Jump to content

Which is the better $1000 gaming pc for 4k (You Vote)


Recently me and my friend have made a bet that we could make a better gaming computer than the other if we had a $1000 budget. This computer is designed for 4k gaming. Over the course of the next few days we have vigorously researched which parts we want in the system and have finally finished our theoretical builds. We want you to pick which computer is better.

 

EDIT: As this is a challenge we have locked ourselves to $1000 and we are rating these computer at their 4k gaming preformance

 

Jake build: I5 4690k (Water cooled)

MSI 797 Gaming mobo

Crucial 10 gb (1x8gb) + (1x2gb) DDR3 ram

Kingston 120 gb ssd

Hitachi Deskstar 2tb 7200 rpm

Asus gtx 970 Strix

EVGA Supernova 650W 80+Gold

Thermal Take Versa case

(Vote Jake)

 

"This PC's CPU power won't cause any bottlenecks and will alow the GPU to be used to it's max power. The extra ram will also be useful at 4k and ther is plenty of cooling to overclock"

 

Hugh Build: AMD FX 8320e (Cooler Master RR-HT2)

MSI 760GM mobo

G-Skill Value Series 8gb DDR3 1333

Hitatchi Ultrastar 1tb 7200RPM

 EVGA 980ti ACX 2.0

CoolMax 500W 80+ Certified

2x Kingwin 120mm fans

(Vote Hugh)

 

"At 4k this build will be great because the GPU should still be used to about 80% before being bottlenecked which is still better than the 970. The extra VRAM will also be useful for games with larger texture packs. The CPU should still be able to overclock to 4.3GHz even on this crappy mobo. This build is only designed for 4k and not any lower resolution as the CPU would bottleneck"

 

Why Pick Jake (Hugh's Negatives)

*Hugh's motherboard is not good at overclocking

*Not a good enough CPU

*Not enough ram

*Graphics card money could have been spread out better

*No SSD

 

Why Pick Hugh (Jake's Negatives)

* Graphics card is very limited at 4k

*Lack of fans=more heat

*Not enough dedicated graphics memory

*GPU will be limited before CPU can strech its legs

 

 

We will be counting votes in a couple of days

Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither, youre gonna want to spend more for a 4k gaming machine.

4690K // 212 EVO // Z97-PRO // Vengeance 16GB // GTX 770 GTX 970 // MX100 128GB // Toshiba 1TB // Air 540 // HX650

Logitech G502 RGB // Corsair K65 RGB (MX Red)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

None of the two are good for 4K gaming. You have to spend more money on the Hugh build. Get at least 1600Mhz ram, and at least an i5.

FX-6300 cooled by Nepton 240M | EVGA GTX 970 SuperClocked | 8GB G.Skill ValueRAM | Cooler Master 690 III | Sharkoon WMP 500 Bronze

Power supplies:

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/406160-psu-ranking-and-tiers/ My F@h stats: http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=userpage&username=zyntaxable Intel vs. FX for gaming: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/401217-more-updated-fx-vs-intel-for-gaming/
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently me and my friend have made a bet that we could make a better gaming computer than the other if we had a $1000 budget. This computer is designed for 4k gaming. Over the course of the next few days we have vigorously researched which parts we want in the system and have finally finished our theoretical builds. We want you to pick which computer is better.

this for 4k?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

don't play games at 4k i beg you. there isn't a good 4k gaming monitor which has more than 60hz and 1/2 ms response time. Get a 1440p max 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically for 4k gaming at $1000 budget, you want to cheap out on everything except the graphics card. The CPU is capable of outputting ~40fps (at least) in any current game regardless of resolution, and that's about what the 980ti can output at 4k. This is a bottlenecked system for 1080p/1440p but for 4k gaming it will be good. You won't be recording youtube videos on this though..PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-4150 3.5GHz Dual-Core Processor ($117.98 @ OutletPC)

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H81M-S1 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($39.99 @ SuperBiiz)

Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 8GB (1 x 8GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($46.99 @ Newegg)

Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($48.89 @ OutletPC)

Video Card: Zotac GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB AMP! Video Card ($648.99 @ SuperBiiz)

Case: Corsair 200R ATX Mid Tower Case ($49.99 @ Micro Center)

Power Supply: EVGA 500W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($34.99 @ NCIX US)

Total: $987.82

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-07-28 15:46 EDT-0400

Nude Fist 1: i5-4590-ASRock h97 Anniversary-16gb Samsung 1333mhz-MSI GTX 970-Corsair 300r-Seagate HDD(s)-EVGA SuperNOVA 750b2

Name comes from anagramed sticker for "TUF Inside" (A sticker that came with my original ASUS motherboard)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Coolmax power supply, yeah that ain't gonna end well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

don't play games at 4k i beg you. there isn't a good 4k gaming monitor which has more than 60hz and 1/2 ms response time. Get a 1440p max 

Most people dont need anything over 60Hz, and refresh rate means nothing.

4690K // 212 EVO // Z97-PRO // Vengeance 16GB // GTX 770 GTX 970 // MX100 128GB // Toshiba 1TB // Air 540 // HX650

Logitech G502 RGB // Corsair K65 RGB (MX Red)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people dont need anything over 60Hz, and refresh rate means nothing.

 

I overclocked my monitor to 75Hz from 60 and it's a very significant difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I overclocked my monitor to 75Hz from 60 and it's a very significant difference. 

Swndlr, on 28 Jul 2015 - 3:44 PM, said:snapback.png

Most people dont need anything over 60Hz, and refresh rate means nothing.

lmk if i need to make that bigger as well so you can read it

4690K // 212 EVO // Z97-PRO // Vengeance 16GB // GTX 770 GTX 970 // MX100 128GB // Toshiba 1TB // Air 540 // HX650

Logitech G502 RGB // Corsair K65 RGB (MX Red)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote turnip!

Intel Xeon E5 1650 v3 @ 3.5GHz 6C:12T / CM212 Evo / Asus X99 Deluxe / 16GB (4x4GB) DDR4 3000 Trident-Z / Samsung 850 Pro 256GB / Intel 335 240GB / WD Red 2 & 3TB / Antec 850w / RTX 2070 / Win10 Pro x64

HP Envy X360 15: Intel Core i5 8250U @ 1.6GHz 4C:8T / 8GB DDR4 / Intel UHD620 + Nvidia GeForce MX150 4GB / Intel 120GB SSD / Win10 Pro x64

 

HP Envy x360 BP series Intel 8th gen

AMD ThreadRipper 2!

5820K & 6800K 3-way SLI mobo support list

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are judging on which will get better preformance at 4k only. Also we dont expect it to be playing games at 4k ultra 16x Anti-Aliasing and get 60fps. The $1000 mark is very strict and we cannot cross it even by a penny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not going to vote as both of these builds have flaws. 

 

The first build is generally ok, but that Ram combo is weird. Just go with 8GB and be done with it. The gpu is too weak for serious 4K gaming. The cpu and psu are very good choices.

 

The second build is a disaster waiting to happen. That psu is a huge NO unless you want your new shiny pc to go up in smoke. I wouldn't overclock with that board, not that you can anyway as that psu will buckle under any sort of load. The only saving grace is the gpu.

 

With this sort of budget a 4K build is a bit out of reach. You should be looking at 1080p or maybe 1440p at a push.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

we are only judging on performance and not longevity of the parts. That's why we cheaped out on a lot of areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that at 4k I will be able to get better performance than Jake because Jake's 970 will be at 100% usage before his epic CPU will be able to give an fps boost. My card on the other hand will be able to get to 95% usage before it is bottle necked by the crappy CPU. Below this post there is evidence that the CPU will not bottleneck the video card. I will also post a 4k benchmark video

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Proof that cpu does not bottleneck the gpu at all

(8320e and 8350 basically the same thing only .5ghz more)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hugh please reword your response, as it stands it dosen't even warrant a response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that at 4k I will be able tI get better performance because his gpu will not be maxed out before mine can reach the 80% bottleneck where the cpu would limit it. Counter argument Jake?

This dosen't even make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

my sincerest apologies Jake it will be edited and fixed. P.s I meant to say ur gpu would be at 100% before the monstrous power of ur GPU came in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here is a 980ti vs 970 comparison. As you can see the 980 ti preforms the same as the titan x which is basically the fastest video card on the market. CPU doesn't matter because his card would be maxed out already. Just minus 10 fps off of the 980 ti and that would be the equivalent to running the game using the 8320e

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×