- Joined
- Aug 22, 2010
- Messages
- 32,728
- Reaction score
- 9,860
PC Sherdog PC Build/Buy Thread, v6: My Power Supply Burned Down My House
- Thread starter m52nickerson
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2006
- Messages
- 41,988
- Reaction score
- 22,424
Well I think the appeal here is probably more in that it is a monitor that can do it all instead of choosing which kind of games you are going to focus your monitor on. You can run your Witcher 3 games at 4k, and when it's time to play Counterstrike you can set it to a lower res and hit that 144 fps
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,593
- Reaction score
- 25,666
That's a great point. I was definitely overlooking that truth.
So thinking about the historically unmatched value in gaming hardware for those lucky enough to purchase an i7-920 (Nov-2008) or i5-2500K / i7-2600K (both Jan-2011) CPU when they dropped got me to wondering what this forum would rate the absolute best performance to price machine if done component by component. Taxes and shipping vary, so I'm only quoting the lowest raw price I've seeing for these parts, brand new, from high-volume retailers.
CPU
($228) i5-7600K
The only question here is whether or not the multithreading of the i7-7700K makes it a better value in the long term. I suppose one could argue for the R5-1600 or R5-1600X on those same grounds, but AMD trails too far in per thread performance for a pure gaming build, especially after overclocking; for the past decade four strong cores have ruled here, and that doesn't appear to be ending anytime soon.
If we weren't overclocking, and this was a budget build, we could include the true "king" of value in this slot: Intel's Kaby Lake Pentium G4560 for $56.
If we weren't overclocking, and this was a budget build, we could include the true "king" of value in this slot: Intel's Kaby Lake Pentium G4560 for $56.
CPU COOLER
($25) Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO
Cryorig H7 has slightly better performance at $35, so that's option #2.
For those who want to push higher numbers you want to look at the Noctua D14/D15 or liquid AIO 240mm/280mm/360mm coolers. There are no custom loops known to me sold on the market that are cost effective performance enhancers. They are about performance, silence, and hardware that never gets hot.
For those who want to push higher numbers you want to look at the Noctua D14/D15 or liquid AIO 240mm/280mm/360mm coolers. There are no custom loops known to me sold on the market that are cost effective performance enhancers. They are about performance, silence, and hardware that never gets hot.
MOTHERBOARD
($130) ASRock Z270 Killer SLI/ac ATX
Determined by the CPU, obviously.
Admittedly this is one component where I almost certainly could go cheaper, but the cheapest Z270 boards start above $100, and the inclusion of 802.11ac and Bluetooth 4.1 already spares the cost and mess of that $35 Gigabyte WiFi adapter with the external antennae. We all know that everyone wants WiFi. Even Desktop users. It also has 4 RAM slots since later expansion of RAM is one of the most cheap, common and useful upgrades that has endured since the dawn of computing.
I'm receptive to the MSI Z270-A PRO for $113 or another slightly more economical board, but you won't shave much, here, and you'll end up with a PC that doesn't talk to phones wirelessly. It's 2017. That's stupid.
Admittedly this is one component where I almost certainly could go cheaper, but the cheapest Z270 boards start above $100, and the inclusion of 802.11ac and Bluetooth 4.1 already spares the cost and mess of that $35 Gigabyte WiFi adapter with the external antennae. We all know that everyone wants WiFi. Even Desktop users. It also has 4 RAM slots since later expansion of RAM is one of the most cheap, common and useful upgrades that has endured since the dawn of computing.
I'm receptive to the MSI Z270-A PRO for $113 or another slightly more economical board, but you won't shave much, here, and you'll end up with a PC that doesn't talk to phones wirelessly. It's 2017. That's stupid.
GPU
- ($176) GTX 1060 3GB, EVGA SC Gaming
- ($235) GTX 1060 6GB, EVGA SC Gaming
- ($330) GTX 1070 8GB, Gigabyte Mini ITX OC
Three obvious price points above. The true GPU value king in terms of raw horsepower is the GTX 1050 Ti, so that would pair well with the Pentium 4560 in a budget build. Nevertheless, I like UserBenchmark's attempts to offer a value metric more in line with actual fps improvements at actual resolutions as gamers play games. That's why cards like the GTX 1070 shoot up towards the top of their value chart.
More aggressive cooling solutions for GPUs are incredibly expensive, and not geared towards squeezing more value out of a lesser GPU, but really towards making a GTX 1080 Ti or Titan XP scream (since developers stopped caring about SLI/Crossfire). Ergo, it's better to just get the best GPU you can for the money while specifically looking for the cheapest model with multiple fans that will provide the best possible native GPU/VRM cooling. You're going to have a lot more luck with that using NVIDIA GPU's than the RX 580 since AMD basically pre-overclocked Polaris with its latest offering...again. The RX 480 is no cheaper than the RX 580, so AMD has nothing. Then there's the fact that NVIDIA's drivers are overwhelmingly favored by the gaming community. The result? All my top value GPUs are NVIDIA. Go figure.
More aggressive cooling solutions for GPUs are incredibly expensive, and not geared towards squeezing more value out of a lesser GPU, but really towards making a GTX 1080 Ti or Titan XP scream (since developers stopped caring about SLI/Crossfire). Ergo, it's better to just get the best GPU you can for the money while specifically looking for the cheapest model with multiple fans that will provide the best possible native GPU/VRM cooling. You're going to have a lot more luck with that using NVIDIA GPU's than the RX 580 since AMD basically pre-overclocked Polaris with its latest offering...again. The RX 480 is no cheaper than the RX 580, so AMD has nothing. Then there's the fact that NVIDIA's drivers are overwhelmingly favored by the gaming community. The result? All my top value GPUs are NVIDIA. Go figure.
- The GTX 1060 3GB offers the best value of these, but it's tough to recommend a gaming build on value that will be obsolete in a few years due to a VRAM shortage.
- The GTX 1060 6GB is a great price
- The GTX 1070 is included because that's about $50 cheaper than any other 1070. It's not intended to operate above reference, I'm sure, but the big picture here is that no amount of overclocking will match the GTX 1060 to its noble physical proportions.
RAM
($98) 2x8GB DDR4-2666 MHz CAS15 RAM, Patriot Viper Elite
Remember to divide the latency by the bandwidth for the RAM's cycle, and that lower scores are better. Also remember that anything clocked above DDR-2400 on a Skylake or Kaby Lake processor is technically already running in an overclock with diminishing returns.
- CAS15/2133MHz = .00703
- CAS14/2133MHz = .00656
- CAS15/2400MHz = .00625
- CAS13/2133MHz = .00609
- CAS14/2400MHz = .00583
- CAS15/2666MHz = .00562
- CAS15/2800MHz = .00536
- CAS15/3000MHz = .00500
- CAS12/2400MHz = .00500
- CAS13/2666MHz = .00488
- CAS14/3200MHz = .00438
- CAS15/3600MHz = .00417
OS/STORAGE
($60) 2TB 7200RPM 64MB Cache HDD, Hitatchi Ultrastar 3K
500GB and 1TB drives are cheaper, but barely so; 3TB drives have the best per-GB price rate, right now, but only by a tiny margin, so the 2TB seemed sensible. Still double the baseline of a console.
By far the most complicated component to navigate with this aim. If we're going after pure performance value for gaming, then you wouldn't purchase an SSD; not even for the operating system, but anyone reading that who doesn't guffaw like they just took an arrow to the knee probably isn't a gamer. Think about spending roughly $1K on a computer that doesn't have an SSD. Tough to swallow, yeah? Of course, if you purchase an SSD for your operating system, that doesn't mean it will help your game performance in any way unless you install your games to that drive, too, and that isn't its intention, so the games would just end up on the HDD anyway.
SSHD, or hybrid drives, for game drives, are one solution that tends to fall between SSD and HDD peformance in game loading. The latest generation Firecuda 2TB is $99. That's a simple and consumer-friendly solution compromising between the two. The thing that goads me is that all SSHD drives really are is an HDD with a measly 8GB of SSD (probably not a fast SSD) acting as cache in a pre-configured Intel Rapid Storage Technology (IRST) setup applying their Intel Smart Response Technology.
Of course, as most have no probably heard by now, Intel now is marketing its "Optane" memory units for this purpose, and this appears to me to be the future where users can get SSD performance at HDD prices. The best part is that you aren't limited to 8GB of SSD. With 64GB of cache your reserve would be bigger than any single game you might play, right now, so while all your games sit on a monstrous 10TB HDD, there's never one that can't fit entirely inside the high-performance Optane unit while you play it.
All of that is great, and I doubt you would see more disagreement among any other component to where "value" is derived, here, and how it is assessed. There's a marvelous argument for a 250GB Samsung 850 EVO for the OS Drive and a Firecuda 2TB for the game drive, but to simplify, ruthlessly, as Sony and Microsoft did themselves, I have chosen a single HDD. Those wishing to upgrade will have to do the same as a PS4 Pro or (upcoming) Scorpio owner, and shell out in the aftermarket.
By far the most complicated component to navigate with this aim. If we're going after pure performance value for gaming, then you wouldn't purchase an SSD; not even for the operating system, but anyone reading that who doesn't guffaw like they just took an arrow to the knee probably isn't a gamer. Think about spending roughly $1K on a computer that doesn't have an SSD. Tough to swallow, yeah? Of course, if you purchase an SSD for your operating system, that doesn't mean it will help your game performance in any way unless you install your games to that drive, too, and that isn't its intention, so the games would just end up on the HDD anyway.
SSHD, or hybrid drives, for game drives, are one solution that tends to fall between SSD and HDD peformance in game loading. The latest generation Firecuda 2TB is $99. That's a simple and consumer-friendly solution compromising between the two. The thing that goads me is that all SSHD drives really are is an HDD with a measly 8GB of SSD (probably not a fast SSD) acting as cache in a pre-configured Intel Rapid Storage Technology (IRST) setup applying their Intel Smart Response Technology.
Of course, as most have no probably heard by now, Intel now is marketing its "Optane" memory units for this purpose, and this appears to me to be the future where users can get SSD performance at HDD prices. The best part is that you aren't limited to 8GB of SSD. With 64GB of cache your reserve would be bigger than any single game you might play, right now, so while all your games sit on a monstrous 10TB HDD, there's never one that can't fit entirely inside the high-performance Optane unit while you play it.
All of that is great, and I doubt you would see more disagreement among any other component to where "value" is derived, here, and how it is assessed. There's a marvelous argument for a 250GB Samsung 850 EVO for the OS Drive and a Firecuda 2TB for the game drive, but to simplify, ruthlessly, as Sony and Microsoft did themselves, I have chosen a single HDD. Those wishing to upgrade will have to do the same as a PS4 Pro or (upcoming) Scorpio owner, and shell out in the aftermarket.
ODD
None
No reason to include one if you don't intend to use it. It's only $18 to add an Asus DVD burner and $45 to add an LG 14X Blu-Ray burner. The former is really only useful if somebody has an old DVD they want to play. Home movie shit, or small office shit. The latter is only useful if you get your hands on some Blu-Ray playback software so that you can play Redbox movies.
Otherwise, stick to flash drives. Everything about them is superior.
Otherwise, stick to flash drives. Everything about them is superior.
PSU
($77) Seasonic RM650 650W Semi-Modular Gold PSU
I'm shaving costs everywhere I can, but I would still opt for the $90 EVGA G3 650W Gold PSU for its full modularity, myself.
Hey, remember when you could get the original Corsair CX430 for $39.99, and it was actually getting excellent scores from reviewers? Remember when there was plenty of strong 500W-550W options under $65? Fuck this component, lately.
Hey, remember when you could get the original Corsair CX430 for $39.99, and it was actually getting excellent scores from reviewers? Remember when there was plenty of strong 500W-550W options under $65? Fuck this component, lately.
CASE
- ($25) Rosewill Galaxy-01 [SALE]
- ($60) Corsair 200R
- ($65) NZXT S340
So no category pisses me off more than the PSUs and Cases, right now, for the simple reason that they have steadily inflated the prices of them all across the board, and unlike RAM, they don't seem to be coming back down despite perpetual fluctuation. Cases are like motherboards in the respect that gamers seem more likely to waste money on features and capabilities that they have no intention of ever using.
Remember when the Corsair 200R was first introduced at an MSRP of $39.99? It was hands down the best case under $50 when it was released, but it hasn't sold for under $60 in about a year that I've seen. Corsair already introduced the 100R, SPEC-01, and SPEC-02, so don't count on it ever dropping back down to $40 where Corsair's margins were surely already profitable. This inflation is pretty much the same across the board for case manufacturers except for Newegg's own hapless in-house "Rosewill" brand. I have yet to see a swell of negative reviews or some Reddit whistleblow of industry reviewer pay-offs. I think people just really, really, really, really hate their design motifs. I know I can't stand to look at them. Rosewill was forced to humbly accept this market position. Their case prices have crashed. On the other hand, DIYPC has aggressively been pursuing this lower margin market.
Both make great cases in the sub-$40 range that should suffice. Why not? The only significant concerns here for the case are if it has the space to house your CPU cooler, and if it has sufficient fans/airflow to let that cooler stretch its legs by working to its fullest capacity without hot spots prohibiting these limits. I don't see anything wrong with Rosewill's Galaxy-01 for that purpose, and Amazon is selling that thing for freaking $25 with free shipping as I compose this post (so long as the order total is greater than $35).
What? Don't look at me like that. It's a goddamn rectangular aluminum box with strategic perforation for ventilation. There's some internal framing required to easily mount a very small number of highly standardized components. That's what a PC case is. After that, a drill and a screwdriver can solve just about anything. The Rosewill Galaxy-01 includes a USB 3.0 front port, pre-installed 2x120mm fans, a wide open belly, and....some shit. I don't care after that.
Rosewill Galaxy-01
It also makes this category the most interesting for this question. Where does the forum feel the floor is for case pricing before you begin to inhibit system performance? Case cooling or airflow tests are very rare. For example, the Corsair 300R has been shown in the past to outperform the Corsair 200R enough that enthusiast overclockers would gladly shell out the extra $10-$20 in exchange for higher overclocking potential. Nevertheless, I will have trouble accepting cases mentioned above $65 considering that the Corsair 200R and NZXT S340 are options at those price points.
In other words? What are the only cases worth buying that still frequently sell for under $60?
Remember when the Corsair 200R was first introduced at an MSRP of $39.99? It was hands down the best case under $50 when it was released, but it hasn't sold for under $60 in about a year that I've seen. Corsair already introduced the 100R, SPEC-01, and SPEC-02, so don't count on it ever dropping back down to $40 where Corsair's margins were surely already profitable. This inflation is pretty much the same across the board for case manufacturers except for Newegg's own hapless in-house "Rosewill" brand. I have yet to see a swell of negative reviews or some Reddit whistleblow of industry reviewer pay-offs. I think people just really, really, really, really hate their design motifs. I know I can't stand to look at them. Rosewill was forced to humbly accept this market position. Their case prices have crashed. On the other hand, DIYPC has aggressively been pursuing this lower margin market.
Both make great cases in the sub-$40 range that should suffice. Why not? The only significant concerns here for the case are if it has the space to house your CPU cooler, and if it has sufficient fans/airflow to let that cooler stretch its legs by working to its fullest capacity without hot spots prohibiting these limits. I don't see anything wrong with Rosewill's Galaxy-01 for that purpose, and Amazon is selling that thing for freaking $25 with free shipping as I compose this post (so long as the order total is greater than $35).
What? Don't look at me like that. It's a goddamn rectangular aluminum box with strategic perforation for ventilation. There's some internal framing required to easily mount a very small number of highly standardized components. That's what a PC case is. After that, a drill and a screwdriver can solve just about anything. The Rosewill Galaxy-01 includes a USB 3.0 front port, pre-installed 2x120mm fans, a wide open belly, and....some shit. I don't care after that.
Rosewill Galaxy-01
It also makes this category the most interesting for this question. Where does the forum feel the floor is for case pricing before you begin to inhibit system performance? Case cooling or airflow tests are very rare. For example, the Corsair 300R has been shown in the past to outperform the Corsair 200R enough that enthusiast overclockers would gladly shell out the extra $10-$20 in exchange for higher overclocking potential. Nevertheless, I will have trouble accepting cases mentioned above $65 considering that the Corsair 200R and NZXT S340 are options at those price points.
In other words? What are the only cases worth buying that still frequently sell for under $60?
OPERATING SYSTEM
($92) Windows 10 Home 64-bit
The alternative is a SteamOS or other Linux build (i.e. Ubuntu, Mint, etc.) that will be crippled by driver issues in the majority of games. Windows still owns this space.
Piracy is a security minefield. There be dragons out there, boys. My formal recommendation these days is to pay even if you know how not to.
Piracy is a security minefield. There be dragons out there, boys. My formal recommendation these days is to pay even if you know how not to.
Ironically, while I've thought of AMD as the more value-oriented brand for a decade, now, almost all of my top value gaming builds are Intel + NVIDIA, now. Regardless of which GPU picked, though, you wouldn't have trouble running any of the "Free" games from my post on the previous page. Ultra for everything, pls.
$1065 total for Rosewill Galaxy GTX 1070 model. Not that great, really. High RAM prices are one likely factor. RAM cratered at ~$70 for 16GB last year, IIRC. The high PSU & Case price stack on top of that don't help. Seems like I've been able to turn in a sub-$1K version of this before, but no matter how you slice it that's a lot of computing power for a smidgen over a grand.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,593
- Reaction score
- 25,666
Ha, so that build is virtually identical to the one maintained by this gentleman:
http://www.toptengamer.com/best-1000-desktop-gaming-pc-build/
Basically I wasted my time. Oh well. Mostly I'm interested in Case discussion in the context of this question.
http://www.toptengamer.com/best-1000-desktop-gaming-pc-build/
Basically I wasted my time. Oh well. Mostly I'm interested in Case discussion in the context of this question.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 728
- Reaction score
- 25
Here, saved you $92. You can still get windows 10 legally for free.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/accessibility/windows10upgrade
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 9,279
- Reaction score
- 0
I agree with you for the most part save for the CPU and RAM options. RAM as much as people want to say 16 GB is what you should get, 8GB is still enough for gaming. For the CPU, the fact that games are for more GPU bound I simply don't agree with going with a K series i5. The higher base clock and overclock are not going to get you but a couple FPS for the added cost.
I would go with something more like this...
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel Core i5-7500 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($188.89 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H270-HD3 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($99.89 @ OutletPC)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($58.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Sandisk SSD PLUS 120GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($54.95 @ Adorama)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 2TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.89 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon RX 580 8GB Gaming 8G Video Card ($219.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: Rosewill Galaxy-01 ATX Mid Tower Case ($24.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: EVGA B3 550W 80+ Bronze Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($66.98 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home Full - USB 32/64-bit ($106.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Total: $891.56
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-04-29 15:12 EDT-0400
The EVGA B3 power supplies are brand new and while no reviews are out yet they are made by SuperFlower.
The Galaxy cases are good for the price, I have one, but the front audio is cheap as hell and will break if you plan on using headphones, but still for a budget case with enough fans for airflow they are good.
Finally I would argue that the RX 480 or 580 are better buys going foreword then the GTX 1060. Right now AMD has the advantage in DX12 and that is the future. For the rest, the cards are neck and neck.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,593
- Reaction score
- 25,666
Agreed on RAM, but I made it 16GB for the same reason we all were choosing 8GB as early as 2011 & 2012. For the most part that was superfluous, but I think most like the buffer for the few games that exceed 4GB system usage. I'm still nervous that everyone, everywhere, from smartphones to office builds, being on x64 processors now, is going to blow up RAM demands in our faces at some point.
I struggled mightily with the GPU for the very reason you mentioned. Clearly this is a category where one is safe going with either the AMD or NVIDIA option. As Cygnus likes to say about his AMD cards, "I like my GPUs like wine or cheese: to age nicely." That definitely appears to be the promise for the RX 580, but I figured dual or triple fan aftermarket boards for the GTX 1060 6GB would stake their argument on the higher overclocking headroom in the card, NVIDIA's driver reputation, and the fact it wins most game benchmarks now despite losing most synthetics.
Mostly, that category is getting caught in my throat. It just goads me that there is $60 difference between the 3GB and 6GB variants of the GTX 1060, and they have identical processing power. This isn't an uncommon gap, either, since some variant of the 1060 3GB regularly drops to ~$175 territory while I've rarely ever see the 6GB for under that same $220 figure we're seeing for the RX 580 8GB. It makes swallowing that middle option a real bitch. So at $330, I'd says there's a fierce argument to be made for that mini version of the GTX 1070 as the superior value over the GTX 1060 6GB at $235. Another technique I like to gauge value is to reverse engineer my thinking: think backwards, not forwards. Take a two generation gap. How does the GTX 760 hold up, for example, versus the GTX 770 on modern games at 1080p? I just park that question in the back of my mind.
I like that you're willing to go a little lower on the PSU. The CX series no longer reliable. Every good unit made under that line has been discontinued. v1 was a Jonnyguru 9+ PSU series, but Corsair got huge, and now their catalog is fraught with high, hidden margins that a spendthrift PC enthusiast must navigate. How I miss that $39.99 Corsair CX430 on Newegg with its routine $25 off rebates = $15 PSU that could run any current single GPU setup in existence so long as you weren't overclocking. Hot damn. I miss that.
Our only major disagreement is about the "K" series processor. The minimal premium for an OC-capable aftermarket cooler is well worth it, especially for the i5-7600K. The latter is only $6 more right now. The unlocked i5-7600 is a terrible value: even for non-overclockers. I would take a 3.8GHz@$228 in a heartbeat over a 3.5GHz@$223. Think about that! The pricing is absurd. Turbo mode is in parentheses:
- $253 = [email protected] 4.5GHz [w/Hyper 212 EVO]
- $228 = [email protected] (4.2GHz)
- $223 = [email protected] (4.1GHz)
- $189 = [email protected] (3.8GHz)
- $153 = [email protected] (3.5GHz)
Overclocks for the i5-7600K on the Hyper 212 EVO are widely reported to fall in the 4.2GHz - 4.5GHz range. I tend to see 4.2GHz quoted the most. Let's investigate by assessing performance in UserBenchmark's single most relevant metric: Quad Core Mixed. Yet we will compare the i5-7500's averages to the i5-7600K's overclocked score.
UserBenchmark Quad Core Mixed
- 417 pts = i5-7500 (avg)
- 501 pts = i5-7600K (avg)
- 595 pts = i5-7600K (peak overclock)
Passmark Overall
- 7,976 = i5-7500 (avg)
- 10,165 = i5-7600K (avg overclock)
The problem with your solution is that this will only upgrade a machine that currently has a previous version of Windows installed, but it also is restricted to that machine.
So you can't use this "upgrade" on new hardware, and after all, that makes sense.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 9,279
- Reaction score
- 0
Well RAM is going to stay higher priced for at least the rest of the year. The main reason is both of the main chip manufactures are working on a nm reduction, which is pulling away from there output for the current generation. After there R&D is done production should return and the prices should start to drop again.
As far as the the GTX 1060 keep in mind that the 3GB version has less CUDA cores then the 6GB version.
http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2604-gtx-1060-3gb-vs-6gb-benchmark-review?showall=1
So, while named the same, the 3GB version is a lesser card.
You are right that the 6GB 1060 wins most benchmarks now. Looking at longevity I think the RX 580 will win out, but this is just a guess. I don't think there is a wrong choice in these cards.
I do agree that if someone can afford a GTX 1070 it's the way to go. The 70 cards have always been the sweet spot for price, performance and longevity.
Yes, the CX series is not what it use to be. The last generation (V3) got a bad rap because of some of the higher wattage units. The 430 and 500 watt versions were okay. The newer ones, 450 and 550 are made by Great Wall and not known for the best quality. The 450M and 550M are still made by CWT, but even they are not good.
http://www.hardwareinsights.com/wp/corsair-cx550m-farewell-group-design/7/#Conclusion-and-evaluation
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,593
- Reaction score
- 25,666
Ah, I'd forgotten that it had fewer CUDA cores and texture mapping units. That's strangely comforting.
Yeah, the v1 CX430 got magnificent scores. Today they're priced nearly double what they were. I hope the market punishes Corsair for resting on those early laurels. Not sure who is buying their PSU's under $100 these days, but they need to stop. I never really see them as a competitive value at any price point, frankly, outside the RM(i) series.
Our real disagreement is about the CPU value, though. Not sure if you saw that because I missed it when I first read your post. Edited that in. I think the gamer chasing long-term value wants to overclock a K series i5.
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 9,279
- Reaction score
- 0
I've had a conversation with Jonnyguru about the CX line. He brought up the fact that Corsair really aims the line CX line at system integrates like Ibuypower and others. They want a named brand power supply, but what it at low cost to them.
https://pcpartpicker.com/forums/topic/110609-corsair-cx
As for the overclocking, we are just going to disagree. I understand the argument regarding overclocking and extending the fictional life of a processor. Thing is for around the same price as an K i5, a Z board and a aftermarket cooler to handle the overclock you could plug in a i7, and have as long if not longer life. For me overclocking is not worth the money unless you are already at the i7 level.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 32,218
- Reaction score
- 18,012
I'm using a CXM500 in my htpc and I don't have any complaints. I got it on sale for $40 awhile ago.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2011
- Messages
- 32,218
- Reaction score
- 18,012
I just ordered an Asus H110 mobo and 8gb of cheap Crucial ram to with my G4560.
I need to find a cpu cooler now. I emailed Antec about using the 620 AIO I have and got this
I need to find a cpu cooler now. I emailed Antec about using the 620 AIO I have and got this
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel Pentium G4560 3.5GHz Dual-Core Processor ($59.48 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Asus H110M-A/M.2 Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($50.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: Crucial 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR4-2133 Memory ($55.45 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Patriot Pyro SE 60GB 2.5" Solid State Drive
Case: NZXT Duet (Black/Silver) HTPC Case
Power Supply: Corsair CX 500W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($109.77 @ OutletPC)
Optical Drive: Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Blu-Ray Reader, DVD/CD Writer ($54.98 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit ($109.99 @ My Choice Software)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Keyboard: Logitech K400 Plus Wireless Mini Keyboard w/Touchpad ($26.19 @ Amazon)
Other: FLIRC
Total: $501.80
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-04-30 04:12 EDT-0400
CPU: Intel Pentium G4560 3.5GHz Dual-Core Processor ($59.48 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Asus H110M-A/M.2 Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($50.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: Crucial 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR4-2133 Memory ($55.45 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Patriot Pyro SE 60GB 2.5" Solid State Drive
Case: NZXT Duet (Black/Silver) HTPC Case
Power Supply: Corsair CX 500W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($109.77 @ OutletPC)
Optical Drive: Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Blu-Ray Reader, DVD/CD Writer ($54.98 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit ($109.99 @ My Choice Software)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case Fan: ARCTIC F8 PWM 31.0 CFM 80mm Fan ($6.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Keyboard: Logitech K400 Plus Wireless Mini Keyboard w/Touchpad ($26.19 @ Amazon)
Other: FLIRC
Total: $501.80
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-04-30 04:12 EDT-0400
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,593
- Reaction score
- 25,666
It isn't just the fact that it is a quad core processor, but that it is an Intel quad core processor, and even the high-flying AAA gaming world evolves around no better performance. Having the i7 would be nice, but it's not what really produces fps when it comes to crunching the numbers, and I don't think the price difference amounts to quite that much. Let me make my case. It's a strong one.
Best value non-K i5 vs. i7 prices
$300 = i7-7700, 3.6 GHz (4.0 GHz) [4c/8t]
$228 = i5-7600K, 3.8GHz (4.1GHz) [4c/4t]
$189 = i5-7500, 3.4 GHz (3.8 GHz) [4c/4t]
$111 = price difference i7 vs. i5
$39 = price difference i5(K) vs. i5
CPU Cooler
$25 = Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO
Z170/Z270 vs. B150/B250/H110/H170/H270 (Cheapest Available Motherboards)
$74* = H170 (ASRock H170A-X1)
$90 = Z170 (ASRock Z170A-X1)
$16 = difference Z170 vs. H170
*it is a viable option can go about $21 cheaper here if you opt for the MicroATX MSI Pro-VD Plus, whereas I can't cut any more dough by going smaller with Z motherboards, but I seized on the serendipity that the above two models being the cheapest of their respective classes couldn't possibly be more apples to apples. Their biggest advantage is the ability to add two more RAM sticks. There are also many more SATA ports for drive expansion.
$80 = Total difference (ATX i5 overclocking vs. ATX i5 non-overclocking)
$101 = Total difference (ATX i5 overclocking vs. MicroATX i5 non-overclocking)
$111 = Total difference (i7-7700 vs. i5-7500)
Also, that i5-7600K will dominate that i7-7700 in any games that don't hyperthread well across all cores. It would be the flat out superior gaming CPU. You can look at the difference between i5 and i7 expenditure, or you can alternatively look at like you are advancing this CPU well beyond this "non-K" generation of i5 performance. Allow me to add some CPUs to the chart I presented before to add perspective, here. Simple strategy. Keep the GHz pedal to the four:
UserBenchmark
Quad Core Mixed, Avg (Stock Frequency)
- 238 pts = FX-4350
- 280 pts = FX-8350
- 316 pts = i5-2400
- 350 pts = i5-3470
- 364 pts = R5-1500X
- 365 pts = i5-4670
- 380 pts = R5-1600
- 383 pts = i5-6500
- 392 pts = i5-4690
- 409 pts = R5-1600X
- 417 pts = i5-7500
- 428 pts = i7-7700
- 501 pts = i5-7600K
- 596 pts = i5-7600K (@5.15 GHz peak overclock score, not expected 4.2 - 4.5GHz score)
- 429 pts = i5-7500
- 491 pts = FX-8350
- 513 pts = i5-7600K
- 594 pts = R5-1500X
- 598 pts = i5-7600K (@5.15 GHz)
- 653 pts = i7-7700
- 868 pts = R5-1600
I added the second "multicore" chart there so that you can see how even for the tiny fraction of games with hyperthreading enabled the advantage the i7-7700 holds over an overclocked i5-7600K is much less than the overclocked i5-7600K will hold over the i7-7700 (or i5-7500) in everything else. Even if we account for the reduced performance from a much more modest overclock than this peak 5.2GHz score this mirrored discrepancy should be about even. So I certainly don't see why one would hasten to argue that the i7-7700 would prove the better value with our very specific gaming focus. After all, if one values the extra threads and multicore performance advantages at stock frequency that greatly, then he would himself choose the R5-1500X ($189) or R5-1600 ($217) over the i5-7500 ($189).
*Edit*
For reference, the i5-2500K notches a Quad Core Mixed Score average of 375 pts at stock frequency, and a whopping 487 pts for the 4.9GHz peak score on the list. I think we can reasonably assume a 4.5GHz clock would score in the 450 pts range.
Unsurprisingly, Steve has a [email protected] keeping up in 2017. It tends to beat the i5-3570K at stock frequency (398 pts), and trail the 4690K at stock frequency (429 pts). So obviously UserBenchmark still isn't perfect for predicting real world fps. I should mention that it did beat a stock frequency i5-7600K in at least one benchmark:
His final assessment is that the i5-2500K is finally beginning to show its age at stock frequency, and will bottleneck the GTX 1070 and stronger GPU's in some games as it did in multiple benchmarks. Overclocked, it flew well.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 24, 2004
- Messages
- 4,832
- Reaction score
- 28
I'm really happy with my Asus rog strix 1080 ti. Runs cool, performs well, and it's pretty damn quiet too.
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2015
- Messages
- 3,553
- Reaction score
- 265
How much did you fork out for it? AS of right now, I can't see a 1080ti (a good one) for less than $1k (£779) over here. I could buy one, but because of lack of stock, it's about 2-4 weeks delivery time, and in that time I forsee a price drop because the cheapest founders are now only about $800 (£629)
I hope AMD/Nvidia don't fast track their next lineup because I intend to stick with a 1080ti for atleast 2 years..
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 9,279
- Reaction score
- 0
Your right. Looking into more then I have before and it is better to spend the extra going to K i5 then a locked i7.
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
- Messages
- 661
- Reaction score
- 13
Looking for a 23-24" IPS monitor to pair with my 280X. PCPartPicker recommends the Acer H236HLbid (no VESA) for 23" and the Asus VN248H-P for anything larger: https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#W=2300,2500&p=1&sort=d6&page=1
I have my eyes on some of the Dell monitors due to their thin bezels and height adjustment, specifically the 2417H. Overwatch is really the only FPS game that I play so I don't believe that the 6 ms response time will be an issue.
All suggestions are welcome. Thanks in advance.
I have my eyes on some of the Dell monitors due to their thin bezels and height adjustment, specifically the 2417H. Overwatch is really the only FPS game that I play so I don't believe that the 6 ms response time will be an issue.
All suggestions are welcome. Thanks in advance.
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 9,279
- Reaction score
- 0
I have an ASUS IPS panel and have been really happy with it. The colors with a little adjusting are great.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,593
- Reaction score
- 25,666
Best monitor resources. Very little variation between them:
http://www.144hzmonitors.com/best-gaming-monitor/
https://www.monitornerds.com/best-gaming-monitor-for-you-144hz-1440p-gsync-freesync-4k/
The market is very thin on IPS panels at 23-24". All I'm seeing:
- Acer R240HY
- Asus VC239H
- Asus VS239H-P
- Acer G257U (25", 1440p)
At 24", I think you'd be much better off with a higher framerate and much lower response time Freesync TN panel like the:
- Viewsonic XG2401 (144Hz)
- AOC G2460PF (144Hz)
- Asus VG245H (75Hz)
At 27", alternatively, if it must be IPS, then I don't see why you don't opt for the 27" offerings where IPS is much more robust. It's not like the 23"-24" IPS panels are 144Hz, and their rarity means you see less competitive niche pricing. If you don't care that much about CS:GO image smootheness, or whatever, and you just want the best "wow" factor in terms of picture, then you want that LG 27UD68. The RX480 should actually be able to do well in Overwatch@4K:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 9,279
- Reaction score
- 0
Microsoft's Windows 10 Game Mode
So, does it work? No. Long story short for average FPS it does nothing. Looking at the 1% low FPS, so testing consistency, it does not do much or makes things worse.
So, does it work? No. Long story short for average FPS it does nothing. Looking at the 1% low FPS, so testing consistency, it does not do much or makes things worse.
