Description

I am Currenly using this build for gaming at 1080p med/heigh settings for most new games the fx 6300 is going to hold me back in the long run but it was cheap so meh im going to upgrade to a i5 4690k and also get a 970 so i can 1080p max alll games. the build is going great so far with no issues.

Part Reviews

CPU

Good performace but am3 + is dead so...

CPU Cooler

Keeps my fx 6300 frosty

Motherboard

Great uefi bios setting and overall good mobo

Video Card

Great gpu gets good frames in most new titles

Case

Amazing case cons: small not a lot of cable managment space

Log in to rate comments or to post a comment.

Comments

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

I see you've got the cm storm devastator combo! How do you like it?

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

I like the detailed pictures.

  • 57 months ago
  • 2 points

XD

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Like jipster said, look into overclocking your 6300, it takes it like a champ as long as your motherboard can take it. I have one clocked at 4.3, but some people have gotten theirs to get even up to 5.0 from the stock 3.5, so I'd really recommend playing around with it, especially with that liquid cooling going for you.

  • 57 months ago
  • 1 point

did you have any issues with the BIOS not being updated? the proc worked right out of the box?

  • 54 months ago
  • 1 point

How the motherboard holding up?

  • 39 months ago
  • 1 point

"Amazing case cons: small not a lot of cable managment space"

Actually the cable management is quite good and simplistic, must not be good at it m8

  • 27 months ago
  • 1 point

its a good build but you could use a ssd card and it would be so much better

  • 59 months ago
  • 0 points

Don't get a 970 for gaming at 1080p get a gtx 960

  • 59 months ago
  • 3 points

Don't get a 960 get a R9 380, its cheaper and better, also don't get a 970 the R9 390 is cheaper, has more than twice the ram and annihilates it. In fact do not even consider Nividia until the $660 region, and only consider them because AMD was stupid enough to only feed their GPU 4 GB instead of the 8 GB they would have needed to put on it to knock them off their high hat. But AMD was lame and if you are playing games that need more than 4 GB and are paying $660 get the 980 ti, if not the Fury X will out preform it.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

I agree for the most part, but the 390 and 970 are the exact same price.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

390 is $20 cheaper... That is if you buy MSI, the MSI 390 is the best 390 in terms of OC-ing.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127874

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127832

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

That's dumb. The MSI R9 390 isn't even in stock on Newegg, and I like the gigabyte cards anyways. The reference 970's are $329, they are the exact same price.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Its the same price on amazon.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

It really depends what kind of games he wants to play and at what refresh rate... If he's playing really intensive games then he might need the extra power over a 380/960!

+1

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

I would take the 980 to over the fury x because of how much further the 980 ti overclocks, especially under water.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Yeah but water is expensive with $600 already out on the GPU not everyone will be able to shell out more.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Most games don't even use 4gb of Vram, so having 8gb is a waste. Amd is unreliable and is hot. Nvidia has more support from devs. Nuff nuff giggly puff.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

That, ladies is what we call a raving fan boy. "8-gb is a waste" Damage control. Just a year or two back, 2gb was "more than enough for 1080p". "AMD is unreliable" that is 100% opinion, I have never seen AMD be unreliable and I do not even know what you mean by unreliable, do you mean driver updates? Yeah they take on average longer than Nvidia, but to what end, I have never had an unstable AMD card. If you mean the debacle with the 390's being recognize as 290 by windows, that was Microsoft's fault, had nothing to do with AMD. "AMD is hot" I see this a lot of this from other fan-boys, yeah 970 vs 390, the 390 gobbles up 130 more watts but I, in my experience, have yet to see crazy changes in my room or instability due to this, so I do not see the problem. "Nvidia has more support from dev's" I have played one game ever that has said "Nvidia, the way it's meant to be played" so the relevance of you statement may vary to put it lightly. The format was unprofessional, and your information, for the most part, unreliable.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Lmao you mad bruh?

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

No, how does disassembling your blind rave make me angry?

[comment deleted by staff]