• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Want a budget gaming PC that's easy to put together and only costs ~$500? No problem.

OmegaX06

Member
The barrier to entry is especially low since the consumer only needs to plug in a graphics card rather than build the entire computer.

Are the PSUs robust enough and have the proper connections for a high power GPU?




One of the main problems with console loading times is the CPU, an SSD only adds to the advantage.

Yes the power supply in those usually include an 8 pin power connector and is adequate for a mid range GPU (500-525w is standard). Literally just throw in the GPU and you are good to go.
 

Rizific

Member
Is 1080hz 60fps just fine versus stepping up to 1440p?

what exactly do you mean? is 1080p 60hz better than 1440p 30hz orrr.....? thats a question that will completely rely on what you prefer. personally, id never recommend a 60hz display over a 144hz display regardless of the resolution.
 

dr_mario

Member
I seriously have no idea about components. A dual core can in any way be enough? That sounds so unintuitive... I even wanted a octocore for my next pc o_o
 

shandy706

Member
I seriously have no idea about components. A dual core can in any way be enough? That sounds so unintuitive... I even wanted a octocore for my next pc o_o

You'll either be buying old AMD CPUs or very expensive i7 CPUs if that's what you're wanting.

Newer Dual Cores and Quad Cores make up for the cores in performance. You can grab older setups for cheap sometimes as mentioned on the previous page too though.

CPUs like the Xeons or the i7 900 series are more than enough for budget builds too.

Quad Core i5s are plenty for even high-end gaming if you want.
 

LordOfChaos

Member
How many years will this PC go before it can't run the latest AAA well?

Check out how the potato masher ages.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQbCPWtOQp0FoY_-7GwWSErWP2j7--Hh5


A lot of people assumed that for near equal hardware, the PC would fall behind as developers stop optimizing for older architectures while the consoles are still targetted, but this was not borne out in the test. The PC and PS4 seemed at the same relative positions at the end as at the start.
 

jonathanp

Member
what exactly do you mean? is 1080p 60hz better than 1440p 30hz orrr.....? thats a question that will completely rely on what you prefer. personally, id never recommend a 60hz display over a 144hz display regardless of the resolution.

Comparatively is there any difference in graphical quality between the two. Is one more preferable than the other?

I currently don't have a preference since I just built my new PC with gaming in mind. The next purchase I'm making is monitor plus GPU so I just wanted some impressions.
 
If you have a definition of "running well" that this system would not fulfill, then no console fulfills it either. In fact, this system will probably have no issue running Hitman at 1080p with 60 FPS, while it runs at 30 on consoles IIRC.

This PC will not run HITMAN at 60fps locked. The game jumps around erratic as fuck for me at 1080p/medium/high with a 290x and 4670k. Yea the framerate will at a lot of times be over 60, but it will also drop near the 30s and 40s for seemingly no reason.

I'm not shitting on this budget PC, I'm just not happy with the performance on HITMAN. Benchmarks will only show you so much, playing the game it's clear the performance isn't good. Like I said in another post, Witcher 3 would be a much better game to test the PC on. Bonus: the graphics are actually good.
 
The barrier to entry is especially low since the consumer only needs to plug in a graphics card rather than build the entire computer.

Are the PSUs robust enough and have the proper connections for a high power GPU?


Yeah, the power supply in the one I've got is 500W and it has all the connectors you need. I did try sticking a GTX 1060 in it and it'll run Forza Apex at 60fps with all the settings at max. Only issue is its an oldish MB so doesn't have 16x PCI-E slot. It came with an XFX HD7850, which is plenty good enough to run any game from the 360/PS3 era at decent settings. The T3500 has a fairly spacious case too so its easy for beginners to work with.

The one I have is an ex-dev machine from a studio I worked for that sadly closed :(
 
Thanks, it's been years since I built a PC & kind of out of touch with what's considered optimal x performance so will definitely be refereeing to the OP.

I'm only after a new Mobo, CPU, RAM & PSU (Maybe new GFX) as I don't really use my rig for Gaming anymore but rather Video Editing & Music Production,. Been having problems with my Rig being unstable and constant crashing & sudden shutdowns whenever I'm in Sony Vegas for more than half hour or even when I'm just browsing Chrome!

As you can imagine, deeply infuriating and I've tried everything and can't figure out what's causing it so I'd rather just buy new parts from scratch then spend another weekend taking my PC apart or reinstalling my OS trying to rule out the culprit.
 
I know I'm not alone in preferring 1080p60 to 4K.

No, you're absolutely NOT alone. I may be doing 1080p for quite some time. I rather ? out the settings, and even go to higher framerates (e.g., 120fps) than go to 4K. Hell, I just bought my 1080p TV a couple of years ago. I'm not gonna toss it out.

Anyway, this is a great deal. I wish I would've run into something like this when I was buying my PC a couple of years ago. At that time, it was just short of $1,000, and probably less capable than this one.
 

IC5

Member
Yeah, I was going to ask the same question. I game at 1440p/4k with my 1070 and I've not had any issues running 8gb.
8gb is plenty for most games. There are a few cases, where more ram helps. GTA doesn't see full potential, until you go over 8GB. Battlefield multiplayer likes RAM. Most modern MMOs. And some people may want to play with nodding. skyrim, fallout 4, etc.

This is a budget build, however. That motherboard has 4 slots. If I were buying today, I would get2x4GB for dual channel bandwidth. It's noticeable.

However, In reality, I would watch slickdeals and forum deals posts for a couple of weeks, to try and get a better price on 2x8GB. That's if we are talking new.

I got my i3-6100 for $85 last June, as a "like new" system pull, on eBay. It was $120 new retail, at the time.

With RAM prices up, I would buy some used RAM at the [H]forums, if O couldn't get on a deal for brand new RAM.
 

LordOfChaos

Member
IMO, the best budget gaming PC you can get is a used Precision workstation from Ebay. Many of these have good 6 core xeons and 12-16gb of ram for around ~$200. Throw a 1060 or 1070 in one of these and you have a pretty nice setup. Blows away the one in the OP and is even cheaper.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dell-Precis...295-Pro-F1T-/311791584599?hash=item48983a0557

If you want a really cheap gaming PC, its worth looking on Ebay for old Dell T3500 workstations. Some of them have pretty beefy Intel Xeon processors, and reasonable graphics cards that will comfortably give you performance that matches a PS4 or Xbone, and you can pick them up for less than £500 easily.

I've got one with a W3680 and a HD7850 that I'm selling right now.



This guy knows!



Hmm. Any limitations with weird GPU size limiting doodads, or the PSU wattage? I remember some Dell desktops having plastic appendages over AGP/PCI-E ports that limited GPU upgrades unless you broke stuff in the past.

And is the MoBo standard to transplant into a prettier case, or custom mounted?

This says
These workstations are notorious for poor compatibility with aftermarket parts, especially consumer video cards. But of course, they're designed for work, not play. So my only caveat is to leave yourself the option of returning whatever you want to try.
http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/desktop/f/3515/t/19611857

And
755SLOT.JPG

755TSlot.jpg


Ebay one looks like
s-l1600.jpg


I seriously have no idea about components. A dual core can in any way be enough? That sounds so unintuitive... I even wanted a octocore for my next pc o_o


As the OP highlighted, hyperthreading makes a big difference. A modest i3 with 2 real cores, 4 virtual threads, can run things better than the trusty old 2400K, a native quad.


Games that "require" quads also see a hyperthreaded dual core as four threads, and launch on them.
 

Rizific

Member
Comparatively is there any difference in graphical quality between the two. Is one more preferable than the other?

I currently don't have a preference since I just built my new PC with gaming in mind. The next purchase I'm making is monitor plus GPU so I just wanted some impressions.
Well, the main difference obviously
being resolution. To me, the difference was noticeable although not extreme. I went from a 27" 1080p 60hz set, to a 24" 1080p 144hz, to a 27" 1080p 144hz, to a 29" 21:9 1080p 75hz, to a now 27" 1440p 144hz. What I learned from all of that is im ok with 1080p at 24", but I'm not ok with a 24" monitor. I like 27", but not at 1080p. 21:9 is nice, but not at 29" and 1080p and 75hz isn't enough of a difference to 60hz. Depending on your budget, I would recommend a 24" 1080p 144hz monitor. If your budget allows, definitely go 27" 1440p 144hz with at least gtx1070 level card.
 

Grief.exe

Member
Thanks, it's been years since I built a PC & kind of out of touch with what's considered optimal x performance so will definitely be refereeing to the OP.

I'm only after a new Mobo, CPU, RAM & PSU (Maybe new GFX) as I don't really use my rig for Gaming anymore but rather Video Editing & Music Production,. Been having problems with my Rig being unstable and constant crashing & sudden shutdowns whenever I'm in Sony Vegas for more than half hour or even when I'm just browsing Chrome!

As you can imagine, deeply infuriating and I've tried everything and can't figure out what's causing it so I'd rather just buy new parts from scratch then spend another weekend taking my PC apart or reinstalling my OS trying to rule out the culprit.

The two leading culprits I can think of, since you already reinstalled your OS to rule out software instability.

Replace the TIM on your CPU/GPU
Faulty PSU

Something isn't able to keep up when load is applied.
 
I really like the build in the OP, except for the RAM part. Get 2 sticks. RAM bandwith limitation ARE a thing. With a single RAM stick at 2666 Mhz you are getting the same bandwith as with 1333 Mhz RAM using dual channel, which awfully, awfully slow in 2017.
It's pretty much free, too. 2x4 GB typically cost pretty much the same as 1x8.
 
Hmm. Any limitations with weird GPU size limiting doodads, or the PSU wattage? I remember some Dell desktops having plastic appendages over AGP/PCI-E ports that limited GPU upgrades unless you broke stuff in the past.

And is the MoBo standard to transplant into a prettier case, or custom mounted?

I've not tried swapping the MB out so I can't comment on that, but mine fits a full size card. As I said, I tried it with an Asus GTX 1060 Turbo and it fitted and worked perfectly. PSU wattage is plenty for a budget games machine.

I once found some dudes website that has a fair bit of info about turning these things into a decent games machine. I'm trying to find a link to the site I'm thinking of, but there is quite a lot of info out there on the subject.
 
SSDs are not needed for a gaming PC guys. Yes they are great to have, but don't belong in a budget PC.

I wouldn't use a dual-core without hyper-threading especially with Ryzen right around the corner. I wouldn't buy anything with Ryzen and Vega around the corner honestly.

I like this video by Jay-Z Two Cents. It's a wholly unattainable build for the most part. He built a budget PC with all new parts for $375, but it was at a micro-center with some really deep discounts. He doesn't include the OS, because he says he wanted to see how much hardware you can get for as cheap as possible. The OS can be pretty nebulous in price, depending on how comfortable you are with alternate markets as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xV3hasqRDoU
 

c0Zm1c

Member
A SSD is surely an unnecessary luxury. I would be much more concerned about whether or not the 8GB of RAM is enough.
 

Neo_Geo

Banned
Sure :)

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Pentium G4560 3.5GHz Dual-Core Processor ($75.00 @ B&H)
Motherboard: Asus H110M-E/M.2 Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($46.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: Team Elite Plus 8GB (1 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($48.98 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 750GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($46.00 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB Video Card ($137.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: DIYPC MA08-BK MicroATX Mini Tower Case ($24.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: EVGA 450W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($37.89 @ OutletPC)

Total: $417.83
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-02-02 11:14 EST-0500

I mean, the 1050 Ti seems to run fine on even 300-350watt PSUs. You could probably knock more off price wise if you stick with the 1050 Ti.

Just add $25-$30 for the RX 470. Add $1 if you prefer the RAM in OP. Add $3 if you prefer the HDD in the OP. You can of course pick and choose.

The above is $100 cheaper than OP and would do 1080p gaming on the latest games just fine. We are talking budget gaming as the title says :).

This build easily leaves room for a small SSD for Windows, Win10 Key and decent KB+M as well staying right at $500.
 

Lister

Banned
A SSD is surely an unnecessary luxury. I would be much more concerned about whether or not the 8GB of RAM is enough.

Exactly. A regular 7400+ RPM spindle drive is going to perform soooo much betetr than a standard drive on a console for one.

And, unlike on a console, if you DO upgrade to an SSD in the future, you will be able to take full advantage of it.
 
For those of you who are looking for an affordable gaming laptop, check out Dells new Inspiron.

It starts at 800 USD, but if you can give it 150 bucks more you can upgrade to a 1050 Ti and an i7 processor. For 950 dollars, this thing is going to kill anything you throw at it at 1080p. On a 15-inch laptop screen the value is amazing. And surprisingly, it sounds like the rest of the machine is pretty good too; 6 hour battery, solid construction, good keyboard, decent trackpad. The screen is the only average and mediocre part.

Dave Lees review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQFn1Z-x9DQ

Getting this kind of power at this pricepoint is insane. These specced laptops used to cost 1500-2000 dollars for this sort of performance. 1050 Ti is incredible powerful!
 

Grimalkin

Member
Is it possible to get/build a mini itx what can run most games in 1080?

Yes, most of the GTX 1060 and RX 480 cards will fit, as will most of the more budget cards. It depends on the case you choose but any reputable case manufacturer will list gpu clearance which you can compare to the actual card dimensions.
 

LilJoka

Member
My config for $500

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-6100 3.7GHz Dual-Core Processor ($109.49 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Asus H110M-E/M.2 Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($46.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill NT Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($51.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Toshiba 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($47.89 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: MSI Radeon RX 470 4GB ARMOR OC Video Card ($173.89 @ OutletPC)
Case: Fractal Design Core 1100 MicroATX Mini Tower Case ($39.99 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply: EVGA 450W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($37.89 @ OutletPC)
Total: $508.12
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-02-02 18:16 EST-0500

Is it possible to get/build a mini itx what can run most games in 1080?

Yep sure is possible easily.
GTX 1080 can be had in an ITX case like a Node 304.
I have a 7700k and GTX 970 in mine.
 
BTW if you really want free windows you could get on the insider preview program and stay on the release preview or slow ring, you would have to deal with mandatory diagnostics and telemetry but hey it's an alternative, and it's not like retail W10 doesn't do any tracking either.
 

alexbull_uk

Member
BTW if you really want free windows you could get on the insider preview program and stay on the release preview or slow ring, you would have to deal with mandatory diagnostics and telemetry but hey it's an alternative, and it's not like retail W10 doesn't do any tracking either.

Also if you work anywhere with a moderately large IT department then there's a decent chance you might be entitled to get a copy from them. MS Office too, usually.
 

Grimalkin

Member

I am curious to know why you chose the i3-6100 over the Pentium G4560?
 

datsunzep

Member
You have one? That chip is benchmarking at I3-6100 levels.

No, but I looked at benchmarks.

But the Phenom lacks new instruction sets and draws significantly more power since it's so old. Also I had the same cpu before changing it to a 4690k and the AMD was a bottleneck even with a modest 270X graphics card.

Well aware. This CPU is also a very similar bottleneck. I didn't say you should get a 7 year old CPU.

That's not how CPUs work...at all. GHz doesn't equal GHz across generations.

Don't know how you interpreted what I said as this. That's why we have benchmarks.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2925&cmp[]=368

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/Intel+Pentium+G4560/review

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/AMD+Phenom+II+X4+955/review

With a mild overclock on the 955, that gap from stock closes. If barely exceeding a a low mid range chip from 2009 was the goal of this chip, it certainly did it. That's the point I was making.
 

benson827

Banned
No, but I looked at benchmarks.



Well aware. This CPU is also a very similar bottleneck. I didn't say you should get a 7 year old CPU.



Don't know how you interpreted what I said as this. That's why we have benchmarks.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2925&cmp[]=368

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/Intel+Pentium+G4560/review

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/cpu/AMD+Phenom+II+X4+955/review

With a mild overclock on the 955, that gap from stock closes. If barely exceeding a a low mid range chip from 2009 was the goal of this chip, it certainly did it. That's the point I was making.

Hahaha, these are synthetic benchmarks where every core and every mhz is used at same time. Think about it this way, the X6 is a six core and is bested by a true dual core. Games rely more so on single core performance ususally leaning towards the first few cores. That is why intel has always excelled as Gaming Cpu versus AMD.

This is also why it makes this pentium so attractive. Sure if you load up say cinebench and benchmark a 6 core AMD versus a true dual core/4 threads then it will be close. BUT gaming performance is where the intel exceeds with single core processing speeds. Trust me, modern pc Gaming even though we have gone very far with splitting up rendering to multiple threads, is still very reliant on just a few threads. This is coming from a 8 thread I7 4790K user who seems very little performance game in enable disable HT coupled with a 1070. But overclocks on the actual GHZ yields huge gains
 
Is a dual core really adequate? Some games don't even run on dual cores at all. I understand it has the ability to run virtual cores, but is that a reliable solution looking forward?

Its adequate for 30fps. 60 fps isnt going to happen under lots of dx11 titles with that amd gpu. Amds driver is very cpu inefficient
 

datsunzep

Member
Hahaha, these are synthetic benchmarks where every core and every mhz is used at same time. Think about it this way, the X6 is a six core and is bested by a true dual core. Games rely more so on single core performance ususally leaning towards the first few cores. That is why intel has always excelled as Gaming Cpu versus AMD.

This is also why it makes this pentium so attractive. Sure if you load up say cinebench and benchmark a 6 core AMD versus a true dual core/4 threads then it will be close. BUT gaming performance is where the intel exceeds with single core processing speeds. Trust me, modern pc Gaming even though we have gone very far with splitting up rendering to multiple threads, is still very reliant on just a few threads. This is coming from a 8 thread I7 4790K user who seems very little performance game in enable disable HT coupled with a 1070. But overclocks on the actual GHZ yields huge gains

I have a 6700K and a 1070, your point? The only game I regularly play after upgrading that I saw a big bump from CPU was Starcraft 2. In reality, most games are GPU dependent and have been since CPUs have been increasing in speed at a lower rate compared with GPUs. I never argued that strong single cores weren't better than multiple lower speed cores when it comes to gaming. However, if you don't think a 3dmark score is relevant to gaming, I don't know what to tell you.
 
older xeons are a great budget option, especially if you already have a compatible. motherboard. recently i picked up a x5670 6 core xeon to upgrade my aging X58 system, and now im good to go. some even overclock really well.
 
Top Bottom