Building A New Computer

[pilzn3r]

Way back in 2005 I built a gaming computer that has served me quite well, but I have decided to build a new one. I have a case and dvd burner, as well as a mouse, keyboard, speakers, and power supply(it's a new antec 550 psu), so I won't be needing any of those. I am working with around an 800 dollar budget and I'm going to be using it for gaming. I will be ordering this friday from newegg.com so any input will be great. Thanks.

CPU - AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition = 175.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103674

Motherboard - ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AM3 AMD 790X = 119.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131402

RAM - G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 = 87.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231277

HDD - Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA = 74.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136319

GPU - SAPPHIRE Vapor-X Radeon HD 4870 1GB = 164.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102825

Monitor - ASUS VH222H Black 21.5" 5ms HDMI 1080p = 159.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236053

The Motherboard and the CPU are coming in a combo deal for 265.98

Total after S&H comes to 778.37

Let me know what ya think.

[JustAnEngineer]

Any input will be great. Thanks.

Welcome to the Tech Report.

Have you checked out the latest system guide?
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/17787

CPU - AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition = 175.99 -30 combo
Motherboard - ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AM3 AMD 790X = 119.99
RAM - G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 = 87.99

$200 Intel Core i5-750
$170 -42 combo Gigabyte GA-P55-UD4P
$ 79 -20 MIR 2x2 GiB PC3-12800 (DDR3-1600, CL9)
LGA1156 provides a higher-performance path forward. Otherwise, you might consider the Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition while it is still available as a less expensive starting point then the Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition.

GPU - SAPPHIRE Vapor-X Radeon HD 4870 1GB = 164.99

While my Sapphire Radeon HD4870 1GB (not Vapor-X) plays current games satisfactorily, I would choose Radeon HD5850 or HD5770 instead of the HD4870 today. Please read the TR reviews.
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/17652
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/17747

Monitor - ASUS VH222H Black 21.5" 5ms HDMI 1080p = 159.99

Your budget wouldn't support an IPS panel. The connectivity and resolution of this monitor are good, but the viewing angle and color accuracy issues with TN panels may bother you. If you need to use the monitor for photo editing, you might consider waiting for a good deal on an UltraSharp 2209WA.

[Voldenuit]

I'd diverge from JAE's suggestion and go with an Athlon II X3 435 - use the extra $100 you saved to upgrade to a Radeon 5850 and stay on budget. Also, I used to be an MVA/IPS purist, but I've actually found myself quite happy with modern TN-Film displays after buying a Dell S2309 for my parents' PC (and later coopting it ). It's superior in every respect (even banding) than my old S-PVA Gateway FP2485W. As long as you're not doing any colour-accuracy critical work (and let's face it, consumer grade IPS monitors are nowhere near decently calibrated anyway), you will probably find today's TNs to be 'good enough' for your needs.

EDIT: I'd also step down to a 785G mobo (save $30) and get cheaper RAM (JAE's suggestion will save you some coin). An AM3 build is about maximizing price/performance ratio, and you absolutely want to spend your money where you get the most payoff.

[pilzn3r]

I was considering waiting until the dx11 cards got a bit cheaper to purchasing one. The 4870 was just to hold me over till then. I was just wanting this computer to be able to play crysis on absolute high settings for now. But good suggestions. And some questions.

Is the Intel i5-750 better than the 955?

Why should I drop down to an amd x3 instead of the x4?

Won't the dx11 cards get cheaper in less than 6months??

[Voldenuit]

I was considering waiting until the dx11 cards got a bit cheaper to purchasing one. The 4870 was just to hold me over till then. I was just wanting this computer to be able to play crysis on absolute high settings for now. But good suggestions. And some questions.

Then you'd have to rebuy a GPU, which means the one you buy now is going to waste.

Is the Intel i5-750 better than the 955?

Yes. But if you're gaming, the CPU is not your bottleneck. And don't forget you're not just paying more for the CPU, but for the motherboard.

Why should I drop down to an amd x3 instead of the x4?

Because most games still aren't multithreaded beyond 2 cores, if that.

Won't the dx11 cards get cheaper in less than 6months??

Probably. But how much depends on supply and competition. Fermi has now been pushed to 'working sample' in Q1 2010, from 'shipping in Dec 2009'. On the bright side, this may mean that nvidia will have to wage a price war with ATI until then. Current ATI 5xxx series are pretty pricey for the performance you get - especially the (comparatively) lacklustre 57xx cards, but with TSMC having 40nm bulk silicon problems, they may not be able to meet demand, creating a shortage and keeping prices high.

[Fighterpilot]

Current ATI 5xxx series are pretty pricey for the performance you get

Huh...wut?
Surely you jest...Radeon HD5850 at around $270 is way fast and makes a mockery of former ...ahem...$649 dollar releases.

[Voldenuit]

Huh...wut?
Surely you jest...Radeon HD5850 at around $270 is way fast and makes a mockery of former ...ahem...$649 dollar releases.

Hence I suggested the 5850 as the best price/performance path for the OP. But good luck getting one at MSRP, and the 57xx series is just a joke - slower than 4870 cards which are 1.5 generations old. Also the 5870 is not worth the $100 premium. So only 1 out of 4 models represents 'good value' in the 5xxx series...

Until nvidia has credible competitors to the 58xx, I don't see their prices budging much, and they certainly didn't rewrite the price/performance curve like the 4850 and 4870 at launch, forcing nvidia to cut $50-100 off their G200 cards.

[StuG]

How did you come up with 1.5 generations? The 4870 has barely changed at all, and the 4890 is not a different generation.

2 Generations for Nvidia, 1 Generation for ATI/AMD.

Also the 5770 I feel is a great value, considering the power envelope, size, and performance. Also, your comparing a card with fully matured drivers (4870) vs very new drivers (5770). The 4670 was crap when it came out, and now its much better. I expect much the same with the 5770, so to call it not a good value I feel is a mistake.

I expect very much the same performance increase for the 5870 over the next coming months.
Just my 2 cents.

[AtomicDumpling]

I would recommend spending about $100 more and going with the Core i5-750 processor and a P55 LGA1156 motherboard. I think in a year or so you will be glad you opted for the more upgradeable path to extend the useful lifespan of your system.

Also it doesn't appear you factored in the cost of the Windows 7 Pro 64-bit operating system into your $800 budget. Hopefully that doesn't throw a wrench in your plans.

[StuG]

I would recommend spending about $100 more and going with the Core i5-750 processor and a P55 LGA1156 motherboard. I think in a year or so you will be glad you opted for the more upgradeable path to extend the useful lifespan of your system.

Than again, if he plans on doing the same thing he did with his last computer again, he won't be looking up upgrade in the same socket, he'll be looking for a while new mobo/cpu upgrade path as he is doing now...though the i5 is the better solution for the most part, just saying that' something that might throw away the "ungradeablity thing".

Also, I wouldn't doube AM3 sockets will be supported until AM4, so that gives someone AM3+ and AM4, or if AM3+ doesn't exist, till AM4+, because look at AM2 socket CPU's, they are still supported up until recently.

Just saying, don't think those users will be abandoned so quickly.

[Voldenuit]

How did you come up with 1.5 generations? The 4870 has barely changed at all, and the 4890 is not a different generation.

Hence the .5. The 4890 was a tweak to the silicon of the RV770, moving transistors around and adding a grounding ring around the core. You can either view it as a separate product or an evolution of an existing product - it's a glass half/empty half full thing. The fact that they coexisted in the marketplace doesn't invalidate either view (the 9600 and 9700 Pro coexisted for a long time as well).

Also the 5770 I feel is a great value, considering the power envelope, size, and performance. Also, your comparing a card with fully matured drivers (4870) vs very new drivers (5770).The 4670 was crap when it came out, and now its much better. I expect much the same with the 5770, so to call it not a good value I feel is a mistake.

It's also preemptive to assume that there are going to be 'free' performance gains from driver optimizations. The 5770 has a very similar architecture (aside from a larger feature set) to the 4870, the same number of execution units, and a faster clockspeed, yet performs measurably (and noticeably) worse than the cheaper (but older) card. Because of that, I am hesitant to recommend it in its current state. Despite AMD's claims to the contrary, I can't help but think that cutting the memory bus in half has something to do with that*. A similar thing happened with the Radeon 9500 and 9600 (although they didn't have equal execution units in that case). The sad fact is that the 5770 is just barely fast enough to run modern games at 1920x1080 w 4xAA, so having DX11 is more of a checklist feature than real 'future-proofing'. Which is better - a full featured card that you (might) have to dial back effects to get a smooth experience (5770) or a cheaper, faster card that uses an older feature set (4870)? To be honest, that was too close to call for me - that's why I recommended the 5850 to the OP instead, but a $100 jump to move up from the 5770 is no light matter either.

That's not to say the 5770 (and 5850) don't have the advantage of lower power draw, quieter fans etc etc, but the OP specifically mentioned gaming as a priority. If he were discussing a HTPC build, then the 5750 would probably have been ideal.

* xbitlabs' overclocking figures with the 5850 - where the 5850 reached wthin 2% the performance of the 5870 at the same clockspeed despite having a 10% shader unit penalty - also suggest to me that there is some bottleneck in the 5xxx cards that is keeping their shader units from hitting their full potential. Whether this is memory bandwidth or just immature drivers, it's too early to tell right now.

[Flying Fox]

Also, I wouldn't doube AM3 sockets will be supported until AM4, so that gives someone AM3+ and AM4, or if AM3+ doesn't exist, till AM4+, because look at AM2 socket CPU's, they are still supported up until recently.

Just saying, don't think those users will be abandoned so quickly.

When it comes to CPU sockets, never trust what they tell you, Intel and AMD included.

[mutantmagnet]

Why should I drop down to an amd x3 instead of the x4?

Because most games still aren't multithreaded beyond 2 cores, if that.

Actually the standard appears to be 3 cores.

I read a review awhile back at Tom's and performance increase from 2 to 3 cores was noticeable in their sample. Going to four cores offered negligible or no performance changes. In one case it led to worse performance.

I suspect this is the case because the Xbox360 is the leader among the high definition consoles (it uses a triple core CPU) and pc development has become increasingly a dumping ground for console ports.