Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Pc

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • luke22
    replied
    lesser chipsets, is there a reason to finish that sent....

    its a gaming pc, which will need to be upgradable and buying into a platform with cutdown features makes no sense when the main fature removed is the ability to overclock.

    none of this changes the fact that an intel system would be better today and better in the long run given the upgrade path open to it over the am3+ route.

    Leave a comment:


  • Terbinator
    replied
    Originally posted by marsey99 View Post
    so are we forgetting how 1155 mobo where 150+ at launch
    Are we forgetting the lesser chipsets that would never approach 150, similar to the ones specced in the Intel build?

    You're right, Cosford.

    We need to know specifics before we can tailor something.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cosford
    replied
    No objections to debate, but I don't believe a new build thread is the best place for pages of discussion on AMD vs Intel, outside of the OP's budget.

    No point comparing i5/7's/amd's equivalents in this thread when none of which fit in the OP's budget.

    EDIT: But bringing it back to the OP, what in the way of peripherals do you require? Monitor? Keyboard? Mouse? Windows? etc. That way, we can recommend an optomised build(s).

    Leave a comment:


  • luke22
    replied
    cosford me and terb are playing mate, debate is the ground upon which forums are built and without debate this would be a very quiet, empty space

    Originally posted by Terbinator View Post
    Cheap board + entry i5 will come in at around 160, so about 60 more than you can expect to pick up an i7 for. Of course, an extra 60 is a perfectly reasonable outlay, apparently, and in essence is essentially the same as 100. but yes, i imagine this hypothetical i5 will be faster than the i7 for the most part - especially in games.

    You can beat the Intel > AMD drum all you want, it doesn't cover up your original flawed reasoning.
    my original flawed reasoning?

    that spending more on a product better suited is the same as spending more on product better suited? i can see how you would think thats flawed yes

    160 for a haswell i5 and mobo?

    wow i love how optimistic you are in the evening. so are we forgetting how 1155 mobo where 150+ at launch and how the i5 chips where (and still are) in the same ball park? so we are talking 300 ish, to beat the 2600k which is some way over your 60 guestimate but thats ok as my figures are just as much make believe even if more rooted in facts.

    i know which i would rather spend to help unchoke my gpu when inevitably the cpu starts to be the bottleneck, but we all know the amd cpu would reach this point sooner than even a cheap intel, never mind the i5 or i7s.

    Bart i think you are on the right lines but in my mind its more.

    <500 amd
    >500 intel

    and as this is just creeping over the 500 mark, is for gaming and will be upgraded over time i think it would be daft to spend it on a platform which is weak for the systems primary role.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bart
    replied
    Low-End (upto 400): Intel vs AMD = AMD Wins
    Mid-End (400 - 600): Intel vs AMD = Even
    High-End (600+): Intel vs AMD = Intel Wins

    Price i based per entire build and is plucked from my head as that is how i think

    @OP tell us what your thinking of getting and we could make some modifications to it to make it better?

    Leave a comment:


  • Terbinator
    replied
    Originally posted by marsey99 View Post
    so you are saying that in 1 or 2 years time an i7 cpu (1155 for this system) will cost as much as a haswell setup? jog on...you will get them for around a ton and it would still beat anything you could put in the amd setup by miles.

    tbh i would bet that in 2 years time amd would still be behind todays i7 cpu.
    Cheap board + entry i5 will come in at around 160, so about 60 more than you can expect to pick up an i7 for. Of course, an extra 60 is a perfectly reasonable outlay, apparently, and in essence is essentially the same as 100. but yes, i imagine this hypothetical i5 will be faster than the i7 for the most part - especially in games.

    You can beat the Intel > AMD drum all you want, it doesn't cover up your original flawed reasoning.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cosford
    replied
    Guys, hate to backseat moderate but this discussion is sidetracking from helping spec a build to AMD vs Intel.

    Leave a comment:


  • luke22
    replied
    lol

    dude you know that prospect has as much chance of happening as winning the lotto.

    so you are saying that in 1 or 2 years time an i7 cpu (1155 for this system) will cost as much as a haswell setup? jog on...you will get them for around a ton and it would still beat anything you could put in the amd setup by miles.

    tbh i would bet that in 2 years time amd would still be behind todays i7 cpu.

    Leave a comment:


  • Terbinator
    replied
    Originally posted by marsey99 View Post
    so its not the fact that it is in essence the same thing but its the fact that its only the same thing if the price difference isnt so big?

    interesting.
    And that's un-reasonable, how, exactly?
    Originally posted by marsey99 View Post
    see to me i would rather take the intel route as it has a better upgrade path, idk about you terb but having an i7 as a possible upgrade is better than being stuck on am3+ imo.
    That's always a false economy.

    By time people are ready to part with their i7s the latest and greatest will be just as good if not better in some regards for the same price. At least with AM3+ there is the prospect the next-line of chips will work too.

    Leave a comment:


  • luke22
    replied
    so its not the fact that it is in essence the same thing but its the fact that its only the same thing if the price difference isnt so big?

    interesting.

    see to me i would rather take the intel route as it has a better upgrade path, idk about you terb but having an i7 as a possible upgrade is better than being stuck on am3+ imo.

    i think bart pretty much nailed it in the 1st reply anyway, swap the cpu for one to match the mobo (none k) and use that money to get a dvd drive and i think its there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cosford
    replied
    this is the best build I could put together with all in; https://www.aria.co.uk/WishList/XHVh...x_HgAdapjKsA,,

    Leave a comment:


  • Terbinator
    replied
    Originally posted by marsey99 View Post
    so spending more on something which is better suited isnt comparable to spending more on something better suited?

    ok...
    Spending 70 more for a negligible difference isn't comparable in anyway to me saying you may as well spend the extra 7 over the 4300.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cosford
    replied
    I'd be more inclined to go for an ivy compatible board and i3, then can drop an i5 in later if needs be.

    you could also drop that power supply down to a 500 or 530w. 600 is fairly overkill. as is the mechanical board, when on a budget.

    Leave a comment:


  • luke22
    replied
    Originally posted by Terbinator View Post
    The same logic that ignores the 60-75 gap?

    It isn't comparable in any way.
    so spending more on something which is better suited isnt comparable to spending more on something better suited?

    ok...

    Leave a comment:


  • THEPORKYPANDA
    replied
    Cheers, I like that rig alot

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X