Is there a BIG difference in a $2000 and $3000 PC?

[PCMR Ricos]

Before, DON'T COMMENT ANSWERS LIKE "YES" or "NO", I want reasons and facts about your opinion.

 

Lets say, I build a PC, in paper the $3000 will have more fps in gaming and better rendering time (5 seconds?)

But, is it really worth it, since after 60 fps if you don't have a 144hz monitor you will not see difference (only input lag)

And Is it worth it spending that much for 5 seconds difference?

 

And, what is your "sweet budget"?

 

P.S. I just like to hear other peoples opinions, It's not like i'm a newbie.

 

[SwiftCraftmc]

Not really, if your limit is 60fps on a monitor then there is no point in getting anything that will be over 60hz and quicker rendering is useless unless you are tight on time or you are made of money there would be no point.

[saladcrack]

I doubt it would make a huge difference unless you want to run like dual Titans or Triple 1080s maybe for some smooth 4k but even then meh.  My sweet budget is around $2000.

[Matias_Chambers]

There wont be a significant difference in performance. You might for example be able to get a 6900K instead of 6800K which wont make a huge difference but will still make a noticeable difference in rendering. Not for gaming though. I would say 2500$ is a good budget, you can afford a Titan XP without cheaping out on other parts. For 3000$ you will get things like faster storage and more RAM which wont make a big difference. 

[Sauron]

Hmm, the question doesn't make a lot of sense - you can buy a 3000$ mac and have lower fps than you would on a 1500$ pc (not a comment on macs being overpriced, just an example of a machine not built for games).

[APasz]

It's a game of diminishing returns. The difference between a 2000 and 3000 pc is normally the little things, you know, creature comforts.

[minibois]

I would say no, because the difference between 2K and 3K would probably be mostly aesthetics, extras like custom watercooling, going for an even higher end CPU (like going from LGA 1151 to LGA 2011-3, which is not a difference for most) and maybe going from 1 to 2 GPU's, which is always a huge gamble (with not all games liking SLI/XFire).

A 2K USD budget fits a 6700K and GTX 1080 nicely, with good coolers on both. 3K allows you to get another GTX 1080 and step up to a 6800K.

 

Best bang for buck lies somewhere in the price range where you either get:

1. an i5 6500 and RX 480

2. an i5 6600K and GTX 1070

3. Low end stuff like an i3 6100 paired with GTX 1050 Ti/RX 460

[PCMR Ricos]

4 minutes ago, SwiftCraftmc said:

Not really, if your limit is 60fps on a monitor then there is no point in getting anything that will be over 60hz and quicker rendering is useless unless you are tight on time or you are made of money there would be no point.

Even with a 144hz monitor, is the $1000 really worth it?

[SwiftCraftmc]

Just now, PCMR Ricos said:

Even with a 144hz monitor, is the $1000 really worth it?

Not really, unless you are a competitive csgo player there isn't a point

[PCMR Ricos]

6 minutes ago, Gamessys said:

I doubt it would make a huge difference unless you want to run like dual Titans or Triple 1080s maybe for some smooth 4k but even then meh.  My sweet budget is around $2000.

 

6 minutes ago, Matias_Chambers said:

There wont be a significant difference in performance. You might for example be able to get a 6900K instead of 6800K which wont make a huge difference but will still make a noticeable difference in rendering. Not for gaming though. I would say 2500$ is a good budget, you can afford a Titan XP without cheaping out on other parts. For 3000$ you will get things like faster storage and more RAM which wont make a big difference. 

 

5 minutes ago, Minibois said:

I would say no, because the difference between 2K and 3K would probably be mostly aesthetics, extras like custom watercooling, going for an even higher end CPU (like going from LGA 1151 to LGA 2011-3, which is not a difference for most) and maybe going from 1 to 2 GPU's, which is always a huge gamble (with not all games liking SLI/XFire).

A 2K USD budget fits a 6700K and GTX 1080 nicely, with good coolers on both. 3K allows you to get another GTX 1080 and step up to a 6800K.

 

Best bang for buck lies somewhere in the price range where you either get:

1. an i5 6500 and RX 480

2. an i5 6600K and GTX 1070

3. Low end stuff like an i3 6100 paired with GTX 1050 Ti/RX 460

 

3 minutes ago, CoolJ S.A.S. said:

If we're talking gaming, absolutely.  There's a lot of things you can do, such as adding another card. Having better storage setups for example makes a big difference, and can really change the experience. Load times are more important than I think people give it credit. For example, it can really help with a games flow. You could do bigger ram disks if that's something you wanted to do, you could go with a better monitor.  An extra $1000 bucks can go a long way depending on what your starting point is and what you want out of your experience.

 

To you three, is it worth it going from an I5 to an I7, even on rendering, waiting 1 more minute?

[Drak3]

In the high end, unless one specifically needs the more expensive hardware, it's rarely worth it or a good value.

Ie. If I were to buy a Quadro M6000 or Titan XP to play GTA V, as opposed to using my RX 470. Sure, I'd see better performance, but not enough to justify spending thousands.

[PCMR Ricos]

11 minutes ago, SwiftCraftmc said:

Not really, if your limit is 60fps on a monitor then there is no point in getting anything that will be over 60hz and quicker rendering is useless unless you are tight on time or you are made of money there would be no point.

 

1 minute ago, PCMR Ricos said:

 

 

 

To you three, is it worth it going from an I5 to an I7, even on rendering, waiting 1 more minute?

question to you ^^

[PCMR Ricos]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

In the high end, unless one specifically needs the more expensive hardware, it's rarely worth it or a good value.

Ie. If I were to buy a Quadro M6000 or Titan XP to play GTA V, as opposed to using my RX 470. Sure, I'd see better performance, but not enough to justify spending thousands.

In your opinion, is the extra worth it for the minimal perfomance? I7 GTX1080 vs i5 GTX 1070

[Matias_Chambers]

Just now, PCMR Ricos said:

 

 

 

To you three, is it worth it going from an I5 to an I7, even on rendering, waiting 1 more minute?

Yes even for gaming especially if you have a high end GPU. i5's are pinned close to 100% in many games and with an i7 you will have less stuttering and smoother gameplay. It's not really worth going X99 over a 6700K unless you do video editing or something like that as a job or constantly. 

[minibois]

5 minutes ago, PCMR Ricos said:

 

 

 

To you three, is it worth it going from an I5 to an I7, even on rendering, waiting 1 more minute?

If the things you do benefit (even slightly) from the extra threads, it is worth considering. If it is worth the extra 100 USD, that is highly dependent on the budget you have at hand.

Generally I would say, if you do only gaming: go for an i5. If you do game streaming, video editing, 3D Modeling or something close to that: consider an i7 and see if it fits in your budget.

 

A Xeon can also be an interesting buy, but I don't think that is available on the LGA 1151 platform (yet?)

[PCMR Ricos]

2 minutes ago, wrathoftheturkey said:

Nah, even casual gamers swear by the smoothness of 144Hz

 

I say it depends. There's no hardware out there that can max out triple A titles at 4k, so in that sense getting better hardware (say a 6700k and a 1080) definitely helps. But once you've got those and a decent SSD then you're pretty much at the performance limit of modern hardware without throwing money down the drain (like you might for an expensive water cooler, PCIe NVME SSD or a Titan

In rendering and doing professional work as a HOBBY, is it really worth it? 4K ins't really worth it, just some more pixels and that's it.

[Matias_Chambers]

Just now, wrathoftheturkey said:

There's no hardware out there that can max out triple A titles at 4k

Dual 1080's or Titan XP's should do the job  

[Matias_Chambers]

Just now, PCMR Ricos said:

In rendering and doing professional work as a HOBBY, is it really worth it? 4K ins't really worth it, just some more pixels and that's it.

I would at least get a 6700K for stuff like that. You can find yourself limited with an i5. 

[Drak3]

Just now, PCMR Ricos said:

In your opinion, is the extra worth it for the minimal perfomance? I7 GTX1080 vs i5 GTX 1070

Well, the i7 is in a position to last a considerable deal longer than the i5, and for multitasking during gaming (streaming, having multiple tabs in a web browser open, etc.). People have also been claiming that the i5's are bottlenecking the 1070 and 1080 (although it seems that it is only occurring at 1080p).

 

Personally, I'd go i7 and 1070. The 1080 isn't poised to last long as 4K gaming becomes more common and panel prices drop, so you could take the money you save and put it towards a more powerful GPU in a generation or two.

[PCMR Ricos]

3 minutes ago, Minibois said:

If the things you do benefit (even slightly) from the extra threads, it is worth considering. If it is worth the extra 100 USD, that is highly dependent on the budget you have at hand.

Generally I would say, if you do only gaming: go for an i5. If you do game streaming, video editing, 3D Modeling or something close to that: consider an i7 and see if it fits in your budget.

 

A Xeon can also be an interesting buy, but I don't think that is available on the LGA 1151 platform (yet?)

I can spend up to £3000, however when I buy it i'll not look at spending cash down the drain. I want something that is good, however I don't mind waiting extra 10 minutes on rendering as I do it for fun.

[acturisme]

I'd go for the $2000 pc and then get the nice extras like a good monitor with some nice studio monitor speakers and a nice desk.  Just my $0.02.

[PCMR Ricos]

5 minutes ago, Matias_Chambers said:

I would at least get a 6700K for stuff like that. You can find yourself limited with an i5. 

 

4 minutes ago, CoolJ S.A.S. said:

I haven't actually gone through it myself, so I can only speak on what I've read, but it seems so. But I think it also depends on what's important to you and how much $2000-$3000 is worth to you too. If render times are important, then probably. I don't know the value you place on the price range you given. If could be a lot of money, a lot of money for a computer, or a lot of money for stuff you don't need, etc. But without knowing how you view the price range you have it's hard to say. I have friends I've recommended the highest end GPU (for example) to some friends whom had budgets that other people would say "is a waste" but I knew they valued the performance gain, no matter how little it was. I made sure they knew what they were getting into, and that's still what they wanted. 

 

4 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Well, the i7 is in a position to last a considerable deal longer than the i5, and for multitasking during gaming (streaming, having multiple tabs in a web browser open, etc.). People have also been claiming that the i5's are bottlenecking the 1070 and 1080 (although it seems that it is only occurring at 1080p).

 

Personally, I'd go i7 and 1070. The 1080 isn't poised to last long as 4K gaming becomes more common and panel prices drop, so you could take the money you save and put it towards a more powerful GPU in a generation or two.

P.S. And wouldn't it be wiser if I spend on an I5 and upgrade it every 2 years?

Update: I do really low end video editing. And games aren't really taxing (CS:GO, GTA (rare), and play new games rarely.)

[minibois]

5 minutes ago, PCMR Ricos said:

I can spend up to £3000, however when I buy it i'll not look at spending cash down the drain. I want something that is good, however I don't mind waiting extra 10 minutes on rendering as I do it for fun.

Keep in mind everyone, up until this point, thought you were talking about US Dollars, not GBP. GBP is worth a bit more in PC components.

Anyways, I would just recommend an i7 6700K setup. It will be faster in a couple years (when more and more software start using more threads) and even know when multitasking it will help. It will allow you to render a video at full speed while also doing some editing or gaming, instead of completely stopping your system.

I would probably not recommend spending more than around 1700 GBP on a PC, as the money saved will be much more useful in terms of upgrades in the future (or peripherals and such now)

[Matias_Chambers]

Just now, PCMR Ricos said:

 

 

P.S. And wouldn't it be wiser if I spend on an I5 and upgrade it every 2 years?

Not imo. I think it's worth the extra 100$ for an i7. I would wait for AMD Ryzen as it should offer more options on the market and push prices down. 

[PCMR Ricos]

2 minutes ago, Minibois said:

Keep in mind everyone, up until this point, thought you were talking about US Dollars, not GBP. GBP is worth a bit more in PC components.

Anyways, I would just recommend an i7 6700K setup. It will be faster in a couple years (when more and more software start using more threads) and even know when multitasking it will help. It will allow you to render a video at full speed while also doing some editing or gaming, instead of completely stopping your system.

I would probably not recommend spending more than around 1700 GBP on a PC, as the money saved will be much more useful in terms of upgrades in the future (or peripherals and such now)

Best answer! Really helpful!

 

2 minutes ago, Matias_Chambers said:

Not imo. I think it's worth the extra 100$ for an i7. I would wait for AMD Ryzen as it should offer more options on the market and push prices down. 

Really good answer too, thanks!