Sub £400 mid-range Gaming Pc..Possible?

my build wasnt useless, it just obviously wasnt the best of the bunch ;) and tbh ssd on that build budget seems pointless, best off with a nice big hdd and spending more on gpu..

i know the 950 is new and cost more, but i didnt think it be any better than the 750ti?


edit: usb2 not that bad really, but other than this enclosure i have nothing nor see anything useful to me to use usb3 until everything goes usb3.

A 950 is faster than a 750ti (i have had both) ;)

And that previous link I gave also shows this.

As for USB3.0, even just putting a large file (film/Game download/anything) on to a USB3.0 device using USB3.0 is significantly quicker than 2.0.

Again I've been there and done that and got the Tshirt.
 
A 950 is faster than a 750ti (i have had both) ;)

And that previous link I gave also shows this.

As for USB3.0, even just putting a large file (film/Game download/anything) on to a USB3.0 device using USB3.0 is significantly quicker than 2.0.

Again I've been there and done that and got the Tshirt.


can i have a t-shirt aswell? :p..

ah right thats handy to know then, i didnt think there was much difference other than age of tech..

okay okay usb3 is the 'Don', but unless any of my usb sticks are(well 1 is but thats used for xbox till i get a hdd) usb3 compatible then i am not converted :D
 
Thanks again for the feedback chaps.
I'm hoping to order sometime this week. How long does delivery usually take? Or is it the same length as a piece of string?
 
Thanks again for the feedback chaps.
I'm hoping to order sometime this week. How long does delivery usually take? Or is it the same length as a piece of string?

If you pay for DPD and order before 4pm it's next day. Only order I've ever had a day late was on Cyber Monday last year
 
My basket at Overclockers UK:

Total: £422.09
(includes shipping: £13.20)



Why an i5 and a weaker GPU when he is gaming? Seriously, he wants to play higher end games and a 380 tanks both the 950 and even the 960 and competes with the 970.
Seems senseless to me that your spending almost half the budget on a CPU when you can get one not far off for a third of the price that will do the trick for his son.
 
Also with my build you arent just getting the cheapest. I selected the board as you will be able to get a nice overclock if you want to add a cooler for like £20 (Hyper 212 evo) and get some nice overclocks on that CPU.
With the rest, it should comfortably beat everything people have listed above.
Plus i think the build will also look nice with the windowed case and GPU, which your son will appreciate (what lad dosen't appreciate a nice looking pc ;) ) But yeah, unless ive missed something, i think this is your best choice :)
 
Athlon X4's tank and fall of a cliff in most games.

Well what can he get then? i3? G3258?
An i5 just seems a stupid waste to me, hes going to be using over half the budget on that and a motherboard leaving barely anything for the rest.
If op was to increase the budget to say £500 then an i5 could easily be included, but at £400 it is pointless really as you wont get as good performance, as the gpu will be a lot weaker.
 
Well what can he get then? i3? G3258?
An i5 just seems a stupid waste to me, hes going to be using over half the budget on that and a motherboard leaving barely anything for the rest.
If op was to increase the budget to say £500 then an i5 could easily be included, but at £400 it is pointless really as you wont get as good performance, as the gpu will be a lot weaker.

Cyanide did include an i3 and a GTX950 in his spec, even an i3 gives a Athlon a beating.
 
I'm not too sure if it's worth mentioning, but my son already has three hard drives (recently purchased WD Caviar green or blue, can't remember), so is it worth taking a hard drive out of the equation.
I know you can never have too much storage, plus £40 might not make much of a different to the processor I choose.
 
Yes, they are sata, Fixup. The WD is only a few months old. I would love solid state but for the price, as far as I've seen, it's not an option at the moment. Not on my budget. Maybe when I'm building for myself I'll treat numero uno to a ssd.
 
if youre not worried about harddrives you could afford to spend money else where. out of interest.. is there anything else he could use from his old system? hows the case? is it a good psu?
 
ohh and if possible I personally would go with the i5.. im not an Intel fanboy and have used AMD for years and built loads of pc's for family and mates and always went with AMD for everyone but I recently got an i5 4690k and cant believe the difference in games.

if you can afford it the i5 is the way to go.. if your on a budget AMD can give good bang on a budget
 
I'm not too sure if it's worth mentioning, but my son already has three hard drives (recently purchased WD Caviar green or blue, can't remember), so is it worth taking a hard drive out of the equation.
I know you can never have too much storage, plus £40 might not make much of a different to the processor I choose.


By an SSD - that will make his system fly - best upgrade for any system

If you can find a 240/250GB capacity one. Use it as your OS drive and you can put some games on there.
 
http://www.techspot.com/review/1089-fallout-4-benchmarks/page5.html

i5 3470 (same core speed) is nicely ahead of the i3 CPUs in Fallout4 and thats just one game;)

You've pretty much just undone your point sharing that chart, assuming the OP's lad has a 60 Hz screen, because anything from an i3 up (or very overclocked Piledriver) manages 60+ FPS minimum.

Furthermore, since the OP is going to get nowhere near the 980 Ti tested, it's even more important that money is diverted from CPU to GPU. Because what's the point in an i5 over an i3 if it means the GPU is going to get nowhere near the FPS made available by having the i5 in the first place?

Edit: To illustrate the point I've found two videos containing running around outside bits. One is an X4 860K+R9 270 (slower than the 380 in post #25), the other is an overclocked i5-4690K+GTX 750 Ti (faster than the 750 in post #5), both at 1080p and high settings (if you skip to the right part). The FPS are similar, with the X4 system just a few FPS faster to my eye.



On top of that, Fallout is more CPU heavy than most, so I would say the X4 + powerful GPU will be a better option more often than the i5 + weak GPU.
 
Last edited:
am I missing something here... the 3 ive outlined.. the i7 I can understand will be quicker than the i5 but the 3470 is higher than the 4690k? :eek:

also.. the i3 4360 scoring higher than the fx 9590??

now Im not saying intel cpu's arent good as im over the moon with my 4690k compared to the 8350 I had.. but i3 4360 scoring higher than the fx9590?? that just dont make sense to me..

CPU_01_zpskj7cw19s.png
 
now Im not saying intel cpu's arent good as im over the moon with my 4690k compared to the 8350 I had.. but i3 4360 scoring higher than the fx9590?? that just dont make sense to me..

What's not to understand? They're using a very powerful GPU at a low screen resolution (1080p), so the GPU is starved for instructions from the CPU. Piledriver suffers from bad predictions and long pipelines, hence the low FPS.

Apart from that though, DirectX 11 is inefficient. Really that chart isn't a test of CPU + Fallout 4, it's a test of CPU + DX11. I'd expect DX12 to look quite different.
 
if youre not worried about harddrives you could afford to spend money else where. out of interest.. is there anything else he could use from his old system? hows the case? is it a good psu?

Sorry for taking so long to get back. There's not much else he can use. He has my old system and is well overdue an upgrade. Only a dual core processor and the motherboard is equally as redundant.
 
Back
Top Bottom