Author Topic: New 'gaming rig' PC questions  (Read 1821 times)

energizingion

  • Minion
  • **
  • Posts: 24
New 'gaming rig' PC questions
« on: August 20, 2014, 04:53:38 PM »

Reiraku

  • Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 134
Re: New 'gaming rig' PC questions
« Reply #1 on: August 20, 2014, 06:49:29 PM »
I've been a big AMD fan for the last few years, but in terms of CPUs, Intel is just better overall by about a generation and a half. A good i5 will go a long way for you.

Video cards, I'm still with AMD on those. They've been a lot more reliable and affordable compared to nVidia in my experience.

microc

  • Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 209
Re: New 'gaming rig' PC questions
« Reply #2 on: August 20, 2014, 07:07:41 PM »
on hardware be care full right now as both intel and nvidia and amd are going to be dropping newer hardware on top of each other. intel had big issues with brodwell (haswell replacment). right now it and skylake the next cpu after broadlake will be out in first half of 2015. the skylake cpu will use ddr-4 ram and 1151 pin mb. also in sept haswell-e are dropping. nvidia in oct from leaks dropping the 860-880 maxwell cpu. on amd side there the new tonga gpu that there rolling out slowly. http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/35491-amd-tonga-xt-based-graphics-card-comes-later
the 290 cards run hot...because of this two of the newer cards in crossfire would be a better set up.

energizingion

  • Minion
  • **
  • Posts: 24
Re: New 'gaming rig' PC questions
« Reply #3 on: August 20, 2014, 08:55:12 PM »
Thanks you two.  Actually got the questions from a co-worker and as I am not a hardware 'geek' like that, I didn't know the answer, I know that Father_Xmas helped me with parts four years ago for my PC, so I thought I'd post here. :)


FatherXmas

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,646
  • You think the holidays are bad for you ...
Re: New 'gaming rig' PC questions
« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2014, 11:30:54 PM »
Thanks you two.  Actually got the questions from a co-worker and as I am not a hardware 'geek' like that, I didn't know the answer, I know that Father_Xmas helped me with parts four years ago for my PC, so I thought I'd post here. :)

Hellooo!

Yes Intel i5 is the way to go because if your game happens to be one of the few where CPU does matter in the game's frame rate equation, a faster core in terms of instructions per second will win over more, slower cores.  Actual CPU core performance is 50-100% faster with Intel's current generation Vs AMD's FX series..

GPU wars ... it's still pretty neck to neck.  nVidia does have the top performer with the GTX 780Ti but the R9 290X is very close behind (within 5%) and beats it on price (looking at NewEgg and again by 5%) but more power is required.  A pair of R9 280X should be faster than either, but a quick look around shows an average of 15% better up to 40% in some games over the 290x.  However power use is nearly doubled.  Power used equals heat, which requires a better case cooling configuration and price because of the beefier PSU requirement.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review

The R9 290X does have their "TrueAudio" tech where the 280X (aka HD 7970 GHz edition) doesn't.  Meh.

Standard multi-GPU caveats.  Performance over a single card is variable.  VRAM isn't additive.  A pair of 3GB cards working together still have only 3GB.  Power used goes up significantly which means a much larger PSU as well as case cooling.

The problems with consistent performance in the 290X due to heat has basically gone away if you choose one of the dual fan coolers cards, which is just about all of them nowadays.  The AMD crossfire stutter problem, alternating from a high framerate to low framerate in Crossfire looks to be solved.

While I understand the attraction of a multi GPU setup, personally I've always believed the extra complication and costs aren't really worth it.  It only makes a practical difference if you are straddling 30fps or 60fps, where a multi GPU setup gets you over that frame rate line in the sand.

My two inf.
Tempus unum hominem manet

Twitter - AtomicSamuraiRobot@NukeSamuraiBot

energizingion

  • Minion
  • **
  • Posts: 24
Re: New 'gaming rig' PC questions
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2014, 02:01:46 PM »
Hellooo!

Yes Intel i5 is the way to go because if your game happens to be one of the few where CPU does matter in the game's frame rate equation, a faster core in terms of instructions per second will win over more, slower cores.  Actual CPU core performance is 50-100% faster with Intel's current generation Vs AMD's FX series..

GPU wars ... it's still pretty neck to neck.  nVidia does have the top performer with the GTX 780Ti but the R9 290X is very close behind (within 5%) and beats it on price (looking at NewEgg and again by 5%) but more power is required.  A pair of R9 280X should be faster than either, but a quick look around shows an average of 15% better up to 40% in some games over the 290x.  However power use is nearly doubled.  Power used equals heat, which requires a better case cooling configuration and price because of the beefier PSU requirement.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review

The R9 290X does have their "TrueAudio" tech where the 280X (aka HD 7970 GHz edition) doesn't.  Meh.

Standard multi-GPU caveats.  Performance over a single card is variable.  VRAM isn't additive.  A pair of 3GB cards working together still have only 3GB.  Power used goes up significantly which means a much larger PSU as well as case cooling.

The problems with consistent performance in the 290X due to heat has basically gone away if you choose one of the dual fan coolers cards, which is just about all of them nowadays.  The AMD crossfire stutter problem, alternating from a high framerate to low framerate in Crossfire looks to be solved.

While I understand the attraction of a multi GPU setup, personally I've always believed the extra complication and costs aren't really worth it.  It only makes a practical difference if you are straddling 30fps or 60fps, where a multi GPU setup gets you over that frame rate line in the sand.

My two inf.

Ah, thanks. :)

I think the co-worker already made his mind up and has purchased the parts but will send this his way just in case.

chuckv3

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 362
Re: New 'gaming rig' PC questions
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2014, 09:45:06 PM »
I just built 3, average cost each: $200. Yeah, they're minimal, but perfectly capable. I wired my office, den and living room for network cabling, so no WiFi cards needed.

- Compaq dc5800 mini-desktop with PCIx slot, $30-ish each (no HDD, 1GB ram, eBay)
- Ram to 4GB: about $21 each (1GB sticks $7 on eBay)
- HDD: $29 each for 500GB SATA (newEgg -- cheapest SATA drive they had listed at the time, not refurb)
- GeForce GT 640: $60 average ($80, $70, $70-40 rebate, newEgg)
- Windows 7 COA: $29 each (eBay)
- drive screws because the dc5800s have those weird "modular, slide-in" drive bays: $4 per machine ($1 per screw, eBay)
- various keyboard, trackball, mouse either from my parts box or whatever (free or insignificantly cheap)

Your mileage may very, of course, but you can create a new low-range machine for about $200. And by low-range I mean more than enough to play CoH on pretty high settings.

The graphics cards came with low-profile slot adapters, and they have HDMI as well as DVI and VGA, so you can use your TVs as monitors. I happen to have two 22" (one personal, one for work, but I work from home), and an old 32" TV that does 1080p, so I didn't need monitors either. That would cost you maybe an extra $100 per machine if you had to add it.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2014, 04:18:11 AM by chuckv3 »

chuckv3

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 362
Re: New 'gaming rig' PC questions
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2014, 09:52:04 PM »
When the game shut down I was running a Geforce 210 (benchmark of about 200), and now I have a danged NETBOOK that scores 200. I was running CoH on middle-of-the-road settings with that, and no graphics lag. The GeForce GT 640 scores about 1200, so I'm thinking it will be more than I need to see everything and play effectively.