Will This work out?

[LukeSavenije]

@jerubedo unfortunately i can't find hard numbers currently, but i can show on the board that it's cheap and will probably fail fast enough

 

dat 3+2 vrm, no heatsink, a320 chipset, it's a cheap board. everyone their things, but I'd even get a TUF over it

[jerubedo]

16 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

So, you enjoy being stuck in the air for more than 10 seconds?  Cuz that happens with HDDs.  It can also take 15 seconds just to open the inventory in AAA titles like Destiny 2.

I've never seen an inventory take 10 seconds to open in any game on an HDD. Maybe you saw some corrupted installation. And again, we're at console prices here! Consoles have HDDs and very few people change them over to SSDs. So it's not like it's any worse than what tens of millions of people are using.

[jerubedo]

52 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Clearly you haven't played a AAA title like Destiny 2.  Also, you're arguing that because it's a problem on a console that it's okay to repeat that problem on a PC.  That's not a good argument at all.  Well, because consoles have inferior graphics to PCs I don't exactly see the problem with gaming on a 710.  Also, no my install isn't corrupt.

I've played that an probably any AAA title you can name. I've played it on console as well and have not seen hangs that last 10 or more seconds. Even if Destiny is a problem for you and some others, that is certainly not representative of most games. PC gaming is about better graphics and better FPS while having the option of which controller or mouse/keyboard you use as well as the ability to mod and change settings depending on preference. Load times are a very small part of it, and as you stated already you can change that aspect on consoles as well by swapping in an SSD, yet most don't. Why is that? Because most people don't give a crap if they have to wait on a load for an extra X amount of seconds.

[GoldenLag]

3 hours ago, jerubedo said:

Why is that? Because most people don't give a crap if they have to wait on a load for an extra X amount of seconds

And most people want plug an play forever with their Hardware. Your system is more or less the reason why people go for consoles because at least its a consistant experience. 

 

You min-maxed the entire system to fit a GPU something that you just dont do on the low end. I want actual quality builds on LTT, not something straight out of Tom's hardware.

[jerubedo]

20 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

And most people want plug an play forever with their Hardware. Your system is more or less the reason why people go for consoles because at least its a consistant experience. 

 

You min-maxed the entire system to fit a GPU something that you just dont do on the low end. I want actual quality builds on LTT, not something straight out of Tom's hardware.

Look, for the price he's getting a system that will perform better than a console. At the end of the day that's it. You're assuming the build quality is bad without any actual data to back it up. Yes, the board is of a lower quality. Will it die? I can say no all day, you can say yes all day, but neither of us have any data to go off of. My argument is that the VRMs are definitely the weakest link, but the 1200 doesn't tax them enough to overheat them nor cause them to fail as a result.

 

Your approach has the user fiddling with their system multiple times (something MANY people don't like to do to begin with), it has them wait on performance instead of having it right now (most people want what they want right at this very moment. Instant gratification), all for some grand idea that the VRMs and the caps are better, that upgrade paths are the best thing for everyone, and that not having to wait an extra few seconds for an app to load is the more important that a huge gain in FPS.

 

The experience provided by my build has the user playing games better than on a console right now, and it performs just fine in all other general uses. It can be sold later, there will be a buyer (at what % total loss, I don't know. I can't imagine it being sold for less than $200 at the absolute worst). After it's sold they can build something better using either the same strategy (best GPU and compromise on other parts for no upgradeability) or they can build something much better and upgradeable WITH the performance they want. In the long run the math works out to be about the same to your strategy which is to buy something with worse performance for the target usage, wait (for who knows how long) and buy a GPU. And then upgrade the CPU (selling the older CPU, but as an individual part it won't recoup much).

 

I don't know what else to say but in my opinion I'd be happier with better than console performance right now as opposed to some machine that "is better build quality" but that I can't play on the way I want until I save more money and throw in more parts. The difference between the 2200g (while it is capable) vs the 1050 Ti is sometimes the difference of 30 FPS vs 60 FPS.

 

See here for vega 11 (not even 8 ) vs the 1050 Ti:

 

 

[GoldenLag]

2 hours ago, jerubedo said:

Look, for the price he's getting a system that will perform better than a console. At the end of the day that's it

Not really. You can get a PS4 Pro for the same ammount of money. And that is a more powerful console.

2 hours ago, jerubedo said:

My argument is that the VRMs are definitely the weakest link, but the 1200 doesn't tax them enough to overheat them nor cause them to fail as a result

Oh boy, the VRMs will be the first to go in that system. Just because you think running something within spec means its gonna last doesnt mean it will. Its literally the worst board you could get. Its worse than buying a VS PSU or a EVGA B series

2 hours ago, jerubedo said:

 Your approach has the user fiddling with their system multiple times (something MANY people don't like to do to begin with)

Once or trice depending on how much he wants to do. And he has allready gone through the trouble of building the damn thing. Having something that is going to last and is going to be upgradable is a much better situation to be in than a system from 2010 that is sluggish at every task and is in constant need of an upgrade.

2 hours ago, jerubedo said:

After it's sold they can build something better using either the same strategy (best GPU and compromise on other parts for no upgradeability) or they can build something much better and upgradeable WITH the performance they want. In the long run the math works out to be about the same to your strategy which is to buy something with worse performance for the target usage, wait (for who knows how long) and buy a GPU. And then upgrade the CPU (selling the older CPU, but as an individual part it won't recoup much).

Except the math doesnt add up. You start with a system that is sluggish and in constant beed of repair. You can upgrade it and instead of spending 100$ on a new CPU and 150$ on a new GPU you will need to spend 300$ (your estimate) on a overall worse system which has the exact same issues as the previous one. That is assuming the mobo hasnt had a failure of sorts and that you manage to sell the r3 1200 to begin with. And you know what a gtx 1050ti goes for today? Not a lot. You get gtx 1060 3GB or rx570 for around 70$. And the 1050ti from what ive seen doesnt sell for more than 60. 

 

And that is today.

2 hours ago, jerubedo said:

but that I can't play on the way I want until I save more money and throw in more parts. The difference between the 2200g (while it is capable) vs the 1050 Ti is sometimes the difference of 30 FPS vs 60 FPS.

 

See here for vega 11 (not even 8 ) vs the 1050 Ti

You can very much play on the vega 8. Its the perfect stop gap system to upgrade. There is a reason why its the best approach to really low budget gaming and general systems

2 hours ago, jerubedo said:

don't know what else to say but in my opinion I'd be happier with better than console performance right now as opposed to some machine that "is better build quality

Excepts its not better than a console (playstation Pro can be had for the same ammount of money with a game bundle). And its the same experience as a cheap desktop from 2010 with it being sluggish at every single task you ask it to do. 

 

Its not just better build quality. It has more features, more upgradability, bettter resale value and better reliability than literally the worst board on the market. A CPU with no desktop workload for easy resale and a GPU that is constantly droping in price dramatically. Unless you are getting really lucky in a scam, i would find that 200$ is the max you will get. Selling the whole system as a bundle as tge oarts alone would be harder to sell. 

 

2 hours ago, jerubedo said:

it has them wait on performance instead of having it right now

You get OK performance to begin with. And you start with a build "10 times" as good for the user experience and you end up with a build way better than the other one even with the case of a rebuild. And that is based on the resale of a system. 

2 hours ago, jerubedo said:

all for some grand idea that the VRMs and the caps are better, that upgrade paths are the best thing for everyone, and that not having to wait an extra few seconds for an app to load is the more important that a huge gain in FPS.

You need to wait a few second for a tab to respond after being idle. Wait for word to open. There will be a lot of pagefiling ruining a allready poor experience.

 

And the VRMs are bad on that MSI biard. Heck they were notoriously bad on B350 boards. And they will be the first to go. And i dont like to spout about hardware failure, but these A series board really are a dissaster. 

 

Not inly that you get limited ports with bo chance to upgrade Ram. Meanign resale value of the awful board drops again.

 

An equivelent system today on the used market would cost about 200$. That would be a 3rd gen desktop with a hd7950 and a new PSU. And the 1050ti doesnt not have. Much better standing than the hd 7950. 

[GoldenLag]

@jerubedo i ca respect a focus in frames. But not when you go ahead taring the system appart achieving it

[jerubedo]

2 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

And you know what a gtx 1050ti goes for today? Not a lot. You get gtx 1060 3GB or rx570 for around 70$. And the 1050ti from what ive seen doesnt sell for more than 60. 

That's why you sell it as a whole system only, not parts in this case.

 

3 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Oh boy, the VRMs will be the first to go in that system.

Again, baseless claim with no data.

 

3 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

You start with a system that is sluggish and in constant beed of repair

Subjective. I wouldn't call it sluggish and I'd say the experience is perfectly acceptable. We're talking the difference of a matter of seconds on load times for applications and game loading. 

 

5 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

You can very much play on the vega 8.

Oh please. Even Vega 11 as shown in that video is barely playable. For someone looking for 720p performance at low settings maybe, but who wants to do that?

 

6 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Excepts its not better than a console (playstation Pro can be had for the same ammount of money with a game bundle). And its the same experience as a cheap desktop from 2010 with it being sluggish at every single task you ask it to do. 

Calling a console sluggish is ridiculous. And no the Pro is still an inferior experience because games are locked to 30 FPS. At least on PC you can tone down some settings and still hit 60.

 

9 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

You need to wait a few second for a tab to respond after being idle. Wait for word to open. There will be a lot of pagefiling ruining a allready poor experience.

Super exaggeration here. A few seconds for a tab? No. On my upstairs computer it's on an HDD and I can refresh a page and wait no more than 1 second. A new tab takes 1.5 seconds. Word opens in 7.5 seconds. Page filling rarely happens.

 

[jerubedo]

20 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

@jerubedo i ca respect a focus in frames. But not when you go ahead taring the system appart achieving it

JayzTwoCentz recommended THIS YEAR getting an HDD instead of an SSD if the budget was too tight and you needed to spend the least amount possible. He also, in his budget build late 2017, used an EVGA 430w 80+ unit alongside a Gigabyte A320m-HD2.

[GoldenLag]

7 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Again, baseless claim with no data.

I would reffer to the failure of AM3 boards and the total lack of care and time put into B series boards and A series boards. But lets be happy these types of boards sell poorly enough that its hard to build data.

10 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Oh please. Even Vega 11 as shown in that video is barely playable. For someone looking for 720p performance at low settings maybe, but who wants to do that?

A lot of people not neccesarly you. Tweaking with setting is something you will have to do anyway. 

11 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Subjective. I wouldn't call it sluggish and I'd say the experience is perfectly acceptable. We're talking the difference of a matter of seconds on load times for applications and game loading

But say hello to page filing. Not only makes it the slower load times worse. It quickly degrades any normal usage aswell as pagefiling is very common in 8GB of Ram systems.

13 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Super exaggeration here. A few seconds for a tab? No. On my upstairs computer it's on an HDD and I can refresh a page and wait no more than 1 second. A new tab takes 1.5 seconds. Word opens in 7.5 seconds. Page filling rarely happens.

It will take a second. And while you might be fine with pagefiling it certainly slows down the system. And pagediling does happen. And it happens a lot. 

 

Do you have more than 4 chrome tabs open? Well you will most likely start to pagefile. Opened a game? Instant pagefile. It happens, and it happens a lot. 

15 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Calling a console sluggish is ridiculous. And no the Pro is still an inferior experience because games are locked to 30 FPS. At least on PC you can tone down some settings and still hit 60.

Its a constant 30 fps on upscaled 4k. Its a more constant optimized experience. And you do not have to deal with a poor motherboard and resale is more or less constant as the PS4 Pro will be forwards compatible with the PS5 (Based on Sony statements)

6 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

JayzTwoCentz recommended THIS YEAR getting an HDD instead of an SSD if the budget was too tight and you needed to spend the least amount possible. He also, in his budget build late 2017, used an EVGA 430w 80+ unit alongside a Gigabyte A320m-HD2.

Well....... Remind me to write down not to look towards Jayz (not a wellknown budget PC compiler) for budget recommendations. Also late 2017 we still had a GPU crisis and a very high nand flash crisis. 

 

And him suggesting a A series board is hobestly a crime. B series board being very cheap at the time 

[jerubedo]

2 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

I would reffer to the failure of AM3 boards and the total lack of care and time put into B series boards and A series boards. But lets be happy these types of boards sell poorly enough that its hard to build data. 

That was TEN years ago.

 

3 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

But say hello to page filing. Not only makes it the slower load times worse. It quickly degrades any normal usage aswell as pagefiling is very common in 8GB of Ram systems.

No it's not as common as you make it sound. Only in the most demanding titles that use more than 8GB which is still rare.

 

4 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Do you have more than 4 chrome tabs open?

No of course not. I use on average 3 tabs at once like a human being. I'm not one of those people that have 15+ tabs open like a maniac.

 

5 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Its a constant 30 fps on upscaled 4k. Its a more constant optimized experience.

30 FPS is a horrid experience on any resolution. Come on now.

 

6 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Well....... Remind me to write down not to look towards Jayz (not a wellknown budget PC compiler) for budget recommendations. Also late 2017 we still had a GPU crisis and a very high nand flash crisis. 

 

And him suggesting a A series board is hobestly a crime. B series board being very cheap at the time 

Yeah sure, tear down minor celebrities now who are well known and established within the tech community just because he made a recommendation not aligning with your elitist view on how a PC should be built and how everyone else should think. YOU obviously care a lot more about load times than FPS whereas most people would be the opposite. You care about upgradeability when many people want a one and done experience anyway. You want the peace of mind of having a "better" motherboard even though most people wouldn't ever know the difference and would be happy in ignorant bliss while enjoying the system and NOT having the motherboard die.

[GoldenLag]

Just now, jerubedo said:

That was TEN years ago.

And the year today is 2019 i believe. And we still have garbo hardware around. Hardware designed with more care than the B and A series boards.

1 minute ago, jerubedo said:

No it's not as common as you make it sound. Only in the most demanding titles that use more than 8GB which is still rare

As someone who use 8GB every day. It pagefiles all the time. 

 

And if the title doesnt use 8GB of ram. U be sure it pagefiles everything in the background. Whohoo for a good experience. 

 

3 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

No of course not. I use on average 3 tabs at once like a human being. I'm not one of those people that have 15+ tabs open like a maniac.

I also use roughly 3 tabs similtaniusly. Still instantly get pagefiling while a game is open. Abd its not uncommon to have 6 tabs open at the time.

4 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

30 FPS is a horrid experience on any resolution. Come on now.

I think roughly 70% of console gamers would disagree. They find the experience to be excellent. 

5 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

Yeah sure, tear down minor celebrities now who are well known and established within the tech community just because he made a recommendation not aligning with your elitist view on how a PC should be built and how everyone else should think. 

Wait.... Im elitist for not wanting to push frames and wanting someone to not waste their money on a poor experience?

 

And Jayz is failry large, but its not as if most of these creators keep up with the market every day while trying to create a good experience. 

7 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

YOU obviously care a lot more about load times than FPS whereas most people would be the opposite. You care about upgradeability when many people want a one and done experience anyway

I care about people having a good experience

 

And you attempt to shame me on the basis of making assumptions about what he wants while creating a poor system experience while assuming a lot yourself?

 

And if he want a quick experience. A console is way better than your build. 

10 minutes ago, jerubedo said:

You want the peace of mind of having a "better" motherboard even though most people wouldn't ever know the difference and would be happy in ignorant bliss while enjoying the system and NOT having the motherboard die.

Sounds like the exact same aegument people who recommend poor PSUs use. Does it mean buying a poor PSU is a good idea? Nope. Should people buy poor PSUs because of it? Nope. Do they save 10-20$ to put towards a inballanced system with? Yes.

 

And yes, i had a worse nights sleep knowing you were suggesting such horrid Tom's hardware level build on the forum to people who have a really tight budget. 

[jerubedo]

1 minute ago, GoldenLag said:

 

All we're doing is going in circles. You obviously prefer to have peace of mind about nothing and a poorer gaming experience with Microsoft Word opening a little quicker than to have 60 FPS 1080p with good settings. I prefer the 1080p 60 FPS experience. So agree to disagree.

[GoldenLag]

1 hour ago, jerubedo said:

All we're doing is going in circles. You obviously prefer to have peace of mind about nothing and a poorer gaming experience with Microsoft Word opening a little quicker than to have 60 FPS 1080p with good settings. I prefer the 1080p 60 FPS experience. So agree to disagree.

Yes i oreffer not wrecking the system tl fit a GPU. Abd knowibg i havent recommended a horrid userexperience to a person on a strict budget. 

 

I can agree with min-maxing. But not with system that have bad components and create a bad userexperience