This VS That

[GeekJump]

I've been asking on here and other forums about a build for my bro and now I have one person saying my build is worse than his suggestions for the price ($850 range)

 

Mine: (after local sales its near budget)

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/Q7yghq

His/Her:

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ggMCKZ

 

It looks like he sacrificed in other areas to squeeze the 1070 in there. Just want some other opinions before I hit the point of no return. sidenote: unless there is a significant price drop, my brother will be using a 1080p monitor for the next few years.

[RevoltTrain]

1 minute ago, GeekJump said:

I've been asking on here and other forums about a build for my bro and now I have one person saying my build is worse than his suggestions for the price ($850 range)

 

Mine: (after local sales its near budget)

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/Q7yghq

His/Her:

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ggMCKZ

 

It looks like he sacrificed in other areas to squeeze the 1070 in there. Just want some other opinions before I hit the point of no return. sidenote: unless there is a significant price drop, my brother will be using a 1080p monitor for the next few years.

Personally I'd go with yours. All around better system

[gtx1060=value]

I agree with @RevoltTrain - while the other person does have a 1070, the ssd (btw get an adata one, ssd plus is crap, but x4000 is better) and overclockability makes it better, and besides, the 480 is enough for any game

[Shiv78]

For 1080p the 7600K system is better. 7500 can limit a 1070

[The Sloth]

2 minutes ago, Shiv78 said:

For 1080p the 7600K system is better. 7500 can limit a 1070

a 7600k can also bottleneck a 1070 depending on the game. 

[dizmo]

Your build is better.

A system without an SSD just seems barbaric these days.

If you're playing at 1080p, a 480 is more than enough.

1 minute ago, nerdslayer1 said:

a 7600k can also bottleneck a 1070 depending on the game. 

Proof?

[Enderman]

The other PC has a better PSU and will get much higher performance.

What sucks about it is no SSD.

[gtx1060=value]

Just now, Enderman said:

The other PC has a better PSU and will get much higher performance.

What sucks about it is no SSD.

how does a s12II beat a cxm???

[Enderman]

1 minute ago, gtx1060=value said:

how does a s12II beat a cxm???

The cheap corsair PSUs don't have a great reputation if you look at reviews.

[gtx1060=value]

Just now, Enderman said:

The cheap corsair PSUs don't have a great reputation if you look at reviews.

then we ask @STRMfrmXMN and @Energycore

[GeekJump]

2 minutes ago, Enderman said:

The other PC has a better PSU and will get much higher performance.

What sucks about it is no SSD.

but would he see a difference on the screen? The 1070 could get +100FPS in games but on the monitor he has he wont see it.

[The Sloth]

Just now, dizmo said:

Your build is better.

A system without an SSD just seems barbaric these days.

If you're playing at 1080p, a 480 is more than enough.

Proof?

 

your kidding right? 

 

 

[Shiv78]

2 minutes ago, Enderman said:

The other PC has a better PSU and will get much higher performance.

What sucks about it is no SSD.

What? CPU performance on OP's build is better, but GPU on the other is better

 

CXM and S12ii are both Tier 3 and of similar quality

[Enderman]

3 minutes ago, Shiv78 said:

What? CPU performance on OP's build is better, but GPU on the other is better

 

CXM and S12ii are both Tier 3 and of similar quality

The CPU performance is not a very big difference, they are both 4 core 4 thread CPUs on the same architecture.

i5 vs i7 would be an actually significant difference. 7500 vs 7600k is not. Why do you think so many people went with the 6500 instead of 6600k for budget builds?

Even if you argue overclocking will make more difference, a 212 evo is barely enough for a few hundred MHz overclock.

 

The difference in games will be minimal, maybe a few fps.

The difference between a 480 and a 1070 is huge.

 

PS- I would trust a seasonic PSU way more than corsair.

[GeekJump]

14 minutes ago, gtx1060=value said:

I agree with @RevoltTrain - while the other person does have a 1070, the ssd (btw get an adata one, ssd plus is crap, but x4000 is better) and overclockability makes it better, and besides, the 480 is enough for any game

That ssd is arriving tomorrow :3...I did it for the price. $15 difference b/w the two 120 GB versions at the time of ordering.

3 minutes ago, Enderman said:

The CPU performance is not a very big difference, they are both 4 core 4 thread CPUs on the same architecture.

i5 vs i7 would be an actually significant difference. 7500 vs 7600k is not. Why do you think so many people went with the 6500 instead of 6600k for budget builds?

Even if you argue overclocking will make more difference, a 212 evo is barely enough for a few hundred MHz overclock.

 

The difference in games will be minimal, maybe a few fps.

The difference between a 480 and a 1070 is huge.

 

PS- I would trust a seasonic PSU way more than corsair.

I did look at a seasonic but went with the corsair for aesthetics since the lower prices seasonics have the mustard/ketchup cables. I knew some of the low end corsair psu had negative reviews before but this one has mainly positive.

 

the gpu power difference is huge but is the step up worth it if he can't see it? Most likely by the time he upgrades his monitor, Nvidia would release new cards.

[Enderman]

Just now, GeekJump said:

That ssd is arriving tomorrow :3...I did it for the price. $15 difference b/w the two 120 GB versions at the time of ordering.

I did look at a seasonic but went with the corsair for aesthetics since the lower prices seasonics have the mustard/ketchup cables. I knew some of the low end corsair psu had negative reviews before but this one has mainly positive.

 

the gpu power difference is huge but is the step up worth it if he can't see it? Most likely by the time he upgrades his monitor, Nvidia would release new cards.

You can feel the difference even if your fps is higher than your monitors refresh rate.

You can also see the difference when you turn your quality settings to high or ultra which the 480 cannot do on many triple A or other intensive games.

[dizmo]

16 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

your kidding right? 

 

 

What am I supposed to be gathering from this video?
The 6700k beats the 6600k by only 8 fps. It's also clocked 500mhz higher.

[The Sloth]

Just now, dizmo said:

What am I supposed to be gathering from this video?
The 6700k beats the 6600k by only 8 fps. It's also clocked 500mhz higher.

 

look at other benchmarks of other games. 

[DarkBlade2117]

28 minutes ago, gtx1060=value said:

I agree with @RevoltTrain - while the other person does have a 1070, the ssd (btw get an adata one, ssd plus is crap, but x4000 is better) and overclockability makes it better, and besides, the 480 is enough for any game

Can vouch for SSD plus being junk. IT certainly is noticeable compared to HDD but not nearly as good compared to other budget SSDs

[GeekJump]

4 minutes ago, Enderman said:

You can feel the difference even if your fps is higher than your monitors refresh rate.

You can also see the difference when you turn your quality settings to high or ultra which the 480 cannot do on many triple A or other intensive games.

What do you mean (the 2nd line), the stuff I looked at says the 480 can handle games at high settings +60 fps. 

 

3 minutes ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

Can vouch for SSD plus being junk. IT certainly is noticeable compared to HDD but not nearly as good compared to other budget SSDs

poop waffles. Well I can return it without a loss. What would be your recommendation?

[Enderman]

1 minute ago, GeekJump said:

What do you mean (the 2nd line), the stuff I looked at says the 480 can handle games at high settings +60 fps. 

I mean A) it's better to have 120 fps than 60fps even if your monitor is only 60Hz and B) not all games will run at high settings over 60fps, there are games where the 480 will need to run at medium or will run below 60fps on high. You cna go look at benchmarks to find out what games.

[dizmo]

5 minutes ago, nerdslayer1 said:

look at other benchmarks of other games. 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/22

 

Shows an even smaller gap between them. Virtually non-existant difference though, so given advance with the 1070, likely the same 8 - 10 fps.

Just as I said.

 

So again, where's the bottleneck that's supposed to be so bad you shouldn't get the cheaper chip?

 

[GeekJump]

2 minutes ago, Enderman said:

I mean A) it's better to have 120 fps than 60fps even if your monitor is only 60Hz and B) not all games will run at high settings over 60fps, there are games where the 480 will need to run at medium or will run below 60fps on high. You cna go look at benchmarks to find out what games.

So between the two builds in post one you would pick the 1070 build? Because with a $850 budget I can fit a 1070 but would need to do something similar to his and remove things like a cpu cooler and ssd.

[Enderman]

1 minute ago, GeekJump said:

So between the two builds in post one you would pick the 1070 build? Because with a $850 budget I can fit a 1070 but would need to do something similar to his and remove things like a cpu cooler and ssd.

Have you considered buying a used 1070 and having more money for the other stuff?

[The Sloth]

4 minutes ago, dizmo said:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/22

 

Shows an even smaller gap between them. Virtually non-existant difference though, so given advance with the 1070, likely the same 8 - 10 fps.

Just as I said.

 

So again, where's the bottleneck that's supposed to be so bad you shouldn't get the cheaper chip?