Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

New Rig


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Exilewing

Exilewing

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:09 PM

Posted 17 June 2016 - 02:09 PM

I am looking into a new gaming computer but like most people i am on a buget of a $1000. I went to http://www.xidax.com/, built a custom, and now i would like some input.

 

https://www.xidax.com/desktops/x-2/?saveconfig=109273&v=amd

 

Motherboard - Gigabyte FM2-A88X-D3H FM2+ Motherboard

Processor - AMD A10-7700K Processor

Memory - 16GB - Xidax Performance 1600MHz DDR3 ( 16GB (2x8GB) )

Power Supply - Corsair CX500 Power Supply

Optical Drive - 24X DVD-RW Combo

Graphics Card - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 - 2GB GDDR5 ( Choose )

Sound Cards - Onboard Audio-HDD/SSD

Western Digital Blue 1TB - 7200RPM 3.5" HDD ( 1TB HDD )

RAID Config - RAID 0

CPU Cooling - Default Cooler

CPU Paste - Standard CPU Thermal Paste

GPU Paste - Standard Graphics Card Thermal Paste

OS - Windows 10 Home Premium 64-Bit

 

which is around $949

 

or

 

https://www.xidax.com/update/6/386f065c98e8b3575793a5c665c51767

 

Motherboard - MSI B150M BAZOOKA

Processor - Intel Quad Core™ i5-6600 Processor

Memory - 2400MHz Xidax Extreme DDR4 Memory 16GB 4x4GB ( 16GB (4x4GB) )

Power Supply - Corsair CX500 Power Supply

Optical Drive - 24X DVD-RW Combo

Graphics Card - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 - 2GB GDDR5

Sound Cards - Onboard Audio

HDD/SSD - Western Digital Blue 1TB - 7200RPM 3.5" HDD ( 1TB HDD )

CPU Cooling - Default Cooler

CPU Paste - Standard CPU Thermal Paste

GPU Paste - Standard Graphics Card Thermal Paste

OS - Windows 10 Home Premium 64-Bit

 

Which is around $1044

 

I am leaning towards the firs one simply because its cheaper and if by your suggestion i can tweak it a bit.



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 TheJokerz

TheJokerz

  • Members
  • 286 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio
  • Local time:03:09 PM

Posted 17 June 2016 - 02:23 PM

I would go with the second setup just because it is an intel.  There is nothing wrong with AMD procs, I used to have a fx8120 that I built and overclocked it and it ran for 4 years without any issues.  But I switched to intel and have never looked back!


utl8q0-5.png


#3 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,401 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:09 PM

Posted 17 June 2016 - 02:34 PM

I am looking into a new gaming computer but like most people i am on a buget of a $1000. I went to http://www.xidax.com/, built a custom, and now i would like some input.
 
https://www.xidax.com/desktops/x-2/?saveconfig=109273&v=amd
 
Motherboard - Gigabyte FM2-A88X-D3H FM2+ Motherboard
Processor - AMD A10-7700K Processor
Memory - 16GB - Xidax Performance 1600MHz DDR3 ( 16GB (2x8GB) )
Power Supply - Corsair CX500 Power Supply
Optical Drive - 24X DVD-RW Combo
Graphics Card - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 - 2GB GDDR5 ( Choose )
Sound Cards - Onboard Audio-HDD/SSD
Western Digital Blue 1TB - 7200RPM 3.5" HDD ( 1TB HDD )
RAID Config - RAID 0
CPU Cooling - Default Cooler
CPU Paste - Standard CPU Thermal Paste
GPU Paste - Standard Graphics Card Thermal Paste
OS - Windows 10 Home Premium 64-Bit

which is around $949


APU with external graphics = no.
 

https://www.xidax.com/update/6/386f065c98e8b3575793a5c665c51767
 
Motherboard - MSI B150M BAZOOKA
Processor - Intel Quad Core™ i5-6600 Processor
Memory - 2400MHz Xidax Extreme DDR4 Memory 16GB 4x4GB ( 16GB (4x4GB) )
Power Supply - Corsair CX500 Power Supply
Optical Drive - 24X DVD-RW Combo
Graphics Card - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 - 2GB GDDR5
Sound Cards - Onboard Audio
HDD/SSD - Western Digital Blue 1TB - 7200RPM 3.5" HDD ( 1TB HDD )
CPU Cooling - Default Cooler
CPU Paste - Standard CPU Thermal Paste
GPU Paste - Standard Graphics Card Thermal Paste
OS - Windows 10 Home Premium 64-Bit
 
Which is around $1044
 
I am leaning towards the firs one simply because its cheaper and if by your suggestion i can tweak it a bit.


- Non-overclockable CPU with only 4 threads
- Awful memory config (2*8GB is much better)
- Mediocre PSU
- Overpriced GPU, AMD R9 470/480 goes at same price range and is much better
- Intel stock cooler is crap
- Windows is probably OEM, Retail is much better
- SSD is missing

Both system are quite bad, cannot recommend neither of those. At least wait for AMD R9 470/480, GTX960 is already obsolete.

Edited by Drillingmachine, 17 June 2016 - 02:34 PM.


#4 OldPhil

OldPhil

    Doppleganger


  • Members
  • 4,123 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Island New York
  • Local time:03:09 PM

Posted 17 June 2016 - 02:55 PM

My two cents when it comes to ram you are better off going with 2 sticks rather than 4, reason being more strain on the memory controller slowing performance slightly.


Honesty & Integrity Above All!


#5 Zone_86

Zone_86

  • Members
  • 303 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:02:09 PM

Posted 17 June 2016 - 06:38 PM

The second rig by a longshot the 6600k is an extremely strong processor and will give you far better performance with that GTX 960.



#6 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,401 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:09 PM

Posted 18 June 2016 - 04:06 AM

The second rig by a longshot the 6600k is an extremely strong processor and will give you far better performance with that GTX 960.

 

Well, that is 6600, not 6600K.

 

And because DX12 games are coming, I wouldn't recommend any quad core CPU for gaming any more.


Edited by Drillingmachine, 18 June 2016 - 04:06 AM.


#7 RoDiSK

RoDiSK

  • Members
  • 1 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:09:09 PM

Posted 18 June 2016 - 12:52 PM

Gaming Computer -> fast loading games -> fast Reading -> SSD + Intel RAID 1 that reads data simultaneously from both drives (like RAID 0), while the data is Protected...
 
 


#8 Zone_86

Zone_86

  • Members
  • 303 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:02:09 PM

Posted 18 June 2016 - 07:32 PM

You have to remember core IPC strength. Most games even now are not taking advantage of quad core much less 6-8 cores although  I7 processors are quad cores with hyperthreading, and all day long and for years to come they willl be stronger in any game verses any 6-8 core Vishera. Even an Ivy Bridge era I5 will do that without the hyperthreading because of the strength of each core. 6600 is the same as a 6600k, other than unlocked CPU ratio on the right mainboard. There isn't one AMD processor I would recommend to anyone for gaming now over a 4 year old 3570k. It's not about how many cores you have it's about pure core strength.


Edited by Zone_86, 18 June 2016 - 07:38 PM.


#9 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,401 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:09 PM

Posted 19 June 2016 - 08:16 AM

You have to remember core IPC strength. Most games even now are not taking advantage of quad core much less 6-8 cores although  I7 processors are quad cores with hyperthreading, and all day long and for years to come they willl be stronger in any game verses any 6-8 core Vishera. Even an Ivy Bridge era I5 will do that without the hyperthreading because of the strength of each core. 6600 is the same as a 6600k, other than unlocked CPU ratio on the right mainboard. There isn't one AMD processor I would recommend to anyone for gaming now over a 4 year old 3570k. It's not about how many cores you have it's about pure core strength.

 

That's because DX9 performance is limited by single core performance. And as DX10 is modified DX9 and DX11 is modified DX10, even DX11 shares this same limitation.

 

DX12 can easily use 8 cores so that problem is not around so I wouldn't recommend any quad core for gaming any more.

 

I have no problem to recommend AMD CPU's for gaming. During three years haven't found single playable (good enough) game so far where AMD FX is too slow. Perhaps that's because I actually play games, do not just look at benchmarks. Benchmarks are very bad representation of real world performance.

 

Another reason why I don't recommend quad cores for gaming are situations where Windows decides to reserve 2-3 cores for update process. With 8 cores available, that is barely noticeable. With 4 cores, well, it really doesn't help how strong core or IPC blah blah, when less than 2 cores are available.



#10 Zone_86

Zone_86

  • Members
  • 303 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:02:09 PM

Posted 19 June 2016 - 05:56 PM

I have no issues recommending AMD CPU's as long as the budget and a particular situation monetary wise fits.Theoretically, Direct X 12 would be able to take full advantage of 8 cores, there are a few games out there now that will take advantage of 8 cores but still you see the stronger 4 core processor win out. This will continue on for several years until the sliding scale of CPU's and the convergence of games that will truly take advantage of all cores are out there, and coded in Direct X 12 properly. You used the word playable, I say that's nice, and it's also true, but what we are talking about is a recommendation per-comparison of the OP's original post of an A-10 7700k AMD processor, which is about as strong as an  AMD 955 Phenom II, to a modern 6th generation Intel I5 6600. In that regard there is no comparison where performance is involved. If the OP were really on a budget I would recommend an FX 8320/8350 the AM3+ platform is going to perform much better than the AMD FM1, FM2, FM3 platform.

 

Update processes are usually done outside of the gaming spectrum, if you mean Windows updates. Don't get me wrong, there is absolutely nothing wrong with an FX 8350/8320 for gaming and anything else they run great, and that multitask very well I ran one and built tons of them. Still do, but I would not recommend it over an I5 6600.

 

As per the OP's post I would not consider the first listed system, If AMD I would consider the AMD FX 8320/8350 with the AM3+ platform with a good AMD 990FX chipset or 970 motherboard (one that has at least 6.2 power phasing), or that Intel 6600 system. FX is not too slow it's just nowhere near that Intel 6600. I think if you feel that an AMD could/should be recommended you could add your thoughts in the specifications of the system for the starter of this thread. By all means go ahead I would be interested to see the system and there is nothing wrong with that. Instead of you and I debating quad cores vs, 8 cores -- provide another AMD solution for the OP that's a better idea.


Edited by Zone_86, 19 June 2016 - 06:11 PM.


#11 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,401 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:09 PM

Posted 20 June 2016 - 08:24 AM

I have no issues recommending AMD CPU's as long as the budget and a particular situation monetary wise fits.Theoretically, Direct X 12 would be able to take full advantage of 8 cores, there are a few games out there now that will take advantage of 8 cores but still you see the stronger 4 core processor win out. This will continue on for several years until the sliding scale of CPU's and the convergence of games that will truly take advantage of all cores are out there, and coded in Direct X 12 properly. You used the word playable, I say that's nice, and it's also true, but what we are talking about is a recommendation per-comparison of the OP's original post of an A-10 7700k AMD processor, which is about as strong as an  AMD 955 Phenom II, to a modern 6th generation Intel I5 6600. In that regard there is no comparison where performance is involved. If the OP were really on a budget I would recommend an FX 8320/8350 the AM3+ platform is going to perform much better than the AMD FM1, FM2, FM3 platform.

 

Update processes are usually done outside of the gaming spectrum, if you mean Windows updates. Don't get me wrong, there is absolutely nothing wrong with an FX 8350/8320 for gaming and anything else they run great, and that multitask very well I ran one and built tons of them. Still do, but I would not recommend it over an I5 6600.

 

As per the OP's post I would not consider the first listed system, If AMD I would consider the AMD FX 8320/8350 with the AM3+ platform with a good AMD 990FX chipset or 970 motherboard (one that has at least 6.2 power phasing), or that Intel 6600 system. FX is not too slow it's just nowhere near that Intel 6600. I think if you feel that an AMD could/should be recommended you could add your thoughts in the specifications of the system for the starter of this thread. By all means go ahead I would be interested to see the system and there is nothing wrong with that. Instead of you and I debating quad cores vs, 8 cores -- provide another AMD solution for the OP that's a better idea.

 

I mostly agree. i6-6600 set with SSD goes way over budget so if SSD is needed for 1000$ budget. Now, problem with recommending AM3+ system is that thread starter wants (?) to buy from https://www.xidax.com/products/desktops/x-2

 

And they only offer FM2+ and LGA1151 sets. Pretty awful to recommend APU with external Nvidia graphics.

 

So Exilewing, can you buy from somewhere else or can we select another than X2 series?



#12 Zone_86

Zone_86

  • Members
  • 303 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:02:09 PM

Posted 20 June 2016 - 11:18 PM

Yeah I went through the configurator on that site the other evening and for some odd reason they do not offer anything AM3/AM3+. I would definitely go with a different vendor that way you can get FX8320/ FX8350 system as well instead of only Intel. AMD FM series don't really compete in the gaming spectrum. If the OP so chooses I can put together some very nice build configurations both AMD and Intel if willing to build, or knows someone that could build it for him/her. That way you get sneak in a 240GB SSD and it does not have to be the fastest, along with a nice budget.



#13 Exilewing

Exilewing
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:09 PM

Posted 21 June 2016 - 02:15 PM

 

I have no issues recommending AMD CPU's as long as the budget and a particular situation monetary wise fits.Theoretically, Direct X 12 would be able to take full advantage of 8 cores, there are a few games out there now that will take advantage of 8 cores but still you see the stronger 4 core processor win out. This will continue on for several years until the sliding scale of CPU's and the convergence of games that will truly take advantage of all cores are out there, and coded in Direct X 12 properly. You used the word playable, I say that's nice, and it's also true, but what we are talking about is a recommendation per-comparison of the OP's original post of an A-10 7700k AMD processor, which is about as strong as an  AMD 955 Phenom II, to a modern 6th generation Intel I5 6600. In that regard there is no comparison where performance is involved. If the OP were really on a budget I would recommend an FX 8320/8350 the AM3+ platform is going to perform much better than the AMD FM1, FM2, FM3 platform.

 

Update processes are usually done outside of the gaming spectrum, if you mean Windows updates. Don't get me wrong, there is absolutely nothing wrong with an FX 8350/8320 for gaming and anything else they run great, and that multitask very well I ran one and built tons of them. Still do, but I would not recommend it over an I5 6600.

 

As per the OP's post I would not consider the first listed system, If AMD I would consider the AMD FX 8320/8350 with the AM3+ platform with a good AMD 990FX chipset or 970 motherboard (one that has at least 6.2 power phasing), or that Intel 6600 system. FX is not too slow it's just nowhere near that Intel 6600. I think if you feel that an AMD could/should be recommended you could add your thoughts in the specifications of the system for the starter of this thread. By all means go ahead I would be interested to see the system and there is nothing wrong with that. Instead of you and I debating quad cores vs, 8 cores -- provide another AMD solution for the OP that's a better idea.

 

I mostly agree. i6-6600 set with SSD goes way over budget so if SSD is needed for 1000$ budget. Now, problem with recommending AM3+ system is that thread starter wants (?) to buy from https://www.xidax.com/products/desktops/x-2

 

And they only offer FM2+ and LGA1151 sets. Pretty awful to recommend APU with external Nvidia graphics.

 

So Exilewing, can you buy from somewhere else or can we select another than X2 series?

 

I don't have to be that site, I will take any suggestion you give.

 

Yeah I went through the configurator on that site the other evening and for some odd reason they do not offer anything AM3/AM3+. I would definitely go with a different vendor that way you can get FX8320/ FX8350 system as well instead of only Intel. AMD FM series don't really compete in the gaming spectrum. If the OP so chooses I can put together some very nice build configurations both AMD and Intel if willing to build, or knows someone that could build it for him/her. That way you get sneak in a 240GB SSD and it does not have to be the fastest, along with a nice budget.

 

I would take any and all suggestion...as long as i can understand it.Thank you.



#14 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,401 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:09 PM

Posted 21 June 2016 - 04:04 PM

I don't have to be that site, I will take any suggestion you give.


OK, but one important question. Can you build computer yourself or does it have to be prebuilt?

Edited by Drillingmachine, 21 June 2016 - 04:05 PM.


#15 Exilewing

Exilewing
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:09 PM

Posted 22 June 2016 - 02:16 AM

I don't have to be that site, I will take any suggestion you give.

OK, but one important question. Can you build computer yourself or does it have to be prebuilt?

I have changed out parts like the graphics card, memory cards, and power supply. I have not built one. In a pinch I know someone that could help if I can get a hold of him.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users