BB wants a new computer - PC this time

[Barrister]

Thanks Viper that is very helpful.

Okay, as usual of course Viper's pics are both quite high end stuff.

And more than that... yes, if you want to get back into computer games I do strongly urge you to get a better monitor.  Even a nice 23-24", 1080p setup will make games more enjoyable.

But of the games you mentioned... Paradox games are not graphically intensive.  They might help from a faster CPU, I'm not sure (and they'd definitely help from being on a SSD), but if that's your target, it's a fairly low one.

Star Citizen... now that game is unreleased, but I'm willing to bet that it will eat up as many graphics processors as you can throw at it.  I know Elite is like that - it's still quite playable on my current system, but I could get a lot more out of better graphics cards.

So you need to know whether you want to spend more on the possibility you might want to play a game like that (or, say, Fallout 4, which will also take advantage of a nice system).

Finally, Viper suggests a build your own.  Now I've been looking into it, and it's what I'd like to do, but it's hardly the only route.  I'm sure NCIX will sell you a ready-made system that you can plug in and go.

[Norgy]

The only thing I would use this is for playing games.

I am not sure what you mean by sound issues so I guess I don't have any.

I am not sure how much I want to spend. Cost isn't really an issue but I don't want to be stupid about it either.

I have no idea about resolution.  My last computer was purchased about 8 years ago and my monitor is older than that - may have to replace that also.

The latest "Skylake" processors from Intel are getting rave reviews. You probably don't need the most high-end. Tests also reveal that anything above 8 GB of RAM is mostly wasted for games.

A good, stable motherboard from say Asus or ASRock will do. Nothing too fancy.

Where you probably will want to spend money is on a good GPU. I've said it before; the nVidia GTX 970 is probably the best for price/performance. Go for the MSI version. Their cooler is the bee's knees.
Also, a decent SSD for your system and a 3 TB mechanical disk for your data. I recommend Samsung's SSDs.

Sound issues usually come when you overclock, like Beeb says, or when you stuff two rather hot GPUs inside an encased area. Even with a so-called "silent" case, I experience a lot of sound from my GPUs. Granted, I should expect that. When buying a case, sound is also something to take into consideration. You have somewhat different choices across the pond, but I hear good things about Corsair's mid-range cases.

[Norgy]

If you want more performance, you could buy a Geforce Titan X for video card, it'll cost you double of what I picked.  Possibilites are infinite, only the budget is finite

I'd buy anything but the Titan X. 
It's an over-priced, over-hyped piece of hardware where most of your GPU's resources will be unused for games. Unless you plan for 12k gaming.

[viper37]

It's an over-priced, over-hyped piece of hardware where most of your GPU's resources will be unused for games.

You mean like most Nvidia hardware?  I agree 
But lots of you are Nvidia fanboys, so I threw it.  It's the best card on the market right now, when price is not an issue.


For the monitor and case, I think his best bet is to walk a computer store and watch the screens for himself to see what pleases him.

Aside that, I used the same basis as BB's computer.  The i7 is a tad more future proof than the i5 if he wants to keep it untouched for 7-8 years.

[Barrister]

The latest "Skylake" processors from Intel are getting rave reviews. You probably don't need the most high-end. Tests also reveal that anything above 8 GB of RAM is mostly wasted for games.

Actually they haven't.  They've been getting very "meh" reviews, showing at best a 5-10% improvement over last couple of generations.

That being said I'm still planning on getting one.  But it's more an issue that it sounds like it makes sense to get the latest chipset that goes along with Skylake.

[Norgy]

Well, the latest i7 did.

The i5 not so much. It's an incremental improvement.

The first "Haswell" processors run hot, like mine, so there's less OC headroom.  I'd still say the i7 2600k is one of the best processors Intel have made, though.

viper; nVidia is getting some decent competition again now, and I wouldn't say I am a fanboy of them for choosing them over AMD's poor drivers. That's my main issue with AMD. That, and the fact you probably can get blast furnaces that run less hot than AMD's reference cards.

[viper37]

viper; nVidia is getting some decent competition again now, and I wouldn't say I am a fanboy of them for choosing them over AMD's poor drivers. That's my main issue with AMD. That, and the fact you probably can get blast furnaces that run less hot than AMD's reference cards.

Okay, 2 things.
On Windows, there's no real differences between AMD and Nvidia driver-wise.  Both have their strong and weak moments.  Nvidia has had some major fuckups recently with Win10, something AMD mostly managed to avoid.  Some games have had real problems with Nvidia drivers (like Dragon Age Inquisition) while AMD shone.  The reverse could be said for other games, I'm sure of it, I just don't know any from the top of my head.

On Linux, Nvidia still rules, but AMD has gone full open source last year, IIRC and things are improving.

2nd, it's unfair to compare reference cards, especially when a few post above you recommend a non-reference design fro an Nvidia card
Non reference AMD cards aren't selling for a huge premium, except maybe for the Sapphire Trinity, but that goes for Nvidia as well.
Often, you get a very decent card with 2-3 silent fans (or liquid cooling for the very latest models) for less than other brands using the reference design.

On release, the 290x consumed much more power while on idle than comparable Nvidia cards, but not while gaming.  And this seems to have been fixed somewhere along the way, it was possibly a driver issue.  If you look at recent benchmarks for the 290x and 390x 8gb, you'll see similar power consumption than the Titan or GTX 980.

[viper37]

Also, as a rule of thumb, when it comes to technology, I usually avoid the very latest and very high end products.  They are sold at a premium for enthusiasts who always require the very latest tech out there.

Although not holding my breath, I'm still hoping for a small price reduction in previous Intel processor this fall around Black Friday.

[Norgy]

Also, as a rule of thumb, when it comes to technology, I usually avoid the very latest and very high end products.  They are sold at a premium for enthusiasts who always require the very latest tech out there.

Although not holding my breath, I'm still hoping for a small price reduction in previous Intel processor this fall around Black Friday.

I don't disagree with you nearly as much as you think.

I had a reference design nVidia GTX 780 from eVGA that gave me little headache. And a few years ago, the image was the exact opposite; AMD (or ATI Radeon) cards ran cooler and were by and large much better. Whatever you choose now, you'll get a good GPU most of the time. Also, I have noted that AMD's cards are cheaper vise versa the nVidia cards in North America compared to here.

By and large, the only area where AMD has really failed is with their CPUs. Their APUs manage to stay an attractive option for lower-end systems, though. I have one myself.
Looks like 2017 might be the year I do a full overhaul with new motherboard and CPU and that new RAM.

[viper37]

I don't disagree with the CPU, though, for the most part, it has to do with how games are coded.  Most games don't use 4 or 8 cores in the CPU, they use one, then when it's at full capicity, they use another core.  So Intel has better manufacturing process, they increase their core speed, make a second "virtual" core and add more cache to each core wich result in better performances overall in games, but slower in other Windows operations (copying files is slower on my i5 than it was on AMD FX 8 core).

I can see the difference, gaming-wise, with just a i5, it's blazingly fast compared to AMD.  But every other operations are slower   The i7 is just too much $$ for now.  Besides, even AMD cpus have gone up in cost recently.  The latest FX processors sells for as much as my i5 but provide slower gaming performances.

I think I will wait next year, when AMD releases their next CPU line.  I will see how much of a challenge it is to Intel, see if overall prices drop.

[Norgy]

The way I read the experts' comments, there were reasons to be excited over the new AMD lineup.

[Barrister]

So I'm going to pull the trigger on the next day or two.

Now while PCPartspicker is a nice resource, I don't think I'm going to just blindly order from them.  For starters I haven't heard of some of these retailers, and for seconds they don't take into account shipping costs, or any bundled deals you can get.

[viper37]

So I'm going to pull the trigger on the next day or two.

Now while PCPartspicker is a nice resource, I don't think I'm going to just blindly order from them.  For starters I haven't heard of some of these retailers, and for seconds they don't take into account shipping costs, or any bundled deals you can get.

they do take that into account.  You need to click on the individual part to check each store, their shipping and their promo.

That store I gave you, Memory Express, I think they match competitor's price.  NCIX will do up to a point (they won't give you a rebate below cost, as they used to, wich is logical).  Others, I don't know.

I see the site as a tool to help you configure your PC, avoid any incompatibilities and such.  Not the definitive shopping site.
There may well be stores that aren't listed that offer better prices.

[DontSayBanana]

But how well does it work trying to sell something on ebay when you have no account or selling history?

Super late on this, but Viper's right- it tends to not turn out well.  eBay's kind of weird in that it's really gentrified.  It's all about the feedback scores- it's even bled over to where some sellers won't sell to customers with low feedback scores (against eBay's TOS, but extremely commonplace anyway).  On top of that, eBay's become far more of a thrift shop than an auction house- auction bids are relatively rare since customers became able to filter out auctions altogether in favor of buy-it-now prices.  One of my jobs peripherally involved running a very high-volume eBay store, so here's a quick snapshot of what I saw when fulfilling orders/pricing product: 70% buy-it-now, 25% lowball "best offers," only about 5% winning bids.

[Barrister]

Orders placed on my new computer.