hey guys .I'm planning on buying a budget pc in the next days and i would like some advice on the parts that i chose for now and if they work with each other .so what i got by now is : -Corsair NEW VS Series VS450 power suply -1 x HyperX Fury Black 8GB DDR4 2133MHz CL14 Dual Channel Kit -MSI B150M PRO-VDH mother board -SilentiumPC Regnum RG1W Window Pure Black case -GIGABYTE Radeon RX 470 WindForce 4GB DDR5 256-bit gpu -Core i3 7100 3.9GHz box cpu -LED AOC I2369VM 23 inch 5ms silver monitor Please keep in mind that my budget is fairly low so dont recomend things that cost a lot more .I'm planning on buying it in order to upgrade in time when I get some more money.Thank you edit : the total for now is 694.79 euros
I wouldn't suggest an i3 for gaming, the processor you are getting only has a 3MB cache, go for an i5 or an i7 its might be like 50$ more but its quite good, here is one
Socket doesn't match, Motherboard has a Intel 1511 while the CPU you linked is a Intel 1150. The i5 6500 is a 1511 socket, but the price difference is quite a lot between the two. https://gyazo.com/9d04e14bede5358ebfe0e1321bb24b70 <- CPU https://gyazo.com/b00e2da7dde7f9894ae467d089c4ff5e <- Mobo Note: Why does amazon link appear automatically with media tags?
ok so i decided to put bit more money in the cpu and will prob get the i5 7400 3ghz one .I see that the soket should be ok this time.Anything else i should worry about regarding the rest of the build?Oh and i picked the v650 source to be sure i dont lack power with the 450 one Thanks a lot for the help btw
3 ghz is a really really low clock speed and your graphics card requires atleast a 500W psu but since you're not going to overclock you probably wont need more than 500-550W also i'd get atleast a gold certified psu, generates alot less heat than say a bronze certified psu
yeah , the new psu that i chose has 650w and is gold certified so this should be fine .the thing with the cpu is that i really cant afford to put more money in it and having to chose between the i3 3.9 and the i5 3.0 i chose the later one.Ofc that im going to consider upgrading in the future with a new mother board and a top of the line cpu but that will take a bit more (1-2 years).As long as what i chose runs most game for a year or two and permits future upgrades i'm totally fine with what i can get so far.The only thing that i want to be certain for now is that what i chose is the best thing i can get for that money and that there is no bottleneck. edit: in the meantime i also chose to pick the rx480 8 gb instead of the 470 .From what i saw in the benchmarks its a really solid gpu for that cost and shouldnt have any problems in running enything for a while
Well thing is, your cpu is likely gonna bottleneck your gpu, downgrading a bit on the gpu and getting the i5 7500 3.4ghz would be much better imo
Actually 3.0 Ghz is not really that slow, i underclocked my i5 4670 3.4Ghz CPU to 2.8 Ghz to reduce heat dispense and it still performs just the same with very minor difference in loading times. I played games like Batman: AK, DS3, Witcher 3, AC: Syndicate, Watch Dogs 2 and APB.
it is pretty slow, especially if you play cs with it. And how do you even manage to play apb with a 2.8 ghz clock speed, the game is shit at using quad cores so having a low clock speed must be stuttery as hell. And most of the games you listed are not very cpu intense except for Witcher 3 which has like 3.3 ghz set as minimum requirement and i can barely get a stable 60 on 1080 with a 4690k on 4.3 and a gtx 770 in it.
No it's not in 99% of cases. CPU is RARELY the bottleneck so underclocking it wouldn't pose an issue. In CS it's low but yea, that's an exception rather than the norm. - APB is an exception, not the norm. - if you say the games he lists aren't very CPU intensive you're basically already agreeing that 3.0GHz isn't low for what he does. - You're comparing the witcher 3, a demanding as balls title, to everything else. Also the fact that you can barely get stable 60 has FAR more to do with your 770 than your 4690k Also stop looking at just clock speeds, if clock speeds were king AMD would rule the market and they don't.
What? CS demands extremely less, I am sure i can play CS by underclocking my CPU to 2.3 or 2.5 GHz and still get 60 stable FPS. (maybe not 120 fps but i cant test that anyway) I have a NVIDIA 970 Graphics card which really helps a lot with my performance but I am also not claiming i get a constant 60 fps, but almost 90% of my games do run at 60 fps with FPS drops when I am moving while areas are loading etc. Also believe it or not, i got better performance on APB after underclocking my CPU than when i ran the game with 3.4 Ghz.
http://www.userbenchmark.com/PCBuilder Also APB focusses on Single Thread performance, while CS is able to use all threads. What I think is a nice baseline atm:
Have you even seen the minimum requirement for CSGO ? Its a Core 2 Duo processor and 2 GB RAM? I am talking about under-clocking a 4th Gen i5 processor with 8GB RAM on my PC. Do the math buddy
It was more about saying that you could hit stable 60 in a game where you want 128+ at ALL times (assuming you play on the superior 128 tick servers) My statement had nothing to do with capability, only relevance.
