i got 4 years of experience in computer hardware & building.
first of all, a gaming computer relies more on more gpu power over cpu power.
second of all, nobody will notice a difference between a AMD cpu over a intel cpu doing light tasks. the only way you will notice a difference is if you didn't install the cpu right or you're using both cpu's to 100% usage , which most people don't even do.
third of all, a power supply is what gives power to the whole computer. having a cheap power supply with inferior capacitors means you will increase the risks of having things you don't want to happen to your computer happen. for example : crash, explode, set on fire, take some parts down.
fourth thing, more ram will not give any real life performance. you gain 1-2% more fps by jumping from 4gb to 8gb and while gaming a person will hit usually up to 6gb of ram in use.

i would continue going on, but i'm bored.

This post was edited by dolarsignzeroxeighty on Mar 23 2014 05:04pm

Yay finally a counter argument.
The CPU is like the human brain, it processes instructions that are stored in the RAM and executes them. If it cannot process the instructions fast/well enough, hardware like the video card will be waiting for instructions on what to do next. The difference between AMD and Intel is noticeable even if you are not tech savy by running simple benchmarks. The AMD cpu pipeline is crap compared to the Intel one, so a 3ghz Intel cpu will be faster than a 3ghz AMD cpu. Simply because each clock cycle Intel will get a lot more work done compared to AMD. When you factor in things like AVX2 and other extensions, efficient multithreading and context switching you will notice large differences. Here is a read about CPU pipeling: http://www.geek.com/chips/what-is-a-processors-pipeline-561598/

About GPU power vs CPU power, yes graphics are important and I would drop 200-300$ on a video card no doubt. But if it came down to a $100 processor and 200-300$ video card, or $200-300 processor and $100 video card. I would cheap out on the video card. Video card are powerful enough now at $100 to run most games on Ultra.

About the PSU. I have went through 2 motherboards that fried (cheap ones), a video card, and cpu but never a powersupply. Even the crappiest $20 power-supply has not failed me (no capacitator problems). Im not saying to get a $20 PSU infact my PSU ATM is ~$110, but if your on a budget a basic PSU for around 30-50$ will work great. Your not overclocking so you don't need 650W+. Again overclocking may be a different story, and if your messing around with voltages a crappy PSU could fry your hardware or fry itself. But to really mess with voltages you need some tools and knowledge (not just bios changes).


You will not even gain a 1-2% difference going from 4GB to 8GB unless your using swap with 4GB. The ram is for the ramdisk. Which acts as a partition on the system (C:/ this will be D:/). The average Read/Write of a SSD is 300-500MBps. The average Read/Write of DDR3-1600 ram is 5000/5000MBps. When you play Diablo 3, all the game-data, music, monster animations, etc are stored in the MPQ files (Diablo III\Data_D3\PC\MPQs). This data is too large to be stored in ram, so its stored on disk, and loaded into ram when needed. Reading the data off the disk into ram incurs multiple penalties. First the disk must be idle as the read head can only do 1 thing at once, reading from a disk is not multithreadable. Then the speed of the read is not that fast. When you run the game off your ramdisk (D:/ drive), these reads first of all dont need to align the read head of the disk, so the access time is much faster. Second the transfer rate of 5000 up/down MBps is blazing fast, the Diablo 3 MPQs are about 10gb in size. It would take 2 seconds to read all of them. Using a fast SSD would take 10, and if reading small parts of multiple MPQs randomly, would take MUCH MUCH longer on an SSD then if it were in ram.

The difference is most noticeable on joining new games, black screen delay before a cutscene or starting up the game for the first time.

You can read about ramdisks here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAM_drive

This post was edited by russki1 on Mar 23 2014 05:50pm

Did you really expect us to believe you because you threw up a wall of text?

You wouldn't be able to tell the difference between an 8320 build and a 3770k build with the naked eye. If you claim you can, you're a liar. Furthermore, most games don't use hyperthreading. Your argument fails to mention that, probably because you didn't know about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

Regarding the GPU...you don't have a clue, do you?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1125?vs=1037

This post was edited by VVR4ITH on Mar 23 2014 06:15pm

first : i know what a CPU is, i got 4 Years of experience...your difference is related to theoretical benchmarks. i speak in real life, not in benchmarks.
second, assuming you have 400$ for a CPU and a GPU, going with a 150$ CPU ( fx 8320) and spending 250$ on a GPU ( gtx 760) will give you best of both worlds.
you will gain a strong CPU that is considered the best price vs performance wise and gain a real GPU that is the best price vs performance wise and will actually be able to game on 1080p.

Second: a 100$ GPU is a joke, even more in a 800-900$ build. you're supposed to actually spend at least 20% of your budget on a GPU... not 10% on your GPU.
a 100$ GPU will play games on high settings under 1080p and at mediocre fps... if you want, you will see some benchmarks since you like to bring it up in CPU's and RAM DISK.

third: RAM DISK is a crappy excuse to get 32gb of ram. i know what RAM DISK is, i don't consider it a smart thing to do in a small budget build like this one. because you can allocate more money on the GPU instead of upgrading the GPU every year because of low performance. buying more ram later on when you have extra money with the intention of making RAM DISK could be understood, but going strong on ram over gpu power is pointless.

That first post about the GPU, your not gonna be playing a FPS and having a good time at 30 fps, and 90 FPS isn't ideal either. Unless your really casual. So either get a Titan to play those games on that settings + resolution, or lower your GFX a notch. You need at least 200+ FPS (300 average) to have a good time and actually kill something in CSS. If you give me monitor hertz bs, go play CSS at 61fps, and at 300fps, and tell me the difference.

Other 2 videos are great but its just showing the guy playing a game with a video card. Doesn't touch on all the other benefits like AMD boards don't even support PCIE 3.0.

thank you for showing you don't know anything.
first of all, it takes skills, not high fps.
second of all, no monitor so far has a refresh rate even close to 300hz, so playing a game @ 300fps actually doesn't give you an advantage....

with this in mind,you have showed everyone you don't know anything.

Well k, you make a point. Getting 8 GB ram and saving ~$200 on the other 24GB putting to the video card would be better. The difference is only noticeable for games that use the disk a lot, like Civilization 5 off a RamDisk is much more enjoyable. But the difference on a budget isn't worth the sacrifice on the video card. I'm just not that big a GFX fan as you can see, I rather my game load 2x faster then look 2x better but load 2x slower.

Also at the current price of PCIE drives, it might be better to put that ~$200 towards one of these http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227578, performance would be similar as using a ramdisk.

Yea I know. But go play the game at 60 fps, and 300 fps. The refresh rate on the monitor is the same, but the refresh in-game is different, models are much smoother. You cant take everything at face value. Just because a shed says dick on it, doesn't make it not a shed.

This post was edited by russki1 on Mar 23 2014 06:32pm

That's a matter of opinion, one I don't agree with. In any case, this point is irrelevant.

As for the guy playing a game with a video card...last I checked, I was building a gaming PC for the OP. My two videos alone have more relevance than any wall of text you've posted so far.

Yea but whats the point of getting a GTX 770 which is a PCIE 3.0 card when AMD boards only support PCIE 2.0. The bus speed is much slower. Your capping a video card, no point in spending that money if you cant take advantage of it.