Advice on Gaming rig

[fiza]

My son is looking to build his first Gaming rig. He wants to play mainly titanfall, gta iv, cod and sims 4. He is looking at the following ;

 

Case: BitFenix Comrade Midi-Tower - Black - Aria Technology

HDD: 1TB Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 3.5" SATA III Hard Drive - HDD - Aria PC

DVDRW: LiteOn 24x Internal SATA DVD RW Drive [iHAS124-14] - Aria Technology

CPU: AMD (Piledriver) FX-6300 3.50GHz (4.10GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 6-Core Processor - Retail - Aria PC

MEMORY: 8GB (2x4GB) Crucial Ballistix Sport 1600MHz CL9 DDR3 Dual Channel Kit [bLS2CP4G3D1609DS1S00CEU] - Aria Technology

GFX: Sapphire Radeon R9 270X Dual-X Boost OC AMD Graphics Card 2GB Graphics Card - Aria Technology

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P AMD Socket AM3+ Motherboard - Aria Technology

PSU:EVGA 500W 80 Plus Power Supply (100-W1-0500-KR) - Aria Technology

 

Any advice would be appreciated from the gamers out there? Any one recommend anything better for around the same £450 budget? He already has the peripherals required.

[nickbro]

I'd switch to a NVidia GFX, Intel CPU, stick a SSD drive in for Windows + Games, a HDD for video/docs, and up the ram speed.

 

Both have better gaming experiences. NVidia's control panel allows for more advanced GFX control. Intel CPUs are just better at the moment in my experience. AMD are about 1-2 years behind Intel with CPU tech. It may be slower but it handles task more efficiently. But there's a new Intel 14nm tech coming out soon.

 

Also go for 2x8gb RAM, or 4x4gb. Future proof it.

[fiza]

I'd switch to a NVidia GFX, Intel CPU, stick a SSD drive in for Windows + Games, a HDD for video/docs, and up the ram speed.

 

Both have better gaming experiences. NVidia's control panel allows for more advanced GFX control. Intel CPUs are just better at the moment in my experience. AMD are about 1-2 years behind Intel with CPU tech. It may be slower but it handles task more efficiently. But there's a new Intel 14nm tech coming out soon.

 

Also go for 2x8gb RAM, or 4x4gb. Future proof it.

 

Still needs to come under the £450 mark. Will look into the Nvidia gfx.

[nickbro]

Ah, £450 price tag

[Achandler]

ATI graphics cards are better bang for buck at almost all levels, so don't change it. As for future proofing, if your motherboard has enough RAM slots then you cna buy more RAM if and when its needed. No point stacking RAM now if it isn't actually be used.

 

Intel instead of AMD is worth the change if it can be afforded.

[Roberto]

I wouldn't worry too much about "Nvida vs. AMD" on the graphics card side of things. Much like the "PS4 vs. Xbox One" debate, (assuming we're talking about comparable levels of card, obviously) while one might be slightly better than the other depending on what exactly you want to do, they're both good good choices that will serve you well.

 

I'd definitely say intel rather than AMD on the processor side of things. While AMD make good processors and are a reasonable choice, intel are currently make great processors and are a better choice.

[featured_spectre]

I would agree that intel chips are the way to go, however, on a cost/budget, you do get more bang for buck on AMD chips, especially on a budget (I have the 8300 and it works like a charm for my needs).

 

For a little less money, you can get a slightly better NVidia card - Link Here *On a benchmark, it beats it by ~550 points (roughly 13% on the overall benchmark score between the cards)

Edited September 8, 2014 by featured_spectre

[3s-gtech]

At your price point, AMD may be the best choice for CPU. When you are comparing £75 CPUs, the FX6300 is against lower end Core i3 like the 4130 - both good processors but check benchmarks to see how it pans out. It's easy to say 'Intel is better' but price is a factor that is often forgotten in that case - you're not comparing against the FX against the 4690k which is £170!

 

That said, the Pentium G3258 is a cracking CPU and a bargain to boot, it's probably what I'd build a budget gamer around.

 

AMD vs Nvidia for graphics - they are much alike. Saying Nvidia has better gaming experiences is tosh - fanboyism and internet trending. Nvidia make some awesome cards - the 750Ti is ace, but AMD produce some corkers like the new R9 285. Having run both makes, I haven't had driver issues with either (over many, many years) and build quality has been good. Both companies have produced stinkers in their time (Geforce 5 series or ATI 2900) too.

[localzuk]

More studios currently use Nvidia specific tech in their games than AMD, so yes, Nvidia can and will give a better experience for many games. I've had a huge number of problems with games not playing properly on AMD cards sadly. Most recently Mafia II (the game crashes at a certain spot with AMD cards but works fine with Nvidia), but I also had issues with GTA 4 and The Saboteur (partly fixed by a patch, but still not brilliant) in the past.

 

Performance wise, for CPUs. The FX6300 is more akin to the i5-4430 than an i3. So, bang for buck, the FX6300 is a better choice - it comes out about £30 cheaper against the Intel.

[mrbios]

Thought of purchasing some of this second hand?

 

You can get a 280X second hand for the same price as a new 270X, a fair leap in performance there. (Even 290s are selling for £185 - Though i do agree with others saying nvidia, AMDs drivers have been shocking in recent months)

 

Z87 motherboards are selling for ~£50 as people move to Z97

 

8GB ram sets for £35

 

(I'm getting all these prices from the overclockers uk members market, it has prerequisites to being able to get in, but there are other forums with similar things that aren't so restrictive)

 

You could build a FAR better machine with smart use of the second hand market

 

EDIT: on the intel v amd thing, the i5 4430 like localz says is the competitor to the 6300, see here for comparison: http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/358/AMD_FX-Series_FX-6300_vs_Intel_Core_i5_i5-4430.html 45% in single threaded apps is quite a leap and probably worth the extra £ (Also a few other benefits if you see the list on that page, not to mention with the intention of gaming single threaded is where it's at for anything but brand new games)

Edited September 8, 2014 by mrbios

[sonofsanta]

At that budget, I'd say stick with AMD for the CPU to be honest - the motherboards tend to be cheaper as well. You don't want to go any higher than a Core i3 (if you do go Intel) for your CPU on that budget, else you'll have to sacrifice on the GPU to afford the CPU, and GPU is still far more important. Given that AMD can compete with the i3, with cheaper motherboards to boot, you may as well stick with them.

 

AMD GPUs are more powerful for their money at that point of the market as well. Just don't Crossfire really not worth the aggro (says the voice of experience). You can push to the 280; it's about to be replaced by the 285, which is pretty much equal in performance, but the 280 has 3GB RAM vs. 2GB on the 285. If, at any point, you find yourself with some extra budget, pile into the GPU: it's still what makes the biggest difference in the here-and-now (a more powerful CPU may future-proof you and benefit you In The Future, but a more powerful GPU will benefit you now). 280X is the next step up, about £200. Asus are my favourite cooler (DirectCU II), MSI/Sapphire are also good. Not a big fan of XFX, I've had hassle RMAing in the past.

 

So I'd say, from some clicking around on PC Parts Picker:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26277[/ATTACH]

Assuming you don't need to buy a Windows licence.

 

DVD/RW, RAM, case, HDD are all interchangeable, they were just cheapest in the list. Motherboard is a fairly random pick as well, stick to Asus/Gigabyte/MSI IMHO. PSU, Corsair are a reliable brand - I don't know anything about EVGA as a PSU brand. Look for reviews before you buy any PSU though, especially if you can find a jonnyguru review.

 

Can't really squeeze an SSD in at the moment, but it's an easy upgrade in the future - Corsair MX100 256GB are about £75 at the moment, which is a right royal bargain. 256GB will outperform 128GB and gives you a bit more breathing space, though with a 1TB HDD alongside you shouldn't have any problems. Set Steam to install to the mechanical storage, games don't get much benefit, and having to manage your library is a PITA.

 

My tuppence, anyway!

 

EDIT: saying that, I forgot to factor in the Pentium G3258. If you don't mind overclocking - and it's pretty damned easy with an Intel K chip - get the 20th Anniversary edition Pentium, a cheap Z87 board and a decent cooler and get top-drawer single thread performance at 4.5GHz (or thereabouts). Works out about the same price as the 6300 + mobo, but should perform much better in games. Only 2-core/2-thread, but it gives you ample here-and-now performance.

 

Link to new build, the top now looks like this (and if anyone can genuinely recommend a cooler, as I have no idea atm, that'd be grand).

Edited September 8, 2014 by sonofsanta

[Arthur]

Corsair MX100 256GB are about £75 at the moment, which is a right royal bargain.

Through Flubit, that SSD is currently £64.84 (inc. VAT) which is even more of a bargain!

[JLambert97]

If the board has 2 PCIE x16 slots (I think it does I will have to double check) You could buy 2 of these GFX cards and SLI them http://www.amazon.co.uk/Radeon-Graphics-Express-CrossFireX-Technology/dp/B0081LDY7Q/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1410348519&sr=8-2&keywords=amd+radeon+hd+6670.

You will get a fair bit more graphics power for a cheaper price than the card that is listed in your post.

 

~ Josh

[3s-gtech]

Hmmm, the 6670 is ancient, wasn't that great when launched, and CrossFire isn't guaranteed to scale well. I'd say that's a poor idea.

[sonofsanta]

Yeah sod CrossFire - it gives you grief with driver support, application profiles, only uses the VRAM of a single GPU, and you never quite get over the niggling feeling that the game isn't using both GPUs fully. It also demonstrably introduces micro-stutter, which can be invisible to some eyes, but was really, really annoying to mine.

 

If you want to get really technical on micro-stutter, this is a fantastic article (page 9 goes into multi-GPU), but in brief: just get a single, powerful GPU. Seriously.

[JLambert97]

Hmmm, the 6670 is ancient, wasn't that great when launched, and CrossFire isn't guaranteed to scale well. I'd say that's a poor idea.

Fair enough. Although I've been using the 6670 for gaming for a while and I have always had a great experience with it.

[Mako]

My 5870 still slays most things I throw at it. BF4 on high, PayDay2 on medium. However I'd never recommend old tech when new tech is so cheap these days.

 

I will echo the voices before me: Swap the AMD processor for Intel. They are just better.

 

Don't get bogged into the AMD vs nVidia graphics debate though. Your current choice is more than good. When people ask me "which is better?" I provide this analogy: AMD cards are like drag racers, nVidia are monster trucks. AMD cards are fast out of the gate and do the job brilliantly, but at higher ends they get beaten by the sheer brute power of nVidia cards which will roll over them at the super size resolutions and graphics settings, and definitely in multiple-card setups, which you will probably not need.

 

For kid's first setup, stick with what you've got for graphics. I have never personally had a problem with AMD cards, and my golden oldie still beats everything up that I throw at it.