Instale o Steam
iniciar sessão
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chinês simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Tcheco)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol — Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol — América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polonês)
Português (Portugal)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar um problema com a tradução
So you have no idea what the heck you're talking about, obviously. The new i3's are quad cores, and -NOT- the dual core garbage of years past.
See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysAdXfhqGtU
Gaming tests start at 8:25 mark, the i3-8100 is only -9 FPS below the 7700K, when mated with ddr4-3200 ram. It is a slower chip if one uses slower 2400 mhz ram with it. But with fast enough ram, the new i3's are perfectly capable gaming cpu's.
There is not any substantial price difference between a 2400Mhz and a 3000-3200Mhz RAM.
Extra costs are only on RGB ones and ones that are even faster, like 3600Mhz.
OP get what is cheaper because there will be no difference gaming with a 1050 ti, but AMD is going to release 7nm on the current board so I would lean more that way with the possibility of great performance jump with the same motherboard.
Well that just means that you have to look better.
Also, sometimes a 3200Mhz is cheaper than a cheapest 3000Mhz.
Curious where "here" is?