# Help needed on build.



## Asvybre (Aug 3, 2015)

Hi. 

Recently, I have been looking forward to making a build, and so I have been searching for pre-made builds since my knowledge is very limited in this department.

I am interested in a *build* in which I can game not intensively but most games, and do all the common tasks, also I'll be doing some Solidworks/AutoCAD so to keep that in mind too.
Also my budget is very limited.

So, what I found and caught my attention the most was a build from Pc Master Race, the Next-Gen Crusher, that can be found here.
In this build I would opt to buy an SSD first since I have an External HD and then latter an HDD.

Now, the question.. Is it any good? Is it outdated? Can I use my 5 year old case? Suggestions?

Any info would help, Thanks!

*EDIT:*
Progress of the build as for now.
_CPU_ - i7-2600 (second hand)
_GPU _- MSI R9 380 Gaming 4Gb
_Board_ - Asus P6P67 (also second hand)
_RAM_ - Corsair Vengeance 1600 cl9 2x4Gb
_Case_ - Corsair Carbide 200R
_PSU _- XFX TS550w
SSD - Cruxial BX100 256Gb
CPU Cooler - Enermax T40

*DONE*


----------



## bonehead123 (Aug 5, 2015)

Its an OK system, but nothing to write home to momma about.  It would get you by for beginner-mid level gaming but thats about all.

And, to do anything worthwhile in Solidworks/AutoCAD, you WILL need a better CPU and way more ram (16GB minimum, 32 preferable) let alone an SSD and better GPU.  So at the very least I would say keep looking for a better system while saving up some more $$ for it, and get something that will be far more useful from day 1 and not require alot of additional upgrades right out of the box.....

ps... my coworkers use Solidworks/AutoCAD all day every day (for creating/editing mega-layered engineering drawings) with 8 core Xeons, 32gb of ram, and Workstation-class GPU's and they still complain about their systems being slower than they would like.....


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 5, 2015)

bonehead123 said:


> Its an OK system, but nothing to write home to momma about.  It would get you by for beginner-mid level gaming but thats about all.
> 
> And, to do anything worthwhile in Solidworks/AutoCAD, you WILL need a better CPU and way more ram (16GB minimum, 32 preferable) let alone an SSD and better GPU.  So at the very least I would say keep looking for a better system while saving up some more $$ for it, and get something that will be far more useful from day 1 and not require alot of additional upgrades right out of the box.....
> 
> ps... my coworkers use Solidworks/AutoCAD all day every day (for creating/editing mega-layered engineering drawings) with 8 core Xeons, 32gb of ram, and Workstation-class GPU's and they still complain about their systems being slower than they would like.....



Thanks for the reply!
I see what you're trying to tell me, but for that kind of build I would have to spend a lot more money than that, and that's kind of a problem.

Anyway, maybe I'll look into 16Gb of ram and if the motherboard supports it and a better CPU (AMD FX-8320, the upgrade they recommend).

On another note, the Next-Gen Exterminator could, in a remote possibility, be also an option but that's a little more far out my budget..


----------



## bonehead123 (Aug 5, 2015)

Gotcha...but wouldn't the initial cost of the system you selected plus the upgrades be nearly equal to that next system anyways ?(IIRC it was ~$450 vs. $700)


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 5, 2015)

bonehead123 said:


> Gotcha...but wouldn't the initial cost of the system you selected plus the upgrades be nearly equal to that next system anyways ?(IIRC it was ~$450 vs. $700)



The CPU upgrade would be maybe about +50$ and the ram I would have to look up something compatible but even tho that's maybe 150$ less, I could squeeze that but then I would be looking at higher builds, so I don't know...


----------



## 1.61803398875 (Aug 6, 2015)

bonehead123 said:


> way more ram (16GB minimum, 32 preferable)


Now I can't speak from experience, however 16GB of RAM "minimum" sounds like way too much. According to AutoCAD's site, the recommended amount of RAM is 8GB. 32GB is just ridiculous, in my opinion.

EDIT: I did a bit of research on SolidWorks' system requirements and apparently it has a recommendation of >=8GB. 16GB would be more than sufficient, I would think.


----------



## bonehead123 (Aug 6, 2015)

Think what you wanna....but to do anything productive with ACAD.....8gb ain't gonna cut it.....unless of course you are ok with waiting 15mins- 2 HOURS or more for your work to finish processing....

 Yes 8gb will allow the app to launch and run for a short time with only basic functions,  but that s where your productivity will end and your frustrations will multiply rapidly.....

As always though....Y M M V


----------



## 1.61803398875 (Aug 6, 2015)

bonehead123 said:


> Think what you wanna....but to do anything productive with ACAD.....8gb ain't gonna cut it.....unless of course you are ok with waiting 15mins- 2 HOURS or more for your work to finish processing....
> 
> Yes 8gb will allow the app to launch and run for a short time with only basic functions,  but that s where your productivity will end and your frustrations will multiply rapidly.....
> 
> As always though....Y M M V


So long as he is not running complex fluid dynamic simulations all the time then 8GB of RAM should be sufficient.

@OP: If you lack confidence just do a Google search experiences that AutoCAD/SolidWorks users have had using 8GB of RAM.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

1.61803398875 said:


> So long as he is not running complex fluid dynamic simulations all the time then 8GB of RAM should be sufficient.
> 
> @OP: If you lack confidence just do a Google search experiences that AutoCAD/SolidWorks users have had using 8GB of RAM.






bonehead123 said:


> Think what you wanna....but to do anything productive with ACAD.....8gb ain't gonna cut it.....unless of course you are ok with waiting 15mins- 2 HOURS or more for your work to finish processing....
> 
> Yes 8gb will allow the app to launch and run for a short time with only basic functions,  but that s where your productivity will end and your frustrations will multiply rapidly.....
> 
> As always though....Y M M V



Anyway, maybe I'll only be looking at 8Gb of course because of my budget and then if I feel like I need 16 I'll look into it.
But thanks for all the help.

If any of you know the answer to some of my other questions feel free to comment!


----------



## basco (Aug 7, 2015)

is it possible for you to build it yourself??
what case do you have ?but every standard atx case is ok.
maybe you are better of buying a used complete system-you will get more for your money


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Aug 7, 2015)

I love destroying published value builds. Here's a more powerful build for only $5 more- http://pcpartpicker.com/p/rN3ChM 

But in all honesty, with Solidworks/AutoCAD in the list of purposes for this build, I'd highly suggest going the Intel 6c/12t i7 route. http://pcpartpicker.com/p/KkhMNG

I realise the i7 route is considerably more expensive, but in the long run, I believe you will be more happy with it.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

basco said:


> is it possible for you to build it yourself??
> what case do you have ?but every standard atx case is ok.
> maybe you are better of buying a used complete system-you will get more for your money



That's the idea, for me to build it!
Don't know if you can see it on the image but even if I can use it, would it be a lot better to buy a new one for terms of cooling, space and other improvements?
That's a good idea but here on Portugal there's almost no one who asks for a decent price according to the build..


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

BarbaricSoul said:


> I love destroying published value builds. Here's a more powerful build for only $5 more- http://pcpartpicker.com/p/rN3ChM
> 
> But in all honesty, with Solidworks/AutoCAD in the list of purposes for this build, I'd highly suggest going the Intel 6c/12t i7 route. http://pcpartpicker.com/p/KkhMNG
> 
> I realise the i7 route is considerably more expensive, but in the long run, I believe you will be more happy with it.


I like that build! 
Is that the best gpu I can get even for a couple of bucks more?
I get what you're saying, an i7 would definitely be better for that kind of work but that's a lot even tho that build other than being great in processing as the possibility for latter SLI..


----------



## basco (Aug 7, 2015)

maybe some used x79 with 3930k or 4930k and possibility for a lot of ram


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 7, 2015)

6C/12T is really not *essential* for CAD work but it will make things snappier ofcourse. Will it work just fine on a 4C/8T machine? YES.

Save your money.

If you really want to go for maximum value for money, pick up a second-hand i7 Haswell, people are upgrading now! Get a K version and solid cooler and you are more than set CPU wise. Motherboard, pick up a Z97 to go with that, also found second-hand. These parts are good to buy from others because they haven't aged all that much so it is usually almost like buying new parts with a major price reduction.

With the left over budget you can get yourself a nice silent/solid case like a Fractal Define for example, and solid PSU, a nice large SSD and other peripherals you would like. In other words, stuff that will last you several builds. Much better to invest in that than go for a ridiculously overpriced CPU that will only benefit you to a small degree in only one part of your PC activities. (6C/12T is worthless for most applications including gaming)


----------



## basco (Aug 7, 2015)

second hand is the word here


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 7, 2015)

Addendum: build it yourself, never EVER buy pre-built PC's. The biggest bonus in doing so is actually not the lower price, but the fact that you can hand pick your components and you get to know your system so much better. Makes it easier to diagnose issues that you might have further along the road, and you may, and probably will, find it can be quite fun to build systems.

Oh, for SLI you need an SLI enabled board, careful with that (it doesn't come free). SLI doesn't require that much more cpu wise though, any i7 will be more than sufficient, even an i5 (4c/4t) will drive 2 cards with ease.

About RAM. I would recommend 16GB, but there is no harm done in starting off with 8GB and see how far that gets you. As stated, it will work fine, but there are many degrees of CAD work.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

Vayra86 said:


> 6C/12T is really not *essential* for CAD work but it will make things snappier ofcourse. Will it work just fine on a 4C/8T machine? YES.
> 
> Save your money.
> 
> ...



I've looked into that but I haven't found any good deals, there's little to nobody selling them and the ones that do ask for way too much money.
Even the parts that I would buy I'd probably have to order them from spain because here they cost a lot more, so maybe used parts from out of the country would be that great because I would have to spend a lot on shipping.. 
I don't now what really to do..


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

Vayra86 said:


> Addendum: build it yourself, never EVER buy pre-built PC's. The biggest bonus in doing so is actually not the lower price, but the fact that you can hand pick your components and you get to know your system so much better. Makes it easier to diagnose issues that you might have further along the road, and you may, and probably will, find it can be quite fun to build systems.
> 
> Oh, for SLI you need an SLI enabled board, careful with that (it doesn't come free). SLI doesn't require that much more cpu wise though, any i7 will be more than sufficient, even an i5 (4c/4t) will drive 2 cards with ease.
> 
> About RAM. I would recommend 16GB, but there is no harm done in starting off with 8GB and see how far that gets you. As stated, it will work fine, but there are many degrees of CAD work.



Of course, I even went to some pc stores to see how much they would ask for a custom build but it's too much anyway.

SLI is just a maybe for now, not really looking into it.
I'll be going with 8Gb that's almost certain


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 7, 2015)

BarbaricSoul said:


> I love destroying published value builds. Here's a more powerful build for only $5 more- http://pcpartpicker.com/p/rN3ChM
> 
> But in all honesty, with Solidworks/AutoCAD in the list of purposes for this build, I'd highly suggest going the Intel 6c/12t i7 route. http://pcpartpicker.com/p/KkhMNG
> 
> I realise the i7 route is considerably more expensive, but in the long run, I believe you will be more happy with it.



Jumping jack christ that case is hideous. You probably CAN use that case (ignoring possible graphics card/CPU cooler incompatibilities) but you're going to have the worst time in the world building your computer and maintaining it. If you work with an OEM case like that, you'll get terrible temperatures, dust buildup and every time you try to disassemble/add something you may very well get some serious cuts and gashes from the sharp, bare SECC steel (personal experience here).

If you are building a powerful computer like that, you're not going to use that kind of HP OEM case. Period.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> Jumping jack christ that case is hideous. You probably CAN use that case (ignoring possible graphics card/CPU cooler incompatibilities) but you're going to have the worst time in the world building your computer and maintaining it. If you work with an OEM case like that, you'll get terrible temperatures, dust buildup and every time you try to disassemble/add something you may very well get some serious cuts and gashes from the sharp, bare SECC steel (personal experience here).
> 
> If you are building a powerful computer like that, you're not going to use that kind of HP OEM case. Period.



For that price I could pick up a different case, I'm not concerned with that now.
I'm looking for some advice for the cpu, gpu and motherboard mainly. Those at a max of 400$.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Aug 7, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> Jumping jack christ that case is hideous. You probably CAN use that case (ignoring possible graphics card/CPU cooler incompatibilities) but you're going to have the worst time in the world building your computer and maintaining it. If you work with an OEM case like that, you'll get terrible temperatures, dust buildup and every time you try to disassemble/add something you may very well get some serious cuts and gashes from the sharp, bare SECC steel (personal experience here).
> 
> If you are building a powerful computer like that, you're not going to use that kind of HP OEM case. Period.



I've seen worse suggested. Not sure what you're talking about when you say "with an OEM case like that". It's a basic mid-tower ATX case, and it's looks are not much different than the Source 210 in the build the OP listed. As for heat sink and video card compatability, it has room for a 155mm tall heatsink and a 315 mm long video card.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

I don't know if this is the best site (here) to get benchmarks from but with a quick search I found that for the same price, around 160$, I could get either a *AMD FX-8550* or an *Intel i5-4460*. But the amd has 8,980 and the intel has 6,652.

I know that when gaming they will perform very differently according to the gpu and the board but can I start from here?


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Aug 7, 2015)

Do you mean the AMD FX 8350? Never heard of an FX 8550. If so, just get the FX 8320 which is very easy to overclock to 8350 speeds. I would get the 8 core AMD over the i5 with Solidworks and AutoCAD part of the planned uses for the computer.

As for your other question-



> Is that the best gpu I can get even for a couple of bucks more?



Depends on your definition of "a couple of bucks more". Yes, I can suggest a stronger video card, but you will need to raise your budget.


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 7, 2015)

Blue-Knight said:


> Not so much for me.
> 
> 
> 8GB if you want to suffer... 12GB is the absolute minimum for comfortable gaming.
> ...



@Asvybre

1. RAM is never too much, true. Except that you should exercise caution with AM3+, high speed / high capacity RAM kits, and bad boards. Choose a decent 990FX board that can handle overclocking and just about anything else you can throw at it. Recommendations include 990FXA-UD3, 990FXA-UD5, 990FX Gaming, Fatal1ty 990FX Killer (this one has M.2 if you're into that), Fatal1ty 990FX Performance, etc. The Sabertooth from Asus is also good. For AM3+, generally avoid anything from MSI that isn't red in colour. Red colour denotes "Gaming", of which one board is listed above, and basically means that it's an AMD platform MSI board that you can trust.

2. I don't believe that 12GB is the absolute minimum for comfortable gaming. I've never run into a game, however intensive, that requires me to have more than 8GB (except for FC4 but that was just because I had a sh*tload of Chrome tabs open). Plus 12GB is a stupid number on any platform aside from X58. Don't go misleading him.

3. I don't know if Solidworks is well-multithreaded, but if it is, AMD will probably be a better choice for that price. Intel is far more powerful in the upper segments, but it looks like you aren't willing to go there with $$.

4. Graphics card depends on you. What exactly are your needs? What resolution/settings for gaming? What are Solidworks' requirements/recommendations for GPUs?

5. Looks like you don't have a ton of $$$ to blow, but if Solidworks benefits from the faster access speeds and times of SSDs, then all-SSD or nearly all-SSD storage would be something to look into. A SSD as a boot drive is always a good place to start (I would say that it's the only place to start), but once you eliminate all mechanical storage from your system, you will notice a big difference. Not a big issue, just something to think about.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

BarbaricSoul said:


> Do you mean the AMD FX 8350? Never heard of an FX 8550. If so, just get the FX 8320 which is very easy to overclock to 8350 speeds. I would get the 8 core AMD over the i5 with Solidworks and AutoCAD part of the planned uses for the computer.
> 
> As for your other question-
> 
> ...



Yeah sorry, meant the 8350 xD 
Ok that's the one in the build, then there's the R9 270X, should I consider any more gpu's?


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

Blue-Knight said:


> Not so much for me.
> 
> 
> 8GB if you want to suffer... 12GB is the absolute minimum for comfortable gaming.
> ...



Does RAM make that much difference in gaming?


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 7, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> Does RAM make that much difference in gaming?



For your purposes, absolutely not. But it's not a problem since it looks like you're starting at 16GB for Solidworks anyways.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> @Asvybre
> 
> 1. RAM is never too much, true. Except that you should exercise caution with AM3+, high speed / high capacity RAM kits, and bad boards. Choose a decent 990FX board that can handle overclocking and just about anything else you can throw at it. Recommendations include 990FXA-UD3, 990FXA-UD5, 990FX Gaming, Fatal1ty 990FX Killer (this one has M.2 if you're into that), Fatal1ty 990FX Performance, etc. The Sabertooth from Asus is also good. For AM3+, generally avoid anything from MSI that isn't red in colour. Red colour denotes "Gaming", of which one board is listed above, and basically means that it's an AMD platform MSI board that you can trust.
> 
> ...



1. I was in need of some info into motherboards too so very much appreciated, will look into that after I've decided about de gpu!

2. I'll start with 8Gb dual channel or not, then latter into 16, done.

3. That's true, my budget is very limited but if later on I want to upgrade, I'll probably be selling this build and starting another one.

4. For now I'll stick with 1080p, for Solidworks gpu's don't need to be that much powerful I think.

5. SSD is definitely a must for me, I already have a mechanical drive which serves my purposes well enough.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

I've also noticed that with an amd processor I've got less options with the gpu's which also sucks..


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 7, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> I've also noticed that with an amd processor I've got less options with the gpu's which also sucks..



What do you mean? It's not like there are graphics cards that won't work on a 990FX board.

How much are you willing to spend on a graphics card?


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 7, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> What do you mean? It's not like there are graphics cards that won't work on a 990FX board.
> 
> How much are you willing to spend on a graphics card?



It's not that, but won't I have issues with the AMD CPU and a GeForce GPU?
Maybe about 200$ or so


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> @Asvybre
> 
> 1. RAM is never too much, true. Except that you should exercise caution with AM3+, high speed / high capacity RAM kits, and bad boards. Choose a decent 990FX board that can handle overclocking and just about anything else you can throw at it. Recommendations include 990FXA-UD3, 990FXA-UD5, 990FX Gaming, Fatal1ty 990FX Killer (this one has M.2 if you're into that), Fatal1ty 990FX Performance, etc. The Sabertooth from Asus is also good. For AM3+, generally avoid anything from MSI that isn't red in colour. Red colour denotes "Gaming", of which one board is listed above, and basically means that it's an AMD platform MSI board that you can trust.
> 
> ...



Plus, is the 990FX Extreme3 good?


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 8, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> It's not that, but won't I have issues with the AMD CPU and a GeForce GPU?
> Maybe about 200$ or so



No lol this isn't a CPU



Asvybre said:


> Plus, is the 990FX Extreme3 good?



It's nothing special, if that's what you mean. 4+1 probably-analog VRM, no front USB 3.0...it'll work, but it isn't exactly one of the better boards I mentioned. Plus, you're going to have an absolutely *wonderful* time without a front panel USB 3.0 header; if your case doesn't come with a 3.0 to 2.0 adapter, you're going to have to buy one/make do without front USB 3.0.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> No lol this isn't a CPU
> 
> 
> 
> It's nothing special, if that's what you mean. 4+1 probably-analog VRM, no front USB 3.0...it'll work, but it isn't exactly one of the better boards I mentioned. Plus, you're going to have an absolutely *wonderful* time without a front panel USB 3.0 header; if your case doesn't come with a 3.0 to 2.0 adapter, you're going to have to buy one/make do without front USB 3.0.



So then it'll be okay to just go with "any" gpu for this processor?

Ok then, maybe I'll be going with either the sabetooth 990fx r2.0 or the asrock 990fx killer!


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 8, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> So then it'll be okay to just go with "any" gpu for this processor?
> 
> Ok then, maybe I'll be going with either the sabetooth 990fx r2.0 or the asrock 990fx killer!



It would be incorrect to say that "any GPU" would work, because I can't promise that 2 x Titan X SLI won't be bottlenecked, but that's another issue altogether, and one that you won't run into.

Both of those are decent. If I'm not mistaken, there are many versions of the Sabertooth, including the original, R2.0, and Gen3. Gen3 should be the newest (and best) because the heatsink design has been updated to match that of the Z87/Z97 Gryphon and Sabertooth while the older ones were reminiscent of the X58 Sabertooth.

This is what I'm talking about:







@Blue-Knight Also, about RAM never being too much, I get what you're saying and I agree, but AMD has some pretty weak IMCs that can possibly run into issues with a lot of RAM / a lot of fast RAM.


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 8, 2015)

Please don't be that guy that tossed an FX 8320 on a weak motherboard with shitty power delivery. Thousands of people have preceded you and their boards fail in due time.

If you want to have a long and fun time with your FX cpu take a solid, and thus slightly pricier board - no need to break the bank on a sabertooth though. I would strongly recommend Gigabyte UD3/UD5 boards, some of the best price/quality ratio's on the market.

About RAM, 12GB is completely silly in any dual channel setup. Either 8 or 16. For gaming 8 GB is still enough, always has been, and I don't see that changing much either. If any kind of memory usage has gone up for gaming it is VRAM on your graphics solution.

When and if you have the choice to get an i7 (second hand) Ivy Bridge or newer CPU at a similar price of an FX 83xx CPU, always go for the i7. It is simply a much stronger cpu, the use cases where the FX cpu actually wins are extremely limited and never gaming related. Games require a fast single thread and high IPC (instructions per clock), the FX is a power hog (which means added heat and motherboard requirements, see above) and the i7 path will always be a more versatile and powerful choice. If the FX path is cheaper, by all means go for it, it's a fine cpu for the money in general. But, mind you, I would personally ALWAYS pick a second-hand i7 at similar price over a brand new FX 8320.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> It would be incorrect to say that "any GPU" would work, because I can't promise that 2 x Titan X SLI won't be bottlenecked, but that's another issue altogether, and one that you won't run into.
> 
> Both of those are decent. If I'm not mistaken, there are many versions of the Sabertooth, including the original, R2.0, and Gen3. Gen3 should be the newest (and best) because the heatsink design has been updated to match that of the Z87/Z97 Gryphon and Sabertooth while the older ones were reminiscent of the X58 Sabertooth.
> 
> ...



I wasn't able to find the Gen3 so maybe I'll go with either the first one or another one around that price..
And yeahh don't even think abou 2xtitan x xD


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

Vayra86 said:


> Please don't be that guy that tossed an FX 8320 on a weak motherboard with shitty power delivery. Thousands of people have preceded you and their boards fail in due time.
> 
> If you want to have a long and fun time with your FX cpu take a solid, and thus slightly pricier board - no need to break the bank on a sabertooth though. I would strongly recommend Gigabyte UD3/UD5 boards, some of the best price/quality ratio's on the market.
> 
> ...



Yeah, I am willing to spent a little more on the board!
I have found an i7-2600k for around 95$ but the guy says he's getting an blue screen cod 124, so maybe I shouldn't go with that....

And again I found an i7 2600 + Asus P8P67 LE for 200$..


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 8, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> Yeah, I am willing to spent a little more on the board!
> I have found an i7-2600k for around 95$ but the guy says he's getting an blue screen cod 124, so maybe I shouldn't go with that....
> 
> And again I found an i7 2600 + Asus P8P67 LE for 200$..



That doesn't look bad at all for that combo! The board has Sata 3 for your SSD, and with a decent overclock that is one solid cpu. PCIE 2.0, but that is nothing to be worried about. I think you should aim for settling at around 180 bucks, it is a reasonable price.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

Vayra86 said:


> That doesn't look bad at all for that combo! The board has Sata 3 for your SSD, and with a decent overclock that is one solid cpu. PCIE 2.0, but that is nothing to be worried about. I think you should aim for settling at around 180 bucks, it is a reasonable price.



180$ for that combo?
That cpu on the PassMark Benckmarks is slightly above the 8320 (130$) but a little more beneath the 8350 (160$)... 
I'm only skeptical because the cpu is a little old but I don't really now where to go from here...


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Aug 8, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> 180$ for that combo?
> That cpu on the PassMark Benckmarks is slightly above the 8320 (130$) but a little more beneath the 8350 (160$)...
> I'm only skeptical because the cpu is a little old but I don't really now where to go from here...



Considering the 2600 was a +$300 CPU when new and is still very comparable to i7 CPUs being sold today, $180 for one and a motherboard is a very nice deal. I personally would not sell a 2600 for less  than $150 for the CPU alone, $175 for the 2600k. Don't focus on the results from a single benchmark. Here is a better comparison of the 2600k and the 8350- http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=287


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 8, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> 180$ for that combo?
> That cpu on the PassMark Benckmarks is slightly above the 8320 (130$) but a little more beneath the 8350 (160$)...
> I'm only skeptical because the cpu is a little old but I don't really now where to go from here...



I really want to help you, and I'm sure everyone else wants to as well, so do us a favor and never rely on or speak of Passmark again.

Just take our word for it. The 2600K is going to be of better value than the 8350, especially at that price.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Aug 8, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> I really want to help you, and I'm sure everyone else wants to as well, so do us a favor and never rely on or speak of Passmark again.
> 
> Just take our word for it. The 2600K is going to be of better value than the 8350, especially at that price.



don't just take our word for it, look at the comparison I posted in my last reply. The 2600k beats the FX 8350 is most the benchmarks listed there.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

BarbaricSoul said:


> Considering the 2600 was a +$300 CPU when new and is still very comparable to i7 CPUs being sold today, $180 for one and a motherboard is a very nice deal. I personally would not sell a 2600 for less  than $150 for the CPU alone, $175 for the 2600k. Don't focus on the results from a single benchmark. Here is a better comparison of the 2600k and the 8350- http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=287



Ok I can see it but the k series is slightly better then the 2600, isn't it?


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> I really want to help you, and I'm sure everyone else wants to as well, so do us a favor and never rely on or speak of Passmark again.
> 
> Just take our word for it. The 2600K is going to be of better value than the 8350, especially at that price.



Are them that bad? I don't really know where to trust, I saw that site and it was interesting so that's why I mentioned it. But won't do it anymore, thanks.
But again, it's the 2600 only not the k series.


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 8, 2015)

@Asvybre Yes. They just suck. Period. They suck as much as CNET and CPUBoss when it comes to getting useful information about enthusiast products.

Doesn't matter. i7-2600 is still very capable. It's part of the Sandy Bridge family, and back then they also had this feature on "locked" CPUs that allows for a little bit of overclocking, even though the CPU is locked. Look up Sandy Bridge Partial Overclocking or check out this link http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-core-i7-2600k-core-i5-2500k,2833-9.html. The i7-2600 is a "limited" unlocked chip, meaning that you can go 4 bins (400MHz) above the specified frequency in the Intel Turbo Table. It's not easy to explain, but you'll get the hang of it once you read something about it.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

*UPDATE: *I have found an i7-3630QM for 100$ but I don't really know if it is better or not, it is cheaper anyway..
It's getting crazy, there's a ton of possibilities, and I thought it would be simpler with such small budget.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> @Asvybre Yes. They just suck. Period. They suck as much as CNET and CPUBoss when it comes to getting useful information about enthusiast products.
> 
> Doesn't matter. i7-2600 is still very capable. It's part of the Sandy Bridge family, and back then they also had this feature on "locked" CPUs that allows for a little bit of overclocking, even though the CPU is locked. Look up Sandy Bridge Partial Overclocking or check out this link http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-core-i7-2600k-core-i5-2500k,2833-9.html. The i7-2600 is a "limited" unlocked chip, meaning that you can go 4 bins (400MHz) above the specified frequency in the Intel Turbo Table. It's not easy to explain, but you'll get the hang of it once you read something about it.



Ok, got it! I'm feeling confident about the 4 year old cpu anyway! I'll look more into that overclocking part latter.
Now the thing I don't like that much is the motherboard, it has PCIe 2.0, won't it affect the gpu performance?


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 8, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> *UPDATE: *I have found an i7-3630QM for 100$ but I don't really know if it is better or not, it is cheaper anyway..
> It's getting crazy, there's a ton of possibilities, and I thought it would be simpler with such small budget.



What are you doing? The 3630QM is a laptop CPU..............

Why are you so apprehensive about buying the 2600 used?

No, PCIe 2.0 won't significantly affect performance. Plenty of people are on that platform with up-to-date graphics cards. Since you've decided that you're going to upgrade to new hardware in the near future, I don't see a problem with a 4-year-old CPU if it's as excellent as the 2600 is.


----------



## Ikaruga (Aug 8, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> Ok, got it! I'm feeling confident about the 4 year old cpu anyway! I'll look more into that overclocking part latter.
> Now the thing I don't like that much is the motherboard, it has PCIe 2.0, won't it affect the gpu performance?


i7-2600 and PCIe 2.0 is enough for gaming, and 16GB ram is "enough" for 3D stuff. What kind of monitor do you have (native resolution?)


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> What are you doing? The 3630QM is a laptop CPU..............
> 
> Why are you so apprehensive about buying the 2600 used?
> 
> No, PCIe 2.0 won't significantly affect performance. Plenty of people are on that platform with up-to-date graphics cards. Since you've decided that you're going to upgrade to new hardware in the near future, I don't see a problem with a 4-year-old CPU if it's as excellent as the 2600 is.



I wasn't quite sure and it wasn't specified in the specifications of the cpu on intel's site, sorry.

I don't know, never thought of doing that and I don't know what to expect really...

That's a relief then! Soon enough I'll buy it!


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 8, 2015)

Ikaruga said:


> i7-2600 and PCIe 2.0 is enough for gaming, and 16GB ram is "enough" for 3D stuff. What kind of monitor do you have (native resolution?)



I'm planing on playing mainly on 1080p.


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 9, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> I'm planing on playing mainly on 1080p.



Seeing as you'd probably want the GPU to last, rather than have to replace it when you replace your CPU, maybe you'd want to look at something that can handle 1440P just to be on the safe side. GTX 960 and R9 380 are decent 1080P cards. I think you can figure out the rest from there; just go up the stack.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 9, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> Seeing as you'd probably want the GPU to last, rather than have to replace it when you replace your CPU, maybe you'd want to look at something that can handle 1440P just to be on the safe side. GTX 960 and R9 380 are decent 1080P cards. I think you can figure out the rest from there; just go up the stack.



Yes, that's true! Ok! GTX 960 and R9 380 is the way to go then, should I choose the 4gb version? Also in terms of Ram, what specifications should I look for?


----------



## basco (Aug 9, 2015)

go first for the quantity you need after that the mhz dont matter too much
1600cl9 or cl11 doesnt matter much for example


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 9, 2015)

basco said:


> go first for the quantity you need after that the mhz dont matter too much
> 1600cl9 or cl11 doesnt matter much for example



I'm going for the standard then! psu wise, considering all the components I should go with a 500w?


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 9, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> I'm going for the standard then! psu wise, considering all the components I should go with a 500w?



You want the PSU to last? Go get yourself an XFX TS550.

You want a PSU that's 80+ Gold? Go get yourself a EVGA G2 550 or 650. Seasonic G Series 550W /650W is also good.

Also, if I recall properly, the R9 380 is a rebrand of the R9 285, but it comes with 4GB standard.  So far in the benchmarks that I've seen, the R9 380 beats the R9 280X. The GTX 960 comes in at just below the R9 280X, and in some reviews even overclocking does not allow it to beat the 280X, and it's only 2GB. Both the R9 380 and GTX 960 have new technologies that make more efficient use of RAM, and both are relatively efficient, so I'd say the R9 380 wins here. Unless you're really worried about the future of AMD and want to stay with Nvidia. That's OK too.

I beg to differ on the RAM. Quantity over speed always, but 1600 C11 is a bad idea. Go for 1600 C9 at the least. 1600 C9 is barely more expensive than C11, but C11 does suffer. C9 means timings of 9-9-9-24; you'll see that string often.


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 10, 2015)

Great PSU advice, good to see you're taking it all in. Going to be a fine and cost effective build this way.

1600CL9 RAM, seconded, solid value/performance choice.

For GPU: avoid the GTX 960, it chokes on anything past 1080p whereas the AMD alternatives do not. It is a shitty card to SLI as well because of its 128 bit bus and it is priced too high for what it offers currently. Basically it's a GTX 770 that hasn't had a good breakfast. R9 380 is quite okay.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 12, 2015)

@Vayra86 @tabascosauz
As of now, I have acquired the motherboard and the processor and both look really nice.
The CPU cooler is the only thing I think I'll have to change, since it's so little it would be better to get a more effective one for overclocks, wouldn't it?


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 12, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> @Vayra86 @tabascosauz
> As of now, I have acquired the motherboard and the processor and both look really nice.
> The CPU cooler is the only thing I think I'll have to change, since it's so little it would be better to get a more effective one for overclocks, wouldn't it?



Lovely. Yes, you'll need a better cooler. Standard fare is the Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO, not expensive.

However, I"m not a huge fan of that one. A little more money, and you can step up to the Noctua U12S and Phanteks TC12DX, my faves. Enermax T40 is also great.

If you're looking for the best air coolers that money can buy, the Be Quiet Dark Rock Pro 3, Noctua D14 / D15, and Phanteks TC14PE are there for you.

I reckon that the 212 EVO is great for OC into 4GHz territory. Approaching 5 GHz, however, will most likely need a dual tower like the D15 or TC14PE.


----------



## HWTactics (Aug 12, 2015)

There is a sale going on for new GTX 770 2GB cards @ $180 + FS.  This will be faster than the GTX 960 for the same price.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...900_12005_2500_001_gtx_770_graphics_card.html


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 12, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> Lovely. Yes, you'll need a better cooler. Standard fare is the Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO, not expensive.
> 
> However, I"m not a huge fan of that one. A little more money, and you can step up to the Noctua U12S and Phanteks TC12DX, my faves. Enermax T40 is also great.
> 
> ...



The only thing is the socket, this cpu uses the 1155 and those coolers I don't think they support it..
But I would probably go with the 212 EVO, my budget is getting limited..
*
EDIT:*
Just found I was looking at the specs of the 212 PLUS not the EVO xD


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 12, 2015)

HWTactics said:


> There is a sale going on for new GTX 770 2GB cards @ $180 + FS.  This will be faster than the GTX 960 for the same price.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...900_12005_2500_001_gtx_770_graphics_card.html



Thank but I was thinking on taking the R9 380 and I think I can get it for about 200$ here.


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 12, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> The only thing is the socket, this cpu uses the 1155 and those coolers I don't think they support it..
> But I would probably go with the 212 EVO, my budget is getting limited..
> *
> EDIT:*
> Just found I was looking at the specs of the 212 PLUS not the EVO xD



No.

1. LGA1156 LGA1155 LGA1150 LGA1151 coolers are cross compatible. They have the same hole spacing on the board.

2. Plus is virtually the same as the EVO. Make sure to check out the Enermax T40 though; it is the next cheapest. It is very capable, beating the 212 and TC12DX and the white version looks stunning.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 14, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> No.
> 
> 1. LGA1156 LGA1155 LGA1150 LGA1151 coolers are cross compatible. They have the same hole spacing on the board.
> 
> 2. Plus is virtually the same as the EVO. Make sure to check out the Enermax T40 though; it is the next cheapest. It is very capable, beating the 212 and TC12DX and the white version looks stunning.



I'm going for the T40, seams nicer!

Have you got any tips on the case?


----------



## tabascosauz (Aug 14, 2015)

Asvybre said:


> I'm going for the T40, seams nicer!
> 
> Have you got any tips on the case?



Have you decided yet?

I'd go for the NZXT S340 just because of its size; when I can't afford Caselabs, I like cases that are compact for their maximum form factor.  However, its CPU cooler support is not stellar; you could go for the standard choices: NZXT H440, Fractal Design Define R5, Define S, etc.

Just to be sure though, the S340 does support the T40; its maximum clearance is 161mm and the T40 is 160mm.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 14, 2015)

tabascosauz said:


> Have you decided yet?
> 
> I'd go for the NZXT S340 just because of its size; when I can't afford Caselabs, I like cases that are compact for their maximum form factor.  However, its CPU cooler support is not stellar; you could go for the standard choices: NZXT H440, Fractal Design Define R5, Define S, etc.
> 
> Just to be sure though, the S340 does support the T40; its maximum clearance is 161mm and the T40 is 160mm.



Yeah I saw that one and I really liked it and the case supports the R9 380 and the T40. But I'll be looking at some more reviews


----------



## 1.61803398875 (Aug 28, 2015)

Blue-Knight said:


> Not so much for me.


Why not? What tasks do you perform which makes it seem as if 16GB minimum is not "way too much"?




> 8GB if you want to suffer... 12GB is the absolute minimum for comfortable gaming.


Really? Interesting. What games have you played which have provided you an uncomfortable performance sub 12GB of RAM?



> RAM is never too much. The same goes for storage space. Never too much, never.


Perhaps not too much, but unnecessary... absolutely. I could install 64GB of RAM in a system on which light programming is being done... it is not "too much" RAM in such a case, but it is unnecessary and the extra money that was spent on RAM could have been put towards something that would have been more beneficial to the user, such as a CPU or a graphics card... depending on the tasks being carried out.

[quiote]I'd say 32GB is the way to go, because it it is the maximum the mainstream/poor CPU has to offer. And 32GB capable motherboard is not expensive at all.[/quote]
Some 32GB-capable motherboards are expensive, some aren't. It also depends on what you define as "expensive". Expensive, for me, is anything over $250.

If you are going to higher ends... Then 64GB.



Spoiler: Unnecessary comments



You will never see yourself in such situation: "Oh, I just bought too much RAM!".


No, you probably won't see this... however there have been instances, such as one that I have personally experienced, where I thought to myself "That extra 4GB of RAM was really unnecessary". 



> Just my opinion.


Indeed, it is just your opinion... but it seems that some elements of your opinion are ignorant.


----------



## Blue-Knight (Aug 28, 2015)

@1.61803398875 I agree with every line you said.



Spoiler: Unnecessary comments



Perhaps I was not in a good day when I wrote that. LOL!



Sorry!


----------



## 1.61803398875 (Aug 28, 2015)

Blue-Knight said:


> @1.61803398875 I agree with every line you said.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


We all have those days, mate...  I understand.


----------



## Asvybre (Aug 29, 2015)

*UPDATE:*
Just ordered the MSi R9 380 Gaming 4Gb, The XFX TS 550w and the Crucial BX100 250Gb.
Still not too sure about the Case and RAM tho.


----------



## Asvybre (Sep 4, 2015)

*Just got everything together apart from the CPU Cooler and here's the result!!*
*Thanks to everyone for the help!!*


----------

