Here's the original thread.

I am in fact on that very same motherboard, CPU and PSU to this very day. My video card has been much better for years, though, a Radeon HD 7850.

It is time for an upgrade. I am looking to switch the motherboard, the CPU and the GPU. Here's what I have in mind:

motherboard
CPU
GPU

Don't mind the Finnish. I am on the sort of budget where I thought I'd save on the motherboard and just get something cheap like that.

Thoughts?

Also I just looked up that the motherboard doesn't allow for overclocking, so the K will be redundant for the CPU so I might as well get the locked version. It's only 10 euros cheaper, but I know I won't benefit from the K in any way if I go for that motherboard.

Why stay with DDR3 ram?

Also are parts just more expensive in Finland? Doing the conversion I paid 15$ USD more than you'd pay for an i7 Skylake.

Budget. I guess RAM is quite inexpensive but I'll have to look into that later.



Yes. Most everything is, not just computer components. The only thing I can think of off the top of my head that isn't more expensive here are internet connections.

You mention Skylake. I found this i5 CPU. It is only slightly more expensive than the i5 4690 I was looking at originally. I could also get an LGA1151 motherboard pretty cheap.

However, I ran cpuboss to compare the two and I'm not sure what to make of the results. The 4690K has a considerably better score for "performance using all cores" as well as "single-core performance". The other ratings seem less relevant. Yet at the end it says "CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i5 6600K based on its performance and single-core performance." which doesn't seem to make any sense when looking at the individual ratings.

So would there be any sense in going for the 6600K and an LGA1151 motherboard instead of the original plan? From these performance ratings it doesn't seem that way.

Alrighty, I see information says the motherboard is compatible with the 4690k, and supports overclocking. If you go straight to a GTX 970 you're going to need more RAM, as well. 4 gigs is low.

Nevermind about DDR4, if you're on a budget you don't want a new generation processor.

Doing some further research it seems the 6600K would be ever so slightly better than the 4690K, but more importantly an LGA1151 motherboard would provide more upgradeability in the future so that perhaps in the next upgrade (probably years from now) I wouldn't even have to get a new motherboard. "Years from now" is a really long time in PC component terms, though, so maybe it's not realistic to think the LGA1151 mobo would be all that future proof over such a long time, either.

Aye. I forgot that I have 12 gigs of RAM, though, as I upgraded that since the original thread. DDR3, but still.

It depends on your goals if you're just looking to play games 4690k is probably better for your money

DDR3 is fine performance-wise

What's your goal with this computer?

I'm interested in having it able to run the first gen VR devices. Having looked at the minimum recommended specs and read people's experiences, these sort of components aren't optimal but should pull it off fairly comfortably. Gaming would also not be my main application of VR.

A performance boost for traditional gaming (just full HD) will be a nice bonus, and I guess audio creation might benefit as well although I've never really had trouble running my DAWs and VSTs so far.

None of the other things I do on my PC require much of anything in the way of specs.

This is what I got a couple months ago:

Mobo: Gigabyte Z170MX-Gaming 5
CPU: Intel i5 6600k
GPU: Gigabyte Geforce GTX 970
HD: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB
HD2: HGST Deskstar NAS 4gb (it was on sale)
RAM: 8gb Crucial Ballistix Sport (something like that)

I basically followed PCGamers mid-range gaming PC build, except the MSI board I originally purchased was dead on arrival, so I got Gigabyte instead. When I got around to buying the video card a month or two later, I stuck with Gigabyte. Everything's overclockable, but I haven't bothered with that because I haven't found it necessary. The newest game I've played on here is The Division (free with video card from NewEgg), which looks fantastic and runs at 60 FPS. Aside from that I've mostly been playing Portal 2 (which is old) and Skyrim (which is also old, but very demanding. Load times are fast on here, I have everyting on ultra, and stay at 60FPS all the time.)

All around, with the case and other parts, this cost me $1200 USD. I realize that's probably more than most people are willing to spend, but I finally got a good job and it had been several sad lonely years with no PC, so I figured I'd treat myself.

PORN?!

Also, not to hijack, I'm still on the lookout for some decent speakers (2.1) and a fancy monitor (currently rocking 1280x1024). Let me know if you see any killer deals.

(But not right now. Right now I have less than $100. But I get my monthly bonus on the 21st.)

Minimum specs for Oculus Rift are:



You're.. getting there, but it will be laggy.

I have a setup very much like Vin's, with the 6700k being the only big difference, I can run Fallout 4 with everything cranked at 60fps, even downtown. The only game I've found that I can't crank the settings up is GTAV, but that game is a monster so I'm not upset about it.

The 4590k should be more than sufficient to get similar results; it's not really a big performance gain to get with the latest generation.

Skyrim is demanding? I used to play that with my current build (i5 650 which is an old dual core, and Radeon HD 7850) and it ran really well at full HD. I forget my settings but I know they were on high at the very least.








Realistically, that seems like it might well be. I am hopeful having read up on people reporting it was fine with similar specs, though (on reddit and some other places), with only the highest end games suffering with some noticeable slowdown. Of course the games will get more demanding and I'm sure the next iterations of these gadgets will already require more from the PC.

College, healthcare, not being shot to death, etc...

Okay, this is true. Forgot about all that!

I've updated my plan. First off, now I'm thinking of getting the mobo and processor linked in the first post. LGA1151 won't support my current DDR3 RAM and I found out that I wouldn't get much of a performance boost from upgrading to DDR4, so this is why I'm thinking I won't go for the i5 6600 (and the 4690 is very close to that performance-wise).

Secondly, I think I'll wait out on the GPU. The GTX 1070 is going to be available soon and while it's going to be considerably more expensive than the GTX 970, it will be the most crucial part as far as game performance and the jump from the GTX 970 seems to be significant.

I've updated my plan yet again! DDR4 is quite cheap so I think I'll get the LGA1151, the 6600K and DDR4 RAM after all (mainly due to the fact that I'll be skipping LGA1150 in favor of LGA1151, the RAM itself will yield no performance benefit. Neither will the i5 6600 over the 4690 to any substantial degree, though). I'll wait out on the video card and either shell the extra cost of the 1070 or go for the 970 after all due to what should be an even lower price as the 1070 catches on.

OR WILL I?! Because I read a good point that by the time I'd be needing to upgrade the CPU, Skylake might well be obsolete anyway.

Well there's certainly no guarantee that LGA1151 will last very long, LGA1150 had a lifespan of about 2 years.

Dude, you're getting a Dell!