Building My First PC

#1 Posted by TheVeteran13 (1214 posts) -

I'm finally going to take the plunge and build my own PC but I'm not too familiar with what the best parts would be so I figured I would ask the fine denizens of giantbomb.com

I've picked out all the components here: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/9QfvD3

If you have any advice like if I'm going overboard on anything or I'm missing something I need please let me know.

#2 Edited by Corevi (4373 posts) -

I would recommend getting a 650w PSU.

If you aren't planning on overclocking ever you can save a bit of money by getting the locked version of that processor (doesn't have the K at the end). If you are planning on overclocking get a CPU fan.

Just get Windows 8.1, it's basically the same price.

Otherwise pretty good build.

#3 Edited by pcorb (147 posts) -

Couple of things. Your Mobo and processor combo is one generation out of date. You should get a 4690k and Z97 motherboard. Also, if you're intending to overclock (which I assume you are, seeing as you've selected a OC capable Mobo and unlocked chip) you will need some extra cooling.

Windows 8.1 is not that much more expensive than Windows 7 and will be supported for years longer, so get a copy of that instead. If you don't like the metro interface, it is very easily avoided. Also get an SSD.

Here's a revised list with these suggestions.

If that's too far over budget, you could just remove the SSD I suppose, but if you're building a PC in 2014 and you don't throw an SSD in there, you've messed up somewhere down the line.

#4 Posted by TheVeteran13 (1214 posts) -

@pcorb: @corruptedevil: I've changed some things around based on your suggestions,

here's the updated list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/kgTn99

I updated the CPU and the Motherboard to the latest generation, I don't know much about overclocking so i got the locked processor, put in a 650 watt power supply, an SSD and changed Windows 7 to Windows 8.

#5 Edited by Corevi (4373 posts) -

Basically perfect, good job.

#6 Edited by pcorb (147 posts) -

@theveteran13: You can save a bit on the motherboard too. With a Z97 chipset you're paying a premium for the ability to overclock. A cheaper board like the ASRock H97 PR04 would be a better choice if you're not going to OC.

Also, if you want a silent case, the Fractal Design Define R4 and Nanoxia Deep Silence 2 are both significantly better than the 330R for a similar price range. And the fans they come with are perfectly suitable, so you wouldn't have to add those additional case fans into the cost of your build.

#7 Posted by Tyrrael (250 posts) -

First, the 4670K and the 4690K are both part of the Haswell processor line of Intel CPUs. They are essentially the same processor, with a mild increase in clock speed on the 4690K. If you do decide to change to the 4690K, it is also recommended that you change the motherboard to the Z97 chipset, unless you will have to flash the bios on the Z87. That having been said, the 4670K is a fine choice, and you don't really need to change it.

Also, I am vehemently against SSDs unless it is well within your budget. If you can afford one, then by all means, get one. However, if you are trying to save money even a little bit, then it is simply not worth the money for the marginal benefits it provides (with respect to cost), especially in games.

Finally, like the person said a couple posts up, I would get a PSU with a higher wattage rating. 750W is generally the minimum I recommend. It gives you plenty of power now without breaking the bank, and it will let you upgrade with relative ease later on. 650W, in my opinion, is still just slightly too low for comfort.

#8 Edited by sumjugei (54 posts) -

You all set with a decent monitor?

It is a shame to get a new rig and not get to see all the frames or pixels

#9 Posted by Corevi (4373 posts) -
@tyrrael said:

Also, I am vehemently against SSDs unless it is well within your budget. If you can afford one, then by all means, get one. However, if you are trying to save money even a little bit, then it is simply not worth the money for the marginal benefits it provides (with respect to cost), especially in games.

A small SSD is totally worth it just to put the OS on it.

#10 Posted by Andorski (5351 posts) -

You can save money by getting a motherboard with on-board WiFi. That way you don't need to buy that adapter.

#11 Posted by TheVeteran13 (1214 posts) -
#12 Posted by sumjugei (54 posts) -

@andorski: @theveteran13 is there anyway for you to connect your computer directly with ethernet and avoid needing the wifi altogether?

#13 Posted by Tyrrael (250 posts) -

@tyrrael said:

Also, I am vehemently against SSDs unless it is well within your budget. If you can afford one, then by all means, get one. However, if you are trying to save money even a little bit, then it is simply not worth the money for the marginal benefits it provides (with respect to cost), especially in games.

A small SSD is totally worth it just to put the OS on it.

The 120GB 840 EVO, one of the most popular SSDs out there, is around $88 on Amazon right now. That may not seem like a lot, but it's a measly 120GB for the price of, or close to, a terabyte. That's a waste of money to me, if you're on a budget. Like I said, if you're trying to save even a little money, it's not worth it just so your PC boots a little faster or some programs open a little quicker. I can wait about a minute or so for my PC to boot from a full on shutdown to being up and usable, but then again, I don't have money to burn. If you do, then by all means, get one, but for me, and most others on a budget, it's a complete waste of money.

#14 Posted by sumjugei (54 posts) -

@tyrrael: most build guides i've looked at recommend an SSD. I will grant that it is an easy post build upgrade, but for most machines it makes a huge difference. I don't get much benefit to my life from booting faster, but it isnt just booting. If your VRAM is on an SSD it can be accessed and swapped much faster, making it function more like your RAM, and that changes almost everything. I've had friends extend the life of their laptops by only changing over to a SSD.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2048120/benchmarks-dont-lie-ssd-upgrades-deliver-huge-performance-gains.html

#15 Posted by Tyrrael (250 posts) -

@sumjugei said:

@tyrrael: most build guides i've looked at recommend an SSD. I will grant that it is an easy post build upgrade, but for most machines it makes a huge difference. I don't get much benefit to my life from booting faster, but it isnt just booting. If your VRAM is on an SSD it can be accessed and swapped much faster, making it function more like your RAM, and that changes almost everything. I've had friends extend the life of their laptops by only changing over to a SSD.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2048120/benchmarks-dont-lie-ssd-upgrades-deliver-huge-performance-gains.html

First, I'm not saying that SSDs don't give you any increase in performance. My major argument is that they're often not worth the money for that performance increase when the money could be used elsewhere to greate effect, which is an argument I stand by.

Next, if you think that an SSD is going to drastically increase the performance on a PC that has underpowered hardware, you're dreaming, especially since the money would be better served upgrading that hardware, which, for the money, would give you better performance on the games you plan to run on it. That is, if your PC doesn't at least meet the minimum requirements for a game, then I'm betting that slapping an SSD in there isn't going to do much.

Finally, while I can understand that benchmarks are an often used method for comparing various aspects of a PC, they don't always directly translate into real world usage. That is, the higher numbers will generally denote a better machine, but that doesn't mean the other machine is bad. The only tangible evidence I saw from reading that article was that it can rather significantly (percentage-wise anyway) decrease boot time, which I already knew. And even then, it's 40 seconds less. I could care less about that.

I've been using Western Digital Black 7200RPM drives for years, and they've served me faithfully those years. I get perfectly acceptable performance, and I have no desire to spend my money on what is essentially a luxury that I don't need. If you have the money and want one, fine, get one, but don't expect me to. With my limited income, it's not something I'm going to even consider, nor should anyone on a limited budget, when they can get a much larger HDD that will still give respectable performance at a fraction of the cost.

#16 Edited by TehBuLL (613 posts) -

The whole computer loading from off to desktop in a flash paid off for convenience with my SSD as soon as I built it and had to go through updating everything. If anything just throw the OS and a couple of your newest games on there and be satisfied. Really is a game changer.

#17 Posted by pcorb (147 posts) -

@tyrrael said:

First, the 4670K and the 4690K are both part of the Haswell processor line of Intel CPUs. They are essentially the same processor, with a mild increase in clock speed on the 4690K. If you do decide to change to the 4690K, it is also recommended that you change the motherboard to the Z97 chipset, unless you will have to flash the bios on the Z87. That having been said, the 4670K is a fine choice, and you don't really need to change it.

Also, I am vehemently against SSDs unless it is well within your budget. If you can afford one, then by all means, get one. However, if you are trying to save money even a little bit, then it is simply not worth the money for the marginal benefits it provides (with respect to cost), especially in games.

Finally, like the person said a couple posts up, I would get a PSU with a higher wattage rating. 750W is generally the minimum I recommend. It gives you plenty of power now without breaking the bank, and it will let you upgrade with relative ease later on. 650W, in my opinion, is still just slightly too low for comfort.

There's not a huge difference between the 4670 and 4690 i5s, but they generally go for the same price, so it's quite sensible to choose the marginally better one.

I really don't think the benefits of an SSD in day to day use are "marginal". Nobody (I hope) is saying that an SSD will help you run graphically intensive games on max settings, they just make using a PC much more efficient and less frustrating.

Power supply wattage isn't as important as quality and efficiency. I'd feel much more at ease putting, say, a gold rated SeaSonic 500W PSU in that build than a 750W Raidmax piece of garbage. According to this convenient calculator. 650W is well above what that build would require.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.