Advertisement
Boards are fundraising to help the people of Ukraine via the Red Cross at this horrific time. Please donate and share if you can, you will find the link here. Many thanks.

First time build budget €600 to €800

  • 19-10-2017 12:52pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 24 ✭✭✭ oconnor.mike81


    1. What is your budget?€600 to €800


    2. What will be the main purpose of the computer? [Gaming] and [music] (If gaming include which games)
    GTA V, Farm sim 17,

    3. Do you need a copy of Windows? [Yes/No]
    Yes.

    4. Can you use any parts from an old computer? [Hard drive/DVD Drive/Case/PSU/etc.] (If possible state brand and model of the parts to ensure compatibility)
    No

    5. Do you need a monitor? [Yes/No]
    No, have a Hitachi 50HK6T74U 50 Inch 4K

    5a. If yes, what size do you need.


    5b. If no, what resolution is your current monitor and do you plan to upgrade in the near future? 3840 x 2160 pixels

    6. Do you need any of these peripherals? Speakers/headphones


    7. Are you willing to try overclocking? No


    8. How can you pay?
    Credit Card.

    9. When are you purchasing? [In 30 days or less]

    10. If you need help building it, where are you based? Kerry/Limerick

    Would you be very greatful for any help.

    Regards,

    Mike


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,397 Digital Solitude


    Budgets way too low for 4k gaming, you'll be upscaling 1080p. Won't ruin your day but just as a warning


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 ✭✭✭ oconnor.mike81


    How much should I be considering?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,168 Grahamer666


    I would imagine double of your max.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,397 Digital Solitude


    I'm not up on hardware and prices ATM bit I imagine a 580 would be at the low end for 4k, that would give Medium settings with AA turned off I think.

    As mentioned, your budget is sound for 1080p upscaled on your TV but you won't get great 4k gaming under about €1200


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,935 ✭✭✭✭ TerrorFirmer


    That TV is pretty low-end and although it probably has an OK 4k picture, it's quite bad for gaming. Response time of 50ms (monitor is usually 2ms-5ms), only 50hz and cheap TV's tend to have poor upscaling so the picture might look poor at non-native 1080p.

    So even if you shelled out about €1,200 for a somewhat capable 4K gaming PC (4k, medium settings) you're still hamstringed by a really bad response time and a 50hz panel with your TV.

    A lot of people don't take these things into consideration when buying a cheap TV but it makes them painful to play on.

    You're much better off increasing the budget by just a little and getting a 24" 1080p monitor for about €120-150.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24 ✭✭✭ oconnor.mike81


    If was to include a 1080p 24" monitor, around the €950 this is outside my current budget.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭ BloodBath


    Maybe better off getting the new xbox one x coming out November 7th?

    That thing has a fair bit of power. Most games will run above 1080p and upscale the rest of the way to 4k. It even enhances the graphics on the older titles.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,084 ✭✭✭✭ K.O.Kiki


    Lads you're all full of sh*te.

    For older/non-AAA/non-FPS multiplayer games, his budget is fine for 4k/Medium-High settings, or even 1440p-Upscaled.

    Here's a machine that should be quiet & small enough to plonk in the living room.

    PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

    CPU: AMD - Ryzen 5 1400 3.2GHz Quad-Core Processor (£138.29 @ Amazon UK)
    Motherboard: MSI - B350M BAZOOKA Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard (£71.62 @ Amazon UK)
    Memory: G.Skill - NT Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR4-2400 Memory (£56.59 @ Amazon UK)
    Storage: Crucial - MX300 275GB 2.5" Solid State Drive (£79.40 @ Amazon UK)
    Video Card: Gigabyte - GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB Windforce OC Video Card (£188.99 @ Amazon UK)
    Case: SHARKOON - CA-M MicroATX Mini Tower Case (£63.69 @ Amazon UK)
    Power Supply: Corsair - RMx 550W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply (£79.97 @ Amazon UK)
    Total: £678.55
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-10-19 16:05 BST+0100


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,397 Digital Solitude


    K.O.Kiki wrote: »
    Lads you're all full of sh*te.

    For older/non-AAA/non-FPS multiplayer games, his budget is fine for 4k/Medium-High settings, or even 1440p-Upscaled.

    Rude...

    He's only named 2 games, one of which is GTAV, which is pretty hefty


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,299 ✭✭✭✭ BloodBath


    You're probably right. It doesn't need to run at native 4k anyway. You could get away with doing 2560x1440 and upscaling it with that 1060.

    I'd still go for the 6gb version of the 1060 though. Texture quality is something you will really notice at high resolutions and 3gb just doesn't cut it anymore. Game devs are pushing way past this and there is virtually no performance impact as long as you have the graphics memory.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,935 ✭✭✭✭ TerrorFirmer


    4k medium-high is a bit of a stretch for a GTX1060 3GB when talking about AAA games like GTA V. For a comfortable, stable 4K experience at reduced settings/good framerate you would want a GTX1060 6GB or RX580 8GB at a minimum in my opinion.

    But still doesn't get around the problem of a TV with poor upscaling, 50hz and response time of 50ms which is really a killer. Better off with a 24" 1080P monitor and that GTX1060 3GB and happily run most things at 1080p ultra.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,168 Grahamer666


    BloodBath wrote: »
    Maybe better off getting the new xbox one x coming out November 7th?

    That thing has a fair bit of power. Most games will run above 1080p and upscale the rest of the way to 4k. It even enhances the graphics on the older titles.

    I'd agree with this. For a cheaper price than that partpicker list he'd get a better experience from the Xbox imo.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,084 ✭✭✭✭ K.O.Kiki


    Rude...

    He's only named 2 games, one of which is GTAV, which is pretty hefty
    BloodBath wrote: »
    You're probably right. It doesn't need to run at native 4k anyway. You could get away with doing 2560x1440 and upscaling it with that 1060.

    I'd still go for the 6gb version of the 1060 though. Texture quality is something you will really notice at high resolutions and 3gb just doesn't cut it anymore. Game devs are pushing way past this and there is virtually no performance impact as long as you have the graphics memory.
    4k medium-high is a bit of a stretch for a GTX1060 3GB when talking about AAA games like GTA V. For a comfortable, stable 4K experience at reduced settings/good framerate you would want a GTX1060 6GB or RX580 8GB at a minimum in my opinion.

    But still doesn't get around the problem of a TV with poor upscaling, 50hz and response time of 50ms which is really a killer. Better off with a 24" 1080P monitor and that GTX1060 3GB and happily run most things at 1080p ultra.
    I'd agree with this. For a cheaper price than that partpicker list he'd get a better experience from the Xbox imo.

    https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2604-gtx-1060-3gb-vs-6gb-benchmark-review/page-4
    gtx-1060-3v6gb-gta-1440p.png
    gtx-1060-3v6gb-gta-4k.png


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,497 ✭✭✭✭ Billy86


    To be honest, I was using a TV before moving to a projector and didn't have much of any problem at all. A lot I would imagine depends on what you're playing and how competitively, in a lot of first person shooter online games those milliseconds probably make quite a difference but for single player games I had zero issues whatsoever. I also didn't have any real ones on those online shooter types, but then again I'm fairly crap at those games anyway so not exactly playing in any way competitively. :p

    Here's a video of GTAV at 4K high settings running well over 60fps on a 1060 (I'd go for the 6GB version personally, just not a fan of the 3GB model)


    Also some more titles at 4K medium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aud_Xa57Dio


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 29,039 CMod ✭✭✭✭ ancapailldorcha


    Billy86 wrote: »
    Also some more titles at 4K medium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aud_Xa57Dio

    Off-hand, the 3GB 1060 is only 90% as powerful as its 6GB brother. It's not just less memory, the card has also been nerfed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,497 ✭✭✭✭ Billy86


    Someone has been studying! :pac:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,935 ✭✭✭✭ TerrorFirmer


    Billy86 wrote: »
    To be honest, I was using a TV before moving to a projector and didn't have much of any problem at all. A lot I would imagine depends on what you're playing and how competitively, in a lot of first person shooter online games those milliseconds probably make quite a difference but for single player games I had zero issues whatsoever. I also didn't have any real ones on those online shooter types, but then again I'm fairly crap at those games anyway so not exactly playing in any way competitively. :p

    Not all TV's have poor input lag. Usually just the cheap/budget/low end models but it can be a thing with expensive models also.

    I was just about to buy an LG 4K set which has excellent reviews but when I decided last minute to specifically look into gaming it turned out to be an appalling set for games, think it was something like 80ms.

    The TV I got instead is a Samsung at about 20ms. A lot higher than my monitor at 2ms obviously but to be honest I don't notice any difference, unless you were a major player I doubt most people would either as you rightly say.

    But when it's >50ms you do start to notice badly. Literally there is a perceivable gap between pressing a button and the action happening.

    It's not a TV vs monitor argument, it's more about certain TV's.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 ✭✭✭ oconnor.mike81


    Hi All,

    Thanks for your input.

    I will increase my budget.

    Got the following

    i5 7500
    Asus prime Z270 motherboard
    San disk ssd 120
    €420 including delivery



    Going getting 16 gb ram 3200 ddr4 (second hand) is next on the list and case

    Then OS and second hard disk

    Followed by graphics and sound card.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,497 ✭✭✭✭ Billy86


    I wouldn't go with the Z270 or 3200mhz RAM on an i5 7500 to be honest, the benefits of each of those are really geared more towards Intel 'K' chips (e.g. i5 7600K) and would be money wasted on a standard one. I would also definitely go with a Ryzen 1600 in it's place but the 7500 is a grand processor too if you're particularly set on using Intel. The money saved by getting 2133 or 2400mhz RAM and a B250 motherboard instead would probably free up enough budget to move either to an i7 CPU or a higher tier of GPU (e.g. getting a 1070 instead of a 1060 6GB, which if you're aiming for 4K resolution would be a huge boost).

    Example of what I mean:

    PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

    CPU: Intel - Core i5-7500 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor (£161.74 @ Amazon UK)
    Motherboard: Asus - PRIME B250M-K Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard (£59.99 @ Box Limited)
    Storage: SanDisk - SSD PLUS 120GB 2.5" Solid State Drive (£48.99 @ Amazon UK)
    Total: £270.72
    Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
    Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-10-21 13:20 BST+0100

    That's €302, so €120 saved.

    Best priced 2400mhz, £112 - https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/product/hdmxFT/pny-memory-md16gk2d4240015ab
    Best priced 3200mhz, £158 - https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/product/T9Gj4D/gskill-memory-f43200c16d16gvk
    The £46 price difference = €50

    So that's €170 in the difference.

    ---

    i5 7500 is £100 (€112) less than the i7 7700 - https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/product/9mRFf7/intel-core-i7-7700-36ghz-quad-core-processor-bx80677i77700
    1060 6GB is £110 (€125) less than a 1070 - https://www.novatech.co.uk/products/evga-geforce-gtx-1060-sc-gaming-6gb-gddr5-graphics-card/06g-p4-6163-kr.html#utm_source=affiliatewindow&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_campaign=PCPartPicker (1060) vs https://www.alza.co.uk/zotac-geforce-gtx-1070-mini-d4738965.htm?kampan=pcpartpicker_uk_prodej_graphics-card-with-nvidia-geforce-gtx1070-chip-eb167a6&utm_source=pcpartpicker_uk&utm_medium=product&utm_campaign=pcpartpicker_uk_prodej_graphics-card-with-nvidia-geforce-gtx1070-chip-eb167a6&IDP=7291 (1070)

    Both the i7 and 1070 combined would be about €235 more than the i5 and 1060; if you only go with one the GPU would probably be the better upgrade given the resolution you're going for, but even both would only come to about €60-70 more. The difference with the 270 and 3200mhz RAM would not be noteworthy in any real way, shape or form (270 is for overclocking which the 7500 does not do, and if I recall Intel only read up to 2400mhz unless you are overclocking no matter how fast the RAM is), while the difference from a 7500/1060 vs a 7700/1070 would be pretty huge and would add even up to a few years more lifespan into the system, most likely.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,935 ✭✭✭✭ TerrorFirmer


    Yes, I agree all of those choices don't really make any sense at all.

    With 4K resolution you would be fine with Intel Coffee Lake i3-8100, 16GB of DDR4 2666Mhz and the cheapest Z270 motherboard you can find. The i3-8100 is virtually identical to the i5-7500 and a lot cheaper, but the motherboard cost will make it the same as buying an i5-7500 + B250 board.

    But at least then you have the latest platform and a better quality motherboard.

    Other choice is Ryzen 1200 and B350 which is cheaper again though notably slower than i3-8100 unless you're willing to overclock.

    Or else Ryzen 1600 (more expensive CPU) + A320M motherboard (cheaper board), doesn't need overclocking to the same extent and is a good six core processor.

    You also don't need a soundcard, motherboards have integrated audio which is just as good unless you've got a very specific set of requirements audio wise.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,497 ✭✭✭✭ Billy86


    If he goes with a Ryzen, one thing that's been on the back of my mind is an A320 + a 1600X - does that work? As in a 1600X is essentially a factory overclocked 1600 for want of a better term, but the 320 doesn't support overclocking, so would it limit the 1600X CPU, or would it still run to it's full potential?

    Personally if they do go Ryzen and go with a 1600 I think the 350 is still worth it even if they have no plans to overclock - it's a CPU that would last many years and would offer more freedom if they get more confident in looking at OC'ing down the line when they are more familiar with the system and components etc. I think it's only about a €20 difference from the cheapest A320 to a solid B350 like the 'Bazooka' model.

    Also missed the sound card bit - I nearly made the same mistake doing my build last year and I think it was yourself that warned me off of it!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,935 ✭✭✭✭ TerrorFirmer


    Yes, it's the same as the i7 and i7K models for example - the latter will still work fine in a cheap motherboard and you still get the benefit of a higher base clock, you just can't overclock.

    I would just stick with the regular 1600 though as it also comes with a cooler, the 1600X doesn't which is a further expense.

    The difference in motherboards would be about €30 between cheapest A320 and B350, probably about €40 or so for a decent B350 to make it worthwhile. I think in this case an A320M + Ryzen 1600 is a safe enough bet.

    Pity there are no cheap motherboards out for Coffee Lake yet as a budget board + i3-8100 would be a killer combo, unfortunately at the moment you're forced to shell out €100 for a motherboard.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,497 ✭✭✭✭ Billy86


    Ah yes, forgot about the stock cooler, had the 1600X and 1500X confused there.

    Though B350s seem like they might have come down a little recently, a Bazooka model which if I am correct has a very good reputation can be had for £71.62 (€80.14) compared to the lowest priced A320 on PCPP at £51.94 (58.12), so €22.
    Just noticed that's a sale price from Amazon, seriously good price to be getting it at all the same!

    How Intel didn't have even a handful of budget friendly motherboard models at the ready for launch has my mind absolutely boggled to be honest (I've read they're not due until 2018, either!)


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,084 ✭✭✭✭ K.O.Kiki


    Yes, I agree all of those choices don't really make any sense at all.

    With 4K resolution you would be fine with Intel Coffee Lake i3-8100, 16GB of DDR4 2666Mhz and the cheapest Z270 motherboard you can find.

    Z270 is not compatible with 8xx0 (Coffee Lake)!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29,935 ✭✭✭✭ TerrorFirmer


    Sorry, meant to say Z370.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 ✭✭✭ oconnor.mike81


    Just a quick
    Bought the Z370 motherboard
    120 sandisk
    Going to the i3 processor next
    And power supply

    Thanks again y'all


Advertisement