New PC on the way - advice please!

[Sir Prize]

I think I'm going to build this PC:

http://au.pcpartpicker.com/p/fhBDhM

Will it pwn FA on highest settings (or at least get me in to all games I don't have ping issues with) and play whatever other games I care to try on it? Other games might include Eve Online (which will be fine, my old rig plays multiple clients), could try PA if it stops sucking, Dragon Age Inquisition, StarCraft 2 (someone gave me free copies I haven't played yet, stop judging me).

Save your judgement of my gaming choices, please share your thoughts on parts that might suck in ways I haven't thought of or ways I could get real performance gains for another $100-$200.

[Aurion]

Being an AMD sympathizer I'd still say get Intel, unless you want to make your rig warm up the room in a really inefficient way.

[Sir Prize]

I kind of want to know more about this, that CPU has 4 more cores and 700MHz per core (for singlethreaded games like FA) more performance than the best Intel I can see, for $100 less. Genuine question - why should I go Intel? Everyone recommends it especially for FA as a general rule because they have more speed in less cores (right?) but does it hold in this case?

Also, I posted this build on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comme ... help_from/

[Alroys]

Would still hold true in this case, basically a Intel cpu is able to do more per cycle than an amd cpu so you cant just compared clockspeeds of different architecture cpus, you also need to take into account instructions per cycle.
I would recommend going with the i5-4690K which is less expensive (well in NZ anyway) and will outperform a FX-9590 in pretty much every game.
Plus if your not going to overclock it you will be fine with the stock cooler and can save abut of money.

I would link you to some benchmarks, but due to having less than 10 posts i can't post offsite links

Also 220w tdp is huge, the i5 is 84w and overall faster.

[Col_Walter_Kurtz]

I kind of want to know more about this, that CPU has 4 more cores and 700MHz per core (for singlethreaded games like FA) more performance than the best Intel I can see, for $100 less. Genuine question - why should I go Intel? Everyone recommends it especially for FA as a general rule because they have more speed in less cores (right?) but does it hold in this case?

Also, I posted this build on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comme ... help_from/

Because the Intels are far more efficient for the same Mhz. Not only in raw performance but also in power draw. Look here for exmple:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... html#sect2

I would recommend the i5 4690k with a Z97 motherboard and enough RAM for your needs. A bonus is that you can get a 800Mhz or more overclock out of it with not much effort. The "k" cpu is meant for that. If you really don't want it get the non k. Don't worry about the 4 cores without hyperthreading of the i5, you don't need the hyperthreading unless you're into video encoding and that sort of parallel workloads. The 8 cores of the AMD are also not 8 real cores by the way.

This is all coming from someone who has bought and owned mutliple AMD cpu's, back in the day. Intel just makes more sense nowadays (bar a budget build with onboard graphics or other specific scenario's).

[da_monstr]

I don't think the FX 9590 is a good choice for FA, an i5 4690K would be much better, especially once you overclock it. AMD's cores are much weaker than Intel's, their strength lies in giving you good multithreaded performance for a low price. Unfortunately, FA doesn't do multithreading well.
600 W is way too much for your current config, 450-500 W would be the maximum I'd use for a PSU in your case.Perhaps a Seasonic SSR-450RM.
Also, why the low-profile cooler? A good choice would be a be quiet! Dark rock pro 3.
16 GB of RAM might be too much for now in regards of gaming, unless you like to have 30 tabs open in chrome at the same time.
In terms of SSD, my choice would be a 240 GB Crucial MX100.

[Alroys]

Also for an extra $10 you can get a 280 over the 270x, which would be about 10-20% faster.

[IceDreamer]

OK here's my advice (Source: I build and repair PCs as my only income, and keep up with the tech market in detail)

1: Replace your CPU with the i5 4690K. It's much, much faster than the FX in single-threaded applications like FA (And most other programs). Unless you are a professional video editor or an encryption specialist working with highly multithreaded applications, intel is going to be better for gaming. It's also $10 cheaper at that site.

2: A $180 Motherboard is totally pointless. I would suggest, with the i5 CPU, using an Asus H97-PLUS at $128, saving $50.

3: Memory frequency doesn't matter much, and you also don't really need more than 8GB. Cutting from 16 down to 8 is an easy price save, as well as dropping the frequency (My recommended Motherboard only supports up to 1600MHz anyway). This way, you can design the PC so that when you want more RAM, you can just buy an extra couple of sticks and slide them in in 6 months time. I recommend Corsair CML8GX3M2A1600C9, 8GB for $115, saving $94.

4: Getting a CPU cooler aftermarket is utterly pointless unless you're going to go for a very good one these days, because the stock coolers, especially on the Haswell i5s, are so good. You can ditch that without any worries, saving $55.

So that's $209 saved, or you could redistribute it. It's a shame you're an Aussie, because anywhere else this cash could upgrade you to the new, and brilliant, GTX 970 graphics card, but prices on this site are too high. Instead I'd upgrade to a Gigabyte R9 285 for an extra $60, upgrade your SSD to a Corsair 240GB, and replace that Optical drive with a Blu-Ray one.

[BRNKoINSANITY]

The whole "this cpu has more ghz" argument has zero application in today's world. Intel has far better single thread performance because they pack more transistors into their architecture than AMD does, and their chips are also more efficient. To simplify the explanation, if you have 10 things to do, you can either have one switch do all 10 things in one second (10 cycles per second) or you can have 5 switches that each do 2 things per second (2 cycles per second). They do the same amount of work, so the cycles per second is an empty statistic.

Long story short, if you are looking to play SupCom, Intel is the ONLY way to go if you want to do big team games. You can run the game with some AMD chips after heavy overclocking, but in this area AMD just can't keep up. *BRNK prepares for the kickback from all the AMD fanboys*

Here is a motherboard combo for like 30 bucks more for an i5 processor. http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... atId=11497

The only thing with intel is that their CPUs are a little more expensive, but you are paying for a significant performance gain. If you want hyperthreading for 8 threads (really only useful for workstations or if you do video editing/code compiling/audio work.... heavy multi threaded stuff) you can shell out closer to 400 bucks for an i7, but I can personally vouch for the i5. It will handle anything you throw at it gaming wise and for 95% of tasks, and it is a monster for running FA.

[E8400-CV]

AMD FX-9590

Are you looking for a roomheater or FA computer? Even in idle that CPU uses about 30 Watt more energy than the Intel 4690. And in case of full load it's over 200 Watt difference; this really means you need to budget extra for a power supply as well, besides paying more to the utility company and probably crank up your A/C (or buy one). Where I live 1W energy use year-round boils down to about €2; let's just say $2. If you leave your PC on. Just count what you'll pay extra for electricity with that AMD!

FA depends mostly on single core performance. AMD specializes in packing an enormous amount of slow cores. See:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Will it pwn FA on highest settings

You will get a worse score than most game PC's from 2011. (that's 3 years ago) Any i5 2500(K) based PC will bet that AMD 9590.

There are Intel Celerons with higher per-core performance than that AMD.

1: Replace your CPU with the i5 4690K. It's much, much faster than the FX in single-threaded applications like FA (And most other programs).

I agree... but;

2: A $180 Motherboard is totally pointless. I would suggest, with the i5 CPU, using an Asus H97-PLUS at $128, saving $50.

Why would you pick a -K CPU with an H97 motherboard? If you don't pick a Z97 board, you might just as well save that other $15 - 20 and pick the i5 4690 without the unlocked multiplier.

3: Memory frequency doesn't matter much

Not with the Intels, but the AMD's gain more from it.

4: Getting a CPU cooler aftermarket is utterly pointless unless you're going to go for a very good one these days, because the stock coolers, especially on the Haswell i5s, are so good. You can ditch that without any worries, saving $55.

Mostly because the Haswell i5's don't run hot; they don't need a lot of cooler.

upgrade your SSD to a Corsair 240GB

I don't know about AUS, but overhere the Crucials are by far the best price / performance buy. Or perhaps look at a nice M.2 SSD, if you get a motherboard that fits it.

Here is a motherboard combo for like 30 bucks more for an i5 processor. http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... atId=11497

I would buy a 2nd stick of 4GB with that. 4 GB is not really a lot and you miss out on Dual Channel that way.

The only thing with intel is that their CPUs are a little more expensive, but you are paying for a significant performance gain. If you want hyperthreading for 8 threads (really only useful for workstations or if you do video editing/code compiling/audio work.... heavy multi threaded stuff) you can shell out closer to 400 bucks for an i7, but I can personally vouch for the i5. It will handle anything you throw at it gaming wise and for 95% of tasks, and it is a monster for running FA.

With the Haswell refresh, the i7 (the K one) also gains in clock frequency, making it a little more attractive to go i7 compared to previous generations. With an i7 you also gain some extra cache on the CPU, that's useful for gaming too. But yes, you don't gain 50% performance for that 50% price increase, absent some specific use cases.