add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube
LiquidBody
  • 70 months ago

Hello... I am building my first gaming PC and I was wondering if the forum could make suggestions on my current choice. Thank you in advance for all the input.

Sidenote: The memory Ram choice below is green in color as there is no option in the memory ram list. I would go for either Black or red.

Thanks again

pcpartpicker

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Type Item Price
CPU Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor $239.99 @ Newegg
CPU Cooler Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler $24.99 @ Newegg
Motherboard MSI Z97-GAMING 5 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard $139.99 @ Newegg
Memory Corsair Vengeance LP 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory $96.99 @ Amazon
Storage Sandisk Extreme II 240GB 2.5" Solid State Drive $132.98 @ Newegg
Storage Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive $52.91 @ OutletPC
Video Card MSI Radeon R9 280 3GB TWIN FROZR Video Card $199.99 @ Newegg
Case Cooler Master HAF XM (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case $99.99 @ Newegg
Power Supply EVGA 750W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply $99.99 @ NCIX US
Total
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available $1062.82
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-08-06 17:25 EDT-0400

Comments

  • 70 months ago
  • 2 points

I would recommend using a fx 8350 for the processor. 4.0 ghz 8 cores a great CPU for 50$ less than a i5. And the the extra cash towards a 290x maybe.

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

I would second this. I've got a 8350 (currently OC'ing it) and it performs well in all the games I throw at it, only bottleneck being my GPU (6970 OC'd). Can't go wrong with an 8350, especially since they're so overclockable :)

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

Hello Knowledge, Thanks for the input. I went to look for the reviews on both of those CPU. FX 8350 do outperform i5 4690k when multi-cores are required. But single core comparison i5 still have the edge. and games nowadays still don't use more than 2 cores, i5 would probably be more suitable for me, as it opens for future upgrades, it runs cooler, requires less power (therefore, requires less cooling than FX). FX might run faster with its 8 cores but with this many disadvantages, I don't really see the point of getting 8 cores FX just for the sake of saving 50 dollars as I might have to get a better cpu cooling for the FX which ended up costing you about the same. Or am I wrong?

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

Go for the R9 290 VGA instead of 280 if you don't mind the extra 100$ because it outperforms it. Other than that I guess it's all good.

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

Thank you for the fast reply. I thought about the r9 290 Tri-x, Sapphire made. But wouldn't it be an overkill for playing games just in 1080p?

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

It might be a little overkill but better have it and not need it than need it and not have it, i'm going to buy it in a few weeks for my first rig and i want to be sure that i can play games on ultra at 1920x1080. And if you still don't want to buy it you can go for 280x.

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

Hey, I would have to disagree with you on that comment that you made, 'better have it and not need it than need it and not have it.' I said this because technology turn over so fast. And, Since I am a poor student, I choose PC parts that is the most efficient while costing less. R9 280 is priced at about $200, 280x average price is about $300, While R9 290 average price is about $400. I checked on some game benchmark, performance - r9 290. but at the cost of 2 r9 280 which if you do CF would run faster than r9 290. Granted some games do not support CF. And even for the most taxing games (battlefield 4) on 1,920 x 1,080, DirectX 11, 'Ultra' Settings, R9 290 fps average 61, R9 280x Average fps 50 and R9 280 average fps 43. I personally believe that the extra $200 is not necessary as I am not gaming above 1080p and with the fact that technology turned over so fast, by the time I do need the R9 290 power, R9 290 might cost me less than the difference that I have saved. ($200) and r9 280 price could even drop to $100 range which gives me a total of $100 savings for the a better performance than a single r9 290 card.

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

I agree with you. I'm a poor student too, and i've been saving for some time now to be able to build a good gaming pc, but the reason i chose the 290 is because everything already costs more in my country (1500$ for a 1000$ build) and when the 290's price would have dropped, it wouldn't drop a lot in Lebanon, and i know i will be using the VGA for a lot of years so i went for the better one which costs a bit more (i was initially going to buy a GTX 770 for 485$ which was a lot overpriced so i went for the 290). But after all, everyone has their own case and knows whats best for them.

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

Wow! GTX 770 for $485!!!! that's crazy prizing!? now I see why you suggested the r9 290. so much premium on the GPU that its not even worth going for the budget card. If I am in your case, I would probably go for r9 290 too. Sorry to hear that Mazendia. Thanks for the input!

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

https://pcpartpicker.com/part/gskill-memory-f314900cl9d8gbsr I have experience with this RAM and the 1600mhz variant. Cheaper and faster, plus it's black and red, and low profile. There may be better options out there even than this but this is a pretty sweet deal as it is :)

  • 70 months ago
  • 2 points

yea. Most definitely. its on sale huh right now on newegg... Thanks for the input KillaDisturbed. I will think about it.

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

No problem! Always happy to help people ascend to Gaben! :)

  • 70 months ago
  • 1 point

The thing about the 8350 is that as games start taking advantage of more cores you will slowly start seeing it perform better and better. As for the heat you could get a 8320 processor it is clocked at 3.5ghz with 8 cores. Basically same cpu pretty much just not over clocked. It comes in even cheaper than the 8350. Like 10$ or something. So with less speed not as much heat. And if you want it to go faster you could easily overclock it to perform exactly like a 8350.

[comment deleted]
[comment deleted]

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube