New Gaming Computer

[Sharoth]

I was planning on getting a new gaming computer in the next month or two. I will be able to spend no more than $1380 on it. I want to play Fallout 4, XCOM 2, the new Doom, and the new Mass Effect. But I am also planning on using it for learning to program, starting with C++ and Java. I will also be working on my CCNA and CCNP in the next year. I will be using a Best Buy card (thanks for letting me use it Mom) so other sources are out. I want a desktop computer instead of a laptop. I already have a mouse, keyboard and speakers. I will need the computer itself and a monitor. I was initially planning on just buying a pre-built tower and a monitor, but then someone suggested that I just build it. I have all the tools needed to build it and have done so before (in ages past when the Old Ones roamed the land). I am planning on setting up a dual boot between Windows X and Linux so I can learn Linux. Any suggestions on a good system for my price limit. Pre-built or in pieces. Either way. Thanks for the advice in advance.

[Silfir]

I built a gaming PC no two months ago with a lower budget, using sites like this (http://choosemypc.net/) and this (http://www.logicalincrements.com/) as a guide, via reddit.com/r/buildapc, which also has an active chatroom to ask for advice in.

I didn't have to get a monitor, though, and I don't know about what to get in that department. There's a guide for monitors on logicalincrements, too, though.

[factotum]

If you're just installing Linux in order to learn it, you might be better off installing it on a virtual machine (e.g. Oracle VirtualBox, freely available for Windows) rather than having it as a dual-boot--the problem with dual boot is that it's always easier to just use whatever the default OS you've booted into is, rather than restarting so you can have a play with the other one. With a virtual machine you can have both systems running at the same time!

[Silfir]

As far as I can tell, monitors above 1080p (1920x1080) would pretty much obliterate your budget, so gaming at a higher resolution than that is right out. 60 fps on 1080p on current titles (and some besides) are very much doable, though. (Decent 1080p monitors should be at $200-300.) GPU-wise, a Geforce GTX 970 would be enough, though with your budget you can probably make a GTX 980 happen.

How about something like this (http://choosemypc.net/build/?budget=1040&oc=false&options=)? The prices listed are not necessarily Best Buy, but it appears Best Buy has a price matching policy (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/TV-Video/Televisions/pcmcat290300050001.c?id=pcmcat290300050001) that applies to Amazon or Newegg prices, among others. In the case of the GTX 980, for instance, Best Buy apparently offers it for $550, but Amazon has it for $480.

[Sharoth]

This is the computer that I am looking at right now (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-desktop-intel-core-i7-16gb-memory-2tb-hard-drive-gray/9991162.p?id=1219459040379&skuId=9991162) and this is the monitor that I am looking at. (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-24-led-hd-monitor-black/2791023.p?id=1219558787781&skuId=2791023) Having said that, I am still eying the parts to build my own.

[Sharoth]

If you're just installing Linux in order to learn it, you might be better off installing it on a virtual machine (e.g. Oracle VirtualBox, freely available for Windows) rather than having it as a dual-boot--the problem with dual boot is that it's always easier to just use whatever the default OS you've booted into is, rather than restarting so you can have a play with the other one. With a virtual machine you can have both systems running at the same time!


Interesting. So how do I set up A Virtual Machine Linux? ~thinks and the plans on checking out Youtube after work~

[Sharoth]

I guess I am a sucker if I plan on buying this (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/fallout-4-pip-boy-edition-windows/9648037.p?id=1219705076082&skuId=9648037) and this. (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/fallout-anthology-windows/9852688.p?id=1219041461865&skuId=9852688)

[Gnoman]

This is the computer that I am looking at right now (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-desktop-intel-core-i7-16gb-memory-2tb-hard-drive-gray/9991162.p?id=1219459040379&skuId=9991162) and this is the monitor that I am looking at. (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-24-led-hd-monitor-black/2791023.p?id=1219558787781&skuId=2791023) Having said that, I am still eying the parts to build my own.

That's not a good deal - the i7 is a good processor, and it does have a good bit of RAM and storage space, but the GT 740 is a bit of a wimpy card that probably won't run Fallout 4 too good. You're better off getting something like this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.2432991) and adding a $200 video card to it, runs about the same price. You can always add a second hard drive later.

[factotum]

How about something like this (http://choosemypc.net/build/?budget=1040&oc=false&options=)?

That's a nice looking build, except for one thing: a single RAM stick means you're stuck in single-channel mode and have half the memory bandwidth. That can make a few percent difference to performance, so if you want 8Gb of RAM I'd always recommend a 2x4Gb kit rather than a single 8Gb one. OK, it makes future upgrades more expensive, but c'est la vie.

@Sharoth: Virtual machines are pretty easy to set up. You basically tell it how much of your Windows RAM to occupy, give it a large file somewhere on your hard drive to act as a virtual hard disc, and then mount the .ISO image containing your Linux CD or DVD installer as the optical drive in the virtual machine. Everything else should then go pretty much the same as installing on dedicated hardware would. The only thing to worry about is that your graphics performance is not going to be stellar (because the virtual machine has to emulate the graphics card), so you won't be running high-end 3D games on the Linux install!

[Sharoth]

If I do that, then I will probably be doing 16 GB of RAM.

[Silfir]

This is the computer that I am looking at right now (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-desktop-intel-core-i7-16gb-memory-2tb-hard-drive-gray/9991162.p?id=1219459040379&skuId=9991162) and this is the monitor that I am looking at. (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-24-led-hd-monitor-black/2791023.p?id=1219558787781&skuId=2791023) Having said that, I am still eying the parts to build my own.

Like Gnoman said, a GT 740 is beyond wimpy. Ctrl-F this list (http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html) to see just how wimpy it is. (For comparison - the cheap PoS (475€ in 2012) I bought pre-assembled three years ago has a Radeon HD 6850 - and that one's still a good bit faster than what Best Buy is trying to sell you.)

This is a common theme in pre-built machines; they tend to have horrible part selection geared more towards marketing purposes than anything else. (In this case, it more or less has two "big" numbers that the listing is trying to get you to look at; it's an i7 with 16 GB RAM. Actually, it has a third - the GT 740 is advertised with 4 GBs of video RAM. That tells you precisely nothing about how good it actually is at its job. The GTX 980 also has 4 GB of video RAM and is galaxies beyond the GT 740 in performance.) Its other faults - it lacks an SSD, for starters. For the parts it doesn't offer information on, like the mainboard or PSU, you kind of have to assume they're the cheapest they could get away with.


That's a nice looking build, except for one thing: a single RAM stick means you're stuck in single-channel mode and have half the memory bandwidth. That can make a few percent difference to performance, so if you want 8Gb of RAM I'd always recommend a 2x4Gb kit rather than a single 8Gb one. OK, it makes future upgrades more expensive, but c'est la vie.

That's a very good point. I think the site suggests a single stick of 8GB RAM over 2x4GB for two reasons - it costs a bit less, and at least one of the motherboards it commonly recommends (and that I got myself) only has two RAM slots, which makes upgrading to 16GB tricky. As far as I can tell from what I read (like this test (http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/1349-ram-how-dual-channel-works-vs-single-channel/Page-3)), the difference in performance is absolutely minimal in gaming, which is probably another reason the site doesn't prioritise getting dual channel RAM, since it tries to optimize a budget for gaming purposes. That's also why it gets only 8 GB - you might get some actual use out of 16 GB if you perform highly memory-intensive tasks, but for gaming, 8 GB is plenty. I think video editing is often named as an example. (EDIT: So is running a virtual machine, probably!)



As far as gaming goes, though - the biggest performance benefit for your money is gotten by investing in a quality GPU. They aren't commonly found in pre-assembled builds. (Best Buy doesn't even offer the GPU as a search criterium if you search its pre-builts.) I don't really see anything in what the OP has posted so far that would suggest he needs an i7 over an i5; you should be able to program on either just fine. In gaming terms, they're pretty much the same, except the i7 is much, much pricier.

You also get a significant performance boost for gaming and everyday usage (put the OS on it!) with an SSD. Pretty much every game out there reads from the hard drive mid-game, or in loading screens, and it's hard to put into terms how much faster an SSD is at doing it than a regular HDD. That said, SSD space is expensive GB-per-$$, so an HDD for videos, music and other large media files (as well as a "secondary" Steam Library; you can select where games are installed to) is worth picking up in combination with a smaller SSD.

(I just picked one of the really expensive Best Buy builds at random - this one (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/alienware-desktop-intel-core-i7-16gb-memory-2tb-hard-drive-128gb-solid-state-drive-epic-silver/3993525.p?id=1219613164432&skuId=3993525) - and I really wonder if my eyes are working right - it costs three grand and still doesn't have an SSD. Also, a $3k rig could be running two GTX 980s in SLI and use a 1 TB SSD, both of which are frivolous, and there'd still be over $1k to buy the rest of the parts. I have no idea what Best Buy actually does with the money you would throw at that thing. Blackjack? Hookers? EDIT: It does have one. It's tiny(128GB) and only listed in the title of the listing, not the actual feature list down if you scroll down. 128 GB SSDs are worth like $60, so still no clue where the money goes. Maybe the case is made of actual silver?)



tl;dr: Best Buy is Worst Buy - from what I've seen so far, don't get one of their pre-builts if you feel at all confident you can assemble a PC yourself from properly researched parts.

As for the monitor, the one you picked seems pretty much fine, but I did barely any research on monitors since I already owned one.

[Gnoman]

(I just picked one of the really expensive Best Buy builds at random - this one (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/alienware-desktop-intel-core-i7-16gb-memory-2tb-hard-drive-128gb-solid-state-drive-epic-silver/3993525.p?id=1219613164432&skuId=3993525) - and I really wonder if my eyes are working right - it costs three grand and still doesn't have an SSD. Also, a $3k rig could be running two GTX 980s in SLI and use a 1 TB SSD, both of which are frivolous, and there'd still be over $1k to buy the rest of the parts. I have no idea what Best Buy actually does with the money you would throw at that thing. Blackjack? Hookers? EDIT: It does have one. It's tiny(128GB) and only listed in the title of the listing, not the actual feature list down if you scroll down. 128 GB SSDs are worth like $60, so still no clue where the money goes. Maybe the case is made of actual silver?)


Having the Alienware name on something doubles or triples the price - much like Apple it costs more because it has a prestigious name. This isn't Best Buy's fault.

[Silfir]

Having the Alienware name on something doubles or triples the price - much like Apple it costs more because it has a prestigious name. This isn't Best Buy's fault.

Ah, the more you know! (And knowing is half the cattle.)

I was going to point out that it is Best Buy's fault if they're stocking the damn things - but what choice does Best Buy have, if there are Alienware brand believers out there who will actually buy the things and complain if they can't do so at Best Buy? So, point well taken.

[Sharoth]

~sighs~ Well, it looks like it will be November or December before i can get my computer and I might have $200 less to use. ~shrugs~ In that case, I think I will build it when I get the resources.

Edit - BTW, i actually PREFER to build a computer because I have more control over it and I would have a better idea of what is going on with it.

[factotum]

As far as I can tell from what I read (like this test (http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/1349-ram-how-dual-channel-works-vs-single-channel/Page-3)), the difference in performance is absolutely minimal in gaming, which is probably another reason the site doesn't prioritise getting dual channel RAM, since it tries to optimize a budget for gaming purposes.

I'd still say it's worth going for the dual channel--that site you linked to shows that it *does* offer a performance benefit for pretty much anything *other* than gaming, and the big advantage of PCs is that they *can* be used for something other than gaming. Otherwise you might as well save yourself a shedload of cash and buy a PS4 or XBone--they'll game nearly as well as any reasonable budget PC, and they cost a lot less.

[halfeye]

As for the monitor, the one you picked seems pretty much fine, but I did barely any research on monitors since I already owned one.
Nope. :smallbiggrin:

It has three inputs, HDMI, HDMI, and VGA.

VGA is old, it's not that great.

HDMI is fine, up to 2560 * 1600, but except maybe HDMI 2.0, only runs at 30 FPS at 3840 * 2160, and not all graphics cards come with HDMI out, they often come with adaptors if they don't include an actual socket, but you have to check the specs if you need to know.

DVI was the input to have up to last year, now it's display port, next year I expect we'll need something different again.

[Silfir]

Yeah, I was blindsided; didn't think it might not come with DVI. Shows the importance of research. Though since this monitor doesn't go beyond 1920x1080, the limitations you mentioned shouldn't really come into play? Also, it comes with a DVI-to-HDMI adapter itself; that should cover all eventualities regardless of the video card.

Also, the monitor comes with in-built speakers. I'd take a guess that's why it has HDMI slots instead of DVI. DisplayPort being the new hotness or not, there's probably no good reason why monitors that don't go past 1920x1080 should have it. (Unless you're doing 144fps gaming or some other craziness, possibly? It doesn't look like the OP has the funds or inclination to venture into that territory of madmen and too much money.)


I'd still say it's worth going for the dual channel--that site you linked to shows that it *does* offer a performance benefit for pretty much anything *other* than gaming, and the big advantage of PCs is that they *can* be used for something other than gaming. Otherwise you might as well save yourself a shedload of cash and buy a PS4 or XBone--they'll game nearly as well as any reasonable budget PC, and they cost a lot less.

"pretty much anything other than gaming"? As far as I remember, the article performed a multitude of tests for very specific things you can do with a PC that would significantly tax the RAM, such as simulation, RAR compression or video editing. For the things that people do use PCs for other than gaming - programming, text processing, browsing, what have you - you will notice the difference even less than you would for games, i.e. not at all. Or as the article put it:


Despite all that I thought I knew leading up to our MSI meeting last July, dual-channel just isn't necessary for the vast majority of the consumer market. Anyone doing serious simulation (CFD, parametric analysis) will heavily benefit from dual-channel configurations (~17.7% advantage). Users who push a lot of copy tasks through memory will also theoretically see benefits, depending on what software is controlling the tasking. Video editors and professionals will see noteworthy advantages in stream (RAM) previews and will see marginal advantages in render time. It is probably worth having in this instance -- in the very least, I'd always go dual-channel for editing / encoding if only for future advancements.

Gamers, mainstream users, and office users shouldn't care.

Dual-channel costs a bit more money and takes more RAM slots - those are disadvantages. The performance benefit is a advantage. It's a matter of weighing the two, and unless you are planning on doing the specific tasks that would heavily tax the RAM, single-channel is quite simply just fine, and even sensible if your motherboard doesn't have four slots. (Not all of the budget ones do, mine for instance doesn't.) If I was planning on doing video editing, I'd go for 2x8 GB RAM, no question. But OP didn't mention anything of the sort.

[Sharoth]

~wry smile~ I wish I DID have that kind of money, Silfir. Sadly, being broke and in debt will do that too you. Thus the "Thanks Mom" part. Unfortunately she used her card for something else earlier this year and will not have it paid down enough until later on this year. ~shrugs~ I can wait. I just need to be patient. Besides, the games that I want to play that need that kind of power will not be out until then anyway.

[halfeye]

Yeah, I was blindsided; didn't think it might not come with DVI. Shows the importance of research. Though since this monitor doesn't go beyond 1920x1080, the limitations you mentioned shouldn't really come into play? Also, it comes with a DVI-to-HDMI adapter itself; that should cover all eventualities regardless of the video card.

Hm, yeah.

In my view the limitation would be the lack of display port connectors, not that the monitor itsself needs them, but if on the basis of what the monitor needs someone picked a card without display port that might affect their upgrade options later on. Display port is what you need for UHD, but it's barely enough for it, it looks as if 8k is on the way down the pipeline, and that's going to need another new connector.


(Also, the monitor comes with in-built speakers. I'd take a guess that's why it has HDMI slots instead of DVI.)

Probably, I think you can send sound over DVI if you want, but sound's probably less fuss with HDMI.