Looks like I'm gonna be helping my friend with a £500 build, mainly for normal use of office, Web browsing and games.
Some parts ill try to include :
i5 3750k
Asus mobo
4GB Corsair ram at least
We're thinking 250/500 WD HDD
60gb SSD
MS Comfort 5000
But I don't know about the lower end of gpu's... Is a 650Ti ok? Don't think there's enough money for a 660Ti.... Might have to look on the second hand market
Also I don't know if a AMD CPU or ATI gpu is worth getting...
And cases? He said he doesn't care about the aesthetics.... So just something cheap but with good features (thinking of a bottom placed Psu, good airflow) so I don't know if the CiT vantage case (£35) is worth getting - top mounted Psu surely means it'll take in warm air....
Last edited by Mehta23; January 20th, 2013 at 08:42 AM.
Thanks. I don't really know what kind of PC my friend is looking for now, as he dismissed HD monitors, and a discrete GPU. Looks like it'll be iGPU all the way :P
Now, even though he has £500 to spend... he doesn't wan tot spend it. SO I've advised him to get a (crappy) cheap laptop for a few hundred bob. That'll be enough for TF2....maybe something a bit more intensive too...
I don't no why...but I feel bad that I said that something with a Pentium processor will be good enough. I guess I was annoyed that he didn't seem to understand the idea of the whole point of making your own PC. He just wanted to get the bare minimum. Nothing more.
I guess that desktop could still be made...I dunno.
Last edited by Mehta23; January 20th, 2013 at 04:01 PM.
Right. i managed to sort everything out now. Still £500 budget.
But I'm finding it hard to allow that £500 to get all the necessary parts, and a monitor, and a graphics card. Obviously this means I'd have to leave one of them, or settle for AMD/ATI parts too.
Is there anything worth getting instead of a i5 3750K
Asus P8Z77 V LX
or a used 560TI.
Right. i managed to sort everything out now. Still £500 budget.
But I'm finding it hard to allow that £500 to get all the necessary parts, and a monitor, and a graphics card. Obviously this means I'd have to leave one of them, or settle for AMD/ATI parts too.
If you're budget limited, why not buy an AMD system? You'll get a lot more performance for the money. I'm running a 4-core AMD CPU on my Linux desktop and a 6-way AMD CPU on my Windows desktop (which is a newer purchase). Performance is great, and if I didn't have software that needs a NVIDIA GPU to be able to do accelerated transcoding, the AMD/ATI graphics card that I typically use would be just fine.
Now that AMD and Intel are using an integrated CPU/GPU architecture, I'd be well chuffed by being able to buy a top of the line AMD APU that can be had for the same price as a mid-range Intel CPU. Nobody wants Intel graphics, but an AMD APU with ATI graphics seems ideal to me!
Like I said, the top of the line AMD APU is something that you can afford. I'd start with the AMD A10-5800K APU ($129US) or FX-8350 CPU ($199US) and work from there.
While the FX CPU may put you above your budget limits, it's worth looking at the Piledriver FX CPU as an alternative to the APU. If you have really, truly need to have a NVIDIA GPU to run Cuda applications, this will let you do it. Otherwise going with the A10 makes life simple: Just get the A10-5800K and a motherboard with all the features that you need, add RAM, PSU and case and you have a top-performing computer for a budget computer price!
I went to the NewEgg (US) website and found a package that included an ASUS F2A85-M Pro mobo, 8GiB of RAM, a 1.5TB HD and case for less than $450US. You could double the RAM and HD capacity to 16GiB and 3TB respectively, and still be well within your budget.
I'm writing this on a pre-built ASUS PC that I bought for $400US, and I'm very happy with it. I can't say I would have done any better without being wasteful if I had bought and assembled the components myself. So I wouldn't overlook the ready made and bare-bones options if I was in your shoes.
From what I've seen online they're squarely in i7 territory. Benchmarks can be misleading though, and you have to remember that you're simply not going to have the most impressive gaming box when you're on a strict budget.
I'm not a gamer, but from the chatter I get the feeling that many gamers get distracted by "bragging rights" numbers, and often lose track of where the line that separates a good value from a money pit lies.
The Following User Says Thank You to Speed Daemon For This Useful Post:
Yeah. Here, the FX 8350 I think, is around the same price as a i5.
I think my friend will be doing normal word processing and browsing, and some gaming and a little bit of video editing.
I was thinking of getting a used 560Ti off eBay for around £100. I think the ati equivalent model was a bit more, so the CPU/GPU may turn out to be roughly equal in price.
I could probably just about fit in a i5 and a decent motherboard... But seeing how much cheaper some of the AMD CPU's and mobos are may allow for a Ssd!! :-D
Also, he'll be playing a bit of Borderlands 2 and might be using Vegas, so I don't know if a NVIDIA card is more worthwhile than a ATI.
Last edited by Mehta23; January 26th, 2013 at 02:53 PM.
Yeah...a lot of people forget that AMD invented the CPU instruction set architecture that is used with modern 64-bit operating systems and software. Why use Intel's knock-off version when you can have the real McCoy?
I want to reiterate that the APU is an excellent buy, and IME the "real" ATI GPU hardware has always been a lot more stable than NVIDIA. Because NVIDIA doesn't make its own video cards, and the quality of 3rd party video cards regardless of GPU is pretty sketchy, I've always used ATI brand video cards. Now that AMD owns ATI, this can only make things better.
If you're not building an ultimate, no cost limit gaming PC, if NVIDIA's top GPU is the fastest one this month, that's not really a good reason to buy a 3rd tier NVIDIA product when you can get a better deal with AMD/ATI. Unfortunately 99% of the hardware reviews on the web these days are heavily biased to extreme computer builders, and aren't helpful at all to 99% of the computer users who don't care about having the biggest FPS number to brag about. Sad to say that this is yet another place where most buyers have become dupes of the same kind of marketing hype that sells lots of Rolex watches to people who really don't need them. It's fine if you have unlimited funds, of course, but...
£100 will get you both the CPU and GPU if you buy the AMD APU. Buying the used NVIDIA video card at the same price gets you only a GPU, but no CPU. IJS
I saw the AMD A10-5800K APU on amazon. £98. How good would this be for gaming?
Seeing how it's £60 less than a i5 and amd socket motherboards are cheaper is starting to look good. But isn't everything using AM3 sockets now?
For roughly the same price I can get the FX 8130? - the 6 core one. 8 core fx 8120 is £115. Would getting discrete graphics help/ be necessary with any of these CPU's or is it not similar to Intel Integrated Graphics... If you see what I mean.
Last edited by Mehta23; January 26th, 2013 at 05:51 PM.
Stuff like this makes my wonder why I didn't research deeper into actual non fan boy ati vs nvidia. My 670 FTW SIGNATURE 2 was £310. This 7970 looks like a better deal, even if it is oem. :-(
And I just looked at a comparison between the 670/80 and then 7970. I feel sad now :-(
Also, as you know, my 670 is in for a RMA. If it doesn't get replaced / replacement isn't good, should I just sell the card / try to refund it and buy
1. Another 670 card
2. A cheaper 660Ti
3.7970
4. I'm getting too far ahead of my self and i should be patient.
Last edited by Mehta23; January 26th, 2013 at 06:48 PM.
I'm afraid that I can't give you an informed idea about gaming, as I'm not a gamer, and I've never used the APU myself. But what I do know may help:
AMD differs from Intel in that AMD has been using HyperThansport in place of an old-fashioned front side bus. AMD also put the memory controller in the CPU die long before Intel copied that trick. What AMD APUs lack in benchmark numbers is made up by using this wicked fast local bus in conjunction with an on-die GPU is graphics and multimedia I/O that a PCIe graphics card rig can't keep up with. What the AMD APU offers is much more than mere integrated graphics; it's the fastest possible way to take advantage of the GPU's calculating power.
Yes, the FX CPU line offers more CPU cores, and there are PCIe attached GPUs with more cores, but it's not that simple, especially now that more and more applications are utilizing the GPU to do things that were traditionally done by a CPU. All the cores in the world wouldn't matter if you saturate the PCIe link! IMO the HT bus one place where AMD still has Intel beat. Intel has come out with its own version of HT, but it's only available on the most costly Intel CPUs.
The bottom line is that the AMD APU using HT is a very potent package. Don't let the price fool you. Yes, it's cheaper to make, but it's also great for performance! You can get bigger core counts by buying the FX series and using a PCIe video card, but as separate parts they aren't going to communicate nearly as fast. Using brute force strength of numbers may yield better benchmarks, but I don't know if real-world performance would be increased enough to justify the high price.
I'm someone who owns way too many computers and computer parts. If I had a graphics card on RMA I'd use it to upgrade one of my existing machines, whether it needed it or not. In your case, if you don't have a use for it right away, getting your money back is the best choice, as the card could be ancient by the time you finally get to use it. OTOH you might not have any choice other than taking a replacement. So you're probably best to find out what your options are, and be prepared to use or sell the replacement 670, depending on what the RMA policy is.
I don't really understand what you mean by if i have a use for the 670..?
Edit : also, I feel like I could've saved a lot of money if I didn't adopt the '£20 more? What the heck, I'll buy it' idea. :-P
I suppose, at least I know so much more now, than before nd when I need to upgrade (hopefully in more than 3yrs) ill be able to get the right parts for the right prices. :-D
Last edited by Mehta23; January 27th, 2013 at 04:37 AM.
Yes, AMD is clearly the way to go for the best deal. Since AMD emerged as a serious competitor to Intel starting with their K6 line back in 1997, the title for the fastest CPU that money can buy has gone back and forth between AMD and Intel. But the top of the line CPUs command HUGE price premiums, often 2-4x that of the next lower model! If you rule out the seriously expensive models (Extreme, Opteron, Xeon), which most people do, and settle for up to only the 2nd or 3rd fastest CPU on earth, the maths change. Overall, AMD has a lot more "bang for the buck" than Intel, while still offering performance levels that doesn't need any excuses.
When it comes to the GPU segment, things are murkier. The same seesaw thing is going on between AMD and NVIDIA having the fastest GPU that money can buy. It's even more competitive than with AMD vs. Intel on CPUs. And just like the CPU market, once you step down from the top of the line, bleeding edge products, the maker of the best product for you isn't always the same one that makes the world's fastest GPU.
Quote:
I don't really understand what you mean by if i have a use for the 670..?
I'm not that well informed about how many computers you have in your household, or your particular function on taking care of them. I gathered that you had planned on using the 670 card that's being returned on the system that you're building. If that's the case, and you decide to go with the AMD APU, you're not going to need the 670 for that computer, so (at least to me) the question is "what to do with the 670 card now?" Maybe I misunderstood. I was close to being ready to go to bed when I wrote that, and really didn't feel up to looking back to see the back story.
Quote:
Edit : also, I feel like I could've saved a lot of money if I didn't adopt the '£20 more? What the heck, I'll buy it' idea. :-P
The old "but it's only a little bit more" trick, eh? Been there, done that.
Quote:
I suppose, at least I know so much more now, than before nd when I need to upgrade (hopefully in more than 3yrs) ill be able to get the right parts for the right prices. :-D
If I've learned anything since I hand-built my first bespoke computer in 1993, it's that it's very easy to spend a lot of money on computer hardware, but a lot more difficult to spend no more than is necessary to get what you need. It might even be impossible. And because technology changes so quickly, knowing what's "just right" at any given time is a hopelessly convoluted thing. You can never know too little. OTOH you can learn a whole lot that doesn't actually help you in what you want to do. That's what I find most maddening about the hardware reviews that we see on the Internet. Good luck with all that!
Step 1) Acquire TARDIS from Doctor Who.
Step 2) Travel to future and acquire future computer.
Step 3) return with future proofed computer!
Step 4) Discover future computer incompatible with today's games
The 670 is for my build. This current budget build is for a friend. Just helping him get some information.
I told him about the AMD/APU stuff, but he said that some quick research showed that i5 was slightly better and would apparently last longer than a FX.
I've just realised that he didn't compare the A10 apu. :-P good thing that he hasn't ordered anything yet. I'll get back to you regarding what he'll have chosen. But I think he may opt for the i5... And try to squeeze everything into the budget.
Thanks again!
Also, the last paragraph in your previous answer before the tardis one... That is exactly what I have encountered. It's why this budget build is harder.
One more thing : would a AMD CPU and a nvidia gpu work ok, or is it better to get an Intel CPU for that.
Last edited by Mehta23; January 27th, 2013 at 03:49 PM.
The 670 is for my build. This current budget build is for a friend. Just helping him get some information.
OK, now I see. Two different concurrent builds.
Quote:
I told him about the AMD/APU stuff, but he said that some quick research showed that i5 was slightly better and would apparently last longer than a FX.
LOL...Last longer? That's a new one! As long as you don't abuse the part, it should last longer than its usefulness. But I think it's a good sign that your friend really wants the i5. You might as will give him his wish, rather than risk having him complain forever about (probably imagined) shortcomings of an AMD system. Your friendship is more important than getting the very best deal.
Quote:
Another post said a i5 should be taken if you have high end graphics. Reckon a 560Ti is high end - ish?
I don't see the i5 as a "high end CPU". It's in between the i3 and the i7. The i3 is decidedly "budget/mobile". The i5 is the most I've seen in laptops, but for a desktop the i7 is clearly the high end product.
I suppose that using a more high end graphics card is one way to beef up a cheap i5 PC a bit, but I don't think at all that the i5 commands any need for a costly graphics card. If you have a $1000US+ Extreme Edition i7, then sure, get a $1000US+ graphics card to match. But for an i5? Meh.
Quote:
One more thing : would a AMD CPU and a nvidia gpu work ok, or is it better to get an Intel CPU for that.
You can mix and match graphics cards as you please. The ASUS pre-built 6-core AMD computer that I'm using to manage my TiVo videos has a motherboard with onboard ATI/AMD graphics, and came with an ATI/AMD graphics card installed. I swapped in a NVIDIA card so the transcoding software I'm using can use its CUDA API to speed things up. No problems at all so far.
The Following User Says Thank You to Speed Daemon For This Useful Post:
By the way, if you want to save a few bucks - you could look for a different OEM for the mobo. Asus tends to charge high rates, but their products are solid. I'm personally a huge fan of Gigabyte and AsRock.
__________________
I talk to corporate like a BAWSS!
LOL...Last longer? That's a new one! As long as you don't abuse the part, it should last longer than its usefulness.
Yep. Although I didn't read the article/forum post myself, apparently Intel CPU's require less power, and run cooler, so that they'll last longer. Obviously, I wondered about the huge difference in the time any CPU will last, and the time you'd use it before an upgrade...
Quote:
But I think it's a good sign that your friend really wants the i5. You might as will give him his wish, rather than risk having him complain forever about (probably imagined) shortcomings of an AMD system. Your friendship is more important than getting the very best deal.
TBH I don't think he knows what he exactly wants. At first he was showing me these really bad laptops, and then when I introduced the idea that sometimes dekstops can be both more powerful and cheaper, he then sent mye links to desktops for £300 tyat had i3's, and a AMD CPU that was inferior to a Pentium!
Quote:
I suppose that using a more high end graphics card is one way to beef up a cheap i5 PC a bit, but I don't think at all that the i5 commands any need for a costly graphics card. If you have a $1000US+ Extreme Edition i7, then sure, get a $1000US+ graphics card to match. But for an i5? Meh.
That's why I asked. FOr him, the most he'd be spending is £150. So for that, you could get a 560TI, a 650Ti, or maybe a Radeon equivalent.
Quote:
You can mix and match graphics cards as you please. No problems at all so far.
Good. That's what I may be doing on my own expensive build :P
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCHitman1
By the way, if you want to save a few bucks - you could look for a different OEM for the mobo. Asus tends to charge high rates, but their products are solid. I'm personally a huge fan of Gigabyte and AsRock.
Yeah, thanks for pointing that out. The reason I thought about getting the asus was that I liked the extra features it gives like the AI suite. I assume Gigabyte has it's own features that a very similar.
I'll have a look at some Gigabyte boards .
Last edited by Mehta23; January 28th, 2013 at 05:32 PM.
Yep. Although I didn't read the article/forum post myself, apparently Intel CPU's require less power, and run cooler, so that they'll last longer.
That sort of marketing hype conveniently ignores the fact that what made it possible for the chip to draw less power in the first place, smaller on-chip circuitry, makes the entire chip all the more fragile and more susceptible to damage from heat and other things. Before long we'll have chips with logic gates that are made up of a couple of molecules. When you get to that scale, all it takes is an energetic cosmic particle to knock out a molecule and bork the whole chip. As we approach the quantum limits of circuit density, premature failures will occur more and more often. But today, as long as you use adequate cooling and don't overclock, the CPU should last longer than it's useful. Intel CPUs still require plenty of cooling, AMD's slightly larger microarchitecture actually makes it more robust than Intel.
Quote:
TBH I don't think he knows what he exactly wants. At first he was showing me these really bad laptops, and then when I introduced the idea that sometimes dekstops can be both more powerful and cheaper, he then sent mye links to desktops for £300 tyat had i3's, and a AMD CPU that was inferior to a Pentium!
...
That's why I asked. FOr him, the most he'd be spending is £15. So for that, you could get a 560TI, a 650Ti, or maybe a Radeon equivalent.
You're the one who knows him best, so I'll leave it to you to decide how much of a role you want to play in influencing him...or not.
My friend has bought some Kingston ram : no heatsink, but £35 and 8GB at 1600mhz.
He's also bought a Zalman Z11 case for £50 ( £20 less than my Storm Enforcer) and im so jealous. It's a really good looking case and it's cheaper too! And I bet the panels actually align too. And I really want it/want him to not get it
Is the CX Corsair builder series a good enough Psu
Last edited by Mehta23; February 3rd, 2013 at 06:40 AM.
How would one explain the difference between the usb ports on a case plugging into the motherboard in the middle (main board?) and into the ports in the back?
I ask because, even though I've explained a few times, I was sent a picture of the case as well as a video showing that the USB ports are on the top of the case.... Not the back.
My friend has bought some Kingston ram : no heatsink, but £35 and 8GB at 1600mhz.
Heatsinks on RAM make handling them safer, but imho if RAM requires them to operate reliably then it's either poor design or poor settings.
Quote:
Is the CX Corsair builder series a good enough Psu
Any Corsair PSU is a better choice than a no-name generic brand, provided the PSU provides sufficient power to begin with. At least you can be sure it will deliver what it advertises - too many cheap PSUs only deliver their rated amps when lightly loaded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23
How would one explain the difference between the usb ports on a case plugging into the motherboard in the middle (main board?) and into the ports in the back?
The onboard USB headers are intended to be connected to ports on the chassis, or used by internal devices. The rear, backplane-mounted, ports are for direct connection to external devices.
The onboard USB headers are intended to be connected to ports on the chassis, or used by internal devices. The rear, backplane-mounted, ports are for direct connection to external devices.
Yeah, I now that. But on his Zalman Z11 case, the front USB 3 ports don't connect the the internal USB 3 header....
I told him that either he had to route the cabling to the external ports on his motherboard, or get a cheap adapter that uses the internal header.
On both ends? The USB 3.0 header is (iirc, only USB 2.0 onboard here) a 20-pin block connector. The Z11 user manual shows both an eight-pin block connector and a USB Type A male connector, each terminated by the 20-pin one (see below)
Really? I watched a video on youtube about the Z11 Plus and he said that the usb 3 cables don't go into the usb 3 header....
Edit: I had a look at a manual online, not only is it hard to read ( good luck to my friend who won't be needing any help with that :P) but it does look like the USB is for the internal header...
I watched a video on youtube about the Z11 Plus and he said that the usb 3 cables don't go into the usb 3 header....
I can't fathom what Zalman were thinking of. The user either sacrifices backplane ports in favour of the top ones, or buys an aftermarket adapter cable to use the header(s) that every USB 3.0-capable 'board will have?
Would a £50 60gb SSD (Sandisk or Kingston) sound right for the OS (Win7) and maybe one or two games?
From the SSD thread and research. I'm thinking there are certain tiers of ssd... Drives within a tier offer little difference... Drives in different tiers may offer a slight difference.
a message saying 'no usb on back, only top' is annoying me.. :-P
How many backplane USB 3.0 ports does the mainboard have? One (or perhaps two) will be needed for those bass-ackward top-mounted ones, but the remainder will still be available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23
Would a £50 60gb SSD (Sandisk or Kingston) sound right for the OS (Win7) and maybe one or two games?
Only if it can be fitted into the budget. I'd advise configuring the system without, and then if money allows adding one as a bonus. A 60GB drive is pushing it anyway for anything other than the OS and applications, imho.
Turns out he no longer had the actual Windows 7 disk... But he does have the files on his mac book.... Is there an easy way to burn that to a bookable flash drive from it? (the optical drive for the Pc hasn't arrived yet)
Turns out he no longer had the actual Windows 7 disk... But he does have the files on his mac book.... Is there an easy way to burn that to a bookable flash drive from it? (the optical drive for the Pc hasn't arrived yet)
I've run into a problem straight away. I have a Windows 7 iso already burned onto a dvd but if i copy it across, I get lots of folders.... Can these be converted to a .iso?
Turns out he no longer had the actual Windows 7 disk... But he does have the files on his mac book.... Is there an easy way to burn that to a bookable flash drive from it?
Not really. All the programs I know of require Windows XP or later, probably due to NTFS support being required. If the installation folders can be copied to a Windows system then WiNtoBootic is probably the easiest solution.
n.b. If the original disk is no longer available then the product key is probably missing too, so activation will be problematic.
Quote:
I have a Windows 7 iso already burned onto a dvd but if i copy it across, I get lots of folders.... Can these be converted to a .iso?
You can't "copy" an ISO once it's burned to DVD; you either need the raw .ISO file or to convert the new disc back to an .ISO file.
Last edited by Slug; February 22nd, 2013 at 11:49 AM.
Oh, sorry... I forgot to mention that because he seems stuck doing it from his mac that I've decided to make the bootable flash drive from my win 7 pc.
He told me that whilst he has the dvd case with the key, the dvd isn't there.... So i guess we should be good to go?
Would the program you mentioned be good for converting my Windows disk to an iso?
Edit : I have both the installation files on my hdd and a dvd so i dont know whats easier to do - although i guess its all the same really
Last edited by Mehta23; February 22nd, 2013 at 12:20 PM.
3Likes
New Budget Build
