Tax-refund gamer PC?? I'll build it myself!

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Rvenger

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator <br> Video Cards
Apr 6, 2004
6,283
5
81
I give it a couple days and he will be complaining that he can't get it to POST.
 

aphelion02

Senior member
Dec 26, 2010
699
0
76
Actually, I encouraged him to spend an extra twenty bucks on a better processor that would give him the option to overclock if he chose to. And, the CPU does its own overclocking by way of turbo boost, so it'll give the guy some level of overclocking that he doesn't even have to worry about.

You are not understanding the difference in the k and non-k processors. All non-k processors get turbo boost as well. So do all 6 series chipsets. If he doesn't manually go to BIOS/ UEFI to overclock, there is absolutely no difference in performance. I also don't consider having to replace your motherboard to overclock much of an option.

As for 8GB of RAM, sure, now that might be unnecessary. But in a year or two... And, with the limited base of two DIMM slots, he'll have already have 8GB and won't have to drop his 2x2 configuration to then go out and buy an 8GB set.

Ok, I'll buy that argument. But 8gb of ram is still completely disproportionate. But you have an valid argument here, just that you sacrifice a lot for gaming performance for that 4gb of ram you may or may not use in 2 years.

A computer can be a heckuva lot more than just a gaming machine. With the processor that he bought, he'll pretty much be able to do whatever he wants to do with it. And when he throws a better video card in there, even a "piddly" $130-$150 one, he'll still be able to play whatever games he wants with no issues whatsoever.

The i5-2400 isn't some piece of shit either. It beats the first generation i7s in a good number of benchmarks. It pretty much has no performance difference in average usage, and absolutely none for gaming in the next 3 years. And it comes $50 cheaper. i5-2400 with 4gb of RAM will be just as awesome in regular workloads. That 0.3GHz will only be noticeable if you do video encoding or benchmarking.

So I suggested an upper tier processor that cost him a whopping $230, and one that automatically overclocks so he doesn't have to worry about tinkering with it. And, when he chooses to, he can if he likes.

Once again, k processors do not automatically overclock. Turbo boost is not overclocking; intel processors since Nehalem have had turbo boost for a long time, both k and non-k versions. And he can't just overclock if he likes, he will have to shell out $100+ for a P67 or Z68 motherboard and do a complete system rebuild.

Again, this is simply my opinion, but every gamer I know uses his computer for more than just that. I am not someone who ever suggests a $200 plus video card because it simply will be old in a short time period. You may disagree, and that is all well and good, but I simply tend to look at what the person has been doing, and what he's been used to. He sounds similar to me, someone who likes to game, but doesn't invest his entire paycheck into it. A computer can be a heckuva lot more than just a gaming machine. With the processor that he bought, he'll pretty much be able to do whatever he wants to do with it. And when he throws a better video card in there, even a "piddly" $130-$150 one, he'll still be able to play whatever games he wants with no issues whatsoever.

Here is one such example of a good card for a low pricepoint (listed in hotdeals):

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...&amp;SID=u00000687

OP asked for best possible gaming performance right now. You invested in everything except gaming performance. The better processor and RAM are things that the a regular user won't even see a difference in unless you have heavy non-gaming workloads. Also, $200-$250 graphics cards are a great price point that both vendors aggressively target and you are not getting ripped off for performance.

Considering TSMC's incompetence, a 6950 or 560ti will retain its value well for at least a year, and in this age of console ports will be able to play at high to max settings at his resolution for at least 2, probably 3. Even the 8800GT does well in a lot of games.
 

mfenn

Elite Member
Jan 17, 2010
22,400
5
71
www.mfenn.com
You are not understanding the difference in the k and non-k processors. All non-k processors get turbo boost as well. So do all 6 series chipsets. If he doesn't manually go to BIOS/ UEFI to overclock, there is absolutely no difference in performance. I also don't consider having to replace your motherboard to overclock much of an option.



Ok, I'll buy that argument. But 8gb of ram is still completely disproportionate. But you have an valid argument here, just that you sacrifice a lot for gaming performance for that 4gb of ram you may or may not use in 2 years.



The i5-2400 isn't some piece of shit either. It beats the first generation i7s in a good number of benchmarks. It pretty much has no performance difference in average usage, and absolutely none for gaming in the next 3 years. And it comes $50 cheaper. i5-2400 with 4gb of RAM will be just as awesome in regular workloads. That 0.3GHz will only be noticeable if you do video encoding or benchmarking.



Once again, k processors do not automatically overclock. Turbo boost is not overclocking; intel processors since Nehalem have had turbo boost for a long time, both k and non-k versions. And he can't just overclock if he likes, he will have to shell out $100+ for a P67 or Z68 motherboard and do a complete system rebuild.



OP asked for best possible gaming performance right now. You invested in everything except gaming performance. The better processor and RAM are things that the a regular user won't even see a difference in unless you have heavy non-gaming workloads. Also, $200-$250 graphics cards are a great price point that both vendors aggressively target and you are not getting ripped off for performance.

Considering TSMC's incompetence, a 6950 or 560ti will retain its value well for at least a year, and in this age of console ports will be able to play at high to max settings at his resolution for at least 2, probably 3. Even the 8800GT does well in a lot of games.

:thumbsup::thumbsup: Extremely well said. Matches my opinions to a T.
 

mvbighead

Diamond Member
Apr 20, 2009
3,793
1
81
Well, to sum up my last reaction to this here talk, I am willing to admit that the board I selected likely wasn't the best. I am not sure where you determine that multiplier adjustments aren't possible with it, but I'll take your word for it. The board I selected was very inexpensive, and would take his CPU and Memory, and VC.

There were a lot of boards that only had 2 dimm slots, and given that the premium to move up to a 4 slot board was 20-30 it seemed, I figured 8GB of RAM would be the better compromise, especially given the Shell Shocker that day. How that is disproportionate is beyond me. If the system needs 4.5 GB of RAM for whatever, it'll have it. He won't have to fiddle with selling RAM and buying new... he's set.

Personally, as someone who did his fair share of PC gaming back in the day, I have never spent over $200 on a video card. And I have always had a pretty decent rig. Like I've said, graphics cards change constantly. My buying process has always been that of buying latest generation, mid tier. $200+ for a card for me was seldom ever worth it, and I know that most $150 cards do the job quite well. And, for someone with a $700 budget, fitting it into the budget is a piece of cake, and gives you plenty of room to solidify the rest of the system, which, chances are, will be around a while.

As for turbo boost, while it isn't technically overclocking, it's essentially the same business. Multiplier adjustment rendering different speeds than the factory multiplier. Sure, the processor is intended to do it, so it isn't "overclocking" because you aren't going over the factory spec. But the general gist is there.

So, I'll hold up a white flag and say you got me on the MB. But on the rest, meh. $150 for a decent video card (not the one I selected) would be just fine for almost any gamer.
 

Steve8867

Member
Jan 16, 2011
33
0
0
Regarding this build, does the CPU qualify as 64bit as far as O/S's go?
Is it meant to run 64 or 32 bit, I have some old copies so I could got either way.

Another snafu!
My old DVD drive is not SATA, pitty installing an O/S through USB wasn't the easier option -.-
 
Last edited:

aphelion02

Senior member
Dec 26, 2010
699
0
76
You definitely need 64bit otherwise you will not be able to fully utilize your 8gb of ram (32 bit maxes out at under 4gb). And this is just my opinion, I also think its a much better idea to stick with an official copy of Windows.
 

mvbighead

Diamond Member
Apr 20, 2009
3,793
1
81
And this is just my opinion, I also think its a much better idea to stick with an official copy of Windows.

Also, definitely this. I misread your last post, and thought you grabbing a skin or something for your OS. If you plan to pirate, be prepared for problems.
 

Davidh373

Platinum Member
Jun 20, 2009
2,428
0
71
I am currently skimming the Torrents to get ideas for a new Windows O/S 64 0r 32 bit (I've seen some nice costume ones).
Not seeking opinions, seeking facts.

-.-... He just assumes because we're into computers that we're alright with piracy. Listen, it's only $100. You never mentioned this in your OP. Get an official copy or plan on at least having problems, and at most getting caught and sued.
 
Last edited:

mfenn

Elite Member
Jan 17, 2010
22,400
5
71
www.mfenn.com
Regarding this build, does the CPU qualify as 64bit as far as O/S's go?
Is it meant to run 64 or 32 bit, I have some old copies so I could got either way.

Another snafu!
My old DVD drive is not SATA, pitty installing an O/S through USB wasn't the easier option -.-

Nice edit :D
 

Rvenger

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator <br> Video Cards
Apr 6, 2004
6,283
5
81
Wow, yeah! Smooth sneaking that one in under the radar! Good thing I got the original in my quote, so his edit is worthless. Hey Steve, play any dodgeball!? YARG!! :D

Don't we have a Microsoft rep lurking in these forums?? :D
 

Steve8867

Member
Jan 16, 2011
33
0
0
In other words, I still need to get a new SATA DVD burner cause the noob wasn't thinking about a board being EIDE friendly or not.


OH good news!
I just discovered the iggy function, but for the small hand full of people who were really trying to help me thank you and the rest, bye bye enjoy the iggy bin!
 

Rvenger

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator <br> Video Cards
Apr 6, 2004
6,283
5
81
In other words, I still need to get a new SATA DVD burner cause the noob wasn't thinking about a board being EIDE friendly or not.


OH good news!
I just discovered the iggy function, but for the small hand full of people who were really trying to help me thank you and the rest, bye bye enjoy the iggy bin!



I said that like 3 times in this thread about you needing a Sata burner. All of us here have repetatively tried to help you and you just seem to go your own way. This thread should be locked due to the fact the OP is not taking suggestions like he asked for.

Go ahead and add me to the ignore bin... whoopeedoo.
 

aphelion02

Senior member
Dec 26, 2010
699
0
76
In other words, I still need to get a new SATA DVD burner cause the noob wasn't thinking about a board being EIDE friendly or not.

OH good news!
I just discovered the iggy function, but for the small hand full of people who were really trying to help me thank you and the rest, bye bye enjoy the iggy bin!

I'm all for helping, but I also think you need to show more respect to those people that have been trying to give advice. So far you have ignored people's advice and demanded information like it was owed you, and dismissed people when they try to provide context to their advice. I myself have spent more than an hour trying to put together your build, which is probably more time than you have taken to research and educate yourself. We not are here at your beck and call, I have received more appreciation from my boss about my tasks and I am helping you for free.

If you want advice you also must be prepared to accept information about where you are wrong. You should also volunteer you own feedback about your build's progress, because as we invested time into this we deserve to know the result. Remember, we are the ones providing advice to you here, if you starting insulting people and blocking people out you are the only one who loses.
 

Steve8867

Member
Jan 16, 2011
33
0
0
And to think in spite of the flamefest YOU instigated I have yet to block you because you HAVE made an effort, but you DID seem to take it personally that I didn't choose your build.

And Im fairly sure the insults were not coming from me but were directed at me (at me for not choosing the forum favorite).

Whats done is done, I made my choice (no backsies) and I may suffer for it yet.

BTW I visited a local Computer store and the PIRATES wanted between 65-75 USD for a SATA DVD burner!
Think I saw better on newegg = the waiting continues. . .
 

aphelion02

Senior member
Dec 26, 2010
699
0
76
Two points:

1. I didn't instigate anything.

2. Not all criticism are flames. Every here has tried to help you despite some of us being unhappy.

3. You need to realize its us doing you a favor, not you granting us the privilege of helping you. We lose nothing if we don't partcipate in this thread. Its you who loses.

Anyways, for a SATA DVD/burner, you can look at these two:

Samsung DVD burner, 18.99 with free shipping
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16827151192

Liteon DVD Burner, $23.88 after shipping with free 50 pack DVD/R
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16827106289

The LiteON is slightly faster at 24x vs 22x but I don't think thats really a big deal. The key thing is the cost and the free DVD pack.

Edit: I had good experience with LiteON dvd burners so I'd probably recommend that.
 
Last edited:

Davidh373

Platinum Member
Jun 20, 2009
2,428
0
71
Anyways, for a SATA DVD/burner, you can look at these two:

Samsung DVD burner, 18.99 with free shipping
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16827151192

Liteon DVD Burner, $23.88 after shipping with free 50 pack DVD/R
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16827106289

The LiteON is slightly faster at 24x vs 22x but I don't think thats really a big deal. The key thing is the cost and the free DVD pack.

Edit: I had good experience with LiteON dvd burners so I'd probably recommend that.

I think at this point you should just stop helping him... he's been such an ass to all of us... He has no respect, and no appreciation...
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,548
10,171
126
Edit: I had good experience with LiteON dvd burners so I'd probably recommend that.
I would get the Samsung. My experience with Lite-On burners is that they are flimsy and cheap. I prefer LG over either one of those.

I've got a Lite-On in this machine, that barely reads brand-new CDs, and it's only a few years old.

I've got LG IDE burners in my two desktop rigs, and they have burnt and read quite a few discs flawlessly over the years. (They don't like Memorex (RITEK?) DVD+R DL discs though, they only burn Verbatim DVD+R DL.)

I gave the Memorex DVD+R DL discs to my buddy with a Samsung, and now with NEC/Sony Optiarc burners, and those burn in those drives fine.