• $600 Computer Build
    18 replies, posted
Is this a decent starting build? CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($109.99 @ TigerDirect) Motherboard: MSI 970A-G46 ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($79.98 @ SuperBiiz) Memory: GeIL EVO Veloce Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($62.99 @ Newegg) Storage: Western Digital RE3 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($50.44 @ Amazon) Video Card: Asus Radeon R9 270 2GB Video Card ($194.98 @ SuperBiiz) Case: Sentey CS1-1398 PLUS ATX Mid Tower Case ($34.99 @ Amazon) Power Supply: Rosewill Hive 550W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($59.99 @ Amazon) Optical Drive: Samsung SH-224DB/BEBE DVD/CD Writer ($14.99 @ Newegg) Total: $608.35
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46976120]if that WD drive is a red its a bad choice, reds are known to fail and you don't want to be that guy who gets his wd red and it fails after a week(yep from experience ive had about 150 out of 200 fail) case is aesthetic so that's down to you but ive never heard of sentey before, Rosewill is a hit and miss, you could get a Seasonic for that or a EVGA for better quality [editline]21st January 2015[/editline] give me 5 minutes [editline]21st January 2015[/editline] [url]http://pcpartpicker.com/part/seagate-internal-hard-drive-st1000dm003[/url] [url]http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-power-supply-120g10650xr[/url] whilst im not a big fan of that amd cpu, if that's your budget then yeah it should do you ok[/QUOTE] Alright thanks
[img]http://i.imgur.com/d4q9xUD.png[/img] Slightly faster graphics card, [U]MUCH[/U] faster processor [url]http://pcpartpicker.com/p/nDPGwP[/url]
[QUOTE=Rixxz2;46979275][img]http://i.imgur.com/d4q9xUD.png[/img] Slightly faster graphics card, [U]MUCH[/U] faster processor [url]http://pcpartpicker.com/p/nDPGwP[/url][/QUOTE] Assuming he is gaming, it would be worth it to get a cheaper processor and invest in a better video card. I am running an OC'D Richland 760k (slower than the I5-4440) and an Invidia GeForce GTX 670 (faster than the R9 270X) and it's still the GPU that holds things back. Also, a Micro ATX may not be the best idea if he plans on expanding ever. I am running a Micro ATX and my GTX 670 blocks 2-3 PCI slots, leaving only a PCI-E x16 slot open. I have to run an extender/whatever to run a PCI device.
[QUOTE=FordLord;46981457]Assuming he is gaming, it would be worth it to get a cheaper processor and invest in a better video card. I am running an OC'D Richland 760k (slower than the I5-4440) and an Invidia GeForce GTX 670 (faster than the R9 270X) and it's still the GPU that holds things back. Also, a Micro ATX may not be the best idea if he plans on expanding ever. I am running a Micro ATX and my GTX 670 blocks 2-3 PCI slots, leaving only a PCI-E x16 slot open. I have to run an extender/whatever to run a PCI device.[/QUOTE] I agree, I think it is worth the extra cash to just go ahead and get a full ATX board. Will save a lot of trouble in the long run.
[QUOTE=Th3applek1d;46981492]I agree, I think it is worth the extra cash to just go ahead and get a full ATX board. Will save a lot of trouble in the long run.[/QUOTE] so what ATX board would you recommend?
[QUOTE=FordLord;46981457] I am running an OC'D Richland 760k (slower than the I5-4440) and an Invidia GeForce GTX 670 (faster than the R9 270X) and it's still the GPU that holds things back. [/QUOTE] No. The processor is a pretty massive bottleneck in your system (It's about as fast as a CPU that was considered mid-range 6 years ago, go figure) either you haven't noticed it because you're happy with the framerate you're getting anyway, or you're playing titles that are mostly GPU heavy, but don't come in here saying that the processor is the fastest part in your system, because that's just wrong. Should also be noted that my old Phenom II X4 965 @ 4,2GHz bottlenecked my HD 7970 to fuck, the performance increase in literally EVERYTHING was massive after I upgraded to my current i5 4690k [editline]22nd January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Disco Ghost;46983618]so what ATX board would you recommend?[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157563&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=[/url]
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46976120]if that WD drive is a red its a bad choice, reds are known to fail and you don't want to be that guy who gets his wd red and it fails after a week(yep from experience ive had about 150 out of 200 fail) [/QUOTE] You're talking out of your arse. Not a single part of that is true.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46987836]So explain 3 separate batches of WD reds that failed mate. 150 drives out of 200 in 4 separate batches and you're calling me a liar. That's great mate you can think what I want and you can think what you want no need to say that I'm talking out of my arse.[/QUOTE] You sure you're not talking about blues? Because they're the only drives I consistantly have issues with. [QUOTE=Rixxz2;46979275] Slightly faster graphics card, MUCH faster processor [url]http://pcpartpicker.com/p/nDPGwP[/url][/QUOTE] God damn that's what $600 can get you now? That's pretty nice.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46987836]So explain 3 separate batches of WD reds that failed mate. 150 drives out of 200 in 4 separate batches and you're calling me a liar. That's great mate you can think what I want and you can think what you want no need to say that I'm talking out of my arse.[/QUOTE] Alright, sure: a) WD Red series is designed to be used in RAID setups, i.e. not something you'd use as your main HDD. Seeing as how you handled a shipment of 200 of the bastards, I'm sure you knew that already. b) There's absolutely nothing inherently wrong with the drives, you got a faulty batch. c) I won't even touch the fact of how unlikely your anecdote is. You're saying that one of the biggest and most reliable brands in the market slipped up and sold someone not one, not two, but 150 faulty drives. Not even Seagate can boast with such a fuck up. I think you're either misinformed or just making shit up, both of which fall within talking out of your arse.
[QUOTE=Stopper;46987960]Alright, sure: a) WD Red series is designed to be used in RAID setups, i.e. not something you'd use as your main HDD. Seeing as how you handled a shipment of 200 of the bastards, I'm sure you knew that already. b) There's absolutely nothing inherently wrong with the drives, you got a faulty batch. c) I won't even touch the fact of how unlikely your anecdote is. You're saying that one of the biggest and most reliable brands in the market slipped up and sold someone not one, not two, but 150 faulty drives. Not even Seagate can boast with such a fuck up. I think you're either misinformed or just making shit up, both of which fall within talking out of your arse.[/QUOTE] Reds are pretty notoriously bad in the industry.
[QUOTE=~Kiwi~v2;46987879]Blues never saw a single one [B]but their only good for people that don't game. [/B] [/QUOTE] ??? A Blue is practically a Black without extended warranty? I've only used WD Blues for the past 7 years, and I've never had any problems with them
Most modern blue's are unnoticeable slower than blacks (Blacks just have a slight gain with the actuator arm speed iirc). Also I'm not paying almost twice as much for two years more of warranty for most of my situations.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.