KSP1 Computer Building/Buying Megathread

[Camacha]

Of course, as we know, the free upgrade period is ending this weekend. Even though I certain I certainly do not plan to use Windows 10 as a daily driver, I have installed my eligible versions of Windows in different ways and then upgraded then to Windows 10. That way I have maximum flexibility in the future.

I installed Windows 8 to a spare hard drive and upgraded it, so I can run Windows 10 on that system if I would be so inclined.
I installed Windows 7 to a virtual machine and upgraded that so that I can experiment with Windows 10 or run it inside or alongside my current OS.
My normal hard drive still has my usual OS, so I do not need to spend a lot of effort on switching back and forth.

This should keep me occupied for a while

[Endersmens]

@Camacha The problem with that is you'll get used to different versions and then it'll be chaos

 

[Alphasus]

2 hours ago, Endersmens said:

@Camacha The problem with that is you'll get used to different versions and then it'll be chaos

 

I routinely use 4 different OSes...

Primary:Windows 10/Mac OS X 10.11

Testing: Ubuntu 16.04, Windows 7

Sometimes: Windows 8, Windows XP

Rarely: OS X 10.6-10

[Guest]

OK, so It's all mostly together.  My graphics card just shipped today, so it'll all be up and running around Friday.  I'm excited!

[Camacha]

6 hours ago, Endersmens said:

@Camacha The problem with that is you'll get used to different versions and then it'll be chaos

 

Not likely. I work with 7 different OS' on a daily basis, and a few more less regularly. I think I got this

[FlushStroke]

Im wanting to buy a pc to switch from consoles but dont really know much about computers. I've looked on amazon and there are 1000's ready built and ive got no idea the difference in things between them.

I heard AMD though is a good starting point for low budget, my budget being really not much more than £400. I dont have lots of money to throw around unfortunately but can obviously upgrade stuff in the future

Basically is this a good starting point or can I build a better and cheaper one for the same sort of price, and if so what and where from? Any help much appreciated, I want to avoid as much of a potato as possibe. I dont know if I can post links so I'll put the specs in a spoiler box

Spoiler

SPECIFICATION

Processor	- AMD A10-7700K APU - Quad core - 3.4 GHz / 3.8 with Turbo Boost - 4 MB cache
Memory (RAM)	8 GB DDR3 (16 GB maximum installable RAM)
Graphics card	No dedicated graphics
Storage	1 TB HDD, 7200 rpm

CONNECTIVTY

Wireless	No
Ethernet	Gigabit Ethernet (10/100/1000)
USB	USB 2.0 x 6
Video interface	- DVI x 1 - VGA x 1
Audio interface	3.5 mm jack
Other ports	PS2 keyboard & mouse

MEDIA

Optical disc drive	DVD/RW with double layer support
Expansion card slot	- PCIe (x1) x 1 - PCIe (x16) x 1 - PCI x 1

SOUND

Sound	5.1 surround sound

POWER

PSU	Corsair VS350, 350 W

I know it doesnt come with a graphics card but ill cross that bridge when I get there but all that is £350, is it worth it? Id use it to play ksp as well as other games, basically to replace having to have a console. 

Hope Im asking in the right place, buying a computer is surprisingly daunting 

[Vanamonde]

Your question has been merged into the master thread for this sort of thing, @FlushStroke. 

[Alphasus]

2 hours ago, FlushStroke said:

Im wanting to buy a pc to switch from consoles but dont really know much about computers. I've looked on amazon and there are 1000's ready built and ive got no idea the difference in things between them.

I heard AMD though is a good starting point for low budget, my budget being really not much more than £400. I dont have lots of money to throw around unfortunately but can obviously upgrade stuff in the future

Basically is this a good starting point or can I build a better and cheaper one for the same sort of price, and if so what and where from? Any help much appreciated, I want to avoid as much of a potato as possibe. I dont know if I can post links so I'll put the specs in a spoiler box

  Reveal hidden contents

SPECIFICATION

Processor	- AMD A10-7700K APU - Quad core - 3.4 GHz / 3.8 with Turbo Boost - 4 MB cache
Memory (RAM)	8 GB DDR3 (16 GB maximum installable RAM)
Graphics card	No dedicated graphics
Storage	1 TB HDD, 7200 rpm

CONNECTIVTY

Wireless	No
Ethernet	Gigabit Ethernet (10/100/1000)
USB	USB 2.0 x 6
Video interface	- DVI x 1 - VGA x 1
Audio interface	3.5 mm jack
Other ports	PS2 keyboard & mouse

MEDIA

Optical disc drive	DVD/RW with double layer support
Expansion card slot	- PCIe (x1) x 1 - PCIe (x16) x 1 - PCI x 1

SOUND

Sound	5.1 surround sound

POWER

PSU	Corsair VS350, 350 W

I know it doesnt come with a graphics card but ill cross that bridge when I get there but all that is £350, is it worth it? Id use it to play ksp as well as other games, basically to replace having to have a console. 

Hope Im asking in the right place, buying a computer is surprisingly daunting 

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/WCdMcc

I matched you. Same specs, but a slightly better PSU. You save about 15 euros with something non-prebuilt, and you get a clean OS.

[FlushStroke]

1 hour ago, Alphasus said:

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/WCdMcc

I matched you. Same specs, but a slightly better PSU. You save about 15 euros with something non-prebuilt, and you get a clean OS.

pcpartpicker comes to £380 searching shops around the uk, yeah my spec I showed didnt come with OS but I can get a windows 7 key for £15ish and upgrade it to 10 for free can I (I think)? so that would make it (with your link and my theory) £315 altogether, so is £45 cheaper which can go towards a graphics card I suppose. Cheers as well, didnt know about that pc build site thing. (does have some compatibility notes at teh bottom about usb 3 ports though?)

But all in all, would that pc be any good ... like say I ran ksp, how would it be looking? and if it is/isnt, which graphics card would be good if needed? I really stuggle when I comes to knowledge about pc's soz

[Jeb-head-mug kerman]

ok thanks guys I HAVE A NEW COMPUTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YEP THATS RIGHT I HAVE A NEW CMPONUTERKERBULLFF! oopz soryy guys i am just very happy. it is a laptop HP Envy with a i7 intel core and GEFORCE and abot 1 TB of memory/space!

[Endersmens]

Well. I have completely assembled the computer, and it works. I was so happy to see the BIOS screen. I was worried I may have zapped a part because I didn't know about grounding it until after. I installed the OS, and decided to run AIDA64 to do a stress test, I was worried about temps with the stock cooler.

Well. I ran the stress test, stressed CPU, FPU, and memory. I ran it for 30 minutes. CPU was at 100% utilization and 3.3GHz for the duration of the test. And....the maximum CPU temperature reached was 49C.  

I don't know if I should be happy or concerned something isn't working lol. Thoughts? I was able to confirm temperature with multiple programs.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

18 hours ago, Endersmens said:

Well. I have completely assembled the computer, and it works. I was so happy to see the BIOS screen. I was worried I may have zapped a part because I didn't know about grounding it until after. I installed the OS, and decided to run AIDA64 to do a stress test, I was worried about temps with the stock cooler.

Well. I ran the stress test, stressed CPU, FPU, and memory. I ran it for 30 minutes. CPU was at 100% utilization and 3.3GHz for the duration of the test. And....the maximum CPU temperature reached was 49C.  

I don't know if I should be happy or concerned something isn't working lol. Thoughts? I was able to confirm temperature with multiple programs.

 I've done some checking before, and people seem to say ~75 C max for CPUs.

I don't overclock, but on hot days running games I see 50-60 C.

 

Edited July 29, 2016 by Mad Rocket Scientist

[Endersmens]

9 minutes ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said:

 I've done some checking before, and people seem to say ~75 C for CPUs.

I don't overclock, but on hot days running games I see 50-60 C.

 

My concern is that the number should be higher. Idle is around 40C and full load is 48C. There should be a bigger difference. 

 

Aida64 will run hotter than any game, as it literally puts the CPU under complete full load. It's max work load

Edited July 28, 2016 by Endersmens

[cantab]

@FlushStroke for £350 that's so-so. It'll play most games but you'll often be knocking settings and even resolution down and it might actually be inferior to the consoles in visuals. For a future graphics card upgrade the power supply is a low wattage which will constrain you but at least it's a reputable brand and 80+ cert so you can probably trust it and graphics cards are getting more and more performance per watt. (Or you could just upgrade the PSU too).

I think you can do better. I would shop around more and try to find something with a decent graphics card, it'll make a big difference to the visuals. It's not easy to find good gaming PCs for £400 but there should be a few.

If you want to build, at the low end of the market getting Windows can be an issue, the standard full price is a huge slice of your budget and cheap copies make one wary it might be non-legitimate. It's still doable with bargain hunting on the components though.

[Alphasus]

4 hours ago, FlushStroke said:

pcpartpicker comes to £380 searching shops around the uk, yeah my spec I showed didnt come with OS but I can get a windows 7 key for £15ish and upgrade it to 10 for free can I (I think)? so that would make it (with your link and my theory) £315 altogether, so is £45 cheaper which can go towards a graphics card I suppose. Cheers as well, didnt know about that pc build site thing. (does have some compatibility notes at teh bottom about usb 3 ports though?)

But all in all, would that pc be any good ... like say I ran ksp, how would it be looking? and if it is/isnt, which graphics card would be good if needed? I really stuggle when I comes to knowledge about pc's soz

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/vvWK4C

Sorry about that. Fixed your compatibility there. That won't KSP too well because the CPU is quite slow for its time. But the APU portion is pretty nice. KSP would look very good though. I know that @Camacha runs or ran KSP on a GTS 450, an inferior card to said on-die R7.

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/BcTjpb

I did blow your budget by about £30 including Windows OS. That has an i3, which is very good for KSP in comparison to the APU, and a video card that is faster by quite a bit.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Alphasus

[Camacha]

7 hours ago, Alphasus said:

I know that @Camacha runs or ran KSP on a GTS 450, an inferior card to said on-die R7.

That card has been retired for a while now, but mostly because I wanted something faster and new and not because it was required due to lack of performance. That was a while back, though. Without graphics mods, KSP ran incredibly well on that card at excessively high settings and resolutions. If it is KSP you are after, it should work well enough.

[Alphasus]

4 hours ago, Camacha said:

That card has been retired for a while now, but mostly because I wanted something faster and new and not because it was required due to lack of performance. That was a while back, though. Without graphics mods, KSP ran incredibly well on that card at excessively high settings and resolutions. If it is KSP you are after, it should work well enough.

What do you use now?

[FlushStroke]

15 hours ago, cantab said:

@FlushStroke for £350 that's so-so. It'll play most games but you'll often be knocking settings and even resolution down and it might actually be inferior to the consoles in visuals. For a future graphics card upgrade the power supply is a low wattage which will constrain you but at least it's a reputable brand and 80+ cert so you can probably trust it and graphics cards are getting more and more performance per watt. (Or you could just upgrade the PSU too).

I think you can do better. I would shop around more and try to find something with a decent graphics card, it'll make a big difference to the visuals. It's not easy to find good gaming PCs for £400 but there should be a few.

If you want to build, at the low end of the market getting Windows can be an issue, the standard full price is a huge slice of your budget and cheap copies make one wary it might be non-legitimate. It's still doable with bargain hunting on the components though.

 

I've always just bought a crappy laptop for web browsing and day to day stuff and used a console for gaming so Im jumping into new territory and im very limited on what I know about pc's, trying to pick up on as much as I can. I do actually have ksp for my laptop but obviously had settings way-way down, it just about played it but my laptop was getting hotter and slower as it struggled so called it a day on that a couple of years ago. cheers for your info btw :-)

 

13 hours ago, Alphasus said:

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/vvWK4C

Sorry about that. Fixed your compatibility there. That won't KSP too well because the CPU is quite slow for its time. But the APU portion is pretty nice. KSP would look very good though. I know that @Camacha runs or ran KSP on a GTS 450, an inferior card to said on-die R7.

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/BcTjpb

I did blow your budget by about £30 including Windows OS. That has an i3, which is very good for KSP in comparison to the APU, and a video card that is faster by quite a bit.

 

If it's paying a little more for something thats much better then really a no brainer yeah? I wanted to use ksp as a comparison of games in general. As I find out more about pc's ill upgrade things as and when, but this should be a solid start for something to build upon?

I really appreciate you help, thanks

Edited July 29, 2016 by FlushStroke
spelling

[Alphasus]

14 minutes ago, FlushStroke said:

 

I've always just bought a crappy laptop for web browsing and day to day stuff and used a console for gaming so Im jumping into new territory and im very limited on what I know about pc's, trying to pick up on as much as I can. I do actually have ksp for my laptop but obviously had settings way-way down, it just about played it but my laptop was getting hotter and slower as it struggled so called it a day on that a couple of years ago. cheers for your info btw :-)

 

 

If it's paying a little more for something thats much better then really a no brainer yeah? I wanted to use ksp as a comparison of games in general. As I find out more about pc's ill upgrade things as and when, but this should be a solid start for something to build upon?

I really appreciate you help, thanks

Its fine. Wait for @cantab or @Camacha to optimize it for price though.

Its paying E30 more for a better start, I guess. The bare minimum for most new systems is an APU, and a step above that is the 750 Ti in that build. A 750 Ti can run most games at medium with a few settings tweaks(anecdote from a friend who accidentally had his GPU underclocked for a year).

[Camacha]

You might want to think about your strategy going into this. Do you want a solid base that you can expand upon, or do you want a system that is optimized for performance within the budget, but possibly sacrificing some flexibility.

[Elthy]

Right now the 750ti would be a bad idea, the RX 460 will be released on 8.8. and will propably be better in every way. There may be an unpleasant suprise with the price (as with the other 14/16nm GPUs) but its definetly worth waiting.

[Alphasus]

10 minutes ago, Elthy said:

Right now the 750ti would be a bad idea, the RX 460 will be released on 8.8. and will propably be better in every way. There may be an unpleasant suprise with the price (as with the other 14/16nm GPUs) but its definetly worth waiting.

It will be a long wait... About 1 month after the release, the inflation is likely to stop, as with the 14nm and 16nm GPUs so far. In that time, the 950 75W(or pure 950) should have dropped in price enough to be an option(1080p High). And the 950 75W is 1.35-1.5x faster than a 750 Ti. The RX 460 is projected to be 1.3x faster than a 750 Ti. The 950 should then be close to an RX 470. That puts a 950 at 15% faster than an RX 460 at best, and about 4% faster at worst, while having a similar TDP. And if you can find a 770... do it, its like a 960 at a 950 pricing in exchange for more watts needed.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Alphasus

[Elthy]

From what ive read the card should be availanle imideatly. Also older Nvidias will propably be less future proof. The RX 480 is allready beating the 1060 in DX12/Vulkan, an even older Nvidia could have similar issues.

[Alphasus]

52 minutes ago, Elthy said:

From what ive read the card should be availanle imideatly. Also older Nvidias will propably be less future proof. The RX 480 is allready beating the 1060 in DX12/Vulkan, an even older Nvidia could have similar issues.

If by beating the 1060 in DX12, you mean winning ~30-40% of DX12 benchmarks then sure(and Hitman 3, which is an AMD partnered game in the same way that games exclusively using GameWorks are unfair to AMD cards). Fact still stands that a 950 should be mathematically faster. Lets wait till 8/8.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Alphasus

[FlushStroke]

1 hour ago, Camacha said:

You might want to think about your strategy going into this. Do you want a solid base that you can expand upon, or do you want a system that is optimized for performance within the budget, but possibly sacrificing some flexibility.

a base to build on, imo it's the best option as computers always are moving forward. but also something that is semi decent enough to be used straight away and for the time being. Hopefully that makes sense. 

Would http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/BcTjpb fit that or need some amendments? I really dont know enough about pc's to make an informed decision myself on builds