>>57165214 This isn't going over budget. This is staying

File: 590b033d111cb36d4ee5c4e9ad26da8b.jpg (307KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 2000x1000px

>>57165226
You got me

>>57165214
>tfw no poo in the loo gf to use my face as her designated shitting street

>Athlon 880k
Is this using the newer architecture that the 845 uses or is it just an 860k with higher base clocks?

>>57165628
It's got higher clocks and a wrath cooler iirc. Not sure what other changes it has

>>57165735
Looking around it does seem to be Steamroller, not Excavator. That's too bad, an unlocked 845 would be pretty badass.

>>57165767
You can still bclk oc the 845 though.

>>57165214

I want to watch her poop.

About to purchase an RX 470 4GB by MSI for 1080p vidyer. Am I making a mistake?

>>57166813
I'd say bump up to the 8GB version, many games are already close to or over the 4GB limit so it'll be a bottleneck pretty soon.

BF4 used almost 3GB, gta V uses 4GB, shadows of mordor uses up to 6GB, for example.

>>57166888
>many games are already close to or over the 4GB limit

vram counters are a load of shit, you don't need 8gb, waste of money

>>57166888
Thought so, it's only 20 bucks more anyway. Thanks.

>>57166932
nah, he's right. Ever seen a 970 try to run mirror's edge catalyst on max settings?
It actually can't even run the game, because it uses more than 4gb of vram.
Of course with a 470 you probably are not going to be maxing out any games, but getting the 8gb won't hurt.

>>57166932
It's one of the reasons the 7950 aged better than a 670. It has 50% more vram.

Also 290 vs 780.

>>57167028
>extreme high end vs upper midrange

gee I wonder why it aged better

470 is upper mid too

>>57167042
Wtf you on about?
7950 was competing with 670.
7970 was competing with 680.
290 was competing with 780.
290x was competing with 780 ti.

>>57165214
Budget hardware is the best. I have a z8300 and z3735f, only have an a8-5500 and gtx 750 ti in addition though.

>>57167140
I'm amazed at what budget hardware is capable off. Most people who buy an i5 or i7 would be just as well off on an i3 or Pentium.

File: 1476168391545.jpg (41KB, 443x526px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 443x526px

>>57167443
>tfw someone in pcbg spent nearly a grand on a pc that is used only for chinese cartoons and music file converting
It's his money alright, but still...

Lol this bullshit thread about outside looking in. What a garbage mentality to sell your violence. Dumb nigger.

>>57168075
Really?
Why do people do it? I got a cheap d2550 for my htpc last year, 25 aud.

Can't imagine going that overkill on my specs ever, it's just wasteful ;_;

>>57167443
I haven't had to feel the gut wrenching turn of my stomach drop when I read that something can't run on my machine since I bought the i5. Better to stay ahead of the lower end theory and just push on with knowledge about the computer than knowledge about the market. But, I mean look at OP's pic. What's that little steel sheet for anyway?

Hello woooorol - SKIP! BUDWEISER

>>57168834
Yeah but what won't run on an i3 4170 or 3220?

I'm getting consistent 60fps in gta v, medium settings. I3 3220, r7 260x, 8GB ram.

>>57169121
>medium settings
There you go. If everyone ran Medium settings at 1080p, no one would need better shit.

>>57169225
Well my bottleneck is my 260x right now, I'm going to upgrade to a 470 8GB soon and if my i3 isn't enough for 60fps max then I'll upgrade to an i7 3770.

You can max out every modern title on an i3 6100, it's as fast as an i5 6400 for most games thanks to the massive difference in single thread performance.

>>57168834
don't forget to click back, btw.

>>57165214
all trash, just bin any garbage that can't run 4k at 144hz. I refuse to buy a fucking graphics card that won't

>>57165214
The last atom, Z8750, is great. Still cheap too

>>57169380
>the last Atom
Has it been discontinued or did you mean latest?

>>57169428
That'll be the last one. Supposedly there'll be an announcement next year on intel's next low power chip. I think core m is pretty much done for too by the way things sound.

>>57169462
Damn. Was hoping to upgrade from my z3735f to a much better atom in a few years.

I'm going to assume that the name change will come with a price change too.
Unfortunate.

>>57169472
Yes but I don't see a big price difference if they stick to the same ultra low power template for the next iteration. They've always been between $20-$40 msrp for the chips themselves. Core M on the other hand are literally ten times the price and nobody wants it.

>>57165214
>FX8350 $160
>16GB Hyper x fury 1866 ram $79
>Gigabyte 990FX board $109
>WD 1TB Drive $60
>Used Radeon HD7970 GPU $145
>Cooler Master Hyper TX3 $23
>Rosewill challenger case because cheap fuck $35

$611 for a console killer with 8 crappy AMD cores is still a great deal even today, the CPU board and ram could even be bought used to bring the price down a little bit, but that's a console killer, a normie doesn't really need much more than that.

>>57169121
Don't you want to play Fallout 4?