Planning on a new build to upgrade from my 770. Is this good?

File: f27865fe3db31b8e0af75cc8c5eaf4a5e55702a6.jpg (29KB, 328x222px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 328x222px

>>388849376
seems p good, although I'd get a k proc if you're going to buy watercooling (even if it's AIO)

>>388849376
You should get 16 gigs of ram desu

>>388849376
16GB of RAM is a must nowadays
no point getting watercooling if your not overclocking your cpu to at least 4.4Ghz, get the 7600k

>>388849458
already using an h100i which i fucking love. going to-reuse it for this new build. K really worth it if I don't really care for overclocking?

>>388849484
is the difference in speed that much better? its double the price if I go for 16

>>388849376
nice! I just did something different but I had to go a bit cheaper. I have a 1070 and I'm perfectly happy with it. The 1080 is dope though! It should handle everything you want very well

>>388849589
>is the difference in speed that much better? its double the price if I go for 16
>double the ram costs double the price
really makes you think

>>388849663
>>388849589
>the amount of memory you have will create a "difference in speed"
made my hmmm'er go hmmm

>>388849458
fuark where is this deal?

>>388849376

Wait until the cost of graphics cards goes down. It's not like a 770 can't handle current gen games.

>>388849868
Fry's last Monday

>>388849839
>same amount of system memory as video memory
really activates my almonds

>>388849915
i havent checked prices for GPUs lately but i'm aware theres some sort of big bubble due to bitcoin farming.
Last time I checked a 1080 was close to 800$, but now its 600$ (im in canada), will it go even lower?

>>388849915
this. 680 still plays everything i give a shit about at 60fps. battlefield 1 is probably the last graphics intensive game i played and it ran fine at "still probably better than console" settings.

>intel cpu
good goy

>>388849376
what resolution/framerate are you aiming for?

>>388850075

Yea, will probably go down to around ~$450 this time next year

I too am thinking of getting a new PC, monitor the lot - should I go for 1440p or 4K? What sort of money am I going to have to save if I want to play at 60 fps 4K but with decent in game settings?

I am clueless

>>388850138
i currently have a triple 1080p screen set up, so id like to either play on one screen or extend the displays. i think that triple screen resolution should be fine for 1080p on a 1080

>>388850720

You'll be more comfortable at 1440p if you like 60 fps and maxed settings. You're going to have to compromise at 4k if you want 60 fps thought it all depends on the gpu

>>388850835
i don't know if you've ever actually played on multi monitor setup before (i can't even remember what it's technically called nSurround for nvidia or something) but it's actually pretty fucking terrible and i would only ever consider doing it in something like a racing game.

t. someone who got 3 monitors who was hyped to extend the game across all 3 but found out it was actually retarded.

>>388850995
I guess the real question I should be asking is how does 4K medium settings compare visually to 1440p High settings - I just feel like since I'm planning on making a pretty big investment in this I should future proof it and just get the 4k.

>>388851102
i already have yes, it works fine on my current build, I just have to reduce the overall quality of textures, etc.

>>388850835
yeah, the gtx 1080 should do fine for a triple 1080p setup

>>388849376
>i5
>non K
>liquid cooling

>>388851158

Mediium is meh. Well I'd say we're 2 gens away from getting the ability to play 4k games comfortable on mid range cards in the range of the gtx 1070 and vega 56. Right now you'll probably hit 40-60 fps on those cards on 4k on high and not maxed out. Might need to compromise earlier too as newer games come out.

My suggestion is get a 4k monitor and get nvidia's volta line coming in 2018. No idea what video card you will actually get but if you'r aiming for the gtx 1060 and rx 580 line of 200 bucks then forget about 4k unless you're ok with 30 fps.

I have the same case OP. It's really nice

>>388851943
oh good. i was into this case when it was announced and im glad someone likes it

>>388850835
Yeah your totally fine, a 1080 would even give you room to upgrade to 1440p, 4K or 144hz. And at 1080p a 1080 will easily last you 4-5 years if not longer.

>>388849589
Double the price of the cheapest thing in your computer. No point in hamstringing your entire machine over $50.

And if 8GB of RAM is costing you more than 50-60 dollars, it means you're falling for 1337 GAYMER RAM bullshit.

>>388852230
excellent. I had the 770 since release and it really carried me far

>>388852265
im also canadian so the good non-gamer ddr4 ram (pictured was the same price so I picked randomly) comes at 80$. 160 for 16gb

>>388851627
this wtf. wouldn't even bother with an aftermarket hsf i mean i would for $20 but you probably don't have to

>>388849376
>i5
>1080

kek

Why liquid cooling? Components are cool as fuck these days. Even the 10 series Nvidia cards.

>>388853628
>>388853762

im using it because its a leftover from my current computer and I really like it. im not buying it. shouldve specified it

how much am I going to need to spend if I want to play on ultra setttings 60fps and 1440p?

I'm going to be upgrading in a few months and I need to know how much I should put away

>>388854346
>60fps and 1440p
a 1080
>I'm going to be upgrading
so if you just need a graphics card then whatever a 1080 costs minus whatever you can sell your current card for.

>>388854779
By upgrading I mean buying an entire thing from scratch upgrading from my craptop haha

but thanks

>>388849376
Absolutely stupid.

If you have the money for a GTX1080, you need to get a high refresh rate 1440p monitor.

CPU has weak multithreaded performance. For perspective, the new i3s are going to have almost as much multithreaded perf as the current i7s

Liquid cooling is pointless

>>388854346
Don't bother with Ultra. No visual upgrade for a lot of performance it. Aim for High

I'd save up $1500 or so, including a nice monitor.

>>388850720
1440p at monitor sizes and viewing distances

>>388855013
if you're going all out, i.e. not buying the shittiest brands and cheapest parts, and even need peripherals like m/kb plus a 1440p 60hz monitor you're looking at close to 2k.

>>388854346
For reference, my computer is similar to the "outstanding" range on this chart and I get 60fps at 1440 on everything but a few horribly optimized games like XCOM 2.

http://www.logicalincrements.com/