Advice on Best Dell Pre-Built Gaming Computer

• 

  Godric on 14/11/2017 - 15:58

  2k and a GTX1060 lol

• 

  airal3rt on 14/11/2017 - 16:06

  You're better off choosing your own parts and paying someone $50 or so to assemble them for you if you really don't want to build it yourself.

  Out of the 2 prebuilts you're looking at the GTX 1060 6GB is obviously better for gaming than the RX 570 4GB. You need to have a resolution/frame rate in mind when assessing the suitability of your GPU and hardware, playing on a 1080p/60hz monitor is obviously going to have lower requirements than 1440p/165hz or a 4k monitor.

  As far as the idea of sockets being more or less future-proof, there is some truth to this as Intel jumps platforms more frequently than AMD, and I believe AMD have made some guarantees as to how many CPU generations will be on the AM4+ platform. However, in terms of practical benefit to you it's somewhat unlikely you would be upgrading your CPU in the next two or possibly even three generations, typically you'll see a lot more benefit from upgrading your GPU in a 2-3 year cycle. Future-proofing in nice in concept but is usually somewhat of a trap in reality, you're better off focusing primarily on what your needs are today and placing less weight on unknown future upgrade paths.

  • 

    Polde on 17/11/2017 - 01:01

    Thanks for replying.

    But I still prefer to buy it having peace of mind that it's all tested well. You bring good points for CPU, and with the GPU too. I guess keeping the CPU now is a good investment, while upgrading the GPU later on frequently is the best option.

    • 

      [Deactivated] on 18/11/2017 - 18:16

      +1

      Do you really think an assembly line doing bare minimum testing would be better than store builders (who are often enthusiast at the same time) doing stress testing? Secondly, PC assembling is literally lego, the only moderately difficult thing is cable management

  • 

    [Deactivated] on 18/11/2017 - 18:12

    +1

    Plus, prebuilt skimp on PSU quality and uses custom connectors so you can't easily chuck a decent EVGA in. Usually the 1050Ti/1060 in them is already stretching the power supply to its limit

• 

  scrimshaw on 14/11/2017 - 16:07

  +2

  The Intel system is actually beefier (more RAM and a graphics card that is one 'tier' better) but the extra beef also costs an additional $400, which in this case, makes it the clear loser when it comes to dollar vs performance. $1600 for an outdated i7 Quad core and GTX 1060 don't make much sense…

  found that the Ryzen 5 series are more suited to streaming, video editing etc than Intel series which perform better for gaming. But from what I'm aware the Ryzen socket is more future proof than what Intel i7 series is

  Somewhat correct. Haven't seen or read every benchmark but generally speaking Ryzen's extra cores benefit productivity tasks and that's why it's much preferred over the quad core i7 Kaby Lakes when looking for a productivity rig. I do a lot of Handbrake X265 encoding and Ryzen was a good pick as it has lots of cores.

  The trade-off is less performance in games, but that's really only an issue when you are playing a CPU bound game. Won't apply in your scenario because you're not running a $600 dollar graphics card.

  • 

    Polde on 17/11/2017 - 01:04

    Thanks for replying.

    You bring up some good points with dollar vs performance in terms of what tech to invest in now. Looks to me sticking with the Ryzen now is a good investment, while changing the GPU every few years is where I need to put more focus on.