Decent PC build for under $750?

J.D

No Stranger To Love
I tried to make a PC build for under $750 but I failed terribly. My stepbrother is getting around $800 for his tax refund and wants to get a gaming PC. The build will need to include everything, including a monitor and keyboard. Preferably an Intel CPU too, can be dual core. I'll just give him one of my old mice. Anyway, any help here?
 
I have zero experience with Micro ATX motherboards. Do I install it in a Mid ATX case exactly like I would install a Mid ATX board?
 
rf8Rq.png

Far better PC than XCVG's. About the best you can get for that price, I reckon. $755 with $50 of mail in rebates.
 
I picked this stuff out for a buddy of mine who wanted to build a mini game server, so the case isn't fantastic and the power supply isn't beefy enough to run a big graphics card, but it should give you a good idea of where to start anyway.

Cheap ghetto MicroATX case - $35
Antec EarthWatts 380w PSU - $40
WD Caviar Black 640 gig - $60
Intel i5-2400 Sandy Bridge 3.1 ghz (3.4 turbo) Quad-Core - $190
Asus P8H61-M Motherboard - $80
G.Skill DDR3 1333 4 gig stick - $40

Total: $445

Usual rules apply:
- Sandy Bridge is the way to go. Don't even think about AMD until Bulldozer comes out; SB slaughtered the K10.
- Asus, Gigabyte, Foxconn, and Intel are great. Acer and MSI are okay. ECS, PC Chips, ASRock, and no-names are rubbish.
- Get a decent power supply from a name you recognize
- Bundles are awesome
- Look at quantity of reviews, then at the rating. Ignore reviews by people who don't know what the Heck they're doing (like rating motherboards 0 stars because their built in video requires an on-chip GPU like Clarkdale and they loaded in a Lynnfield.)

EDIT: VVVV I know those parts are underpowered for a gaming machine; they were priced for relative efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and muscle for use as a LAN/VPN game server that will run in the corner headless 24/7. The CPU and motherboard are solid (even though the MB is MicroATX), so it's a starting point. (Heck I even thought about going for a Mini-ITX but that would have limited RAM expandability. :lol:)

Get a better case, step the PSU up to something like a 750 watt Corsair, bump the hard drive up to a 1 TB Caviar Black, and throw in a video card and you're much closer to a real gaming machine.
 
The AMD is a bit faster with the cores unlocked (but slower with only the two stock cores), but he asked for Intel. There are a few things I would change, but I think you have me beat.

Attempt Two:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6827151192
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6811129066
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6822136769
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6824236109
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814125333
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6817371016
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6823201010
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820146748
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDeal ... mbo.631850

Total: $711.90

SEMI-EDIT: If you can fit in a quad Sandy Bridge like in bic's rig, go for it. I would change a few things for sure. 380W PSU is not enough, no way in Heck. Caviar Black 640GB is nice, but if push comes to shove, skimp on the hard drive. One stick of RAM is slower but allows a future upgrade path. Your choice.
 
I find that the unlocked phenom 2 is plenty. Sure, a sandy bridge i5 wipes the floor with it, but (I did not check) Im pretty sure it beats an i3 pretty well if you unlock. Plus its a good bit cheaper. And realistically, anymore, processors seem to matter less and less. Sure, a blazing fast i7 rocks, but as long as you have a good dual core, it really doesnt change game performance much. Sure it affects load times slightly, and things like boot time, but most of your game performance is based on your graphics card these days. I would rather have a better graphics card and a weaker CPU, if given the choice. (Heck, my main PC is athlon x2 based, pulling 4.1ghz. I slapped a gtx 480 in it, and its performance was really close to all the big benchmark results from anandtech, etc. like 5 - 10% less. And I have ddr2 ram and everything)

Also realized my build forgot a disc drive, but you can just add one in. Its still only like $730, with the rebates.
 
The i3-2100 consistently benches around 25% faster than a Phenom II X2 565, on much lower power consumption and heat output.

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1179-page4.html

I still recommend going up to the i5 I linked to earlier; it costs more but you get a better return on your investment. (Much more cache and it's a quad instead of a dual core.)
 
The i3 2100 is faster than a Phenom II X2, but slower in almost all tests than a Phenom II X4. I'll be going with a quad core Sandy Bridge for my own rig. If you can afford one, you can get performance comparable to $800 processors for around $300. That being said, as sj3 has stated most games do not benefit significantly from more cores. However, since I do a lot of video editing and extreme multitasking (recode+gaming+downloading+internet browsing), a quad core is worth it for me. What I'm getting at is this: Trying to get other people to pick parts for you is folly. Listen to the suggestions for sure, but pick the parts out yourself. Only you know exactly what the needs of this rig are (and your stepbrother, but he isn't a member).
 
samjc3 said:
And realistically, anymore, processors seem to matter less and less. Sure, a blazing fast i7 rocks, but as long as you have a good dual core, it really doesnt change game performance much. Sure it affects load times slightly, and things like boot time, but most of your game performance is based on your graphics card these days.

I hate disagreeing with Sam, but, that's just plain not true.
I dare you to play TF2 with a 2.4GHz Pentium 4 (Free!) and a GeForce GTX 590 ($700+). Settings maxed out, I doubt you'll be able to hit 60FPS, much less STAY THERE.
With an i7 at 3.0GHz ($270) and a Radeon HD 5770 (1GB version, $120), you'd rarely dip below 80.

The fact of the matter is, your processor DOES matter.
But it all really depends on the games.

Source Engine games are VERY processor dependent.
Half Life 2, TF2, Left4Dead, these will eat your processor alive, it's just what they do.
A "decent" graphics card next to a solid CPU will let you take on any Source game, no problem.

The Unreal Engine has FANTASTIC GPU optimizations, and isn't nearly as dependent on the processor as the Source Engine.
Any reasonably good processor paired with a nice graphics card, and you'll happily enjoy you Borderlands/Killing Floor/BioShock/Duke Nukem Forever.

Personally?
I do enough with my computer, beyond gaming, that I would sooner put my money towards a processor, and skimp on the graphics card.
But if you're a gamer, you'll need a balance of both, just don't let your processor be a bottleneck.
 
jleemero said:
But if you're a gamer, you'll need a balance of both, just don't let your processor be a bottleneck.
I agree with all that you have said, but what I am attempting to say still stands. Most modern processors are good enough not be a bottleneck. I have built two PC's now using the phenom x2, unlocked to four cores, OC'd to 3.5ghz. I find performance to be plenty fast, and really dont see them being a bottleneck for games. Sure, a P4 will bottleneck the flax out of something. But my PC can run source games maxed out, and Im on an athlon x2, OC'd to 3.8ghz. (was 4.1, but it was running hot as plink.) (9500 gt). I just cant see the slight performance increase offered by an i3 justifying the extra cost. I would rather Spend that money on an HDD, or what have you.
 
samjc3 said:
phenom x2, unlocked to four cores, OC'd to 3.5ghz

Yup, I thought the same and that it was more than enough. At least until my Phenom X2 started becoming completely unstable, first while overclocked (had been stable for a while on the OC too), and eventually even at stock. Not an isolated incident either, it happened to Mako shortly after. Do not skimp out on the CPU.

There are plenty of games and applications that are CPU heavy, especially when it comes to stuff like emulation. At least personally, I'll be spending the extra cash for a nice CPU on my next rig.
 
I've been using a Phenom II X2 unlocked to four cores, paired to a 5770 and 4GB RAM, for a bit over a year now, and most of the games I've tried can run max settings, including eye candy like lots of AA, at 1080p, very smoothly. Crysis, the Crysis 2 multiplayer demo, and Metro 2033 are the notable exceptions to this out of the several dozen PC games I own, but then again I don't know anyone with a rig crazy enough that can run any of them that well at max settings at my resolution.

If I ever build a new system, I'm going for Sandy Bridge, but as it is, I'm very much satisfied with the results I'm getting with my current system.
 
Core 2 Quad Q8200, Radeon HD 4670, only 2GB of RAM. It's definitely time to upgrade. Most Source games run okay, but Gmod as usual lags like flax. My 4670 was a good card for the time but I can't max out settings on the games I have and it doesn't support DX11. Gaming performance is still acceptable, not great but okay, but it's video editing and emulation that I want to upgrade for. I want to play some Wii games on Dolphin and speed up my video editing, which gets pretty slow at times.

Kind of off topic. For pure gaming, a Phenom II X2 will do.
 
Back
Top