Help needed with first time build

B

Bisectors Fore

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
480
I want to build myself a computer. I love gaming but I have little knowledge or experience where hardware is concerned. I would like to have a machine that can run future games (Stalker 2, Fallout 3, Etc) well, and has reasonable longevity and upgradeability. However, I do not know what hardware would be appropriate for this and my budget. I am hoping to spend ~$1500 although I could spend $2000 if I had to in order to get a good system. I have been told that Intel and nVidia are best for CPU and GPU, respectively, but I don't know what the right components are for me, or what components work well toghether. I'm sorry if these are dumb things to ask, but I have very limited knowledge of the nuances of computer hardware. Any help would be much appreciated.
Thanks.
 
Do you have an existing setup? What is the specs of your current build? What size monitor do you have? What games do you currently play now? What res? How long do you plan on keeping this pc? Where do you plan on buying the hardware from? Where are you located? Is gaming the primary use of this PC?
 
I have a laptop, the specs of which are: AMD FX-60, nVidia 7800 256 MB, 2x 100 GB SATA HDDS, 2 GB RAM, 17" Widescreen monitor @ 1920x1200. Games I play: Oblivion, Stalker, Dark Messiah, Etc, and it lags like a SOB on all of them, hence I want a new computer. Resolution = crap, to help deal with lag. I would like to keep the new computer for several years, and be able to upgrade it. I plan on buying from newegg.com. I live in Virginia. Gaming is the primary use of PC.
 
What about a desktop monitor? If you don't have an LCD monitor, I assume the $1500 budget will include the LCD monitor to? What size LCD you looking to buy if you don't already have one?
 
In addition to HardwareGuru's questions:
- Will you be overclocking?
- List out all the parts you need for this PC. i.e OS, HDD, CPU, RAM, mobo, etc
- What features do you need in a motherboard? RAID? Firewire? eSATA? 2nd PCI-E port? etc
 
I was just planning on scrounging a monitor somewhere. I don't know much about the pros/cons of overclocking, so I'm not sure whether or not it is something I would want to do. I was planning to use Windows XP Pro for OS, as I've heard that Vista is a resource hog. If by what parts I need you mean what ones I don't already have, I have none, save a mouse. As for RAID I was planning on just one HDD. I'm not sure about the other features you listed, as I am unsure of their function. Sorry for my cluelessness, but I am a n00b. Thanx for the help.
 
If you are going XP, I would suggest going with WinXP MCE instead of Pro.
 
For your pure gaming PC (it is purely for gaming, right?), I recommend the following:

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 CPU - $170
Gigabyte GA-EP43-DS3L Intel P43 Motherboard - $90
G.Skill F2-8000CL5D-4GBPQ 2 x 2GB DDR2 1000 RAM - $85
VisionTek 900244 Radeon HD 4870 512MB PCI-E Video Card - $270
Western Digital WD6400AAKS 640GB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - $85
Samsung SH-222F 22X DVD±R SATA DVD Burner - $25
Corsair 750TX 750W PSU - $98
Antec 300 ATX Case - $50
Xigmatek HDT-S1283 120mm Rifle HSF - $37 & Retention Bracket - $7
Windows Vista Home Premium 64bit SP1 OEM - $80
Sceptre X24WG-1080P Black 24" DVI Widescreen LCD Monitor - $340
----
Total: $1337 (LOL! :))plus tax and shipping

Under budget and a 24" monitor is included! The HD4870 is enough for playing games at 1920x1200 but if you want to max out your games at that resolution, then get the HD4870X2 instead:
VisionTek 900250 Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB PCI-E Video Card - $560

Go with Windows Vista because on newer hardware, Vista is not a resource hog. In fact, with most games today, the performance difference between XP and Vista is a mere 5% at the most. In addition, Vista 64bit will allow you to use all 4GB of RAM whereas XP 32bit (like XP MCE, Home and Pro) will only allow you to use about 2.5 to 3.5GB of RAM depending on the video card you go with.
 
Wow thanks! Is the HD4870X2 one vidcard or two? Also, I had heard that nVidia was ahead with video cards. Is that true? As for resolution, that 1920x 1200 was simply the native res on my old laptop, but I have no particular attachment to it. I would be thrilled to run games on 1600x 1200. Is the CPU list a dual-core or quad-core? Is quad important? The rig is mostly for games, as I will still have the laptop for other things, although that setup you listed had prettymuch everything I want.
 
That setup by Danny is solid man. To answer your questions, the HD4870X2 is 2 cards in 1. So, actually it is physically 1 card when you look at it. It's slapping 2 x HD4870 cards together. Similar to what they did with the Radeon HD 3870X2, and Geforce 9800GX2. Since you mention only games, the E8400cpu or a Quad core Q6600 will do, based on a 1600 x 1200 res, it really doesn't matter as much because the video card will play more of a factor at that resolution.

Oh yah, I forgot to mention that Nvidia was in the lead until ATI released the Radeon HD4870X2 video card. The E8400 cpu that was specied is a Dual Core cpu clocked at 3ghz.
 
Won't 2 vidcards together like that get super hot? Is 1600x 1200 a low res? I thought it was pretty high.
Also, would a setup like this have reasonable longevity/upgradeability?

I gotta now but thanx everybody and I'll be back later.
 
Bisectors Fore said:
Won't 2 vidcards together like that get super hot? Is 1600x 1200 a low res? I thought it was pretty high.
Also, would a setup like this have reasonable longevity/upgradeability?
Click to expand...

It does run somewhat hot but with a properly cooled case (i.e the Antec 300), it should be fine. 1600x1200 is a mid to high resolution IMO.

And yes it does have resonable longevity and upgrade capabilities.
 
Is 4 1GB sticks of RAM in any way better than 2 2GB sticks? Also, is it worth it to get a widescreen monitor? I have a widescreen in my laptop, and I have found that while most games allow you to play at widescreen resolution, your picture gets somewhat smooshed.
 
Naw, 4 sticks of RAM is not better. Using more modules, you consume more power as oppose to 2 x 2gig RAM, Plus, as far as O/C potential, you won't do as well with 4 sticks as oppose to 2 sticks. As far as widescreen displays, pretty much a majoirty of lcds are widescreens that it's hard to find a non widescreen display these days. Your pictures don't get smooshed. It can still maintain its orignal aspect ratio. It's just that when you take pics, it is not in a widescreen format. Therefore you see the black bars on the left and right.
 
Thanks @ RAM. To clarify, I meant that while gaming, the perspective of the game itself gets distorted in one of two ways. (1) by running normal aspect ratio resolution on the widescreen monitor. (2) by running a widescreen resolution in a game designed for normal aspect ratio.
 
It depends what resolution you set your game to play at. Since you are gaming on your notebook, I assume you game at a lower resolution like 800 x 600, 1024 x 768. If you use a resolution like this, these are not a widescreen resolution.

800 x 600 = 4:3 aspect ratio non widescreen
1024 x 768 = 4:3 aspect ratio non widescreen

1280 x 720 = 16:9 aspect ratio widescreen

1280 x 800 = 16:10 aspect ratio widescreen
1680 x 1050 = 16:10 aspect ratio widescreen

Note: most if not all HDTV are in 16:9 widescreen aspect ratio. Most WS LCD monitors on the other hand are 16:10 widescreen.

If you do get a WS lcd monitor, The graphics card nowdays will push higher resolution gaming where you can game at the lcds native resolution. So, if you had a 22" widscreen display with a native res of 1680 x 1050, you can play most games at that resolution. Just set your games resolution to that scale. A game will get distorted if you set say an 800 x 600 resolution on a ws monitor because it will stretch the image to fit on that ws display.
 
You have 1900x1200 on a 17" laptop? :eek: Thats like having a 24" widescreen desktop monitor, lol. Most newer games support widescreen resolutions, so that shouldn't be a big problem. However, if the resolution you want is not on the list, you can probably add a custom res anyways. Widescreen monitors are much cheaper because of supply and demand. People want widescreen so they can see more stuff in-game, hence, widescreen monitors are better for gaming.

Keep in mind, the more pixels you have to push, the more GPU power needed. If gaming on your laptop, lower the resolution to 1440x900 and it should perform better for most games, unless your CPU bottlenecked.
 
Yup, plus our eyes are more capable of seeing more width as oppose to height. Therefore, I can see why WS is more common now than before. Imagine trying to game on a 10:16 monitor. You will be bobbing your head while gaming.
 
The games I play now like Stalker and Oblivion allow me too use widescreen res, but they get distorted if I do use widescreen res, (the game is meant to be played on normal screen) and they get distorted if I don't use widescreen res (the monitor is meant to be used with widescreen res) AAARGH!!!
 
Hey guys, I'm also in the market for a new PC - and I've based alot of my selections from Danny's build. Could you guys take a look at my wish list and let me know if you see anything wrong with it?

I know I could save a few bucks buying the power supply from provantage/buy.com and the mobo/OS from some other vendors but I would like to keep it all in one newegg order.
 
Bisectors Fore said:
The games I play now like Stalker and Oblivion allow me too use widescreen res, but they get distorted if I do use widescreen res, (the game is meant to be played on normal screen) and they get distorted if I don't use widescreen res (the monitor is meant to be used with widescreen res) AAARGH!!!
Click to expand...

If the following is true, then you shouldn't get any distorted picture:
  • The game you're playing supports the resolution you want to play at
  • The display supports the resolution you want to play at
  • You have updated GPU drivers

Keep in mind, LCDs don't look as good unless native resolution is used. Also keep in mind, your GPU can't handle 2MP in gaming.
 
Danny Bui said:
Looks good but I'd swap out the case for the Antec 300. Same price but better cooling. Other than that, looks good to me.
Click to expand...

Cool, thanks for your input. That case looked pretty cool so I went with the antec. I went ahead and made the order an hour or so ago, but decided to lower the price a bit and went with a E7200 & HD4850. I figure I can get some pretty good overclocks with the E7200. As for the 4850, I'll be playing games on a Dell 2405FPW and a 50" Samsung DLP so I'm not sure entirely if things will run as smooth with it. If not I'll just save up and get the 4870 later when needed. I can run 1360x768 on the TV until then (unless you think it could handle 1080?). I'll let you know how it works out for me when It all gets here.

system.jpg
 
I doubt the HD4850 could handle 1080p with newer games, unless you're playing something like WoW.
 
Is it worth upgrading to a quad-core CPU and a HD4870X2 GPU for better performance/longevity? Also, how the heck does the HD4870X2 have 2GB of memory? The single card versoion only has 512MB.
 
Bisectors Fore said:
Is it worth upgrading to a quad-core CPU and a HD4870X2 GPU for better performance/longevity? Also, how the heck does the HD4870X2 have 2GB of memory? The single card versoion only has 512MB.
Click to expand...

Longevity for the Q6600 but not for the HD4870X2. Simply put: Video cards are the fastest depreciating item in a PC. So it's best not to spend a ton of cash on them when a new card will outperform them in 6 months. Just upgrade your card when you think you need the boost.

HD4870 cards with 1GB of VRAM are due to be released in early Sept IIRC. So it is possible for the HD4870X2 to have 2GB of VRAM. Each GPU has 1GB of VRAM just for it. So two GPUS = 2 x 1GB VRAM = 2GB of VRAM total.
 
So is that a 'yes' on the quad-core? And does it make sense to look at NVIDIA options for a video card if I'm not going to get the 4870X2?
 
Stick to ATI for best bang for buck right now in the $180-$250 range.
 
Bisectors Fore said:
I could potentially pay more than that. How much of a performance boost could I get and still have reasonable price?
Click to expand...

The HD4870 is more than enough for 1920x1200 gaming. Not much more you can get in that price range.
 
Is Intel enough ahead of AMD that it doesn't make sense to look at AMD processors? Also, will a quad core processor be twice as powerful as a dual core with the same speed (GHz)?
 
Get a Q6600 or an E2220. A Q6600 will last longer than an E8400, an E2220 will last about the same amount of time but costs much less.
 
Bisectors Fore said:
Is Intel enough ahead of AMD that it doesn't make sense to look at AMD processors?
Click to expand...

yes... faaar ahead.

Bisectors Fore said:
Also, will a quad core processor be twice as powerful as a dual core with the same speed (GHz)?
Click to expand...

yes, its twice as powerful, but the question is, can the software use all of that extra power? most software is not yet optimized for multi-core processing. since dual core CPUs came out, more and more software are getting updated to take advantage of multi-core processing, but you can only speed up a well optimized program so much -- as not everything can be done in parallel. for serial tasks (no multi-threading/parallel processing), the higher speed single core will be faster than a slower clocked dual core. for tasks that have been optimized for 2 threads, a quadcore's other two cores would sit virtually idle unless the user is multi-tasking.
 
Ok, thanks. One other question: are BTX motherboards worth using for better/more effecient cooling, or are they still to obscure?
 
AVT said:
Get a Q6600 or an E2220. A Q6600 will last longer than an E8400, an E2220 will last about the same amount of time but costs much less.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to sell e2220 or soemthing. 2nd post I've seen that you giveadvise in and probably the worst advise i've seen anyone give on this forum ( minus Genmay of course)
 
The mainstream industry rejected BTX. The only people who use BTX are the OEM's right now, as far as I know.
 
A'ight, thanx. What do you guys think about 10,000 RPM hard drives? Are they worth it, or are they to loud/expensive? I should add that I do not need a huge amount of storage. A few hundred GB should be fine (I have 2x 100GB HDDs in my laptop, and I've never come close to filling them).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top