|
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. |
So I've successfully gotten my wife addicted to SC2 (especially on my computer while I'm not using it), only problem is that the laptop she is using leaves her craving more in the graphics area. So I told her I'd build her a computer of her own that can run the game on medium settings on a 1600x900 monitor.
What is your budget?
Cheap as possible that can build what I am looking for.
What is your resolution?
1600x900
What are you using it for?
Microsoft Office applications, web browsing, watching videos, SC2 @ medium graphics
What is your upgrade cycle?
Probably not for another 3-5 years
When do you plan on building it?
One week
Do you plan on overclocking?
Nope
Do you need an Operating System?
Yes Windows 7 preffered
Do you plan to add a second GPU for SLI or Crossfire?
Nope
Where are you buying your parts from?
Microcenter (Cincinnati), newegg, amazon ... wherever is cheaper.
|
I'm not too familiar with AMD CPUs. What does Hudson D2 or D3 mean? When buying a motherboard I just care about a socket FM2 chip being compatible with a socket FM2 motherboard right?
|
On March 16 2013 05:06 Leeto wrote:
I'm not too familiar with AMD CPUs. What does Hudson D2 or D3 mean? When buying a motherboard I just care about a socket FM2 chip being compatible with a socket FM2 motherboard right?
Hudson D2 is A55 chipset, Hudson D3 is A75 chipset, which has more features including USB3 support.
You need to be sure to use a FM2 chip with a FM2 motherboard, yeah. If ever in doubt, go check the motherboard manufacturer's website for the CPU support list.
Note that this is relevant in the case of sockets that had significant changes over the life cycle and thus breaks in compatibility (e.g. 775) or low-end motherboards that don't support the higher-TDP processors for a given socket.
|
On March 16 2013 03:54 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote + unless it is very simple as adjusting BIOS and add on a simple better fan… I am not exactly that good at building computers… It is, if you have a good board. You basically set load line calibration to something (there's "best" values in a lot of guides on overclock.net for certain boards or manufacturers) and then its a matter of four variables: Voltage and Frequency(ghz), which you can change with a couple keystrokes in bios, which in turn affect Temperatures and Stability. Higher CPU frequency needs more voltage to stay stable, both the higher frequency and higher voltage increase temperatures, which you are trying to keep low More voltage than you need = higher temperatures than you need (which is bad) but less voltage than you need = crashing, bluescreening or other problems, which is also bad. There's also a couple things to keep in mind like voltage and temperature limits that you should not go over, and how to test for max temperatures and stability properly, etc. If thats all too much for you, you can pretty much TL;DR a lot of stuff, tweak a few settings and with an hours testing have an acceptable 30% overclock that should not ever have problems, though it might not be as high of an overclock as you could get manually with knowledge. I just spent half an hour messing around with this: http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2731731If you're not afraid to get into it, its an incredibly fun learning experience
What exactly is the LLC? Mine is auto as part of my current 4.6ghz OC, and I'm not sure if I should change it or not. (3570k + Z77 Pro3).
|
How are you stable at that voltage at 4.9?
|
On March 16 2013 07:02 Gumbi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2013 03:54 Cyro wrote: unless it is very simple as adjusting BIOS and add on a simple better fan… I am not exactly that good at building computers… It is, if you have a good board. You basically set load line calibration to something (there's "best" values in a lot of guides on overclock.net for certain boards or manufacturers) and then its a matter of four variables: Voltage and Frequency(ghz), which you can change with a couple keystrokes in bios, which in turn affect Temperatures and Stability. Higher CPU frequency needs more voltage to stay stable, both the higher frequency and higher voltage increase temperatures, which you are trying to keep low More voltage than you need = higher temperatures than you need (which is bad) but less voltage than you need = crashing, bluescreening or other problems, which is also bad. There's also a couple things to keep in mind like voltage and temperature limits that you should not go over, and how to test for max temperatures and stability properly, etc. If thats all too much for you, you can pretty much TL;DR a lot of stuff, tweak a few settings and with an hours testing have an acceptable 30% overclock that should not ever have problems, though it might not be as high of an overclock as you could get manually with knowledge. I just spent half an hour messing around with this: http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2731731If you're not afraid to get into it, its an incredibly fun learning experience What exactly is the LLC? Mine is auto as part of my current 4.6ghz OC, and I'm not sure if I should change it or not. (3570k + Z77 Pro3).
Logical Link Control. Last-Level Cache.
Okay fine, in this context it's Load-Line Calibration. The CPU voltage regulators are an n-phase synchronous buck converter. It's stepping down 12V DC to VCore by rapidly switching on and off power MOSFETs (how long in off state, how long in on state) to control when the inductors are being charged with energy and discharged, which sets the voltage output level. In the middle of each cycle, the smoothing capacitor on the output is discharging (and some other things) and the voltage will sag a bit. The amount of change is the ripple voltage, should be single-digits mV. For a given circuit, there's probably more sagging if the load is drawing more current (more power) and thus more energy being discharged. With larger-value parts, more voltage phases, higher switching frequency, maybe some other things too, then you'd expect less sagging. Also, the whole feedback process and setting the voltage may not perfectly sense all the values correctly so the voltage could be a bit off the target even if it is relatively stable over time; a heavier load might take the voltage lower than intended. Total deflection under load from set voltage to what shows up is the Vdroop.
I think LLC implementations and settings might differ a bit, depends what they're really referring to. But generally it's a mechanism to increase voltage under heavy load to offset the sagging. Mostly. There may be some other changes with respect to behavior and different unintended consequences as the load changes, you go from heavy to light CPU utilization and so on.
More or less, you can think of it as supplying extra voltage under certain conditions that is not part of the nominal VCore value. Effectively you might think of this as allowing enthusiasts to get stable overclocks at a lower nominal VCore (so the e-peen can be stroked) and potentially also maybe lower actual voltage being sent. As for the difference between adding more VCore with no LLC and adding less VCore with more LLC—resulting in more-or-less equal actual voltage under load—depends on the implementation, and the behavior at the beginning and end of a cycle could be a bit different. I don't know if anybody's really captured it with a high-speed scope to see.
Just use what works.
edit: wait a sec I need to stop writing stuff in a hurry, inaccuracies, etc.
|
On March 16 2013 07:02 Gumbi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2013 03:54 Cyro wrote: unless it is very simple as adjusting BIOS and add on a simple better fan… I am not exactly that good at building computers… It is, if you have a good board. You basically set load line calibration to something (there's "best" values in a lot of guides on overclock.net for certain boards or manufacturers) and then its a matter of four variables: Voltage and Frequency(ghz), which you can change with a couple keystrokes in bios, which in turn affect Temperatures and Stability. Higher CPU frequency needs more voltage to stay stable, both the higher frequency and higher voltage increase temperatures, which you are trying to keep low More voltage than you need = higher temperatures than you need (which is bad) but less voltage than you need = crashing, bluescreening or other problems, which is also bad. There's also a couple things to keep in mind like voltage and temperature limits that you should not go over, and how to test for max temperatures and stability properly, etc. If thats all too much for you, you can pretty much TL;DR a lot of stuff, tweak a few settings and with an hours testing have an acceptable 30% overclock that should not ever have problems, though it might not be as high of an overclock as you could get manually with knowledge. I just spent half an hour messing around with this: http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2731731If you're not afraid to get into it, its an incredibly fun learning experience What exactly is the LLC? Mine is auto as part of my current 4.6ghz OC, and I'm not sure if I should change it or not. (3570k + Z77 Pro3).
It depends on your motherboard, so you have to look at a discussion thread about overclocking with your motherboard or at least about ASRock. I think I've seen the suggestion for ASRock to not use the setting that means 100 % and not use 0 %, but one of the settings in between that. It's generally suggested to try to find the setting that keeps vcore the most stable when comparing the CPU at idle vs. at load. Complicating this is that what the hardware reports to programs like cpu-z may be off. Some people have tried the different settings at different voltages and checked with an actual multimeter on the backside of the board near the CPU, so you could try to find a post about the results with Google.
|
I use LLC level 2 for ASRock FWIW.
|
Considering I have CM 212 plus cooler and a 3570k, heat limits as opposed to voltage limits (I know they are related, I'm taking about the mutual limits of each regardless of either setting) are things to watch out for, and seeing as my temps are well within the safe zone (max of 85 - 87 degrees with 40 runs of IBT max and high 70s after 8 hours Prime) as long I'm not crashing/blue screening etc I don't really have to worry about the LLC, right? Bad or good logic? Basically I've only touched the CPU multiplier and the voltage offset and stress tested accordingly.
|
Pretty much. You could potentially get a "better" overclock (either more clock at same temps/voltage or same clock at lower temps/voltage), but so long as you're stable and temperatures are within tolerance then you're fine. Realistically the lifespan reduction from temps and voltage are typically well beyond your upgrade cycle.
|
On March 16 2013 08:01 Craton wrote:
Pretty much. You could potentially get a "better" overclock (either more clock at same temps/voltage or same clock at lower temps/voltage), but so long as you're stable and temperatures are within tolerance then you're fine. Realistically the lifespan reduction from temps and voltage are typically well beyond your upgrade cycle.
That's all I need for now, really. As long as I'm somewhere in between OCing with a sledgehammer (read 4.4ghz @1.5volts or something) and safe temps etc I'm happy. If I want to tweak later I will. Currently I'm stable at 4.6ghz at just under 1.25 volts which I think is quite good considering my temps are well within the safe range.
|
|
|
On March 16 2013 04:13 Elairec wrote:
So I've successfully gotten my wife addicted to SC2 (especially on my computer while I'm not using it), only problem is that the laptop she is using leaves her craving more in the graphics area. So I told her I'd build her a computer of her own that can run the game on medium settings on a 1600x900 monitor.
What is your budget?
Cheap as possible that can build what I am looking for.
What is your resolution?
1600x900
What are you using it for?
Microsoft Office applications, web browsing, watching videos, SC2 @ medium graphics
What is your upgrade cycle?
Probably not for another 3-5 years
When do you plan on building it?
One week
Do you plan on overclocking?
Nope
Do you need an Operating System?
Yes Windows 7 preffered
Do you plan to add a second GPU for SLI or Crossfire?
Nope
Where are you buying your parts from?
Microcenter (Cincinnati), newegg, amazon ... wherever is cheaper.
maybe something along the lines of this? APU should be enough for sc2 on medium.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/IyR8
|
|
|
I don't see how that's bad cable management, that's great cable management. The whole point of cable management is hiding cables out of view, it doesn't matter what it looks like behind the motherboard. Even I find that absurd to care about:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ByFVqMZ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6ZuDWBU.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xLyWfQe.jpg)
then again most people have a hdd bay to hide their cables behind, a modular psu, a dedicated ssd slot behind the mobo, and don't have 8 case fans and a fan controller.
sata and especially molex seriously need to be done away with. Once case manufacturers start designing cases around the expectation that people use SSDs instead of HDDs and USB instead of ODD, we're going to see some really awesome, clean cases.
|
On March 16 2013 07:02 Gumbi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2013 03:54 Cyro wrote: unless it is very simple as adjusting BIOS and add on a simple better fan… I am not exactly that good at building computers… It is, if you have a good board. You basically set load line calibration to something (there's "best" values in a lot of guides on overclock.net for certain boards or manufacturers) and then its a matter of four variables: Voltage and Frequency(ghz), which you can change with a couple keystrokes in bios, which in turn affect Temperatures and Stability. Higher CPU frequency needs more voltage to stay stable, both the higher frequency and higher voltage increase temperatures, which you are trying to keep low More voltage than you need = higher temperatures than you need (which is bad) but less voltage than you need = crashing, bluescreening or other problems, which is also bad. There's also a couple things to keep in mind like voltage and temperature limits that you should not go over, and how to test for max temperatures and stability properly, etc. If thats all too much for you, you can pretty much TL;DR a lot of stuff, tweak a few settings and with an hours testing have an acceptable 30% overclock that should not ever have problems, though it might not be as high of an overclock as you could get manually with knowledge. I just spent half an hour messing around with this: http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2731731If you're not afraid to get into it, its an incredibly fun learning experience What exactly is the LLC? Mine is auto as part of my current 4.6ghz OC, and I'm not sure if I should change it or not. (3570k + Z77 Pro3).
The idea behind LLC is that you use less voltage than you would otherwise if you didn't use it.
Long story short, your software does not report an accurate vcore, it reports an average (and asrock boards especially are notorious for making an overly generous algorithm). Be careful on hardware reviews about this - for example Anandtech and TH extolled the virtues of Asrock in overclocking because they could be stable on .05v less than the other boards, when in reality asrock boards feed about 0.1v more than what your software reads.
All the boards cheat in some way - gigabyte will dynamically tighten your tRD, Asus increases bclk, etc. but that's ot.
Your voltage goes up and down, it's not nearly as stable as your software read-out makes you think it is, even on high quality boards. Your motherboard dynamically reduces voltages, but intelligently makes sure to not go too far. What LLC does, is stop this from happening and make your voltage more stable. There's a balance for overclockers here - we want a more stable voltage for stable overclocks, but we also want to keep temperature low and voltages low, and LLC ultimately increases your temperatures and your voltages. It also increases your peak voltage, or the max voltage your voltage shoots to on the + side of VID. So us overclockers, we want to use basically the least amount of LLC we need.
Now these nuances will never be captured in software, so the only way to actually tell what LLC is best for you, is to use a digital multimeter, and test prime95 for 24 hours and figure out the lowest voltage needed to be stable at every LLC setting. Fortunately, people like Sin0822 and myself have done this!
I can tell you that:
- High LLC is the least voltage but required so much voltage it wasn't worth it. (+.34, 1.53v)
- Extreme LLC added the most voltage, but required the lowest voltage setting.(+.27v, 1.54v)
Vcore = VID + Offset + LLC, LLC itself is an addition of voltage.
Unless you are willing to do all these tests with a digital multimeter, it's best for any ambient overclock to just set your LLC to the 2nd highest setting. For Asrock boards, this means Level 2.
Also be aware that we are quibbling over about .05v here. Wost case scenario you use a sub-optimal LLC and your actual voltage is, at most, .05v higher than what it would need to be stable. But for example, it takes for me at 5ghz and extreme cooling, 1.53v on High LLC (level 3 for asrock) to be stable while 1.499v for Turbo (level 2 for asrock) to be stable, so the increased LLC lets me be more stable on a slightly lower voltage.
|
Here's the back of my case (Xigmatek Elysium). I was somewhat disappointed with how it turned out ultimately, but it was mostly just the fault of having too big a case for my PSU cables to really let me manage things as I'd have liked. The big pushed out grommet is something that happened near when I took the picture that I didn't notice at the time (I took this after I reseated my heatsink because I forgot to initially).
If I were to do it all again (starting from when I had all my parts and nothing assembled), I'd change a few things. First, I'd route all the SATA drive cables through one grommet and all the SATA power cables through the other. I'd put a few more power cables through the grommet that only has the big 24-pin cable (it's partially obstructed on the other side by the PSU). It's really hard to hide all my cables because of just how many drives I had and the fact that the Elysium has its cables pointing to the inside and not the rear (this was a point of consternation when I was deciding which case to go with).
Might've also looked for a PSU with extra-long cables or found some kind of good-looking extenders, but that's stretching past "when I started assembling."
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LAFUqB3.jpg)
For those of you with a keen eye: yes, there are 10 SATA cables plugged in. I have 7 internal drives, a hotswap connection on the top, I think one feeding the top eSATA, and the 10th one to my combo optical drive.
On March 16 2013 10:16 Belial88 wrote:
I don't see how that's bad cable management, that's great cable management. The whole point of cable management is hiding cables out of view, it doesn't matter what it looks like behind the motherboard. Even I find that absurd to care about:
Were you responding to my video?
I was only linking for the monitor.
|
^ Yea I was responding more to the bad cables part of his video than the monitor. There's nothing to really say about his monitor :X
I have no frame of reference about your cable management man, you gotta post the other side. I posted my back to show how little the backside matters, it's all about how clean it looks to the part that is 'visible' (relatively).
|
|
|
Can the Zalman Z11 Plus fit the Asrock z77 extreme 4?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
