150 socket, whereas the i5 3350p uses the LGA 1155 socket. All that technical info should be listed right there in the product descriptions.
You’re overthinking the CPU situation; even an FX 6300 holds its own and will stay relevant for upcoming titles. Think of it like this: the GPU is the engine driving the gaming experience, while the CPU just needs enough horsepower to keep up. Right now, your graphics card is being bottlenecked, meaning it's sitting there underutilized. Upgrading the processor should help you squeeze more performance out of the card you already own. It’s hard to predict the exact jump because every game handles hardware differently, but you can expect higher minimum FPS and fewer sudden stutters.
Later on, if you decide to tackle next-gen titles at higher settings, that's when you should look into swapping out the graphics card.
David Sanders4 said:When it comes to gaming, the graphics card is the absolute priority. You can easily save about $40 on the CPU and maybe $50 on the motherboard, leaving you with more $133 to put toward a superior GPU.
Look at this
THIS is a better board (superior voltage regulation)—meaning it should be more stable for serious overclocking, though if I'm not mistaken, that isn't really your concern, so it doesn't matter much.
You won't notice any difference in code performance because the game itself isn't particularly demanding; the 8320 might stay relevant for a while longer (think next-gen titles, simulations, etc.), but the area where you would actually feel a massive impact is the graphics card.
Look, I get the logic of swapping parts before they become totally obsolete and lose their resale value, but you seem to be doing it way too often. From what I can gather from your posts about the Radeon HD 6950, then the GeForce GTX 660, and now the HD7870... it just doesn't make sense. These are tiny incremental steps, almost like you're just moving sideways rather than actually upgrading. I bet you'd even sell them slightly below market value just to get 😬 . Honestly, you’re better off saving your cash and waiting for at least the next full generation of GPUs. This is exactly that modern "obsession" trap—like that guy in the link mentioned, focusing more on the hardware itself rather than the actual gaming experience the gear is meant for. I highly doubt a Radeon HD 7870 is holding you back in most titles. If you want to crank up MSAA in those ultra-demanding benchmark games, you'd need a high-end card costing thousands of dollars anyway, which isn't worth the investment. Besides, I assume you've already finished the heavy hitters, so I don't see much point in this
It’s a bit overkill; you won't see much benefit at standard resolutions like 1080p or 1200p. Those high-end GPUs really only start to shine once you push past that. Plus, with the card pulling 290 watts, it runs pretty hot, so you’ll probably want to budget for an aftermarket cooler too—maybe around $350-$133. review (just look at the actual in-game frame rates instead of those synthetic benchmarks)
No, that setup you mentioned is actually more powerful. A GeForce GTX 970M (the laptop version) is significantly weaker than a standard GTX 770. It used to sit in the same performance tier as something like an $333 desktop card. Honestly, if you're looking for serious gaming, buying an expensive laptop just isn't worth it. You end up paying the same amount of money for noticeably worse performance, plus you're stuck with a smaller screen and all that.
The only reason to go that route is if mobility is your absolute priority.
If I were buying for myself, I wouldn't go overboard on an overpriced GPU just to push overkill performance while cutting corners on everything else—like the case or an unlocked CPU—just to make the math work within a strict budget.
Look, you can approach it however you want, but while the GPU might struggle to hit its peak in modern titles, you'll definitely feel that performance boost in plenty of other games.
By the way, we were actually discussing Phenom processors earlier here: click (the 270x is slightly more powerful than a Radeon 7870—think of it as a 7870 with a Tahiti chip—but it still falls short of the GTX 760 and the HD7950, which offers massive overclocking potential).
Here is some additional feedback from PC enthusiasts regarding the GTX 760:
I tested a GTX 760 one day on an overclocked Phenom 965 running at 4.2GHz, and it just couldn't keep up with a 7970, which is clearly the stronger card...
So, let's cut the chatter and the speculation if you haven't actually run the tests yourself.
It would be much more helpful if you could just specify which processor model you're running, what kind of power supply you have, and your actual budget for the graphics card—that way, I can give you a clear recommendation on what will actually work best for your setup.