New PC build: Gaming/Software Development/Media - $1000-$1500 Budget

[Gamma_Ray]

Hey all,

It's been over a decade since I last updated my pc (phenom II x6 cpu, gtx 560ti gpu. Yeah. Old). Last upgrade I built myself. I'm looking for help with a new build that would be used for (general) gaming, software development, and watching media. My budget is between $1000-$1500.

Could you help me make a decent build that's within my budget? I'm looking to purchase this weekend.

Also, I'm looking to get dual 27" monitors (separate budget, $1000 total) and an electric desk ($500 budget) and chair ($500 budget) if you have any suggestions feel free. Getting a whole new setup.

Thanks!

 

[LukeTbk]

As of now, all regular hardware are made for exactly this and a good at exactly this, if you software development does not require a ton of VM at the same time, something capable of general gaming will be way more than enough for software developpment and watching media, playing a AAA of 3 years ago being way more difficult than those.

For software dev, a lot of the time, if you have a gaming capable PC the monitor-desk-keyboard-chair are good element to look at.

I would recommand a 7900x as the sweat spot for the price performance crown:

Price per core:
7950x : $35
7900x: $32
7700x: $36

On AMD it is often the sweat spot, people that need core buying the 7950x, people that do not need them going for the 8 or less, leaving the x900x 12 core at a nice price for the people that want a lot of core for software compilation but still on a budget.

64 GB DDR-5 kit are nice at good price, 6000mhz is perfectly nice.

Do you have softwware development that has any specific need (large database, lot of virtualisation, use GPU-cuda quite a bit) ? If not base the GPU with the budget left and the game you want to play, 6800xt-7800xt-7900GRE being for new gpu at large price the good value it seem

If you want to use CUDA or think it is possible (which become likelier everyday), just go with Nvidia.

Peerless assassin 120 se can work at a incredible $34 and let you put money elsewhere, but if you often go all-cores, artic liquid freezer 280-360 can be nice, 2TB SN850NX seem to be a nice sweat spot in term of price.

 

[Gamma_Ray]

As of now, all regular hardware are made for exactly this and a good at exactly this, if you software development does not require a ton of VM at the same time, something capable of general gaming will be way more than enough for software developpment and watching media, playing a AAA of 3 years ago being way more difficult than those.

For software dev, a lot of the time, if you have a gaming capable PC the monitor-desk-keyboard-chair are good element to look at.

I would recommand a 7900x as the sweat spot for the price performance crown:

View attachment 641789

Price per core:
7950x : $35
7900x: $32
7700x: $36

On AMD it is often the sweat spot, people that need core buying the 7950x, people that do not need them going for the 8 or less, leaving the x900x 12 core at a nice price for the people that want a lot of core for software compilation but still on a budget.

64 GB DDR-5 kit are nice at good price, 6000mhz is perfectly nice.

Do you have softwware development that has any specific need (large database, lot of virtualisation, use GPU-cuda quite a bit) ? If not base the GPU with the budget left and the game you want to play, 6800xt-7800xt-7900GRE being for new gpu at large price the good value it seem

If you want to use CUDA or think it is possible (which become likelier everyday), just go with Nvidia.

Peerless assassin 120 se can work at a incredible $34 and let you put money elsewhere, but if you often go all-cores, artic liquid freezer 280-360 can be nice, 2TB SN850NX seem to be a nice sweat spot in term of price.

Thanks for this. Not any intense software development or anything specific. Largely educational. Definitely looking to have a solid gaming experience. Think I’d still need all that ram and cores?

Thanks!

 

[LukeTbk]

Not any intense software development or anything specific. Largely educational. Definitely looking to have a solid gaming experience. Think I’d still need all that ram and cores?

No you can build with only gaming in mind in that case, a 7800x3d for example would still be an incredible 16 thread machine and much easier to cool, Peerless assassin 120 se becoming maybe what you want, with a MT passmark not far from the 3950x that would have been the top of the line for regular desktop not that long ago and 32 GB would do.

20+ threads and 64+ GB, is nice when you build relatively large set of dependancy-projects and speed matter a lot.

If the software dev needs are relatively basic, better put the money on the GPU for gaming, cutting the core cpu core count imo.

 

[Axman]

Thanks for this. Not any intense software development or anything specific. Largely educational. Definitely looking to have a solid gaming experience. Think I’d still need all that ram and cores?

8 cores and 16 gigs is kind of the minimum requirement for any gaming machine right now, and I personally wouldn't build something to the minimum. Do you need 64? Probably not. Do you want 32? Definitely.

 

[LukeTbk]

8 cores and 16 gigs is kind of the minimum requirement for any gaming machine right now

Not sure a minimum amount of core for gaming would make much sense, a 6 core 5600x3d will beat a 16 core 5950x in most games, what people saw in the better performance with core count going up, is better multithread performance (and here the highest MT performance on the lowest amount of core the better) and often pass a certain point more cache.

There a non 0% chances that a well clocked 6 cores 7600x3d would beat every cpu outside the 7800x3d right now.

 

[Axman]

Not sure a minimum amount of core for gaming would make much sense, a 6 core 5600x3d will beat a 16 core 5950x in most games, what people saw in the better performance with core count going up, is better multithread performance (and here the highest MT performance on the lowest amount of core the better) and often pass a certain point more cache.

There a non 0% chances that a well clocked 6 cores 7600x3d would beat every cpu outside the 7800x3d right now.

PC gaming follows console gaming, sadly now, and while yeah I'm sure there are many examples of games running better on systems with fewer cores, regardless of who makes them, 8 cores is currently what the consoles use, and I believe the PS5 is also rumored to be 8 cores.

I don't really consider added threads for gaming, since like you said, there's a limit to what they can do and stuff like cache and clocks still matter more.

 

[LukeTbk]

8 cores is currently what the consoles use

Has been 8 cores since 2013 I think, I meant by there that the 5600x>3900x at gaming type of situation will continue to be true, consoles by now have not much cpu MT performance even with 8 cores, less than the latest 6 cores cpu have despite their lower core count.

When your game engine job graphs look like this:

It become single thread bottleneck and multithread performance, exact core count not being necessarily part of the design.

Sometime I feel people mean by minimum how many cores can you add on a cpu archectecture for which it is possible to see a difference in the game that are the worst case scenario in that regard, versus which CPU run game well enough. And if you core are much faster they will be able to handle more of the jobs even with less core.