CrustyBritches
Gold Member
This is a build aimed at matching a PS4Pro, which also uses Amd CPU/GPU.never pair an amd gpu with an amd cpu if you care at all about 60 fps
What do you recommend in the $90-new price range from Intel?
This is a build aimed at matching a PS4Pro, which also uses Amd CPU/GPU.never pair an amd gpu with an amd cpu if you care at all about 60 fps
Yeah, he found a quad SLI TITAN X Maxwell because people started upgrading those systems to TITAN XP SLIs a fee months back.
It's a prank.
This is a build aimed at matching a PS4Pro, which also uses Amd CPU/GPU.
What do you recommend in the $90-new price range from Intel?
I'd argue they do from the benchmarks I've seen.spend more and buy an intel. the consoles dont have to worry about amds extremely cpu inefficient dx11 driver
i5 750 overclocked to 3.7 ghz
Asus P7H55 LGA 1156 motherboard
That reeks of desperation to prove a point.
Those are 6 or 7 years old parts at this point of time and while cpu is still fine (if overclocked it can beat most of what Amd sells today) but with mainboard it's asking for troubles and finding replacement one is getting expensive.
I'd argue they do from the benchmarks I've seen.
Anyway, what CPU do you recommend and the price new?
i3 6100 at the absolute minimum
As of 2016, I think people have laptops / tablets for basic productivity.Good thing is even if this dollar store PC loses the gaming battle it can still do all of the tasks pertaining to your actual life.
The greatest irony of the threads like these are that when it's a DF video showing how close a Pro can get to PC performance wise the thread is quite positive, people happy about their purchase "Pro is a beast" etc. Have the opposite and it's just constant posts about how yea, but it's impossible in Europe, it's still not as cheap etc. Entirely missing the point of the video and thread which is to help try and clear up misconceptions created around PC gaming. Yes it's not as cheap, or as simple, it's all about options, open platforms and modular design on PC and it certainly eclipses the competition in that regard. As someone who owns a PC and a Pro and loves them both I get so sick of this shit.
It's also important to note as I did above that resolutions and subsequent performance are very much different on console with checkerboarding than native resolution etc.
Good thing is even if this dollar store PC loses the gaming battle it can still do all of the tasks pertaining to your actual life.
That reeks of desperation to prove a point.
Those are 6 or 7 years old parts at this point of time and while cpu is still fine (if overclocked it can beat most of what Amd sells today) but with mainboard it's asking for troubles and finding replacement one is getting expensive.
Wow, this thread.
The party line is how PC gaming is all about spending thousands of dollars and constant upgrades. Video series like the Potato Masher showing budget PC gaming as not only viable but extremely competitive to low-cost consoles throws that idea out of the window. It must be upsetting to have proof shut down the fallacies people have been repeating for years, which explains the replies in this thread.
I respectfully disagree.
What people are arguing is that when you're building a PC using donated and used parts, you're not providing an accurate evaluation of the real-world costs involved in building a 4K capable PC. Comparison's are built on a principle of objectivity, and when the information provided is misleading, it undermines the very purpose of the comparison. For example, if I said "My $4.99 PS4 Pro beats a $9.99 PC", the responses would be "$4.99 PS4 Pro where?" and "What kind of PC costs $9.99.?" People would point out that the comparison I have made isn't reliable because it does not use the average cost of entry for those platforms. The majority of people are not going to able to acquire a $4.99 PS4 Pro or a $9.99 PC.
The reason console-only gamers are positive when they learn that the Pro version comes close to the PC version is because they know that by buying the console version, they aren't buying into a noticeably inferior experience. Console versions will almost always be inferior to the PC version, so the hope is that the differences between the console and PC version do not make the console version a regrettable purchase. $60 is a lot of money for a game, so it makes sense that people would want the best bang for their buck. Personally, I think if people want the best value for their games then PC is the way to go. But I realize that a lot of people might not have the time, money, and capabilities to build a gaming PC.
Furthermore, I don't understand why people are dismissing the comments from European gamers. When people in Europe point out that it's next to impossible to build a gaming PC for $450 in their respective country, they're not trying to undermine the Potato Masher comparison by providing misleading information. They're simply pointing out that the cost(s) of building a PC outside of the US are, on average, higher than building the same PC in the US.
I don't think this needs mentioning, but when people say "PS4 is a beast", that shouldn't upset you: it's a long-running joke. I think the joke originated (correct me if I'm wrong) via the announcement of 8GB GDDR5 RAM in the console. I believe it was Shinobi who was the first to call it a beast.
I respectfully disagree.
He isn't that far off.
To be fair you can get a PS4 Pro for $380
Really?As of 2016, I think people have laptops / tablets for basic productivity.
A 5 year old Intel quadcore is honestly a much better choice for a very cheap gaming machine than anything AMD offers right now. This might change in 2017, but it's clearly the case right now.
Really?
Seriously, I can't really imagine using a tablet for productive work -- I have a hard enough time with a laptop but at least in that case I can imagine it works for other professions.
How good is the original potato masher with newest games, he built it for the whole generation, right?
I'd like to see some results please.
Very light productivity maybe but if you work in tech, something with moderate data processing or anything that isn't very simplistic you need at least a laptop.Most people use tablets and laptops, not desktops.
Really?
Seriously, I can't really imagine using a tablet for productive work -- I have a hard enough time with a laptop but at least in that case I can imagine it works for other professions.
I guess it depends on what kind of work you're talking about.
My father in law is a real-estate agent, buying/selling that kind of crap and he's always glued to his samsung tablet, even if at family gatherings or dinners etc.
Very light productivity maybe but if you work in tech, something with moderate data processing or anything that isn't very simplistic you need at least a laptop.
A new video from JERMGaming which provides an interesting look at how the Potato Masher Pro fares in Battlefield 1 with the PS4 Pro.
Am I the only one who finds the whole potato meme to be the work of immature, PC gaming children lacking in wit? The work of a child/manchild who feels owning a PC is a status symbol, making them superior over others who happen to own a console.
I say this as someone who owns a 6700K/1080 GTX & enjoys playing games on my PS4 Pro and XO.
We're talking basic home productivity here though, I figured CAD/CAM work would be done on your employer's provided workstations.I know I wouldn't want to work with Solidworks or Mastercam on a tablet or even a laptop any time soon.
Sometimes price to performance ratio and ease of repair trumps portability.
Am I the only one who finds the whole potato meme to be the work of immature, PC gaming children lacking in wit?
He isn't that far off.
i5 750 $40
Arctic Alpine 11 Cooler $10
Intel DZ68DB Motherboard $60
8GB AMD DDR3 Ram $20
Nvidia GTX 1060 6GB $240
EVGA 430W PSU $40
WD 320GB HDD $20
Azza CSAZ Case $20
Windows $25
Total $475
To be fair you can get a PS4 Pro for $380
You are completely missing the point of these comparisons. You are treating them as buying advice when they are anything but.
I assume that when you put a dollar sign in front of an item, you're now dealing with a past, present, or future transaction. I could be wrong, but looking at the YouTube comments by the creator of the video, he's clearly offering buying advice by providing build recommendations and build options.
over $500 after shipping and the RAM ships from China via carrier pigeon and arrives in February.
Oh noes the OS!!!!!!!
You can get win10 for 10$ if thats what ruins this whole thing.
I respectfully disagree.
What people are arguing is that when you're building a PC using donated and used parts, you're not providing an accurate evaluation of the real-world costs involved in building a 4K capable PC. Comparison's are built on a principle of objectivity, and when the information provided is misleading, it undermines the very purpose of the comparison. For example, if I said "My $4.99 PS4 Pro beats a $9.99 PC", the responses would be "$4.99 PS4 Pro where?" and "What kind of PC costs $9.99.?" People would point out that the comparison I have made isn't reliable because it does not use the average cost of entry for those platforms. The majority of people are not going to be able to acquire a $4.99 PS4 Pro or a $9.99 PC.
The reason console-only gamers are positive when they learn that the Pro version comes close to the PC version is because they know that by buying the console version, they aren't buying into a noticeably inferior experience. Console versions will almost always be inferior to the PC version, so the hope is that the differences between the console and PC version do not make the console version a regrettable purchase. $60 is a lot of money for a game, so it makes sense that people would want the best bang for their buck. Personally, I think if people want the best value for their games then PC is the way to go. But I realize that a lot of people might not have the time, money, and capabilities to build a gaming PC.
Furthermore, I don't understand why people are dismissing the comments from European gamers. When people in Europe point out that it's next to impossible to build a gaming PC for $450 in their respective country, they're not trying to undermine the Potato Masher comparison by providing misleading information. They're simply pointing out that the cost(s) of building a PC outside of the US are, on average, higher than building the same PC in the US.
I don't think this needs mentioning, but when people say "PS4 is a beast", that shouldn't upset you: it's a long-running joke. I think the joke originated (correct me if I'm wrong) via the announcement of 8GB GDDR5 RAM in the console. I believe it was Shinobi who was the first to call it a beast.
I have a PC myself (i7 6700k, GTX 1070) and a Pro, so best of both worlds but I always find these comparisons a bit off, especially when people start adding up the costs of parts but always leave out stuff like the OS, mouse, keyboard and monitor, which will add more to the cost.
While you could use a TV for the PC, most will use a monitor, so that really shouldn't be left out and while you could argue you need a TV for a console, you don't normally buy a TV just to use with a console, as most people will already have a TV.
But for $399 / £349 the PS4 Pro is great value for what it offers.
A little OT, but the prices of used Intel processors are ridiculous. $180 for a 2600K? I can get a 6600K for $210 if I shop around. This is likely due to the lack of adequate competition in the CPU space.
I can't believe there are people on this thread defending this comparison. This really is absolutely shitty, unfair, and very misleading specially from the title.
Honestly, going off this thread, I feel it's doing the complete opposite. You pay $700-$800 for a system, then $250 more to upgrade it to outperform a $400 console?Dear God no, anyone who recommends this kind of build is not to be taken seriously. This is a fun experiment and it is useful for PC gamers thinking about upgrading an older system or console gamers still mistakenly believing that you need a $1500 PC at the bare minimum. Noone would recommend that you go and buy a Core i5 750 in this day and age.
These videos are great because they dispel the myth that consoles represent much better value than PC. It's useful information that PC hardware might be more expensive out the gate but much of it will survive multiple upgrades and still continue to offer great performance for many years.
Look at it this way. The original Potato Masher would have cost somewhere in the region of $700-800 if it was bought new back when its parts were still somewhat fresh in the market. It would have cost up to double the money of a new games console, maybe more. Anyone looking at just the upfront cost would reach the conclusion that the console is better value. That's not looking at the whole picture. Not only do you get significantly higher performance with a PC, many parts survive multiple upgrades and the PC saves you money over the long term. It's an investment that pays off over time and the Potato Masher proves it. An old PC provides better performance than the Pro with a $250 upgrade.
This is why taking the comparison at face value is missing the point by miles. If you are actually interested in dabbling in PC gaming these videos show you that your investment is worth it.
Honestly, going off this thread, I feel it's doing the complete opposite. You pay $700-$800 for a system, then $250 more to upgrade it to outperform a $400 console?
In the case of the PS4 and PS4 Pro it is to significantly outperform two $400 consoles. The idea is that if you opted to build a good gaming PC instead of buying a PS4 at launch you can easily stay ahead of the upgraded PS4 Pro with a simple GPU upgrade. This is what the video shows you. The upfront cost of a PC might seem scary to consumers used to the razors-and-razorblades model of console gaming but over time it is actually as good if not better value for money.
The video creator even says so in his intro. The point of his videos is to show that PC gaming can offer as good or even better value for money than consoles, not to push any sort of PC master race narrative. There are a lot of people who are completely misinformed on the topic of PC gaming costs, there's nothing wrong with letting them know that PC gaming isn't just about monster rigs. PC gaming on a budget is absolutely possible when one overcomes the initial sticker shock.
In the case of the PS4 and PS4 Pro it is to significantly outperform two $400 consoles. The idea is that if you opted to build a good gaming PC instead of buying a PS4 at launch you can easily stay ahead of the upgraded PS4 Pro with a simple GPU upgrade. This is what the video shows you. The upfront cost of a PC might seem scary to consumers used to the razors-and-razorblades model of console gaming but over time it is actually as good if not better value for money.
The video creator even says so in his intro. The point of his videos is to show that PC gaming can offer as good or even better value for money than consoles, not to push any sort of PC master race narrative. There are a lot of people who are completely misinformed on the topic of PC gaming costs, there's nothing wrong with letting them know that PC gaming isn't just about monster rigs. PC gaming on a budget is absolutely possible when one overcomes the initial sticker shock.
Even if PC costed 500$ more I would never get closed & limited console