I am looking to possibly build a gaming pc in the near future,i wanted to post here and see if you guys could give me the recommended parts for the best performance,peferably under $700.Basically i want to be able to play new games on higher settings,emulate older consoles up to PS2,and i would prefer a between 1tb and 2tb of HD space.If at all possible also link your recommended parts.
Thanks.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/sx5z
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/sx9n It is a i3-2100 with a H77 motherboard and a 7970, just shy of $700(without OS). Here http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-performance/page7.html is a wonderful link with a ton of CPU's and how they really do on a high end game like battlefield 3 .
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/508 This is the benchmarks for the HD7970 in various games with various resolutions.
I put a larger then needed power supply to give you some head room if you wish to upgrade to a large cpu, heck even to add a watercooling loop as well. The board is a M-atx which means there will not be any crossfire but honestly 1 physical powerful card is always easier to deal with then two.
This system is not put together for a overclocker, if you are looking for overclocking ability for a solid price the FX series build akira posted will do very well. I noticed one of your requirements was 1tb+ of storage space, my apologies but i sacrificed it for a good bit of gaming performance boost. A simple fix for that is just replace the 7970 with a 7950 and choose the larger hard drive if you so wish to do so.
good luck trying to play crisis and bf3 on 2 cores. to put it into prospective an a10 is faster than a i3. but if he went a10 he would have 4 cores... and yes 4 cores or more does make a difference. in bf3 if you have 2 cores it will drop out npcs from the game. and your fps suffers.
Oh well,i probably wouldn't play them anyways.I'm probably gonna go with the other one anyways.
Akira, take a look here please, about half way down the page. http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-performance/page7.html Thank you for your time ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4PDoy-mi0A
Hmmm, yes, as long as you're comparing decent CPUs in games FPS, difference will be minimal( 0-6FPS). But the problem is, an i3 is locked, while you can really push a 6300 to further the gap
thank you
I'm with Akira Here. You can do a LOT more with those AMD CPU's and the system will be more well rounded. Yes, the 7970 is a monster... But I'd rather at least have an AMD FX 4300 (almost as fast as the FX 6300 in games). I like the i3 but I would never use one for a $700 rig.
You will probably want a stronger power supply. Maybe this: XFX P1-650S-NLB9 It's 650W and will give you some room to upgrade.
That's how I feel. An i3 is something I'd put in cheaper everyday-use builds
Alright guys,i am not very knowledgable when it comes to building PCs espcially gaming PCs,but i made a few cost cutting changes,tell me what you think http://pcpartpicker.com/p/sybF .
Lets keep this discussion going, these kind of discussions are always good to have and share different perspectives and views. This one is for you guys that want to have or have a fx quad or six core, you have a i3 dual with HT vs a quad core(closer in price) FX, why is the i3 considered to be a budget system cpu when it has the exact same gaming performance stock for stock as the FX series quad(possibly even the six core)? Is the overclock potential of the FX the appeal? Will a OC fx 6300 really matter when you already maxed the game out with a i3? Is the quad and six core FX make you feel that you are some how future proofing your systems?
Personally i have a 1100T(stock clocks and OC at one point a good bit ago) and a i3-2125, i have used a 5870 on both of the systems to see if my six core monster was indeed a monster. There was zero difference in any game from Skyrim to Dead space 2 etc. I had every game maxed at 1080p and the i3 never even flinched, so the final question to you fellas is this, why is the quad or six core overclockable cpu's better then a dual when their performance in games is equal?
I have had more AMD's then i have Intels but i do have come to respect the i3 for its performance, even when going agaisn't a six core phenom II. Even to this day the i3 does the job just as well as my 1100t(over a year with the i3).
I massively respect you guys and your opinions, please don't take this as me starting a Intel vs AMD nonsense, i just believe this can be a good discussion topic that a lot of folks can benefit from. My apologies to Ps3tna for highjacking his thread a bit, that system looks nicely done!
Overclocking on a budget rig is the way forward and a i3 just cant offer that