Building a new PC.

[broadbandaddict]

You finished on max detail? And what APU exactly? Because the OP wants to play the most demanding games on max detail with good fps. So for the purpose of discussion, anything else is not very relevant

Edit: Even so the information is only for my edification. Regardless, APUs are weaker for gaming than Phenoms for the same money if you're looking for performance. The integrated graphics keeps the clock speed somewhat low and the memory controller is not up to snuff. Even if you use an APU with a dedicated GPU you get lower performance than with a similar CPU and the same GPU.

It's better to get a dedicated CPU and GPU.

I wouldn't call 30 FPS "good". The APUs do fine if you are on a budget. More so if you team one of them up with a dedicated card and run Crossfire. I don't know what you are talking about with clock speed being low but the memory controller in them is fine. It just needs faster RAM than most systems.

It could be better to get a dedicated CPU and GPU. But the best would be an APU and GPU, then crossfire them.

 

[RobotDinosaur]

I spent around $600 on an upgrade a while ago and got:
-Intel Core i5
-8GB RAM
-A motherboard - don't know which one and can't be bothered to look it up right now. Something with the right processor socket and some PCI-E x16 slots, beyond that I don't know what features they put in MoBos to justify more than $100 or so.
-550W PSU with 80+ Gold rating
-GeForce 560 Ti
-120 GB SSD
-Wireless card and a few other things that made up a small part of my budget. I also reused my case, secondary HD, and W7 install.
My build wasn't meant to be as robust as yours - built more for strategy games and some action games at modest resolutions. You might sink extra into a better graphics card or a Core i7 to boost performance. (But I wouldn't consider any other CPUs.) The SSD is shiny but not strictly necessary. If you're worried about upgrade-ability, extra PCI-E slots are a good idea, and at least two x16 slots means you have two-card options (although some bigger graphics cards will block two slots.) As for retailers, I gather you're not from the US so can't help you much there. It also might mean your prices won't match mine - I caught a few sales when buying my parts, so don't be surprised if you end up spending a bit more than I did for the same parts.

 

[VladG]

You finished on max detail? And what APU exactly? Because the OP wants to play the most demanding games on max detail with good fps. So for the purpose of discussion, anything else is not very relevant

Edit: Even so the information is only for my edification. Regardless, APUs are weaker for gaming than Phenoms for the same money if you're looking for performance. The integrated graphics keeps the clock speed somewhat low and the memory controller is not up to snuff. Even if you use an APU with a dedicated GPU you get lower performance than with a similar CPU and the same GPU.

It's better to get a dedicated CPU and GPU.

I wouldn't call 30 FPS "good". The APUs do fine if you are on a budget. More so if you team one of them up with a dedicated card and run Crossfire. I don't know what you are talking about with clock speed being low but the memory controller in them is fine. It just needs faster RAM than most systems.

It could be better to get a dedicated CPU and GPU. But the best would be an APU and GPU, then crossfire them.

It's not. Look for benchmarks and reviews. Same AMD GPU combined with a regular CPU and an APU at the same price point, the APU combo yielded poorer results.

Not to mention that not all games are optimized for Crossfire.

 

[VladG]

The APUs are pretty bad for gaming, they have terrible bottlenecks, and aren't that cheap. Those are really only worth it if you want to play some not very demanding stuff on your office pc.

Phenoms are indeed getting a bit old, they do drain more power than current Intel architecture, but for gaming the difference in performance is too small to make the price difference really worth it. If you use your PC for serious photo/video editing, rendering, stuff like that as well as gaming, Intel is the way to go. If all you're looking for is gaming, AMD gives better value.

I finished Metro 2033 on my APU. My real world experience says different from what you say. I'll go with what I've seen in real life.

Which is, they offer good value for money. An OC'able quad core Athlon II and a 5500-esque GPU for £90 is good value.

You finished on max detail? And what APU exactly? Because the OP wants to play the most demanding games on max detail with good fps. So for the purpose of discussion, anything else is not very relevant

Edit: Even so the information is only for my edification. Regardless, APUs are weaker for gaming than Phenoms for the same money if you're looking for performance. The integrated graphics keeps the clock speed somewhat low and the memory controller is not up to snuff. Even if you use an APU with a dedicated GPU you get lower performance than with a similar CPU and the same GPU.

It's better to get a dedicated CPU and GPU.

That wasn't the topic of conversation. You were saying that they weren't that good for gaming, I am saying that that is incorrect. For the money you get good performance.

A phenom II is better than an Athlon II? I can tell you are a real whiz for pointing that out.

Are you talking about APUs? Or about Athlons? Because they are NOT the same thing. The Athlon is a regular CPU. Do you even know what you have? Oh, btw, a single core cpu is great value for money if all you want to do is play solitaire. Better than An OC'able quad core Athlon II and a 5500-esque GPU. Is that in any way relevant to the discussion? No.

And yes, APUs not being capable enough for high performance gaming is EXACTLY what the conversation is about. I'll point out AGAIN that the OP wants something that can play games on max settings, not something that can play games.... kinda. So you pointing out that hey, I can play on low settings on a low resolution monitor without the game stuttering too bad on my APU is very much off topic.

Just to put an end to a pointless discussion, an AMD APU alone, while cheap and good value for money if what you're looking for is some low quality gaming is NOT going to cut it for what the OP wants his PC. Also an APU plus a dedicated GPU crossfired yelds weaker results than a CPU costing as much as the APU and the same GPU, thus making the APU a bad choice any way you put if for this discussion.

 

[Griffolion]

So after deciding to upgrade to windows 7, I realized that many of my games need 4 gigs of RAM instead of 2. And since my motherboard doesn't have that many RAM slots, I would need to replace it, and by extension, replace pretty much everything else in my rig as well. So I figured this would be as good a time as any to buiild and entirely new rig.

Unfortunately, I lack the technical know-how of which parts are any good. Which brings me to you, fellow escapists. Can you recommend me a reasonably high-end rig (let's say battlefield 3, 1920 x 1080, ultra settings, 30 fps), preferably with room to upgrade without having to replace my motherboard again.

The absolute limit I'm willing to spend would be ?800 (around £650 or $1000) but I'd like to keep the price lower than that, so I would have some money left to spend on actual games. A new mouse and keyboard will have to be factored into that price, because I'm selling the entirety of my old rigs to my parents. Recommendations on a good 1080p monitor are also welcome, but don't need to be factored into the price, because my parents will buy it for me.

TLR I want to buy a new high-end gaming rig and I need your help deciding the specs.

EDIT: Also inb4 "Yay, it's this thread again."

First of all, you're in the wrong forum, try Toms Hardware.

But while we are here, there you go (this is from Newegg.com):
Case: Fractal Design Core 1000
HDD: Western Digital Caviar Blue WD10EALX 1TB
Mobo: ASUS M5A88-M AM3+
GPU: XFX FX-785A-CNFC Radeon HD 7850
PSU: CORSAIR Enthusiast Series TX650 V2 650W
RAM: CORSAIR XMS3 8GB (2 x 4GB)
CPU: AMD FX-4100 Zambezi 3.6GHz
Mouse/Keyboard Combo: RAZER Arctosa Silver USB Wired Standard Gaming Keyboard + RAZER Abyssus Mirror Special Edition Black 3 Buttons 1 x Wheel USB Wired Mouse
Optical: SAMSUNG 22X DVD Burner SATA Model SH-222BB/BEBE - OEM

After rebates, $820.

 

[VladG]

The APUs are pretty bad for gaming, they have terrible bottlenecks, and aren't that cheap. Those are really only worth it if you want to play some not very demanding stuff on your office pc.

Phenoms are indeed getting a bit old, they do drain more power than current Intel architecture, but for gaming the difference in performance is too small to make the price difference really worth it. If you use your PC for serious photo/video editing, rendering, stuff like that as well as gaming, Intel is the way to go. If all you're looking for is gaming, AMD gives better value.

I finished Metro 2033 on my APU. My real world experience says different from what you say. I'll go with what I've seen in real life.

Which is, they offer good value for money. An OC'able quad core Athlon II and a 5500-esque GPU for £90 is good value.

You finished on max detail? And what APU exactly? Because the OP wants to play the most demanding games on max detail with good fps. So for the purpose of discussion, anything else is not very relevant

Edit: Even so the information is only for my edification. Regardless, APUs are weaker for gaming than Phenoms for the same money if you're looking for performance. The integrated graphics keeps the clock speed somewhat low and the memory controller is not up to snuff. Even if you use an APU with a dedicated GPU you get lower performance than with a similar CPU and the same GPU.

It's better to get a dedicated CPU and GPU.

That wasn't the topic of conversation. You were saying that they weren't that good for gaming, I am saying that that is incorrect. For the money you get good performance.

A phenom II is better than an Athlon II? I can tell you are a real whiz for pointing that out.

Are you talking about APUs? Or about Athlons? Because they are NOT the same thing. The Athlon is a regular CPU. Do you even know what you have? Oh, btw, a single core cpu is great value for money if all you want to do is play solitaire. Better than An OC'able quad core Athlon II and a 5500-esque GPU. Is that in any way relevant to the discussion? No.

And yes, APUs not being capable enough for high performance gaming is EXACTLY what the conversation is about. I'll point out AGAIN that the OP wants something that can play games on max settings, not something that can play games.... kinda. So you pointing out that hey, I can play on low settings on a low resolution monitor without the game stuttering too bad on my APU is very much off topic.

Just to put an end to a pointless discussion, an AMD APU alone, while cheap and good value for money if what you're looking for is some low quality gaming is NOT going to cut it for what the OP wants his PC. Also an APU plus a dedicated GPU crossfired yelds weaker results than a CPU costing as much as the APU and the same GPU, thus making the APU a bad choice any way you put if for this discussion.

The CPU cores in the APUs are Athlon II cores, I thought you would have known that. So yes, they are the same thing. And about the 5500-esque GPU, that's what the integrated graphics in the desktop A8s are roughly equivalent to.

Where the hell did you read they are based on Athlons? A8 APUs are based on mobile Phenom architecture while FX-8150 (and the other Bulldozers) are based on Opteron architectures. Oh, you might notice that AMD actually has different types of APUs, and you have yet to answer my question, what APU exactly are you using? And much more to the point, does it actually have the power to max out games? If not, please stop wasting everyone's time, and find a thread that wants "a 300pound pc that plays games... kinda"

Regardless of the answer, I won't bother replying. You don't know what you're talking about, are wasting my time, and the OPs if he's even bothering to read this anymore.

And if you want performance gaming, A8 IS crap. You can get better results with cheaper CPUs.

 

[Tallim]

I'd take a look at this:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-introducing-the-digital-foundry-pc

extra cheap so you can save budget to boost the bits you want and because they are DF they did tests on it running all sorts of things. Results were pretty impressive given the money they spent.

Unless you are just going "crazy" I suppose.

 

[VladG]

Where the hell did you read they are based on Athlons? A8 APUs are based on mobile Phenom architecture while FX-8150 (and the other Bulldozers) are based on Opteron architectures. Oh, you might notice that AMD actually has different types of APUs, and you have yet to answer my question, what APU exactly are you using? And much more to the point, does it actually have the power to max out games? If not, please stop wasting everyone's time, and find a thread that wants "a 300pound pc that plays games... kinda"

Regardless of the answer, I won't bother replying. You don't know what you're talking about, are wasting my time, and the OPs if he's even bothering to read this anymore.

And if you want performance gaming, A8 IS crap. You can get better results with cheaper CPUs.

Wow, the ignorance.

The llano APUs are based on the Athlon II cores.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review

For $98 you can buy an Athlon II X4 640 running at 3.0GHz. For $37 more AMD will sell you an A8-3850 APU, effectively determining the price of the integrated GPU.

[...]

These are all quad-core parts with updated 32nm cores, boasting a ~6% increase in IPC over their 45nm Athlon II predecessors

[...]
Although AMD has tweaked the A8's cores, the 2.9GHz 3850 performs a lot like a 3.1GHz Athlon II X4. You are getting more performance at a lower clock frequency, but not a lot more.

I'm running a desktop A8, like I mentioned. I assumed you don't need things said explicitly but it seems you can't do that at all.

Also, want more proof that this is an Athlon II?

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/amd-athlon-ii-x4-631-s-fm1-lynx-core-quad-core-26ghz-100w-retail

Notice how you can buy an Athlon II X4 for the APU socket? Gee, it's almost like they are selling the APUs with no integrated graphics...

Also, it's not like I'm going to be talking about Trinity which isn't even out yet. And before you try to backpedal, it is based on Piledriver. I have no clue where you got phenom from.


Your knowledge is shockingly lacking and your aggression just makes it all the more hilarious.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Maybe you should take a read.

Holy Shit! A8 is based on Athlon?? Quick, go alert AMD, they still think they are mobile phenom based. Go enlighten the manufacturer of his error!


"Llano" (32 nm)


All models feature upgraded Stars (Mobile Phenom II architecture) [28] CPU cores (Husky) with no L3 cache"

And in case you're not clear on this, the A8 is a Llano device.

Also Piledriver is a modifier Bulldozer core. And I never said Bulldozer is based of Phenoms. maybe the little voices in your head told you that, I wouldn't know.

Mnyeah. My knowledge is lacking.

 

[VladG]

Holy Shit! A8 is based on Athlon?? Quick, go alert AMD, they still think they are mobile phenom based. Go enlighten the manufacturer of his error!


"Llano" (32 nm)


All models feature upgraded Stars (Mobile Phenom II architecture) [28] CPU cores (Husky) with no L3 cache"

And in case you're not clear on this, the A8 is a Llano device.

So I talk about the desktop A8 and you quote a review for the mobile variant? Give it up, you know you have lost. Also, cite some sources, like I have.

I looked at your source, it was a wikipedia page that talks about the desktop APUs and cites Tom's Hardware's Mobile APU review. Not exactly convincing.

The desktop A8's, the ones we have been talking about, are based of Athlon II. Hence the Athlon II's for sale on the FM1 socket, like I had showed.

"If you can't convince them confuse them"

I think that's what you are doing. We were never talking about mobile parts, your whole post was a red herring.

I won't mind if you don't post back, there is no shame in defeat as long as you learn from your mistakes.

Dear lord. Yes, we're talking about desktops. You are incapable of reading though, that's clear.

Let's try this again.

"Llano" (32 nm)


>>>>>>All<<<<< models feature upgraded Stars (Mobile Phenom II architecture) [28] CPU cores (Husky) with no L3 cache"

Now just to make it clear for you, the word ALL means that it includes both desktop and mobile Llano cores. That's how English works. That means ALL Llano cores are base of old MOBILE cores. You understand how this works now?

Also here's a source that closely analyses Llano architecture. I'm also looking into official AMD specs, stand by
http://semiaccurate.com/2011/06/20/a-llook-at-the-llano-architecture/