I thinking about new PC with around 1500 USD budget.

1) I don't play new games, so there si no need for more powerfull PC.
2) I'm mainly coder, PHP developer and sometimes graphic designer, so there is no need for more powerfull PC.
3) PC is also used as multimedia centrum, so there is no need for more powerfull PC.

Sometimes i have wierd thoughs.

  • 8
    With 1500 usd you can buy two of them
  • 0
    You can definitely get something nice with such budget. Though we still need to see some real benchmarks, I'd suggest taking a look at a full AMD build.

    PS: What definition are you going for? 1080p? 1440p? Higher?
  • 1
    1500 is a fine budget for a gaming PC. you can easily make a good PC for programming with much less and spend the rest on more monitors maybe

    Take some AMD Ryzen processor (even a first gen Ryzen) and maybe some RX480, RX570 or RX580 for a fairly budget video card. gtx1660ti is a fine choice as well.
  • 2
    By the way, OP, why not get a decent PC and a NAS on the side?
  • 2
    @iiii don't forget memory and nvme storage. Depending on the OS the OP uses virtualization comes into play requiring more memory.
  • 0
    @hjk101 nvme storage is overrated.
  • 1
    @Jilano what is the purpose of the nas?
  • 0
    @hjk101 I first read "media center" hence the suggestion, but might have been wrong. You can easily leave a NAS like a small Synology 24/7 without much power consumption and it'll be great to manage a large media collection.
  • 0
    @iiii what do you mean?
  • 0
  • 0
    @iiii "nvme storage is overrated"
  • 0
    @ScribeOfGoD sata 3 in general is more than enough for almost anything and is already hard to saturate with every day usage. Nvme drive is not a must have contrary to what many people tend to say.
  • 2
    @iiii just like a few years back I would not get a computer without SSD it's the same with nvme. It's so much faster with booting/indexing in bloated ide's, running database intensive tests and unpacking large php frameworks with composer. Of course nvme like sata and usb... is just a protocol and should be backed by decent flash storage.
  • 1
    @Jilano yeah we need more info on the "multimedia centrum" i choose to ignore it. Will it be attached to a TV? Will it need to stream dlna? Is it just music and occasional movie for during development?
    Unless going for the dnla route I would recommend a low power device like Intel nuc or appliance for that. PC is possible as an always on device. Power scaling becomes important than especially check for videocard support.
  • 1
    Wow you got so excided. Truth is, as i stated in post, i do not need new PC. :P Just a thoughts about it i have are bit wierd. Like some fucking child player who just need new PC!
  • 0
    @hjk101 I doubt very much you could really constantly saturate even SATA 3 bandwidth with your daily usage.
  • 2
    @iii it would be silly if It would be NAS or some other continues stream. Than sata would be far more cost effective. It is not the case with a typical Dev environment. I don't even care about max throughput. Latency and iops though are severely affected by the overhead SATA gives. I have a few (aforementioned) workloads that care about that.
    And if you are on NTFS you need all the help you can get as the per file overhead is insane.
  • 1
    @iiii nvme results in lower overall latency for basically everything because much faster data throughput (and possibly also actual bus latency), so I'd say it's well worth it. I can definitely tell the difference between a sata and a nvme SSD.

    If anything, since most everyday tasks are memory bottlenecked (not compute heavy stuff like gaming) you can get away with a crappier cpu but invest in very good memory.
  • 0
    @RememberMe actually a have seen some evidence that using nvme drive does not actually increase the perceived responsiveness for regular usage outside of benchmarks and definitely IO bottlenecked operation like big file copying and creating archives
  • 0
    @iiii I'd be happy to see it, because again, I can definitely tell the difference.

    Plus, why not future proof your system? Memory requirements are only going to go up, not down.

    And for the kind of stuff I do the increased throughput really makes a difference anyway, and doubly so if you're using a VM for eg.
  • 0
    @RememberMe future proofing is somewhat meaningless. Tech does not rise in price in general. There's no reason to pay any price now if you will pay half of that when it is time for an upgrade.

    As for myself, I'm pretty happy with a regular sata 3 drive and I don't see any meaningful reason to upgrade it in near future.
  • 0
    @iiii by future proofing I also mean what all your tech is capable of doing, which limits what you can do with it at some time in the future. You don't want to buy a new system and be limited by it. You should never be tech-bound if it's within your budget. Good tools are worth it.

    Marginal increase in price for a decent nvme drive is not much at all over a decent sata drive, especially during sales, and you get nvme slots on most motherboards anyway. The difference is worth it imo.
  • 2
    Regarding SATA / 3 SSD vs NVME...

    Guuuuyyysss.... Be a bit more specific.

    Cause there's no point talking about that without being specific.

    NVME is first and foremost a _protocol_.

    Yes it's PCI Express... But it's just that.

    PCI X _2.0_with 2 lanes has roughly 500 MB/s transfer speed.

    Earliest M2 SSDs used that.

    PCI X_3.0_with 2 lanes doubled the speed.

    ~ 1 GB/s per second. First time exceeding the speed of SATA.

    SATA Express did the same by bundling two SATA ports.

    And that's where the fun started.

    The number of lanes is important - M2 SSDs nowadays typically use 4 PCI x lanes.

    But high end shit might use up to 16 lanes.

    The thing is: NVME with 4x lanes and up to 4 GB/s is unrealistic.

    You won't use that speed at all times.


    NVME protocol is compared to AHCI a major win win.

    Homework: Find out what the crazy lunatic talks about.
  • 0
    @IntrusionCM and that's why I'm saying it is overrated. Everyone brags about "mah speeds" but no one of them seemingly stops to reconsider whether they actually saturate the 500MB/s bandwidth of SATA 3.
Add Comment