553 posts shown.
You can do way better for that kind of money...
CPU: Intel Core i3-6100 (3MB Cache, 3.80 GHz), s1151
Motherboard: MSI H110M PRO-D, s1151
GPU: MSI GeForce GTX 1050Ti 4GT OC, 4GB GDDR5, DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort
RAM: DDR4 8GB (1x8GB) PC3-17000 2133MHz CL15 Crucial, CT8G4DFS8213
Hard Drive: Toshiba 1TB, P300 High-Performance, 7200 rpm, 64MB cache, SATA 6Gb/s, HDWD110UZSVA
Case: MS KNIGHT midi tower case without PSU, MBO: ATX, mATX. 2X 5.25" external slots, 3X internal slots
PSU: 400W FSP Fortron/Source Hexa+, ATX 2.4, PPA4004900
A much more powerful setup for $1317 bucks (eBay)
EDIT: I left out the optical drive, that's another $43 or you can snag a used one on Craigslist for $17...
I'm honestly just wondering if there's going to be anything actually worth watching here. 😬
My bad, I linked the wrong one 🙈 Definitely stay away from the 3GB version
Bradley Richardson41 said:Someone asked me about my power supply about ten days ago. It's a Corsair GS600. Totaling 600W. Specs.
Can I just grab the graphics card (Nvidia GTX 1060) or do I need something else too?
(Is there much difference between MSI, Asus, and the rest? I was thinking about picking up an MSI Nvidia GTX 1060 at Extreme Digital.
Don't do it at Edigital. Not only is there a ton of bad feedback on that shop, but that specific model only comes with a 2-year warranty, whereas MSI in the US offers 3 years.
If you've set your sights on an MSI gtx 1060 then this is definitely the better way to go.
Clearly we’re still not on the same page...🤦 (That facepalm is directed at my own inability to actually say what I mean)
The OP wants to know if an AMD Radeon RX 480 can handle 2-3G... which is a whole tier above the NVIDIA GTX 1050. Given how much better the AMD Radeon RX 480 is compared to the NVIDIA GTX 1050, I was being sarcastic when I suggested one should be even more "worried" about the NVIDIA GTX 1050 instead. Are we clear now? 😉
mellowtiger83 said:What's there to worry about with a GTX 1050? Absolutely nothing. Gaming clearly isn't his main priority anyway, and even if it were, it's not like you need everything cranked to max settings. Medium will do just fine. Honestly, the visual difference between medium and ultra in modern games is tiny. Personally, I think some games actually look better when you dial back the detail and lower the graphics quality.
You completely missed the point here...
The OP was worried about whether an AMD Radeon RX 480 would hold up for the next 2 or 3 years... in that context, no matter how much he stresses over the AMD Radeon RX 480, he should be worrying way more about a GTX 1050... regardless of whether those worries are even valid, does my comment make sense now? 😬
crimsonstag84 said:I haven't seen gaming listed as a primary use case here 🤔 ...so there’s no real need for an AMD Radeon RX 480; something like an NVIDIA GTX 1050 Ti would do the job fine.
He didn't mention gaming, but he's worried about how the AMD Radeon RX 480 will hold up over the next 2-3 years. If that's his concern, why wouldn't he be just as worried about an NVIDIA GTX 1050 Ti?😬
Did you see that? Their websites are a complete mess, and I can't find a single shred of info on there ☕
Timothy Kim60 said:How is that possible when there are games out there where even a 1070 can't hit an average of 60 FPS, let alone a minimum? And he's rocking a 144Hz monitor too...
That's because the guy is only talking about Call of Duty.
...that rig is basically being used to play Call of Duty 90% of the time....
That was the point of my comment. Chasing +120 FPS in Call of Duty only matters if you're playing multiplayer "seriously," but then a "serious" player isn't going to touch Ultra settings anyway. No matter what card they have, they'll always be hunting for the highest possible FPS on Low settings...😉
Fair enough. 👍 If money isn't an issue, then "overkill" isn't even a thing. Otherwise, getting a GTX 1070 for 1080p is just total overkill. 😉
crimsonstag84 said:With a 144Hz monitor, a GTX 1080 isn't exactly overkill. It’s just right. 😛
I don't see the point in paying extra for those overbuilt versions like the AMP. Just grab the cheapest one you can find that still comes with a solid three-year warranty and call it a day.
So, what? An RX 480 pulls an AVG 98, and you're seriously claiming that card is going to struggle like hell on a 144Hz monitor and that a GTX 1070 is some kind of necessity? Fine. Like I said before, I’m sticking to my guns if...
Don't expect some insane FPS. Running a GTX 1080 at 1080p on Ultra settings? That's just overkill. It's like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. ☕
Jack Alvarez said:Hey everyone, quick question... I've got a build sitting here with an i7 4770k, 16GB of RAM, an ASUS Z87 Pro, a 700W PSU, a BenQ XL2430T monitor, and a Sapphire Radeon HD 7970 Dual-X OC Edition. This rig spends about 90% of its time running Call of Duty. I'm thinking about picking up a ZOTAC GeForce GTX 1070 AMP Extreme Edition in about a month. Is that actually a smart, worthwhile move right now? If so, should I go with the ZOTAC GeForce GTX 1070 AMP Extreme Edition, the ASUS ROG Strix GTX 1070, or something else? Thanks.
Look, if you're sticking to 1080p, a GTX 1080 is total overkill unless you're chasing insane frame rates. Even an RX 480 or a GTX 1060 will push 80+ FPS on ultra settings. Only consider the upgrade if you're planning to swap to a 1440p monitor soon.
Which i9 are we talking about here?
wiredotter14 said:If you grab that setup from Best Buy, for example, getting 6GB (4+2GB) ends up being $104, whereas 2x4GB is $117. Just a heads up: that 6GB configuration won't run smoothly in dual channel, and honestly, there isn't a single scenario where that's worth the headache.
You can totally go with what crimsonstag84 suggested regarding the 4GB. It's a new platform, and with an SSD, you aren't going to need more than 4GB of RAM for what you're doing. He found you the absolute best value for your needs. That Celeron is only marginally weaker than a Pentium for basic internet browsing. If you're planning on playing high-res video on big screens—like a 4K TV—down the road, then maybe opt for the Pentium
If you really want to walk into a physical store, you could pick up what I listed at Best Buy or stick to your original plan (just please, don't do the 6GB 🙏)
But if you're ordering from Best Buy, I'd still recommend placing the order online and just picking it up in-store. That way, you get that 14-day return window where you can send stuff back without even giving a reason. If something feels off or you just change your mind, returning it won't be a nightmare.
And besides, just order online because the prices are actually lower. Walking into a store to place an order is the worst move you can make; they won't give you the online discount, so you're basically leaving money on the table.
goldenotter9 said:What's the point if the CPU is just going to choke again in a year or two? I wouldn't bother upgrading past a GTX 970... unless it at least had an Extreme 6-core/12-thread setup. A basic i7 just doesn't cut it anymore.
The guy is rocking a 4K monitor and you're telling him not to go higher than a GTX 970? 😬
driftingdrifter88 said:What's the move here? Grab a 1080 or just wait?
Predator 360mm radiator
i7-6700K processor
16GB Kingston RAM at 3000 MHz
ROG Maximus VIII Extreme motherboard
EVGA G2 850W power supply
Samsung EVO 250GB SSD
Monitor is an Acer Predator 4K, I think
If you can't swing it right now, just hold out for the 1080 Ti...
Like I said, my brother and I get our payout just 7 days after the billing cycle wraps up. If anyone else is seeing theirs hit 14 or 21 days later, shoot me a DM and let me know how you're pulling that off—I wouldn't mind having that "privilege" myself 😬
wiredotter14 said:there's a big difference between the billing cycle ending and the actual due date
For me, the statement closes on the 1st or 2nd of the month for everything from the previous month, but the bill doesn't actually hit my desk until mid-month.
Maybe someone else has their cycle end on the 15th, but they aren't expected to pay immediately either—it wouldn't be due until the end of the month. It’s just like a credit card; the charge never hits your wallet instantly. There's always this lag: period > billing > invoice > payment due date.
Exactly! Look at my own Amex statement this month (applies to any month, really): my billing cycle runs from Sept 13th to Oct 13th, then I get the bill between Oct 16th and 17th depending on the mail, with a due date of Oct 20th. So, if I wasn't paying attention (hypothetically speaking 😬), and I ran something on my Amex on Oct 12th, that would show up on the statement I get on the 16th, and I'd have to pay it by the 20th... does that make sense now? 😉