Building a $650 gaming computer?

[Popinski]

It's over.......

I felt some rumbling on the road on the way to the store. 5 minutes later 3 of 4 tires went flat.

GOod bye money.......Dang I hate cars.

I'm just going to take my old curent computer and change its ram, motherboard, processor and power supply.

Thanks for the help guys.. such bad luck.

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

Sorry to hear about your misfortune.

If you're going to change out all those parts, do take a look at the link i talked about in the "thank you" thread you created. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at how the NewEgg.com deal is exactly what you're looking for...

 

[Nick R]

AMD has matched intel in the current market. In gaming, unless you have the highest end GPU available, the graphics card will be the limit... Not the CPU. AMD CPUs match Intels in the mid market. These are what I think you should look at. The integrated graphics are adequate for alot of casual gaming, and you can always add a PCIe16x card later if you want. And it's cheap. And all I have to say is wow, RAM prices skyrocketed in the past year. Last christmas I was able to buy a 4GB Patriot Extreme Performance CL4 kit of DDR2-800 for $52, not it's $96. And until you upgrade to Windows 7 x64, or some other 64 bit OS, you will only be able to utilize 3.25GB of RAM, as that is the maximum 32 bit adressable space.

Cost: $383.94 plus shipping.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128395

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103688

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211288

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371033

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136218

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827106335

 

[OVERKILL]

AMD hasn't even come CLOSE to matching Intel.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-cpu,2570.html

Page 6:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-cpu,2570-6.html

Where we start getting into the mid-range CPU's, we see the i5-750 as the clear pick. I like this quote:

Quote:
The new Core i5 brings top-of-the-line Nehalem-class performance at a $200 price point. We recently awarded it our Recommended Buy honor after seeing it stand up to more expensive CPUs in games and other demanding apps.

For those desiring the best possible performance, the Core i5-750 can be overclocked to great effect, performing similarly to the $1,000 Core i7-975 Extreme at its stock settings when pushed a bit.




There isn't an AMD CPU past that point in the review. Because they don't make anything that touches i7.

Their heirachy chart on page 7:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-cpu,2570-7.html

Rounds it off nicely. The entire top segment is Intel CPU's:

Core i7-965, -975 Extreme
Core i7-860, -870, -920, -930, -940, -950
Core i5-750
Core 2 Extreme QX9775, QX9770, QX9650
Core 2 Quad Q9650

With no AMD CPU's that are comparable.

In the next segment down:

Core 2 Extreme QX6850, QX6800
Core 2 Quad Q9550, Q9450, Q9400
Core i5-650, -660, -661, -670

and two AMD CPU's: Phenom II X4 Black Edition 955, 965


AMD hasn't matched anything.

They have however, been doing a great job with ATI! I love my 5870!

 

[Nick R]

Tomshardware is one of the worst websites out there. Anandtech is far better. If you are looking for price/performance in the $80-$150 area, AMD is highly competetive. Not to mention there is an AMD fab facility being built about 15 minutes from my house, in Malta NY.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Tomshardware is one of the worst websites out there. Anandtech is far better. If you are looking for price/performance in the $80-$150 area, AMD is highly competetive. Not to mention there is an AMD fab facility being built about 15 minutes from my house, in Malta NY.


Dude, no offence, but I've probably been browsing hardware websites since before you knew what a computer was; given that I'm at LEAST a decade older than you and got my first PC in 1988. I was hacking on VAX when you were probably in diapers. I am likely the LAST person you want to be giving computer advice to.

I remember when both Tom's and Anand started. This was in the mid 90's.

Anand is more technical, but both provide similar data and information from either is equally valid. Tom's "roll-up" comparison are often better for a price/performance break-down and why I cited them. Since they often include tables, like this one did.

In the "budget" market, AMD is a good bang for the buck. But anything mid-range and up, they have nothing on Intel. Which completely goes against your statement that "AMD matches Intel"; they clearly don't. AMD has no mid to high range offerings to compete with Intel at all. Unless we pretend the computer market consists of CPU's solely below $200.00. Considering most of us spend more than that on video cards, I don't think that's a very logical constraint to apply here, do you?


The Athlon has had its run. It is an old architecture that is clearly showing its age. AMD has brought nothing to the table that can compete with Core. Until they do, there is simply no contest in terms of all-out performance.

 

[Nick R]

I won't argue that intel holds the top segment, but these days lets face it. It's not about processor power anymore, it's about GPU power. If I put a 5890 in my computer right now and upgraded my monitor, and grabbed a slightly larger power supply, my Wolfdale at 3.4Ghz would be able to handle that thing with no problem. And if I felt like bumping the voltage a tad I could get it to 3.6Ghz, ande even 3.8. You can buy a $140 processor and never be wanting for computing power. Unless of course you do nothing except video/audio encoding and things like that. But for gaming, games arne't CPU bound anymore except at low resolutions, they are GPU bound in nearly all cases.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
I won't argue that intel holds the top segment, but these days lets face it. It's not about processor power anymore, it's about GPU power. If I put a 5890 in my computer right now and upgraded my monitor, and grabbed a slightly larger power supply, my Wolfdale at 3.4Ghz would be able to handle that thing with no problem. And if I felt like bumping the voltage a tad I could get it to 3.6Ghz, ande even 3.8. You can buy a $140 processor and never be wanting for computing power. Unless of course you do nothing except video/audio encoding and things like that. But for gaming, games arne't CPU bound anymore except at low resolutions, they are GPU bound in nearly all cases.


Depends on the game. Even with the most hardcore video card, there are some games that are just CPU pigs. When I had my 4890's and my Q6600, there was a noticeable FPS difference between the CPU at 3.0 and 3.6Ghz.

Going from the stock clocks on the i5 to 3.2 yielded an increase in FPS on a number of games. Not to mention a more responsive system.

While the big gains in games are definitely gained by superior video hardware, one cannot ignore the role a CPU plays.