I had a gaming laptop until recently, but it broke and now I wanted to build my own gaming PC. Since I'm not very familiar with the subject, I asked my friend to help and he put together what he thought was a good computer for a price range of 1000 euro, but now I wanted to ask if this PC was also good for them today's possible services for this price range.
I now list the individual components:
Processor / CPU:
https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
Mainboard / motherboard:
https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
Graphic card:
https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
Space storage:
https://www.alternate.de/G-Skill/DIMM-16-GB-DDR4-3000-Kit-Arbeitsspeicher/html/product/1283393?event=search&zanpid=11731_1587328074_7ec706114a350f3a570bb953e98a3711&awc=11731_1587328074_7ec706114a350f3a570bb953e98a3711&campaign=AF/DeZanox/Textlinks/Alternate
SSD:
https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
Power adapter:
https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
Casing:
https://www.amazon.de/...01BNFPNBQ/
I'm already looking forward to your answers!
Unless you want to use PCIe4.0, take an MSI B450 A Pro Max or Tomahawk Max and save yourself the 50 euro.
You could then invest them in better RAM: one of them has better dies for potential OC:
https://geizhals.de/...mp=2222519
The case doesn't look like something high-quality, why not a bQ Pure Base 500 ?:
https://geizhals.de/...26864.html
Rest should fit.
3733mhz ram
thicc III graphics without rgb or sapphires nitro + special as rgb
b450 / x470 mainboard from msi
The mainboard does not fit the housing (mainboard ATX, housing mATX).
Furthermore, I think the case is rather unsuitable for a gaming PC, especially since the power supply has to be mounted on top.
Otherwise the PC basically fits.
With the mainboard you could theoretically save 50 euro if you e.g. Take a B450 Tomahawk MAX.
A different design should be taken from the 5700 XT because the VRAM cooling of the TUF is very bad.
You could take even faster RAM.
Mainboard is pretty bad for an X570 board and in general, an X570 is pretty pointless for a Ryzen 5. With a simple but good B450 "Max" board from MSI you are much better and cheaper!
The RX 5700 cards from ASUS, especially the TUF; one should also avoid defects due to massive cooler design.
For example, the TUF does not have good cooling for the VRAM, which is why the card gets very loud to compensate for this. That's why it's so cheap!
And the case is really just a bunch of plastic and tin waste… It doesn't support the ATX mainboard, but a maximum of mATX!
There are so many good cases for relatively little money!
For 1000 euro this is much better overall!
You can use this as a guide:
Thanks for your quick and good answer, would you be so kind and would you put together a PC in a price range of 1000 euro? That would help me enormously!
And one more question, is this PC better? Respectively. Is it good for the price?
https://www.hardwaredealz.com/bester-gaming-pc-fuer-unter-1000-euro-gamer-pc-bis-1000-euro/
No, the configurations of HardwareDealz are not really good, because almost all of them have the same errors:
Too much money for a Windows 10 key
the case is quite cheap
A very poor custom design of the graphics card is often recommended
a much too small and expensive 480 gig SSD, for which you get a lot more good storage!
Better the slightly weaker RX 5700 XT, which is much cheaper!
For 1000 euro you save too much on the mainboard, which can and will severely limit future upgrading of the entire PC and overclocking
-
I already linked a good 1000 euro configuration to you!
Here again:
https://geizhals.de/...WL-1207916
And also at Mindfactory directly in the shopping cart,
just click on the Mindstar Link beforehand to get the GPU 20 euro cheaper.
Thank you so much!
Do I understand correctly that this PC is the best that you can currently get for 1000 euro?
Basically yes.
I don't see any good opportunities to get out without saving too much anywhere else.
You could of course use a different housing, since it is a matter of taste! That is why I have a few alternatives inside the miser list.
But only as long as the dimensions fit and there's enough airflow.
Why did you actually take such an expensive RAM memory and not a cheap one like that
Because you need DDR4 RAM with at least 3000/3200 MHz for gaming on a current platform.
DDR3 RAM, as you linked there, is not compatible!
In addition, it should be a dual kit, i.e. 2x 8 GB, because otherwise you can't use a dual channel and thus lose a lot of performance.
You will also lose a lot of performance if you take slower RAM, as the infinity fabric architecture of the Ryzen CPUs largely works in parallel with the RAM clock.
70/80 euro is a completely normal and above all affordable price for current RAM kits. Especially when you consider that they cost twice as much 2 years ago…
But my friend says that you need another old CPU for another mainboard to activate the mainboard, so to speak, or at least something like that
Not with the B450 MAX from MSI, as these were later released with an already updated BIOS (Ryzen 3000 Ready), with the other B450 boards this is actually a problem (exception: the MSI B450 Pro Carbon AC, which can also be updated without a compatible CPU )
I have linked a DDR4 RAM?
No, DDR3.
Samsung RDIMM 16GB,
DDR3-1600, CL13-13-13
So for me there's DDR4
Just look again at the link you sent…
I also don't like to recommend the G.Skill Aegis RAM because it is quite inferior…
For just a few more euro there are cheap Micron Rev-E dies from Crucial that can easily manage 3600 MHz CL16 when overclocking!
And the Patriot Viper isn't that bad about OC either.
The Aegis RAM, on the other hand, is literally at its limit with the Hynix M-Dies.
I'm sorry but I don't quite understand it because the link also says DDR4
My friend also says you linked an HDD instead of an SSD to me
This is the link you sent.
https://geizhals.de/...24485.html
And that is clearly DDR3 RAM from Samsung.
And no,
I put an SSD and an HDD in the wish list and in the Mindfactory shopping cart.
First the SSD, a Silicon Power P34A80 512GB,
and the hard drive is the Seagate BarraCuda Compute 1TB
I added this link for the RAM:
https://www.alternate.de/G-Skill/DIMM-16-GB-DDR4-3000-Kit-Arbeitsspeicher/html/product/1283393?event=search&zanpid=11731_1587328074_7ec706114a350f3a570bb953e98a3711&awc=11731_1587328074_7ec706114a350f3a570bb953e98a3711&campaign=AF/DeZanox/Textlinks/Alternate
That's nice.
Then why did you link the DDR3 RAM when you asked when you questioned the RAM?
I'm not looking at your question again, which is already full of links,
if you send me a link to your RAM request.
Oh, I'm sorry. That was my fault. I actually meant the RAM memory that my friend recommended to me. So this one:
https://www.alternate.de/G-Skill/DIMM-16-GB-DDR4-3000-Kit-Arbeitsspeicher/html/product/1283393?event=search&zanpid=11731_1587328074_7ec706114a350f3a570bb953e98a3711&awc=11731_1587328074_7ec706114a350f3a570bb953e98a3711&campaign=AF/DeZanox/Textlinks/Alternate
I've already written what I think of RAM.
With the Crucial Ballistix (Sport LT) RAM you are much better positioned for the future.
You are welcome to take the Aegis RAM too, but apart from the fact that you can't overclock it, it is also pretty ugly, in my opinion.
First of all I would like to thank you for your great help!
Now I have the following question: Isn't this memory theoretically as good as your linked one?
And what's the difference between:
https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
And the:
https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
And do I have to buy both or do I just need one of them but then I don't understand why the second one is so expensive. Then I'd rather buy the cheap one.
And of your linked ram memories this is: https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
The best?
Wouldn't this graphics card be better with the graphics card?
https://geizhals.de/...91067.html
I'm really sorry to ask you so many questions but I just don't want to do anything wrong with my PC.
1.) Can you please stop opening a new comment every time and just keep writing under one instead? You already managed that!
It doesn't matter if you ask a lot of questions, but this way it gets very confusing! ^^
2.) The Seagate Barracuda is of higher quality and has a direct guarantee. The Toshiba P300 is not worth it.
3.) The first is a hard drive, the second is an SSD.
You might want to find out more before you order and build the PC if you don't even know it yourself.
You should definitely take both. An SSD is essential because it speeds up your PC a lot compared to a system that only has one hard drive. For this, Windows must of course also be installed on the SSD.
In return, an SSD is not cheap, but 80 euro for a high-quality 512 GB NVME SSD is very cheap in comparison and not expensive!
A hard drive, on the other hand, is much slower and therefore not suitable for the operating system at the current time. But it is great as a mass storage device for everything, including games.
That's why the combination of SSD and hard drive is always the most sensible and inexpensive for a gaming PC!
You might be able to take a smaller and slower SSD, but you can save a maximum of around 30 euro without saving too much, and that won't do you anything for anything else.
4.) Yes, this Crucial RAM is the best.
5.) Why should the graphics card be better?
The RX 5700 XT is approx. 10% stronger than the RTX 2060 Super or 2070.
Ok I'm sorry.
Wouldn't it be better if you only installed an SSD because it would make the entire PC run faster? Such as. These ones:
https://geizhals.de/...36280.html
And I already know the difference between SSD and HDD, but it wasn't clear to me that one was an HDD and the other was an SSD, or I assumed that both were SSDs, so I was confused
No, it wouldn't really be better.
SSDs are still too expensive for this and your PC will not be faster as a result. It's not worth it for a 1000 euro gaming PC!
As soon as Windows is installed on a good SSD, the PC itself will always be as fast, even if a hard drive is installed.
Sure, the data on the hard drive will have to load longer, but since you are not constantly running something on the hard drive, you will hardly notice the difference.
I also recommended a very high quality 512 GB SSD for a reason:
This gives you more than enough space for at least 2-3 games, which you can also install on it, even if Windows is installed on it!
More SSD storage would be too expensive for a 1000 euro PC and in the end you would have too little storage or even have to do without gaming performance!
But even if that won't be enough for you sometime, as soon as you have accumulated more games / data etc., you can simply buy another SSD like the one you linked here with this Samsung 1 TB QLC SSD and pack it up!
Overall, it's much cheaper and easier to install afterwards than if you were to save on the graphics card or something!
It would also be nonsensical to use this QLC SSD as system memory for Windows, since the cache will quickly fill up and the SSD will be slower than a hard disk!
TLC is mandatory!
What is the CPU fan for? Is there no fan with the CPU?
And which 512 GB HDD would you recommend to me, because I don't actually need 1.5 TB, but 1tb would be enough for me.
I would also like to know how many more memories I can add afterwards
For 1000 euro it is recommended to take a good CPU cooler.
The box cooler is sufficient for now, but if you want a quiet and cool PC, a better cooler is essential.
-
1 TB is the minimum recommended size for a hard drive…
There are smaller ones, but they cost 5 euro less and are therefore absolutely not worth it…
Otherwise I can only recommend you to take a smaller SSD, but I have already explained why it is not really worth it.
And you can install as many additional SSDs or HDDs as possible. Their size doesn't matter.
With an M.2 SSD and an HDD, i.e. 3 additional SATA SSDs or HDDs, a total of 4 via SATA.
Or without M.2 SSD up to 6 SATA storage devices.
Okay, I really want to thank you very much. You helped me enormously. But I still have the following question, because some have already told me that 1TB SSD is much better and the SSD I linked to you in my actual question only costs 100 euro and the 1tb HDD + 512gb SSD are more memory that I have but do not need and it costs a little more. 120 euro if I'm not mistaken.
Gladly ^^
For your SSD, however, you must note that you are not using a QLC SSD!
QLC SSDs have the disadvantage that they will be slower than a hard drive if the cache is full, if more effort is required. Therefore they are unsuitable for the operating system.
I already explained that to you above.
You don't get a 1 TB SSD for 100 euro, because they would all have QLC storage.
For a 1TB large TLC SSD you pay 110-120 euro and only for a SATA SSD.
https://geizhals.de/...mp=1756905
You can also take one of these SATA SSDs,
but I would prefer the combination of the hard drive and the faster NVME SSD.
Alone because 1 TB can fill up very quickly and after 5 years alone with 3 TB of storage I can hardly get by for the games that I currently want to be able to play at any time.
But 1tb remains 1tb or takes a 50gb file with an SSD not more memory than with an HDD
What do you mean by that now?
You meant that the SSD's memory fills up quickly, but it fills up just as quickly as a hard drive
No, not the memory, the cache!
The cache is a buffer, a kind of buffer that an SSD uses to read / write data faster.
The faster SLC NAND memory is used for this, for example.
If this buffer runs fully with an SSD with QLC NAND memory, it becomes very slow because QLC NAND is very slow without a cache.
This happens when you move / install / view a lot of or large data, which is not uncommon for the operating system!
-
QLC stands for Quadruple Level Cells or Quad-level cells.
This means that the memory cells each have a storage density of 4 bits.
Roughly speaking: the denser, the slower the reading / writing of these cells.
A TLC SSD doesn't suffer as much when the cache is full, which is why
So there's QLC what is bad and TLC what is good or is there a thing in between or something? And is this SSD good?
https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
After a question
how do I know which SSD is QLC and which is TLC?
There are still MLC and SLC, but these are suitable as mass storage for SSDs.
Therefore only QLC and TLC are relevant.
Yes, the MX500 is good, but just a SATA SSD and not an NVME SSD.
So it is a little slower and you would have less storage overall for the same money.
That's why I say yes that it's not really worth it.
And maybe you should also take a look at the pages that you link there. The data sheet always says whether it is TLC or QLC memory!
For example with the MX500:
3D NAND memory modules
TLC, Micron, 64 Layer (Generation 2)
With the Samsung 860 QVO
3D NAND memory modules
QLC, Samsung, 64 Layer (V-NAND v4)
What do you think about the following links?
1.https://geizhals.de/adata-xpg-sx6000-pro-1tb-asx6000pnp-1tt-c-a1893101.html?show_description=1
2.https://geizhals.de/crucial-mx500-1tb-ct1000mx500ssd4-a1745481.html?show_description=1
3.https://geizhals.de/silicon-power-p34a60-1tb-sp001tbp34a60m28-a2196810.html?show_description=1
4.https://geizhals.de/gigabyte-nvme-ssd-m-2-2280-1tb-gp-gsm2ne3100tntd-a2140750.html?show_description=1
5.https://geizhals.de/adata-xpg-sx6000-pro-1tb-asx6000pnp-1tt-c-a1893101.html?show_description=1
As far as I saw it correctly, they all have nvme and tlc
I don't believe in your idea of just taking a 1 TB SSD, but I see that I can't convince you.
1.) Too expensive for the performance / quality
2.) No NVME SSD, but SATA connected via M.2.
The NVME only has one contact gap, not two.
3.) Is more recommendable, since it is only 10 euro more expensive than the 1 TB Sata SSDs
4.) Too little TBW and too little information. Does not testify to quality.
5.) Same from 1.)
-
So either the:
https://geizhals.de/...cription=1
or:
https://geizhals.de/...at&hloc=de
But the second is too expensive for me again, but still the cheapest of the same performance and quality
I think you are right with the HDD so I think I would rather buy 1tb HDD and 512gb SSD. Thanks again!
I'm currently watching a video by Kreativecke in which he presents an xfx 5700 xt thicc and it should be a bit louder than e.g. The one you linked but is apparently much better.
If you want to know which video I mean:
Correct me very much, if I love wrong, but isn't it better to take the GPU from XFX? After all, it costs just as much.
No, it is definitely not better!
Why should it be better when it is louder?
It then has to turn up a lot higher in order to cool well!
This shows that the card has a rather poor cooling design!
Creative corner is also not someone who makes good reviews…
Here are two professional reviews of the card:
In contrast, the reviews of the gigabyte:
So you are sure that the PC you created for me can't be further optimized? I will probably order this PC gradually over the days when it really doesn't get any better.
I would also like to know if you have to buy something for the computer or something or if you still have to thank something. Maybe there's something else somewhere that you make a second CPU to update the picture somewhere or something.
You will probably notice that I'm very careful about the PC. I'm just afraid that for the big money I'll buy something that doesn't really work, just like my laptop that is broken now… But if you say that this PC can't be optimized further, I will believe you have to. However, I actually trust you, you make an impression on me as if you were familiar with computers.
Yes, I don't see any opportunities to optimize anything and stay below 1000 euro. So you're definitely good at it.
I added a few alternatives because some components may be poorly available.
https://geizhals.de/...WL-1207916
I assume that you mean "update image" to update the BIOS?
No, this is not necessary with the "Max" boards from MSI. These B450 / X470 boards are new revisions that come with newer and bigger BIOS chips.
You only have to create a boot stick for Windows with the Media Creation Tool, of course. ^^
I've been doing this for a long time, it would be stupid if I didn't know my way around, even if that sounds pretentious.
What do you say to the following text?
greetings
I personally would exchange the M.2 PCIe SSD for a 1Tb M.2 SATA SSD, such as a Crucial MX500 or Samsung 860 Evo or Western Digital blue 3D, because when gaming, the M.2 PCIe has exactly zero advantages over the SATA variant. There are advantages to writing / reading larger data, such as video editing.
And just take the 1TB variant and then leave out the HDD.
Here is a suitable video for comparison when gaming, comparing an HDD (Western Digital Blue 7200rpm 1TB) with a 2.5 "/M.2 SATA AHCI SSD (Samsung 860 Evo 500GB) and a M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD ( Samsung 970 EVO 500GB), because you can see that there's no big difference in gaming, for example, between a SATA AHCI SSD and the more expensive but faster PCIe (NVMe) SSD
We had all of that sorted out 🤔
Yes, for gaming itself, the advantage is not great, but noticeable with any loading times, moving and installing data.
The problem is that such a "1Tb M.2 SATA SSD" costs at least 120 euro, as we have already clarified.
Of course, he can also wrongly think that the QLC SSDs would be worth it for 100 euro, but we have already clarified why this idea is very bad!
-
Alternatively, you can argue again why you don't take a 512 GB SATA SSD, because the NVME SSD still costs more, but the advantage is not as great as the guy thinks.
But the difference here is only around 10-20 euro, which is really not much for the difference in performance.
These 10-20 euro don't really have any better uses anywhere than here at the SSD, as we explained earlier.
If you want to save these few euro, you are welcome to do so and take one of the recommended SSDs as long as the TLC has memory.
