6 Years Since My Last PC Build

[DarthNeo1964]

I know this question has been asked before but I will ask it one more time.  If I want to build a gaming rig, AMD or INTEL?

 

If I want to play games at the highest graphic settings, AMD or Nvidia?

 

If my budget is $1500, what would be my best configuration.

 

If I decide to keep my current rig a bit longer, what upgrades would you recommend?

 

Current Rig:  i-2500K - 212+ - Sabertooth P67 - EVGA GTX 970 SSC  - 8GB Ram - HAF 932 

[DarthNeo1964]

Correction - 7 years since my initial build, the only thing I changed was the video card about 2 years ago...

[AskTJ]

Intel and Nvidia.

 

8700k with a 1080ti, and 16GB of ram and your set really.

[chckovsky]

For 100% gaming, no workloads etc, Intel is likely the way to go, at least for now. However for you upgrade prices will be extreme, as RAM is two to three times as expensive now compared to a year ago (in my country). Motherboards aren't cheap either. I'd stick with my 2500K for as long as it runs.

 

Ryzen 2 showed slightly increased clock speeds, but Intel is still ahead in that area. However Zen 2 (not Ryzen 2) will be at 10nm, and AMD will most likely be ahead of Intel in that aspect. I actually wouldn't be surprise if AMD came to lead the consumer gaming cpu market around 2020, but we'll see if that happens and eventually for how long.

 

As for GPU - currently only AMD Vega can somewhat rival 1070, 1070ti, 1080 and 1080ti - and those are soooo overpriced and impossible to get a hold of because they are so good at mining (at least in my country). My best bets would be anything 1070 or above.

 

You should identify where your current system is lacking at the moment. Different games have different bottlenecks. CSGO is mostly CPU intensive while something like the Witcher 3 is almost completely GPU bound on modern systems. Use MSI afterburner to see where your system is maxing, and where there is room for more performance while running your games. DDR3 is very cheap used (and to some extent, new) now that most are upgrading to DDR4 systems. 8GB is starting to become a bit limited these days.

[chckovsky]

Oh and there is no point in "upgrading" to a 1060, as it's only barely higher performance than your 970.

 

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-970-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1060-6GB/2577vs3639

[DarthNeo1964]

Just now, chckovsky said:

Oh and there is no point in "upgrading" to a 1060, as it's only barely higher performance than your 970.

 

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-970-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1060-6GB/2577vs3639

My 2500K is not overclocked? Would that help?  And I do have DDR3 Ram, Should I go to 16GB?

[McHox]

i'd upgrade to a 8700k, see where that leaves you budget wise
then maybe wait and see what computex brings for gpu's

[Justin2Justin14]

15 minutes ago, chckovsky said:

Oh and there is no point in "upgrading" to a 1060, as it's only barely higher performance than your 970.

 

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-970-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1060-6GB/2577vs3639

If you overclock i can get on par proformance with a 980!

[chckovsky]

4 minutes ago, DarthNeo1964 said:

My 2500K is not overclocked? Would that help?  And I do have DDR3 Ram, Should I go to 16GB?

It depends. If you have an overclockable motherboard (z-77 or z87 i think for the 2500k) you could try that. That may give you a nice boost to performance but it may force you to buy a better cooling solution for yor CPU, as overclocking generally means more heat is generated. Overclocking an odler chip will also send it to it's grave faster, but the 2nd gen core-series already have 5 sucessors (well, 4 if you don't count broadwell as it wasn't wide spread).

 

I'd say yes, you should upgrade to 16GB IF you run into problems with full RAM when in game. Far from all games utilize more than 8GB RAM in-game (including windows and background tasks). Keep in mind for optimal performance you can't just buy any second set of DDR3 and add it to your system. It needs to be THE same, (not just make/model but model number as well) so it's often better to just buy a 16 GB set (which isn't expensive at all).

 

But please, do research, find out what ways your system is underperforming. Don't just buy the latest and greatest (unless you actually do have cash for that).

[chckovsky]

3 minutes ago, Justin2Justin14 said:

If you overclock i can get on par proformance with a 980!

Sort of. Keep in mind the 4GB version of the 970 isn't actaully 4GB, but 3,5GB. It's an architecture thing, where disabling certains components to make a xx70 variant from a sub optimal xx80 card, also disables half a GB of GDDR5.

 

Also, you need a case of serious airflow and a setup that allows for loud fans for this to be safe and efficient.

[DarthNeo1964]

2 minutes ago, chckovsky said:

Sort of. Keep in mind the 4GB version of the 970 isn't actaully 4GB, but 3,5GB. It's an architecture thing, where disabling certains components to make a xx70 variant from a sub optimal xx80 card, also disables half a GB of GDDR5.

 

Also, you need a case of serious airflow and a setup that allows for loud fans for this to be safe and efficient.

It's only within the last 2 years that I cannot play games at ULTRA settings.  I think I did I pretty good job of building a "future proof" rig SEVEN years ago.  How long do you think most GAMERS stick with a rig?

[chckovsky]

Most (casual) gamers buy laptops these days it seems, at least in my country. So roughly one to three years. However, I bought the 7700K this november. I'm not upgrading that before DDR5 is mainstream, which will likely be 2022 if one can belive certain memory manufacturers. I think most gamers spend what they have, and more often than not, that's not enough for a rig that is relevant for 5+ years IMO. We'll see how games are developed the next few years. I will way that computing power seems to have evolved more drastically from 2006-2012 than it has 2012-2018. Maybe that changes now that Intel has a worthy competitor?