Looking to update my PC

[CK1]

I currently have a PC as per the spec in my profile but I want to update it to play some of the latest games, mainly Witcher 3. I figure I just need a CPU, GPU, mobo, and memory as the rest of the components are fine (I think). My monitor outputs at 1920x1200.
I used to be really into overclocking but haven't bothered with this in the last few years as I have lost interest.

I have looked at Scan and come up with the following: -

Intel Core i5 4590 - £156
2GB MSI GTX 960 100 MILLION Edition - £169
MSI Z97-G43 Intel Z97 - £70
8GB (2x4GB) Corsair DDR3 Vengeance Pro Series Red, PC3-14900 (1866) - £49

Please let me know if you think this is a good spec and good value for money or whether other choices should be made.

Thanks.

[Agrippa]

Looks mainly ok to me, but I really, REALLY wouldn't go out and buy a 2GB video card today if I could help it.

[kalniel]

I'd be more than fine with a 2GB video card - it's plenty for most tasks and a good match for the 960, which is a very capable card.

[jag272]

I can't offer advice for all the parts you've selected however the MOBO and to an extent the GPU I believe I can.

MOBO I have a z87-g43, I was looking at the z97-g43 board info just the other day on MSIs site, it seems to be the same board just with the newer chipset. 7 Months in and I've had no issues with this board what so ever, lacks a lot of the extras you get with other boards but if you just want the board its great. Only niggle I have with it is the PCIe x1 placement, as you can see theyre located above and below the GPU which is making my inclusion of a soundcard sometime next week slightly more troublesome, will probably have to go into the PCIe 2.0 x16.

As for the GPU I'm using MSI's standard GTX 760, the differences between the 760 and 960 are quite minimal, slightly better performance as a result of Maxwell mainly, the card is handling great for me, the really new games its struggling with a bit, GTA V in particular is being a bit awkward but if youre looking for really top of the line you want the 970 anyway.

The CPU and RAM I'm quite similar on, see my specs on here. I have a 4670k (I don't currently plan to overclock at all, but with my part selection h87 and non-k wasnt actually any cheaper) and 8GB of XMS3 1600MHz CL11, havent run into any issues with the CPU as far as I'm aware, and still not hitting near that 8GB of RAM.

I'd say youve got a good selection there.

[dfour]

Personally i would ditch the 960 and go for a 970. I know its another £100 but will give you better longevity and better frame rates at more eye candy at 1200P you play at.

[Bonebreaker777]

Agree with the previous posts, try to squeeze out more value from the other components and pour the gained resources into a beefier GPU.

If you are not going to overclock, I think a cheaper MoBo would do just fine (unless it is for a very similar price).

If you are not going to have a Z class MoBo, go for cheaper 1600Mhz memory modules (unless it is for a very similar price).

If I may suggest , second hand CPUs are absolutely fine and the saved money can be used to increase your GPU fund (unless it is for a very similar price).

http://m.dabs.com/products/corsair-8gb--2x4gb--ddr3-1600mhz-cl9-vengeance-black-performance-desktop-memory-kit-79V4.html?q=Corsair%208GB%20(2x4GB)&src=16 - a £10 saved here near enough

As motherboards go, you could save anywhere between £10-£40.

i5 4590 for £120 at CeX - another £35 saved.

With all the changes I am sure a nVidia 970 would be within your grasp without altering your budget. (£10 + £40 + £35 = £85 + £169 = £254 which is the average price for a nice 970 with 4GB of VRAM).

[stefan_965]

Looks good to me, i5 is perfectly fine for gaming. Wouldn't really go out of your way to spend money on it looks a good system overall. Maybe think about upgrading in 6 months or so.

[Thorsson]

Maybe think about upgrading in 6 months or so.

Are you kidding??? You should never buy looking to upgrade in 6 months... unless you just won the Euro lottery.

[Marcvs]

Its Solid but my 2c.

Consider having a wait for a month or two to take a look at Skylake (and if its Meh just grab broadwell), I would consider upping to a 970 OR Maybe even an R9 285 / R9 290 which can be had for silly cheap atm.

I personally prefer Asus or Gigabytes BIOS to MSI but its a solid board as far as I am aware. One question though - Please tell me you are planning to overclock?

I currently have a PC as per the spec in my profile but I want to update it to play some of the latest games, mainly Witcher 3. I figure I just need a CPU, GPU, mobo, and memory as the rest of the components are fine (I think). My monitor outputs at 1920x1200.
I used to be really into overclocking but haven't bothered with this in the last few years as I have lost interest.

I have looked at Scan and come up with the following: -

Intel Core i5 4590 - £156
2GB MSI GTX 960 100 MILLION Edition - £169
MSI Z97-G43 Intel Z97 - £70
8GB (2x4GB) Corsair DDR3 Vengeance Pro Series Red, PC3-14900 (1866) - £49

Please let me know if you think this is a good spec and good value for money or whether other choices should be made.

Thanks.

[CK1]

Thanks for the help so far. I will consider the extra outlay on the 970. Also, how do the AMD cards compare? What are the AMD equivalents to the 960 & 970? Is it simply based on price? Are the new 380's and 390's a better bet, i believe they only came out last week so it might be too early to tell.

Also, I have an old PCI X-Fi Music sound card in my current system. Should i carry on with that in my new build or would it be better to use the onboard sound instead?

As far as overclocking is concerned I used to run my old Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4Ghz at 3.4Ghz and the the subsequent E7500 at around 4Ghz up from 2.93Ghz. Apart from it running a little hotter and probably using more power I never noticed any real world difference, sure the benchmarks I ran were all quicker but day to day stuff was more or less the same. I think the latest CPU's are more than powerful enough without the need for overclocking unless you just do it for fun.

[gupsterg]

I think the latest CPU's are more than powerful enough without the need for overclocking unless you just do it for fun.

I sort of agree and don't as well with this.

I like to OC, never been a extreme overclocker, I see it as free performance on top which will allow me to use the hardware for longer before an upgrade.

For instance my current CPU will do 4.6GHz with 1.27v, 4.5GHz with 1.23v and 4.4GHz with 1.18v.

What do I run it on for 24/7 use? 4.4GHz with 1.18v, I can use lower volts for OC's if using for gaming but folding@home requires stability and so bump them up.

Now even though the other profiles may not be using hugely high vCore but the gain in MHz vs rise in vCore is showing diminishing return. Benchmarks show I do not gain much by the 4.5 and 4.6 profiles for what I use rig for. I applied this same principle to my Q6600 rig, that will do 3.6GHz on air (quietly ) but I use 3.4Ghz 24/7 and 3.555GHz as a little boost, she's now 8yrs old IIRC () .

[OutcasT]

Dont buy a locked processer with a Z97 chipset as it is a waste

[KeyboardDemon]

I'd go along with the comment on waiting for Skylake, we are very close to the end of June and Skylake should be readily available by early August, if you're in no hurry then wait till it launches.

Check out the Scan Today Only offers, these usually last more than a day and always have a few gems in there, I just had a look through now and found some good prices on mobo and CPU bundles, GTX960 cards at around £25 cheaper than the one you've selected and some good prices on GTX970 starting at around £225 for the Asus Strix model.

[DanceswithUnix]

Thanks for the help so far. I will consider the extra outlay on the 970. Also, how do the AMD cards compare? What are the AMD equivalents to the 960 & 970? Is it simply based on price? Are the new 380's and 390's a better bet, i believe they only came out last week so it might be too early to tell.

I was in much the same boat. Paying that 960 money for a 2GB card grated on me, and I didn't want to spend 970 money. The AMD equivalent of the 960 is an R9 285 in the old range (which I got for a bargain £120, at which point I let it off being 2GB) though I was very tempted by a 4GB GTX 760 that I saw.

Check out some benchmarks here: http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphi...rce-2x/?page=4

So AMD R9 285 is slightly slower, 280X is slightly faster. But... for a bit more money than the 960 and less than a 970 you might still be able to get an R9 290 or even a 290X but they seem to be selling out fast. Part of me wonders if the 290 is the way I should have gone. In the new AMD range you would be looking at the R9 380, but I doubt you will get a bargain one of those.

I would agree with others that waiting for Intel to bring out their new range would be the thing to do. I would get the graphics card now though, it will work fine in your existing machine.

[zachs33]

I agree - the 960 is a much better fit. Buying older hardware is best avoided; it will only create obstacles for you in the future. Equally, next gen can be expensive. For a budget build, I'd say the suggested hardware looks good.

[kalniel]

I'd personally stay far far away from these ancient AMD cards with their ridiculously high power usage (R9 285 190W, R9 290 250W+)

The 280X/290(X) are so cheap because they're ancient power hogs. The 280X is nothing more than a rebadged HD7970 GHz-Edition from 2012 sipping 250W out of your PSU..

That's just an inaccurate statement regarding the severity of power use.

The 290 draws roughly the same as an nVidia 780ti.
The 280X draws roughly the same as an nVidia 770
The 280 draws roughly the same an an nVidia 760.

None of this is a problem to anyone with a gaming PC.