Need help deciding upon computer parts

[Woodzyowl]

So I already have most of my computer, but I'm still missing some crucial parts (the motherboard, the processor, and maybe an SSD, how much more crucial can it get?). I was wondering, if price was not a big issue, what the best computer parts for the price I could get for a middle-range gaming computer would be. I've been looking at the i7-2700k for my processor, but I think that might be overkill. As for motherboards and the possible SSD, I have no clue what to get. Surprise me.

The games I play are:
Skyrim
Audiosurf
League of Legends
Minecraft
DotA 2
Warcraft 3

And I intend on getting more eventually. Also, for current specs:
Old MSI motherboard (replacing)
Pentium Dual 2.6 GHz (replacing)
4 Gb DDR2 800 RAM (already have 8gb DDR3 1600, maybe I need more?)
Creative Soundblaster Xtreme Gamer
AMD Radeon HD 6870
1Tb WD Caviar Black 7200 RPM (might supplement)
500 watt PSU (could theoretically upgrade)
Generic 24x DVD burner
ASUS 20 in widescreen monitor

I realize that there may be better places to look this up, but I've looked at many of them, and think that I would rather have the opinion of the playground. Thanks in advance!

[Grinner]

You should establish a budget first.

Edit: A supplementary SSD is going to cost you around $100, maybe less.

I may have gotten ahead of myself. We still don't know your MoBo's specs.

[Woodzyowl]

... I was wondering, if price was not a big issue...

I guess, if I had to be more specific, I would say try not to jump over $600 or so for these parts (no i7-3960x for me, thank you). However, for a mid-range computer, I would expect that budget to be more than sufficient.

EDIT: I would rather like that motherboard to be compatible with my sound card (PCI) and graphics card (PCI express 2.1 x16).

[Grinner]

EDIT: I would rather like that motherboard to be compatible with my sound card (PCI) and graphics card (PCI express 2.1 x16).

That's the problem. Without specifications, I could end up telling you to order something which would invalidate all of your other hardware.

Really, the only time you need to order a new motherboard is when you're building a new computer, or you want specific features found on a compatible one, like an integrated RAID card.

[Woodzyowl]

What if it's using an LGA 775 socket? Therefore having no particularly good upgrade paths available at this point in time? Keep in mind, I'm probably not going to be getting these until Ivy Bridge comes out, so LGA 1155 seems to me like the best choice.

[Grinner]

Well, if you want to keep your graphics and audio cards, you'll need to make sure the new motherboard has PCIe 2.1 and DDR3 RAM slots.

Also, addressing your concerns about your RAM, if you have to choose between buying more RAM or an SSD, go with the SSD, though you should be fine with 8 GBs.

Edit: Just checked your audio card's specs. Do you have the PCI version?

I need to learn to read. :smallsigh:

Yeah, you'll probably have to scrap the audio card. Make sure the new motherboard has an integrated one.

Edit 2: Here's two (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813138338) motherboards (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131790). They have PCI slots too.

[factotum]

Are you married to the idea of going with Intel for your CPU? I know that Skyrim runs just fine on my triple-core AMD X3, and one of those is quite a bit cheaper than the equivalent Intel kit. Of course, if you have the extra money to spend, Intel is faster...I didn't have the money to spend, which is why I got what I did!

[tyckspoon]

It's been a while since I went over the latest news, but last time I was delving into this stuff the i5-2500k was the preferred build option (it looks like there's been a line update, so the 2550k would also be fine if you can't find a good deal on somebody clearing out a 2500.) The primary difference between the -500 and the -6/700 line is just Hyperthreading, which.. doesn't do a heck of a lot for games (or much else unless you're doing something like running a dedicated Folding@Home server.) Nothing wrong with running the 2700, but if you feel like saving a hundred bucks or so you don't really sacrifice anything meaningful with the 2500.

Motherboards: Don't know particular models right now, but: Make sure the features you want are on there. Like the others said, if you want to carry through your sound card make sure there's still an old-style PCI slot- they're not guaranteed these days. If you're considering ever moving to multi-GPU, you need the PCI-Express slots for those. At least 4 RAM slots. (8 GB of RAM is fine, btw. Any more is largely wasted, again excepting particular specialized uses or deep power-user tweaking.)

Brandwise, if you don't want to do a lot of tweaking the Intel boards are usually pretty solid but dull, and may/may not have many extras depending on whether or not Intel has decided to be progressive for this generation. If you want more exotic features and settings control, Gigabyte and ASUS do reliably good enthusiast/builder hobbyist boards. MSI is usually reasonable if you need to go a bit lower-budget. Most other brands, check reviews and see if the particular model you're looking at is well-received.

[Reluctance]

The new line of processors comes out in like a month. You're probably better off waiting for one of them. If nothing else, it'll mean you can get one of the current generation chips for cheaper.

Otherwise, I find it strange that you're married to your graphics card when that's the most important thing that games look at. You'd be better off with midrange other parts and a high-end GPU than vice versa.

[Woodzyowl]

I'm not completely averse to the idea of a new graphics card, it's just that I got this one relatively recently and I'm almost certain that the current bottlenecks on my computer are the RAM, the CPU, the motherboard, and maybe the hard drive. If I get the parts and find that a new graphics card is required, I'll get one, but it's not what's slowing me down.

Also, I have no problems with AMD, I just have heard that their new technology is lame and their old technology is, well, old. As for the new generation from Intel, that's exactly what I'm hoping for. Maybe I'll be able to snag an i5-2500k for under $200. Or perhaps I can get the replacement to the 2500k. Who knows.

And are SSDs really that much faster than HDDs? I might be able to live with my current hard drive if an SSD really doesn't make more than a 15 second boot up time decrease, or if it doesn't improve my frame rate in the aforementioned games by at least 5-10 fps.

[Grinner]

And are SSDs really that much faster than HDDs?

So I've heard. Assuming you get those DDR3 modules installed, an SSD slave drive would be one of the next best things you can get.

[tyckspoon]

I'm not completely averse to the idea of a new graphics card, it's just that I got this one relatively recently and I'm almost certain that the current bottlenecks on my computer are the RAM, the CPU, the motherboard, and maybe the hard drive. If I get the parts and find that a new graphics card is required, I'll get one, but it's not what's slowing me down.


The only thing on your current games list that might want a beefier card is Skyrim, and that's only if you decide you really want to push its graphics as high as they'll go and/or use a more graphically-intensive mod. (And possibly if you switch to a higher-resolution monitor if your current one doesn't support 1920.)


And are SSDs really that much faster than HDDs? I might be able to live with my current hard drive if an SSD really doesn't make more than a 15 second boot up time decrease, or if it doesn't improve my frame rate in the aforementioned games by at least 5-10 fps.

Yes, they are, although they target a very specific bottleneck. Moving things from HDD space to live RAM is the slowest procedure on most modern computers, and that's where an SSD really makes a difference. Program launches go a lot faster, bootup is usually improved notably (assuming you move your OS install to the SSD). Gamewise, the main difference is how much time you spend on loading screens (next to none from an SSD.) It won't make a bit of difference on the actual in-game performance. If you're keeping your startup procedure lean already, without very many launch-on-boot programs and services, then you probably can live without one.

[factotum]

Also, I have no problems with AMD, I just have heard that their new technology is lame and their old technology is, well, old.

Presumably by "new technology" you mean Bulldozer, which is generally considered to be fairly poor; however, the older AMD Phenom is hardly horrendously old--the AMD X3 in my machine first came out in October 2009, which is actually a month *after* the first Core i7 hit the shelves. Yes, the Intel chip will beat the AMD one in any benchmark you care to name, but we're not talking an order of magnitude difference here, and I did say you'd mainly go with the AMD solution to save money, which you could then use to improve other areas of your machine's performance. Doesn't help to have the fastest CPU if the rest of the machine drags it down!

[Reluctance]

My comment about graphics cards was mostly for after you'd done some basic updating. A mid-range i5 or even an i3 will get your processing needs out of the way, and the ram you have should eat everything you throw at it. High-end modern components aren't that necessary unless you're going all out. (E.G: The point of the K-series intel chips is their overclockability. Dedicated overclockers wouldn't be asking the questions you are, so you can save some cash by going for a more modest processor. Likewise, top end clock speeds are close among the three types. i5 is mostly about bringing turbo boost when you need it, while i7 is about hyperthreading.)

And like Tyckspoon said, SSDs are there for load times. Putting your OS and most common boot programs on one will give you lightning fast starts. Putting your favorite games on one will give you fast saves/loads/boots. The in-game performance difference is practically nonexistent, and it's worth asking if you want to put big games on small drives when the one you have already has space.

[Woodzyowl]

Wow, you guys have given me a lot to think about. How about a list of things I've figured out that are needed/helpful?

Probably going to go with an i5-non-k series, since I need neither hyper-threading nor overclocking (sorry factotum, I think I'll just stick with Intel for the time being)

A motherboard with at least one PCIe x16 and one PCI slot that also supports the processor and the ram

An SSD of some ilk or another

Now for the probable last question I ask: how big would I need the SSD to be to support a Minecraft server, League of Legends, Skyrim, possibly Halo (the original), and Windows 7, and still have enough space for more games if I buy any? Also, what are some good SSD brands?

[Reluctance]

The two most popular SSD sizes I'm seeing with a quick search are 60GB and 120GB. 60 might be a little slim for Windows, all your favorite boot programs, and select favorite games. Let me again advise keeping your old HD for big files, though. Afraid I don't know the quality names, other than to tell you to check Amazon/Newegg reviews and see what people say.

[tyckspoon]

Win7 wants 20GB. Skyrim is apparently massively compressed and officially only asks for 6GB, although mods and DLC will change the actual amount of space it uses. My League folder is ~2.6 GB (although League doesn't do all that much hard-drive activity, AFAIK, and could live on your TB drive comfortably.) You'd probably be fine with 60GB, although you'd have to do a lot of managing if you developed a more significant collection and wanted your current game(s) always resident on the SSD. 120 would give you a pretty comfortable amount of space, budget permitting- SSDs are still pretty expensive, so that space comes at a considerable extra cost.

Brandwise.. Intel's actually pretty much the industry standard for SSDs. OCZ, Corsair, Mushkin, and Samsung all make good models as well. (If you're not doing tweaking and you just don't want to think about it, you can just buy all Intel product and do fine.)

[Balain]

I haven't looked to hard at motherboards and CPUs in a while. I think I would go with something like this, $449 for cpu and mother board. (http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/BDL_2600K_Z68VPROG3)

My personal opinions,

As for the stuff you have now, I would get a bigger power supply. I would look at going to about 750W, maybe even more. The problem with a 500W power supply is it's not really 500w, it's more than likely 490W or something.

The sound card should be okay, I have a x-fi Fatal1ty. It is okay but had a few glitches when I moved to Vista and then windows 7 but nothing major, and new drivers helped when they were out.

The video card is good for now, but it's about 2 or 3 years old now, newer stuff coming out in say a year or two might start slowing down.

[tyckspoon]

As for the stuff you have now, I would get a bigger power supply. I would look at going to about 750W, maybe even more. The problem with a 500W power supply is it's not really 500w, it's more than likely 490W or something.


500W is *fine.* The real draw of most systems would be adequately handled by 400W with a bit of headroom to spare, except that few to no manufacturers make reliable gaming-quality PSUs in that range. There's no reason to go above 500 unless you're intending to do a multi-GPU setup or possibly buying a new-release top-of-the-line card, which tend to need as much power as every other component put together. (And even then, 500w would probably cover it if the particular PSU was constructed to throw that much power on the appropriate rails. Most of them aren't.)