Building a New PC - First Time

[J-man]

I want to build a new PC (first time builder here).

I saw this build from Tom's hardware but I have a bit more budget. They've spend 700 dollars on hardware I can spend about 200 dollars more (dollar to euro conversion taken into account). They use an i3 I'm considering upgrading to an i5, so I also need to change the motherboard. Any recommendations?

pcpartpicker: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/jzY96h
Tom's hardware: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/newegg-system-builder-marathon-q3-2015-gaming-pc,4305.html

Thanks!

 

[cardgame]

I'd definitely recommend an i5, and you don't need to change the mobo for that at all. I'm rocking an i5-4460 in an H97 Pro 4 myself. For your higher budget I'd get a 500GB SSD instead of their 250 and/or a 1-2TB HDD as well depending on how much storage you need - I doubt 250 will be enough. SSD is love, man.

 

[Maniacal]

I'd definitely recommend an i5, and you don't need to change the mobo for that at all. I'm rocking an i5-4460 in an H97 Pro 4 myself. For your higher budget I'd get a 500GB SSD instead of their 250 and/or a 1-2TB HDD as well depending on how much storage you need - I doubt 250 will be enough. SSD is love, man.

250 isn't bad but it certainly is restricting. Especially with increasing game sizes these days. I have a 1TB HDD to supplement my 240GB SSD and it works well, most of my games don't really get a huge boost from the SSD anyway. 500GB is definitely better though.

If you have a bit more to spend I would recommend a 390 over a 380 too. Hell for an extra $50 or something get 16GB of RAM too if you think you'll use it.

 

[cardgame]

390 is quite a bit cost bump over a 380 though, I'm not sure he can upgrade to i5 and 390 both.

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: Was getting too confusing in the quick questions thread, so split this discussion off to its own thread.

 

[illram]

So I assume you want to game with this PC? At what resolution? What games?

I'd second the recommendations to get an i5, but lose the CPU cooler. The stock intel cooler is more than adequate if you're not overclocking.

 

[Maniacal]

Yeah I'd say a case with good airflow and filling all or most of the fan slots is a bit more important. You can always pick up a CPU fan or one of those enclosed corsair CPU water coolers and some thermal paste later.

 

[J-man]

Thanks everybody for the replies. I've swapped the i3 for the i5 and the 250 GB SSD for an 500 GB. I also added a HDD. I hope I'm still good with the power supply?

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/hN9CYJ

 

[cardgame]

It looks like it will be fine, but you could increase the PSU to 600-650W to provide breathing room for a GPU upgrade down the line for similar cost to your current unit.

 

[illram]

500w should be fine for the future. You could plop a 980ti in there with a 500w PSU, and power efficiency should just continue to get better. If the idea is upgrading later, I'd ask first, what's the goal? If the goal is higher res gaming why not just spend the money now and have something for a while.

That 380 should be OK for 1080p for the foreseeable future in AAA titles. If you want more headroom for the future or if you want higher resolution gaming (i.e. 1440) I'd pick up a 970.

 

[cardgame]

If we're talking future, then the 970 and its 3.5GB of VRAM is out, and the 8GB 390 is in. Basically same price.

 

[illram]

Depends on the resolution. If you want 4k, yeah. But you shouldn't be buying either of those for 4k gaming anyway. 4GB or 3.5GB or whatever it is on the 970 is adequate for WQHD and below as far as I know from all the benchmarks I have seen.

 

[cardgame]

Games' vram hunger is increasing all the time, though. 3-4 years ago 2GB or so was the standard.

 

[illram]

Could be.

I do hope at some point AMD cards start to reclaim some of the market space, they seem to be second fiddle lately. I do not want an NVIDIA-run future where we get gouged for $1000 performance cards.

 

[Zelig]

Well there's Apple now. The iPhone 6s is essentially on par with the fastest AMD desktop processor for single core performance, and the 2 year-old iPhone 5s is on par with everyone else's current flagships.

 

[illram]

I don't see Apple being relevant in gaming PC's anytime soon.

 

[cardgame]

>comparing ARM architecture to x64

 

[Zelig]

I don't see Apple being relevant in gaming PC's anytime soon.

"PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in."

Most popular video card of Steam users is the Intel HD Graphics 4000, I expect the iPad Pro to have nearly 4x the GPU performance.

>comparing ARM architecture to x64

It's not notably different for the end user or for most developers. iOS/Mac OS and Windows 10 both let developers re-use pretty much all their code across x86/ARM, and Android straight up has x86-based phones where most users are none the wiser. (e.g. Asus Zenfone 2)

You can be certain Apple has OS X running on ARM devices in their labs. They managed the switch from PowerPC to x86 pretty well.

 

[illram]

Why does any of that matter when hardly anyone is making games for anything other than Windows (and consoles)?

 

[Zelig]

Because in the context of "providing the market with a CPU alternative to Intel", there are plenty of iOS/OS X games. (Quick check shows 8/10 top 10 Steam games available on OS X. Anecdotally, my unplayed list of Steam games is like 400 PC games and 250 OS X games, so in either case, many more than I have time for.)