I'm a console gamer getting sick of being shafted when I purchase games on them. The graphics are dumb downed and the content is so much better on the PC, but I'm a cheap ass. So I'm looking for a PC that will allow for me to play current games, but be able to power through the wave of awesome games coming out in the near future.
Here are my needs:
Budget - 450 USD
Retailer - Newegg
Purpose - Gaming Rig and Light surfing
FPS - Want a smooth frame rate, but don't really know what a high framerate looks like.
N00b at PC - Know basic stuff, but never put one together or picked out components and I don't know what the hell overclocking is.
OH! Found a bundle of Newegg and was wondering if this was a good deal or not.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.1661629
Don't bother with that bundle from newegg. It's an APU machine (with on-board graphics) and won't provide the gaming performance you're looking for.
For just a few dollars more, you could build something like this: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3PupM You'll be able to upgrade to an i5 or what ever you want later on and the R9-270 is a really strong performer at that price point. I would highly suggest, if you can, to save up about $80 more and go for something like this instead: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3PuEC Why? Because the i3 is a hyperthreaded dual core and is still a surprisingly capable gaming CPU and the motherboard is a little better with 4 RAM slots instead of 2 - makes upgrading the RAM easier.
Do you think I could put in a gpu later and crossfire it later?
If you're talking about dual-graphics, no, I wouldn't do that. The performance may increase, but the price-performance ratio is terrible.
If you're talking about the builds with the R9 270 here, you will need a better motherboard for crossfiring if you do not want to experience any bottlenecks. I would also recommend you get an i5 before you add another GPU.
Awesome just got a couple of questions. How did you guys learn so much about computers and with the Intel processors, are they better than the AMD APUs and CPUs or are they just outperforming them for now?
Generally you can learn a lot about computer hardware from visiting forums, reading reviews, and viewing benchmarks.
As for Intel vs AMD: AMD tends to have more cores than Intel in the same price range. However, AMD CPUs have weaker cores than Intel CPUs. This means that AMD processors are more powerful than Intel ones in certain situations where a program is optimized to run for the larger number of cores. However, many programs are not optimized for more than one or two cores, and very few for more than for cores. Games, in particular, are not optimized for very many cores. This leads to situations where a game optimized for 8 cores (Battlefield 4, for example) causes an AMD FX 8350 (8-core) outperform an Intel i5 (quad core), where in another game optimized for only two cores (Starcraft 2 is one such game) causes an Intel i3 (dual-core with hyperthreading) completely crush the 8350. Also, there are a couple of important differences between AMD and Intel CPUs. Some Intel CPUs, primarily the i3s and i7s, have a feature called hyperthreading. This allows two threads to run simultaneously on the same core, making the operating system believe there are two separate cores. AMD, on the other hand, has "modules," which are basically two cores that share resources. For example, the FX 8350 is referred to as an 8 core, but is a 4-module chip. Basically, both the hyperthreading technology and module architecture result in something more powerful than a single core, but less powerful than two true cores, if utilized correctly.
Basically, Intel CPUs perform more consistently for a wide range of tasks. AMD CPUs perform very well in tasks optimized for their large number of cores, and they generally are pretty capable even in the tasks optimized for a small number of cores, just they won't perform quite as well as an Intel CPU. I recommend looking at benchmarks to see which CPU is better for your needs.
Hopefully you were able to get through that wall of text. Oh, and if anyone notices any false statements I made, please point them out.
Question one answer:Well, some of us (not me) work with technology all day, although I wish I could.
Question two answer: No, they are not necessarily better, AMD is a lot cheaper, but it depends what you are using your CPU for. Typically, you see Intel CPUs in higher end/budget builds, but that doesn't mean that you don't see AMD CPUs in high end builds. If you are on a budget, AMD is the way to go.
Yeah, what he said. Listen to the man in the hat.