How to scale a PC build?

Associate
Joined
27 Nov 2011
Posts
106
OK, so I have always found that for a new build, an equal split between CPU and GPU cost (around the same figure for each) is a good fit for building a new gaming rig but I am not even sure if that is good thinking and if there is a simple way to know if the ratio should be varied and if there is a way to know which one bottlenecks the other.

After all, what is the point in having a great CPU/GPU if the other part will hold it back.
Does anyone have input on how they determine what CPU or GPU to get when building a new system?

Aside from that, what happens when you want to go from an entry level build spending a £100-200 on a CPU/GPU, to something more in the £300 range to something you would spend £500 on CPU and GPU parts... in respect of the other parts you need??

Is the case, PSU, mobo, RAM, storage, cooling all going to be equivalent no matter what CPU / GPU components you get? I see people building systems that are a tier up from a performance point of view and it seems they spend more on the other parts in relation to that but whilst I can research benchmark benefits of CPU/GPU, I am not sure how the other parts scale by build.

I don't know if this is just a case of finger-in-the-air thinking where someone says their budget is 1.8K, 1/3 on GPU, 1/3 on CPU and 1/3 on other parts and they just find ways to spend £600 on those parts or if there is more detailed thinking on how much you should spend on each part irrespective of budget.


In conclusion, I want to look at what I have done before in building a gaming PC and see how to improve and don't know if looking at it purely from a budget perspective is worthwhile or if there is a better way. If I had 1.5K to spend on a system before and now I want to spend twice that, is the ratio of cost : parts something that scales linearly and if not, how do system builders with experience know how to scale a specific builders budget and not end up wasting money on irrelevant parts.
 
Associate
Joined
11 May 2017
Posts
1,037
Location
Portsmouth
When I built my rig two years ago it cost me 4.6K because I wanted to go 4k gaming there is no ending to it :) you talk about spending £500 on a CPU but some CPU cost 1.6k and higher and again people like to budget them self.

We can only give people advice but it's their choice in the end:D
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
23 Mar 2011
Posts
16,747
Location
West Side
You have to ask what's your goal when building a pc, e.g 1080p at 60fps . Factor in future games and what they need 4 cores 6 or 8 so that has longevity is it worth paying for that.

A car is technically a car e.g mini v ferraei it will both get you to the same destination but it's how it does that., quality and style. Is worth 0sying the extra for ?

Most people set a budget and the best they can for that.

Balancing a system once you know what you want to achieve is the key.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
27 Nov 2011
Posts
106
For years I struggled to make a 600-800£ build work and stretch it out for 4-5 years, always having to take a hit somewhere in performance but thankfully I have more to spend on a build and recently have been able to put twice as much and found the results pleasant.

Can run everything on Ultra, bench way above average on performance, 2 years into my most recent build still get use from my 144hz monitor from a refresh rate POV on less intensive titles but still well above 60 in more demanding ones.

However I am keen to invest more in a build if it means that I can get closer to an enthusiast build, bench might higher but in doing so, I just don’t wouldn’t know which parts to tweak.

Aesthetics don’t bother me, doesn’t need to be pretty, rgb friendly or even care about where the cables go in the case :)

From a CPU /GPU point of view, I could use benchmark tools to trial/error add components until I found the sweet spot for which combination works well and gives less drop off from a diminishing returns aspect.

However, the other parts I wouldn’t know.
A case is a case, for a mobo knowing if it had the right slots is all I would care for, not a fan of AIO and would just get a good number of fans and rate the stock/vs/aftermarket coolers in general for a decent one. For PSU, gold standard works... and for ram, it doesn’t feel
Much of a game breaker as long as I can get a well reviewed stick that has a good clock speed I’m set.


Should I be spending more on the other parts or am I right that these parts are not near as critical as long as they do their basic job?
 
Associate
Joined
11 May 2017
Posts
1,037
Location
Portsmouth
How can you say PC case is a case! when they all come in different sizes and new designs, so you don't care where the cables go in the case that's sloppy work not a enthusiast build by far, best to use duck tape and a cardboard box if you want to save money:D
 
Last edited:
Associate
OP
Joined
27 Nov 2011
Posts
106
I really do not consider the case to be a significantly important component on the basis that once you reach a certain level (£50+) the quality of the cases meets a certain minimum level and additional to that seems to be to support bigger builds (more racks/hardpoints), RGB builds, AIO builds or from a design perspective.

The point I am making is that for any non-compute part, once you meet this relatively part-specific base standard, how do you scale past that?
Are there people buying the same case/PSU class/cooler for a 1K build they would for a 3K build because there is no functional benefit to having something better?
Or, is there a scalable benefit that comes from putting more budget into those parts that has a qualative benefit that I am not noticing, and if so, how do you judge that?
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Oct 2019
Posts
11,656
Location
Uk
If it's for gaming then you want to spend the most you can on the Gpu while having a CPU that is good enough if your limited by budget.

A cheap CPU like a ryzen 3600 paired with an RTX 3080 will work just fine for gaming especially if your res is higher than 1080p.
 
Associate
Joined
11 May 2017
Posts
1,037
Location
Portsmouth
I really do not consider the case to be a significantly important component on the basis that once you reach a certain level (£50+) the quality of the cases meets a certain minimum level and additional to that seems to be to support bigger builds (more racks/hardpoints), RGB builds, AIO builds or from a design perspective.

The point I am making is that for any non-compute part, once you meet this relatively part-specific base standard, how do you scale past that?
Are there people buying the same case/PSU class/cooler for a 1K build they would for a 3K build because there is no functional benefit to having something better?
Or, is there a scalable benefit that comes from putting more budget into those parts that has a qualative benefit that I am not noticing, and if so, how do you judge that?

So again you don't consider the case to be a significantly important! then why say you want to get to a enthusiast build? £50+ my TT900 case cost £250+ that's a enthusiast build if you want to game at old tec 1080p 60hz you can build a very cheap rig just remember to put in a cardboard box with allots of duck tape like I said or an old fish tank -best still leave it open on the desktop lol:D,

What you asking is you want a top end performance PC but at cheaper price for the next 5 years so you don't lose out on the latest games coming out get a X BOX or PlayStation then ;) about £600 job done.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
3 May 2006
Posts
1,448
IMO, people frequently over-spend on case (just needs decent quality & good airflow), motherboard (just needs good VRM & bios - especially now that useful overclocking is basically over) & ram (higher speeds cost a lot more for very marginal performance gain). I might add storage too - outside of a few specific use cases, a big, cheap pci-e ssd is near-enough as good as anything else in practical everyday terms.
In my opinion, CPU, GPU & RAM quantity (this last more for non-gaming uses) are the important things. Add a good Power supply (I prefer to stick to gold rated, but would do bronze for a budget build). The rest is just there to support those parts. Only other area worth spending more is a monitor. A good monitor will always improve your experience a lot & will keep givening through multiple upgrades of other parts. As it gets older, it becomes the 2nd monitor & you upgrade the 1st monitor & so on.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
27 Nov 2011
Posts
106
It is gaming that I am focusing on, so the research I have seen suggests that devoting around upto 40% on the gpu, upto 20% on the cpu upto 10% on the ram and then for the remaining 30%, mix/match as needs must.
Unless I am missing something obvious, as long as you obtain quality, there is usually a point of diminishing returns on a lot of parts but it isn't always easy to see where.

I would love it if I could just put a calculator together that says because I apply the above rule (or something similar) a 1K budget vs 2K budget vs 3K budget would be linear, but due to those diminishing returns, its much harder to gauge and whilst I can feel the difference between an extreme build that hits all the benchmarks and looks good in a youtube video sponsored by the manufacturer, when I judge the £/per whatever, there will be a point that, depending on your attitude, will start getting the expensive rather than worthwhile territory.

And aside from watching decent reviewers and builders online answer some of these questions in roundabout ways, I was looking to see if there were any good guides or advice on making the same cost comparisons, perhaps taking into account bench tests for other less critical parts
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Posts
18,539
Location
Aberdeen
It is gaming that I am focusing on, so the research I have seen suggests that devoting around upto 40% on the gpu, upto 20% on the cpu upto 10% on the ram and then for the remaining 30%, mix/match as needs must.

CPUs are a bit expensive right now. But you're looking at something like a GPU, CPU, motherboard, 16-32 GB RAM, a SSD, a case, CPU cooler, and a PSU. For an enthusiast build, everything apart from the CPU and GPU are pretty static.

My basket at Overclockers UK:
Total: £642.17 (includes shipping: £12.30)​

Hmm... forgot the CPU cooler:

My basket at Overclockers UK:
Total: £88.69 (includes shipping: £8.70)​

Cases are as much a matter of personal taste as airflow.
 
Associate
Joined
11 May 2017
Posts
1,037
Location
Portsmouth
CPUs are a bit expensive right now. But you're looking at something like a GPU, CPU, motherboard, 16-32 GB RAM, a SSD, a case, CPU cooler, and a PSU. For an enthusiast build, everything apart from the CPU and GPU are pretty static.

My basket at Overclockers UK:
Nice try Quartz;) but Vadersoul said "I really do not consider the case to be a significantly important component" & "Aesthetics don’t bother me, doesn’t need to be pretty, rgb friendly or even care about where the cables go in the case" my Choice for him is to use a cardboard box so that will save him another £109.99 Case:D
 
Last edited:
Associate
OP
Joined
27 Nov 2011
Posts
106
lol @ aorus. Not the first time I have been slated for having an A-Z approach to a build. I see the fascination with pimped up builds, I even remember me and friends talking about water cooling PCs back in the 90s with bulbs in the case for lighting, so the fact that you can not only do that but its not that costly to do so and the industry seems to promote it as a preference isn't a bad thing. Just not my cup of tea. I like functional and would rather have better airflow and customization of components than extra effort on how to setup an RGB controller.

@ Quartz, the biggest point here isn't about finding a build to buy and a recommendation of what kit to get now, but more about how that scales when making comparisons once I am ready to build, likely Q1 2021 once I have seen what AMD are packing following their Q4 launch this year.

So, for example, in what you have put above, if you wanted to spend twice as much (ie x2 budget) would you invest £300 in ram? £300 in a mobo? or would you limit some of those parts in regards to diminishing returns and if so, which and why.
It isn't an easy question and my concern is that the real answer is a combination of YMMV, personal taste and there being too many variables to account for.
 
Associate
Joined
20 Jul 2015
Posts
386
The case is there to house components safely and provide adequate cooling. Most cases are essentially black metal boxes - or lately metal and glass boxes. Some people place a LOT of value on the "Look at my case, it has all the lights" approach when that does not in any way improve the computers performance, even though, subject to taste, it can be aesthetically superior. Somebody saying if your rig isn't in a £200 case it's not an entusiast PC, well, that somebody has a skewed/biased idea of what an enthusiast is.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
27 Nov 2011
Posts
106
The case is there to house components safely and provide adequate cooling. Most cases are essentially black metal boxes - or lately metal and glass boxes. Some people place a LOT of value on the "Look at my case, it has all the lights" approach when that does not in any way improve the computers performance, even though, subject to taste, it can be aesthetically superior. Somebody saying if your rig isn't in a £200 case it's not an entusiast PC, well, that somebody has a skewed/biased idea of what an enthusiast is.

Sure and I think that some people have different definitions of the enthusiast level. For some it is £/spend, some it is how customized it is (a custom loop vs AIO), some it is just about best of breed regardless of cost.
I do think prescribing to those trains of thought, or others is limiting since it commits you to making decisions irrespective of other factors. Someone who must have RGB or design feel might spend an extra £100 on ram just because it fits that criteria whereas someone who is more focused on £/fps or £/gig or £/iops is going to take a hit on the look or brand loyalty or such if it meets that criteria.

I mean look at the work Linus did on making the other Linus (of Linux fame)'s PC based on quotes and Q+A he had for describing his build. He was more bothered about CPU and never played games on it so he litterally was going to put the lowest cost GPU in there. That is why the build has an AMD TR but the GPU is almost obsolete in its quality. Different people want different things.

I suppose that is what makes PC building an interesting hobby group. There isn't a rule to say one is better than the other but no matter what Hobby group you have out there from collecting beermats to building PCs, there will always be people who want to rules lawyer the conversation.


TL;DR for the below: Once you get to a certain level of spend for a PC, it becomes a lot more about subjective rather than objective benefit and it is fairly reasonable to say that overspending will occur and if you are aware/educated about how/why then even if you make those decisions you feel much more comfortable as a result


The conclusion to my current finding is that I am setting a specific goal for every part and being quite specific for it and setting a limit on quality for most parts with the GPU and CPU being the key parts I intend to overspend on if needed.
So, if a case has all the clearance, device bays, ease of install that I like, even if I plan to spend £3,000 on the full build, I am happy with a £50 case.
Same goes for things like PSU. If I find I don't need platinum quality and Gold will do and have no plans to Dual card in the future, I am happy to get a PSU that can account for the quality/usage of my build.

There might be something simple about just saying 5% on a PSU, 5% on Case and then spending £150 on a PSU and $150 on case irrespective of the diminishing returns from my quality perspective but spending a bit more time going over this is worth it for me if I know I got the best value for money.
It seems the thinking of ratio/cost for building up to a certain level makes sense, for some "budget builds". Mainly because this makes up the majority of the builds being done and there are larger leaps in quality to cost at this level. It seems once you start looking at the £2,000+ level, it becomes much more about what you can choose to overspend on because although it isn't overkill so to speak, the returns are much less and you go into it knowing that you are not getting the best value for money but justify that.


And in any comparisons, that seems to be the critical part people miss. It isn't about if it costs less or more, it is about what it is worth to have "more" and what you might lose by having "less".
 
Associate
Joined
11 May 2017
Posts
1,037
Location
Portsmouth
The case is there to house components safely and provide adequate cooling. Most cases are essentially black metal boxes - or lately metal and glass boxes. Some people place a LOT of value on the "Look at my case, it has all the lights" approach when that does not in any way improve the computers performance, even though, subject to taste, it can be aesthetically superior. Somebody saying if your rig isn't in a £200 case it's not an entusiast PC, well, that somebody has a skewed/biased idea of what an enthusiast is.

I like all the RGB in a custom PC case why not show it off to your friends/family on how much work you put into it and with the money you spent on it some people like it and some don't so answer this question - why do all brand name tower cases have glass in them? why not put it all metal and no glass! because not many would be sold PC enthusiast is a sub-culture not just about custom builds, overclocking too and some like to build RGB custom watercooling / just custom watercooling and A.O builds also why do motherboards have RGB on them also GPU cards, times have changed we are given more choices on building new rigs than in the old Retro years of computers with no glass in them and we face limited air flow and over heating problems.

PC builds have come along way of Retro years hiding your pc under the desk and don't care of what's inside. but if that your choice that's fine but not mine;)
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
24 Mar 2006
Posts
1,022
Location
UK
The most important thing (imo) when building a new PC, is the selection of the motherboard. If you use this forum's advice and say you want to future proof as much as possible, then the right motherboard is key. With the right motherboard, ou can leverage CPU, RAM, and GPU improvements for a good 6-7 years with BIOS updates.

Motherboards are probably the least sexy component to buy (outside of the PSU), but from specifying from scratch, if you want longevity and the ability to to swap in CPUs, RAM, and GFX cards over a decent period, then the motherboard is key to everything.

PCI4 might be overkill now, but in 2-3 years time when you want to swap out your current gen GFX card or M2 disk you will be greatful you paid the extra £30 back when you specified your original configuration.

I also think (although stand to be corrected) that the motherboard is what your Windows licence is tied to.
 
Associate
Joined
6 Dec 2007
Posts
1,368
Location
Cambridge
Thinking about it, I'm much more likely to do a phased upgrade than a 100% new build.

If I had to start from scratch, I would start by working out my priorities then decide on lifespan of components. Case, PSU, cooling and storage will generally be the components you keep longest. Mobo and cpu usually last longer than your gpu, especially if you game at higher resolutions.
 
Back
Top Bottom