550$ Budget Gaming PC's

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21
  1. #1
    Alpha Member DragonSeth is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Aug 2011 Join Date
    2,348Posts

    550$ Budget Gaming PC's


    RaGEZONE Recommends

    RaGEZONE Recommends

    Okay welcome everyone so that i had a little free time i wanted to build some budget builds for you guys. For Intel & AMD. Now these builds are nothing special they will get you the most performance for the money.

    Now as for intel there a little on the pricey side so there parts are a little hard to pick out. But this build will allow you to play games medium to high in 1080P to 720P.

    Now the reasons for the choice of parts.

    • Intel i went with Intel - Core i5-6400 for the cpu do to the fact it's the cheapest and gets the job done.
    • The reason for 8 GB in both builds was simply as most games require 8 GB these days.
    • Now for the graphic card i went with rx 560 as its a budget card and surely will get the job done.
    • Now the reason for fx 8300 in amd rig is for its cheap and a bit better then the fx 6300.


    Now some changes you could do is switch the Pentium G4560 for a intel core i3 6100 but will run you a little more money.

    Now i went with a 500W power supply to give you guys a little over clocking room as well.

    Also i added a SSD to both rigs in order to give you a fast boot for windows as that is the only thing i recommend the SSD for and the store your games and etc.. On the HDD

    Now personally i use the fx 8350 which the only difference between that and fx 8300 is one is a higher clock. So i personally know fx is a great cpu it just gets very hot. But other then that i run games high to ultra 1080P to 4k.


    If you have any suggestions please feel free to let me know. And please do not start a flame war this thread is just simply to help new people. As this is where i learn to build my budget rig.

    FX Build: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/m6sRXH -550$
    Intel Build: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/LpGsFd -565$
    Ryzen Build: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/RZPxvV -560$

    Also please keep in mind prices changes all the time so i can't promise these will stay 500$
    Last edited by DragonSeth; 23-06-17 at 06:10 PM.


  2. #2
    ThuGie.NL - Webmaster ThuGie is offline
    True MemberRank
    Apr 2006 Join Date
    NetherlandsLocation
    1,150Posts
    Last edited by ThuGie; 07-06-17 at 06:56 PM.
    Hate me or Love me, Just dont bother me!
    Only argument i lose, is a argument with my gf, where even when i am right i lose

  3. #3
    Alpha Member DragonSeth is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Aug 2011 Join Date
    2,348Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    I was gonna choose these but i went with the ones that were best rated. My Bad :|

  4. #4
    Infraction Banned master_unknown is offline
    True MemberRank
    Oct 2004 Join Date
    HellLocation
    752Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    This will help you get an idea of 500$ budget gaming pc.
    https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...rapyard+wars+5

  5. #5
    ThuGie.NL - Webmaster ThuGie is offline
    True MemberRank
    Apr 2006 Join Date
    NetherlandsLocation
    1,150Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    Well that is second hand, his list is new.
    But as the title has gaming saving cost on everything other then gpu/cpu for most power :p.
    Hate me or Love me, Just dont bother me!
    Only argument i lose, is a argument with my gf, where even when i am right i lose

  6. #6
    Registered rares95 is offline
    MemberRank
    Feb 2012 Join Date
    5Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    In my opinion, the Intel system is just trash and pointless. Seeing as many games nowadays won't even start without a 4 core processor, you can clearly see how that's a problem.

    Same thing could be said about the AMD system. The FX platform is just old, hot and power hungry. Considering that the new AM4 boards and Ryzen cpus are out, i think it would be best to go for those instead.

  7. #7

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    I have a FX63000, it heats up very fast... I do not recommend...

  8. #8
    "(still lacks brains)" NoBrain is offline
    ModeratorRank
    Sep 2011 Join Date
    United KingdomLocation
    2,687Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    Quote Originally Posted by ModCoder View Post
    I have a FX63000, it heats up very fast... I do not recommend...
    The FX line are really outdated and at the current price of Ryzen it's really not worth it for the FX line :)

    Quote Originally Posted by rares95 View Post
    In my opinion, the Intel system is just trash and pointless. Seeing as many games nowadays won't even start without a 4 core processor, you can clearly see how that's a problem.

    Same thing could be said about the AMD system. The FX platform is just old, hot and power hungry. Considering that the new AM4 boards and Ryzen cpus are out, i think it would be best to go for those instead.
    Intel currently win in the IPC (single-core performance) area, which applies to 90% of games, since most games don't really use more than one or two cores due to terrible engines. Most gamers will go for Intel due to IPC, for creativity (Sony Vegas, 3D rendering, etc.) or streaming while gaming - Ryzen is the best bet. Once Zen+ and Zen 3 release, Intel won't have so much of a gap in terms of IPC.

  9. #9
    Alpha Member DragonSeth is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Aug 2011 Join Date
    2,348Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    Sheesh guys i only went with fx series cause its cheap and good for the price. The intel system is not great. But your not gonna get a great rig on a budget. Unless you buy used parts but you have to get lucky on those.

    The FX series does heat up yes but i run FX-8350 and it doesn't pass 50C in games with the stock cooler.

    Ryzen is out and i said i know this but its hard to build a full ryzen system on a budget. Since there cheapest cpu is 150$.. And then you have to buy a AM4 Motherboard with ddr4 ram it just came out to be to much.

    Yes intel is winning in single core performance but since this is not a debate. I'm not going into it.

    And btw i know people who game on medium settings to high using a intel core i3. So don't tell me that there not good cpu's.

    And bonus FX series is out of date yes. But there still good cpu's as i use a 8350 In my main rig and everything works perfectly fine and i can run a lot of games between 1080p and 4k.

  10. #10
    Registered rares95 is offline
    MemberRank
    Feb 2012 Join Date
    5Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    Quote Originally Posted by NoBrain View Post
    The FX line are really outdated and at the current price of Ryzen it's really not worth it for the FX line :)



    Intel currently win in the IPC (single-core performance) area, which applies to 90% of games, since most games don't really use more than one or two cores due to terrible engines. Most gamers will go for Intel due to IPC, for creativity (Sony Vegas, 3D rendering, etc.) or streaming while gaming - Ryzen is the best bet. Once Zen+ and Zen 3 release, Intel won't have so much of a gap in terms of IPC.
    IPC doesn't matter when you're comparing an 8 core monster to a dual core tiny mouse. The Pentium cores are limited by the TDP and the low amount of cache and won't win any performance awards. On the other hand, the FX cores are fast due to high frequency and higher cache.

    Also, many games nowadays benefit from high core counts. Some even benefit from faster RAM, like GTA V.


    @DragonSeth By the way, that motherboard won't even run an FX 8350 for more than a couple of months before frying. The power delivery stage is weak af and it won't be able to sustain the high amperage that an FX needs for long. Minimum recommended for an FX, even the 95W TDP FX 8300, is a solid chipset 970 board like the Gigabyte GA-970-UD3P or DS3P.

  11. #11
    Alpha Member DragonSeth is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Aug 2011 Join Date
    2,348Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    Quote Originally Posted by rares95 View Post
    IPC doesn't matter when you're comparing an 8 core monster to a dual core tiny mouse. The Pentium cores are limited by the TDP and the low amount of cache and won't win any performance awards. On the other hand, the FX cores are fast due to high frequency and higher cache.

    Also, many games nowadays benefit from high core counts. Some even benefit from faster RAM, like GTA V.


    @DragonSeth By the way, that motherboard won't even run an FX 8350 for more than a couple of months before frying. The power delivery stage is weak af and it won't be able to sustain the high amperage that an FX needs for long. Minimum recommended for an FX, even the 95W TDP FX 8300, is a solid chipset 970 board like the Gigabyte GA-970-UD3P or DS3P.
    Really now. That seems a bit weird since i have a fx 8350 and i ran it on that board for more then a year. Until i switch to the msi 970 gaming for more features seems legit. But its a budget setup i'm not fighting just here to help people.

    That board is meant to run fx 6300 but it can run 8350 with no problems.

  12. #12
    "(still lacks brains)" NoBrain is offline
    ModeratorRank
    Sep 2011 Join Date
    United KingdomLocation
    2,687Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    Quote Originally Posted by rares95 View Post
    IPC doesn't matter when you're comparing an 8 core monster to a dual core tiny mouse. The Pentium cores are limited by the TDP and the low amount of cache and won't win any performance awards. On the other hand, the FX cores are fast due to high frequency and higher cache.

    Also, many games nowadays benefit from high core counts. Some even benefit from faster RAM, like GTA V.
    IPC matters a heck of a lot since most applications do not need to use or just weren't designed for more than 4 cores. You're right games like GTA V, Battlefield and a few others handle more cores better (as well as RAM speed) - however you are incredibly wrong about FX cores being fast. The FX cores are in fact incredibly slow, but excel in applications that do need to use more cores. The FX line aren't actually true 8 core CPUs since 2 cores share 1x L1 cache, 1x L2 cache, Fetch, Decoder and 1 FPU. Thus, making the cores incredibly slow for single threaded / low core usage applications. The sharing of modules REALLY killed the performance of the FX series and the only way AMD could survive until Ryzen and to slightly increase the performance of the FX series was by clocking it higher, which means more heat.

    Higher frequency does not always mean it will performance massively different if the core design is completely wrong for todays tasks. While AMD predicted applications would head towards a more multi-threaded design, they were off by about 12 years. Even now adoption for multi-threaded applications is very slowly picking up.

  13. #13
    Alpha Member DragonSeth is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Aug 2011 Join Date
    2,348Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    Main post has been updated with all new rigs. At the budget of 550-560$

    Bonus: Added Ryzen System.
    Last edited by DragonSeth; 10-06-17 at 04:54 AM.

  14. #14
    Registered rares95 is offline
    MemberRank
    Feb 2012 Join Date
    5Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    Quote Originally Posted by NoBrain View Post
    IPC matters a heck of a lot since most applications do not need to use or just weren't designed for more than 4 cores. You're right games like GTA V, Battlefield and a few others handle more cores better (as well as RAM speed) - however you are incredibly wrong about FX cores being fast. The FX cores are in fact incredibly slow, but excel in applications that do need to use more cores. The FX line aren't actually true 8 core CPUs since 2 cores share 1x L1 cache, 1x L2 cache, Fetch, Decoder and 1 FPU. Thus, making the cores incredibly slow for single threaded / low core usage applications. The sharing of modules REALLY killed the performance of the FX series and the only way AMD could survive until Ryzen and to slightly increase the performance of the FX series was by clocking it higher, which means more heat.

    Higher frequency does not always mean it will performance massively different if the core design is completely wrong for todays tasks. While AMD predicted applications would head towards a more multi-threaded design, they were off by about 12 years. Even now adoption for multi-threaded applications is very slowly picking up.
    You do know that you're preaching to the choir, right? I'm well versed in hardware, having designed and recommended thousands of systems, and thus i'm well aware that the FX cores are slow, but they sure as hell aren't slower than Pentium cores, for the reasons I've stated in my previous post. You should know this...

  15. #15
    Alpha Member DragonSeth is offline
    Alpha MaleRank
    Aug 2011 Join Date
    2,348Posts

    Re: 500$ Budget Gaming PC's

    Quote Originally Posted by rares95 View Post
    You do know that you're preaching to the choir, right? I'm well versed in hardware, having designed and recommended thousands of systems, and thus i'm well aware that the FX cores are slow, but they sure as hell aren't slower than Pentium cores, for the reasons I've stated in my previous post. You should know this...
    The builds have already been updated. Yes pentium cores are pretty slow. But it was a budget cpu. FX cores are slow but there not terrible. As its a hex-a core processor. This was my first time recommending a system. So chill out.

    And for AMD being outdated yes they was. But now they are beating intel for the first time in a while. Intel new I9 CPU was just dumb. And a fail attempt to fight against AMD.

    Also i have been building systems for about 3-4 years now. So i know some about hardware to.

    Also AMD was never good at single performance until ryzen and everyone knew that.




Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Advertisement