|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
XeveN
Posts: 95
Location: Denmark
|
 Posted: Wed, 7th May 2014 23:55 Post subject: New PC, a few questions about "future proofing" |
|
 |
Good evening Humpers,
I am about to finally upgrade my PC for gaming and have been going into the jungle that is the hardware market, so many different models of the same product..
Anyways, as i can't afford to upgrade my PC every year / other year, i'm trying to get a hold of some good parts that will last for a while, but some questions have popped up.
I have found some parts that i like, some are mostly cost efficient, while others have passed the price per performance a bit, but in the spirit of having something that will last a little while longer i think this is what i come up with.
- Core i5 I5-4670K 6 MB (Intel Boxed) or Core i7 I7-4770K 8 MB (Intel Boxed)? - I've read that the i5 is "enough" for gaming, but would the i7 be worth the extra money for future proofing, i see the difference is hyperthreading on the i7 and a little more cache.
- About RAM, i am looking to get 16gb, again it is said that 8 is "enough" for current gaming, but again, this is likely to be my computer for the next 3-4 years, so would it be worth it with the 16gb?
I am currently looking at Kingston HyperX Predator 2 x 8 GB and
Corsair Vengeance 2 x 8 GB, is there another one that would be better? (Seen G.skill being mentioned as decent as well)
- For a motherboard i am looking at either ASUS Z87-PRO or MSI Z87-G45 GAMING, never really been into overclocking, so that is not a priority.
- And lastly, the graphics card.. As far as i can see the 780 is top dog before the prices go batshit crazy, so the one i have in mind is a ASUS GTX780-DC2OC-3GD5 (3 GB), but can also get a Sapphire RADEON R9 290X (4 GB), which seem to perform close to the 780, but has 1 GB more ram.
I haven't been able to see any new tech coming out soon, nVidias 800 series seems to be pushed until 2015, so not sure if there is anything coming up within the next few months that is worth waiting for.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 00:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Haswell is not so good in overclocking so there is not much point in bying "K" CPU. Also, non-K variant includes the complete feature set while K doesn't. Of course you probably won't be using all/any of them in everyday work, but (disclaimer, this is highly subjective) I would rather buy a fully enabled CPU than a version with something missing just to get several hundreds of MHz more.
So you can buy regular 4770 (which should cost somewhere in between i5-4670K and i7-4770K), be safe for several next years and won't regret the money.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 00:27 Post subject: |
|
|
there are only advantages in buying a "K" cpu and NO disadvantages.
~ Mind your tone - PA ~
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 01:43 Post subject: |
|
|
| Guy_Incognito wrote: | | And also good luck getting 1 GHz more on a Haswell (esp. one already running on pretty high clock) with a cooler which doesn't sound like an airplane turbine. |
Done. My 4770K does 4.7 (stock is 3.5) without much effort. H100i for cooling. And I haven't even replaced the stock fans. Pretty much everyone I see on forums gets to 4.5 just fine. It's just that beyond that, the voltage requirement goes up exponentially. So no, Haswell will not get the same 1.5-2.0 bumps as easily as we could get them with Lynnfield, Sandy and Ivy. But your statement is utter nonsense.
@ OP: Go with the 4770K and the 16 GB. If you can afford it, there's no real reason not to and as Sabin says, we're likely to see much better utilisation of all our resources in the next couple of years. Courtesy of Mantle, D3D12 and the consoles being x86. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
XeveN
Posts: 95
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 12:54 Post subject: |
|
|
Okay, thanks for the input guys.
I'll find me a shop that has all my parts.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 13:41 Post subject: |
|
|
Nobody is commenting on the graphicscard? Not even recommending a TI or taking the 290x in consideration? Are these so bad alternatives?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 13:53 Post subject: |
|
|
Haha, doh.. didn't even see that, was concentrating on the CPU. The 780ti is just too expensive to be a viable recommendation, but a 290x is well worth it if you can get a price equal or close to the normal 780.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 14:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| PumpAction wrote: | | Nobody is commenting on the graphicscard? Not even recommending a TI or taking the 290x in consideration? Are these so bad alternatives? |
290X is worth it if you can get it close to the 780's price. It still carries a premium, but not as much as the 780 Ti. 780 Ti just isn't worth the premium.
Between the 290, 780 and 290X (ordered in terms of performance) it really just depends on local pricing. The latter like I said has a premium and usually isn't worth it any more than the Ti is, but between the other two it's just a toss-up and price is the only factor one should look at (that and having a custom cooling solution for the 290  ). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 14:54 Post subject: I have left. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 20:29 Post subject: |
|
|
| PumpAction wrote: | | Nobody is commenting on the graphicscard? Not even recommending a TI or taking the 290x in consideration? Are these so bad alternatives? |
is there even a point in doing so on this AMD GPU centric message board? any attempts in discussing alternatives to AMD GPU just ends up in one sided gang up, insulting and other crap.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 21:00 Post subject: |
|
|
That's horsecrap, everyone's been recommending getting either a 780 or 290 depending on price lately. The 780 Ti is just too expensive for what it offers, regardless of whether you compare it to AMD or their own smaller sibling. The only reason the 290X isn't an immediate write off over its smaller sibling is because the 290X in some countries is actually the same price or sometimes even CHEAPER than a regular 780. In other countries it still carries the standard premium (at least on non-reference cards), so there it's still a bad choice.
Cheapest here in NL right now:
- 780 Ti: 590 (funnily enough, that's MSI TF, reference ASUS costs exactly the same)
- 290X: 450 (400 for reference)
- 780: 400 (MSI reference, MSI's TF is 420, which I'd say is well worth the 20 EUR)
- 290: 350 (335 for reference)
I'm sorry, but unless you've got some seriously skewed glasses on, the 780 Ti is just not a good option, period. 140 EUR over a custom 290X or an utterly retarded 190 over a regular 780 (170 if you go for the Twin Frozr). And no less than a whopping 240 over a 290.
Whether that 50 EUR premium on a 290X is worth it is up to the buyer. It nets you a bit more performance and has Mantle, whereas the 780 has Shadowplay. And for those who don't care about the noise (and yes, those people do exist), it's an even harder choice as there is no price difference.
Same thing goes for the 780 versus 290. For 50 EUR, you get a bit more performance and Shadowplay. These 3 cards are just so close together, that you can't really go wrong with any of them, local offers and prices are the deciding factor.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 21:05 Post subject: |
|
|
If you truly want any kind of future proofing for games, and if you can wait a couple of months, I'd wait for some new console ports to see what will be required. It'll obviously not give you the full picture, but you'll get some kind of overview. That PC might be too weak, or more importantly, it might be overkill. With our luck in ports, they'll run best with a 32-core CPU and a 4850.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sin317
Banned
Posts: 24322
Location: Geneva
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 21:08 Post subject: |
|
|
here it's :
ASUS GTX780TI-DC2OC-3GD5, GeForce GTX 780 Ti, 3.0GB = 544€
ASUS GTX780-DC2OC-3GD5, GeForce GTX 780, 3.0GB = 400€
ASUS R9290-DC2OC-4GD5, Radeon R9 290, 4.0GB = 347€
ASUS R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5, Radeon R9 290X, 4.0GB = 416€
Still don't know, why the Ti is so much more expensive lol.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 21:10 Post subject: |
|
|
Because it can be. There are enough retards out there who will buy it at that price. Worked for Titan, works here.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
XeveN
Posts: 95
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 22:18 Post subject: |
|
|
There will always be the people with too much money that want to have a card that is even the slightest better, even though the price difference is immense.
I did end up with the 780 card, as it was slightly cheaper than the 290x.
Again, thanks for the input!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 23:00 Post subject: |
|
|
| Sin317 wrote: | here it's :
ASUS GTX780TI-DC2OC-3GD5, GeForce GTX 780 Ti, 3.0GB = 544€
ASUS GTX780-DC2OC-3GD5, GeForce GTX 780, 3.0GB = 400€
ASUS R9290-DC2OC-4GD5, Radeon R9 290, 4.0GB = 347€
ASUS R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5, Radeon R9 290X, 4.0GB = 416€
Still don't know, why the Ti is so much more expensive lol. |
factory OCed
and they add a fancy Fan on it also ... thats why |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 23:54 Post subject: |
|
|
I'd go with the i5 - the CPU hasn't been a bottleneck, ever for gaming.
My 7yo OC 4GHz Q6600 still wipes the floor with any game thrown at it, using a high-end GFX.
16GB is perfect for future proofing. 8GB is currently considered non fillable - so 16GB is the next logical step, and at that point you can also remove your page file completely.
As with the i7 - there is no point in thinking about quad channel. Isn't worth it.
The biggest investment atm SSD - 256 is a must if you want to put some multiplayer games on it, 512 if you can stretch it.
For GFX I'd go with 780GTX, or 760GTX and wait for 8** series.
| Lutzifer wrote: | | and yes, mine is only average |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sin317
Banned
Posts: 24322
Location: Geneva
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th May 2014 23:58 Post subject: |
|
|
yeah i just upgraded to 16gb from 8, because some games actually started to fill the 8gb (well ram usage went to 90-95% lol).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 9th May 2014 03:27 Post subject: |
|
|
just buy Patriot Viper 3 DDR3 2x8GB 1600MHz CL9 XMP PV316G160C9K , you can OC them nicely
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
) I do have to agree -- recommending a non-K over a K is just...... what? No, just no. The only missing "feature" from K procs is the lack of VT-d for extended hardware virtualisation. Unless you routinely run multiple guest OSes then there is absolutely reason on this earth to waste money on a non-K, because I tell you something; the performance boost from the 1Ghz++++++ OC is massive.
