Noah
I am purchasing parts off of newegg and tigerdirect here is a list what do you think any advic
Motherboard: ASRock 970 EXTREME4 AM3+
CPU: AMD FX-8150 Zambezi 3.6GHz
RAM: G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3
HDD: Western Digital Caviar Black WD1002FAEX 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive
DVD: ASUS DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS Black SATA 24X DVD Burner - Bulk - OEM
Video Card (only item from tigerdirect): EVGA GeForce GTX 550 Ti 01G-P3-1556-KR Video Card - 1GB, GDDR5, PCI-Express 2.0(x16), 2x Dual-Link DVI-I, 1x Mini-HDMI,
No power supply yet please suggest a power supply
Answer
Intel is the ONLY price/performance solution, forget about AMD's watt sucking Bulldozers, read these links to find out why,
Performance Analysis
With the addition of numbers for the Intel Core i3-2100 and Core i5-2400 in some of our benchmarks, it's plain to see that even with a price cut, the FX-8120 struggles in most of our tests. In very multi-threaded tests such as Cinebench and WPrime, it just about manages to hold its own against the similarly-priced Intel Core i5-2400 - slightly ahead in WPrime, a little behind in Cinebench and noticeably faster than the cheaper Core i3-2100. The Core i5-3570K is much faster in both tests, but then it costs around £30 more.
Our image editing test was a real let down with the FX-8120. It came bottom of the graph, being trounced by a staggering 500 points by the Core i3-2100 - a CPU that costs just £90. Even the ageing AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition was considerably faster while the similarly priced Intel Core i5-2400 was nearly twice as fast. Clearly, if you do any amount of photo editing, the AMD FX-8120 represents particularly poor value.
With eight cores at its disposal, you'd think the FX-8120 might stand a good chance in our video encoding test. Sadly this wasn't to be and its score of 2,150 was over 400 points short of the Core i5-2400. Thankfully for the FX-8120, the Core i3-2100 was noticeably slower, with its two physical and two virtual cores not able to keep up.
Everything started to fall away from the FX-8120 again in our multi-tasking test, where it was yet again at the bottom of the pile, coming 100 points short of the much cheaper Core i3-2100, while the Core i5-2400 was nearly 50% faster - pretty damning result. Overall, it was no surprise to see the FX-8120 rock bottom, bettered by the Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition and Core i3-2100 and trounced by the Core i5-2400.
Our game test lacks data for the two Sandy Bridge CPUs as we tested these some time ago, however, with the Intel Core i5-3570K retailing for just £30-40 more, it's clear from our results that the FX-8120 isn't a great buy for games either. The Intel CPU was 60 per cent faster in Arma II while costing around 30 per cent more - not a bad rate of return if you can afford the extra layout.
Conclusion,
Sadly, its more of the same bad news for AMD or anyone with a Socket AM3+ motherboard looking for a decent CPU for around the £150 mark. The FX-8120 just isn't a good choice when it comes to the kind of applications we run on our PCs. It's regularly outpaced by far cheaper Intel dual-core CPUs, while the similarly-priced Intel Core i5-2400 is significantly faster in many of our tests. It's not all bad news for AMD - before we get accused of being biased towards Intel, we have no qualms recommending the A8-3870K for those looking to build a budget gaming PC, while we also recommend many of its graphics cards.
As it stands, the FX-8120 will have to be a lot cheaper for it to be worth considering over an equivalently-priced Intel setup, while owners of the Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition can rest assured that there aren't any worthwhile upgrades yet.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2012/07/27/amd-fx-8120-review/8
Gaming CPU Hierarchy Chart
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html
Intel is the ONLY price/performance solution, forget about AMD's watt sucking Bulldozers, read these links to find out why,
Performance Analysis
With the addition of numbers for the Intel Core i3-2100 and Core i5-2400 in some of our benchmarks, it's plain to see that even with a price cut, the FX-8120 struggles in most of our tests. In very multi-threaded tests such as Cinebench and WPrime, it just about manages to hold its own against the similarly-priced Intel Core i5-2400 - slightly ahead in WPrime, a little behind in Cinebench and noticeably faster than the cheaper Core i3-2100. The Core i5-3570K is much faster in both tests, but then it costs around £30 more.
Our image editing test was a real let down with the FX-8120. It came bottom of the graph, being trounced by a staggering 500 points by the Core i3-2100 - a CPU that costs just £90. Even the ageing AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition was considerably faster while the similarly priced Intel Core i5-2400 was nearly twice as fast. Clearly, if you do any amount of photo editing, the AMD FX-8120 represents particularly poor value.
With eight cores at its disposal, you'd think the FX-8120 might stand a good chance in our video encoding test. Sadly this wasn't to be and its score of 2,150 was over 400 points short of the Core i5-2400. Thankfully for the FX-8120, the Core i3-2100 was noticeably slower, with its two physical and two virtual cores not able to keep up.
Everything started to fall away from the FX-8120 again in our multi-tasking test, where it was yet again at the bottom of the pile, coming 100 points short of the much cheaper Core i3-2100, while the Core i5-2400 was nearly 50% faster - pretty damning result. Overall, it was no surprise to see the FX-8120 rock bottom, bettered by the Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition and Core i3-2100 and trounced by the Core i5-2400.
Our game test lacks data for the two Sandy Bridge CPUs as we tested these some time ago, however, with the Intel Core i5-3570K retailing for just £30-40 more, it's clear from our results that the FX-8120 isn't a great buy for games either. The Intel CPU was 60 per cent faster in Arma II while costing around 30 per cent more - not a bad rate of return if you can afford the extra layout.
Conclusion,
Sadly, its more of the same bad news for AMD or anyone with a Socket AM3+ motherboard looking for a decent CPU for around the £150 mark. The FX-8120 just isn't a good choice when it comes to the kind of applications we run on our PCs. It's regularly outpaced by far cheaper Intel dual-core CPUs, while the similarly-priced Intel Core i5-2400 is significantly faster in many of our tests. It's not all bad news for AMD - before we get accused of being biased towards Intel, we have no qualms recommending the A8-3870K for those looking to build a budget gaming PC, while we also recommend many of its graphics cards.
As it stands, the FX-8120 will have to be a lot cheaper for it to be worth considering over an equivalently-priced Intel setup, while owners of the Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition can rest assured that there aren't any worthwhile upgrades yet.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2012/07/27/amd-fx-8120-review/8
Gaming CPU Hierarchy Chart
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html
Best gaming computer under 600 dollars?
Joe
It needs to be able to run minecraft over 125 fps, have fast internet, good memory, play other games great too, it doesn't matter whether it is a laptop or a desktop just as long as it meets my requirements.
Answer
If you want a killer gaming pc then increase your budget a bit, around $1000 will buy you a nice gaming pc which can run almost any game available at decent fps.
Following is config i would suggest(I own this config pc and i know it runs everything so good)
Intel Core i5-3570K Quad-Core Processor 3.4 GHz 4 Core ($209.99)
Nvidia Geforce GTX 660, GDDR 5, 2 GB, PCI 3 ($200)
Corsair Vengeance 8GB (1x8GB) DDR3 1600 MHz ($66.98)
BenQ VA LED GW2255 21.5-Inch Screen LED-lit Monitor ($130.77)
Corsair Builder Series CX 600 Watt ATX/EPS 80 PLUS (CX600) ($66.24)
A compatible mother board and other things will cost around another 200$
And if you want to stick with 600$ budget then compromise on few things.
Intel Core i3-2120 Dual-Core Processor 3.3 GHz 3 MB Cache LGA 1155 ($122.37)
Nvidia Geforce GTX 650, GDDR 5, 1 GB, PCI 3 ($109.99$)
Corsair Vengeance 4GB (1x4GB) DDR3 1600 MHz ($ 38)
Corsair Builder Series CX 600 Watt ATX/EPS 80 PLUS (CX600) ($66.24)
BenQ GL2055 20-Inch LED-lit Monitor ($89.99)
A compatible mother board and other things will cost around another 200$
Note: All prices are from Amazon, so it is possible you might get some parts for lower price from your local retailer.
If you want a killer gaming pc then increase your budget a bit, around $1000 will buy you a nice gaming pc which can run almost any game available at decent fps.
Following is config i would suggest(I own this config pc and i know it runs everything so good)
Intel Core i5-3570K Quad-Core Processor 3.4 GHz 4 Core ($209.99)
Nvidia Geforce GTX 660, GDDR 5, 2 GB, PCI 3 ($200)
Corsair Vengeance 8GB (1x8GB) DDR3 1600 MHz ($66.98)
BenQ VA LED GW2255 21.5-Inch Screen LED-lit Monitor ($130.77)
Corsair Builder Series CX 600 Watt ATX/EPS 80 PLUS (CX600) ($66.24)
A compatible mother board and other things will cost around another 200$
And if you want to stick with 600$ budget then compromise on few things.
Intel Core i3-2120 Dual-Core Processor 3.3 GHz 3 MB Cache LGA 1155 ($122.37)
Nvidia Geforce GTX 650, GDDR 5, 1 GB, PCI 3 ($109.99$)
Corsair Vengeance 4GB (1x4GB) DDR3 1600 MHz ($ 38)
Corsair Builder Series CX 600 Watt ATX/EPS 80 PLUS (CX600) ($66.24)
BenQ GL2055 20-Inch LED-lit Monitor ($89.99)
A compatible mother board and other things will cost around another 200$
Note: All prices are from Amazon, so it is possible you might get some parts for lower price from your local retailer.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Title Post: I am looking to build a gaming computer for about 500 to 600 dollars?
Rating: 100% based on 998 ratings. 5 user reviews.
Author: Unknown
Thanks For Coming To My Blog
Rating: 100% based on 998 ratings. 5 user reviews.
Author: Unknown
Thanks For Coming To My Blog
No comments:
Post a Comment