I run a mildly overclocked FX-6300 and 2x GTX660 SLI, and in a large battle my FPS dips down into the teens. Plan on getting an unlocked high end i5/i7 if you want 30+ FPS in PVP battles.

EDIT: For what it's worth, I went with AMD about a year ago, and really wish I would have spent the extra $100 or so to stick with Intel. I'm already looking to upgrade back to an i5.

@Pahlehvahn nice build. You made some good choices, IMO. Good MMO mouse, good GPU, good memory, good power supply (often over looked).

I'm an AMD man myself, but be aware that AMDs are inferior when core to core performance is measured. i5 are still the gold standard with current games (i7s are also good but their technology is not widely utilized in most games atm)... However, I did do a poll several weeks back and found that many AMD users were reporting good performance... So, I'm not knocking the cpu/mobo pick, just saying that for a little more money (i5s are down in price) you could have an objectively better machine.

Here is a site I love to go to for comparing chips:
Intel 4690k VS AMD FX 8350

The intel chip has better performance with its 4 cores compared to the 8 core AMD, it is significantly better in single core performance, ties in power consumption, and is only rated slightly less in overall value...

On Newegg.com the FX 8350 retails for $179.99 ATM (great price BTW). The Intel 4690k is retailing for $239.99. Everyone's finances are different, but I would go with the i5 myself... Especially with MMO type games like ESO that are so CPU hungry.

*EDIT*
I just want to add, just like power supplies, single core performance is often over-looked and under appreciated. Even though modern games do thread over multiple cores, single core performance is significant... When AMD is using 8 cores to do what intel does with 4, that tells you, the quality is with intel atm.

I have an FX 8320 oc to 4.5ghz (insanely easy to oc these) paired with 2 r9 280 in crossfire and according to msi afterburner +hwinfo I only drop to 40 fps during large keep battles.

Intel is slightly faster in single threaded, but that's not the whole story, and AMD has shown there is more then 1 way to skin a cat.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r29396194-Tom-s-Hardware-Conducts-Mantle-Test-with-Suprising-Results-of-AMD

AMD CPU + AMD gpu using mantle slaughters every Intel CPU up to the 4770k in gaming in games that support Mantle including higher minimum frame rates.

AMD has essentially rendered Intels single thread advantage useless...Mantle is the biggest gaming innovation and game changer since AMD introduced AMD 64

also many big time 3rd party titles such as Battlefield Hardline, Star citizen, and Dragon Age Inquisition will ship with Mantle support out the gate. Also, Crytek has integrated Mantle support into the newest Cryengine.

Intel may be better for ESO right now, buy ESO isn't the only game out there.

Also Intel must be worried because they have approached AMD numerous times the last few months trying to get access to the Mantle SDK and specs and AMD has refused...of course Intel wants access because mantle based games beat the tar out of their CPU with AMD CPU and Intel can't have that hehe...

Crytek, Ea, Dice, and Eidos have jumped aboard Mantle its not going anywhere even when DX12 comes out. Look for more to jump on soon.

game devs helped AMD create mantle, its the apu game devs have wanted for years. AMD has said they will give Nvidia access to most if the API so the green team can write drivers too, there will be a few things AMD will keep to themselves such as TressFX and true audio, but Nvidia will be free to incorporate PhysicX and the like into their Mantle drivers for the green teams cards.

the landscape for PC gaming is changing, CPU is not going to be as important anymore in the next two years.. The fact an FX 4350 gets higher frame rates in Mantle games then an i7-4770k proves the landscape is changing.

Intel is not a bad buy, you buy what's best for you, but even Toms Hardware, a very reputable source concedes that Mantle is a game changer, so much so that it gives AMD and comparative advantage over Intel in games that support it, and more of those are coming out everyday.

Pahlehvahn wrote: »

Will it run max settings above 40 fps in PvP while in combat?
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/XNNjBm
Any thing you suggest me to change please say so.

I try to help.

Not adviced:

16 GB Ram & SSD

Unless you work with your PC (music production, video encoding, graphics & art) 8 GB are totally fine. Especially since 2x8 costs quite a lot these days and it would be better to go for 4x4 if you really want 16 GB.
Reason is, if one block breaks down then you only need to get a cheap 4 GB and not an expensive 8GB.

Same which was said for the Ram applies for the SSD. It wont give you a better performance ingame, it only boosts your OS and the execution, writing of files.

Unless you record your gaming sessions, an SSD is not necessary.

Razor Gimmicks & keyboard

While I know there is a lot of commercialism in regards of Razor and the "gaming" tag, you pay a lot of money for the brand. I would also never buy a mouse or keyboard from the internet before I had it in my own hands in a shop.
Every hand is different and especially a mouse must fit your hand like a glove.

AMD CPU & Nvidia GPU

AMD CPU´s are not adviced for MMOs. Reason is their poor single core performance, you just lose lots of FPS due that. Unless you are some hardcore pc nerd that can OC to oblivion and find a few other tweaks - you will just always be outperformed by an Intel - even if its just a duo core.

As for Nvidia, in my opinion AMD always outperforms Nvidia if it comes to price / value of a GPU.
You pay 320 bucks for a performance that a 250 bucks AMD delivers as well. Besides that, you get only 2 GB of VRAM - something that should not be underestimated especially if you play with graphical enhancing mods.

Unless you really want things like PhysX or Shadowplay, an AMD is always the better choice.

Advised:

RAM & CPU & GPU

Go for a no name brand if it comes to the RAM. There is almost no difference in performance between a brand and a no name these days. My advice are 2x4GB - make sure its compatible with your CPU & mainboard.

As a CPU, go for a new I7 of your choice.

While what someone said in regards of Mantle isn't wrong and AMD CPU benefit most from it in theory (from 30 FPS to 60 FPS is more noticeable than from 60 FPS to 100), intel has full Mantle access right now

At BF you gain about a 30 - 40% FPS independently of your CPU (2-3 FPS difference between the different CPUs in general), so that Intel is still the better choice there.
We are talking of a difference between 90 FPS to 65 FPS (I7 vs. AMD FX ) as one example.
Mantle is currently an AMD GPU exclusive, not an AMD CPU exclusive - the poster above probably mixed this up.

All this wont matter at ESO however, it does not support Mantle and most likely never will - so that even with different results you wont benefit from an AMD CPU.


As GPU I would advice a 280x of AMD or 290. Both cards run every game currently on the market in full HD and still have power reserves for future gaming.



The rest of your components like the PSU looked alright to me, you could however go for a smaller PSU with about 500W unless you plan on running SLI soon.

Also note, if you plan on switching to Intel then cooler, MB must also be changed including the parts I mentioned earlier.
If you can run the game in pvp at 40fps at Ultra? With a few settings lowered maybe, this however is a client issue and not a PC issue.

I wonder how a PS4 or a Xbox One will mantain at least 30 fps in large Cyrodiil fights

yeah my 770gtx superclocked 4gb edition still gets to 30-40fps while in cyrodil, funnily back a few patches ago it was stable at 60+ whereever i was, anywhere, ever.
Pre 1.1 i believe.

Audigy wrote: »

Not adviced:

16 GB Ram & SSD

Unless you work with your PC (music production, video encoding, graphics & art) 8 GB are totally fine. Especially since 2x8 costs quite a lot these days and it would be better to go for 4x4 if you really want 16 GB.
Reason is, if one block breaks down then you only need to get a cheap 4 GB and not an expensive 8GB.

Same which was said for the Ram applies for the SSD. It wont give you a better performance ingame, it only boosts your OS and the execution, writing of files.

Unless you record your gaming sessions, an SSD is not necessary.

Razor Gimmicks & keyboard

While I know there is a lot of commercialism in regards of Razor and the "gaming" tag, you pay a lot of money for the brand. I would also never buy a mouse or keyboard from the internet before I had it in my own hands in a shop.
Every hand is different and especially a mouse must fit your hand like a glove.

AMD CPU & Nvidia GPU

AMD CPU´s are not adviced for MMOs. Reason is their poor single core performance, you just lose lots of FPS due that. Unless you are some hardcore pc nerd that can OC to oblivion and find a few other tweaks - you will just always be outperformed by an Intel - even if its just a duo core.

As for Nvidia, in my opinion AMD always outperforms Nvidia if it comes to price / value of a GPU.
You pay 320 bucks for a performance that a 250 bucks AMD delivers as well. Besides that, you get only 2 GB of VRAM - something that should not be underestimated especially if you play with graphical enhancing mods.

Unless you really want things like PhysX or Shadowplay, an AMD is always the better choice.

Advised:

RAM & CPU & GPU

Go for a no name brand if it comes to the RAM. There is almost no difference in performance between a brand and a no name these days. My advice are 2x4GB - make sure its compatible with your CPU & mainboard.

As a CPU, go for a new I7 of your choice.

While what someone said in regards of Mantle isn't wrong and AMD CPU benefit most from it in theory (from 30 FPS to 60 FPS is more noticeable than from 60 FPS to 100), intel has full Mantle access right now

At BF you gain about a 30 - 40% FPS independently of your CPU (2-3 FPS difference between the different CPUs in general), so that Intel is still the better choice there.
We are talking of a difference between 90 FPS to 65 FPS (I7 vs. AMD FX ) as one example.
Mantle is currently an AMD GPU exclusive, not an AMD CPU exclusive - the poster above probably mixed this up.

All this wont matter at ESO however, it does not support Mantle and most likely never will - so that even with different results you wont benefit from an AMD CPU.


As GPU I would advice a 280x of AMD or 290. Both cards run every game currently on the market in full HD and still have power reserves for future gaming.



The rest of your components like the PSU looked alright to me, you could however go for a smaller PSU with about 500W unless you plan on running SLI soon.

Also note, if you plan on switching to Intel then cooler, MB must also be changed including the parts I mentioned earlier.
If you can run the game in pvp at 40fps at Ultra? With a few settings lowered maybe, this however is a client issue and not a PC issue.

No SSD? Lol really? It won't improve graphics rendering, but load times for games will be improved without a doubt. Also going from cold to useable desktop in 13 sec is something that never ever gets old.

Agree on the mouse/keyboard, find a brand you like and stick with it. If you like Razors though then I guess you are set.

Also if you go for 8gb of RAM i would try to find some with a better latency.

Pausekey wrote: »

Audigy wrote: »

No SSD? Lol really? It won't improve graphics rendering, but load times for games will be improved without a doubt. Also going from cold to useable desktop in 13 sec is something that never ever gets old.

Agree on the mouse/keyboard, find a brand you like and stick with it. If you like Razors though then I guess you are set.

Also if you go for 8gb of RAM i would try to find some with a better latency.

As I said, an SSD wont make a better gaming performance. I do all my work on the SSD its great, but the games do not really profit from them. Ok for some a faster loading time is important, to me spending a few more seconds in the loading screen wont justify a 100$ investment

With my HDD by WD I usually don't have to wait longer than 5 seconds.

Everyone to his own to be honest, if he is also working with his PC then a SSD is great. If he doesn't, the money should be spend more wise in my opinion especially since he had a few weak parts in his setup.

poodlemasterb16_ESO wrote: »

Audigy wrote: »

Vunter wrote: »

I wonder how a PS4 or a Xbox One will mantain at least 30 fps in large Cyrodiil fights

Those use a different API that wont stress the CPU´s that much. I wont be surprised if the overall performance on Consoles is better than on PCs right now

All consoles run close to the metal and are more efficient because of that. Still they are making games run in weird resolutions just so the xbone won't be overstressed. I would expect the PS4 to do a bit better. No none of them will come close to my 2560x1600 GTX 780 powered display.

Anyhoo, you have a lot of advice to give, some useful. Might I inquire as to your particular qualifications to make such sweeping statements about AMD, Mantle and the usefulness of various things. It's my experience that beginners get all enthusiastic about anything they have and tend to diss that which they know little about. Still we all have things to learn.

I wouldn't call it "diss"

During my studies I worked a lot in hardware stores, went to conventions, talked to people who create all these fun things for us. You just pick up stuff over time and I still profit from it today.

But there are also tons of benchmarks from hardware based websites where all this can be read up if wanted by the OP. Techspot once did a test run about Mantle vs. Directx based on Thief, the I7 still had a better performance on Directx than the FX by AMD with Mantle which was also beaten by an I3

Needless to say that the I7 also won with Mantle enabled. While AMD won more FPS than Intel, they still cant beat them. I was a big AMD fan for almost 10 years, but after digging a bit deeper into all of this, I realized that Intel just does a better job if it comes to gaming and non optimized games that don't utilize all resources like ESO. Still, Mantle helps AMD CPUs a lot but they still wont beat Intel

That said, ESO doesn't use Mantle so all our chatter wont matter anyways for the OP And hey, there is still AMD in the GPU market and as I mentioned to me these cards just rock.

Funny circumstance actually, I went from AMD to Intel and from Nvidia to AMD. Times change I guess but in the end every piece of hardware has its area where it shines. The question just always is, what does someone want to do with his PC?

Based on this hardware must be picked and every serious PC magazine will clearly indicate this in their test reviews.

Ram used to be dirt cheap - SSDs are dropping - I picked up two Samsung ev0 840 240gb's to raid 0 for about 230 dollars...Video cards are the insane priced items right now...that and memory. I have an i5 oc'ed to 4.8 ghz running a r290 and an old i7 3.2 ghx with a gtx 470 - I can't really tell the difference between the two playing eso..I mean the r290 is prettier with all the stuff turned on but..meh...it's not 1000 dollars prettier.

I'd sugest more then 2bg of vram. 4gb, depending on what res you wish to play.

What monitor(s) and resolution you plan to play at is a big piece of the puzzle.

discosoc wrote: »

Syndy wrote: »

No, it will not... But that is not because the components on your end...

I have a GTX 780Ti, and an i7 3820, I go down to 30fps with max settings in average size fights...

The fps issue is on their end not ours...

I have an i5 and GTX780, and framerates are in the 60-80 range.

You won't maintain that in Cyrodiil.

Also, Cyrodiil is actually a CPU bottleneck, rather than a GPU bottleneck.

I'll take a read though this thread when I have some time tonight, but my PC recently broke and I'm hunting for a PC that can play ESO on max setting. I'd prefer an actual PC over a laptop, but I'm easy (I'm playing from a Mac laptop currently and crashing aside it's fine, but the laptop isn't mine!).

I'm tempted to buy a pre-made system from here: http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=1411&zenid=c4123618e2474b3bcd2aabfa4d638f47 but I'm not sure which would be ideal. In terms of building a PC I have no experience but have access to friends who can do so... I'm simply not sure how to go about getting parts and whatnot. I was told unless you can manage the computer and are tech savvy you're best bet is to simply buy a pre-made system with a warranty.. decisions decisions.