Looking for a Budget Gamer Dekstop

hctan on 11/03/2013 - 00:13

Hey guys,

Starcraft 2 heart of the swarm is coming out and I am looking for a basic PC to play that game. Are these options any good? I am hoping to get one around the 700-800 range. Any cheaper would be good.

http://www.msy.com.au/SYSTEMS/INTELAMD-PowerValue.pdf

http://www.mrpcgeek.com.au/p/8211621/intel-quad-core-i5-3470... + upgrade to 2GB ATI HD-7850 Graphics card, + windows 8 home + upgrade mobo to z77 +wireless for 825

its that ok?

the requirements for sc2 would be
https://sea.battle.net/support/en/article/starcraft-ii-syste...

I would love it if the PC could run cod4 or any of the newer more system requirements games. but just need something basic for now.

Computing

Comments

_Bruce_ on 11/03/2013 - 08:58

You are better off with an i3 and a 7870 than an i5 and a 7850, and probably save money also.

Sapphire 7870 XT or Powercolor MYST PCS+ 7870 are both a step above any other 7870 if you can get them.

Having said that SC2 (and CoD4) will work just fine of a Pentium and a 7770.
http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&c...
Use the extra money to get an SSD.
scrimshaw on 11/03/2013 - 10:10

NEVER buy the MSY pre-built systems, they give you shitty cases and power supplies.

Best to spec your own and tell them to build it for you (via email).

Here's what $800 will get you:

Intel i3-3220 $119
AsRock B75M-DGS $59
8G Kit 1600 Patriot-S $54
2G 7850 MSI OC $214

Seagate SATa 1TB $69

Case Antec One Gaming $64
Corsair VS450 power supply $49

Windows 7/8 $99
Building fee +$70

TOTALS: $797
Prices from MSY

You can save a lot of you build it yourself, but its up to you.
- zeggie on 12/03/2013 - 14:56
  
  scrimshaw has a good system there, but I would make some alterations.
  
  HIS Radeon HD7950 3GB $299
  Silverstone Strider 500W ST50F-ES $55
  Silverstone Precision PS08 USB 3.0 Micro ATX Case $49
  
  Get a mate to build it for you and it'll cost you $800 and kick ass for games
  - _Bruce_ on 12/03/2013 - 16:01
    
    No question that the 7950 is better, but it is also $85 that you will not see any benefit from Starcraft 2 or CoD4.
    
    If you do want more this:
    http://www.scorptec.com.au/computer/49120-sa-7870-2gd5-xt
    Is $30 cheaper and not a lot slower (uses same chipset, very confusing name).
    
    And a 2GB standard (OC) 7870 for $229 is exceptional for value.
hctan on 11/03/2013 - 10:13

How do I get the os for $99? i tried looking for it and it costs 200 over.
- scrimshaw on 11/03/2013 - 12:09
  
  http://www.msy.com.au/product.jsp?productId=9816
  - hctan on 11/03/2013 - 12:44
    
    thanks i thought that is only available if you buy a PC off them.
    - scrimshaw on 11/03/2013 - 13:09
      
      That rule applies to Windows 7 only I think. Windows 8 is an exception.
zelda707 on 11/03/2013 - 10:58

just a quick question, what's the difference between the Thermaltake V3 and V4?
- scrimshaw on 11/03/2013 - 12:13
  
  http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/1607503
  - zelda707 on 11/03/2013 - 19:24
    
    thanks!
  - zelda707 on 12/03/2013 - 11:18
    
    would you recommend the Thermaltake V3/V4 or another Case with PSU for around the same price?
ethereal88 on 12/03/2013 - 07:22

Look at Crysis 3 benchmarks online - i3's are rubbish in 2013. You want an i5 minimum. Next gen consoles are all 8 core, games are increasingly multithreaded. i5 minimum.
- _Bruce_ on 12/03/2013 - 07:28
  
  Don't do this. Crysis 3 is an exception and even then, you need a top end video card (or more than one) running high detail before you need an i5.
- scrimshaw on 12/03/2013 - 10:39
  
  Look at Crysis 3 benchmarks online
  
  Crysis 3 will run like shit on any system. It's an extremely unoptimised port for the PC and requires way more grunt that it should.
  
  Besides, the OP does not have a big enough budget to accomodate a Core i5 without lowering the GPU (which means introducing GPU bottlenecks)
  - ethereal88 on 12/03/2013 - 10:56
    
    Still defending the i3? Its far from unoptimized, like No 1, it needs grunt. Proof:
    
    http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2302954
    
    Tomb Radier too:
    
    http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2305791
    
    i3 gets 87 vs 100+ for quads.
    
    There are no more exceptions, duals are on the way out.
    - +1 vote
      
      zelda707 on 12/03/2013 - 11:17
      
      it doesn't really matter. Not every one needs to play the latest games at the highest settings. An i3 is fast enough for most people
    - scrimshaw on 12/03/2013 - 11:19
      
      Exactly. You just buy what you need. OP just wants
      
      but just need something basic for now.
      
      and we're here to discuss a basic SC2 PC, not something capable of running Crysis at max settings. Not every gamer is a sucker for fancy graphics.
      
      We do however want something that is possible to upgrade later on. It is the main reason why I've opted for a Corsair VS450 rather than a generic PSU bundled with a Thermaltake case.
    - _Bruce_ on 12/03/2013 - 11:36
      
      http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2302954
      
      On a GTX 690.
      
      http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2305791
      
      Why would you care? Think your monitor is going to show more than 78 (actually number) FPS?
      
      I don't understnad why you keep repeating this unfounded rubbish. You either can't learn or are just trolling.
    - ethereal88 on 12/03/2013 - 16:50
      
      yawn
      
      120Hz monitor
      
      and the 690 removes all GPU bottlenecks
      
      yawn
      
      Duals are pointless simple. You want a 3yr PC i5. Simples.
    - +2 votes
      
      scrimshaw on 12/03/2013 - 18:08
      
      I don't know if you're here to actually give advice to OP or here to start a personal debate.
      
      Either way, if you intend to help then provide a list of parts or a prebuilt system that actually matches the OP's budget, and with as few bottlenecks as possible.
      
      All you're stating is quads are better than duals with little regard of what the OP can afford to actually buy. We're discussing how to get the best bang for buck system for under $800, and that doesn't neccesarrily mean it has to have a Core i5.
ankor on 13/03/2013 - 08:55

Constrained to only sc2 WOL/HOTS/LOV the i3 setup will be ok.
People are gaming with old e8400 setups on WOL and flying in sc2 without problems.

But, start introducing other games and you will find that an i3 will give you lesser performance compared to an i5.
I think it's up to you whether <50fps is playable as opposed to 90-100+ fps in other newer games.
- _Bruce_ on 13/03/2013 - 14:35
  
  If you are going to make this argument please back it up with specific games that will result in less than 50 fps on i3 (as compared with i5) on anything like this video card range.
  
  As discussed above almost the only time that it matters is when you have top of the line video cards and can afford to have the detail so high. The cost jump from an i3 to an i5 is significant, and this is almost always better spent on a video card ($15 more will get you a 7870 over a 7850, the cpu is hard to justify).
  
  Additionally, most monitors will work at 60Hz, and this is generally considered to be quite enough even for twitchy reflex games, more than this is just not very useful (almost all console games run at 30 fps).
  - ankor on 13/03/2013 - 19:54
    
    I must admit Bruce is right. After an exhaustive review I fully retract my previous statement.
    
    The only games where the i3 is significantly disadvantaged compared to an i5 seem to be multiplayer BF3, and Crysis.
    
    The i3 performs comparably in relation to an i5 across many games, and the ~$70 price jump imo isn't worth it if you are focusing on performance today.
    
    In the same situation, I'd see myself with two possibilities:
    
    get the i3, and enjoy gaming as it is now with a view to upgrading the processor if required down the track
    
    spend the extra $70 now, for an i5-3330 to get quad-core and enjoy the increased 5-15fps across a range of games.
    
    Arguably, that $70 might be better invested towards an SSD in the future which would help decrease loading times on your PC.
    
    Starcraft Specific Benchmarks
    
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-i...
    
    http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/pa...
    
    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/129
    
    Other gaming benchmarks courtesy of techspot
    
    http://www.techspot.com/review/645-tomb-raider-performance/p...
    
    http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page...
    
    http://www.techspot.com/review/615-far-cry-3-performance/pag...
    
    http://www.techspot.com/review/608-hitman-absolution-perform...
    
    http://www.techspot.com/review/537-max-payne-3-performance/p...
    
    http://www.techspot.com/review/467-skyrim-performance/page7....
    
    http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-performance...
    
    http://www.techspot.com/review/405-the-witcher-2-performance...
    
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-4170-core-i3-3220-ben...
-1 vote

Joran on 13/03/2013 - 17:45

Hey Champ,

Check your Messages,
Can build you an gaming PC with equal specs + upgrade to an Older Gen i5 for the same price.

Cheers,
Joran
zelda707 on 14/03/2013 - 20:21

what's the AMD equivalent of the i3-3225?

and are AMD integrated graphics better than Intels?
- _Bruce_ on 14/03/2013 - 22:02
  
  what's the AMD equivalent of the i3-3225?
  
  No direct equivalent, but the AMD FX-4300 is close.
  
  and are AMD integrated graphics better than Intels?
  
  There is no one product for either. Intel can come with either HD2500 or HD4000 on the current models (4000 on the 3225). AMD has a huge range. Neither has any integrated graphics at the level of the rest of the options discussed here.
hctan on 19/03/2013 - 21:41

Thanks everyone guys, will probably get the pc next week!
- scrimshaw on 19/03/2013 - 22:01
  
  Noice. How much did you end up spending?