Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Building new PC soon

KorvikKorvik Member Posts: 11

I'm looking at purchasing parts for a new PC soon and I wanted to get some assistance on a possible build. I plan on purchasing within the next few days. I live in the US and I'm too far from any major PC retail stores to make it worth while. I would like to buy everything online (newegg, amazon, tigerdirect, etc...).

 

What I do need:

 -Case, Mobo, CPU, heatsink, GPU, SSD, maybe a storage drive, PSU, RAM (8 gig should be good), LCD monitor, OS license.

 

What I do not need:

 -Mouse, keyboard, speakers, optical drive. For what its worth, I haven't used an optical drive in a long time. I know I can put Windows 8 onto a flash drive and install from there, so I see no need for one.

 

My budget is going to be $1,000. I'm sure I can stretch it a bit if it is worth it. However, I would prefer to keep it as close to the $1,000 mark as possible. Gaming on this PC is sole focus of this build, so I shouldn't have any extraordinary requests.

 

My main concern is to get the best bang for my buck, so I don't care if its Intel, AMD, Nvidia parts that will be going into this build. I couldn't care less as to what manufacture made the parts, as long as they're not junk.

 

I know on a budget build AMD-FX CPU's might be a better choice so I could step into a better GPU. I'm completely open to this possibility, but if I can step into an i5, I won't complain.

 

I honestly don't want to do any major overclocking, or none in the immediate future, if I can get by without it. I would still like the option of a modest OC in the future.

 

I look forward to any suggestions you folks can give to me.

«1

Comments

  • xmentyxmenty Member UncommonPosts: 716

    I am no PC expert but you can have a look at some recommendations here. 

    http://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcforme/comments/2fjp7f/i5_alienware_alpha_runs_for_799_can_something/

    Pardon my English as it is not my 1st language :)

  • IAmMMOIAmMMO Member UncommonPosts: 1,462
    If you just MMO, stick to intel, if you plan to game a lot of single players over the next five years, AMD not  a bad choice, Since next gen consoles are AMD tech and games ports to PC will be already tweaked for AMD, unless a Pc exclusive.  Don't go cheap on motherboard,
  • syntax42syntax42 Member UncommonPosts: 1,378

    I think this site is good for those looking for some place to start their builds.  It is ad-supported.

    http://www.logicalincrements.com/

     

    I would recommend prioritizing a SSD in a gaming PC build.  The performance difference is worth the money.  If you need storage for media, get a mechanical drive and only use it for movies, music, pictures, etc.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    With that budget I would wait a few months if possible so you can get DDR4 memories. Right now are the motherboard for them pretty expensive (at least here in Sweden but probably everywhere) but prices will fall soon when more and more manifacturers start making them.

    You can of course get a really nice graphics card already since you can use that in your old PC and the same with an SSD and a good monitor. An modern SSD and a new GFX card will improve your current PC a lot  anyways.

    Here is some good stuff:

    SSD: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2W01AZ5550 $130, 250 gig. This one have software so you can move your old harddrive to it so getting it in the PC is fast and easy. I have one myself.

    GFX card: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133564 Nvidia 780 GTX, $330. This is the top card from last generation but still beats most from the new one.

    Cheaper alternative: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127744 Nvidia 760 GTX, $190. Far below the first card but a pretty good deal still. It might be worth to wait for the 960 card here though.

    Monitor: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2PF1R18585 $150, 23", 1920x1200 Best one for that price. Higher resolution screens cost 3 times as much sadly.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,135

    Ah, right.  I forgot the monitor.  That will definitely require cutting back on the video card.  Anyway, here's a monitor:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824160167

    And then you can get an OS/video card combo:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2054754

    That comes to $1026 in total.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,135
    Originally posted by Loke666

    With that budget I would wait a few months if possible so you can get DDR4 memories. Right now are the motherboard for them pretty expensive (at least here in Sweden but probably everywhere) but prices will fall soon when more and more manifacturers start making them.

    You can of course get a really nice graphics card already since you can use that in your old PC and the same with an SSD and a good monitor. An modern SSD and a new GFX card will improve your current PC a lot  anyways.

    Here is some good stuff:

    SSD: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2W01AZ5550 $130, 250 gig. This one have software so you can move your old harddrive to it so getting it in the PC is fast and easy. I have one myself.

    GFX card: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133564 Nvidia 780 GTX, $330. This is the top card from last generation but still beats most from the new one.

    Cheaper alternative: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127744 Nvidia 760 GTX, $190. Far below the first card but a pretty good deal still. It might be worth to wait for the 960 card here though.

    Monitor: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2PF1R18585 $150, 23", 1920x1200 Best one for that price. Higher resolution screens cost 3 times as much sadly.

    The difference between DDR3 and DDR4 memory basically doesn't matter in a desktop.  The reason DDR4 motherboards are expensive is that they're for Intel's high end CPU.  That requires Intel's high end chipset, and that's expensive because Intel charges a lot for it.

    That SSD is rather overpriced.  It's not really any better than the Crucial M500 that I linked, but it's $38 more expensive.

    The first video card you linked is a GTX 970, not a GTX 780.  It's also a nice card, but if you want to make room for a higher end video card like that, you're definitely going with an AMD processor.  And even if you do want to spend that much on a video card, you can get a faster Radeon R9 290X for cheaper.  But I wouldn't go more expensive than the R9 290 that I linked above, as it would take cutting back elsewhere.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,135
    Originally posted by xmenty

    I am no PC expert but you can have a look at some recommendations here. 

    http://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcforme/comments/2fjp7f/i5_alienware_alpha_runs_for_799_can_something/

    Why do people do things like this?  He's asked for help in an appropriate place, and there's no need to send someone off to some other site.

  • jdnewelljdnewell Member UncommonPosts: 2,237
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    Ah, right.  I forgot the monitor.  That will definitely require cutting back on the video card.  Anyway, here's a monitor:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824160167

    And then you can get an OS/video card combo:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2054754

    That comes to $1026 in total.

    Why not steer him towards an AMD build instead of cutting back on the GPU and throwing in a cheap knockoff monitor?

    With the addition of a monitor into a $1000 build it does not make sense to go with intel. 

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,135
    Originally posted by jdnewell
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    Ah, right.  I forgot the monitor.  That will definitely require cutting back on the video card.  Anyway, here's a monitor:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824160167

    And then you can get an OS/video card combo:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2054754

    That comes to $1026 in total.

    Why not steer him towards an AMD build instead of cutting back on the GPU and throwing in a cheap knockoff monitor?

    With the addition of a monitor into a $1000 build it does not make sense to go with intel. 

    That's a perfectly legitimate approach.  i'd probably prioritize the CPU more today on the basis that:

    1)  it's easier to upgrade a GPU than a CPU later, as the new CPU will also require a new motherboard, a new OS license, and likely new memory,

    2)  GPUs are improving at a faster rate than CPUs (largely because GPUs scale well to more "cores" and CPUs don't), so a modern high end CPU will still be nice in five years, while any GPU you can get today will probably feel very dated in five years, and

    3)  it's easier to compensate for a GPU that isn't fast enough by turning down graphical settings than to do the same for a CPU.

    -----

    The monitor is a 22" 1920x1080 IPS monitor.  Sure, there are better monitors, but the one I linked will hardly be cheap junk.  Again, it's a matter of trade-offs, as paying more for a monitor requires cutting back somewhere else.

  • KorvikKorvik Member Posts: 11
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    Ah, right.  I forgot the monitor.  That will definitely require cutting back on the video card.  Anyway, here's a monitor:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824160167

    And then you can get an OS/video card combo:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2054754

    That comes to $1026 in total.

    That's right around the mark I was looking at price wise. I just didn't want someone posting a 1,200 build while assuming they're keeping it close enough for my budget.

     

    Thank you Quizz. I should be buying in the next few days, if not tonight. I'll post here if any combo deals are no longer available when I'm ready to check out.

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,193


    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Ah, right.  I forgot the monitor.  That will definitely require cutting back on the video card.  Anyway, here's a monitor:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824160167And then you can get an OS/video card combo:http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2054754That comes to $1026 in total.

    Going with R270 is absolutely akward solution how to save money.


    First thing to cut should be that SSD and aftermarket cooler...

    Next step is cheaper PSU, cheaper MB and if it is not enough, lower clocked i5 or even going with i3-4330.

    Cutting on primary workhorse of gaming computer is anything but smart.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,135

    If you would rather spend more on the GPU and less on the CPU today, as some have suggested, then you can drop the CPU, motherboard, GPU, and CPU cooler above in favor of these:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113327

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130679

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125505

    And then you use the stock cooler.  I'd advise against that approach, but it's sensible if you're a max settings or bust sort of guy, rather than being willing to turn down a few settings to make a game run smoothly.  It's also reasonable if you know that you're never going to upgrade the computer you buy now, but will instead run it until it dies or you replace the whole thing all at once.  But if you can build a computer today, you can probably replace a video card while leaving everything else intact in a few years.

    Part of the problem is that you'd lose an upgrade path.  If you have $300 to upgrade the first rig I linked three years from now, you buy a new video card, leave everything else as is, and then have a very nice gaming rig then.  If you scale back on several parts, then you have several things that it would be nice to upgrade and $300 won't buy an upgrade for all of them.

    If you go AMD as I linked, then upgrading the CPU is probably too expensive, and spending $300 on a video card leaves you with the same video card and a substantially slower CPU three years from now.  Even if you do expand the budget to get a new CPU, motherboard, memory, and OS, any video card you can buy today will be much slower than a good $300 card three years from now.

    Going with a slower Intel CPU as Gdemami suggests doesn't get around this, either.  A Core i3 is much more likely to be problematic in a few years than the FX-6350 I linked, so just upgrading the GPU then doesn't solve the problem.  The CPU upgrade option would be to get a Core i5-4690K that you could have bought today and had a faster CPU in the meantime in addition to spending less in total--and that's assuming it's not discontinued and off the market, as could easily happen:  New Egg doesn't carry any Sandy Bridge desktop processors at all today, and the Ivy Bridge processors it does carry aren't the top end K-series ones.  A cheaper Core i5 today has the same problems, while also not saving you much money today to allow for better other parts.  If you also saved money on the motherboard today to make room for a faster video card, then you upgrade the CPU and can't overclock it because you bought a motherboard that doesn't support it.

    And ditching the SSD as Gdemami suggests is something that I'd very, very strongly advise against.  $100 for a very nice 240 GB SSD is hardly outlandish, and if you did scrap the SSD, you'd still have to pay $60 or so for a hard drive, so you only save $40 in exchange for a computer that is much slower at everything, just to be able to turn up an extra graphical setting (singular!) that doesn't even matter in some games.

  • jdnewelljdnewell Member UncommonPosts: 2,237

    It is very doubtful that an AMD 6300 build would need to have the cpu swapped out in 3 years to make it a viable gaming machine.

    Upgrading the GPU is something that will be done regardless in a few years, going with a 270 will only make that happen sooner. While the 6300 CPU will be just fine for gaming purposes for years to come, especially with overclocking capability.

    If the OP would have posted he wanted an $850 build without a monitor no one would have gone with an Intel build. Same difference basically as a $1000 build with a monitor.

    Turning down settings to make a game playable is fine for some I guess. But most people who are building a gaming rig want something that runs great at high settings, with good fps. If you like playing at Med settings at 30fps then thats all good and may be just fine for you personally. I would rather play at High settings at 60fps, doesnt have to be uber max settings pushing the envelope, but high / ultra is a world of difference between low / med. Isnt that almost the point of building a gaming PC?

    An SSD is a luxury item for sure. I have them in both PCs and will most likely always have them in PCs from now on. However slower load times for games is the ONLY difference. I may boot into windows and load faster in game than the guy with an HDD, but once the game is up and running there will be no difference, except a 3-5sec delay in load screens.

    Opinions may differ but going with an AMD build with a high end GPU would be the way to go for me, even at the cost of an SSD. Having said that there really isnt a reason not to buy an SSD when they are so cheap.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    The difference between DDR3 and DDR4 memory basically doesn't matter in a desktop.  The reason DDR4 motherboards are expensive is that they're for Intel's high end CPU.  That requires Intel's high end chipset, and that's expensive because Intel charges a lot for it.

    That SSD is rather overpriced.  It's not really any better than the Crucial M500 that I linked, but it's $38 more expensive.

    The first video card you linked is a GTX 970, not a GTX 780.  It's also a nice card, but if you want to make room for a higher end video card like that, you're definitely going with an AMD processor.  And even if you do want to spend that much on a video card, you can get a faster Radeon R9 290X for cheaper.  But I wouldn't go more expensive than the R9 290 that I linked above, as it would take cutting back elsewhere.

    I don't agree with you about DDR 3 and 4, but it is indeed true that the only MBs right now are for Intels more expensive CPUs. That will change soon when more motherboards with DDR4 are made from different manifacturers. I would be very surprised if AMD wouldn't have DDR4s as well soon.

    As for he SSD the crucial do indeed work fine as well, one of the reasons I reccommended it is if OP would go for waiting and will put it in his current build for now. Samsungs merging software is very simple to use and fastSso OP wpould be running his old build from it one hour later. For a completely new build from start the Crucial would be a better buy.

    Ooops, I must have copied the wrong link, it was between those 2 for the same price (both are very good). Still, getting a good graphics card and cutting costs elsewhere is the best choice if you have a limited budget and game. The GFX card makes the biggest impact there. And yes, I don't particularly fancy the Radeon cards, never liked the software and drivers for them so I usualy use Nvidia for my builds unless the person whu want a new computer is on a very low budget or specifically state they want a AMD graphics card.

  • jdnewelljdnewell Member UncommonPosts: 2,237

    Here is an AMD build as an example.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827151266 $14 after promo code. DvD drive

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147161 $70 case

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236335 $135 after rebate. Monitor. Just picked one, many options for around that price

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128602 Mobo $70

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817182068 $65 PSU

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231455 $70 after promo code. RAM

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113286 $110 CPU

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832416776 $100 OS

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148820 SSD $110

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150697 GPU $269

    Come to $1019 after rebate and promo codes. And has a $20 gift card with one of the components. Uses a stock cooler though, could always spend another $20-$30 and add one, but the AMD coolers are not that bad.

    This build has an SSD and an R9 290 as the GPU.

    I put this together rather quickly, you could probably shop around for some discounts on some items and shave a few bucks off overall. Either way this has a nice GPU and a very capable CPU.

     

     

     

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,135
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    The difference between DDR3 and DDR4 memory basically doesn't matter in a desktop.  The reason DDR4 motherboards are expensive is that they're for Intel's high end CPU.  That requires Intel's high end chipset, and that's expensive because Intel charges a lot for it.

    I don't agree with you about DDR 3 and 4, but it is indeed true that the only MBs right now are for Intels more expensive CPUs. That will change soon when more motherboards with DDR4 are made from different manifacturers. I would be very surprised if AMD wouldn't have DDR4s as well soon.

    Give it a year or two and DDR4 will probably be cheaper than DDR3 and then everyone will use DDR4 for desktops and laptops.  But we're not there yet, and for now, DDR4 is a lot more expensive.  Is DDR4 at 2133 MHz really any better than the same amount of DDR3 at the same clock speed?  It will use less power, but that doesn't matter in a desktop.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,135
    Originally posted by jdnewell

    Turning down settings to make a game playable is fine for some I guess. But most people who are building a gaming rig want something that runs great at high settings, with good fps. If you like playing at Med settings at 30fps then thats all good and may be just fine for you personally. I would rather play at High settings at 60fps, doesnt have to be uber max settings pushing the envelope, but high / ultra is a world of difference between low / med. Isnt that almost the point of building a gaming PC?

    That is not relevant to the card I picked.  Let's keep straight that we're talking about the difference between a Radeon R9 290 and a Radeon R9 270.  It's not like I told him to use the Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics in the CPU; it's faster than that by probably more than a factor of 10.  The Radeon R9 270 that I linked has 20 GCN compute units, as compared to 40 in the R9 290.  It has half the memory bus width, and similarly for some other stuff, so the card is basically half as fast as an R9 290, which is about as fast as is reasonable to consider on the stated budget.

    And the Radeon R9 270 is still a fast card.  It's considerably faster than a PlayStation 4, which is itself about 50% faster than an Xbox One.  It's much faster than the Radeon HD 5850 that I still use--and that has let me run the games I play at 60 frames per second and whatever settings I want.  (Admittedly, that's partially a statement about what games I play and what settings I like.)  It will be faster than AMD's top end integrated graphics by about a factor of three or four.  It will run a lot of games at max settings at 60+ frames per second, and nearly everything else at 60 frames per second at fairly high settings.

    Now, if you really insist on max everything, rather than being willing to turn down or off a handful of lighting effects while maxing everything else, then saving some money on the GPU by getting an R9 270 isn't for you.  And there are people like that.  I think it's silly, though.

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,193


    Originally posted by Quizzical
    If you would rather spend more on the GPU and less on the CPU today, as some have suggested, then you can drop the CPU, motherboard, GPU, and CPU cooler above in favor of these:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113327http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130679http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125505And then you use the stock cooler.  I'd advise against that approach, but it's sensible if you're a max settings or bust sort of guy, rather than being willing to turn down a few settings to make a game run smoothly.  It's also reasonable if you know that you're never going to upgrade the computer you buy now, but will instead run it until it dies or you replace the whole thing all at once.  But if you can build a computer today, you can probably replace a video card while leaving everything else intact in a few years.Part of the problem is that you'd lose an upgrade path.  If you have $300 to upgrade the first rig I linked three years from now, you buy a new video card, leave everything else as is, and then have a very nice gaming rig then.  If you scale back on several parts, then you have several things that it would be nice to upgrade and $300 won't buy an upgrade for all of them.If you go AMD as I linked, then upgrading the CPU is probably too expensive, and spending $300 on a video card leaves you with the same video card and a substantially slower CPU three years from now.  Even if you do expand the budget to get a new CPU, motherboard, memory, and OS, any video card you can buy today will be much slower than a good $300 card three years from now.Going with a slower Intel CPU as Gdemami suggests doesn't get around this, either.  A Core i3 is much more likely to be problematic in a few years than the FX-6350 I linked, so just upgrading the GPU then doesn't solve the problem.  The CPU upgrade option would be to get a Core i5-4690K that you could have bought today and had a faster CPU in the meantime in addition to spending less in total--and that's assuming it's not discontinued and off the market, as could easily happen:  New Egg doesn't carry any Sandy Bridge desktop processors at all today, and the Ivy Bridge processors it does carry aren't the top end K-series ones.  A cheaper Core i5 today has the same problems, while also not saving you much money today to allow for better other parts.  If you also saved money on the motherboard today to make room for a faster video card, then you upgrade the CPU and can't overclock it because you bought a motherboard that doesn't support it.And ditching the SSD as Gdemami suggests is something that I'd very, very strongly advise against.  $100 for a very nice 240 GB SSD is hardly outlandish, and if you did scrap the SSD, you'd still have to pay $60 or so for a hard drive, so you only save $40 in exchange for a computer that is much slower at everything, just to be able to turn up an extra graphical setting (singular!) that doesn't even matter in some games.

    Bunch of horrible advice and theorycrafting that has no basis - as always.


    Going AMD is the worst thing to do since for the same price you can get Intel that is SO MUCH faster in games and easier to upgrade.

    With Z97 MB there will likely be no issue to get CPU replacement in 3 years from now on because Broadwell is going to be released at the end of 2015.

    And that is BIG IF you need any by that time, CPU are so outperforming CPU demands and the gap isn't closing. Old C2D are very fine for gaming today and they are lower end CPUs +6 years old.

    I3 is superb value CPU with enough power to run any game, it's a beast. Lower clocked i5 is then "safe bet".


    Not bothering to comment on SSD, I think anyone reading that part of the post can understand how off your advice is. Silly obsession with SSD you put in any build, regardless.


  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,135
    Originally posted by Gdemami

    With Z97 MB there will likely be no issue to get CPU replacement in 3 years from now on because Broadwell is going to be released at the end of 2015.

    There are so many problems with that statement that it's going to take a while to unpack.

    1)  Broadwell is available in laptops today.  Okay, so it's barely plural, but "is going to be released at the end of 2015" is wildly wrong.

    2)  It's not at all clear whether there will be a version of Broadwell that makes sense in desktops--at least if you ignore weird form factors like Intel's goofy NUC.

    3)  Even if there is a desktop version of Broadwell, it's likely that it won't be faster than Haswell.  The top end version of Broadwell currently available has a max turbo boost of 2.9 GHz.  Well, that's if you count "on Intel's web page" as "available"; if you want to restrict to parts that you can actually buy today, the highest I've seen is 2.6 GHz.

    4)  Even if there is a desktop version of Broadwell, it likely won't fit the same LGA 1150 socket as Haswell.  The transition to DDR4 is under way, and that demands a new CPU socket.  While the current Broadwell die is DDR3, it's also wildly inappropriate for desktops (e.g., certainly too few PCI Express lanes to properly attach a video card, and probably too few USB ports to even make a useful desktop), and there's no reason why you can't pair different memory standards with the same CPU cores.

    5)  The last CPU socket for which you could later get a meaningful upgrade over the initial launch parts was LGA 1366 in 2008, if you're willing to count the Westmere CPUs for which the cheapest was over $500.  If you don't count that, then you have to go all the way back to LGA 775 in 2004.  With DDR4 demanding a new CPU socket, there's no reason to believe that Intel is suddenly going to become a big fan of backward compatibility.

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,193


    Originally posted by Quizzical4)  Even if there is a desktop version of Broadwell, it likely won't fit the same LGA 1150 socket as Haswell.

    Broadwell using 97 chipset is confirmed, so yes it will LGA 1150 socket.


    The release date for desktop was always slated for much later after mobile platform, so nothing is wildely wrong there.


    It is still miles better than going AMD as you or the other guy have suggested. LGA 1150 will be there for a while, thus upgrading will be much easier and more sensible performance wise, even if no Broadwell desktop CPU were released.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,135
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by Quizzical

     

    4)  Even if there is a desktop version of Broadwell, it likely won't fit the same LGA 1150 socket as Haswell.


     

    Broadwell using 97 chipset is confirmed, so yes it will LGA 1150 socket.


    The release date for desktop was always slated for much later after mobile platform, so nothing is wildely wrong there.


    It is still miles better than going AMD as you or the other guy have suggested. LGA 1150 will be there for a while, thus upgrading will be much easier and more sensible performance wise, even if no Broadwell desktop CPU were released.

    Could I please see the confirmation that Broadwell will use the Z97 chipset?  A Google search found rumors that it will, rumors that it won't, and rumors that the chips would already have been launched months ago by now.  I've also seen rumors that there won't be a desktop version of Broadwell at all.  So obviously, at least some of those rumors are false.  Officially confirming a launch date of something a year away sounds like something Intel wouldn't do--in part because that's something that they really can't know just yet.

    And even if something does use the same chipset, that doesn't automatically guarantee that it will use the same socket, though it does make it seem likely.  There are AMD 760G chipset motherboards that use Socket AM2+, Socket AM3, and Socket AM3+, for example.

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,193

    Something simple as that for good efficiency and value:

    i5-4460 - 190 USD
    Asrock Z97 MB - 90 USD
    G.Skill 8GB - 60 USD
    Evga 600W - 55 USD
    WD Blue 1TB - 53 USD
    Diamond R290 - 280 USD
    Windows 8.1 full - 110 USD

    839 USD total, 35 USD in rebates. Add case up to your likehood, change parts as you see fit.


    There is no need screwing up the build with SSD or AMD.


  • kzaskekzaske Member UncommonPosts: 518
    I would advise that what ever video card you chose, be sure to get at least 4GB of RAM on it.  It makes a huge difference in-game.  I am really loving my Gigabyte Windforce GTX770 4GB.  The card runs very cool and performs very well.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,193


    Originally posted by Quizzical

    Could I please see the confirmation that Broadwell will use the Z97 chipset?

    http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog/2014/05/12/chipshot-intel-releases-new-intel-9-series-chipset-with-pc-platform-enhancements

Sign In or Register to comment.