# Upgrading my RIG. First time going into INTEL. Need help.



## Greenmousa (Sep 27, 2016)

So yeah. It's happening. I gotta take off my red shirt and go baby blue this time around. AMD served me well for so many years (every computer i've ever built since my Pentium 4 was RED) 

I was planning on upgrading my Video Card, going for a RX480 or 1060GTX since i play only on 1080p at 60fps, so more than that is just overkill and overbudget.

Thing is, my 8320, overclocked and all will bottleneck the fuck out of my new VGA, so it's time to upgrade.

My wife needs a PC for audio editting, so i'm re-rigging my old 8320 for her, and upgrading for myself. Heh! Sucker!

The reason i decided to go with Intel this time around is that there's no good AMD option that i can see right now to stay with my current motherboard, which is great and all but it's getting old faster than i expected i must say.

Can you guys prove me wrong? Is there a valid AMD option right now? I plan on playing mostly BF1, Overwatch, Dota2, and whatever the hell triple A thingie comes out. I must say during the BF1 Beta my current rig held it's ground magnificently letting me play confortably at 60fps with medium-high settings. 

IF NOT, i'm planning on getting an i5-6600k or 6400. 

I do need help in the motherboard part, i have no freaking idea on that subject when it comes to intel.

Thanks in advance for all your help.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 27, 2016)

I see two options here:

Option a)
Wait for amd zen (early/Jan 2017) or stay with current system - the 8320 with oc isn't bad.

Option b)
I5 6600k and overclocks with a z170 board. Ddr4 2800+ 16gb and a suitable cooler. If you take the i5 6400 the upgrade is much smaller compared to the fx 8320 - so better take the 6600k.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 27, 2016)

I won't wait for Zen, i've been waiting for AMD's "OH THIS IS IT MAN, THIS IS IT!! GROUNDBREAKING SHIT RIGHT HERE" and then nothing happened, this entire build that i'm currently using i would call it "MANTLE HYPE" Remember Mantle? Yeah. 

I see what you mean. Do you think a 6600k would need overclock in order to not bottleneck the vga?


----------



## alucasa (Sep 27, 2016)

4ghz, at least, yeah.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 27, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> I won't wait for Zen, i've been waiting for AMD's "OH THIS IS IT MAN, THIS IS IT!! GROUNDBREAKING SHIT RIGHT HERE" and then nothing happened, this entire build that i'm currently using i would call it "MANTLE HYPE" Remember Mantle? Yeah.
> 
> I see what you mean. Do you think a 6600k would need overclock in order to not bottleneck the vga?


No but you'd have much more cpu performance for the future or heavy games  (bf1) today.

The new i5s at any clock do certainly not bottleneck a medium gpu like 1060 or rx480.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 27, 2016)

Should i jump straight for an i7 then? Man, this is getting expensive fast.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 27, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> Should i jump straight for an i7 then? Man, this is getting expensive fast.


If you have the money for the 6700k yes. But I'd rather take a 6800k on a x99 system then. Few bucks more but a lot more performance.


----------



## Ebo (Sep 27, 2016)

First I would OC the system that you allready have, and buy a new GFX. Then I would see how that works before throwing money after a whole new system.


----------



## alucasa (Sep 27, 2016)

Well, the guy needs to give his significant other a rig. So, might as well get himself a new one.


----------



## slozomby (Sep 27, 2016)

the 6600k overclocks to 4ghz easily. its more than enough for a 1060.  is the 6700k faster. yup. will you notice it at 1080p. nope

if you're going to spend more money. stay with the 6600k and upgrade to a 1070 rather than jump to an 6700k.


----------



## Toothless (Sep 27, 2016)

How are you guys saying a 6600k will bottleneck a 1060. That's not the case at all.

A stock 6600k will be just fine for even a 1070.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 27, 2016)

I'm just not sure if the 6700k is really worth it. I like 6 cores way more because it's only a tad more expensive.

Also yeah maybe the money is better spent on a gtx 1070 compared to a better cpu than 6600k.

I'd say get a 6600k with oc and a gtx1070. Evga or Msi.


----------



## peche (Sep 27, 2016)

come on people ... read the 1st post, OP is gonna bring the old board  + cpu  + ram to this wife, 
will take a full rig for him... come on read and then advise...

@Greenmousa , how much money do you have for the upgrade? which parts do you exactly want to upgrade? like a full rig??

Regards,


----------



## slozomby (Sep 27, 2016)

oh and about the motherboard. theres gunna be a lot that can be recommended. depending on features and pricepoint required.


----------



## TheHunter (Sep 28, 2016)

Get at least i7 6700(k) if you plan to stay longer with this new cpu. 

6600K is ok and all, but 4threads is 4..


----------



## qubit (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> I won't wait for Zen, i've been waiting for AMD's "OH THIS IS IT MAN, THIS IS IT!! GROUNDBREAKING SHIT RIGHT HERE" and then nothing happened, this entire build that i'm currently using i would call it "MANTLE HYPE" Remember Mantle? Yeah.
> 
> I see what you mean. Do you think a 6600k would need overclock in order to not bottleneck the vga?


Yup, hype and no substance. Let AMD prove themselves to us first. It's not up to us to have faith and then be constantly disappointed when they don't deliver. 

I'd say wait for Skylake to release then consider your options, it won't be too long now. I would invariably recommend the 7700K paired with an enthusiast motherboard and at least 16GB RAM.


----------



## peche (Sep 28, 2016)

TheHunter said:


> Get at least i7 6700(k) if you plan to stay longer with this new cpu.
> 
> 6600K is ok and all, but 4threads is 4..


4 threads are plenty for tasking,  gaming and also design sir... mostly on PC, 

Regards,


----------



## slozomby (Sep 28, 2016)

peche said:


> 4 threads are plenty for tasking,  gaming and also design sir... mostly on PC,
> 
> Regards,


especially when you consider the bulk of the games run primarily on 1 core.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

Wow so many replies, thank you guys, i just got home from work, let me read all and i'll start quote-responding, thanks in advance.


----------



## qubit (Sep 28, 2016)

slozomby said:


> especially when you consider the bulk of the games run primarily on 1 core.


That's a bit misleading. While many do, the triple A games tend to use 2-4 cores and performance will suffer if they are not given the number of cores that they need. Indeed they may not run at all sometimes. Therefore, go for a true quad core every time to ensure this isn't a problem. 4 cores + hyperthreading can help with running the PC smoothly and in certain apps, but not so much in games.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Sep 28, 2016)

slozomby said:


> especially when you consider the bulk of the games run primarily on 1 core.


What rock you live under

No current triple A game runs only a single core

Hell alot of games fail to load on dual cores let alone single


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 28, 2016)

Bottleneck, lmfao


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

Ebo said:


> First I would OC the system that you allready have, and buy a new GFX. Then I would see how that works before throwing money after a whole new system.


Thanks bro, but that won't do, my wife do need a new computer, so no, i won't keep OCing this one, that is already OC'ed by the way.



Toothless said:


> How are you guys saying a 6600k will bottleneck a 1060. That's not the case at all.
> 
> A stock 6600k will be just fine for even a 1070.




THIS. I thought that a 6600k wouldn't bottleneck a 1070, let alone a 1060 or 480, i'm starting to really think that people exaggerate way too much on what bottlenecks what. I mean, my 8320 is for sure a huge bottleneck, i've seen footage of GTA V stuttering at 40fps with a 1070 on an 8320, but, a 6600k feels like such a huge upgrade that i would be really concerned if that also bottlenecks. If that's the cas then i7's are the only way to go, and i kinda refuse to believe that.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 28, 2016)

Nobody said that, he was talking bullshit. Just one person said, that 6500 is a bottleneck compared to 6600K, that's it. I then clarified that it's not - not  for the 1060 or 480 anyway. For the 1070 maybe. Depends, but I think yes. 

FX 8320 with high OC (4500+) is a bottleneck for 1070 only - that's it. I'm not even talking about that CPU without OC - it's just slow.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

peche said:


> come on people ... read the 1st post, OP is gonna bring the old board  + cpu  + ram to this wife,
> will take a full rig for him... come on read and then advise...
> 
> @Greenmousa , how much money do you have for the upgrade? which parts do you exactly want to upgrade? like a full rig??
> ...




Thanks man. Yeah, so she would get my MOBO-CPU (without the cooler i think...if i can fit it into the i5, i gotta check incompatibilities , if not well, that lucky bastard will get it with cooler and all) and maybe a discrete VGA without 6 pins or anything like that, she doesn't need it, just to watch videos and the ocasional photoshop. My RAMs and that's it. PSU stays here and my case stays so does my hard drive, i know i should be getting some SSD but here in Argentina they're still quite expensive. 

About the budget that's a whole other thing, let me give you a quick example of pricings here. 

GTX 1060 6GB MSI - $7300 = uS$ 448 

...

YEP. I know. 

So with the budget you guys usually take as Enthusiast here you get somewhere between medium standards. 

So i'm willing to get a 1060 and maybe some form of Intel i5 + Motherboard+ RAMS and a discrete GPU for my wife, add to that a new hard drive and optical drive, PSU wise, she'll be using the one that comes with the tower kit, i don't think i'll need a dedicated 80 plus nothing PSU.  

That might be in the range of $16.000, something like us$1067 

It hurts to write that kind of stuff down when i look at the prices in the states.  



Kanan said:


> Nobody said that, he was talking bullshit. Just one person said, that 6500 is a bottleneck compared to 6600K, that's it. I then clarified that it's not - not  for the 1060 or 480 anyway. For the 1070 maybe. Depends, but I think yes.
> 
> FX 8320 with high OC (4500+) is a bottleneck for 1070 only - that's it. I'm not even talking about that CPU without OC - it's just slow.



I know, it's not just you, i've been reading stuff like that all day long, that's what i'm saying, it's like people are really hooked on this everything bottlenecks thing.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 28, 2016)

Then the GTX 1070 is off the table I guess.

It's your choice, you can go with i5 6500 or 6600K and a RX480/GTX1060. If money wise 6500 + 1070 is the same as 6600K + 1060, I would go for the first if you can pay it. Prices in argentina seem to be 80%+ more compared to US. Wow.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

Kanan said:


> Then the GTX 1070 is off the table I guess.
> 
> It's your choice, you can go with i5 6500 or 6600K and a RX480/GTX1060. If money wise 6500 + 1070 is the same as 6600K + 1060, I would go for the first if you can pay it. Prices in argentina seem to be 80%+ more compared to US. Wow.


ikr? it's fucked up. The only thing with your suggestion is that high end graphics like the 1070 may go even more expensive since the stock is relatively low, there's very little demand for stuff like that, usually you order it and wait for it.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 28, 2016)

Okay.
I'm not a big fan of the GTX 1060, I would certainly take a 6600k/6500 and a RX 480 then (Sapphire or XFX).


----------



## slozomby (Sep 28, 2016)

Durvelle27 said:


> What rock you live under
> 
> No current triple A game runs only a single core
> 
> Hell alot of games fail to load on dual cores let alone single


I stand corrected. in order to get 60fps at 1080p ultra in fallout 4 I had to turn on a second core. and doom wouldn't go higher than 1366x768 with 2 cores in vulkan mode.


----------



## alucasa (Sep 28, 2016)

I'd say 6600k and 1060. For 1080p gaming, 1060 is all you need really. I'd say k-version just in case you wish to OC it. Though, if you do choose 6500, you can save a lot by not having to go with Z170 mobo.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

Kanan said:


> Okay.
> I'm not a big fan of the GTX 1060, I would certainly take a 6600k/6500 and a RX 480 then (Sapphire or XFX).


Any reason why not 1060 6gb? I mean, what specifically you don't like other that the laughable 3gb version, that serves no niche whatsoever.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> Any reason why not 1060 6gb? I mean, what specifically you don't like other that the laughable 3gb version, that serves no niche whatsoever.


Because it's inferior in DX12/Vulkan and I don't buy a GPU for a old API (DX11) if I want to hold it for 2+ years. RX 480 is simply a GPU with a lot of untapped power - and that power is unleashed in DX12/Vulkan. The way I see it AMD GPUs are good for the long run, whereas Nvidia ones are fast now, but slower later. There are a lot of examples for that, most famous is R9 290X vs 780 Ti or 7970 (280x) vs 680/770 (R9 380(X) vs 960 and soon RX 480 vs 1060).

New example of DX12:
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-amd-gpus-benchmarked-forza-horizon-3/

That RX 4*7*0 is faster than a 1060.


----------



## slozomby (Sep 28, 2016)

Kanan said:


> Because it's inferior in DX12/Vulkan and I don't buy a GPU for a old API (DX11) if I want to hold it for 2+ years. RX 480 is simply a GPU with a lot of untapped power - and that power is unleashed in DX12/Vulkan. The way I see it AMD GPUs are good for the long run, whereas Nvidia ones are fast now, but slower later. There are a lot of examples for that, most famous is R9 290X vs 780 Ti or 7970 (280x) vs 680/770 (R9 380(X) vs 960 and soon RX 480 vs 1060).
> 
> New example of DX12:
> http://wccftech.com/nvidia-amd-gpus-benchmarked-forza-horizon-3/
> ...


and yet here is another article from there where the 480 and 1060 trade the lead.
http://wccftech.com/rx-480-gtx-1060-dx12-vulkan-tested/

whats confusing is this post from the other forza thread


> Game is kinda beta, it's just a mess. Kepler isn't really supported and "Ultra" doesn't change anything visually but eats 50%+ FPS away. Fury X is slower than RX 470 @ Ultra 1080p but faster in 4K (High) again compared to RX 470. I hope it has a DX11 mode too, it's yet another bad implementation of DX12 it seems.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 28, 2016)

slozomby said:


> and yet here is another article from there where the 480 and 1060 trade the lead.
> http://wccftech.com/rx-480-gtx-1060-dx12-vulkan-tested/
> 
> whats confusing is this post from the other forza thread


It's (RX 480) clearly faster in 3 games and in the other games about equal. Your link just proves me right, thanks. And in 2 years the RX 480 is probably 20% faster than 1060 - history proves me right.

Before this thread is derailed: do what you want I don't have the time for childish Nvidia vs AMD debates. Typical users here with Nvidia GPUs will come and comment that 1060 is faster, but as you can see I own a Nvidia GPU myself and still I dont recommend a 1060.


----------



## ixi (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> I won't wait for Zen, i've been waiting for AMD's "OH THIS IS IT MAN, THIS IS IT!! GROUNDBREAKING SHIT RIGHT HERE" and then nothing happened, this entire build that i'm currently using i would call it "MANTLE HYPE" Remember Mantle? Yeah.
> 
> I see what you mean. Do you think a 6600k would need overclock in order to not bottleneck the vga?


Intel quads right now will not be bottle-neck for anygame. Except those quads which runs under 3.0 ghz, those maybe.


----------



## evernessince (Sep 28, 2016)

If you're only doing 1080p might as well get an RX 470.  At $150 it's by far the best value and it's only a bit slower than the RX 480 / 1060.

FYI on Zen, AMD have already shown it beating Intel's top of the line processor so it's likely to be good.  If Zen fails to compete it's very possible that AMD will fold and Intel will have a complete CPU monopoly and Nvidia a GPU monopoly.  I would wait for Zen, even if it isn't good it's likely to cut CPU prices in half when it comes out.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

Everytime i read "VULKAN IS THE FUTURE" i can only think about the MANTLE fiasco.  I've been let down by AMD before, as i said, i've always built AMD machines, i'm all for team red, but lately i started to wonder if it's not beat wife syndrome and i just don't know any better. Know what i mean? I've always picked AMD because of the $ - Performance ratio, it's all about the value.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> Everytime i read "VULKAN IS THE FUTURE" i can only think about the MANTLE fiasco.  I've been let down by AMD before, as i said, i've always built AMD machines, i'm all for team red, but lately i started to wonder if it's not beat wife syndrome and i just don't know any better. Know what i mean? I've always picked AMD because of the $ - Performance ratio, it's all about the value.


1) Mantle is not Vulcan. Vulcan is the successor to OpenGL, not a stand alone exclusive AMD thing like Mantle. Every GPU supports Vulcan - that is the biggest difference.
2) Zen will be good, I'm sure. If you don't believe, it's your problem - I do.
3) Go and buy Intel / Nvidia then, I will laugh later when the 1060 is slower than even a RX 470 like the other Nvidia GPUs before it. 780 Ti, 680/770, 960, 970 (vs R9 390). And the 980 is starting to fall apart aswell - loses more and more to 290X/390X.

One thing more: the RX 480 has 2304 shaders whereas the 1060 has only 1280. The only thing thats holds the RX 480 back from completely destroying the 1060 is the lower clock. In games with new API (DX12 / Vulcan) the 1060 isn't better. How many links do you want to see? I thought 2 are enough.


----------



## luciferxy (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> ... it's all about the value.



if that's what matter the most for you, then the 1060 may not be the right choice. nvidia gpus quickly loose their value (resale & performance wise) when new arch comes out. Performance optimization (driver) is also poor on older arch gpus.


----------



## Vario (Sep 28, 2016)

Kanan said:


> The way I see it AMD GPUs are good for the long run, whereas Nvidia ones are fast now, but slower later. There are a lot of examples for that, most famous is R9 290X vs 780 Ti or 7970 (280x) vs 680/770 (R9 380(X) vs 960 and soon RX 480 vs 1060).


That's total bullshit.



luciferxy said:


> if that's what matter the most for you, then the 1060 may not be the right choice. nvidia gpus quickly loose their value (resale & performance wise) when new arch comes out. Performance optimization (driver) is also poor on older arch gpus.



No difference with AMD.  The only exception to this rule was the litecoin bubble which inflated the value of AMD VGA's until late 2013.  Both manufacturer's lose value when new architectures are released.  They also both have similar staying power.

There isn't really that much of a difference between Radeon and Nvidia in terms of "fast now slow later" or "expensive now cheap later".


----------



## Kanan (Sep 28, 2016)

What have I said? This is derailed into a Nvidia vs AMD childish shit soon, and here we go:



Vario said:


> That's total bullshit.


You are unable to argument, so what you tried is bullshit, nothing more. What I said holds true, because it's simply a fact.



> There isn't really that much of a difference between Radeon and Nvidia in terms of "fast now slow later" or "expensive now cheap later".


That's bullshit. I already said what happened. Old AMD GPUs that were equal or even slower than Nvidia GPUs of the same generation are faster than their Nvidia counterparts now. 290(X) (also 390/390X) compared to 780 Ti and 970/980, 280X/7970, 285/380(X). Even Fury X looks a bit better every day compared to 980 Ti. And the 1060 will be the next victim.

Nice try, trash talker.

btw. I'm OUT of here. Topic is already answered anyway, now it's derailed into a childish and fruitless debate, I don't have the time for this shit. You can buy what you want. The facts are layed out.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

It would really suck if this becomes a brand war guys. Keep it friendly.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

By the way the thread is not answered, as i stated before, i have no idea on Intel Motherboards, and i really need advice, about chipset and stuff.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 28, 2016)

Kanan said:


> What have I said? This is derailed into a Nvidia vs AMD childish shit soon, and here we go:





Greenmousa said:


> It would really suck if this becomes a brand war guys. Keep it friendly.



In any Thread where you mention
Intel + AMD or Nvidia +AMD this kind of things will always happen, there will be an Intel, Nvidia or AMD Fanboy that will want to intensify this 'war', better not to mix those two names together in a Thread.


----------



## tabascosauz (Sep 28, 2016)

@Greenmousa Here, why don't we keep it simple.

CPU: 6600K, has no problems whatsoever with a GTX 1060 or RX 480, OC or not to OC, that is up to you once you get your rig. 6600K stock (and 6400/6500, more so) will undoubtedly fall short of an i7 in big games _*when*_ paired with a GTX 1070 (but not so much that I would call it a bottleneck), but you don't have a GTX 1070, so all is well.

GPU: GTX 1060 or RX 480.

1. Is the GTX 1060 ridiculously expensive? If so, buy the RX 480. If not, proceed to 2.

2. Are both the GTX 1060 and RX 480 ridiculously expensive? If so, flip a coin and buy whichever wins, or settle for a RX 470.

3. Are they both reasonably priced? If so, flip a coin and buy whichever wins.

Some of you need to stop jumping at every opportunity to promote/bash AMD/Nvidia. Truth is, it doesn't matter what kind of performance the RX 480 is speculated to gain/lose. OP comes from a HD 7870. You bet your ass that either one is going to be a massive jump in performance @ 1080p that he can't help but notice. And if he's a level-headed consumer as opposed to a hardline fanboy, he's going to be sitting back and enjoying his new games while you bicker about how the GTX 1060 lost 10 fps down from 20 fps in the latest DX12 test and the RX 480 lost 7 fps down from 16 fps.

Now, I was making a point about choosing between the GTX 1060 and RX 480. Your choice will depend on more than just that. AIB cards for the GTX 1060 are generally of a wider variety, so if you need a GPU that is small and short, the GTX 1060 will be your best bet as EVGA and Zotac for example make rather short cards. With the RX 480 you will have tougher luck as I think it's the higher TDP that necessitates a larger PCB, but you do get nicely built cards from Sapphire and XFX for example if compactness is not something you value in your cards. XFX offers a reference RX 480 blower-type that comes with a backplate, something you don't see every day from AMD.

I'm sure you're aware but be aware of the difference between the 3GB and 6GB 1060. Core config is different between the two cards, and for example on Amazon it can be quite confusing to distinguish between the two from rather ambiguous seller product titles.


----------



## JalleR (Sep 28, 2016)

If you play AI intense games a i7 is worth the money,

If you want a more future proof system go with the i7.
If you want full scale Overclocking Z170 is the chipset to chose for an 6700K

Regarding Graphics cards go for the cheapest, Rx480/1060, No one can predict the future and now the 1060 is the best choice if the prices are the same. based on my experience i would lean towards the 1060 6GB


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

tabascosauz said:


> @Greenmousa Here, why don't we keep it simple.
> 
> CPU: 6600K, has no problems whatsoever with a GTX 1060 or RX 480, OC or not to OC, that is up to you once you get your rig. 6600K stock (and 6400/6500, more so) will undoubtedly fall short of an i7 in big games _*when*_ paired with a GTX 1070 (but not so much that I would call it a bottleneck), but you don't have a GTX 1070, so all is well.
> 
> ...



This is helpful yeah. Basically when it comes to the GPU i gues money will do the talking and availability. I'm well aware of the difference between the 3 and 6 gigs, thx. 

I will still however play at 1080 @60fps, so again, as long as it pulls 60fps i won't consider it a propper bottleneck, and i'm light years away from changing my monitor.

Could you elaborate on what chipset should i buy? Or intel manufacturer for good mothers, i had my share of learning while purchasing AMD boards, and eventually consider Gigabyte to be the best for the red team, rock solid performers at a great price point, i don't know how is it on the intel side.




JalleR said:


> If you play AI intense games a i7 is worth the money,
> 
> If you want a more future proof system go with the i7.
> If you want full scale Overclocking Z170 is the chipset to chose for an 6700K
> ...



Thanks, same question here, would you care to elaborate on the motherboards? 

Also general question, should i go for DDR4 rams??


----------



## Estaric (Sep 28, 2016)

TheHunter said:


> Get at least i7 6700(k) if you plan to stay longer with this new cpu.
> 
> 6600K is ok and all, but 4threads is 4..


No offense but the extra 4 threads dont do much in gaming alot of benchmarks say so


----------



## alucasa (Sep 28, 2016)

If you go with 6600k, you'd want Z170 motherboard. Z170 costs pretty penny. If OC isn't in your interest, just pick one with features you want.

For an example, I went for non-k i7 6700 with a cheapo H110 motherboard. Asrock is my favorite motherboard brand.


----------



## Toothless (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> This is helpful yeah. Basically when it comes to the GPU i gues money will do the talking and availability. I'm well aware of the difference between the 3 and 6 gigs, thx.
> 
> I will still however play at 1080 @60fps, so again, as long as it pulls 60fps i won't consider it a propper bottleneck, and i'm light years away from changing my monitor.
> 
> ...


You kinda have to go with DDR4 with Skylake.


----------



## JalleR (Sep 28, 2016)

I am always going for ASUS, but Gigabyte is also good quality boards, Asrock should be good as well but I don't have any personal experiences with them.

DDR4 is the future and there is only a few DDR3 Boards for Skylake, but performance wise it is the same. maybe 1% her and there (in gaming and general programs)


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> Do you think a 6600k would need overclock in order to not bottleneck the vga?



I'm running a i5 6500 with GTX1070, works perfectly fine.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

alucasa said:


> If you go with 6600k, you'd want Z170 motherboard. Z170 costs pretty penny. If OC isn't in your interest, just pick one with features you want.
> 
> For an example, I went for non-k i7 6700 with a cheapo H110 motherboard. Asrock is my favorite motherboard brand.



What's the difference? Bigger headroom for overclock? stuff like that? I usually don't Oc that much, at most i might disable the power boost and stuff like that 'cause i hate to see the frecuency jump around like crazy, my 8320 is stuck at 4.0, been that way for years, when it could go up and down in frequency, being myself an Alt-Tabber gamer, man it drove me crazy. 



Toothless said:


> You kinda have to go with DDR4 with Skylake.



I figured that much, yeah. Thanks.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> I'm running a i5 6500 with GTX1070, works perfectly fine.


Awesome, glad to hear that.


----------



## alucasa (Sep 28, 2016)

Intel has disabled OCing on non-OC chipsets. So, Z170 is the only chipset Intel officially allows OC. That's why.

This is what happens when AMD is so far behind sadly.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

alucasa said:


> Intel has disabled OCing on non-OC chipsets. So, Z170 is the only chipset Intel officially allows OC. That's why.
> 
> This is what happens when AMD is so far behind sadly.


Wtf i didn't knew that. That's fucked up.


----------



## alucasa (Sep 28, 2016)

Well, those who knew how things were, yeah, it's fucked. But for new kids who are just entering the scene, I guess this is norm to them. It's been this way for a while.

No more grabbing cheap Intel CPUs and OC the fuck outta it and match high-end CPU. The fun is long gone and CPUs became so good that I don't bother OCing anymore.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> Wtf i didn't knew that. That's fucked up.



I'm running an older BIOS so if I wanted I could still OC my non-k CPU with changing the BCLK.
You just need an older BIOS for it to work.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

alucasa said:


> Well, those who knew how things were, yeah, it's fucked. But for new kids who are just entering the scene, I guess this is norm to them. It's been this way for a while.
> 
> No more grabbing cheap Intel CPUs and OC the fuck outta it and match high-end CPU. The fun is long gone and CPUs became so good that I don't bother OCing anymore.



Pretty much what i thought, yeah. CPUs got so good that overclocking is more like trying to squeeze out every penny out of it. Seriously i just want to slap the damn thing inside the case and be done with it. I had my fair share of tinkering around CPUs an over volts when i was younger hahah


----------



## FireFox (Sep 28, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> I'm running a i5 6500 with GTX1070, works perfectly fine.



@Greenmousa

I am running 2 x Xeon X5677 ( old Gen) with an EVGA GTX 1080 Classified, so far it works more than perfectly, so a 6600K
( new Gen ) will be more than enough.


----------



## TheHunter (Sep 28, 2016)

Estaric said:


> No offense but the extra 4 threads dont do much in gaming alot of benchmarks say so



Oh yes they do, also lower overall cpu usage.. I bought i7 4770k 3years ago and good that I did, atm 4.7ghz it slices through everything, still. I will keep it for another 2-3yrs for sure.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 28, 2016)

TheHunter said:


> Oh yes they do


Since when?


----------



## peche (Sep 28, 2016)

So OP have like $1000 for making it?
Motherboard, Ram, Processor and new video card?

stop the war beteen AMD and intel and help the op people come on ...

Regards,


----------



## BirdyNV (Sep 28, 2016)

The misuse of bottlenecking is giving me AIDS.


----------



## tabascosauz (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> This is helpful yeah. Basically when it comes to the GPU i gues money will do the talking and availability. I'm well aware of the difference between the 3 and 6 gigs, thx.
> 
> I will still however play at 1080 @60fps, so again, as long as it pulls 60fps i won't consider it a propper bottleneck, and i'm light years away from changing my monitor.
> 
> Could you elaborate on what chipset should i buy? Or intel manufacturer for good mothers, i had my share of learning while purchasing AMD boards, and eventually consider Gigabyte to be the best for the red team, rock solid performers at a great price point, i don't know how is it on the intel side.



A little bit different on the Intel side. On AM3+ all the manufacturers were using terrible components for power delivery and Gigabyte was providing somewhat better parts than the others.

I swear by Gigabyte because Gigabyte swears by matte black PCBs on their higher end mini-ITX boards, which are the ones I buy. But I will concede that Gigabyte boards don't have all the bells and whistles, and the BIOS is not as intuitive as Asus for example.

I recommend GB (H97N-WIFI, Z97MX-Gaming 5, and H81M-S2PV). But I would also like to give Asus a try, if nothing but to try out their BIOS. I have a 7-series ASRock board that's still going strong (Z77 Extreme3), and a MSI one that died (H81I, but mostly because it was a cheap board and my rig's purposes were a little too much for its entry-level manufacture).

All in all, your computer will not melt/explode/catch fire on the blue side of the fence if you choose a low quality board, so when it comes to AIBs you are basically choosing based on features, durability and brand loyalty.

While you don't want to overclock, just remember that it's the same as AMD; the higher you go in price bracket, generally the better the board is (quite possibly) the longer it will last.


@JalleR pretty sure that is not how it works...you turn off hyperthreading and not by disabling 4 cores. Also that logic does not make any sense, as AMD's Piledriver architecture is vastly different to Intel Core and is miles behind Skylake on a per-core basis, 4 Piledriver "cores"/"half-modules" is not equivalent to 4 Skylake cores. There's going to be a significant difference in performance between his 8320 @ stock and a 6600K @ stock in games where CPU matters.


----------



## JalleR (Sep 28, 2016)

Regarding i5 vs i7 you can try to disable 4 cors on your current cpu and see how it acts, (my info says the one you have now is 8 cors right?)

If your games only supports up to 4 cors then it should not change any performance. what are you gaming btw.?


----------



## FireFox (Sep 28, 2016)

peche said:


> So OP have like $1000 for making it?
> Motherboard, Ram, Processor and new video card?
> 
> stop the war beteen AMD and intel and help the op people come on ...
> ...



I have said mine already


----------



## TheHunter (Sep 28, 2016)

Knoxx29 said:


> Since when?



Idk for the last 5-6yrs, not all but a lot with proper multi threading..


By some games its minimal, while by others up to 12fps+ difference no HT vs HT.

Skyrim or Fallout4 runs faster with 8 threads, quite funny since its not very threaded engine.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...ntel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-18.html

Crysis3, JustCause3, ID5,6 engine, few U3E & U4E games, MT engine, Glacier engine, frostbyte2,... All can benefit from more threads.

GTA5 also
i7



http://www.hardwareunboxed.com/5-ge...0k-3770k-4770k-5775c-6700k-gaming-comparison/

vs

i5



http://www.hardwareunboxed.com/ever...-lynnfield-to-skylake-7-years-of-i5-goodness/

Even older COD WAW benefits from more threads while playing MP lol , I was like wut?




Anyway, this should be the most interesting for thread starter:

FX3820 @ 4.2 and 4.8ghz vs i5 6400
http://www.hardwareunboxed.com/the-benchmarks-part-4-amd-fx-vs-intel-skylake/


----------



## Fx (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> I won't wait for Zen, i've been waiting for AMD's "OH THIS IS IT MAN, THIS IS IT!! GROUNDBREAKING SHIT RIGHT HERE" and then nothing happened, this entire build that i'm currently using i would call it "MANTLE HYPE" Remember Mantle? Yeah.
> 
> I see what you mean. Do you think a 6600k would need overclock in order to not bottleneck the vga?



I have defected to Intel for many things, but I am waiting for Zen for my own gaming rig. Like you, I don't have serious gaming demands (think 4k @120 refresh) and I am confident that Zen will be competent for my CPU needs. I'll go up to either 1440p or 4k when the time comes, but that is mostly handled by the GPU. AMD's Zen won't be the bottleneck.

It is right around the corner...


----------



## fourletterfame (Sep 28, 2016)

TheHunter said:


> Idk for the last 5-6yrs, not all but a lot with proper multi threading..
> 
> 
> By some games its minimal, while by others up to 12fps+ difference no HT vs HT.
> ...



That example isn't totally relevant to the discussion. When you make the cpu the bottleneck for the purposes of testing, you will see a difference. People who pair their hardware sensibly aren't going to see it the same way.


----------



## TheHunter (Sep 28, 2016)

Yes and no, later when you get stronger gpu it will show that gap really quick.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 28, 2016)

HTT on 2 cores is essential because it's a 30-50% increase on i3 cpus. 4 threads is essentially the minimum today.

On 4 cores it depends if the game can utilise it and needs it. Battlefield 4/new 1 does for example. Also you can do side by side gaming and streaming or other things with a i7 that get a pain in the ass with a i5 fast.

Other examples: crysis 3 (at least jungle map, eats cpu power needs all it gets)
Witcher 3 (heavy game)
City skylines (extremely cpu heavy rts)

There's more. My point is newer aaa games do more and more profit from more than 4 threads the "golden age" of i5s is kinda over - i7 are better now. Best is 6 cores anyway - more full power threads.

@op: I would go for a i5 6600k at least, has way more standard clock compared to 6400 and can be easily overclocked for a lot more cheap performance and future use.


----------



## Flow (Sep 28, 2016)

Hmm, 5 years ago I bought myself an i7, because I wanted the extra threads. Today I'm still running it.
It has seen several videocards already and every faster card produced faster numbers in games and benches.

So that's my advice, get an i7.


ps. Many of todays games are already supporting HT, and with dx12 this will only grow further and further.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

So, tu sum up a bit:

i5 6600k + Z170 + 8gigs DDR4 @2100 ish? + RX480 or 1060 6GB whatever comes up cheaper. 

Oh and i've been using W8.1, i should move up to 10 right?


----------



## alucasa (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> So, tu sum up a bit:
> 
> i5 6600k + Z170 + 8gigs DDR4 @2100 ish? + RX480 or 1060 6GB whatever comes up cheaper.
> 
> Oh and i've been using W8.1, i should move up to 10 right?



8.1 and 10 are pretty much the same. 10 doesn't have the stupid dashboard.

Other than that, go for it.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

How about what we talked about OCing and stuff, if i don't plan on Overclocking and stuff, maybe disable the turbo so it stays at 3.9 constantly, because, well, i had bad experiences playing and alt tabbing with a CPU that likes to "HYPER BOOST MEGA TURBO" when playing, random frame drops are not appreciated in my eyes, specially on a new system. 

Could i save some money on another motherboard? Or should i keep pushing with a z170 one?


----------



## alucasa (Sep 28, 2016)

Like I said before, if you don't OC, you will save a lot on both CPU and mobo. It's entirely up to you. 

I don't OC because I see it as diminishing return in this era. The extra power required to gain so little ain't worth in my eyes also. Some just want to squeeze everything out of something.

It's something you need to decide. We can tell you all kind of crap and have told you all kind of crap. You already have enough info.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

Yeah, i think i do. Thanks man.


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

I'll be back here when i get the list of available parts from the supplier, so you can guys spot any piece of trash that i'm not aware of!

Thanks for all of your help


----------



## peche (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> So, tu sum up a bit:
> 
> i5 6600k + Z170 + 8gigs DDR4 @2100 ish? + RX480 or 1060 6GB whatever comes up cheaper.
> 
> Oh and i've been using W8.1, i should move up to 10 right?


W10 its pretty great sir,  also the partes listed are great!

also about your case, the one listed in specs its kinda generic one, its there any option to replace it? or you goint to re-use it?
Where are you going to order from ? or buy ?

Regards,


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

peche said:


> W10 its pretty great sir,  also the partes listed are great!
> 
> also about your case, the one listed in specs its kinda generic one, its there any option to replace it? or you goint to re-use it?
> Where are you going to order from ? or buy ?
> ...



This case  may seem generic,  but it's just a non popular brand, the truth being, it's a well built case and the fan on the side it's a freaking beast and is very efficient at keeping the temps in check. I live in Santa Fe, a region in Argentina that reaches EASILY 56°C (yup that was last year, we broke our own record!) , that would be 132°F for you guys in the states (Not you Peche, if you're from costa rica you know about this) so, every piece of cooling i can get my hands on i'll take it. That being another reason to decide between the 1060 and the rx480, temps, the 480 runs hot, very hot, and that kind of worries me.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> So, tu sum up a bit:
> 
> i5 6600k + Z170 + 8gigs DDR4 @2100 ish? + RX480 or 1060 6GB whatever comes up cheaper.
> 
> Oh and i've been using W8.1, i should move up to 10 right?


16 GB DDR4 if you can afford it and 2800 MHz or higher speed (should be about same price as 2133). Rest is pretty good. Also go with Win 10 for DX12 - new gpu -> new OS.



> That being another reason to decide between the 1060 and the rx480, temps, the 480 runs hot, very hot, and that kind of worries me.



Not really true, it's a 150-180W TDP card, what's "very hot" for you? My card is over 250W TDP and manages fine within my case. Just take a RX 480 with good cooler like Nitro, if you want to buy it.


----------



## peche (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> This case  may seem generic,  but it's just a non popular brand, the truth being, it's a well built case and the fan on the side it's a freaking beast and is very efficient at keeping the temps in check. I live in Santa Fe, a region in Argentina that reaches EASILY 56°C (yup that was last year, we broke our own record!) , that would be 132°F for you guys in the states (Not you Peche, if you're from costa rica you know about this) so, every piece of cooling i can get my hands on i'll take it. That being another reason to decide between the 1060 and the rx480, temps, the 480 runs hot, very hot, and that kind of worries me.


great so the case is still with you then, 
what about the parts, where are you gping to buy them ? 

Regards,


----------



## Greenmousa (Sep 28, 2016)

peche said:


> great so the case is still with you then,
> what about the parts, where are you gping to buy them ?
> 
> Regards,



I'll get them probably from a local supplier, that way i save shipping taxes. The downside is, that contrains my options even further. But it is what it is, luckily none of these parts are particularly hard to find, so i should be ok. Once he gives me the list with all the motherboards specs and brands i'll reply here to let you guys see the options and advice me, just in case i'm screwing up!

Thanks!


----------



## peche (Sep 28, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> I'll get them probably from a local supplier, that way i save shipping taxes. The downside is, that contrains my options even further. But it is what it is, luckily none of these parts are particularly hard to find, so i should be ok. Once he gives me the list with all the motherboards specs and brands i'll reply here to let you guys see the options and advice me, just in case i'm screwing up!
> 
> Thanks!


great! waiting for that list, 

Regards,


----------



## Vario (Sep 28, 2016)

Just get the 6600K, MSI, Gigabyte, Asus, or Asrock Z170 of your choosing, DDR4 3000 GSkill and either a 1060 or a 480 from Asus, EVGA, PNY, Sapphire, MSI.  No need to make this hard.  Take a look at reviews on this site Techpowerup or Hardwaresecrets or Anandtech, and lastly read the critical reviews on Newegg and Amazon before you pull the trigger.  There are sites like this one https://pcpartpicker.com/ that look for the cheapest price on components, might help you.

Gonna say this again, there isn't any difference in Nvidia vs Radeon for long term performance. I own both a 7850 and a 770 and both work just as well with the current games as they did when I bought them in 2012 and 2013.  I guess its all down to the game you want to play or the driver that you use.  But saying that an Nvidia card has an expiration date is complete nonsense.  If you are overly focused on the ram limit maybe, I have no problems running games on 2GB VRAM.  I play GTA 5 mostly High settings 2560x1440.  Also not a fan boy of any brands.  Any time someone makes an absolute statement they better come prepared with some data to back it up.  That is all.


----------



## Kanan (Sep 29, 2016)

Vario said:


> Gonna say this again, there isn't any difference in Nvidia vs Radeon for long term performance. I own both a 7850 and a 770 and both work just as well with the current games as they did when I bought them in 2012 and 2013. I guess its all down to the game you want to play or the driver that you use. But saying that an Nvidia card has an expiration date is complete nonsense. If you are overly focused on the ram limit maybe, I have no problems running games on 2GB VRAM. I play GTA 5 mostly High settings 2560x1440. Also not a fan boy of any brands. Any time someone makes an absolute statement they better come prepared with some data to back it up. That is all.


Still trash talking huh?
Go and check out some TPU reviews of 7970/R9 280X from 2012 and 2015/2016 then. There is enough evidence, your ignorance doesn't change facts. GCN (even 1st gen) was made for DX12/Vulcan, Kepler isn't. That's why they are scaling that nicely now. On top of that AMD sorted out some driver issues, drivers got simply better over time, so that the GPUs are properly utilized now. Next time you are repeating your nonsense, talk directly to me and don't pretend there were no arguments stated here.
And this was just a example, you could check out nearly every GCN vs. Kepler/Maxwell card from release vs. now and find that the Radeons a) catched up and b) sometimes passed the Nvidia GPUs. No sense in denying facts. If you want to repeat your bullshit, do it however. No sense in talking to someone that ignorant.

Ah I see you own a GTX 770, that's why you can't accept that 7970/R9 280X is easily faster now than your own GPU. Simple egoism on your side without any deeper sense.

"Evidence":

Compare GTX 680/770 vs 7970/R9 280X.

Old from release 2012:
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_680/27.html
New:
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_380X_Strix/23.html

It's even the GTX 770 that loses against R9 280X. Seems what I said is absolutely right. The same GPU that was slower surpassed Nvidia over time - and also has 1 GB more Vram which is really helpful now.

I could embarrass you even more with evidence on 780 Ti/970/980 vs 290(X)/390(X), but that's enough for now.


----------



## Vario (Sep 29, 2016)

Kanan said:


> Still trash talking huh?
> Go and check out some TPU reviews of 7970/R9 280X from 2012 and 2015/2016 then. There is enough evidence, your ignorance doesn't change facts. GCN (even 1st gen) was made for DX12/Vulcan, Kepler isn't. That's why they are scaling that nicely now. On top of that AMD sorted out some driver issues, drivers got simply better over time, so that the GPUs are properly utilized now. Next time you are repeating your nonsense, talk directly to me and don't pretend there were no arguments stated here.
> And this was just a example, you could check out nearly every GCN vs. Kepler/Maxwell card from release vs. now and find that the Radeons a) catched up and b) sometimes passed the Nvidia GPUs. No sense in denying facts. If you want to repeat your bullshit, do it however. No sense in talking to someone that ignorant.
> 
> ...


I think you are insane.  Keep going.  "Embarrass" me further.


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 3, 2016)

Ok! Just got the list from my supplier, these are the available Processors and Motherboards. The price it's in usDollars so you guys get the picture. Yeah it's overpriced i know, but what you gonna do.

Core i5-6600K Quad Core 6MB 3.9GHz    USD 322 
Core i7-6700 Quad Core 8MB 3.4GHz    USD 396 
Core i7-6700K Quad Core 8MB 4.2GHz    USD 450    

ASUS Motherboard (1151) B150M-A    USD 113
ASUS Motherboard (1151) B150M-K    USD 107
ASUS Motherboard (1151) H110M-D    USD 79 
ASUS Motherboard (1151) H110M-K    USD 77
ASUS Motherboard (1151) H170-PLUS D3    USD 151 
ASUS Motherboard (1151) H170M-E    USD 111
ASUS Motherboard (1151) H170M-Plus    USD 153 
ASUS Motherboard (1151) Maximus VIII Hero Alpha    USD 383 
ASUS Motherboard (1151) Z170 MAXIMUS VIII RANGER    USD 286 
ASUS Motherboard (1151) Z170 PRO GAMING    USD 226 
ASUS Motherboard (1151) Z170 PRO GAMING AURA    USD 226    
GIGABYTE Motherboard GA-B150M-DS3H    USD 102 
GIGABYTE Motherboard (1151) GA-B150M-D3H    USD 109 
GIGABYTE Motherboard (1151) GA-H110M-H    USD 79 
GIGABYTE Motherboard (1151) GA-H170 GAMING 3    USD 167 
GIGABYTE Motherboard (1151) GA-H170M-D3H DDR3 ATX    USD 142
GIGABYTE Motherboard (1151) GA-Z170M-D3H DDR3 ATX    USD 174 
GIGABYTE Motherboard (1151) GA-Z170X-GAMING 3    USD 221
GIGABYTE Motherboard (1151) GA-Z170XP-SLI    USD 205 
GIGABYTE Motherboard (1151) GA-Z170XP-SLI DDR4 ATX    USD 205

What do you guys think it would be the best bang for my buck? Thanks in advance as usual!


----------



## peche (Oct 3, 2016)

*GIGABYTE  Z170XP-SLI *USD 205 +* Core i5-6600K* : USD 322 = 527 USD *[happiness!]*
thats the combo i'll choose, great motherboard, if there are any other like MSI or Asrock! those boards are great!

Regards,


----------



## BirdyNV (Oct 3, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> Ok! Just got the list from my supplier, these are the available Processors and Motherboards. The price it's in usDollars so you guys get the picture. Yeah it's overpriced i know, but what you gonna do.
> 
> Core i5-6600K Quad Core 6MB 3.9GHz    USD 322
> Core i7-6700 Quad Core 8MB 3.4GHz    USD 396
> ...


6600K Is always gonna be the bang for buck processor compared to 6700(k). and the GA-Z170XP-SLI


----------



## Estaric (Oct 3, 2016)

peche said:


> *GIGABYTE  Z170XP-SLI *USD 205 +* Core i5-6600K* : USD 322 = 527 USD *[happiness!]*
> thats the combo i'll choose, great motherboard, if there are any other like MSI or Asrock! those boards are great!
> 
> Regards,


I agree to that, great board from what i hear (buddy uses it). And i5 6600k Is a beast of a cpu!


----------



## alucasa (Oct 3, 2016)

6600k for sure, but God, look at how much you save by not OCing.


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 3, 2016)

alucasa said:


> 6600k for sure, but God, look at how much you save by not OCing.



You mean on the Motherboard side of things?


----------



## alucasa (Oct 3, 2016)

Yeah, it seems you save at least 100USD which should translate to a fair bit more on your local currency. You'd probably save some on RAM as well. If you do go for Z170 though, that CPU should easily OC to 4.4ghz easily. Sounds a lot but then it's only 10%ish.


----------



## peche (Oct 3, 2016)

also, add a aftermarket cooler, intel stoped adding stock cooler since skylake!

Regards,


----------



## alucasa (Oct 3, 2016)

peche said:


> also, add a aftermarket cooler, intel stoped adding stock cooler since skylake!
> 
> Regards,



Only K versions don't come with stock cooler. But then that's what OP is getting, so a valid point.


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 3, 2016)

I do have my current cooler check my system specs, that is compatible with the 6600k


----------



## peche (Oct 3, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> I do have my current cooler check my system specs, that is compatible with the 6600k


Great but its better if you add a more powerful cooler, like cooler master hyper 212 evo ...even moar when OC, overclocked processors might need better cooling for achieving better freqs, 

Regards,


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 3, 2016)

Thing is i really don't plan on overclocking that much, as i said before, temperatures here do reach 50°ish Celcius, so adding more heat to the Processor is kind of overkill. I mean i would happily run my current cooler on the 6600k on stock, you really think i should overclock the 6600? I mean, i don't know, if the 6700 no K is faster at stock maybe that's what i should get...I'm just really not sure about jumping into the overclocking wagon again.


----------



## alucasa (Oct 3, 2016)

You don't have to OC k-version. But k-version is worth it by a fact that their stock frequency is higher than non-k.

In my case though, I chose i7-6700 (non-k) due to TDP being only 65w versus 91w on 6700k.


----------



## peche (Oct 3, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> I'm just really not sure about jumping into the overclocking wagon again.


if not interested at all on OC you should get a locked processor, save some money, also H or B Chipset, Z chipset its the most complete one, also the more expensive one for desktop Core series processors, 
example for this: 
Core i 5 6500 / 6600 and B150 / H170 board, 


Regards,


----------



## alucasa (Oct 3, 2016)

The major difference in Z, H, and B are chipset PCI-lane number with Z allowing OC.

I think Z has 20 lanes while H and B have 14 and 10. *70 has 14. *10 has 10.


----------



## peche (Oct 3, 2016)

alucasa said:


> The major difference in Z, H, and B are chipset PCI-lane number with Z allowing OC.
> 
> I think Z has 20 lanes while H and B have 14 and 10. *70 has 14. *10 has 10.


watch there some info!




Spoiler: Intel 1151 Chipsets



*Introduction*


The Z170 chipset has been available for some time now, but due to Intel's staggered launch of Skylake-S the other chipsets from this generation have just recently become available.

In addition to the Z170 chipset, there are now five other consumer chipsets available: the H170 and H110 for consumers and the B150, Q150, and Q170 for business. With the move to the new Skylake-S CPUs, all of these chipsets have some large changes over their predecessors, such as the move the DDR4 and many other things we covered in our Z170 vs Z97: What is the Difference?article, but they also have a couple of key ways in which they differ from each other.












**In addition to the 16 PCI-E 3.0 lanes from the CPU
**This represents roughly how many PCI-E devices (LAN, USB, Thunderbolt, etc.) are able to use the available chipset PCI-E lanes*

There are a large number of differences between the three consumer chipsets, but we have marked what should be the most important for the average consumer in red. The first and most commonly known difference is the fact that the Z170 chipset fully supports CPU overclocking, while the H-series chipsets do not.

The second major difference is in regards to the PCIe lanes. Modern Intel-based systems actually have two sets of PCIe lanes: one from the CPU and one from the chipset. The CPU PCIe lanes are used primarily for graphics cards and other add-on PCIe devices. For the 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes that are available from all Skylake-S CPUs, the Z170 chipset has the ability to split up the lanes two or three ways which allows for the use of multiple video cards or simply more PCIe devices to be directly connected to the CPU as long as they do not need to run at full x16 speeds.

The chipset lanes are a bit different - while a few may be used for add-on devices, they are mostly there for additional features the manufacturer has built into the motherboard that are not native to the chipset like WiFi, more USB ports, additional LAN ports, etc. The number and speed of these lanes changes based on the chipset: Z170 has 20 PCIe 3.0 lanes, H170 has 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes, and H110 has just 6 lanes that run at the slower PCIe 2.0 speeds. The biggest impact of having fewer lanes is that there is less opportunity for manufacturers to add additional features to the board, although another factor is the number of x4 M.2 or SATA Express devices that can be used on the chipset: Z170 can have 3 such devices, H170 can have 2 and H110 can have none. In addition to having fewer and slower PCIe lanes, H110 also still uses the older DMI 2.0 revision which means the connection between the chipset and the CPU is a bit slower than it is on the other chipsets.

As far as connectivity goes, Z170 and H170 can both power 6 SATA drives and have the same total number of USB ports (14) - although Z170 can have two more USB 3.0 ports than H170 (10 versus 8). H110, being the more budget-oriented chipset, can only power 4 SATA drives and can have only 10 USB ports (4 of which can be USB 3.0)

For the additional feature sets, both Z170 and H170 support Smart Sound Technology, Rapid Storage Technology, and Smart Response Technology (otherwise known as SSD Caching). For business-based customers who do not wish to use the business chipsets for whatever reason, both H170 and H110 support Small Business Basics while only the H110 chipset supports Small Business Advantage.








**In addition to the 16 PCI-E 3.0 lanes from the CPU
**This represents roughly how many PCI-E devices (LAN, USB, Thunderbolt, etc.) are able to use the available chipset PCI-E lanes*

Unlike the consumer chipsets, there is actually not a huge amount that is different between the three business chipsets, but we have marked what we consider to be the most important ones in red.

Like the consumer chipsets, one of the key differences between these chipsets is in regards to the PCIe lanes. As we stated in the previous section, modern Intel-based systems actually have two sets of PCIe lanes: one from the CPU and one from the chipset. The CPU PCIe lanes are used primarily for graphics cards and other add-on PCIe devices. For the 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes that are available from all Skylake-S CPUs, the Q170 chipset has the ability to split up the lanes two or three ways which allows for the use of multiple video cards or simply more PCIe devices to be directly connected to the CPU as long as they do not need to run at full x16 speeds.

The chipset lanes are a bit different - while a few may be used for add-on devices, they are mostly there for additional features the manufacturer has built into the motherboard that are not native to the chipset like WiFi, more USB ports, additional LAN ports, etc. The number and speed of these lanes changes based on the chipset: Q170 has 20 PCIe 3.0 lanes, Q150 has 10 PCIe 3.0 lanes, and B150 has just 8 PCIe 3.0 lanes. The biggest impact of having fewer lanes is that there is less opportunity for manufacturers to add additional features to the board, although another factor is the number of x4 M.2 or SATA Express devices that can be used on the chipset: Q170 can have 3 such devices, while Q150 and B150 can have none.

As far as connectivity goes, all of the chipsets are able to power 6 SATA drives. Q170 and Q150 have the same total number of USB ports (14) although Q170 can have two more USB 3.0 ports than Q150 (10 versus 8). B150, being the more budget-oriented chipset, can only have 12 USB ports (6 of which can be USB 3.0)

For the additional feature sets, all of the business chipsets support Small Business Basics and Small Business Advantage. The key difference in terms of features is that only the Q170 supports vPro and only the Q170 and Q150 chipsets support SIPP (Stable Image Platform Model).



*Conclusion*


Keep in mind that the chipset is only one of the may factors you should take into consideration when choosing a motherboard. If there is a specific feature you need like CPU overclocking or M.2 support, knowing what each chipset offers gives you a great starting place. But even from there, you still have to sort through the large number of motherboards that use that chipset. If you don't find a motherboard that fits your needs in terms of rear or internal ports, layout, or other functionality, you may even need to look at a "higher" chipset instead.

For example, while the H170 chipset may sound like the ideal choice for the majority of our customers, we have found that the Z170 motherboards are often a better fit even if a customer doesn't need all the features present in the Z170 chipset. The main reason is that motherboard manufactures tend to add more additional ports, headers, and features on their Z170 motherboards since that is what is considered the "premium" chipset. Often times, just a couple of additional ports can make the difference between a motherboard working for a customer out of the box or needing to use add-on PCIe cards to get the proper functionality.

In general, we tend to recommend the Z170 chipset for users who want to be sure they are getting all the features they may possibly need. However, H170 can be great in small form factor systems (such as our Echo systems) since things like additional PCIe lanes is not a big deal for mini-ITX motherboards that have only a single PCIe slot.

Even for business customers, we tend to use either Z170 or H170 motherboards. In fact, the only time we would recommend using a business-class chipset is if that is the only way you can get a feature that you specifically need such as vPro, SIPP, or Small Business Advantage. In most other cases, a consumer chipset is going to give you a wider range of options (so you can use a board that has the appropriate ports and layout that you need) and will generally be easier to source and maintain.


----------



## alucasa (Oct 3, 2016)

Yeah, well, I got it wrong. It's 20, 16, 6.


----------



## Kanan (Oct 3, 2016)

If you don't plan to overclock get a non K as you save a lot of money that way (cpu + Mainboard). If you plan to overclock however go for the 6600k with that gb z board and stronger cooler. With that high ambient temperatures you need good cooling for oc.


----------



## alucasa (Oct 3, 2016)

OP should stick his rig into a fridge and run it from there.


----------



## peche (Oct 3, 2016)

dont scare OP, lets discuss the topic correctly, avoid jokes about location, that wont help, 
stick on correct chipset and processor according the situation ...

Regards,


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 3, 2016)

I know right? hahah. 

Alright, thank you guys for the info i'll do some numbers and let you know what i end up with!


----------



## peche (Oct 3, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> I know right? hahah.
> 
> Alright, thank you guys for the info i'll do some numbers and let you know what i end up with!


Great!
If still have doubts always ask, and also consider:
Better cooling in chase that you decide to get 6600K + Z170, 
don't mind about cooling if get Locekd 6600/6500 and "B" or "H" chipset, and also avoid the options that allow DDR3, stick with DDR4 on skylake!

Regards,


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 3, 2016)

After much considering, and watching the 6700 Non K scoring the same on every game as a 4.6 oc'ed 6600k i think i'll go for that one. The TDP is lower, the core temperature is lower about 10° which is awesome for me, i don't know, it's not like i use my pc only for gaming i am a graphic artist/designer so the i7 may prove really usefull all around. And i might go for the h170 to save me the bucks needed to reach the i7. And yeah, 8 gigs of DDR4 of course. 

I'm not sure i like the same motherboard on its h170 version tho...

After that i'll just have to see what comes cheaper the 480 or the 1060 over here. I was all about the 1060 but the 480 seems nicer by the minute, like if the option was "If you're not going full 1070, go for a 480".


----------



## Kanan (Oct 3, 2016)

Good decision but go with 16 gb ddr4. 8 GB is on the low side now, 16gb is the new standard.


----------



## peche (Oct 3, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> After much considering, and watching the 6700 Non K scoring the same on every game as a 4.6 oc'ed 6600k i think i'll go for that one. The TDP is lower, the core temperature is lower about 10° which is awesome for me, i don't know, it's not like i use my pc only for gaming i am a graphic artist/designer so the i7 may prove really usefull all around. And i might go for the h170 to save me the bucks needed to reach the i7. And yeah, 8 gigs of DDR4 of course.


i7's are likely hot, i have owned one of every generation excluding skylake yet, so trust they tend to be a little bit hotter since they have 4 cores and 8 T, not gonna explode but sometimes under some tasks and work mught increse temps, so consider another cooler, could be a cheaper 212 EVO, but im glad you decided to Get an i7, ultimate boost on tasking!



Greenmousa said:


> I'm not sure i like the same motherboard on its h170 version tho...
> 
> After that i'll just have to see what comes cheaper the 480 or the 1060 over here. I was all about the 1060 but the 480 seems nicer by the minute, like if the option was "If you're not going full 1070, go for a 480".


there is no problem gettin' Z based board, unless the money, but H and B150 boards are great too!
Also for desing and graphics consider 16GB of Ram, but great you already gave your 1st steeping, sounds like a plan gettin that i7!

Regards,


----------



## alucasa (Oct 3, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> After much considering, and watching the 6700 Non K scoring the same on every game as a 4.6 oc'ed 6600k i think i'll go for that one. The TDP is lower, the core temperature is lower about 10° which is awesome for me, i don't know, it's not like i use my pc only for gaming i am a graphic artist/designer so the i7 may prove really usefull all around. And i might go for the h170 to save me the bucks needed to reach the i7. And yeah, 8 gigs of DDR4 of course.
> 
> I'm not sure i like the same motherboard on its h170 version tho...
> 
> After that i'll just have to see what comes cheaper the 480 or the 1060 over here. I was all about the 1060 but the 480 seems nicer by the minute, like if the option was "If you're not going full 1070, go for a 480".



My i7-6700 build before being fed up with only 8 threads and moving to X99 platform, I went with a H110 motherboard. It had all basic functionality I wanted and the mobo was cheap as dirt. So, consider H110 motherboard as well.


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 4, 2016)

Alright guys, here's the final list, i talked to my supplier and this is what i'll end up getting, both machines will look like this:

SATELLITE L590

WESTERN DIGITAL Blue 1TB SATA 6 Gb/s 64MB   
Radeon EAH6450 SILENT DDR3 1GB HDMI    (trust me she doesn't need any more than that)
SENTEY BCP450-XS 450W   
MOTHERBOARD + RAM + CPU (see system specs)
dvd burner, etc.

-------------------------

COOLER MASTER STORM ENFORCER BLACK

Core i5-6600K Quad Core 6MB 3.9GHz       
GA-Z170XP-SLI DDR4 ATX                              
DVD ASUS 24x SATA                      
CAVIAR BLACK 1TB
Thermaltake SMART M Series SP-650M
ASUS GeForce GTX 1060 O 6GB DUAL-GTX1060-O        
CORSAIR Vengeance LED 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 3200 Mhz RED   

I needed to tone the price down a bit accounting for the other machine to be properly built, so this is the final product.
He gave me a good price. The only thing missing is the aftermarket cooler for the i5 that he'll give me later today but i'll most likely go for a cooler master 212 or something like that. 

Thank you all for your help, let me know what you think!


----------



## peche (Oct 4, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> COOLER MASTER STORM ENFORCER BLACK
> 
> Core i5-6600K Quad Core 6MB 3.9GHz
> GA-Z170XP-SLI DDR4 ATX
> ...


Great rig!
i'll switch video card for other brand, i just dont trust asus due several bad moments in the past, also do you really need a DVD Drive? if not, reuse the older one for the installation and save space on case and money!
also the supplied ram memory on that list could be expensive, look for kingston fury or G.Skill that are cheaper on almost all planet !
but in a overall the listed parts are great!


Regards,


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 4, 2016)

peche said:


> Great rig!
> i'll switch video card for other brand, i just dont trust asus due several bad moments in the past, also do you really need a DVD Drive? if not, reuse the older one for the installation and save space on case and money!
> also the supplied ram memory on that list could be expensive, look for kingston fury or G.Skill that are cheaper on almost all planet !
> but in a overall the listed parts are great!
> ...



i've been using ASUS GPU's for a while now, my current one 7870 OC it's been a solid performer with great cooling solution, and so far i've seen no complains on the 1060 or 1070 on Newegg or places like that, so i'll just follow my instinct here hahah. I'll see if i can work around some other mems! Thanks man.


----------



## peche (Oct 4, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> so i'll just follow my instinct here hahah. I'll see if i can work around some other mems! Thanks man.


you welcome! hope you will get great times with it!

Regards,


----------



## alucasa (Oct 4, 2016)

Well, dude, welcome to the dark side.


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 4, 2016)

alucasa said:


> Well, dude, welcome to the dark side.



It's scary, i defected completely, intel AND nvidia? i don't even recognize me anymore.


----------



## alucasa (Oct 4, 2016)

You are changing into a truck.


----------



## peche (Oct 4, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> It's scary, i defected completely, intel AND nvidia? i don't even recognize me anymore.







Welcome to the dark side indeed!


----------



## Kanan (Oct 4, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> It's scary, i defected completely, intel AND nvidia? i don't even recognize me anymore.


You're a really strange guy indeed. Didn't you say a few hours earlier you want to go i7 6700 and rx 480? And now it's 6600k and 1060.  this is a neverending story anyway. 5 pages for such a simple thing as buying a new pc.


----------



## alucasa (Oct 4, 2016)

The guy is turning into a Sith from being a Jedi.

It deserves 50 pages.


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 4, 2016)

Kanan said:


> You're a really strange guy indeed. Didn't you say a few hours earlier you want to go i7 6700 and rx 480? And now it's 6600k and 1060.  this is a neverending story anyway. 5 pages for such a simple thing as buying a new pc.


It all ended up having to do with the prices and stock my supplier had. So yeah, and it's not such a simple thing when there's so much money involved man.


----------



## Kanan (Oct 4, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> It all ended up having to do with the prices and stock my supplier had. So yeah, and it's not such a simple thing when there's so much money involved man.


Hahaha okay welcome to the dark side, Darth Mousa.


----------



## peche (Oct 4, 2016)

alucasa said:


> The guy is turning into a Sith from being a Jedi.
> 
> It deserves 50 pages.


and a custom lightsaber ....


----------



## alucasa (Oct 4, 2016)

Yeeeah, so give him a break.

He's turning into a Sith. He's transforming into a truck. He's got a lot going on in his mind.


----------



## peche (Oct 4, 2016)

alucasa said:


> Yeeeah, so give him a break.
> 
> He's turning into a Sith. He's transforming into a truck. He's got a lot going on in his mind.


lol


----------



## TheHunter (Oct 4, 2016)

I would still rather chose i7 6700 over 6600k and it can OC via blck 133mhz strap >> 4.5ghz

someone posted this when he OC'ed to 4.7ghz@1.4v using asus z170p blck OC









also found this topic about it, asrock also capable of blck..
http://www.overclock.net/t/1575627/i7-6700-non-k-on-z170-what-overclock-possible/10


http://overclocking.guide/gigabyte-z170-non-k-overclocking-guide/


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 4, 2016)

TheHunter said:


> I would still rather chose i7 6700 over 6600k and it can OC via blck 133mhz strap >> 4.5ghz
> 
> someone posted this when he OC'ed to 4.7ghz@1.4v using asus z170p blck OC
> 
> ...


Sadly i need this build to happen NOW and i can't wait in order to save more for the 6700, (specially now that i have to add a 212 Hyper to the build and over here it's 120 usDollars)  it may not seem much but if you multiply times 4, you get the approximate over here.
(you may think that i could've save on the Motherboard and all that jazz, but the truth is, i didn't like any other motherboard on the list, except for the z170 and i can't build a rig where i don't trust the motherboard, had too many bad experiencies with that)


----------



## ASOT (Oct 4, 2016)

@Greenmousa  6500 any mobo,16gb and gtx 1060 6gb forget about rx 480,again amd failed down 

OR: 6600K,Z170,16gb @3000 or higher,GTX 1060/1070 and GG!


----------



## Cvrk (Oct 7, 2016)

Your going for the dark side ,bro.... DON'T ! Stay in da' light. Never give up on AMD. You will see, one day they will be da' best


----------



## ASOT (Oct 7, 2016)

@Cvrk  So lame  One day mean never ))))


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 7, 2016)

Cvrk said:


> Your going for the dark side ,bro.... DON'T ! Stay in da' light. Never give up on AMD. You will see, one day they will be da' best


I've been saying that for 5 years. I need to feel the power. Yeeessss, pawaaaa.


----------



## peche (Oct 7, 2016)

@Greenmousa


----------



## alucasa (Oct 7, 2016)

That poster sounds more like "sh!t happens"


----------



## peche (Oct 7, 2016)

alucasa said:


> That poster sounds more like "sh!t happens"


lolz, its a matter or perspective i guess


----------



## Ungari (Oct 7, 2016)

Stay away from Intel Skyrape, Cannonrake, and Icerake, with their extra charges to enable overclocking, and wait for AMD Zen.


----------



## ASOT (Oct 7, 2016)

Wait is not a solution ))))


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 19, 2016)

So! Status update, i'm happily running mi i5 now, i should update my System Specs, i'll do it after this post. 

I'm just waiting for my new GPU to arrive, and here are my choices, i can pick whichever one i want once they come, i do have some sort of priority with the importer. So yeah, what do you guys think? I'll be mostly playing Shooters, on PC they're basically my bread and butter. Battlefield 1 runs INCREDIBLY GOOD on an Rx480 with DX12, just mops the floor with the 1060, but then again the 1060 beats the 480 in many other games. The jump towards the 1070 still is really high. 


ASUS GeForce DUAL GTX 1060 O 6GB  $ 7.150 
ASUS GeForce DUAL GTX 1070 8GB      $ 9.500 
ASUS GeForce DUAL GTX 1070 O 8GB  $ 9.950     
 ASUS STRIX GTX 1060 6GB GAMING    $ 7.690 
ASUS STRIX GTX 1070 8GB GAMING     $ 10.350 
ASUS STRIX GTX 1080 8GB GAMING     $ 15.350


Sapphire NITRO+ RX480 4GB GDDR5 256Bit OC (11260-02-20G) $6.000 
Sapphire NITRO+ RX480 8GB GDDR5 256Bit OC (11260-01-20G) $7.200

Don't mind the prices, it's us$*15,6, aprox. 

I was kinda sold on the Nitro+480 8 Gigs, the price is right in the middle, performs great, and seems like a bit more future proof. On the other hand, the 1060 6GB STRIXX is far more temp efficient, and consumes less power. I can't make up my mind, i watched a gazillion youtube videos and aghhh, i just want to kick everything and get a 1070 and be done with it.


----------



## Ungari (Oct 19, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> So! Status update, i'm happily running mi i5 now, i should update my System Specs, i'll do it after this post.
> 
> I'm just waiting for my new GPU to arrive, and here are my choices, i can pick whichever one i want once they come, i do have some sort of priority with the importer. So yeah, what do you guys think? I'll be mostly playing Shooters, on PC they're basically my bread and butter. Battlefield 1 runs INCREDIBLY GOOD on an Rx480 with DX12, just mops the floor with the 1060, but then again the 1060 beats the 480 in many other games. The jump towards the 1070 still is really high.
> 
> ...



When you say Dual do you mean SLI?
My understanding is that the GTX 1060 has been disabled so it cannot be run in SLI.


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 19, 2016)

No, it's the model name, Asus named it like that. It has dual fans.


----------



## Caring1 (Oct 19, 2016)

Personally I would get the 1060 for now, then in 12 months or more see what advantages Dx12 brings, if any.
You will run cooler and save power along the way too as a bonus.


----------



## slozomby (Oct 19, 2016)

if you can afford a 1070 then that's what i'd recommend. otherwise the asus dual 1060 is plenty good.

I've been seeing a lot of good things about the xfx gtr 480, specifically about its power/temp control.  not sure if its available in your area. if I were in the market for a new card i'd be tempted to pick one up.


----------



## uuuaaaaaa (Oct 19, 2016)

slozomby said:


> if you can afford a 1070 then that's what i'd recommend. otherwise the asus dual 1060 is plenty good.
> 
> I've been seeing a lot of good things about the xfx gtr 480, specifically about its power/temp control.  not sure if its available in your area. if I were in the market for a new card i'd be tempted to pick one up.



XFX GTR 480 seems to be one of the best 480's out there, there's even a whole therad about it on TPU:

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/xfx-rx-480-gtr-performance-results.225398/


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 19, 2016)

slozomby said:


> if you can afford a 1070 then that's what i'd recommend. otherwise the asus dual 1060 is plenty good.
> 
> I've been seeing a lot of good things about the xfx gtr 480, specifically about its power/temp control.  not sure if its available in your area. if I were in the market for a new card i'd be tempted to pick one up.





uuuaaaaaa said:


> XFX GTR 480 seems to be one of the best 480's out there, there's even a whole therad about it on TPU:
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/xfx-rx-480-gtr-performance-results.225398/



I've been recommending that same XFX to pretty much everyone in these forums, thing is, it's virtually impossible to get one here in Argentina sadly. :/


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Oct 19, 2016)

I would say go for the Nitro 480+ 8GB as majority of the upcoming games are DX12 capable and apparently 480 is better in DX12 or go straight for the 1070  You won't save lots of money on electricity by going for the 1060 if you ask me.


----------



## peche (Oct 19, 2016)

@Greenmousa ytou didnt make us a project log with all parts.. assembling your rig  

Regards,


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 19, 2016)

Oh! Sorry about that, thing is as i had to assemble 2 computers i gave them directly to the guy that imports the parts and he put them together, so that's why!!


----------



## peche (Oct 19, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> Oh! Sorry about that, thing is as i had to assemble 2 computers i gave them directly to the guy that imports the parts and he put them together, so that's why!!


thats a shame! wanted to see some sexy hardware pics of a new Rig born !
congrats about the rig, hope you will experience some great times and gaming sessions with it!

Regards,


----------



## Greenmousa (Oct 19, 2016)

I still need to decide on the GPU!!


----------



## peche (Oct 19, 2016)

Greenmousa said:


> I still need to decide on the GPU!!


if you could afford it GTX 1060 .. 
if its available or in your budget GTX 1060..
dont over think it lad! the green side, thats it! 

Regards,


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Oct 19, 2016)

I think you should go with either of them(480 8GB or 1060 6GB) it's all down to preference as they're really close in terms of performance...I would go with 480 because it comes with BF1 )


----------



## Greenmousa (Nov 13, 2016)

Final update. Got my 1060, got my i5 660k at 4.2ghz, it's a breeze, runs BF1 @1080 everything at ULTRA settings, TAA, you name it, 90+ fps constantly, it's fucking amazing, i've never been happier with a purchase. No more fiddling around with weird settings, IT WORKS, out of the box, the motherboard adjusted settings loaded by default to OC 6600k's it got me to 4.2ghz no probs under 50° at full load, the GPU works wonderfully peaking at 1950mhz on clock speed thanks to being the ASUS OC version, 65° degree at full load with the fans at 55% (custom curve of course).

I love EVERYTHING about my new pc. Thank you guys for the help and i'm just so glad and let me tell the you, the grass is greener on this side.

Until we meet again AMD.


----------



## Liviu Cojocaru (Nov 13, 2016)

Congrats on your setup, I felt the same way when I've upgraded my platform from an AMD FX 6350 to my current i5 4690K


----------

