My Rig: Cut the price down without cutting performance?

PCunicorn said:
Don't downgrade to a FX-6300. It just isn't worth it. The 8320 is like 30 percent better and only 40 bucks more. And, a PSU upgrade is worthless. 500W is more than enough for a 8320 and a 270X.

270X=180W
8320=95W
Other Components=80W
Click to expand...

Why are these guys telling me to get a CX600M then? Is it because I'd likely need it when I upgrade my PCU/GPU in the future?
 
LambentTyto said:
Why are these guys telling me to get a CX600M then? Is it because I'd likely need it when I upgrade my PCU/GPU in the future?
Click to expand...

You should really get the 600 watt, just to give yourself more headroom and so you can upgrade components, notably the graphics card, easier in the future.
 
But GPUs are just going to get get more power efficient. so that statement is ridiculous. Go with a CX600M if it's only a little more, but if it is a lot more, a CX500M is more than enough.
 
Well if I'm going to keep the AMD FX8320 I'll have to sacrifice the CX600 and go with the 500 and just spend more money later possibly upgrading the PSU

But will the AMDFX 6300 coupled with my graphics card run the current games on ultra high settings? Because if they will, then it really won't matter either way. In the future I'll have to spend a little more to upgrade either way, weather it's the PSU or the processor.

What do you guys think? Will my CPU/GPU run games on Ultra High settings? The videos on youtube seem to make me think I will, but at what frame rates and how hot is my AMD processor going to get? Really I'd like an Intel, but it's too much money for me right now.
 
PCunicorn said:
But GPUs are just going to get get more power efficient. so that statement is ridiculous. Go with a CX600M if it's only a little more, but if it is a lot more, a CX500M is more than enough.
Click to expand...

It is only a little more and I'm talking about upgrading to a higher-end GPU.

I see no reason for him not to go with the 600W. It's always good to have headroom. I'm sure the majority of people here will agree with me.

What you've been saying on here in other threads about running i3s and 7850s on sub-400W power supplies is ridiculous if you ask me.

An i3 system with no GPU could likely run on a sub-400W PSU just fine, but paired with a 7850? No. You want *at least* 500W and I would always recommend going about 50-100W over what you *need* just to give yourself some headroom. I do not recommend going any more than around 100W more than you *need* because then it turns into a bit of a waste of money. But for this system, is buying the CX600M over the 500M a waste? Absolutely not.

To get back to the OP:

Yes, your FX-6300 with the R9 270X (which is the card you are going for?) will run games very nicely. What resolution are you playing at? The CPU does not make as big a difference in gaming as the GPU does. You want to spend as much money as possible on the GPU.

The FX-6300 is a capable gaming processor which is priced well. Sure, the FX-8320 is a little better, but really for gaming you will be fine with the 6300 and the 270X.
 
Last edited:
spirit said:
It is only a little more and I'm talking about upgrading to a higher-end GPU.

I see no reason for him not to go with the 600W. It's always good to have headroom. I'm sure the majority of people here will agree with me.

What you've been saying on here in other threads about running i3s and 7850s on sub-400W power supplies is ridiculous if you ask me.

To get back to the OP:

Yes, your FX-6300 with the R9 270X (which is the card you are going for?) will run games very nicely. What resolution are you playing at? The CPU does not make as big a difference in gaming as the GPU does. You want to spend as much money as possible on the GPU.

The FX-6300 is a capable gaming processor which is priced well. Sure, the FX-8320 is a little better, but really for gaming you will be fine with the 6300 and the 270X.
Click to expand...

At this time I'm sticking with the FX-6300 and the R9 270X.

I'm not sure what resolution I'll be playing at. I intend to buy myself a $100-150 dollar monitor of around 18" 22" inches.

Is my graphics card week enough to be effected by what resolutions I play on?
 
The R9 270X is a powerful card. If you're only looking at an 18" or 22" monitor, then man, the 270X will be way more than enough. Chances are an 18" or 22" monitor may not even be 1920x1080 and the 270X should be fine even beyond 1920x1080. It will certainly play very well at 1080p and 1920x1200.

I would look at 24" 1920x1080 monitors.
 
spirit said:
The R9 270X is a powerful card. If you're only looking at an 18" or 22" monitor, then man, the 270X will be way more than enough. Chances are an 18" or 22" monitor may not even be 1920x1080 and the 270X should be fine even beyond 1920x1080. It will certainly play very well at 1080p and 1920x1200.

I would look at 24" 1920x1080 monitors.
Click to expand...

Well I'll certainly get as large a monitor as I can so long as it holds within my budget to do so. One problem though, is that I live in Ecuador and electronics here are generally double what you'd spend in the states. So because of that, I have people bring the stuff down, and a monitor getting past 22" is getting kind of big for carry on luggage. Checked luggage isn't really an option, unless you know how to pack extremely well, which is exactly what I did on the way down. But that monitor I brought was only an 18" and I've since sold that.
 
By the way, I'll need to get an OS for my system. I like Windows 7 but it does take up a lot of RAM compared to XP. Now I'm not thinking of getting an XP OS because it's too old and I believe they're going t stop updating it completely in 2014.

Anyways, what's gaming on Windows 8 like?
 
Same as 7 really. My friend has 8 and games and has no problems. Although he did have trouble getting Crysis 1 to work. That may not be an issue with W8 though.
 
No, old games won't work on 7 either if they wont work on 8, generally. Usually a old game won't work because it was designed for 32 Bit and most modern computers use 64 Bit.
 
PCunicorn said:
No, old games won't work on 7 either if they wont work on 8, generally. Usually a old game won't work because it was designed for 32 Bit and most modern computers use 64 Bit.
Click to expand...

Crysis 1 works just fine on my 64 bit copy of Windows.
 
No, I wasn't talking about your case. Besides Crysis 1 is a pretty recent game, have doubts it has anything to do with W8, 32 bit or 64 bit.
 
I've run games from 2004 and 2005 fine on Windows 7 x64 and Windows 8 x64, so I would say there is nothing really to worry about.

Take it from me, 7 and 8 are practically identical for gaming.
 
spirit said:
I've run games from 2004 and 2005 fine on Windows 7 x64 and Windows 8 x64, so I would say there is nothing really to worry about.

Take it from me, 7 and 8 are practically identical for gaming.
Click to expand...

I'll probably just go with Windows 8 then. I thought it looked kind of cool in a presentation I saw.

So my brother found a guy selling some older desktop computers locally for around $60. I'm wondering if I could use one of those older tower cases for my rig, or is that not recommended?

Though I can't remember, but a somebody was telling me to get the corsair 300R rather than the Corsair 200R. Does it really matter? What's the difference between a newer model case and an older one?

I ask this because I'm going to have somebody bring all this stuff down, and a tower case is pretty bulky. But I don't know, maybe those older tower cases aren't a very viable option?
 
Last edited:
I would recommend buying a new case, since the old cases may not fit your board properly and may have really bad cable management. Might look a bit ugly and old too.

I'd stick to the 200R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top