Thoughts on new rigs

FixupSellon said:
i myself can understand the 2 system setup, loads of members do it infact, maybe not gaming based as such and im sort of the same, well was untill i sold what i got as money needed(i build/upgrade computers), but one was more for testing and the other for games/movies, but having a windows 8.1 computer a lot of games of old i have(more old school gamer) either dont run or doesnt run well due to compatibility, so i will be looking for an older but nothing fancy computer for such games...


my advise would be if you have a computer thats oldish and has issues then fix/upgrade that for low en dand save up for the high end or just go on ebay/gumtree and buy a computer for 45-60 and just add the required bits if needed..
Click to expand...

When I got the laptop a few years back, I decided to have everything I had installed on it so depending on what one I was using, I still had access to everything (although saves weren't the same on both) but limited space on the laptop (it only has a 250GB hard drive, and before I put the GT610 into the desktop it had more graphical power) meant that I had to remove games from it so I could have a decent buffer when I installed other games which is why I decided on this split build since a majority of what I have doesn't need that much graphical grunt, and the rest while some wouldn't be able to run or run in low settings they will be able to stretch their legs once the more powerful system is built (please excuse the wall).

The other problem is that even if I tried to get around the known issues with the desktop, the main issue is that the processor is at least nine years old and will have the crap kicked out of it by any other currently available equivalent processor (and will most likely get teabagged at the end) which is why I decided to use more current components (the laptop will still be used since it contains my whole iTunes library, and the desktop can still be used and could probably be wired to a TV (if I ever get one since it can't be connected to my current one) and used to play media either locally or through a network attached device).

I might eventually build an ultimate gaming system (that could be a challenge for those here to come up with 2 options (one with an AMD processor and the other with an intel processor) no expense spared but not an overkill system), but that is only going to happen when I actually have the money (I'd most likely be able to build the low end system and a budget gaming rig with the money required for an ultimate system and still have change left over).
 
I hear you, but old tech isn't always that bad, I played crysis on socket 754 with over clocked sempron, 2gb ddr ram and a GeForce 310 512mb(computer I recently sold) ,now while it just playable the whole computer was sorta round the same age as the game which was my point of looking at game specs..

If a game doesn't suggest beyond xp/vista then build a rig round those specs with a little bit extra performance for clearance, but of course don't build a pentium 2/3 just because the game suggests that in requirements as that just be stupid..

Sounds like for modern tech wise you require an APU of some kind for the low end as Intel be better for high end.
 
FixupSellon said:
If a game doesn't suggest beyond xp/vista then build a rig round those specs with a little bit extra performance for clearance, but of course don't build a pentium 2/3 just because the game suggests that in requirements as that just be stupid..
Click to expand...

It isn't more OS compatibility for those that I'm running in my VM test (and out of the other three I'm having issues with, one requires a video to be re-encoded to stop it from locking up at start (it still works without the video in question in the install folder) and the second has some issues with fonts that don't seem to be included in windows 8.1 and the third I'm still trying to figure out what's going wrong with even though I've tried everything I've discovered on the internet, but it might just be an 8.1 issue which I can easily find out if I upgrade to ten), it's more that some of them wouldn't work on a 64-bit version of windows since it doesn't have 16-bit support which is why the basic build was only configured to run a 32-bit OS, but if windows 10 fixes two out of three (and that ain't bad) current problematic games then at least that means for those I can build DVD variants of the installers (and for one I can replace the setup file in one of them with the version that works in current operating systems) so I don't have to bother swapping discs when it comes to reinstalling them (again please excuse the wall).

I'm also not mad to build a system based on outdated hardware (I can't even find AGP graphics cards) since a lot of what I have only required 500Mhz processors and not that much of RAM, but as there are games going onto it that require a lot more grunt I'll stick to modern components.
 
demonix said:
It isn't more OS compatibility for those that I'm running in my VM test (and out of the other three I'm having issues with, one requires a video to be re-encoded to stop it from locking up at start (it still works without the video in question in the install folder) and the second has some issues with fonts that don't seem to be included in windows 8.1 and the third I'm still trying to figure out what's going wrong with even though I've tried everything I've discovered on the internet, but it might just be an 8.1 issue which I can easily find out if I upgrade to ten), it's more that some of them wouldn't work on a 64-bit version of windows since it doesn't have 16-bit support which is why the basic build was only configured to run a 32-bit OS, but if windows 10 fixes two out of three (and that ain't bad) current problematic games then at least that means for those I can build DVD variants of the installers (and for one I can replace the setup file in one of them with the version that works in current operating systems) so I don't have to bother swapping discs when it comes to reinstalling them (again please excuse the wall).

I'm also not mad to build a system based on outdated hardware (I can't even find AGP graphics cards) since a lot of what I have only required 500Mhz processors and not that much of RAM, but as there are games going onto it that require a lot more grunt I'll stick to modern components.
Click to expand...


games that are outdated are best with outdated hardware, outdated games on windows 7/8.1 just doesnt always work or are no different as such..

ive got i3 4160 and gtx 750 non ti that makes no difference on old games even if is like 100x better machine, that is unless you play a game like crysis or another game i got called Damnation where my system excels compared to old hardware, but thats to be expect if your hardware doesnt even meet the original requirements..

mean you could buy a dual core computer with anything up to 4gb ram that could run anything like a hd2400/2600 or majority of the 3 & 4 series range depending on extra cable need or not or an 7/8 series for upwards of £50 if that and do everything you pretty much want without problems..


no point wasting money on recent tech to play old tech, this is currently my experience apart from im buying old games for a new generation of tech lol
 
FixupSellon said:
No point wasting money on recent tech to play old tech.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what your buying when you build an AMD system? Old tech?

Personally Intel is not the problem, user error is, nothing described within the OP's replies says otherwise.

As for the 1st post, building two PC's etc. None of it will solve the OP's issue.

Not that two budget PC's is an issue, the majority of PC builders have overspecced epeen systems that usually never get used to their full potential or does any better than a budget system for the majority of it's use.

Until AMD bring new CPU architecture that actually competes with Intel for less expendature, they will continue to be ill advised. I fail to see in what manner Intel are causing the issues stated by OP as an excuse to buy AMD nor do I think there is any value in AMD when the hardware has been sitting for years unchanged while Intel progressed.
 
I've had bad experiences with intel based systems in the past and won't ever build a system with an intel processor.
Click to expand...

This is like the worst logic, ever, except for your further reasoning behind it.

Nothing you described was symptomatic of an Intel CPU issue.
 
Change of plans.

After a bit of reassessing, I've decided that my current desktop is going to remain as the basic system with a single new build which is going to initially be a test bench for some of the original hardware that is going in it since if those tests bring up good results will be used for another project when I upgrade certain parts in the future.

Along with the change in plans is the change in parts for the most part, and I'll explain the reason for choosing some of the parts at the end.

MoBo: Asrock FM2A88X Pro3+
CPU: AMD Athlon X4 860K
RAM: Crucial Ballistix Sport 8GB (2X4GB) DDR3 PC3-12800C9
HDD1: Samsung 250GB 850 EVO SSD
HDD2: Toshiba 2TB 7200RPM HDD
ODD: Samsung SH-224FB/RSMS DVDRW (retail)
GPU: Sapphire Radeon R7 250X Vapor-X
SC: Creative Sound Blaster Z High Performance Sound Card
PSU: Corsair Builder Series CX 430w Modular PSU
Case: Bitfenix Neos ATX Tower Case Black/Red

Before anyone comes back in and starts spouting that I should be using intel processors, I'm trying to keep the spend down on this one since matching the number of cores would mean getting an i5 which costs over (or around) £150, and from what I've read that CPU beats the snot out of almost all of the currently available CPUs and APUs when it comes to single core (which is what is required for world of tanks since they haven't even bothered updating the game engine to one that works with multi-core processors) and it isn't going to be its final form since the SSD, GPU and most likely the power supply will be upgraded with the existing parts being (as I already mentioned) used for another project which could easily end up with an intel processor at the core of the build.
 
Core efficiency.

A budget Intel system is still going to offer more than AMD.

http://www.techspot.com/review/1017-best-budget-gaming-cpu/page7.html

And the system you stated will not do too well with World of Tanks.

My basket at Overclockers UK:

Total: £552.21
(includes shipping: £12.30)
​


​
 
Last edited:
demonix said:
and from what I've read that CPU beats the snot out of almost all of the currently available CPUs and APUs when it comes to single core (which is what is required for world of tanks since they haven't even bothered updating the game engine to one that works with multi-core processors)
Click to expand...

Even a Pentium will give the Athlon a good slapping on single core performance
 
sastusbulbas said:
And the system you stated will not do too well with World of Tanks.
Click to expand...

My current system does pretty well with world of tanks even though its a 7+ year old processor tied to a recent gen non gaming GPU (on the default low settings I can get at least 60fps map depending and as long as the hard drive isn't getting thrashed by something else), so that setup is likely to make some improvements when it comes to world of tanks and world of warships (it should get me out of big firefight lag hell when it comes to world of warships).

That R7 250X isn't going to be the final card in that system since the GPU and SSD (and most likely the power supply) will be moved to another system once specific tests have been done and confirmed that what I'll actually be using those components on another future build and most likely an overclocked GTX 960 with 4GB GDDR5 RAM.

Also, I was comparing AMD with AMD since the processor for the "gaming" system was a Piledriver quad core which went to a six core and both were beaten in single core by the Athlon X4 860K (and I did do a comparison between the 860K and the intel processors that are around the same price level and they did do better when it came to single core operations).

As for the previous suggestions, I might use it in part for this build or I might use part of it in my next build knowing that some performance will be better on it with the hardware I'd be moving to it.
 
What you think of as doing pretty well and pretty well we may not agree on, I have been playing WoT since beta myself and specifically done a lot of it with budget builds and LGA 775 hardware, including overclocked E8500 dual cores with 4gb of DDR2 and various cards.

I aim for a steady frame rate too, none of that wow I hit 127fps looking at grass malarky with 50% frame drops when it gets busy, but a consistent 60fps regardless of map at max settings, and old hardware does not usually do too well with such on the HD client. Usually looking at the SD client with medium/high settings and some eye candy off with budget builds.

For games such as World Of Tanks an overclocked G3258 pentium dual core still walks all over AMD. Because AMD's core efficiency simply is not as good. Best budget PC was at one time was the G3258 and Nvidia 750ti 2gb, it's a real shame we have no up to date equivalent to those two with the release of Skylake and 950 model GPU's.

Edit, what is the complete list of your current pc components in your current system?
 
Last edited:
Thing is lads, you dont see what he is saying, let me explain, and i think OP hasnt made the best choices he could, and rather than smashing him for going AMD (nothing wrong at all for budget systems, Intel is overpriced in that regard IMO).
OP, for your budget system, as i understand, you are strapped for cash and want to game, I hear you, but buying 'new' isn't the way to go. Get yourself on the bay of E or Gumtree and look up some used parts and then when you have saved up some money, slowly upgrade it with new parts from OCUK of course ;) !

You could even have 2 hard drives, which if you want to swap, just change the sata cable and bam, your into whatever OS you want.

In my opinion, this is your best option, especially if money for this sort of thing isnt east to come by, 2nd hand markets are your absolute best source, there are some absolute bargains to be had, that can fulfill your dreams, without being stupidly overpriced.

Honestly I think its wrong to absolutely destroy him for choosing AMD, OP, have a look out there on the places i mentioned above (admins, i recommended him places as that is best for him, just remove the text if rules are broken!) for some parts, and try and pick some up when you can afford them, and pick a cheap system up from Gumtree.

You would be silly to go with them builds when there is so much better performance to be had, i understand what you want to do with these systems, but my point stands!
 
sastusbulbas said:
Edit, what is the complete list of your current pc components in your current system?
Click to expand...

These are the ones that should matter.

Mobo: Asus M2N-MX
CPU: AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+
RAM: Corsair XMS2 Twin-X DDR2 PC5400 2GB
GPU: EVGA GeForce GT 610 1GB (the newest part in the system)
HDD: Samsung Spinpoint F1 500GB (now with a bad block as of a few hours ago)

And @theaterix, the original plan has been scrapped and the plan is to now build a single system that was to start out with lower end graphics and a low to mid capacity SSD to test for another build that will be done in the near future and a larger capacity SSD and a more higher end graphics card (however with the problems that have cropped up means that I'll have to nurse my current system back to full health, or just put it out of it's misery and either build a new system or get a mini PC).
 
Considering the risks of second hand buying, I would rather trust Overclockers and receive the Haribo than suggest he tries buying various second hand parts from various second hand sellers all at different times then hope nothing goes wrong as he builds it.

And none of us are saying do not buy AMD, just pointing out opinions. Had the OP been less flippant and more forthcomming with details I would have assumed straightforward answers would have been abundant at the start.

He started with around £1200 of components, then it was a bit by bit build, now I assume under £500.

He wanted a budget gaming system and a high end gaming system initially even though any high end gaming system will still be capable of also playing low res games, I was playing Jet Pac and such games some time back, still play old titles such as Command & Conquer, Age of Empires II etc.

If it's all about gaming, he needs the best gaming PC for a stated budget, simple, no point wasting time building various computers with cheap thrill band aids just for trial and error and later changing, unless he again wants to mess up software and such with consistent driver changes/updates etc.

Currently the AMD 380 4gb card is a great 1080p GPU, so maybe aiming for a decent PSU that powers such a card with a fair Z97 board and Pentium would still allow him to upgrade to an i5 K chip later?

I would be happy to suggest an AMD alternative, but what, it's been 990 motherboards with FX cpu's since Vista. If there was a newer alternative other than the rehashed on board graphics choices I would be in there, but their top motherboard is now over 4 years old, and it has been superceded by half a dozen Intel chipsets in it's time.

My basket at Overclockers UK:

Total: £361.88
(includes shipping: £9.90)
​


​

Thats AMD's best, been the same sort of Piledriver/990 choices since 2011. Back then the gamers CPU of choice was Intels i5 2500K. Now I ask you, would you buy one today brand new retail for £235? Or would you buy a Skylake 6600K for £200 and more performance?

Thats the issue, not just it underperforming against Intel, but the fact that it has been underperforming for years against Intel while remaining stagnant against Z77, Z87, Z97, and now Skylake. It's like going out and buying a 720p TV with a 2" plastic bezel around the screen for the same price as a 4K smart TV with a 5mm bezel.

If AMD reduced the price in accordance to how old the tech is, I would have a go myself at an 8 core 990 AMD build, but no matter how good value it may seem, those prices for underperforming 4 year old hardware from a company who currently seem to be in decline seems ludicrous.

Really, once Intel release a quad core pentium or i3, with 6 and 8 core desktops in the same price bracket or marginally more expensive than AMD, then thats it. But currently, I would rather have an Intel Pentium or i3 from the Z97/Skylake range.

It will not be long until the only choice is an Intel CPu with an Nvidia GPU for your home desktop, unless AMD pull that fist out of their Anus and stop rebranding and tweaking the old pap. When K12 or Zen get released in 2016 I really hope we see AMD back on the map with value for money components that compete with Intel. Maybe then we will see these riduculous RRP prices and pathetic performance increases become more attractive.

Some components can simply be bought to use with the OP's current hardware, there are superb cases for full ATX motherboards from £27 upward available, though I currently like the NZXT S340 and Phanteks Enthoo Evolv, a solid PSU that covers any single GPU build is a sound investment. I have upgraded old LGA 775 systems simply by buying a decent case, then PSU, then GPU, then SSD, then storage drive, then CPU cooler, leaving a motherboard/cpu/memory bundle upgrade until last.

My basket at Overclockers UK:

Total: £988.61
(includes shipping: £14.70)
​


​
 
Last edited:
True story,

I remember a few years ago i tried asking for advice on a really bad idea. I felt my idea was great and i joined a forum to finalise my plans. I was thinking, like yourself on a very strict budget and wanted the most, i was planning on getting a (at the time) £700 mobo and cpu and then get a £100 GPU, a few weeks later get another GPU, ect ect until i had 4 way SLI. I was told how ridiculous that was to play games i needed a £2/300 mobo cpu and a high end GPU.
As expected, i got shot down, hard, I spent all night and some of the day after trying to argue my point and get people to understand my needs, my budget, my goals and in the end, i had no idea what i wanted and very confused. i decided to listen to everyone else and got a last gen mobo and cpu for a 1/4 price and saved up for my GPU. spent £550 on a 780 (none ti as this was before the price plunge!!)
This was the best thing i could have done. swallowed my pride and took advice from people who know exactly what there talking about.

I know you keep mentioning budgets but you get build a budget pc that will game better than any next gen console for under £500. You can, instead of buying parts twice building 2 PC's, give yourself a GPU jar and what money you budget, slam it in there. Itll soon add up and you can get the machine you really want, not 2 you will regret.

(Normally, i proof read what i write but i did this all in one and its way past the hour of caring, sorry if its nonsense)
 
Since there still seems to be some ignorance of my more current posts, I'll make it clear in as large a text size as possible.

The original plan has been scrapped

My current desktop system (once I've sorted out the hard drive problem) is going to act as the compatibility system with the new build being a gaming build, but some of its parts will be used for what I'm referring to my emulation system which will be for running (physical since playing some games on actual hardware is rather painful in the frame rate stakes) PS1 and PS2 games on my TV without having to set up the hardware.

Also my CPU choice while being the best among a majority of the currently available AMD processors in single core, it was for getting quad core on a budget (since I might be getting games in the future that require more than two cores) since I would have to go for core i3 which would be about twice as much (it also means that if I need more CPU performance for the emulation system after I do my tests, I can easily plan an intel build since there are more mini ITX boards available on that side).
 
So.

What is your new budget this time?

You want a beer budget gaming PC. What OS and what games and programs are going to be used.

No, wait, it is for new multi core titles, not the emulated software gaming?

No, your current PC is going to check compatability? In what manner?

And your still only going to buy one or two parts per month?

And is your £60 AMD choice actually the best out of all AMD for single core use? A £60 quad core, that will need overclocked, so needs a good cooler, taking it into £80 territory, that still gets beaten on single thread performance by intel pentium and i3 at £56 and £86 which do not need an aftermarket cooler? And your looking at a £70 GPU for a stop gap until you can afford a £150 GPU?

But your current PC has faults and issues so needs replaced or replacement parts.

Personally I would avoid AMD, its an underperforming dead end that is still overpriced at £60. It is a backward step, offering no upgradability or performance gain currently against similar priced old and new tech, even though at stock a G3258 is still outperforming it on games like Crysis 3, BF4 and Far Cry 4 (oops, a 4 core game running on a dual core!) ?

Fair enough, you want to build a budget 4 core AMD gaming build, using the least upgradable AMD path, FM2+, because you read an article online. And your not interested in anything other than someone picking what you have already decided on.

My basket at Overclockers UK:

Total: £538.11
(includes shipping: £12.30)
​


​

Personally I think the sound card is overkill, PSU generic, graphics card pointless, and retail DVD has no benefit. You will need a cooler for any overclocking, so I included one.

For not a huge amount more you can build this PC below, the PSU is way more reputable and unlike the 430w you mentioned it can run a decent GPU, the PC case no better or worse than your choice, a DVD drive does what DVD drive does, and the CPU needs no fancy cooler as it cannot be overclocked yet even at stock it wipes the floor with that AMD choice, motherboard allows future upgrading all the way to i7 with hyperthreading in case future games require 8 threads. You can add a soundcard later as the onboard sound still works. You can even save money by adding the HDD later, so whatever way it cuts it is still in the ballpark pricing of the above. You could also save £20 on the PSU by getting a Corsair VS-550 or EVGA 600w model. Though personally I would add more and get the Superflower Leadex gold 550w or 650w power supply, and the cheapest case I like is The Bitfenix Nova windowed case.

My basket at Overclockers UK:

Total: £585.11
(includes shipping: £13.20)
​


​

The important thing is I have added a GPU that in recent tests outperformed the Nvidia 960 and even allowed gaming at 1440p and currently resides as one of the best 1080p gaming cards in that price bracket before moving up to 970/390 territory, and removing your £70 future paperweight. As the GPU and single core performance are what matters and it's stated as a "gaming" PC, it makes sense to invest in a usable CPU/motherboard/GPU and not dead weight.

If you are dead set on AMD, Piledriver at least offers some upgrade paths, with the FX-4 4300 practically being the same as the X4 860K, and there is also the FX-6 6300 6 core and the FX-8 8320 eight core. All perform single thread applications in a similar fashion, bear in mind that in some benchmarks there were reports of the Intel G3250 leading by as much as 70% for dual and single core workloads with only on very limited and relitively rare gaming workloads did the 860K offer a marginal improvement over the G3258, it only takes a bit of homework on google to actually see why people are advising against AMD.

Edit.

I would be looking at a decent PSU, such as a Superflower Leadex gold, and a nice case and new DVD drive, putting the old PC into that, then upgrading the GPU and hard drives with those listed above, making it a little more affordable, upgrading the CPU/motherboard/ram as a bundle last.
 
Last edited:
Time for some clarification.

My current desktop system is going to be used for games that don't run or have issues with current operating systems (it will also be home to everything that I'm not installing on the gaming system with the exception of world of tanks and world of warships which will be moving over to the gaming system).

This build is going to be a dedicated gamer that in it's final form should be able to handle what current games can throw at it with decent frame rates, but before that it'll be a test bench for the emulator build which if there are any issues regarding the processor side of things that would be more suited to an intel processor I can configure it accordingly.

When I start getting parts for that build, I will also be getting parts that will be replacing those going into the emulator build which will be the SSD, graphics card and the power supply, and while some of the new configuration is a bit overkill or unnecessary, I decided to keep some of the parts from the original two system builds in this new setup (I might even need the DVD drive for installing anything that is on a disc).

As for the issues with my current system, my priority is to back up everything that isn't currently backed up and then once funds become available again I'll be getting an SSD and a copy of windows 7 pro to get it a little bit up to date on the OS front, but keeping a majority of the compatibility (I do at least have other options for getting the 16-bit games to run), and as long as everything is working as it should I'll add a few more modern touches along with a bit more RAM to avoid any loading bottlenecks and call it done.

And as for the OS side, apart from what I'll be getting for my current desktop, I have a windows 7 home premium key (that might work since it hasn't been used) and 5 windows server 2012 keys (which I can convert into a regular desktop with some work) of which one will be used for the emulation build, but since I don't need all the compatibility stuff that those would bring to the table I could just go for windows 10 or even 8.1 on the gaming system.

I'm also sticking with modular or semi-modular power supplies since I don't want a ton of cables floating around the case, but there do seem to be some good options floating around in the 500W+ area for the more powerful card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom