AMD CPU's are weaker. Their performance just isn't good enough. Yes, they are cheaper, but Intel uses less electricity and they perform better. Plus cheapest ASRock mobo's are really bad so there's no point buying mobo that costs around 40$ or so if it's from ASRock (trust me - I know it from my own experience). I suggest staying with Intel.
Comment has been collapsed.
ASRock make very solid mobos, ive never had an issue, they're basically ASUS. AMD CPUS are NOT weak, thats a common misconception from ill informed people. A 6300 can be got for around €100 as its very good for gaming and intense usage, and can be OCed to nearly 4.5ghz. Voltage difference is miniscule so not really a deal breaker.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've had 2 AMD CPUs which were best when I bought them. And I had an Intel CPU which had same GHz and cores as those AMD ones - it was faster and benchmarks were better. And for ASRock - sure they make solid mobos but only if price goes over 100$. Cheapest ones are very bad. Yes, I have ASRock H61M-S in my PC at the moment but just because I had very limited budget and I wanted to get better CPU so I can upgrade my MOBO later. I have seen benchmarks and seen in real life how Intel outperforms AMD.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's not how the real world works. That's like saying my car should go the same speed as someone else's car because it has the same amount of wheels.
You compare performance at a specific price point, not through the Mhz rating which means nothing these days.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is so wrong... It's like if you buy cheap car that breaks all the time although it's good on paper. And your friend buys car that costs a bit more, that's on paper a bit worse but performs better and doesn't break. Of course your friend wins because you will have to pay again for new car or parts for it. Same goes with AMD and Intel CPUs. For graphics cards there isn't that big difference but in CPUs you will see it.
Comment has been collapsed.
As I said - I have had 2 AMD CPUs. Now I'm using Intel i3-3220. I had 2 different Semprons before with same GHz (one on laptop, one on PC). I changed PC one with Intel Celeron if I remember correctly (although I could be wrong with what it was because it was some time ago). Same GHz, same count of cores, same whole system except motherboards (most of times impossible to mount Intel on AMD motherboard). Benchmarks were lower for AMD and I felt myself that the performance increased with Intel. I never said there are problems with AMD. What I'm saying is - Intel will have better performance then AMD. Hell, that old laptop with Sempron is still running. And I still have that old PC with Sempron or Celeron (I just need to switch mobos with already mounted CPUs) available.
Comment has been collapsed.
1+ I have no real experience, but I did buy a Intel processor, that was worse on the paper then any equalient AMD in my price range, I bought basically the cheapest I could get, that was still good enough for my needs. The AMD one had 4 cores and looked very great on the paper, but when I checked up benchmarks it didn't quite do as well as this Intel with "only" 2 cores and about 0.5GHZ less in powah. This was my first own custom built computer, and I did shitloads of research before I ordered anything...
Comment has been collapsed.
AMD CPU performance "isn't good enough"? Not good enough for what? I haven't seen a single person complain about the performance of their AMD based computer. And yes, they use it for gaming / video & photo editing, not just web browsing. Not sure what you have in mind that they aren't good enough for.
Comment has been collapsed.
That video card is very powerful for that CPU. It would suffer if you want to run PlanetSide 2, i think.
I have an AMD FX-8350 procesor and an AMD Radeon HD 7850 and i can run pretty much anything at 60fps. PlanetSide 2 runs at medium settings: 30 fps on intensive firefights, and 60 fps on everything else.
Oh, and i have 1 TB HDD and i think it's not enough :/.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually, the 8470 is barely even entry level, while the 7850 is low-mid tier. The i3 should do fine/only struggle a bit with PS2.
To OP, don't buy that unless it's ≤$600(4k krona, although I don't know the average rate for PCs in Sweden, and this particular PC is about 550 here.), and even then look out for better deals. Give or take Borderlands 2, though, which I'm not quite sure about, you should be able to play all of the games in your library with it.
Definitely build your own though, if you can. Cheaper, Stronger, and there are videos all over to teach you how.
Comment has been collapsed.
As you know it's not a high end machine. The GPU is really the weakest link. Idk if it will just be a gaming machine for you, but it should handle the games in your library fairly well.
Comment has been collapsed.
Eh, that's pushing it. It's actually a notch down from a 6670/7670, and that's entry level, at least for gaming. AMD 8000 series as of now are simply rebranded 7000 series.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're kidding right? That's your counter argument? That it runs them at ultra settings at 640x480? It's pretty much assumed that everyone will be using 1920x1080 these days, if not it'll be something like 1600x1200 and the performance difference there is negligible.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually resolution does matter the most imo, my old gaming laptop could play certain games on high quality if resolution was like 800 x 600, source games for example. If i wanted to raise the resolution even higher, computer would get fps lag, and if i ended up cutting on the quality instead, the fps would drop down again.
And this was a very old gaming laptop, it's 5 years old and components in it are sort of ancient by now.
And i missread the graphics card he had for some reason...
Comment has been collapsed.
My suggestion is to build a computer. I just did it myself for the first time and it really is a lot easier than it seems. Largely the only complicated thing is figuring out which parts you want and making sure they quality and compatible. Tom's Hardware forum is a great place for questions about that as is PCPartPicker for planning your build.
The i3 processor is fine for gaming nowadays. Just note that as games progress they will begin to use more of the processor cores and with the i3 only having 2 real cores (and 2 virtual ones) it will be needed to be upgraded in a few years. That being said, for a gaming PC the main focus should be a good graphics card than processor. A general rule of thumb is that the GPU should make up about 1/3rd of the total cost of the PC.
Comment has been collapsed.
My recommendation for an entry to medium level gaming PC:
Here was my build if you'd like ideas. It ended up costing $800 for the computer itself but I would have ended up paying around $1200 for a similar prebuilt one.
Comment has been collapsed.
Processor is Low to Mid.
Graphics card is Very Low.
RAM is Low to Mid.
Hard-Drive is Low.
No, that is not a good computer. That graphics card technically doesn't even exist, it's a rebadged 7000 series card (actually it's a rebadged 6450) for shoddy store-built PCs.
Comment has been collapsed.
CPU isn't that bad - I'm using it and for now it is enough for games. RAM is low? 6GB is enough. Yes, would be nice to see frequencies and model. HDD - can't say if it's low. 500GB/1TB is enough but without model can't say anything. Graphics card - yes, it is rebadged 7000 series card but will be fine enough if he doesn't wanna play games in fullHD (1920x1080 and up) resolutions.
Comment has been collapsed.
How to build a computer based within a store:
-see a build made within the shop that fits your price range;
-browse through the store, find similiar components that are nearly the same and cost a few bucks less;
-start changing piece by piece untill your build is like 200€/$ cheap from what it used to be OR apply stronger components in other areas.
I did this, i changed some stuff, no big deal and managed to save around 150€ that got invested in double the ram with 1866MHZ instead of 1600 (16gb), asus gtx 660 to 670 and a kingstone SSD 120GB.
Parts i "downgraded" mostly was the mobo, desktop box (cheaper but still better the one i got, has cooling buttons for the fans i have applied, other one didn't plus it's easy to break it apart when to do some cleaning). Bought cheaper gaming components (mouse and keyboard) and a cheaper monitor, all that made me save that much. i ended up paying a little bit more because of the SSD, it wasn't included in the build to begin with.
Comment has been collapsed.
21 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by gauxel
39 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by OneManArmyStar
760 Comments - Last post 22 minutes ago by m0r1arty
21 Comments - Last post 29 minutes ago by OneManArmyStar
42 Comments - Last post 43 minutes ago by SergeiKuzmin
32 Comments - Last post 47 minutes ago by m0r1arty
15 Comments - Last post 50 minutes ago by WhaleAlex
495 Comments - Last post 24 seconds ago by Martibsir
16,890 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by MjrPITA
710 Comments - Last post 3 minutes ago by Skull18
0 Comments - Created 6 minutes ago by Lugum
20 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by miIk
0 Comments - Created 10 minutes ago by ConanOLion
153 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by Noobdynone
Hi everyone! Im just wondering is this computer good?
It is an Acer Aspire XC 600 and i think i gonna get one.
Its a small computer, but i think it can be good anyways.
This is the specs on the computer:
Intel Core i3-3220 processor / 3.3 GHz
AMD Radeon HD 8470 / 2GB dedicated
6 GB RAM / 500 GB hard drive
GUYS! I found one version of this computer with an i5-3330 proccesor + 1 TB hard drive.
Sorry if i wrote something wrong im Swedish :P
Comment has been collapsed.