Could I get a better upgrade for the money?

[lttlejoe]

Finally this week I'm getting around to buying the bits I need to upgrade this computer and fit the existing mobo etc into another case as a spare computer. I've been saying it for weeks but kept changing my mind over different combinations but it's finally going to happen and this is what I've chosen.

I have upgraded my case and fitted it out with 4 new fans, a 6 channel fan speed controller. I have twin optical drives, an onboard multi card reader, 2 x SSDs for a dual boot system which is now up and running. I also have dual HDDs for backup and the AM4 mobo I've chosen has the required number of SATA connectors I need so all is looking good. The current PSU should be ok but I can if necessary, upgrade that too.
The upgraded computer will be primarily a day to day computer as well well as my music player just as the current configuration has been used for but with the addition of a GPU for entry level gaming .

I set a budget for this part of the upgrade to around £500-550 which is roughly in the ball park with my chosen bits.
So is this choice of CPU, mobo, Ram and GPU the best bang for my bucks?

Also can you suggest a cheapish 22-24" monitor suitable for entry level gaming, as my current monitor which is fine for general use is only VGA and from what I believe I can't connect it to the GPU I've chosen!
Your opinions welcomed as I want this all sewn up this week.

Cheers.


EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 3072MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card
Stock Code GX-30D-EA



10+ In stock

1
Was: £218.99
£209.99*
£209.99*



AMD Promo Bundle - AMD Ryzen 5 2600, Gigabyte X370-Gaming 3, Team Group RAM *FREE 240GB SSD*
Stock Code BU-01F-AM



10+ In stock

1
£328.97*
£328.97*


your selected configuration:Edit Configuration
Memory CapacityTeam Group Vulcan T-Force 8GB (2x4GB) DDR4 PC4-24000C16 3000MHz Dual Channel Kit - Grey (TLGD48G3000

 

[orbitalwalsh]

Looks good, you can get a VGA to DVI or HDMI converter /lead if needs be and want to save cash.
Depends how old your monitor is if you want something with a higher quality picture , VA/IPS panel

 

[lttlejoe]

Looks good, you can get a VGA to DVI or HDMI converter /lead if needs be and want to save cash.
Depends how old your monitor is if you want something with a higher quality picture , VA/IPS panel

Cheers for that OW...this must be the longest running upgrade saga in the history of OCUK!
I'm the worlds worst at choosing --ambivalent is my middle name but usually I get things right in the end. I thought the components I chose looked about right for my spend and it leaves me with an upgrade path further down the line but should hopefully handle entry level gaming without too many issues at the moment.

The monitor I currently have is an older HP w2007v with only a VGA connection and a native resolution of 1680 x 1050. I've had it for quite a few years and for general use I really wouldn't bother changing it as it does all I want and the picture quality is very good but I doubt it would be suitable for gaming.

Realistically, a 22"-24" screen absolute maximum is all I could fit in the position I have the current monitor so I'm limited in choice due to screen size. I could get a converter as long as it will work and see how I get on and then get a new monitor if I'm not happy and then decide on screen size. If I could get something of the same quality as this I'd be happy.
I have seen a 24" iiyama which I like the look of if it will fit. I had an old iiyama years ago and it was the best screen I had come across for calibrating for photography.
The main thing is it's pointless spending money on decent components and then viewing the results on a rubbish monitor.

 

[orbitalwalsh]

you using the build mainly for photography/editing ?

 

[EsaT]

The current PSU should be ok but I can if necessary, upgrade that too.

BeQuiet L7 was low end PSU when new and now it must be really used up.
So wouldn't exactly consider it worthy for any new PC.

Bitfenix Formula would be good starting PSU with modern efficiency and good capacitors.
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/search?sSearch=bitfenix+formula
For stock CPU and that level graphics card 450W would be enough.

Realistically, a 22"-24" screen absolute maximum is all I could fit in the position I have the current monitor so I'm limited in choice due to screen size.

I have seen a 24" iiyama which I like the look of if it will fit. I had an old iiyama years ago and it was the best screen I had come across for calibrating for photography.

You should be looking for 1920x1200 16:10 monitor for more screen size for spent desk space than in 16:9 low screens wasting more desk space for smaller image.
Those are also available in ~22" size if you're short on desk space...
And because of better aspect ratio give basically vertically as big image size as ~24" 16:9s

 

[lttlejoe]

you using the build mainly for photography/editing ?

No, just general all round use hence all the peripherals but I'd like to try my hand at entry level gaming too. It's something I've wanted to do for years but never had time for it until now and that is why I chose those components.
For the amount of image editing I do, even the current mobo and cpu and ram would easily cope with it, albeit laboriously. The upgrade is to allow entry level gaming.
I did consider at one point just popping in the 1060 in this board and seeing how it would fare. I'm sure it would play games though I suspect it would hardly be good, probably about the same as a 1030 in a Ryzen board at best and similar to a Ryzen 2400 G which I also considered.

The main thing I require from a monitor for photo editing is actually the ability to calibrate it accurately so that it matches my printer's output.

 

[orbitalwalsh]

nah, gtx 1060 is a damn good card. just a shame mining prices made is sore up!!!!! should have never have been a £250 card etc

ah i see about calibration needs now - not so much getting it to look the best but more so as close as to how it would come out from the printer - most want the other way around and forget about how it comes out, but guessing they don't do the printing part

 

[lttlejoe]

BeQuiet L7 was low end PSU when new and now it must be really used up.
So wouldn't exactly consider it worthy for any new PC.

Bitfenix Formula would be good starting PSU with modern efficiency and good capacitors.
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/search?sSearch=bitfenix+formula
For stock CPU and that level graphics card 450W would be enough.


You should be looking for 1920x1200 16:10 monitor for more screen size for spent desk space than in 16:9 low screens wasting more desk space for smaller image.
Those are also available in ~22" size if you're short on desk space...
And because of better aspect ratio give basically vertically as big image size as ~24" 16:9s

Can't argue about replacing the PSU...I have checked it over with a meter and it seems ok at the moment but I would be replacing it in any case as it's going into the case which will be my backup computer so I'll need a new one.

The issue I have with the monitor size is that I have my computer and monitor on an adjustable rack system with overhead shelves which house my printer, scanner and lots of other things which fill the shelves and need to be kept there and then shelves below which accommodate my 5.1 bass unit, router etc, so space is restricted to around 20" in monitor height including stand. I could VESA mount it but I wouldn't gain much. Viewing distance for normal use is quite close at about 16-20 inches on average so it doesn't need to be too big which is why I was satisfied with a 20" monitor but for playing games it may not be enough.

 

[lttlejoe]

nah, gtx 1060 is a damn good card. just a shame mining prices made is sore up!!!!! should have never have been a £250 card etc

ah i see about calibration needs now - not so much getting it to look the best but more so as close as to how it would come out from the printer - most want the other way around and forget about how it comes out, but guessing they don't do the printing part

I sometimes post online too with people who have properly calibrated monitors so they see what I see. Unfortunately most people do not calibrate their monitors so never get an accurate rendition of the image.
I used to shoot a few weddings in the past and it was essential that the editing I did on the screen matched the output of the printer . I used quite a few screens but the iiyama was the best I used at that time.
Calibrating the screen was the old equivalent of placing a specific piece of coloured fabric in some shots taken on colour film so that chappie who D&P'd them could get accurate colours when you sent him the film and a piece of the fabric to the film lab.

 

[orbitalwalsh]

I sometimes post online too with people who have properly calibrated monitors so they see what I see. Unfortunately most people do not calibrate their monitors so never get an accurate rendition of the image.
I used to shoot a few weddings in the past and it was essential that the editing I did on the screen matched the output of the printer . I used quite a few screens but the iiyama was the best I used at that time.
Calibrating the screen was the old equivalent of placing a specific piece of coloured fabric in some shots taken on colour film so that chappie who D&P'd them could get accurate colours when you sent him the film and a piece of the fabric to the film lab.

few friends did Wedding photography , set them up with HDR range monitors and to be fair, only half of them calibrated them at all, although they all said they don't print as theres no money in it .
if you havent see a Pressional HDR monitor with 100 adobe RGB scale.. worth looking at. though £600+ for basic ones , believe they are 10 bit panels as well - which standard nvidia cards cant drive, only 8+2 bit panels

 

[lttlejoe]

I don't dispute that high quality monitors are the way to go but I just don't do enough to justify it these days so a modest monitor will do fine for me.The last time I did any pro wedding photography was about 8 years ago when digital imaging had just nicely settled as the replacement for film.
Back then the packages consisted of prints for albums and converted and edited RAW files on CD to reduce printing costs. The problem is that unless those printing off the prints at the other end has a decent printer, the results are going to be questionable.

As long as I get a decent monitor for multi use that will be good enough. If you can suggest something reasonably priced to do the job that would welcomed.

 

[EsaT]

so space is restricted to around 20" in monitor height including stand.

20" height fits 24" 16:10 easily.
For example Dells are little short of 21" with panel in its highest height and 16" high with panel in lowest height.
Because of lower panel height per marketing size even 27" 2560x1440 16:9 wouldn't be much any higher.
Heck even my 30" 2560x1600 is 19" high with panel at lowest height.

 

[lttlejoe]

20" height fits 24" 16:10 easily.
For example Dells are little short of 21" with panel in its highest height and 16" high with panel in lowest height.
Because of lower panel height per marketing size even 27" 2560x1440 16:9 wouldn't be much any higher.
Heck even my 30" 2560x1600 is 19" high with panel at lowest height.

I've just re-checked and the bottom edge of this monitor panel sits 80mm (just over 3") off the desk top when on its stand and the maximum height of any new panel would have to be no taller that 380mm ( just under 15 inches) with the bottom edge sitting 80mm above the desk top.

I've looked again at the dimensions of the 24" iiyama to give me an idea and it only sits 40cm high on the stand to the top of the panel so that would be probably ok. The 20" monitor I'm currently using is roughly 16:9 so a 22" in the same format or close to it would be ideal but a 24" would be perfectly acceptable too.

The 24" iiyama I've looked at is 1080p full HD and is 16:9. 84hz. it would probably be ok but not being familiar with gaming requirements I can't say for sure whether it would be good enough.

 

[EsaT]

I've just re-checked and the bottom edge of this monitor panel sits 80mm (just over 3") off the desk top when on its stand and the maximum height of any new panel would have to be no taller that 380mm ( just under 15 inches) with the bottom edge sitting 80mm above the desk top.

No need to measure anything else than available vertical space.
Any serious monitor maker tells full measures.
Dell even has this level info:
https://downloads.dell.com/manuals/..._display/dell-u2415_reference guide_en-us.pdf

 

[lttlejoe]

Ideally, by the looks of it a 22" or 23" monitor would be perfect with regard to viewing distance and size without having to modify the depth of my desk but there isn't a big selection in those sizes on OCUK. Also they're not exactly expensive so would any of those be good enough for what I need?

 

[EsaT]

Ideally, by the looks of it a 22" or 23" monitor would be perfect with regard to viewing distance and size without having to modify the depth of my desk but there isn't a big selection in those sizes on OCUK. Also they're not exactly expensive so would any of those be good enough for what I need?

If you do image editing you'll want extra vertical resolution of 1920x1200 over FoolsD marketing fad.
While having just fair 11% more pixels in absolute sense Windows taskbar and tool bars of programs have fixed pixel height.
So effective working area available for image, text document, spreadsheet etc becomes easily 15% bigger.

Rather curious desk if you can't have monitor farther.
Though there are couple 22.5" 1920x1200 monitors, like two iiyamas with difference in first lacking height adjustment in stand.
https://iiyama.com/gb_en/products/prolite-xu2395wsu-b1/
https://iiyama.com/gb_en/products/prolite-xub2395wsu-b1/
With DisplayPort they seem to support 75 Hz.

Here's visualization of size differences between your current, 22½" and 24" 16:10 and 24" 16:9
https://goo.gl/i2Vdj2
22.5" 1920x1200 would also have pixel size closest to your current HP.

 

[lttlejoe]

If you do image editing you'll want extra vertical resolution of 1920x1200 over FoolsD marketing fad.
While having just fair 11% more pixels in absolute sense Windows taskbar and tool bars of programs have fixed pixel height.
So effective working area available for image, text document, spreadsheet etc becomes easily 15% bigger.

Rather curious desk if you can't have monitor farther.
Though there are couple 22.5" 1920x1200 monitors, like two iiyamas with difference in first lacking height adjustment in stand.
https://iiyama.com/gb_en/products/prolite-xu2395wsu-b1/
https://iiyama.com/gb_en/products/prolite-xub2395wsu-b1/
With DisplayPort they seem to support 75 Hz.

Here's visualization of size differences between your current, 22½" and 24" 16:10 and 24" 16:9
https://goo.gl/i2Vdj2
22.5" 1920x1200 would also have pixel size closest to your current HP.

Thanks for the reply.
The desk area is 54 cm x 140 cm which can't be changed. The ATX desktop computer sits on the desktop to my left for easy access. Added to this the racking and shelving restricts the monitor height and although it can be adjusted by a cm or two, more than that would displace everything else above and below which would be cimpractical.

I can see your argument for 16:10. I'd actually prefer the traditional 16:12 if I was doing enough editing but it's only casual private stuff these days and my I manage ok with my 16:9 though a 16:10 would be nearer to what I need.

As I've said, I'm not monitor aware so would something like those in the links you've posted be suitable for both gaming and general use ? They seem very reasonably priced especially if they would do what I want but I don't want to buy something just because it's cheap if I end up unhappy with it as I'll just have to buy another.

 

[EsaT]

As I've said, I'm not monitor aware so would something like those in the links you've posted be suitable for both gaming and general use ?

Those would easily handle more than "entry level" gaming.

 

[lttlejoe]

Those would easily handle more than "entry level" gaming.

Thank you. That's reassuring to know and exactly the information I was seeking.
I'm somewhat of an older geezer compared to the ages of most avid gamers. I've never done any gaming other than very primitive stuff years ago even though I've actually had computers since the 80's and my view of them was as a tool to help with most office/business chores. Gaming however, is something I've always promised myself I'd have a go at and finally at long last I'm getting around to it, albeit rather later in life than most others.

I think a Ryzen 5 2600 plus a GTX 1060 should suffice to start me off and with a decent monitor from what I can gather, I should be able tackle most popular games albeit maybe on lower settings with the more demanding titles.

 

[orbitalwalsh]

you should be good. not much difference between ultra and high settings and ultra does take a bigger hit off frame rates .

Fancy a bit of fun, overclock ryzen 2600 to 4ghz all cores - should hit 4.1/2 though