New gaming build

[TheLurch]

Hello everyone, I'm about to build a new system as my last build is getting long in the tooth, about 4 years old now. As I have for my last two systems, I'd like to get input from the Anandtech forum. So, here goes:

1. What YOUR PC will be used for. Gaming.

2. What YOUR budget is. 1500-1700

3. What country USA

4. IF you're buying parts OUTSIDE the US, please post a link to the vendor you'll be buying from. N/A

5. IF YOU have a brand preference. N/A

6. If YOU intend on using any of YOUR current parts: Only my monitor

7. IF YOU plan on overclocking or run the system at default speeds. Undecided

8. What resolution, not monitor size, will you be using? 1920x1200

9. WHEN do you plan to build it? Will order parts this week.

X. Do you need to purchase any software to go with the system? Yes but this is not part of the stated budget.

I was leaning towards the 4/6/2014 Mid-Range system in the sticky at the top of this forum:

4/6/2014 update:
i5 4670K $230
ASRock Z87 Pro3 $90 AR
Team DDR3 1600 8GB $61
PowerColor R9 280X $330
Crucial M500 120GB $80
WD Blue 1TB $60
LG DVD Burner $15 AP
Seasonic S12II 620W $70
Corsair 200R $55 AR
Total: $991 AR AP

I would go with the 240gb SSD, other than that I am not familiar with Powercolors product. Any opinions on that card?

What I am really wondering however is if the extra room in my budget make enough difference to warrent the extra expenditure? If so what changes would you make or would you recommend a whole new parts list?

Thanks in advance,

Lurch

 

[Charlie98]

I think the parts in the mid-range build look pretty good... with the extra bump in SSD capacity. You mentioned you are undecided about overclocking, the K CPU and Z87 board give you that option, you would need to get an aftermarket CPU cooler like a CoolerMaster 212 EVO or the Artic i30 to handle the extra heat. OC'ing isn't that difficult as long as you don't get stupid with it.

As far as the PowerColor GPU, I don't know anything about PC, but with your budget on a strictly gaming computer, I would probably bump up the GPU (depending on your gaming needs specifically,) or improve your monitor.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Since you have plenty of room in the budget, I think I might move up o the 4770k. Some games, so far Watchdogs and the upcoming Mordor game, are recommending hyperthreaded quads. It remains to be seen how an i5 will handle these games, but since you have plenty of room in the budget, you might consider an i7.

 

[mfenn]

Definitely get the larger SSD and an aftermarket cooler (if you want to overclock). You could also get a nicer/quieter case like the Fractal Design R4 for $100.

PowerColor is totally fine as a GPU manufacturer. They're not as big of a name as ASUS, Sapphire, MSI, Gigabyte, etc. but the cards are good.

 

[NewYorksFinest]

Read this. Out of the 4 games they played, the Radeon only won 1 and the GeForce GTX 770 (click the link) won 3 and the GTX 770 was rated better. Also, the NVIDIA chipsets are more quieter than the Radeons.

I would buy the Corsair H100i as it would be quieter AND able to overclock.

IMO, the RAM @ 8GB is fine, although you can upgrade to 16GB with your budget and the i5-4670K is fine, although with your budget you can buy a 4770K.

As with mfenn, the Fractal Design is a good case.

Finally, I would buy a 250GB Samsung SSD over the Crucial.

 

[DSF]

Read this. Out of the 4 games they played, the Radeon only won 1 and the GeForce GTX 770 (click the link) won 3 and the GTX 770 was rated better. Also, the NVIDIA chipsets are more quieter than the Radeons.

I would be careful with the conclusions made in that article. I think the author misinterpreted his own data.

For example, the Radeon's ability to sustain a minimum of 29.99 FPS vs. the 770's 21.82 (27% loss from better score) is WAY more important than an average of 112.53 vs. 118.92 (5% loss from better score) respectively.

The fact that he declared the 770 a conclusive winner in three tests where the results were, in reality, extremely close leaves me with two possible takeaways.

- He doesn't understand how to compare graphics card performance all that well.
- He was leaning towards writing the article in favor of Nvidia in the first place. (Perhaps unintentionally.)

Using AnandTech's own bench, it's pretty clear that the cards are neck and neck:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1041?vs=1037

The Radeon wins in some applications and the Nvidia wins in others. Generally speaking, the differences are minimal. That's what you'd expect from two products from good companies designed to compete with one another.

The decision should come down to pricing and exactly which games the OP intends to play.

 

[NewYorksFinest]

Where is N/A located :biggrin:?

Everyone else seems to understand the bolded capitalized "IF" in question number 4. You've had the meaning of the question explained to you before, so stop making useless posts about it.

mfenn
General Hardware Moderator

 

[MongGrel]

I wasn't aware Dell made a 29" 4k monitor myself, I have a U2913WM, I do see a new 28 inch 4K one that looks pretty sweet.

But the refresh on it horrible.

http://www.amazon.com/Ultra-Monitor-...rds=4k+monitor

 

[mfenn]

I would be careful with the conclusions made in that article. I think the author misinterpreted his own data.

For example, the Radeon's ability to sustain a minimum of 29.99 FPS vs. the 770's 21.82 (27% loss from better score) is WAY more important than an average of 112.53 vs. 118.92 (5% loss from better score) respectively.

The fact that he declared the 770 a conclusive winner in three tests where the results were, in reality, extremely close leaves me with two possible takeaways.

- He doesn't understand how to compare graphics card performance all that well.
- He was leaning towards writing the article in favor of Nvidia in the first place. (Perhaps unintentionally.)

Using AnandTech's own bench, it's pretty clear that the cards are neck and neck:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1041?vs=1037

The Radeon wins in some applications and the Nvidia wins in others. Generally speaking, the differences are minimal. That's what you'd expect from two products from good companies designed to compete with one another.

The decision should come down to pricing and exactly which games the OP intends to play.

Good analysis.

To throw an extra couple cents in, the R9 280X is also more forward-looking because it comes with 3GB of VRAM instead of 2GB. Yes, I know that there are 4GB GTX 770's, but they are priced higher.