Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: T-Man on July 22, 2015, 03:19:20 am
-
(seems to be a common theme at the moment with Mongoose and Mars' recent threads; felt it would be impolite to hijack their topics though)
I've been planning and saving for a while to get myself a new PC for newer games and beefy programs like FS Open, Unreal 4 and potentially Maya LT. I'm admittedly not 100% on the hardware side of PCs or the current market, and recall there's some members and mods here with a lot of that hardware and market knowledge, so felt it wise to run past here the rig I'm currently considering going for in case I'm missing a catch with it.
Usually we buy parts and build our PCs, but we found recently this Dell (http://www.dell.com/uk/p/xps-8700/pd?oc=cdx8708&model_id=xps-8700) that has practically every element was looking for (may look into shaving off some of the add-ons, and may wait a bit and see if I can get it with Win10; seems a waste to get 8.1 just to upgrade it the moment I get it) and is going for well below what I was expecting to have to save.
The main bit I'm not sure of with the deal is the graphics card (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 745 4GB DDR3); I've had a lot of NVIDIAs so am used to them but don't know much about this one's age or whether it's got the grunt I'm hoping for (my dream benchmark was the PC being able to run BP's Icarus cut scene full blast without stuttering; dooable or a fools errand?). I did find some posts on TomsHardware (http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-2161092/nvidia-geforce-745-gtx-4gb-info.html) saying it's apparently a custom card made especially for PC builders like Dell and they had found some specs for it, if it helps judging it;
Nvidia Geforce GTX 745
Discrete Memory: 4GB DDR3
Width: Single Slot
Wattage: 50 W
Controller Speed/Graphics Clock: 1033 MHz
OnBoard Memory Speed: 900 MHz
Onboard Memory Data Width: 128 bit
API Supported: DirectX 11.2, Open GL 4.4, OpenCL
Slot Requirements: 3.0 Gen PCIe x16
Maximum Resoltion:
2048x1536
1920x1080 HDMI
2569x1600 DVI
I/O Ports:
1xDual Link DVI-D
1xHDMI
1xVGA
Sound like a good buy to you guys?
-
Hmm. Passmark says it's about comparable to a Radeon 7770 or GTX 460, which would make it a lower mid-end kind of card. Especially for that price/performance/wattage ratio, that's a pretty good deal; You should be able to get at least Console-grade performance out of it in most games, especially considering the rather beefy CPU that system comes with.
That said, one thing to keep an eye on (and I couldn't find it at a glance) is the kind of PSU that system comes with. My guess is something in the 300 to 400 Watt range, this is going to be a bottleneck should you choose to upgrade the GPU.
-
Personally, I would not touch a Dell with a 40 foot barge pole. My Dad use to fix Dells and one thing he noted is how similar they are to Peugeots (yes I know this is brand of car). The similarity is that if a Dell part breaks, you have to replace it with a Dell part and cannot use something aftermarket. The other problem is the amount of shyte that comes with these pre-built machines.
In fact, I would not touch any branded build, including anything like Alienware... usually because you are paying for the name. The only time I would think of a brand is in laptops.
if you want a pre-built machine, get a specialist company like Novatech to do it!
If you can build a desktop, stick to building it yourself.
What would be good to know to help you with a build is:-
1) Budget (most important)
2) How fast you want it
3) Do you need just a box or do you need other things like a monitor, keyboard and mouse etc...
4) Multi-tasking or single threading
EDITS:-
5) How long do you want this build to last?
6) Will you be muli-screening?
7) Will you be downloading and needing lots of storage?
-
If you can get comfortable with applying thermal paste, building your own PC is absolutely the way to go. I've done it twice. Always worth it.
-
If you can get comfortable with applying thermal paste, building your own PC is absolutely the way to go. I've done it twice. Always worth it.
And it's fun!
-
Even if it makes you bleed a bit! Or maybe especially so then!
But as far as Dells go, going back to my family's 2000-ish desktop, I've always seen at least one major component fail within only 2 or 3 years. That original one had its HDD go kaput relatively quickly, my 2004 system did the same (and yet its replacement has been going 7 years strong), and the current family Vista-era system had its PSU conk out within a couple of years (and that thing only experienced light usage). I know these are just anecdotes, and the Dell laptops my brothers went off to college with served them well, but personally I'd never buy another Dell desktop for anyone.
-
One thing with prefabs is they can be a real pain in the ass if the power supply blows. I've taken ones apart that have had the cables both over and under the mobo.
I like to have at least 2 PCI expansion slots, I've had onboard USB and Ethernet connection issues with mobos before. A lot easier if you can just pop a replacement card in for something faulty on the southbridge.
You go to NewEgg or something similar and see what you can build for yourself for 800 quid? I always get carried away and go a bit over target, but if you're worried about the graphics card already, might as well factor that in.
-
One thing with prefabs is they can be a real pain in the ass if the power supply blows. I've taken ones apart that have had the cables both over and under the mobo.
Yeah, plus there's the possibility of custom hardware sizes. I once looked into replacing the one in my 2004 Dell, but its original PSU was a couple of centimeters shorter than the standard size, plus its case didn't have the usual rectangular cut-out, so I couldn't physically fit a new one in there. Luckily it seems as though Dell at least partially wised up over the next few years, since the family's dead PSU was standard size and easy to replace.
-
I suggested this build to Mongoose on his thread:-
Intel i7 4790K $319
MSI Z97 Gaming G45 $134
G Skill Ripjaws 16GB Ram £100
Samsung SSD $162
Hitachi HDD $124
Zotac GTX970 Omega Core $340
Rosewell Thor V2 $120
EVGA 750 watt PSU $94
Total:- $1393
This little lot translated to about £930, when converting USD to Sterling (using an average exchange rate of $1.50 to £1.00). I would class Mongoose's build as reasonably high end.
This build below is similar, and if you were to just buy from Ebuyer would cost £1141. But the whole build could be done cheaper if you shop around. Price in brackets is as quoted on PriceSpy.
Intel i7 4790K £292 (£255)
MSI Z97 Gaming G45 £111 (£101)
G Skill Ripjaws 16GB Ram £116 (£86)
Samsung 850 EVO SSD 250GB £86 (£74)
Seagate 2TB SHDD £80 £(72)
Gigabyte GTX 970 OC WINDFORCE 3X 4GB GDDR5 £263 (£254)
In Win GR One Gaming Case Full Tower E-ATX USB3 Black & Red £83.00 (Ebuyer cheapest for this so same price)
EVGA SuperNOVA 750 watt P2 Power Supply £110 (same again)
Ebuyer Price £1141
PriceSpy (shopping around) £1035
Price compared to Mongoose's build, we have it a bit rough this side of the pond.
A couple of parts could be swapped out for cheaper options to skrimp on some cash. You could also save another £100 if you use an AMD mobo and CPU.
As FIZ said as well, you could build something for £800 easily and it would most likely be a lot better then what Dell would sell you!
Also, made an edit to my post earlier with regards to questions that need answering when building.
-
If you can get comfortable with applying thermal paste, building your own PC is absolutely the way to go. I've done it twice. Always worth it.
How much practice should I do before doing it for real for the first time.
-
I just wussed out and used the stock cooler because the idea of dealing with paste scares the hell out of me.
-
I just wussed out and used the stock cooler because the idea of dealing with paste scares the hell out of me.
Pshh, it's not bad, you just smear it on there! It's not boiling acid
-
I think the fear is of misapplying it and damaging your CPU. I narrowly avoided doing so with a stock cooler.
-
Thermal paste isn't hard to deal with at all. Two schools of thought on it, and I've done both with no ill effects.
1) Smear it over the die on the CPU yourself. Can use fingers or some kind of spreader tool. I've used a business card. Many use credit cards. Really, anything stiff enough and lint free would work.
Pro: Easier to absolutely ensure full coverage and keep the thickness to a minimum.
Con: Messy. Silver-based ones stain, including your skin for a while. Hard to get perfectly even.
2) Put a sizeable drop in the center (or lines/other patterns if you want to get fancy) of the heatsink surface and let the pressure as you install spread it for you.
Pro: Even coverage. A bit easier. As long as you start with a big enough drop or use a good pattern (I used lines along the heat pipe seams for mine), there's really no worry about not being covered enough. Really though, if a tiny bit of the corners aren't covered with paste, it'll still be fine.
Con: Usually results in thicker layer than it's possible to get spreading it yourself. Excess will run out the edges and should really be scraped away. Can be annoying depending on your heatsink. You can't see for yourself that it covered everything. You could always pull it up to check, but then that defeats the point of doing it this way.
Google "applying thermal paste" and you'll find a plethora of articles and videos to help you out.
-
Yeah, exactly, I just watched a bunch of YouTube tutorials and gave it a shot.
-
I spread the paste using a plastic sandwich bag with my hand in it. You don't want to touch the paste directly, as skin oils will reduce its effectiveness. The 4790K stock cooler is lousy and barely adequate for that processor, which runs very hot on certain types of code (AVX2).
Note that FS2 is totally CPU limited on modern systems and will slow down in many missions regardless of the hardware, so you probably won't see much improvement there. I believe the collision detection code makes it slow down.
-
If you apply too much paste and need to clean it, makeup removal pads are very effective as they contain the alcohol used for cleaning electronics!
MX4 Paste comes in a syringe and it is quite easy to apply, but if it blobs up then you can use a cotton bud (or cue tip in the U.S... i think) to help spread it!
-
Note that FS2 is totally CPU limited on modern systems and will slow down in many missions regardless of the hardware, so you probably won't see much improvement there. I believe the collision detection code makes it slow down.
Usually; it depends on the mission, but with the newer rendering engine, it's entirely possible to find yourself GPU-limited.
-
Surely any CPU + stock cooler combo comes with instructions of how, where and how much thermal paste to apply, anyway. It's not exactly rocket science, so all you really need is to watch a few video tutorials on the subject (about your specific CPU and cooler wouldn't hurt) and think what you're doing enough that you're not putting things in backwards. It certainly doesn't require any esoteric knowledge or prior familiarity, it's enough to carefully follow instructions while applying common sense.
-
keep q-tips/cotton swabs and anything else lint-producing the hell away from your thermal paste (unless removing and you're going to clean it after anyway).
-
If you apply too much paste and need to clean it, makeup removal pads are very effective as they contain the alcohol used for cleaning electronics!
Isopropanol/Isopropyl alcohol, to be more precise. Definitely avoid acetone.
-
That's the stuff... I just couldn't remember the name, but i know my wife's makeup removal pads contain it. I think she gets them from Boots and I think that they were actually nail varnish remover pads... but they did the job brilliantly!
-
That's the stuff... I just couldn't remember the name, but i know my wife's makeup removal pads contain it. I think she gets them from Boots and I think that they were actually nail varnish remover pads... but they did the job brilliantly!
if its varnish remover, its most likely acetone, which is a fair bit stronger than isopropanol. which may or may not damage the motherboard/the cpu board. if you are extremely careful when wiping it, taking care none of it leaks down, great. if not, avoid it. isopropanol is strong enough to get rid of the remnant paste residue.
-
Surely any CPU + stock cooler combo comes with instructions of how, where and how much thermal paste to apply, anyway. It's not exactly rocket science, so all you really need is to watch a few video tutorials on the subject (about your specific CPU and cooler wouldn't hurt) and think what you're doing enough that you're not putting things in backwards. It certainly doesn't require any esoteric knowledge or prior familiarity, it's enough to carefully follow instructions while applying common sense.
The stock cooler on my Phenom II came with a preapplied layer of goo. No need to spread it yourself. But daym that stuff petrified in a year. Damn near broke my CPU when I wanted to change to a better cooler and pried the old one out.
-
That's the stuff... I just couldn't remember the name, but i know my wife's makeup removal pads contain it. I think she gets them from Boots and I think that they were actually nail varnish remover pads... but they did the job brilliantly!
if its varnish remover, its most likely acetone, which is a fair bit stronger than isopropanol. which may or may not damage the motherboard/the cpu board. if you are extremely careful when wiping it, taking care none of it leaks down, great. if not, avoid it. isopropanol is strong enough to get rid of the remnant paste residue.
With it being on a pad... there is no worry of leakage. But the pad I used was definitely laced with isopropanol because I checked the ingredients before I used it on my CPU.
-
Thanks everyone for the comments and massive apologies it's taken me so long to respond (bit shameful of me in fact :o); new job has been draining my days.
Do agree on self-builds being interesting if you can afford them my current PC was one, and we usually do build our own when we get them (use a UK site called SCAN (http://www.scan.co.uk/) a lot that does some cool deals on parts). I got a bit excited at that Dell one as it was ticking most of my boxes for less than i'd expected (and still on the fence about whether to go for it or not in the end; would even get free delivery for it), but perhaps as many of you say a much better job could be done for the same price by self-building. Only real paranoia is a part of it not working out in the end as it's going to be most of my savings gone getting it. Never had huge issues in the past though so fingers crossed.
Hmm. Passmark says it's about comparable to a Radeon 7770 or GTX 460, which would make it a lower mid-end kind of card. Especially for that price/performance/wattage ratio, that's a pretty good deal; You should be able to get at least Console-grade performance out of it in most games, especially considering the rather beefy CPU that system comes with.
Huge thanks for the info on that GTX card mate; know very little about how the market is at the moment beyond the basics so didn't really know where to start with comparing components/prices. Am glad that Dell is sounding at least decent as an option; can also use it as a good point of reference if I do decide to go with a self-build instead in the end.
That said, one thing to keep an eye on (and I couldn't find it at a glance) is the kind of PSU that system comes with. My guess is something in the 300 to 400 Watt range, this is going to be a bottleneck should you choose to upgrade the GPU.
Good point I hadn't actually considered PSUs and given I want this to be easy to upgrade I probably should be looking into them (Apparently this Dell one comes with a 460w PSU by a Delta Electronics; same Tomshardware thread mention that's not strong enough for some later Nvidia cards so potential bottleneck as you say).
What would be good to know to help you with a build is:-
1) Budget (most important)
2) How fast you want it
3) Do you need just a box or do you need other things like a monitor, keyboard and mouse etc...
4) Multi-tasking or single threading
5) How long do you want this build to last?
6) Will you be muli-screening?
7) Will you be downloading and needing lots of storage?
To answer your questions mate (and sorry again it's taken me so long);
1) Budget?: Perfect scenario would be within £1K mark, though I could go higher given time. Upper limit i'd say would be about £1.5K. Am a believer in 'in you get what you pay for' so prefer to go for best quality rather than cheapest price (within reason of course; my heart is still recovering after reading how much NVIDIA Quadros can cost :nervous:).
2) How fast?: Hoping for Higher-end speed with beefy memory (prefrably good i7 - have used Intels a lot in previous PCs - and at least 16GB RAM) and a powerful graphics card with some dedicated memory (about 4GB? Always had NVIDIAs so probably one of those); I hope for it to be able to run things like Maya LT, Unreal 4, FS-Open and Modded Minecraft without any stuttering or slowdown.
3) What do you need?: Likely just the SU/box; is going to be alongside my old PC so already have monitor/keyboard/mouse etc and checked their all compatible with new systems.
4) Multi-tasking?: Definitely multi-tasking preferred; have heard single can sometimes go faster but i've had programs not work because of my old motherboard being a single core.
5) How long?: As long as it can really; hoping to make it an easily upgradable work rig I can add or replace components in as needed (avoiding OEM Windows for this very reason).
6) Multi-screening?: Not at the moment but may switch it to this in the future so compatabilty would be apprechiated.
7) Lots of Storage?: Not a major amount; a 2 TB drive will easily do me (plus a smaller SSD we were thinking of having dedicated to it's Windows and supporting programs; heard that's a popular trick). Household already has some external disks for storage (we're all computer addicts) and I'd probably grab another one if downloading becomes a bigger thing.
If you can get comfortable with applying thermal paste, building your own PC is absolutely the way to go. I've done it twice. Always worth it.
Heh heh aye recall it is a bit fiddly; it's definitely a bit you need to build up the confidence for, but then it's essentially a matter of knowing how much and where. Have always heard another funny one is actually pressing the processor chip into it's cradle to engage the lock; apparently a lot of people panic that they're pressing too hard on it no matter how many times they do it.
-
The CPU should literally just drop in if you're doing it right. Unless Intel does it differently now? Current gen AMDs still work this way at any rate.
-
No problems in replying T-Man... I know all too well about real life pressures! So to counter answer the questions:-
1) Budget: If you can push out to that £1000 mark, there is no real need to break this, unless you go for that high(ish) end build I posted.
2) How fast you want it?: I did not ask this question correctly which has led to a mis-interpretation. My fault, so my apologies. The question was meant to be in relation to "How fast you actually want to get the computer in terms of... can you hold off for a while before you build or do you want it straight away?"
3) What peripherals?: Good to know that it is only the box needed. I would also recommend to see what you can salvage from an older build.
4) Multi-tasking or singlethreading?: You answered multi-tasking here, so I reckon that an AMD build would be better for you (more on this below).
5) How long do you want this build to last?: This means that you can mix the build up with some lower end parts with higher end, but swap them out at a later date for easy upgradeability (more on this below)
6) Will you be multi-screening?: If you do not want to multi-screen, then get a ard with 2GB onboard RAM as this will be plenty for most applications and games. It will even do dual screens fine. But if you add more than two screens, then you do want to be looking at the 4GB region. Also, 4GB onboard RAM will help to futureproof the card for games with larger textures, however, this will only futureproof for so long as new technologies appear.
7) Storage: I have an SHDD. Not as fast as SSD but it does the job for me. So the drives I suggested earlier should be fine for your needs.
The More Below Bit:-
I would recommend the AMD FX8370 if you are looking into multi-tasking anduse an ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0. This pair will cost about £250. It is what I currently use. Now for raw FPS and stupid levels of performance on single-threaded applications like games, it will not perform as well as an i7. However, they are more than adequate for gaming needs.
The beauty about this AMD chip is that it can get some insane levels of overclocking and currently holds he world record at something silly like 8GHz, but needed stupid amounts of cooling. The cores aren't as strong as Intels, but because there are more of them, it does mean that it can handle multiple applications better than Intels. The mobo will give you stable overclocks as well. If you do overclock, make sure you spend a bit on aftermarket cooling.
These two parts substituted for the i7 setup will work perfectly fine with the rest of the components I suggested in my previous post. Also, because they are less expensive than the i7 setup, it will also keep some cash back for the 3rd Quarter of 2016 when proper benchmarking can be done between Intel's Skylake architecture and AMD's ZEN architecture, allowing for a two part upgrade... although by this point and if you decide to go down this route, you might (?) be forced onto DDR4 RAM. If you did not want to upgrade straight away when the new architectures arrive, then this AMD build should easily last at least two years... but most likely more before you forced into an upgrade again.
IF you decide to go for the AMD setup, DO NOT go higher than the 8370, as you will need have to spend extra on cooling because of the higher TDP, which makes the chip run hotter. You also spend more if you select something higher than the 8370 and this is where AMD begins to use its "bang per buck" advantage over Intel.
Please note that I base this post on a lot of research and my own experiences, however, make sure you take note of what other people say as they will have different experiences to myself.
I hope you find this post useful, and good luck. If you post a part list, like I did with Mongoose, I will tell you what I THINK, you should change.
:)
-
At this point, going for an AMD FX CPU is a really bad idea. Yes, they're cheaper than Intel kit, but it really does not matter. Intel completely outclasses AMD on both single- and multithreaded performance (Except in a few synthetic scenarios), and unlike AMD, they're not on the verge of collapse right now.
-
To say that AMD are on the verge of collapse is total poppycock and simply untrue. If they were on the verge of collapse, it wouldn't be a bad thing because someone like Samsung would just buy them up, which I actually hope will happen given the size of the dies which Samsung have already been playing around with!
We still have Xmas to go and most consoles are powered by AMD chips. Their GPU market is not going to disappear in the click of a finger either! I read an article on AMD projected forecasts and how "unrealistic" they were meant to be, but there were so many holes in that article it would put a seive to shame.
Price does matter when building on a budget. Of course the much higher priced Intel chips will outclass the AMD, but I should think so given you pay £100 more, but just because you pay £100 does not mean you get £100 more performance. As for the multi-threading side, that depends on how heavy the multi-tasking is as an FX 8XXX series that is overclocked would perform as well as a Xenon 1230 v3 if doing extremely heavy multi-threaded tasks like rendering and simulations. Then there is the multi-tasking side which is how many programs can be opened at the same time, which is not the same as one multi-threaded application. Don't disregard the FX series ability to overclock!
Anyway, what I was putting out to T-Man is that he could go with those cheaper parts with AMD to start off with and do a CPU and MOBO upgrade in 12 to 18 months or so, when he could splash a bit more cash and choose whether to go for Skylake or Xen based on true benchmarks, when they appear! If T-Man does not want to overclock or do an upgrade then I will say to him, "Spend a bit more and go for an Intel!"
-
£1k is a ridiculous amount of money for a machine. You can get a very ****ing high-end machine. It is NOT a budget purchase.
AMD is bad. Bulldozer flopped hard and they never recovered. AMD's gpu's (in the lower end of the market, however) are flaky as hell as well. Intel+nvidia and you are good to ****in go.
also, here's a nice little benchmark of I7-860, a almost 6 year old Intel CPU vs a 10 month old AMD FX-8370 cpu.
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/326/AMD_FX-Series_FX-8370_vs_Intel_Core_i7_i7-860.html
For clarity, i have the i7-860. it requires neither overclocking nor ridiculous clock frequencies and does massive amounts of stuff without drama.
Take your fanboyism out and face the reality, AMD ****ed up horribly and has exited the CPU race with intel on the high-end.
-
"AMD is about to collapse, Intel outclasses them on everything" - exaggerated post (amd collapsing) with slight fanboyish overtones.
"AMD's price/performance is still generally better than Intel's, and they are in fact not on the verge of collapse due to other markets" - reasonable and valid points.
"Take your fanboyism out and face the reality, AMD ****ed up horribly and has exited the CPU race with intel on the high-end." - fanboy rant about fanboyism.
:doubt:
-
Bulldozer did flop hard. I will never disagree with that. However, the FX8370 is piledriver which is a lot better than bulldozer, even though it comes from the same family.
I never said his budget was "low budget" or that it is a "budget build". I'm not trying to steer T-Man one way or the other... the advice I was giving T-Man was to consider other options he might not have thought of based on his needs and what his real world applications will be.
I prefer AMD chips because of the general price/performance ratio. I don't have lots of money to spend on high-end CPUs. With the money I save from that initial purchase, I can then put towards a better GPU which is essential for gaming rather than having to pay £100 less. How you can call me a fanboy is beyond given ALL my previous posts in this thread and also Mongoose's thread.
AMD are not in the "high end" CPU market at the moment... no doubt about that. However, with Zen (got the spelling right this time haha), they could be by Q3 next year depending on how that architecture performs, considering it will be using SMT and 14nm dies!
-
AMD CPUs are not worth considering for games because of their poor single-threaded performance, which is still the limiting factor in the vast majority of games and is way behind Intel at this point. If you're on a budget, even the cheap Pentium G3258 will destroy them in a lot of games with a typical overclock. They're good for tasks like rendering or compute that can make full use of all cores.
AMD video cards are a different matter, and are more than competitive in the market. The regular Fury and 290X are great choices.
-
Okay... here is a new element to be brought into the mix.
DirectX 12
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-why-directx-12-is-a-gamechanger
This article shows that the FX8350 (£139) is going to be competitive with an i5 4690k (£178) in terms of performance. The FX 8370 is about £150. The FX 8370 already beats the i5 4690 on price per performance... so when DirectX 12 is released, I wonder what will happen then?
As more games become written for DirectX 12, AMD is not out of the gaming market and the CPUs perform just fine (okay not as well as on an Intel) on DirectX 11.
I believe it to be a bit premature to just say that AMDs are not worth considering for gaming considering Windows 10 is being released imminently, with DirectX 12 at its core.
On the gaming front, Intels will perform better than AMDs on games written for DirectX 11. For DirectX 12, they will be more comparable.
My advice to T-Man as a result of this is... if you can, wait a while before commiting to parts until more DirectX 12 games hit the market and more benchmarking can be done, not only to get better comparisons but also because it could drive down the price of an Intel if you choose to go for one! :)
-
Just remember how long it took DX11 to really matter. Due in part to the fact that MS didn't go past 9 on XP. Which is pretty much the same as what they're doing now with not releasing DX12 on windows 7.
-
Absolutely Klaustriphobia. I think the article I posted even said as much!
It really annoys me that I'm going to have to install Windows 10 to reap the benefits, as Win 7 is the best to this date (in my opinion). Well... arguably I could say XP but you have to hack the crap out of it to get the benefits and it could theoretically be done with 7 as well. But that's how the market works, although, saying that, Windows 10 will be free for a lot of people. So apart from the hassle of reinstalling the OS, it kinda becomes a moot point.
Time will tell how long it will actually take to make the transition, no doubt about that. But i don't think it will be as long as DirectX 11. "Ashes of the Singularity" is already released on alpha, which is a DirectX 12 game. IIRC, more are expected towards the end of the year!
-
"AMD bad" - fanboy
"AMD good" - reasonable and valid
ok
-
AMD is alright per dollar in the CPU market, and currently a little ahead in the GPU market in terms of that juicy "upper mid-range" as far as I can tell. I'm sticking it out to see where the Nano releases at and what happens to the market when it releases, but right now the R9 390X (290X) is pretty damn competitive with the 980. I wouldn't invest in AMD shares right now, their time may be limited, but their equipment isn't all bad.
If I had straight $1500 to spend on a machine though, yeah Intel/Nvidia all the way though.
-
Gee1337, I am sorry but could you please stop with the poor advice regarding AMD FX CPUs. Unless you of course want OP to get a system that is outdated before he even buys it.
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=90027.msg1789813#msg1789813
-
@ Fury
Nothing I have said is incorrect though, so it is not "poor" advice.
If an 8350 can be competitive with an i5 4690 for much less due to DirectX 12, then that is a no brainer.
Did you miss the part where I said, "Wait until more benchmarks have come out for DirextX 12 before deciding."
Did you miss the part where I said, "Spend a bit cheaper now for future upgrade is an option."
Did you miss the part where I said, "If you don't want to wait, overclock or upgrade, then get an Intel."
Did you miss the part where the OP said, "I will be multi-tasking."
Did you miss the part where I said, "An AMD buyout by Samsung would not be bad thing and I hope it happens."
Did you miss the part where I said, "I am trying to give the OP options depending on his needs."
Did you miss the video I posted on that thread regarding the TDP discussion in desktops?
Did you miss the part where I said, "Do not go higher than an 8370."
Did you miss the part where I said, "I can't afford to go for Intel chips."
Did you miss the part where I said, "I would prefer to spend an extra £100 on a GPU than a CPU when gaming."
Did you miss the parts I listed that he get for £1035? There wasn't even an AMD part in that list!
Everything I have said is based on research.
Would you like another video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvLRZxRL8N8
What happened with the i5 3750K when it used X Split compared to the 8350 when playing Crysis? Okay, this was a couple of years ago, but the point is still relevant. Here's what happened:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
Once again, I am not trying to sway the OP one way or the other. I am trying to give him options based on what his needs are!
If I had the money, I would go all out and get the top end kit which does mean Intel, but probably an AMD GPU. I tend to upgrade every 18 months or so, so I do not have to spend £1500 every 3 years or so because a lump sum like that would end up being needed for something else like work on my house, car, a holiday, xmas or children. The list I posted for £1035 didn't even include an aftermarket cooler.
The last piece of advice I gave the OP was to see if he could wait a while, to see if the release of DirectX 12 could drive down the price on the Intel chips should he wish to go for one. The OP would ideally like to spend £1000 (could push to £1500) and he needs a full box build. If he games, and gets an Intel, he is not going to be able to spend as much on a GPU which is more important for gaming.
Is that really bad advice?
Is it bad to try to save someone money so they can buy a better part for cheaper and spend more money on a different part?
I'm so sorry that I telling people not to discount AMD offends the Intel fanbase. Call me a fanboy all you want, but to Intel fanboys all I have to say is "Intel compiler", and remember what kind of company you pour your money into! The truth is that I chose my parts based on a price/performance ratio because that matters; and what I save on the CPU I can then spend on a GPU because that matters!
When it comes to GPUs, I have absolutely no bias as I have had good and bad experiences with ATi/AMD and NVidia. Currently, I use an NVidia which the link I posted earlier shows that it is more suited on an AMD cpu! Go figure.
-
You're awfully quick to resort to throwing "fanboy" and "fanbase" words around, shame on you.
AMD 900 series chipsets are grossly outdated by today's standards. That alone takes FX CPUs out of the equation for anyone who wants to build a modern computer. On the assumption that DX12 gives AMD bigger advantage than Intel at lower price points, that's great, but it does not magically make the 900 series chipset modern. Not only that, but the FX CPUs are two CPU generations behind of what AMD has, so they don't even offer the best AMD could offer.
All that said, if outdated motherboard and poor single-thread performance won't bother you and you absolutely need 8 threads for cheaper than an i7, then sure go for AMD.
Oh and by the way, there is no guarantee that if Samsung or any other company for that matter buys AMD, is not buying AMD for its patents and other intellectual property and then selling off physical assets. Those patents and other IP are more valuable to most other companies than laptop/desktop/server markets that AMD is already having trouble keeping.
I for one hope that AMD miraculously recovers starting next year with its Zen-based CPU and APU lineups and new motherboard chipsets, because a buyout would cast even murkier future over AMD than what it currently has.
And before you accuse me for being Intel fanboy, I am not. I very much like AMD for its business practices compared to Intel and especially NVIDIA. I hate NVIDIA, yet I own GeForce GTX 970. When I am looking to buy a new product, I have to base my decision on cold facts of today, not what if's of the unforeseeable future.
-
Yeah, there is practically no reason to get an AMD processor for games. As I said earlier, if you want to save money, that Pentium is $70 and better than anything AMD offers at that price. It will take years for DX12 to be mainstream, by which time all of these low end processors would be outdated anyway.
What happened with the i5 3750K when it used X Split compared to the 8350 when playing Crysis? Okay, this was a couple of years ago, but the point is still relevant. Here's what happened:-
This is not a typical use case though. How often does anyone encode video and play a high end game at the same time? The 8350 is better for encoding/streaming, but unless you're actually doing that more often than regular gaming, it doesn't make sense to buy it for that.
-
Pardon mild necrothreadage. I just realised I never did pass on the news and say thanks to everyone (massive apologies for that); I recently was able to get the new rig (and am in fact typing this message from it).
I did decide to go with a self-build in the end as Gee and other's recommended, since the advice here from Gee and E made me feel a lot more confident choosing what I needed, and we reckoned I could with the budget and that knowledge get a PC that'd be slightly better and last longer. That Dell would've been a darn good PC, but likely would've needed an upgrade not long down the line which would've negated any saving from the deal.
Below is what we ended up with (pardon for pic admins, have nowhere to plonk them at the moment). 850W PSU (recalled your warning E about power bottlenecking so went with a beefy one), i7 Haswell motherboard ('MSI Gaming 5' it's apparently called) with a GTX980. 16GB of RAM in it, plus the 4GB for graphics the card has built in. Plonked a small SSD for running the OS (Win 10 Pro, which I've liked so far must confess).
It runs FS_Open full-blast like a bloody dream ('Icarus' looks so weird without stutter, all the ships are so slow) and got Unreal on there fine.
Wanted to pass on a genuine thanks for people here who advised for giving their time (E and Gee especially); had actually been largely unemployed till very recently so this had literal years of savings (and in fact all of my savings) banked on it and didn't really know what to do about it. Ended up feeling quite confident buying it, which is a rare feeling for me (am an over-thinker and paranoid as heck, for the record :lol:). I'm hoping over the next few years to get into games work, and get a little more active on HLP (realised recently I've been here for over a decade and contributed zilch compared to some :o), so I reckon this rig will serve me well for that.
Cheers again.
[attachment deleted by nobody]
-
I read your post and think "overkill".
Then again, I did bought myself what could have been considered a somewhat "overkill" pc a few years back and I must say it was indeed a good investment.
You'll have that monster running for years without a problem at all. Congrats!