EPTComputer Build Resource Thread - Page 1418
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
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. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
| ||
|
Mathwel
Chile53 Posts
thanks for the answers. | ||
|
Rollin
Australia1552 Posts
On March 18 2013 22:50 Mathwel wrote: ohh nice, then im going with the 4x4 then xP thanks for the answers. What are you using the HT and 16gb of ram for again? | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
Thoughts? A little dissapointing to me, hopefully good results with overclocking. If the IHS issues are fixed then its got >20c over ivy bridge before even making any changes to the CPU but there's a lot of rumor of it overclocking a lot better than ivy bridge especially with stuff like this cropping up: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?285301-New-batch-3570k-like-GOD | ||
|
iTzSnypah
United States1738 Posts
On March 18 2013 22:59 Cyro wrote: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-4770k-haswell-performance,3461.html Thoughts? A little dissapointing to me, hopefully good results with overclocking. If the IHS issues are fixed then its got >20c over ivy bridge before even making any changes to the CPU but there's a lot of rumor of it overclocking a lot better than ivy bridge especially with stuff like this cropping up: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?285301-New-batch-3570k-like-GOD How is it disappointing? It's HUGE! The performance gain over IVB is larger than the performance gain that IVB got over SB. And it should overclock a lot higher since the decoupled Cache. | ||
|
Mathwel
Chile53 Posts
On March 18 2013 22:51 Rollin wrote: What are you using the HT and 16gb of ram for again? well.. essentially the pc is for gaming, but i also do alot of rendering | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On March 18 2013 23:09 iTzSnypah wrote: How is it disappointing? It's HUGE! The performance gain over IVB is larger than the performance gain that IVB got over SB. And it should overclock a lot higher since the decoupled Cache. IVB was disappointing over sandy though a lot of that was in the running-25c-hotter-than-it-should-for-no-real-reason factor - Haswell was an entire new architecture instead of just a mobile-focused die shrink and i heard 10% performance projections with some hopefuls for 15-20. 3-9% is not 10%. Its ok, but if it does not overclock notably better than ivy, it will be a disappointment, and i mean regularly achieving 5ghz on air like ivy does 4.5 or something along those lines. I mean if we achieved a 15% performance increase vs sandy bridge 2.5 years after its launch, well, its not exactly head turning, it's just not anything like the Nehalem to Sandy Bridge gap where we first saw c0 bloomfields overclocking to maybe 3.6ghz or so, than d0's to around 4ghz easier, than sandy bridge shows up and goes 15-20% higher overclocked frequencies than even d0 with a 15% or whatever IPC lead - barely 2 years after initial bloomfield i7 release. I bought my system a month and a half before sandy bridge, it made me feel like an idiot and rightfully so - if somebody was to do that before Haswell though, its like oh, 3-8% performance gap - its not even visible in a blind test - while we're talking 35-50% between a c0 bloomfield and OC'd sandy bridge. With these kinds of numbers, Haswell would need superior overclocking performance to make a splash - the rumor is there that it will blow everything out of the water, but its just that, rumor, and i'm a little worried for it now. You need a special ivy and high end cooling plus a delid to go 24/7 5ghz. On March 18 2013 23:14 Mathwel wrote: well.. essentially the pc is for gaming, but i also do alot of rendering You wont see any performance gains in almost all games from HT and RAM over 4gb is only useful if you will use it - for a lean gaming system, this means pretty much never - but if you are not an advanced user 8gb is nice for buffer so you never have to care about it. | ||
|
Mathwel
Chile53 Posts
thats why im going with the best for the moment.. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
Basically its about cost efficiency and using the right parts without overspending for no reason - a lot of us are performance nuts, want the best or whatever, but there are times when people spend hundreds more than they need to for literally no gain or to save a couple hours of time and effort, everyone should be aware of that as to not make the same mistakes. | ||
|
Mathwel
Chile53 Posts
On March 19 2013 00:11 Cyro wrote: Yea it can be good for rendering, but you just have to keep in mind the 3570k is a very capable CPU, rendering 20% faster than it is not the biggest deal - if performance matters that much to you, you can overclock and render 60% faster - Its just that, and the extra RAM wont do anything unless you utilize the capacity, even a lot of rendering programs wont use anywhere near 16gb RAM. Basically its about cost efficiency and using the right parts without overspending for no reason - a lot of us are performance nuts, want the best or whatever, but there are times when people spend hundreds more than they need to for literally no gain or to save a couple hours of time and effort, everyone should be aware of that as to not make the same mistakes. thanks for the answers, but in ur opinion, its not worth to invest in this 16gb ram and the 3770k so it work for atleast some years for now? since im buying socket 1155, shouldnt i be buying atleast the best for it? since i wont be able to upgrade it without changin cpu, mb. thanks again for ur answers | ||
|
druss90
United States11 Posts
I'm not opposed to building my own, but I was looking at these computers, the latter being my maximum budget: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883227472&cm_sp=DailyDeal-_-83-227-472-_-Product http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883227441 Both of those seem that they are the same price, if not cheaper, than if I build the same rig with those parts. Would you reccomend either? Also, I'm not sure if I even need the GTX 660. I know the 7770 is much weaker, but I only play SC2 and LoL really. Also, if a built my own rig I would need to buy an OS. | ||
|
Rollin
Australia1552 Posts
On March 19 2013 00:20 Mathwel wrote: thanks for the answers, but in ur opinion, its not worth to invest in this 16gb ram and the 3770k so it work for atleast some years for now? since im buying socket 1155, shouldnt i be buying atleast the best for it? since i wont be able to upgrade it without changin cpu, mb. thanks again for ur answers Depends on which program you're using and what you're doing with it. If you're really serious about rendering a workstation card can be appropriate for some scenarios, in others it will be inferior to a faster consumer card. | ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5282 Posts
On March 18 2013 20:37 Craton wrote: A backup of files or an exact copy of the drive? SyncToy will handle the first and you'll either regular disk images or a second drive in a mirrored configuration for the latter. Ok, so we will get another 2TB internal HDD. Could anyone now please suggest a good build we should consider getting? | ||
|
Rollin
Australia1552 Posts
On March 19 2013 00:47 druss90 wrote: I am looking to build a computer that is capable of streaming SC2 on low settings with minimal lag. I don't play in 1920x1080, I usually play in 1024x768 because I have bad eyes, but let's just say I'll play in 1280x720. I'm not opposed to building my own, but I was looking at these computers, the latter being my maximum budget: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883227472&cm_sp=DailyDeal-_-83-227-472-_-Product http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883227441 Both of those seem that they are the same price, if not cheaper, than if I build the same rig with those parts. Would you reccomend either? Also, I'm not sure if I even need the GTX 660. I know the 7770 is much weaker, but I only play SC2 and LoL really. Also, if a built my own rig I would need to buy an OS. For SC2 there is no reason to get the second one, but you could save some money on the first one if you built it yourself. Have you considered getting glasses? | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On March 19 2013 00:47 druss90 wrote: I am looking to build a computer that is capable of streaming SC2 on low settings with minimal lag. I don't play in 1920x1080, I usually play in 1024x768 because I have bad eyes, but let's just say I'll play in 1280x720. I'm not opposed to building my own, but I was looking at these computers, the latter being my maximum budget: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883227472&cm_sp=DailyDeal-_-83-227-472-_-Product http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883227441 Both of those seem that they are the same price, if not cheaper, than if I build the same rig with those parts. Would you reccomend either? Also, I'm not sure if I even need the GTX 660. I know the 7770 is much weaker, but I only play SC2 and LoL really. Also, if a built my own rig I would need to buy an OS. They dont state the quality or details of the PSU or anything which is 400w - high quality unit would be great, but what if its bad? They dont tell you otherwise. Obviously the system runs, but there's very little further guarantee of quality. They are using 1333mhz RAM and one of the holy shit cheapest motherboards available in order to cut pricing - you are not getting good components - you are still paying for the OS, too, its just in with the price of the system. We reccomend 7770's all the time for maxing sc2 at 1920x1080 - Which is 2.25x 1280x720 - SC2 is extremely limited by single threaded CPU performance and in the end, when FPS minimums are around 25-30 for the best stock CPU's in worst case 1v1 fights - you dont need a high end GPU to keep up with sc2's 7-year-old-or-whatever engine, even maxed out. In that regards streaming low wont be much smoother than max settings with a capable GPU (because graphical settings hardly affect framerates - if at all - when they are anchored hard by the limitations of how fast the CPU is on one core) Benchmarks often by tech sites and stuff are very deceiving here, because they rarely give a good picture. Nobody will deny that FPS on a 7770 vs a titan might be 120 vs 300 early game max settings - but in a maxed battle with brood lords that's irrelevant 'cause both systems are at 30, or 50FPS or whatever. The performance gap narrows as CPU requirements rise, as framerates drop, until it's nonexistent or extremely extremely close to it - people rarely simulate 400 supply engagements and if they do there's often something wrong with the benchmark - it's just what you would expect from people benching sc2 that do not play the game or understand themes in the performance of the engine. Quoting Linus, "so its kind of a worst case scenario" when talking about a bench - 50 zealots vs 50 zealots with 30 medivacs on each side. This is closer to a real world scenario than many tests are on sites - which tells you a lot. Idle medivacs do not contribute much to performance loss - we have basically 100 units, maybe half of the medivacs active at once - so 100 attacking units plus half or so of the medivacs being active. If you look at any WOL late-ish game PvZ, For the zerg alone, lets say half of his supply is in 60 drones and 20 broodlords. He has 80 units. When the broodlords fire, you have to calculate all of the damage, pathfinding+collision, ai etc for 40 broodlings - he has 120 units. This is HALF of the supply of ONE player. Regardless - Even though his FPS is 2-3x higher than it should be in a real world worst case 1v1 test - the 7770 keeps up with the game - Holding the 67fps i think it was, maxed. Same as the 7950 - if you were CPU limited at 30fps by infinite zerglings, you'd need like half as much GPU power - and this is max settings. You can get massive gains (~35%) from getting an unlocked i5, a decent aftermarket cooler, a decent motherboard and overclocking the CPU. Its relatively simple and if you want performance gains in sc2, that's the way to go. (Made some edits above this - so it does not make much chronological sense)Wait, you're talking about 7770 vs 660 for low settings, what? The GTX260 that i threw in my rig after my 580 died runs the game on low settings - without maxing out the GPU - at 450fps looking at some points of the map early game. It would be higher, but that's literally CPU limited with 12 supply on the map on an i7 950@4ghz (which - due to performance per clock improvements in later gens - is about equal in sc2 to a stock 3570k) + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/p32gZQm.png) Imgur compression due to 2.8MB pic - the actual game looks betterThe 7770 is around twice as powerful. If it's of any use, i dont think i come close to dropping below 60fps in LoL, ever - We're talking FPS in the 150-200 range maxed out with nothing happening, and LoL, unlike sc2, does not lose massive amounts of performance due to increasing requirements with game lengh - its graphical effects are pretty light, it's ai and cpu requirements minimal due to, relatively, low unit counts. If somebody said they took a bench with my system, played a half hour game and FPS minimum was above 100, i would not be at all suprised - though i cant say that 100% without testing. Hope this was informative | ||
|
druss90
United States11 Posts
One last question. I was fiddling around with a budget build, how do you think this would fares? http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Kxiq | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
The i5 3570 is almost 50% faster than the 965 BE at 3.4ghz vs 3.4ghz and also overclocks a lot further and easier if you want to go down that route - it makes the 965BE an ok budget choice, but clearly massively inferior. This WILL show, it basically defines your framerate in-game and maximum stream resolution/fps. A pentium build is really nice for playing sc2, like budget sc2 max, sandy/ivy bridge pentium and a 7770 is really really awesome - but you kinda need the four cores of the Phenom II x4 965 for streaming easily or well - even if its much weaker per-core. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
On March 18 2013 23:09 iTzSnypah wrote: How is it disappointing? It's HUGE! The performance gain over IVB is larger than the performance gain that IVB got over SB. And it should overclock a lot higher since the decoupled Cache. Performance differences between Sandy and Ivy were expected to be small, based on CPU architecture tweaks (very minor). Intel doesn't change much on the CPU side when changing manufacturing nodes, but they do when keeping the same node, as for Ivy to Haswell. So we got a lot greater of a performance difference than Sandy to Ivy. That was indeed 10+% (creeping up to 13%) in the Chrome compile time. Obviously not all workloads are going to benefit from the increased execution resources and other improvements in terms of cache transfer rates, widening of some elements, and so on. Frankly these days it's difficult to get large IPC improvements, particularly if you're not revamping the entire architecture, which didn't happen. Evolutionary changes beget evolutionary improvements, at least for legacy code. As was seen, for something specific that can make use of AVX2 (these days x264 uses AVX, though I'm not sure how much benefit there is there) obviously the difference would be a lot larger. Now, the particulars of the on-package VRM with respect to overclocking are unknown, but that could be another improvement. The motherboard still needs to step down 12V to something smaller, but the extra die on the package is supposed to convert that smaller voltage to the different CPU voltages, supposedly with higher granularity than what motherboards did previously. I guess it's mostly about providing different voltages to the chip and for power states and power savings, but it might be helpful for overclocks as well. Supposedly that's 16 phases per power cell, 20 power cells on the package. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
Haswell is, in an intel engineers words IIRC, "an overclockers dream" but does this mean they fixed the heat spreader and made some optimizations in the CPU so that it runs 30c cooler than ivy bridge at the same clock speed and voltage? It's certainly completely possible and not at all that farfetched. Does it mean 5ghz overclocks will be the new 4.5ghz, being accessible on almost all CPU's or even requiring as low as 1.2v instead of the 1.4-1.55v on the ivies that can do it? Will the gains be massive in x264 encoding, or just the lower end of the spectrum, 3-5% or 13%? Will the new features around overclocking actually increase potential yields, or just make it slightly easier to play with in different ways? These are not easy questions to answer | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
I don't really follow x264 dev, but in the past months there are already a lot of code commits regarding framework and functions to exploit AVX2. AVX support was slow, as IIRC Dark Shikari kind of had some spats with Intel (though wait a sec, that was more with regards to Quick Sync? I think I'm getting stories mixed) and a lot of routines were mostly in integer, but I doubt AVX2 support will be years late. That's on top of the architectural improvements in Haswell that benefit both legacy and new code. Supposedly, Ivy Bridge can maybe be thought of as porting Sandy Bridge to 22nm and improving the IGPU to get HD 4000. They weren't trying to be too fancy (e.g. doing too much at once, like AMD with a radically-different architecture and a move to 32nm with Bulldozer, and delaaaaaays...), so supposedly they left low-level power and performance optimizations on the table. Haswell should be a more serious exploitation of a more serious 22nm. The on-package VRMs are getting cooled by the CPU cooler, so those might be relatively frosty for once. Power MOSFETs are often thermally constrained. It could be that they're moving to the whole choose-your-"gear"-ratio with respect to multipliers, like was seen on Sandy Bridge-E. I doubt that alone is enough for somebody to call Haswell an overclocker's dream. I wouldn't be too surprised if the heatspreader situation were similar. It's not like Intel does something without it making sense on some level, so what would have changed between Ivy Bridge and now except possibly some small segment of enthusiasts bitching? (what, are the guys going for max performance going to buy AMD instead? lol) If, for example, it saves a tiny amount of money, then it'd still save a tiny amount of money. | ||
| ||
