I'm thinking of putting my current PC (core 2 duo @ 2.2 GHz with a 8600 GS card) in the living room to use as a media center, and building a new one from scratch for gaming.

For the graphics card I really want to go with Nvidia due to some very specific reasons (nothing against ATI, it's just that I have some software and plans which require an Nvidia card), but for the CPU I'm thinking it may be cheaper to go with AMD. Since I don't know much about AMD stuff, I thought I'd ask a few questions.

I don't want to spend too much money, and if possible I'd like it to not use too much power. With that said, I would like it if the PC can run current games (for example L4D2) at or near 120 fps, as I may want to try out 3D gaming one of these days, and you really need high framerates for that. Running games at lower settings to achieve those framerates is not a problem, but they must run at 1680x1050 res (the native resolution of my monitor).

With that out of the way here are the questions:

1- I have pretty much ruled out the X4 965 CPU. Too expensive and uses too much power. Is a tri-core worth it with new games, or should I just stick to a X2? Any suggestions for the CPU?

2- Is DDR3 worth it, or can I stick to DDR2 memory?

3- If I get a AM3 CPU, will it work well with a AM2+ motherboard? I don't want to spend a lot on the motherboard unless I really need to.

1) There are a number of power-efficient CPUs - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103683&cm_re=phenom_ii-_-19-103-683-_-Product might be something to look at, or there's a quad-core one that's otherwise the exact same as this as well. There's also some low-energy Athlon IIs, but I haven't actually seen them for sale anywhere. >_>

You'll need to spend a good amount of money on a video card to get 120 FPS out of games that are both not old, and not L4D... and I don't really know much about 3D gaming, and its impact on framerates, so someone else will have to help you there. However, most games run fine using just a good dual core CPU, since it's pretty well the video card that matters most.

Also, you could try messing with the dark art of undervolting, as a lot of newer AMD CPUs are supposed to do fairly well with that.

2) I would just spend the extra few dollars to get DDR3 memory, especially since AMD revealed that their next-generation of CPUs in 2011 will still use Socket AM3, meaning you'll be able to upgrade then without needing a new motherboard. The price different isn't too much - the cheapest 4 GB DDR2 and DDR3 kits on Newegg are only 2$ apart, for example.

3) AM3 CPUs are backwards-compatible with AM2 and AM2+ motherboards, provided the BIOS supports the CPU. That being said, there usually isn't any difference between an AM2+ or an AM3 motherboard in terms of price, so might as well get the AM3 one.

Thanks!

I'm aware I'll have to get a good GPU. For reference, here are some benchmarks I found of L4D2:

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?p=1629066

Of course I don't need the game to run at a consistent 120 fps, just something near that in order to have a margin for playing games in 3D later (which basically halves the framerate).

I was under the impression that AM3 motherboards were quite more expensive. But maybe that's outdated knowledge. I believe DDR3 memory only works with AM3 boards, is that correct?

Well, keep in mind that those benchmarks were using a 5870 - more powerful than all but one of NVIDIA's cards, and also extremely hard to find as well.

And you are correct, AM2+ motherboards only support DDR2, and AM3 ones only support DDR3, that's the only difference between the two. But if there is a price difference between an AM2+ and AM3 model of the same motherboard, it's probably nothing more than 5$, I'd imagine.

i wanna get a rig or a good comp cuz i wanna leave this laptop and go back to my normal comp but i wanna pimp my normal comp lol

I can handle running without AA or AF, so I should be able to get good performance out of a cheaper card (and reducing other graphics settings if necessary).

I'll search more on the AM2+ / AM3 price differences.

AM3 processor is useless on AM2+ motherboard you would just be throwing money away, so I'd say go with a budget AM2+ processor preferably X4 phenom if your nvidia graphics card is powerful.

I'd suggest something like AMD Phenom X4 940 3,00 GHZ for it's price and it has good clockability if you want to squeeze more power out of it later, it's a great processor for the AM2+ socket.

I would suggest going with the AMD 955BE. It is a decent priced CPU and is quad core. Games nowadays use more than 1 core. They don't utilize all 4 calls very well but you will get better performance off of a quad core vs a single core or dual core CPU. The additional cores are generally used for physics in physics engines like Havoc. Also games that have a lot of detail or a lot of different things going on at once really benefit from a quad core. Like the up and coming Starcraft 2 will thrive on a quad vs a dual.

Don't sell yourself cheap on the CPU only to save a few bucks. AMD is still neck and neck with Intel for games and is often faster in some games. They only lag behind in video editing and the like. So if you are getting one to make sure it games well, I suggest the 955BE. Especially since games are getting better and better at using multiple cores.

You will want a motherboard with DDR3, it is a worthwhile investment as DDR3 is starting to show major benefits over DD2. In the end you will be spending not more than 100 extra dollars for the 955BE, AM3 mobo and DDR3 RAM. The system will last much longer than and you will get every penny worth of that extra 100 for going just a little bit better.

At that framerate and resolution, you need a very powerful card. Unfortunately, Nvidia has no good cards above the GTX260; anything higher is completely outmatched by the 5850, 5870 or 5970*. And their new (DX11) cards aren't coming until late Q1 2010 at the earliest, given that the production rev hasn't taped out yet and it'll be a 3 months from then to get launchable quantities.

*As an example, when a 5850 at its RRP of $259 [when they are in stock it will return to that], it is 20-30% faster than the GTX285 at $360. A 40% premium for such a reduction in performance surely can't justify the software advantages, especially when you have the extremely low power consumption/temperature/noise of the 5850 and DX11 support.

I'm concerned the GTX260 isn't fast enough to run some of the more graphics-intensive new releases on 1680x1050 and 120Hz.

I would say most current games already benefit from three cores, and new games will increasingly use the quad-cores. If the system is purely for gaming then I would say the 720 BE tri-core; if you will be using it for any kind of CPU-intensive task that will use 4 cores then the X4 945.

Go for DDR3. It's about the same or lower than DDR2. You'll probably want a 785G motherboard for that, as going lower with DDR3 doesn't get chaeper.

Remember to pick up the ATI Radeon HD 5970 ;]