Need help for a new PC

[Molly]

Yea, I didn't read the first post. 

...but when he is specificly trying to work on multiple cores, then the RAM is kinda low. I know that Adobe products for example can use multiple cores when activated in the preferences but the all acquire their own little piece of ram. So there might even be proper usefulness in more RAM than the 8GB...

[zagibu]

Sorry but you are wrong. He is going to be using this machine for graphics rendering.

http://greyscalegorilla.com/blog/2010/11/12-core-vs-8-core-vs-2-core-cinema-4-render-speed-test/

Maybe I missed the post where he said he'd use it for non-realtime graphics rendering. But even then, the CPU you suggested consumes 100 Watts less on full load than what you claim a "very low end" CPU should consume. And AMD chips aren't really known for their power efficiency.

And Benkei is right, if he's going to use the PC for non-realtime graphics rendering, more RAM will be needed.

[Senni__Ti]

So thanks to Rumblood, the specs will be:
Processor: 8 core AMD processor and motherboard combo (205 EUR)
Graphic card:GeForce GTX 760 2GB (185EUR)
Ram: CORSAIR Vengeance 8GB) (50EUR)
Hard drive: Seagate Barracuda 1TB (50EUR)
Case: Case ATX mid-tower and 3 fans (30EUR)
Power supply: CoolerMaster 750W (45 EUR)
heatsink for the cpu/motherboard combo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103179 (40 EUR)

Which gives a total of 605 Euros. Perfect budget wise.

As for the other components like Mouse/ keyboard and CD-ROM drive, i can go a bit over the budget as im just going to look out for the cheapest around.

Motherboard + CPU wise:
Pretty sure you can't order anything from NA without paying some sort of fee ontop. (Usually import tax, and ofcourse shipping ).
Motherboard
http://www.caseking.de/shop/catalog/Mainboards/AMD-Mainboards/AMD-Sockel-AM3/AM3/ASRock-990FX-Extreme4-AMD-990FX-Mainboard-Sockel-AM3::17992.html
CPU
http://www.caseking.de/shop/catalog/Prozessoren/Sockel-AM2/AM3/AM3-AMD/AMD-FX-8120-8-Core-31-GHz-Bulldozer-125W-boxed::17609.html
264 EURO

It's worth keeping in mind, current generation games usually focus on one or two cores. Generally, AMD CPUs don't have the best performance in that area.

Then again, games that will be arriving as ports from the next gen consoles will probably be optimized for ~8 cores (I'm not psychic so don't shoot me if I'm wrong ).
So theoretically, an AMD CPU would be superior for those games. (Intel CPUs as a whole are great for anything that doesn't use many cores, and reasonable for highly multi-threaded programs/applications. Physical cores tend to be better than hyper-threaded (what intel does).)

The CPU you're looking at won't be particularly fast for pretty much all of the currently available games. (Particularly warband which seems to hate multi-threading)

PSU wise:
Also, the 600W requirement of the 760 is crap :p (the 780 has exactly the same requirement). In order to get the best use out of your PSU, you need to be within ~100W of the max.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/geforce_gtx_760_review,5.html 169W Just GPU
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-760-review-gk104,3542-22.html 155W Just GPU

http://hothardware.com/Reviews/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-760-Review-/?page=12 379W Full system, 3960X used (VERY demanding CPU)
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_gtx760/12.htm 297W Pretty sure this is full system, using 2600k OC @4.4ghz (similar level to your cpu)

Nice calc below
http://support.asus.com/powersupply.aspx
Suggested 550W if you have a 3570, 650W if you have a 8120, 750W is overkill. (I have a 700W for my system and it's more demanding power wise than your build).

And the PSU type REALLY matters. A bad PSU can destroy your PC when it dies, a good one will (probably) only take out itself when it dies.
http://www.caseking.de/shop/catalog/Netzteile/Corsair/Corsair-Enthusiast-Series-650TX-V2-Netzteil-650-Watt::16420.html
A decent PSU, expensive, but hopefully worth it :p. You could get away with a smaller wattage. But Rumblood is right, having slightly too much isn't terrible, having too few is .

Graphics card wise:
I would go with Nvidia personally over AMD (as you already have). However, AMD is about to release it's next gen of graphics cards (8000 series, though there are rumours of the 9000 series Oo). ~October

Even if you still go Nvidia, it will knock the prices down.
A) Because it's the run up to Christmas.
B) Nvidia currently has free range and won't then.

In terms of everything, I would look through local computer part websites, try and find a reliable one with decent warranties. Also because the prices you have atm will probably be off.

PS: sorry for the wall

[Rumblood]

Maybe I missed the post where he said he'd use it for non-realtime graphics rendering. But even then, the CPU you suggested consumes 100 Watts less on full load than what you claim a "very low end" CPU should consume. And AMD chips aren't really known for their power efficiency.

And Benkei is right, if he's going to use the PC for non-realtime graphics rendering, more RAM will be needed.

More Euro's are needed.

[Sniger]

When he's only got 600 Euro to spend?  You're delusional.

no u.

SSD is not a rich mans HDD anymore. im certainly not rich (!). check the prices. if you still swear to old, noisy, slow, annoying, power consuming HDD's you must be an oldschool downloader who think that size is all that matters.

i just upgraded my rig i got a gtx660 and a 128gb plextor ssd. i paid less than 2500DKR.

windows starting in 10sec, general window tasks is like twice as fast... i can deploy an image in no time at all... try deploy an image on a regular "analog" HDD... will take ages you can might as well reinstall using the DVD. i refuse to live without it now that i got it. once you go SSD you neva go back. imo :p

[CrazyCracka420]

No, I think that when you only have 600 euro (about $800 US), and trying to put a full rig together, your money is better spent on other things than an SSD.  Especially if you don't already have a hard drive or some sort of external storage.

I also run an SSD in my rig.  But I don't think it's that important

[Sniger]

no matter. if i had just $800 a SSD would still be the first thing on my upgrade list.

some people use their comp for other stuff than gaming

[Sniger]

I also run an SSD in my rig.  But I don't think it's that important

tbh, no offence, but if you say SSD is not important, i dont belive you are a SSD user.

[Sniger]

lol its the damn spinning HDD thats the frikkin bottleneck! everybody knows that xD

[CrazyCracka420]

I think I found your problem Sniger.  Jackie's not upgrading, he's building a new desktop from scratch. 

For me the SSD is a big deal because I only have 8 GB of memory.  If you have 16 GB of memory, you really don't have much need for an SSD.  The normal 7200 rpm SATA hard drives are the bottleneck on a lot of systems nowadays (or the BUS transfer speeds on the motherboard). 

But if you only have $800 to spend, to build a brand new desktop from scratch (one that you can game on, or do graphic editing), an SSD is not going to be a wise use of the money.

When your processor and graphics card can easily take up $400 (half of the amount), I think spending another $150 on an SSD is a terrible use of your money (and that's not even going to get you 250 GB of space). 

I'm not arguing that an SSD isn't much better than a platter hard drive (the difference is literally night and day), but you can get around this with enough memory.  He's going to need a decent amount of memory anyways due to graphic editing, so I wouldn't be able to justify spending money on an SSD.

[Rumblood]

lol its the damn spinning HDD thats the frikkin bottleneck! everybody knows that xD

You know what that SSD drive does for you once your program is loaded into memory? Nothing. All you get is better load times, which isn't worth sacrificing the other components which are working 100% of the time.

Spend your money on SSD and sacrifice memory and guess what? Your programs run slower because even though an SSD is faster than a spinning disc, it is FAR slower than RAM when you are loading pieces of a program in an out because you didn't get enough memory. So when you have a choice between an SSD drive or more RAM, always get more RAM.

[Senni__Ti]

Most programs are limited to 4gb of memory address space. (games in particular)
So around 8gb is good for games.

However if he is doing a lot of rendering, 16gb would be a decent starting point (2 x 8gb). Depending on the motherboard, should leave 2 slots available for 32gb if he found he needed it.

SSD wise, they are nice, but they aren't the cheapest. Currently it's a real squeeze to get everything into the 600 EURO budget. If you add a ~100 EURO SSD, it will probably be 120gb in size (or rubbish quality). Therefore you would have to keep the other HDD, so it's just additional cost, and the money has to come from somewhere. Which would mean downgrading either many things, or one thing a lot e.g. the GPU down to a ~100 EURO GPU.

While SSD's are great, I don't think they are worth downgrading the CPU or GPU.
It is a nice upgrade you can add later on, for little cost (comparatively), but with a decent boost in performance. (Upgrading CPU or GPU would be far more expensive, and I don't think any motherboard in jackie's price range is SLI compatible -> so no 2x GPUs).

[Kafein]

You know what that SSD drive does for you once your program is loaded into memory? Nothing. All you get is better load times, which isn't worth sacrificing the other components which are working 100% of the time.

Spend your money on SSD and sacrifice memory and guess what? Your programs run slower because even though an SSD is faster than a spinning disc, it is FAR slower than RAM when you are loading pieces of a program in an out because you didn't get enough memory. So when you have a choice between an SSD drive or more RAM, always get more RAM.

More than 8Gb has very little use today. That amount of memory under normal use will not fill up and you'll never have to use your hard disk as additional memory (most programs don't like this anyway, it's almost an antique technique now). It's the exact same phenomenon as with hard disks, and for speed you'd be better getting more cache. That is, a better processor.

[Nightmare798]

So yeah, im moving to a new apartement this september and i need a new computer. Since im limited in my budget (around 600 Euros), ill have to settle with a desktop. Im going to use the computer mainly for gaming and in my studies (computer graphics).

I see two possibilites for me, either:

I buy an already built computer, it cost more, but i am sure i have every thing i need. (like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1RKlaSOrFk)

Or i build one myself, with the risk of screwing up.

Please advise me

just buy it complete, for 600 you can have an awesome quadcore, 2gigs of vram gfx and 8 gigs of ram and still have enough for the rest of the stuff if bought second hand.

[zagibu]

An SSD can easily be added later. I agree that it definitely doesn't fit into the 600€ budget.