Budget Gaming Build under $500

What’s even the best choice? Honestly, this stuff has been repeated a million times already, but for some reason, people just won't learn.

I had a Gigica running at 4.5 GHz (8320) myself, but I always make it a point to mention that you shouldn't push for higher overclocking—just stick to turbo speeds or maybe 4.2 GHz (FX 8350). Most people asking for advice don't actually get how overclocking works—they don't think about case airflow, CPU coolers, or any other basic essentials. Plus, if you just disable turbo and the safety features, then manually set it to that clock speed I mentioned, you can also do a nice undervolt to drop both power draw and heat.

If we're talking high-end gear, I think ASRock and MSI are really the only ones worth considering (like Killerica or the 990FX-GD65).

I haven't seen any of those flowers mentioned either 😬

Starting from post #1510 and moving forward, specifically regarding the flagship GD 80

http://forum.pcekspert.com/showthrea...t=GD65&page=51

Nezz, honestly, it’s just too much of a headache to bother when you can pick up something from ASUS or Giga for that kind of money

Regarding the 970A-DS3P—obviously, the average user isn't going to be overclocking. We're talking about enthusiasts who want to squeeze every last drop of power out of their hardware. They usually prioritize cooling first, but it turns out this board can handle the heat for a ridiculous price, and the build quality clearly stands head and shoulders above the competition at this price point.

Look, we all know how this works 😉 For AM3 + Giga and ASUS are easily the top tier—just take a look at the 990 FXA-UD3 and you'll see everything it brings to the table, plus all those extra features, or maybe check out the 970 UD3/UD3P floating around $267 on
forums.
The only ones I’d even consider putting above them—and that's only if someone is being super picky about having a red/black or blue/black color scheme for their build—would be the Killerica or the GD-65, but let's be honest, those specific looks are pretty rare 😁

Pairing that CPU with a Gigabyte board is an absolute nightmare.

If you want a decent baseline, you should look at this LINK

But if you actually care about being future-proof, get this instead: LINK

Honestly, Gigabyte and AMD just don't play nice together, even on their high-end stuff. You can find endless horror stories about it all over the web.

That processor is a solid steal for the price, but that motherboard is straight-up garbage.

Timothy Kim60 said:They aren't exactly high-end stuff, if you ask me.😬

Starting from post #1510 regarding that GD 80 flagship

http://forum.pcekspert.com/showthrea...t=GD65&page=51

Nezz, honestly, it’s just too much of a headache to deal with when you could just grab something from ASUS or Giga for that kind of cash.

Regarding the 970A-DS3P—look, most people aren't going to be pushing their overclocking limits, they're just regular users. But then you've got the enthusiasts who want to squeeze every last drop of power out of their rig—those guys sort of focused on cooling first, but it turns out this board can actually handle it for peanuts, and you can really see the quality difference compared to other boards at the same price point.

Forget about any serious OC with that Giga board; it's a non-starter, whereas the 8320 is basically built for overclocking.🙏

feralcanyon73 - I honestly have no idea what you're getting at. Are you seriously suggesting I’d pick up the 990 extreme 3 for $267 +/-? 🤣

BTW - It turns out even an fx 83xx can be overclocked on that Gigabyte board, whereas for an fx 6300, it's basically perfect—I'm not sure which part of my previous post was unclear to you.

Timothy Kim60 said:feralcanyon73 - man, I honestly have no clue what you're even talking about. Are you seriously telling me you'd grab a 990 Extreme 3 just for a little $267 +/- gain? 🤣

BTW - turns out even an FX 8320 can be overclocked on that Gigabyte board, though it hits its sweet spot with an FX 6300—idk which part of my explanation is tripping you up.

I wouldn't touch an Asrock... but then again, neither would I touch a Gigabyte...
If you're going with AMD ASUS, that's the board you need to get.
Specifically, stick to the Sabertooth or the Crosshair.😉

P.S. Good luck trying to Overclock FX 8320 on that piece of junk board.🙂

EDIT: Send me a link proving that Gigabyte board is actually any good for overclocking that CPU.

Oh, please—he just showed up to grab a quick snack and troll a bit. If you check out his other thread where he was talking smack about Intel, you’ll see exactly what kind of guy he is 😁

graniteharbor85 said:Man, just ignore him. He’s just some troll looking for a quick hit of attention; if you check out that other thread where he was bashing Intel, you’ll see exactly what kind of guy we're dealing with. 😁

Maybe I messed something up in my post?☕

Everything 🤣

Timothy Kim60 said:All 🤣

Man, you're totally killing me with those arguments.🙏

feralcanyon73 said:You're absolutely killing me with those arguments.🙏

I'm killing it. ☕
I already laid out the situation regarding Gigabyte and even threw in a few real-world examples to drive the point home. What exactly was your counterargument again?

This is for the absolute idiots on this subforum:

feralcanyon73 said:That Gigabyte motherboard is an absolute nightmare when paired with that processor.

There really ought to be some kind of baseline established here. LINK

If you're looking to actually future-proof this build, here’s what you should be aiming for: LINK

It’s no secret that Gigabyte and AMD just don't get along when it comes to high-end motherboards. You can find plenty of horror stories online about it.

That CPU is a total steal for the price, but honestly? That motherboard is complete garbage.

feralcanyon73 said:I to Just enough. Sabertooth vs. Crosshair. Which one are you leaning towards?😉

P.S. Good luck overclocking that FX 8320 on that piece of junk motherboard.🙂

Can you send me the link that proves that Gigabyte board actually handles overclocking that CPU well?

I was speaking in general terms here—Intel and true enthusiast culture are just two completely different worlds.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against Intel. I actually own two Intel rigs and just one AMD setup. It’s just that, in my view, Intel chips are destined for server roles and HTPC builds. That is exactly where they belong.

🤣 🙏

Timothy Kim60 said:Man, I'm just killing ☕
I already gave you the rundown on Gigabyte and even brought up some real-world examples. What exactly are you even arguing here?

This whole thing is just for the masochists on this subforum:

🤣 🙏

Where exactly did you find these "real-life examples"?
Drop a link.
Maybe I missed it.🤣

I mean, I knew this PDF wasn't exactly a deep dive into genius-level wisdom, but still... 👏

graniteharbor85 said:

Honestly, if I were you, I wouldn't be bragging about that if I can help it.☕

Alright, I finally tracked down what The New Guy was up to

970A-DS3P & FX 8320 4.8Ghz 1.406V with an Antec H20 650—no throttling, zero issues whatsoever

Is this what you were getting at as an example?

Man, what are you even talking about? By your logic, if someone wants an FX 8320, they have to shell out at least $267 just for a motherboard just to run it at stock speeds? You're saying nothing else works? Are you out of your mind? Look at the links—people are Overclock FX 8320 on a Gigabyte board without breaking a sweat, yet you're suggesting putting a $267 board into a $1167 build just to be "future proof"? No, sorry, I guess for "future proofing" we need to drop at least $400 on a Sabertooth. Are you trolling or what?

I'm really not planning on getting OC-at a new computer—so don't even go there... maybe, in three or four years when I've basically stopped caring anyway.

James Gomez2 said:I really don't have any intention of overclocking a new build—so don't get your hopes up there... maybe in three or four years, once I simply stop caring about these things.

You don't even need to bother; the motherboard and cooler I suggested for the AMD FX-8320 are more than capable of running in turbo mode at 4.0GHz—which, frankly, is plenty for just about anything. When you eventually get it all put together, just toggle that turbo mode on and you're good to go.

There’s really nothing left to say when Turbo is enabled by default...

Turbo isn't some magic fix—it actually puts more strain on the motherboard than if I just manually locked it at 4 GHz. Plus, doing it myself allows for some decent undervolting, which keeps things cooler and lowers power draw.

Timothy Kim60 said:They don't really have an argument when Turbo is enabled by default...

Turbo isn't actually that big of a deal—honestly, it puts more strain on the motherboard than if I just manually locked it at 4 GHz—especially when you factor in some decent undervolting, which keeps things cooler and lowers power draw significantly.

Well, they can certainly make that happen—it's not like it's an impossible task for them—as long as he reaches out and asks nicely, I'm sure everything can be worked out.