PC(2)

Well the whole idea of spending the extra $30 now is so when that "couple years" go by and you're going to notice your computer's no longer as fast on the newer games that come out in that couple years, you'll want to see what you can do to increase that performance again. That means, you can get a new processor at that time (in which the Cannonlakes are suppose to be for LGA1151 socket. Support will most likely come via a BIOS update for the mobo). Also, M.2 SSD support will be there if you wish to pursue that route at one point. Or maybe USB 3.1 is more wide spread, and you want that in the form of a PCI-E expansion card. Or maybe there's a change of plans for where you want to put your computer in what room and now you need to connect to the internet wirelessly via another PCI-E expansion cards. To me, getting a motherboard is all about the options for future additions to prolong the life of your computer before you have to start from scratch again.

Think about it, in a few years time. Maybe you don't want a new CPU, but you just want some new functionality that was implemented on those newer motherboards, those usually will come in PCI-E expansion cards. With a full-size ATX board, you have more of those PCI-E slots. Therefore, you have more options on what you can put in there. But with a mATX board that has a limited amount of PCI-E slots, usually 1 for video card and 1 more that's available. All about options, options and options.

As for the video card, CS:GO should run fine in a GTX 950 (infact, pretty much any videocard made within the past few years should be good for CS:GO), but if you plan on playing black ops 3 like you mentioned earlier... you're in for a bad time as the GTX 950 will struggle. The GTX 1060 3GB should slot in between the the GTX 970 and 980. Personally, I'm not a fan of the GTX 1060 3GB as it's actually marginally slower than the 1060 with the 6GB vram. Not really beacuse of the additional ram, but because the amount of CUDA cores is lower on the 3GB version. But it is priced $50 less for the 3GB one.

index.php
 
To make things clear... this is what I said you'll miss if you elect not to grab a Z170 motherboard.
So you're willing to part off with the ability to run higher ram, k-series processors, more usb 3.0 support, more pci-e lanes from the PCH, and raid support...
With any LGA1151 socket motherboard, you can install any Core i7 skylake CPU's. The difference is again, the "k" designated CPUs which stands for unlocked multiplier processors, which allows for overclocking. You can by all means install a 6700k in a H110... but it kinda defeats the purpose of getting a k-series cpu as the H110 chipset won't allow for overclocking even though the CPU supports it. It's like a two way thing. Both needs to support overclocking.

Seriously, don't be afraid of overclocking when the time comes. I understand your current budget doesn't allow for one now, but performance gains could be substantial depending on the task at hand. Especially when you dive into the world of video editing and what not. Which you might be interested to doing later. Don't limit your hardware to what you're going to do now, but what you potentially may be interested in doing. The price difference is minimal to allow for such an expansion in possibility.

Higher ram speeds also comes from overclocking, but normally you just set it to the XMP profile and it should run at it's design clock speed. Literally like a click of a button within the BIOS to get it to work and it won't decrease the lifespan of it because they're rated for those speeds.

More USB 3.0 ports are available by default on the Z170... which is pretty self explanatory on what that means.

more pci-e lanes from the PCH (chipset), which just means you can plug in more things that run on PCI-E lanes. Generally any super fast SSDs use them. Then you also have PCI-E expansion cards. Those will use up PCI-E lanes as well.

Raid support, well most people don't use this, but it's there if you want to combine multiple drives together to either increase performance, or provide a safe backup redundancy of data. Or both... if you have 3 or more drives which can then run in RAID 5.
 
Just tell me if my build Is good for recording csgo and other non over kill games and editing... The build already is 1K I want it to be 700 should I switch to a10 CPU? I've used that it's fast

I'm also going to bed try to keep helping me out its 1 30am bye
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd probably stay clear from those AMD A10 APU's. They're great when you're on a super tight budget, but 700-800 isn't really considered super tight.

As for your mobo choice, I'd get either this one http://pcpartpicker.com/product/9GL7YJ/asrock-motherboard-z170ax1 or http://pcpartpicker.com/product/fcqbt6/asrock-motherboard-z170pro4s. Preferably the Pro4s as it's just a better board.

The RX470 or GTX 1060 3GB is still the better card vs the R9 380X.

The place to save money is if you want to buy the Windows key off kinguin (include the insurance fee which is like $1). It's a risk though as it is a pretty "grey market" to buy the key off kinguin. Because it is grey market, I can't fully recommend going that route, but it is an option people have taken before and has paid off. Their "kinguin insurance" is suppose to remove most of the risk, but you know... it's not 100% fool proof. The Windows 10 key on kinguin usually goes for around $30.
 
Do you even know what super low min. fps does to your game play experience? I would much rather trade off a lower average fps to have a higher minimum fps. Unfortunately, it doesn't really work like that as lower min fps is most often tied to either a CPU that's being bottlenecked or the GPU being bottlenecked which in turns affects the average fps across the board.

Ever played GTA V when that lower fps stutters occur? IT'S GOD AWFUL. I don't think you understands what sub 10 min fps does when it occurs. That shit is worst than high ping (150+ms) FPS gaming.

Lowest fps means exactly that, the lowest fps hit during the test, it may have only gone down to 8 fps once and for a split second, you are insinuating that its continually dipping down in fps, but the strong average fps suggests that this was a very uncommon occurrence. If your machine should be capable and stutters, then its often to do with software, you can't blame it all on hardware. I do play GTA5 and I do get a stutter very occasionally, no matter the settings, sometimes on other games too like StarCraft 2.
I have 2 gaming machines:

My home rig: 3770k @ 4.8, 32gb 1800mhz and 980ti
My rig in Thailand which I'm using now: A10-7870k @ 4.7, 8gb 1600mhz and R9 270X

GTA5 has that very occasional slight stutter, honestly I feel this happens more on my Intel machine, happens on my friends 4770k too, but for sure StarCraft 2 runs better on the Intel machine, makes me believe its more a programming problem. Seriously if you are a gamer you should know about scores of games that stutter and/or slow, that has nothing to do with your hardware, my home rig to this day still can't play Stalker clear sky without the occasional stutter.

Just because he's uncomfortable with the idea of overclocking NOW, doesn't mean he won't explore it LATER

Still, you can't push it on him now just on the off chance he might overclock later, whether or not he changes his mind in the future is up to him.

Apparently, you didn't understand what that graph showed. It showed even a i5-6600k at stock clock was struggling with games like GTA V in the min. FPS category. Again, read my above response as to why ITS A PRETTY BIG DEAL.

If the definition of a cpu struggling is one time dipping down to 8 fps for a undetermined amount of time, but averaging close to 100 fps, then yes it struggled. 8 fps is unplayable, as is 23, which means the i7 6700k also struggles to play GTAV, hell it seem no cpu is good enough for GTA5. Still I never said the i7 wasn't more powerful, I said it wasn't worth it buying as an upgrade in the future as it doesn't perform much better.

Still you don't understand this is all irrelevant, he doesn't want to overclock, so bye bye i5 6600k and he can't afford an i7 6700k, so bye bye i7.

Also, I never told him to buy a 6700k a few years down the road. I talked about Cannon lake. Which is a die shrink of Kaby Lake. From the latest roadmap, Cannonlake is basically at the time of where we're at right now with Skylakes. If you still don't understand what that means, then let me put it this way. Ice lake, the replacement to Cannonlake, is getting close to being released by Intel, but not quite yet. ie... no it really isn't going to be "old tech" by then. There's also not going to be a cheaper more powerful version of it any time soon. Just look at the previous gen i7 4790k. That thing is fairly close in performance to the 6700k. Apart from stuff like nvme support, m.2 support, and DDR4, there wasn't really a reason to go from something like a 4790k to the new skylake platform.

Why would he want to upgrade so soon after buying a new pc, he should be set for a while now, instead you think he should buy a cheaper cpu or gpu (seriously check the budget), so he can afford the z170 motherboard to buy a replacement cpu in the future. Look, I love messing around taking apart computers and spending my money on them, but after building countless PC's for many different types of clients, I can tell you most want the best possible pc now and to be done with it, until its time for a new pc.
 
Lowest fps means exactly that, the lowest fps hit during the test, it may have only gone down to 8 fps once and for a split second, you are insinuating that its continually dipping down in fps, but the strong average fps suggests that this was a very uncommon occurrence. If your machine should be capable and stutters, then its often to do with software, you can't blame it all on hardware. I do play GTA5 and I do get a stutter very occasionally, no matter the settings, sometimes on other games too like StarCraft 2.
I have 2 gaming machines:
You just contradicted yourself. How's it feel?
Still, you can't push it on him now just on the off chance he might overclock later, whether or not he changes his mind in the future is up to him.
The benefits of the Z170 isn't JUST overclocking. The B150 is definitely not what he should be buying. He won't be using the business orientated features that comes with a B-chipset. Which comes to the topic of the H110. That's a garbage chip. So, what's left? The H170. An ATX size H170 goes around the $80 mark. I've seen Z170 boards for $80 on sale before.
8 fps is unplayable, as is 23
23 fps is a lot more playable than 8.
instead you think he should buy a cheaper cpu or gpu (seriously check the budget)
Never told him to buy a cheaper CPU or GPU. Infact, you'll see me not recommending him to buy a GTX 950 because it won't play black ops 3 (which he stated he plays) with great performance under high settings.

You're telling me to "check the budget" when your build list is over his budget. Great.

but after building countless PC's for many different types of clients
Anddd... there we have it people. The business man mentality. Giving your "clients" only the adequate specifications for today's games but struggle within two years.

Also, remember that Intel's changed their strategy in processor production. It's no longer tick-tock where sockets change every year. Their new strategy involves multiple processor releases along the same socket which will stretch out the years and increase the amount of processors available to that socket. Prolonging it's lifespan before a brand new computer as you say.
 
I never said I played bo3 my PC is so terrible it's 200 dollars rn so.... Yeah

so i guess im keeping this build im going to buy and build it i wont need to do any bois updates or anything right??? im never overclocking btw
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You just contradicted yourself. How's it feel?

You better check what contradicted means before you use it.

You know I was talking about my personal experience with the game because you asked me "Ever played GTA V when that lower fps stutters occur?, I was clearly talking about my computers that I use to run the game, my computers weren't the ones used in the benchmark results, so I'm not contradicting anything. In fact for me to get nearly 100 fps average in GTA5, I would most definitely need these occasional stutters to go.

If your machine should be capable and stutters, then its often to do with software, you can't blame it all on hardware.

You blame these stutters on hardware alone with little to no proof, I understand hardware and software can be to blame. I blame my stutters on software simple because my much less powerful cpu runs the game with less stutters, irrelevant of settings.

The benefits of the Z170 isn't JUST overclocking. The B150 is definitely not what he should be buying. He won't be using the business orientated features that comes with a B-chipset. Which comes to the topic of the H110. That's a garbage chip. So, what's left? The H170. An ATX size H170 goes around the $80 mark. I've seen Z170 boards for $80 on sale before.

How does having more features cause him problems?
Ok tell me, if you have two identical systems, running at the same clocks, but one had the z170 chipset and the other an H110, what gaming performance difference would there be?
How many extra fps will this super all powerful Z170 chipset be pulling in over the H110?

23 fps is a lot more playable than 8.

No, 23 in higher, but still unplayable.

You're telling me to "check the budget" when your build list is over his budget. Great.

Dude come on, you now the build list has been changed many times, its one the benefit of partpicker, at one time it was on budget.

struggle within two years

Dude what planet are you on? Struggling after two years are you kidding me.

My 3770k is 4 years old and doesn't struggle one bit, even at stock speeds my 980ti is able to hit 100% in every game including GTA5. Hell my 8 year old q9550 can still push my to GTX 680 to 100% in basically all games, but that probably would not be true of GTA5, as it is crazy cpu demanding, most games are not like this. In fact the worst timed upgrade I ever did was upgrading from my q9550 to a 3770k, I kept the GTX 680 and felt 0% improvements and my fps in benchmarks basically didn't change. Sure the 3770k is helping now, but I should have waited longer.

Anddd... there we have it people. The business man mentality. Giving your "clients" only the adequate specifications for today's games but struggle within two years.

Dude you have the better business man mentality, pay more now, so I can unnecessarily upgrade you PC after only 2 years. Anyway this is not true, if customers computers only lasted 2 years before needing to be upgraded, then I would not have any. If I were to buy a new computer now I would get the 6600k and I would overclock it after a few years to get more life out of it, I would expect to get a least 5+ years out of it, more than 4 years even without overclocking and considering the 6500 is only a tiny tiny bit slower, it should last just as long. I only overclocked my 3770k this year, with my 980ti I get amazing performance and graphics, I have no intention or need to upgrade any time soon. At my best guess I would have to say my computer will be 6 to 7 years old before its unable to push the new cards and then I will upgrade. I am NOT upgrading because of one poorly optimized game like GTA5. You know most people don't need to keep upgrading to the latest stuff as it comes out to enjoy gaming.
 
Last edited:
You better check what contradicted means before you use it.

You know I was talking about my personal experience with the game because you asked me "Ever played GTA V when that lower fps stutters occur?, I was clearly talking about my computers that I use to run the game, my computers weren't the ones used in the benchmark results, so I'm not contradicting anything. In fact for me to get nearly 100 fps average in GTA5, I would most definitely need these occasional stutters to go.
Again that's not how figuring out the frequency of stuttering works. Without knowing the max fps, you're assumption is skewed. Perhaps you should read up on how statistics works.
You blame these stutters on hardware alone with little to no proof, I understand hardware and software can be to blame. I blame my stutters on software simple because my much less powerful cpu runs the game with less stutters, irrelevant of settings.
blaming hardware with little to no proof? The same graph literally showed what a i5-6600k OC'd to 4.6ghz does to the minimum fps number. Definitely not hardware. Seriously, the difference between 8 fps and 23 fps on min. fps represents that instead of the "occasional stuttering" as you like to call it, you have times where the fps slows down, but not enough to call it unplayable.

You still defend the point of 8 fps is "no big deal"... where as it is a big deal.
How does having more features cause him problems?
Ok tell me, if you have two identical systems, running at the same clocks, but one had the z170 chipset and the other an H110, what gaming performance difference would there be?
How many extra fps will this super all powerful Z170 chipset be pulling in over the H110?
Not once have I mentioned that Z170 makes your games run faster. I simply listed things that he can later add to his build if he wish to sought for faster performance with regards to hardware that uses PCI-E lanes.
No, 23 in higher, but still unplayable.
Yea.. you really have no idea what you're talking about.
Dude you have the better business man mentality, pay more now, so I can unnecessarily upgrade you PC after only 2 years.
Pay more now huh? Your build at the time was like $1050... with a mATX B150 mobo. No one should be rocking a mATX mobo at $1050. Have you seen the prices of a full size ATX B150 board? They're reg price $100. I saw an ASRock one on a wicked deal for $80? That's H170 money. Why would anyone buy that over a H170. Which is also conveniently only $10 less than a Z170. Actually, I've seen Z170's for cheaper than that on sales.

No one here's telling him to fork out over 20% more than his budget.
with my 980ti I get amazing performance and graphics, I have no intention or need to upgrade any time soon.
Yea because the guy asking for a build recommendation is definitely buying 980ti performance video card right now...

Clearly, I haven't been able to knock some sense into your thinking when it comes to why there's really no point in
  1. buying a mATX mobo in a non mATX only case.
  2. buying a inferior chipset for the sake of $10
I hope you realize that your argument consists of saving him ~3% of his total budget. This will be my last post about this matter, as the OP for this topic seems set at what he should be purchasing.
 
Again that's not how figuring out the frequency of stuttering works.

Damn right, I can only speculate because you haven't supplied any useful information like that, this is what I have been saying, was it a one time thing or were the cpu's slowing more often, but still the average fps do not support a constant slowing. I used this game and gave a link where the OP could look at other as an examples as well, to see difference in performance between these two chips in a cpu demanding game, all you are showing is that there was a dip, many dips, who knows, in a games notoriously known to be poorly optimized, this is not useful information.

Without knowing the max fps, you're assumption is skewed

Incorrect, you clearly do not know how a mean value is calculated. Even with the 8 fps minimum, the maximum fps could be 96.1 fps or even 999 fps and you could still get an average of 96 fps because the mean is calculated on time. Maximum and minimum numbers alone give very little information, which is why we use average.

My stutters clearly have nothing to with these benchmark results, you asked me is I had ever played GTA V when lower fps stutters occur and I told you, my stutters happen enough that I believe it has an impact on my average.

Perhaps you should read up on how statistics works.

Clearly you need it more than me.

blaming hardware with little to no proof? The same graph literally showed what a i5-6600k OC'd to 4.6ghz does to the minimum fps number

You misunderstood, of course the graph showed that running at 4.6ghz increased the minimum fps, the cpu is running faster and its performance has been increased, but huge frame dips like this in games are a classic signs of poor optimisation or another problem in the program, not means its because of hardware.

Not once have I mentioned that Z170 makes your games run faster.

Well the OP wants the computer for gaming, but you said
Which comes to the topic of the H110. That's a garbage chip.
Clearly then if they perform the same then its not garbage and it will do the job he needs it to do.

Yea.. you really have no idea what you're talking about.

Because I say 23 fps is unplayable, this means I don't know what I'm talking about. Um, Ok. Do I need to say anymore here, nah, think this speaks for itself.

Your build at the time was like $1050... with a mATX B150 mobo

Well maybe, just maybe this was because we add a monitor, mouse, keyboard and headset that I didn't know about at the start or maybe that's the exact reason.
Again the partpicker was never saved, it was always being changed, this is how it works dude.

No one should be rocking a mATX mobo at $1050

1050 dollars, ok ask the OP it went to about 950 and then it was,
- 88 for the os
- 180 for the screen
- around 70 for the mouse, keyboard and headset.

So, around the 600 mark ok, lets not start making up numbers here.

Yea because the guy asking for a build recommendation is definitely buying 980ti performance video card right now...

No, he can't afford it now, but he can always upgrade in the future and he will have a cpu able to run even faster cards. As is the way with tech, performance gets cheaper and the future will bring faster and cheaper cards.

buying a mATX mobo in a non mATX only case.

There were 2 cases, both supported matx.

buying a inferior chipset for the sake of $10

Don't know where you got that number from because it was more than that, but I was excluding asrock motherboards as I think they make inferior boards.
 
Back
Top