More PC shenanigans - building a media centre and gaming rig....

Drew_TNBD

So I've got my DAW machine sorted out. And I've got a PSU, 4790K chip, and a bunch of RAM that is all good. What do you reckon is the cheapest way to get a gaming rig up and running?? I'd need to add a graphics card, a motherboard, a case, a CPU cooler, and some hard-drives.

It would need to sit inside one of those IKEA KALLAX square holes, so I'm thinking mini-ATX.

Secondary concern is to use it as a media centre. This would be for the front room, so I can separate out my gaming needs from my DAW needs.

I'd be playing games like Witcher 3, Dishonoured2, Outlast2, Fallout3, Skyrim... etc... so I'd want something quite beefy on the GPU front.

@Digitalscream @Myranda - thoughts???

digitalscream

Any vaguely-decent motherboard will do. I tend to prefer aluminium cases, although I have a Corsair Carbide MicroATX cube case at the moment which is pretty awesome - PSU and drives in one side, motherboard etc in the other. Depends how much room you've got, really.

As for the GPU...NVidia are way better than AMD in my opinion, and more reliable driver-wise. If you're gaming at 1080p then I'd say a minimum of a 960 or 1050 - whichever is the more reasonably-priced - but if you want more than 1080p resolution then you might do well to get a 1060 (or even a 1070, but they're stepping up to serious money).

Axe_meister

I use one of these. http://www.fractal-design.com/home/product/cases/node-series/node-605
Have an i7 4770K 32GB Memory with a Watercooler on the CPU. It can take a 3/4 length GPU if you only use two drives

Axe_meister

For 1080p and AMD RX470 or RX480 or Nvidia 1050ti is more than enough unless you really want insane fps, but your TV can probably only do 50/60 fps anyway.

FX_Munkee

Not quite sure on the dimensions of the KALLAX units but I'd be looking for a Micro ATX case that would fit, as it will give you more (= cheaper) options to build it.

Myranda

On the train at the moment... 

But:

a 970/1070 will give killer frame rates on most games at 1080p (even a 60fps TV type screen wants to be at 60 fps to avoid unsightly screen tearing, and ideally use a frame limit of 60 to keep it close to that target) 

Coupled with a 4790 you have a formidable machine... 

MicroATX will be plenty... But you can get mini cards in the 960, 970 1060 and 1070 flavours so you could so a MiniITX too and have an even smaller footprint in the Kalax unit making finding a case easier... 

Invest in a Bluetooth dongle (why was autocorrect "dingle"?) and you should be able to use wireless control pads and get one of the Microsoft wireless keyboards (built in track pad for Netflix convenience)... And you have ultimate sofa computer-ing

ThePrettyDamned

A gtx960 is a pretty solid card, and seems roughly equivalent to a 1050 - not sure which is cheaper though. 

I have a gtx960 and it'll run fallout and doom no problems, at decent settings, at 1080p. They're not uber powerhouse cards, but the step up from them (from when I was shopping) was quite a leap in price. 

I think the 1050 is similar in power but more efficient, might be cooler? I bow down to @myranda and @digitalscream in this technical stuff - my recommendation is based on my own machine and my being happy with the gtx960 for hd gaming. 

Bidley

If you have a 1080p 60hz display, a used 970 would be more than enough and would provide plenty of bang for your buck.

digitalscream

For the record, I have a GTX970 with an i7 6700 CPU, and I run Elite: Dangerous at 1920x1200 on pretty much maxed-out settings with absolutely no problems whatsoever.

The 6700 is only about 5% faster than the 4790 (although it runs much cooler), so I'd say that's a pretty good rig for gaming. The GTX970 is just as quiet as my 12cm CPU cooler - I don't even hear the PC, even with the side off.

ennspek

You could sell all the bits and buy a PS4.

Drew_TNBD

ennspek said:

You could sell all the bits and buy a PS4.

Console peasant!!

crunchman

ThePrettyDamned said:

A gtx960 is a pretty solid card, and seems roughly equivalent to a 1050 - not sure which is cheaper though. 

I have a gtx960 and it'll run fallout and doom no problems, at decent settings, at 1080p. They're not uber powerhouse cards, but the step up from them (from when I was shopping) was quite a leap in price. 

I think the 1050 is similar in power but more efficient, might be cooler? I bow down to @myranda and @digitalscream in this technical stuff - my recommendation is based on my own machine and my being happy with the gtx960 for hd gaming. 

Speeds are on here:
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

Real world might be a bit different but should give an idea.

If you click on the individual card, it will give you more details - including the maximum thermal design power (TDP).  The 960 is listed at 120W while the 1050 is listed at 75W.  They won't always be running at maximum power but the 1050 will run cooler.  Tom's hardware lists power consumption for different uses if you want more details.  For gaming the 1050 tends to be in the 70W region, while the 960 is in the 100W region so the 1050 would save a few pennies on the electricity bill.  More importantly it will make the case run a little cooler.

wolsnah

As well as the fractal-design recommendation above, have a look at the Silverstone cases (http://www.silverstonetek.com). I've built machines with both GD04 and GD09 cases and very happy with both. Bear in mind if you're going for a small form factor you'll need to find a small form factor GPU to fit the case. They're around, just be aware.

Axe_meister

EVGA is the usual goto for small form factor cards 

ThePrettyDamned

crunchman said:

ThePrettyDamned said:

A gtx960 is a pretty solid card, and seems roughly equivalent to a 1050 - not sure which is cheaper though. 

I have a gtx960 and it'll run fallout and doom no problems, at decent settings, at 1080p. They're not uber powerhouse cards, but the step up from them (from when I was shopping) was quite a leap in price. 

I think the 1050 is similar in power but more efficient, might be cooler? I bow down to @myranda and @digitalscream in this technical stuff - my recommendation is based on my own machine and my being happy with the gtx960 for hd gaming. 

Speeds are on here:
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

Real world might be a bit different but should give an idea.

If you click on the individual card, it will give you more details - including the maximum thermal design power (TDP).  The 960 is listed at 120W while the 1050 is listed at 75W.  They won't always be running at maximum power but the 1050 will run cooler.  Tom's hardware lists power consumption for different uses if you want more details.  For gaming the 1050 tends to be in the 70W region, while the 960 is in the 100W region so the 1050 would save a few pennies on the electricity bill.  More importantly it will make the case run a little cooler.

Indeed. 

In fact, it turns out that you can run a gtx 1060 in my pc (alienware x51) which is a big deal - the PSU is a power brick that sits outside the case, so expansion is limited. There are some mini gtx 1060 cards apparently that will fit and still run safely on the included PSU. 

Pretty cool stuff. 

robgilmo

I use JRiver as my media centre, it ticks all the boxes.

Emp_Fab

Pah...  I'll bet nobody here remembers when your choice was CGA or EGA and graphics cards came in 8 or 16 bit ISA form factors - with jumpers to select the IRQ.

FX_Munkee

Emp_Fab said:

Pah...  I'll bet nobody here remembers when your choice was CGA or EGA and graphics cards came in 8 or 16 bit ISA form factors - with jumpers to select the IRQ.

pah - of course I do. I also remember having to write polygon clipping routines to stop cards like the Voodoo crashing if you tried to draw outside the screen area. Happy days, jumpers for goalposts, etc...

digitalscream

Emp_Fab said:

Pah...  I'll bet nobody here remembers when your choice was CGA or EGA and graphics cards came in 8 or 16 bit ISA form factors - with jumpers to select the IRQ.

Bugger off, sir :P

I remember those days quite well - in fact, my first experience with overclocking was when I built a machine with a Cyrix 486 and set the jumpers wrong...that was a happy accident, until I realised (a little too late) how much extra heat it was kicking out at a 32% clock speed bump...

PolarityMan

I was just wondering the other day whatever became of 3dfx? They were giants when 3d acceleration was jsut getting started.

digitalscream

PolarityMan said:

I was just wondering the other day whatever became of 3dfx? They were giants when 3d acceleration was jsut getting started.

The Voodoo 5 6000 had to be abandoned, and it broke them (along with the Rampage project) - it wasn't compatible with P4 motherboards, and the move to hardware texture and lighting (the GeForce's innovation) meant they weren't competitive any more. The 6000 was faster than almost everything NVidia came up with (and way ahead of the Radeon stuff), but it was so bloody expensive to make that it would never have sold. Rampage R&D sucked up the rest of their cash, and they went bankrupt.

Then NVidia bought them out, and the engineers working on Rampage became part of the GeForce 5 team. Most of the other engineers went to ATI and re-interpreted the Voodoo SLI tech to make Crossfire.