The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Building a new PC
rts
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I have seen posts like this in the past, but most of them seemed to be geared to building a pc for under a certain amount of money. That really isn't my goal with this post. My goal is to gather information about what all of the new technology involved in a good gaming PC does, and what is important to have. I hope it is appropriate for this forum.
So, I am thinking about building a new gaming PC. I don't need it to be top of the line, but I would like it to run most newer games at the highest graphic setting fairly smoothly. If that actually does require top of the line, I may be willing to consider some top of the line components. I am aiming for around $3000 I guess, without a monitor. I have had a few sites thrown my way from people I have spoken to about this previously. These include, Tiger Direct, Newegg, and Falcon computers. I have done some research on my own, but I guess I feel it is easier to get straight answers from people with experience.
I guess I will just list off some of my questions:
1. Why kind of graphics card should I be looking at? ATI? Nvidia?
2. What is Dual SLI?
3. What kind of processor should I be looking at? How fast?
4. Does the type of RAM matter, or just the quantity? (I was planning on 2 gigs, perhaps 3)
5. What are the best sound cards on the market? Any recommendations?
6. What should I do to keep this thing easily upgradable?
7. What kind of cooling systems are people using these days?
8. What kind of monitor is good for gaming? Is it reasonable to just use a plasma tv or something as a monitor?
9. Should I build it myself or order it from a company?
I am sure I will have more questions after getting some answers. I would really appreciate any help on this. I really want to do it right.
So, I am thinking about building a new gaming PC. I don't need it to be top of the line, but I would like it to run most newer games at the highest graphic setting fairly smoothly. If that actually does require top of the line, I may be willing to consider some top of the line components. I am aiming for around $3000 I guess, without a monitor. I have had a few sites thrown my way from people I have spoken to about this previously. These include, Tiger Direct, Newegg, and Falcon computers. I have done some research on my own, but I guess I feel it is easier to get straight answers from people with experience.
I guess I will just list off some of my questions:
1. Why kind of graphics card should I be looking at? ATI? Nvidia?
2. What is Dual SLI?
3. What kind of processor should I be looking at? How fast?
4. Does the type of RAM matter, or just the quantity? (I was planning on 2 gigs, perhaps 3)
5. What are the best sound cards on the market? Any recommendations?
6. What should I do to keep this thing easily upgradable?
7. What kind of cooling systems are people using these days?
8. What kind of monitor is good for gaming? Is it reasonable to just use a plasma tv or something as a monitor?
9. Should I build it myself or order it from a company?
I am sure I will have more questions after getting some answers. I would really appreciate any help on this. I really want to do it right.
skype: rtschutter
rts on
0
Posts
So that kind of explains why you constantly see threads with the topic "Gaming PC for $1000"--because the only way to get specific answers on which parts to use is to start with a budget.
But I guess I will put a dollar number on there if that will help with this kind of discussion. $3000 would be good I think. I don't want to go crazy, but I want to be able to play games like Company of Heroes or Medieval 2 without worrying about performance. And my notebook doesn't really allow for that at the moment.
Anyway, let me answer some of your questions.
Which graphics card brand you choose is just a matter of personal preference. I love Nvidia's front end, but you might prefer Radeon's.
As far as SLI, avoid it. It's a waste of money. Just get one good video card. Dual SLI is an even bigger waste of money, so avoid it more.
If you've got the money to spend (and you do) you should get an Intel Core 2 Duo setup. It's the best bang for your buck right now.
Type of RAM really isn't important unless you're obsessive about the parts you choose. Just get something that's not a shitty off-brand. 2 gigs is more than enough.
Soundcards aren't really important unless you're a total audiophile. Onboard sound is just fine.
I wouldn't worry too much about futureproofing your system. The only component you'll be likely to even consider upgrading is the video card, and as long as you don't get some crazy off-brand motherboard, you'll be able to look at PCI-E cards for the forseeable future.
You probably won't need to worry about cooling either. The stock parts will most likely serve you just fine.
I'd look into a widescreen LCD with a 5ms response time if you want a perty monitor.
Building it yourself is the best plan if you feel competent. It will save you a shitload of money.
Here are prices:
Shuttle case (retail and OEM versions)
Compatible Processors (I'd go with Athlon 64 x2)
Compatible RAM (Stick to reputable brands, like Kingston ... never buy Patriot RAM)
EDIT: Just noticed this ... almost the exact same specs as the above case/mobo/PSU, but slightly larger and like $175 cheaper.
Oh wait .... $3000? With that kind of budget you can pretty much buy whatever the fuck you want. You could get a completely ridiculous display like this and then buy the most expensive components you can find and then still have a few bucks left over.
Dual SLI is the use of four Nvidia cards together in one system. There aren't many motherboards that support it because there aren't many people who are willing to pay for four video cards. It should be noted that four cards does not equal a 400% increase in performance, especially considering many games are CPU limited. Also, Dual SLI is not entirely bug free.
As for a CPU, get a Core 2 Duo in whatever price range you can afford. They're the best chip out there for gaming, besting all of AMD's comparably priced CPUs. Intel should have the gaming market on lockdown for the next year or so at least. The best aspect of Intel's Core 2 Duo chips is that they overclock like mad and for $180-200 you can get a CPU (Intel E4300) that'll run at the same speed as chips that cost 4-5x as much.
New systems should have 2GB of RAM, especially since Vista will NEED it to play games well.
Soundcards aren't the necessity that they once were. Many onboard sound processors are quite good these days. Unless you want to hook your PC up to a home theatre receiver and you need a card like an Auzentech X-Mystique or a Creative Labs X-Fi, I'd skip it and use the onboard hardware.
I wouldn't buy AMD right now if you're looking for an upgrade path. Socket F will be coming out and also AM2 will be replaced by AM3 eventually, to add DDR3 support when it becomes available. Intel C2D's use LGA 775 which is all you really have to worry about currently.
For a heatsink, there are a number of very good air cooling solutions, but Thermalright is always at or very near the top in terms of performance. If you need something a bit quieter (though Thermalright heatsinks don't have to be loud if you don't put a loud fan on them), Zalman makes a number of high performance, low noise heatsinks.
A big widescreen LCD is preferred for gaming, but if you've already got a plasma and you don't mind having your PC in your living room, your TV is fine too.
Whether or not you should build it yourself is up to you and whether you have the knowledge required. It's pretty simple. Everything just plugs in but if you have zero experience working with PC hardware, you may want to go the prebuilt route.
EDIT: Oh, and avoid Tiger Direct like the plague. Whoever suggested them should be shot.
It makes little to no difference unless you plan on getting an Open_GL game. In that case, go with Nvidia. However, Nvidia currently has the fastest video cards in the market right now (the 8800 series).
2. What is Dual SLI?
A waste of money.
3. What kind of processor should I be looking at? How fast?
Dual core, preferably Core 2 Duo unless you already have a bitchin 939 system.
4. Does the type of RAM matter, or just the quantity? (I was planning on 2 gigs, perhaps 3)
I would look at buying 2 sticks of 1GB running in dual channel right now. You don't need anything fancy unless you plan on overclocking.
5. What are the best sound cards on the market? Any recommendations?
I am very happy with my Creative Audigy 2 and I have heard positive things about the X-Fi series.
6. What should I do to keep this thing easily upgradable?
Get a beefy power supply (at least 18A on the 12v+ rail), PCIe, and a motherboard that will support Intel's latest offerings.
7. What kind of cooling systems are people using these days?
120mm fans are a lot quiter than their smaller counterparts. Some people are going for water cooling.
8. What kind of monitor is good for gaming? Is it reasonable to just use a plasma tv or something as a monitor?
I would actually stick with a CRT if you are able. Otherwise, look for something with a high contrast ratio (this has a large effect on image quality), low response time (under 16m), and a high resolution.
I use a 27" LCD HDTV and games look great, however, text is a little large.
9. Should I build it myself or order it from a company?
I would do it yourself if you have experience (or a good return policy).
However, here is some advice:
Processor: Dual cores are becoming more and more common but don't offer a significant performance increase unless you're doing something processor intensive at the same time you're gaming. Still, AMD Athlon64 X2 processors are very affordable, so something like the X2 4800+ is a good choice.
Intel's Core 2 Duo supposedly get better performance, but I'm not well versed in them, so I can't offer anything there.
RAM: 2GB is all you'll need for now, even with a dual core machine. Don't worry about getting any more than that, but match the speed of the RAM to the speed of the processor. As in, the Athlon64 X2 has a bus speed of 667MHz, so the PC2 5300 RAM is top end there. Intel chipsets have higher bus speeds, so you could go all the way up to the PC2-8000.
More important that bandwidth concerns, however, are the actual cycle timings of the RAM. The Mushkin Extreme Performance PC2 5300 RAM has the best out-of-the-box timings with 3-3-3-10 that I've seen, so that's a good choice for an AMD system.
Video: ATi and NVidia are pretty much neck and neck. They play constant one-upmanship in the performance race, so just shop around. With your price range you're looking at a really high end card. GeForce 8800 GTX or Radeon X1950 XTX would kick some serious ass.
As far as the SLI configuration goes (ATi's version is called Crossfire), it's two video cards working together. You need two identical cards that support the dual operation (The card specs will say whether or not it's SLI or Crossfire enabled). I would say don't bother, though. For the price you pay it's not worth it. You'll see less than a 50% improvement at optimum conditions for double the price and power draw. In fact, Toms Hardware VGA charts shows SLI doesn't offer a significant performance increase at all.
Speaking of Toms Hardware, here's a good article:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/05/the_best_gaming_video_cards_for_the_money/
Hard Disks: Current Serial ATA motherboards have built in RAID support, so buy at least 2 hard disks. It allows something called "Striping", which basically means, the two hard drives act as one, doubling your bandwidth. Do some research on RAID arrays and figure out what you want.
My next computer (About a month away) will have 3 drives, possibly in a single OS drive + 2 drive RAID setup. Either that or a 3 drive RAID with two partitions. It's all good. After 2 drives, though, the performance increase with each added drive lessens. Your biggest jump is from 1 drive to 2.
Power: Ah, the most neglected part of a performance system. The PSU. DO NOT skimp out on this. Bad or underpowered PSUs are responsible for system instability and crashing in many computers. When in doubt, go bigger. With a top end single video card system, I'd say go with a 600 watt power supply. My brand of choice is Enermax, but there are lots of good ones. Research them. Bigtime. I can't stress the importance of the PSU enough.
So, there's plenty more components, but those are the major ones to a gaming rig. My next system will be mid-high end and cost $1300 CDN. It'll allow me to play Quake Wars so that'll be enough for me. :P If you want to spend $3000 you can certainly do that, but the best bang for your buck is found around the $1500 to $2000 range. Above that you start spending a lot more money for incremental increases in performance. Good luck!
After a while, you get sharply diminishing returns on what you buy.
The first $1000 gets you a lot of computing power, say 100 units.
The next 1000 gets you more, but not as much usefulness - say 80
The third 1000 gets you even less, say 50.
You don't really need that extra 50 to run any games. In fact, trying to be on the bleeding edge in terms of raw CPU power/RAM is probably a mistake since hardware and firmware will be optimized for Vista and DX10 over time; it's like having a super-RAM video card without the latest shader stuff. It cost more when it came out, but it is less useful.
You're probably best off dropping $1500 (at most - i have a machine that can sing with Oblivion, Midieval 2 and CoH.
If you are so cash-flush you are indifferent to spending $1500 and $3000, put that extra $1500 into a Roth IRA or a mutual fund and use it to fund continuing upgrading.
As for hardware advice, Tom's Hardware is the credited answer.
However, I might wait for the next generation of stuff that copes with Vista to come out to see how benchmarks turn out in that (really,really crappy) OS environment.
It rarely makes sense in a bang-buck ratio to buy the most expensive video card around. If you're going to upgrade in a year and a half anyway, consider dropping 300, 350 at the most.
Dual SLI, as many have stated, is a waste of money right now. Maybe when they better optimize the tech it'll be worth it. Getting a dual SLI capable mobo might be a good option, so you can upgrade to it later if things improve.
Intel's Core 2 Duo is easily the best processor right now, so a high-end one of those should do nicely. Dual-core processors aren't used a lot in games right now, but they will be in the near future (Supreme Commander and UT2007 come to mind).
With RAM, you want a quality brand, though you may not need the higher end stuff. 2GB is enough, but having more won't hurt. Look for RAM with low timings. Corsair XMS Pro 1GB sticks clock in at 2-2-2-7, which is pretty darn fast.
Even though onboard sound hardware is now quite good quality-wise, you may wish to invest in a separate sound card anyway. Some modern games (Oblivion, for example) really hate onboard sound. Anything under $100 will work fine. Turtle Beach is pretty good, as are the upper end Creative cards (the lower end ones have a lot of compatibility problems with games).
To keep the system upgradeable, you'll want as many RAM slots as you can get (which, IIRC, is 4). You can also buy a high-end powersupply so that you won't need to upgrade it when you update your system in the future. SeaSonic makes some nice high-end PSUs.
For a high-end system, you can't go wrong with water cooling. There are lots of retail watercooling kits that would work.
As for monitors, I personally use a 21 inch Trinitron screen, and I have yet to see a LCD/Plasma display come anywhere close to matching its image quality. I'm not sure how available these are any more, but they're awesome. Barring that, any LCD with a fast response time would be good for gaming.
Build the system yourself. A machine that costs $3000 in parts can cost $4000+ prebuilt.
I have a new question though. Vista was mentioned, and DX10. I am wondering how this should impact my decisions here. Am I going to have some piece of hardware become worthless when Vista comes out?
And also, the current display I am planning on using is my Samsung DLP TV. It works great with my notebook right now, and I am thinking of just leaving the desktop permanently hooked up. Which means I also want to run the audio through the amplifier. I still am considering other displays though, because I am unsure if I will always want to use the TV.
So far based on your suggestions I am looking at this setup:
Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 $183
http://shop1.outpost.com/product/4893640?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG
Though, I am curious as to the performance difference between this and the E6700 which runs around $500.
Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTS 640mb $489
http://shop1.outpost.com/product/5047055?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG
There is a more expensive version of the 8800 with more memory, but is that really necesary? Its nearly $200 more.
Corsair XMS 2 x 1GB DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel RAM $302
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820145587
Alright, I dont understand the bus speeds. This RAM has a bus speed of 400MHZ. Is that appropriate with this chipset? Is this RAM overkill, or not good enough for the system I want to build. I honestly dont understand RAM much at all.
So I am up to $974 and havent factored in a case, motherboard, drives, power supply, or sound card yet. Any thoughts on the setup so far?
And just a general comment - don't spend $3000. You're barely getting any increase in computing power for the dollars you're spending at that point. You'd be much better off buying a more reasonable computer - say, $1500, 2000 tops - then upgrading a few parts in a couple years (better video card, maybe a second hard drive), and even then there's really better things you can be spending your money on.
There's a jump, although it's not very substantial. The main difference between the two is that the E6300 has 2MB L2 Cache while the E6700 has 4MB. Other than that, it's default clock is lower (1.866 GHz vs 2.666 GHz), but well....the E6300 overclocks like a mofo
ok starting from the top. think about this. the E6300 will overclock at least 100% faster if you spend say.. 50 bucks on a good heatsink/fan.
it's really not worth the extra 500 for the stock speed increase as core2duo is very easy to overclock.
also, I think all core2duo motherboards require DDR2 ram. so you'll need this, or something similar.
the terms "240-Pin DDR2" are the most important to look for in ram.
As for the bus speed (ddr2 800, ddr2 533, ddr2 667, ddr2 900...) there's been much debate on the HardForum as to wether higher bus speed in the ram really makes a difference in overclocking or general performance.
tests showed maybe a 2-4% improvement going from ddr2 533 to ddr2 800. there are a lot of variables (timing, voltage, overall system synergy..) and YMMV.
you probably sholdn't spend over 300$ on 2g of ram. the differences above that are minimal.
Further Suggestions:
as for a motherboard, I would suggest Asus. something like the P5 series core2duo boards are very good; lots of features, easy O.C. stable.
on Power supplies... there is a lot of silliness going on with people wanting 600-700W power supplies just cause it's a bigger number. unless you're running quad SLI, or something like 30 hard drives. you won't even push a decent 500W supply.
Enermax is a good brand here, like this one.
Does that article suggest that the E4300 is a better choice than the E6300? Or just for overclocking? What will be a faster processor in the end?
3ds friend code: 2981-6032-4118
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814133187
Or the lower end?:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130071
Why are there so many companies producing 8800 cards? I don't understand how that works.
There is a shared architecture amongst all of the Core 2 Duo chips. Essentially, if you're going to overclock (which not everyone likes to do), you're paying for what your starting point is - pretty much any one of the chips when properly overclocked can beat any one of the other chips at its base speed. The E4300 was just released and may be in short supply, but has a higher multiplier, and supports an 800 MHz FSB. Basically, it's just easier to overclock.
An article concerning the 4300
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131045
Will most towers work fine? I want to find something subtle. That can sit next to my tv. Is it a bad idea to put a computer on top of the subwoofer? One of those boxy shaped computers looks like it would fit pretty well on top of the sub, but it would require a different motherboard wouldn't it? Regardless there is room for a tower on either side of the TV, or on the floor to the right of the center.
And here is an updated list of planned components:
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 $222
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16819115004
ASUS P5B Deluxe $180
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16813131045
GeForce 8800GTS 640MB $399
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16814130071
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB $276
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16820145034
Total: $1078
Missing: Case, Sound Card (if necesary), Power Supply, Cooling System, Drives
I'm of the belief that putting hard drives, a magnetic based media, next to a subwoofer, which is just a giant magnet, is a recipe for disaster.
but this is me drunk at 2am talking, I haven't kept up to date on the latest shielding methods and whatnot, so I could be spouting nonsense. at least it makes some kind of sense in my head.
Yeah, that's wrong. It would take a magnet of a few thousand Gauss strength to corrupt data on a hard drive. You'd need an industrial degausser for that. A subwoofer won't harm a PC in the slightest (provided you're not still using floppies).
The e4300 is preferrable because it has a 9x multiplier to the e6400's 8x. Which means you don't have to increase the Front Side Bus speed as much, which is often a limiting factor unless you get the right motherboard. When it comes to Core 2 Duos, the motherboard can often be the bottleneck because all C2Ds are really capable of 3.2Ghz or better with good air cooling. The e4300 is also cheaper. The combination of the higher multiplier and lower price make the e4300 definitely the way to go.
Since you can afford it, go for an 8800GTX instead of GTS. There's quite a bit performance difference between the two, actually. Also, just incase you DO care about saving some money versus performance, memory between 533, 600, and 800 has nearly no performance differences.
I used to feel the same way until I switched to a standalone sound card. First of all, my onboard sound card didn't have 5.1, which I later wanted for my new speakers. Second of all, it didn't have digital out, which I later wanted for another purpose.
The only thing I tend to leave onboard in the computers I build is the Ethernet. When a nice sound card is only about $100, it doesn't make sense to leave it out.
I'd recommend no soundcard unless you have specific requirements (Digital out) that the onboard sound doesn't provide. I'm pretty sure my onboard sound does 5.1 or more, so you should be good with just onboard.
For a power supply, I'd recommend Enermax. I gots the Enermax Liberty 500W, and it's modular, which means you haven't got a buttload of unused cables hanging around in your case.
I use stock cooling for my CPU, along with 2 12cm fans in the front and back. It's sufficient for any setup unless you're overclocking or sticking in a ridiculous amount of components.
Drives: I'd recommend the Western Digital Caviar series. I've had two over the last 7 years or so and they haven't failed me. Pretty cheap, as well. Get 250gb +
EDIT: It should be noted for clarity that Enermax does actually design and manufacture their own power supplies, but they're just not as good as Seasonic, Antec and Forton PSUs.
Ask any systembuilder shop
That's inaccurate for most motherboards. Many have 5.1 and digital out these days and if you look at soundcard comparisons that use RightMark Audio Analyser testing, you'll there's very little difference in terms of sound quality between standalone soundcards and onboard audio processing.
This comparison (which includes C-Media's newest processor, the CMI8788), shows there's very little difference between onboard and cards (-110db vs -120db SNR). The only benefit would be if you wanted a card that supported real-time Dolby encoding (which the X-Mystique and b-Enspirer do offer) to send surround sound game audio to your receiver via digital out. Unless you REALLY want that feature, there's no point to dropping $100 on a soundcard.
The Truepower Trio and Neo HE series come with some of the highest recommendations in virtually every hardware review site, magazine, etc. It's possible, of course, that systembuilder brick-and-mortar shops know something the aforementioned sources don't, I suppose...
and your comment is funny, because absolutely shops would know things review sites/mags wouldnt
they get a first hand look at reliability - and while the review places test 1, maybe 2 units for their writeup/opinion, shops sell through and troubleshoot hundreds for all their customers.
anyways thats what I've been told by places like memory express.
If you published a study with only one data point, would you be taken seriously? The answer is no, if you hadn't figured it out already. When you buy a car and it has to go in for a repair, do you immediately conclude that that manufacturer is worse than others? Antec's power supply sales are multiple times that of Enermax and as a result, despite having a lower rate of failure, the sheer volume of power supplies sold by Antec guarantees that there will be more Antec PSUs that fail compared to Enermax PSUs that fail.
Speaking of, Klipsch and Bose. Give me a fucking break. That crap is so overpriced, it's not even funny. Especially for your average idiot gamer than buys a 5.1 system and a soundcard to drive it, then sticks all 5 speakers right on the desk in front of him.
As for soundcards, though, if you want a good soundcard, forget Creative. You want Turtle Beach. They're cheaper, higher quality, and best of all, don't come with Creative's godawful drivers.
As for PSUs, there's a definite hierarchy:
Seasonic > Sparkle > Enermax ~ Antec > Thermaltake > Everything else
Antec tends to be the sweet spot in terms of price/performance. Do not cheap out on a PSU, though. If you're not going to shop by brand, though (which is good - brand loyalty sucks), keep in mind that wattage is just about the last thing you should be looking for.
You want high efficiency, overvolt protection, high sustained amperage on the 12-volt rail(s), possibly noise (lower dB rating is better), and then, finally, wattage.
As for cases, Arctic Cooling makes some really nice stuff, and they tend to come with Seasonic power supplies. They're a bit pricey, though. Again, Antec comes up big, because they make a pretty solid case, too. The solution series (matte finish) and Sonata (gloss finish) are quite nice and come with a ~400 watt Antec Truepower PSU, which is a solid choice. The case and the PSU are like $100 together. It's damned near unbeatable, for the money.
Lian-Li and Coolermaster also make some really nice cases, but you're going to have to sell limbs to pay for them, and their build quality and features are at best marginally better than Antec's.
I wasn't saying that Antec isn't as good as Enermax, or that Enermax is a better choice. I was letting the guy know my experiences. That's all.
I'm going to have to disagree on some of those.
I'll agree speakers are the #1 component in any system. And Realtek's stuff is very nearly as good as any sub-$200 sound card, EMU 0404 and 1212M included. Audiophiles scoff at Bose because it's poorly engineered garbage. They use two inch drivers that cost mere cents and through a couple of enclosure design tricks, they get bloated, muddy bass that ignorant consumers interpret as audiophile sound. Everyone should scoff at Bose because their speakers don't provide a remotely flat frequency response, not just because they're hideously overpriced. But that's marketing for you. People will buy it. Klipsch is scoffed at because their current speakers are terrible in comparison to their old models and are terrible compared to similarly priced competition. There's really no reason at all to buy Klipsch these days.
Also, Turtle Beach hasn't been so hot for a while now, in comparison to other sound card manufacturers. There have been some significant flaws with their last couple cards and they don't really compete even with Creative Labs' offerings, no less Auzentech or Bluegears.
I'm with you on the cases though. It's going to be a while till I replace my Antec P180. I just don't see how you can improve on a mid tower that has seven 3.5" bays fully dampened with silicone grommets and an isolated PSU compartment. It's also damn slick looking.
A cursory search on google will tell you the same thing.