|
When using this resource, please read FragKrag's opening post. The Tech Support forum regulars have helped create countless of desktop systems without any compensation. The least you can do is provide all of the information required for them to help you properly. |
On May 06 2012 05:44 Myrmidon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 05:30 thisisnotralph wrote:so my computer is all built and running  wasn't too bad overall. It is really really quiet which makes me nervous; It has two case fans, and the 6950 was reviewed to be loud, but mine is essentially silent. I can't tell if its on or not unless I look at the LED/monitor. anyway, is there a general free software suite that can benchmark/evaluate my build to make sure it's running correctly and efficiently? i.e. test temperatures, graphics performance, etc? What was the build again? By the way, just checking, but most early graphics card reviews are for the original reference-design card / cooling solution. Most reference design coolers for higher-end graphics cards are loud. Most graphics cards sold after the first few months use custom designs and different cooling designs which may be much quieter; a review for a different product than the one you have is not particularly relevant. Get something like HWMonitor to check temperatures, leave it open, and run 3DMark11 or something like that. That is a reasonable stress on the system to somewhat test stability and temperatures, and it also gives you a benchmark score, which you can compare with what you're supposed to get based on the hardware you're running. If you really want you could also run such things as IntelBurnTest, SuperPI, Cinebench, FurMark, Unigine Heaven, etc.
Eh, unless you have the retail version, 3dmark is bad for testing temps, since you can't loop tests, and the scenes are short and separated. Anyways, for thermals, I usually run all but one thread on P95, with furmark. Furmark may be over the top, but if you don't melt doing that, you're golden for anything else.
|
On May 06 2012 03:37 xDaunt wrote:
For people who need to buy a new OS with their new computer, is it worth waiting for Windows 8?
I'm not expert but after trying out the windows 8 preview for a few days I'm leaning towards no. I admittedly don't know if there are any "hidden" benefits to windows 8 over 7 but the interface doesn't really appeal to me and the desktop view seems lacking atm.
Though I'm not one of those who found it absolutely horrible (it has some potential), I'm not sure waiting for a brand new os with all the potential birth problems that usually comes with it are a good idea. If I were building a new computer and needed windows I'd go for windows 7. In a few years when I change again it's probably a more valid option unless it absolutely fluncs and windows 9 will be rushed out. 
Admittedly though I'm usually very late to switch to a new os, I was still on xp long after windows 7 came out.
|
On May 06 2012 05:59 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 05:44 Myrmidon wrote:On May 06 2012 05:30 thisisnotralph wrote:so my computer is all built and running wasn't too bad overall. It is really really quiet which makes me nervous; It has two case fans, and the 6950 was reviewed to be loud, but mine is essentially silent. I can't tell if its on or not unless I look at the LED/monitor. anyway, is there a general free software suite that can benchmark/evaluate my build to make sure it's running correctly and efficiently? i.e. test temperatures, graphics performance, etc? What was the build again? By the way, just checking, but most early graphics card reviews are for the original reference-design card / cooling solution. Most reference design coolers for higher-end graphics cards are loud. Most graphics cards sold after the first few months use custom designs and different cooling designs which may be much quieter; a review for a different product than the one you have is not particularly relevant. Get something like HWMonitor to check temperatures, leave it open, and run 3DMark11 or something like that. That is a reasonable stress on the system to somewhat test stability and temperatures, and it also gives you a benchmark score, which you can compare with what you're supposed to get based on the hardware you're running. If you really want you could also run such things as IntelBurnTest, SuperPI, Cinebench, FurMark, Unigine Heaven, etc. Eh, unless you have the retail version, 3dmark is bad for testing temps, since you can't loop tests, and the scenes are short and separated. Anyways, for thermals, I usually run all but one thread on P95, with furmark. Furmark may be over the top, but if you don't melt doing that, you're golden for anything else.
I think it's good enough for a "does my computer work (properly)?" test, which is what he was asking. No need to run more programs than that.
It's not the best tool for gauging temperatures for an overclock or rigorous stability testing, that's for sure.
On May 06 2012 06:02 nihlon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 03:37 xDaunt wrote:
For people who need to buy a new OS with their new computer, is it worth waiting for Windows 8? I'm not expert but after trying out the windows 8 preview for a few days I'm leaning towards no. I admittedly don't know if there are any "hidden" benefits to windows 8 over 7 but the interface doesn't really appeal to me and the desktop view seems lacking atm. Though I'm not one of those who found it absolutely horrible (it has some potential), I'm not sure waiting for a brand new os with all the potential birth problems that usually comes with it are a good idea. If I were building a new computer and needed windows I'd go for windows 8. In a few years when I change again it's probably a more valid option.
There are some improvements on the back end as well—it's not just the new interface. It's probably not a huge deal either way though.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/
|
On May 06 2012 06:02 Myrmidon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 05:59 JingleHell wrote:On May 06 2012 05:44 Myrmidon wrote:On May 06 2012 05:30 thisisnotralph wrote:so my computer is all built and running wasn't too bad overall. It is really really quiet which makes me nervous; It has two case fans, and the 6950 was reviewed to be loud, but mine is essentially silent. I can't tell if its on or not unless I look at the LED/monitor. anyway, is there a general free software suite that can benchmark/evaluate my build to make sure it's running correctly and efficiently? i.e. test temperatures, graphics performance, etc? What was the build again? By the way, just checking, but most early graphics card reviews are for the original reference-design card / cooling solution. Most reference design coolers for higher-end graphics cards are loud. Most graphics cards sold after the first few months use custom designs and different cooling designs which may be much quieter; a review for a different product than the one you have is not particularly relevant. Get something like HWMonitor to check temperatures, leave it open, and run 3DMark11 or something like that. That is a reasonable stress on the system to somewhat test stability and temperatures, and it also gives you a benchmark score, which you can compare with what you're supposed to get based on the hardware you're running. If you really want you could also run such things as IntelBurnTest, SuperPI, Cinebench, FurMark, Unigine Heaven, etc. Eh, unless you have the retail version, 3dmark is bad for testing temps, since you can't loop tests, and the scenes are short and separated. Anyways, for thermals, I usually run all but one thread on P95, with furmark. Furmark may be over the top, but if you don't melt doing that, you're golden for anything else. I think it's good enough for a "does my computer work (properly)?" test, which is what he was asking. No need to run more programs than that. It's not the best tool for gauging temperatures for an overclock or rigorous stability testing, that's for sure.
He did specifically mention temps. For temps it's terrible unless you have the full license to run at higher settings and loop.
If you DO have the full license, it's amazing for thermals, since it's capable of hitting high stress without going all furmark retard mode on you.
|
Microsoft's tactic. Make something shit and then good, repeat cycle.
|
On May 06 2012 06:23 skyR wrote:
Microsoft's tactic. Make something shit and then good, repeat cycle.
7 good vista bad xp good ... ME was good so there's something in between those, right? 95 was good 98 bad hmm... Yeah, waiting for windows 9
|
|
|
|
|
United States12705 Posts
I was going to get a MSI H67A-G43 (B3) ATX LGA1155 mobo with my build of
-Intel Core i3-2120 3.3GHz Dual-Core
-G.Skill Value Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1333
-Sapphire Radeon HD 6850 1GB
but I want my board to be in the Micro ATX form it turns out. Any suggestions what I can swap it with?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, ME had explorer.exe crashes all the time, and various bluescreens. I remember for some reason they had installed the brand new Windows ME system for a programming course, needless to say I didn't learn too much that week... Most people had to roll back to 98SE or 2000.
Also, I still can't decide on a graphics card... I've ordered all other parts, guess I'll have to run integrated until 660(ti?) is released... But I heard they will release it several months later than the 670.
|
Hmmm... Maybe there were some issues like that, I can't really recall... I just remember using it for like 4 years and loving it, of course I was pretty small back then but (I think it crashed once in a while but you easily fixed it with ctrl alt del in like 2 seconds I guess that's why I didn't really register it being a problem)
|
Well I don't think its anything particularly groundbreaking, but I don't think there are any real problem with w8, there's just no real reason to wait for it. But as long as its stable, I don't see why you would avoid it for seven, unless you absolutely must have your start menu.
|
On May 06 2012 06:26 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 06:23 skyR wrote:
Microsoft's tactic. Make something shit and then good, repeat cycle. 7 good vista bad xp good ... ME was good so there's something in between those, right? 95 was good 98 bad hmm... Yeah, waiting for windows 9
95 good
98 bad
98 SE good
ME bad
XP good
Vista bad
7 good
8 bad?
It fits perfectly if you consider 98 SE and 98 to be different (which is reasonable I guess, since it's more than just a service pack).
|
Having tried the Win8 consumer preview, I guess I'll stick to 7. Very likely there wont be any real Windows 8 only software as 7 is very dominant right now and 8 is based on 7 anyway. The metro UI is clearly aimed at tablets and isn't anything too awesome if you're very used to how your system works now.
I'm having my 7 look like 98/2K still. With gray bars and all.
|
On May 06 2012 08:00 Rannasha wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 06:26 Shikyo wrote:On May 06 2012 06:23 skyR wrote:
Microsoft's tactic. Make something shit and then good, repeat cycle. 7 good vista bad xp good ... ME was good so there's something in between those, right? 95 was good 98 bad hmm... Yeah, waiting for windows 9 95 good 98 bad 98 SE good ME bad XP good Vista bad 7 good 8 bad? It fits perfectly if you consider 98 SE and 98 to be different (which is reasonable I guess, since it's more than just a service pack).
3.1 was good or was it? o.O Or was there more than 2 versions seperating..
|
On May 06 2012 05:44 Myrmidon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 05:30 thisisnotralph wrote:so my computer is all built and running wasn't too bad overall. It is really really quiet which makes me nervous; It has two case fans, and the 6950 was reviewed to be loud, but mine is essentially silent. I can't tell if its on or not unless I look at the LED/monitor. anyway, is there a general free software suite that can benchmark/evaluate my build to make sure it's running correctly and efficiently? i.e. test temperatures, graphics performance, etc? What was the build again? By the way, just checking, but most early graphics card reviews are for the original reference-design card / cooling solution. Most reference design coolers for higher-end graphics cards are loud. Most graphics cards sold after the first few months use custom designs and different cooling designs which may be much quieter; a review for a different product than the one you have is not particularly relevant. Get something like HWMonitor to check temperatures, leave it open, and run 3DMark11 or something like that. That is a reasonable stress on the system to somewhat test stability and temperatures, and it also gives you a benchmark score, which you can compare with what you're supposed to get based on the hardware you're running. If you really want you could also run such things as IntelBurnTest, SuperPI, Cinebench, FurMark, Unigine Heaven, etc.
my build is:
i5-3750k
asrock pro4
2x4 gskill
sapphire radeon 6950
stupid 3dmark11 won't work for some reason. every time i try to start it, it freezes my computer? reinstalled and tried 4+ times now so i've given up, i guess there's some compatibility issues somewhere.
On May 06 2012 05:59 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 05:44 Myrmidon wrote:On May 06 2012 05:30 thisisnotralph wrote:so my computer is all built and running wasn't too bad overall. It is really really quiet which makes me nervous; It has two case fans, and the 6950 was reviewed to be loud, but mine is essentially silent. I can't tell if its on or not unless I look at the LED/monitor. anyway, is there a general free software suite that can benchmark/evaluate my build to make sure it's running correctly and efficiently? i.e. test temperatures, graphics performance, etc? What was the build again? By the way, just checking, but most early graphics card reviews are for the original reference-design card / cooling solution. Most reference design coolers for higher-end graphics cards are loud. Most graphics cards sold after the first few months use custom designs and different cooling designs which may be much quieter; a review for a different product than the one you have is not particularly relevant. Get something like HWMonitor to check temperatures, leave it open, and run 3DMark11 or something like that. That is a reasonable stress on the system to somewhat test stability and temperatures, and it also gives you a benchmark score, which you can compare with what you're supposed to get based on the hardware you're running. If you really want you could also run such things as IntelBurnTest, SuperPI, Cinebench, FurMark, Unigine Heaven, etc. Eh, unless you have the retail version, 3dmark is bad for testing temps, since you can't loop tests, and the scenes are short and separated. Anyways, for thermals, I usually run all but one thread on P95, with furmark. Furmark may be over the top, but if you don't melt doing that, you're golden for anything else.
so i ran the p95 "combo" test? or whatever that is. and after 20 seconds or so my temps were up to around 90c before i freaked out and stopped the test. i'm not OC'ing and i'm on stock heatsink. is that good? bad? or really tells me nothing because i ran the wrong test or have the wrong hardware?
|
On May 06 2012 08:34 thisisnotralph wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 05:44 Myrmidon wrote:On May 06 2012 05:30 thisisnotralph wrote:so my computer is all built and running wasn't too bad overall. It is really really quiet which makes me nervous; It has two case fans, and the 6950 was reviewed to be loud, but mine is essentially silent. I can't tell if its on or not unless I look at the LED/monitor. anyway, is there a general free software suite that can benchmark/evaluate my build to make sure it's running correctly and efficiently? i.e. test temperatures, graphics performance, etc? What was the build again? By the way, just checking, but most early graphics card reviews are for the original reference-design card / cooling solution. Most reference design coolers for higher-end graphics cards are loud. Most graphics cards sold after the first few months use custom designs and different cooling designs which may be much quieter; a review for a different product than the one you have is not particularly relevant. Get something like HWMonitor to check temperatures, leave it open, and run 3DMark11 or something like that. That is a reasonable stress on the system to somewhat test stability and temperatures, and it also gives you a benchmark score, which you can compare with what you're supposed to get based on the hardware you're running. If you really want you could also run such things as IntelBurnTest, SuperPI, Cinebench, FurMark, Unigine Heaven, etc. my build is: i5-3750k asrock pro4 2x4 gskill sapphire radeon 6950 stupid 3dmark11 won't work for some reason. every time i try to start it, it freezes my computer? reinstalled and tried 4+ times now so i've given up, i guess there's some compatibility issues somewhere. Show nested quote +On May 06 2012 05:59 JingleHell wrote:On May 06 2012 05:44 Myrmidon wrote:On May 06 2012 05:30 thisisnotralph wrote:so my computer is all built and running wasn't too bad overall. It is really really quiet which makes me nervous; It has two case fans, and the 6950 was reviewed to be loud, but mine is essentially silent. I can't tell if its on or not unless I look at the LED/monitor. anyway, is there a general free software suite that can benchmark/evaluate my build to make sure it's running correctly and efficiently? i.e. test temperatures, graphics performance, etc? What was the build again? By the way, just checking, but most early graphics card reviews are for the original reference-design card / cooling solution. Most reference design coolers for higher-end graphics cards are loud. Most graphics cards sold after the first few months use custom designs and different cooling designs which may be much quieter; a review for a different product than the one you have is not particularly relevant. Get something like HWMonitor to check temperatures, leave it open, and run 3DMark11 or something like that. That is a reasonable stress on the system to somewhat test stability and temperatures, and it also gives you a benchmark score, which you can compare with what you're supposed to get based on the hardware you're running. If you really want you could also run such things as IntelBurnTest, SuperPI, Cinebench, FurMark, Unigine Heaven, etc. Eh, unless you have the retail version, 3dmark is bad for testing temps, since you can't loop tests, and the scenes are short and separated. Anyways, for thermals, I usually run all but one thread on P95, with furmark. Furmark may be over the top, but if you don't melt doing that, you're golden for anything else. so i ran the p95 "combo" test? or whatever that is. and after 20 seconds or so my temps were up to around 90c before i freaked out and stopped the test. i'm not OC'ing and i'm on stock heatsink. is that good? bad? or really tells me nothing because i ran the wrong test or have the wrong hardware?
It means you either didn't install your CPU cooler properly, put on too much thermal paste, or didn't install a CPU cooler at all.
I doubt 3dmark 11 has compatibility issues, but since some of it's tests include CPU stuff, good thing it didn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
