It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
The main point of an A10-5800K is the integrated graphics. It makes a ton of sense if you're looking to build a severe budget gaming system running integrated graphics. But it doesn't make any sense to buy that if you're going to get a discrete video card. For the latter on a budget, you'd want something like an FX-6300, which skips the integrated graphics that you wouldn't use, anyway.
On the processor side, any modern desktop (as opposed to nettop) processor would be a huge upgrade over what you have. On the video card side, however, the Radeon HD 7660D integrated graphics would only be a modest upgrade over your current GeForce 9600 GT video card--which isn't six years old, by the way, so I'm assuming you upgraded to it well after buying your computer initially.
It's really a question of what you want to spend. If you're looking to spend $500 excluding peripherals (you'd keep your own monitor, keyboard, mouse, etc.), then integrated graphics is what you get. On a $600+ budget, there's room for a discrete video card that will double the performance of the integrated graphics and be a more worthy upgrade for you. So, which way do you want to go with your budget?
Also, can you assemble parts yourself, or will you need to use up about $100 or so of your budget to pay someone else to use a screwdriver for you? And are you going to keep old peripherals, or do you need a new monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers, and surge protector?
Originally posted by Mondo80 I have seen a few mainboards that offer crossfire capabilties the work with the intergrated a10 chip, so if i want a little more omph in the graphics dept I can add a 7600 card.
Asynchronous CrossFire doesn't work very well. You really don't want to go that route. If you add a discrete card, you use that instead of the integrated graphics, not in addition to it.
IMHO, you should upgrade to an i5 Ivy Bridge instead of an AMD. From what I know, AMD cpu are always worst than the Intel couterpart. If you are planning to OC, look for the cpu with the "K" suffix at the end, they are easy to OC to like 4.3Ghz with a decent CPU cooler, but this might cost more than your budget the more I think about it since you will need a good motherboard for OC and a good CPUI cooler. If you are planning to play any recent games with your PC, you definitely need a descrete GPU so stay away from any integrated GPU. Also stay far far far away from SLi/Crossfire, its only usefull and worth the money if you play at stupid resolution, like anything higher than full HD res which is 1920x1080 or using multiple monitors to play your games. Else its just a BIG waste of money.
You shouldn't have any problem to build a budget PC with 500 to 750$.
really depends on your budget, for just 3570k and a MB you're looking at around $300. You would be left with memory which you can get 8gb 1600mhz for $20-30 right now. A decent PSU which would run around $30-60 bucks depends if you mess with rebates. Windows OS = $80 with deals or combos, cd drive $15-20.
Now is a decent time to find an SSD, there has been several brands of 12x gb drives going for $70-90. However you can go with a HDD for 1T for the same price just slower.
So that leaves a GPU, likely left for your budget is enough for a 7770 which is a good card but it would be your bottleneck.. but you'd have the option to upgrade it later to something else.
If you've been using what you have been then going with the 3570k and upgrading the GPU later is probably the best option because upgrading from an AMD to an Intel would require a new MB/OS aswell as the CPU. So the GPU just makes more sense to upgrade later.
You should be able to accomplish this with about $700 if you go with 3570K. If you're patient enough, wait for price drops and snag items when on sale. The deals will be spread out until about the first week or so of january.
Originally posted by Mondo80 How modest of a graphical upgrade are we taking about? If its only a 50% to 100% improvement I might consider doing the seperate chip and card option, but the a10 does way more than that I'll go with the cheaper option. It takes me 5 -8 minutes to load Civ 5, once it gets going its fine, never crashes. Also even on lowest settings DoW2 gets about 2 -15 fps. Space Marine and Darksiders runs fine for some reason. There are a few strategy games I would like to play but can because of my current setup.
The graphics improvement would be a lot less than that. There are probably even situations in which a GeForce 9600 GT would outperform Radeon HD 7660D integrated graphics.
Your big bottleneck right now is your processor. Even modern nettop processors aren't far behind what you have. 3 GHz may sound fast, but the architecture is the problem, as NetBurst achieved high clock speeds by not doing very much per clock cycle. Turning down graphical settings usually doesn't do much to ease the load on the processor, either, so it's likely that you could turn settings up substantially without changing your (very low) frame rates.
Originally posted by SirFubar
IMHO, you should upgrade to an i5 Ivy Bridge instead of an AMD. From what I know, AMD cpu are always worst than the Intel couterpart. If you are planning to OC, look for the cpu with the "K" suffix at the end, they are easy to OC to like 4.3Ghz with a decent CPU cooler, but this might cost more than your budget the more I think about it since you will need a good motherboard for OC and a good CPUI cooler. If you are planning to play any recent games with your PC, you definitely need a descrete GPU so stay away from any integrated GPU. Also stay far far far away from SLi/Crossfire, its only usefull and worth the money if you play at stupid resolution, like anything higher than full HD res which is 1920x1080 or using multiple monitors to play your games. Else its just a BIG waste of money. You shouldn't have any problem to build a budget PC with 500 to 750$.
Yes, a Core i5-3570K is a better processor for gaming than anything AMD has to offer. It's also more expensive. It's a question of your budget. On a $750 budget, you're better off going with AMD and putting the money elsewhere. On a $1000 budget, there's rarely any reason to look at AMD processors.
Here you go:
That comes to $729, before $45 in rebates. If you want to go Intel on the processor, that would add about $100 to the price tag.
Is 223 GB of storage capacity enough for you? If not, then you'll have to drop the SSD and get a hard drive of whatever capacity you need.
How does this sound?
Aside from the ram, which I can always upgrade later, it seems like a pretty nice setup.
Originally posted by Mondo80
How does this sound? http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=5552097&CatId=7701 Aside from the ram, which I can always upgrade later, it seems like a pretty nice setup.
That would consist of buying a bundle for the sake of buying a bundle. Buy exactly the same parts individually and it would probably be about $100 cheaper. And even that still wouldn't leave enough room in your budget to fill out the rest of the system sensibly.
I did some more digging around and found this:
Are Gigabyte mainboards good?
I'm planing on keeeping the case, power supply, moniter (hannspree 22" (1680x1050)), backlit keyboard/mouse and my Bfg 9600gt 1gb card (for now).
With a little bit of tweaking (need to double check if that PSU is crap or not) this might suit your needs nicely. One thing I will say is that expecting a $500 or less PC to last 5-6 years and perform well on games as the release is asking a tall order (regardless of the genre).
Thats a good enough deal. Personally I have a hard time not getting the 990FX chip if I am getting AMD since the boards are pretty cheap. I was about to interject and say you definetly don't want an APU if you are planning to play RTSs. Definetly want a full processor instead of half of one.
On your budget I would go AMD videocard. When every buck counts, shouldn't pay a premium for a name.