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 August 17 2011 00:21 JingleHell wrote: Actually it's not just Windows defrag that's useless on an SSD. For one, defragging is only useful due to the physical design of HDDs. Since SSD's work completely differently, it does no good, and wastes write cycles while it's at it.
I have read that some defrag programs can still be useful to open space, i didnt really do more reading as i didnt plan on doing and defrag. Thx for the info tho.
On August 17 2011 00:47 ballasdontcry wrote: TRIM is enabled by default on W7, at least on recognized SSDs. earlier on in windows 7 there were some difficulties recognizing some brands of SSDs.
to check for sure, go to your windows defrag program and click scheduler, if you can't see your C: (or whatever your system drive letter is) on the list, then TRIM is by default enabled.
Defragging doesn't create space in and of itself. It just makes sure that files are colocated on the physical spinny media. Imagine it like an old school record player, if half of a song was in one place, and the other half was in another, having to lift the needle and move it to the right spot. It takes more time to find the files, since they're fragmented, which slows you down. Since SSD's don't use spinny media (technical term), it doesn't do any good.
Anyone know how the performance of new Enermax nanx 80+ 450 and 500W. Is it any better than the xfx pro 450? Cant seem to find a review yet. I'm curious to see how enermax does on the lower end of the market.
Some NAXN / NAXN 80+ / Tomahawk are CWT DSAII. Expect pretty much exactly the same as the Corsair CX / CX V2, so pretty decent. Actually, these units use the same Samxon and Teapo capacitors that the CX use, so components aren't up to par with the XFX Core Pro.
Be warned that some of the lowest-end NAXN / Tomahawk models (cheapest and lower-wattage ones, and not the 80 plus ones) are CWT PUF, which is significantly worse. NAXN 82+ is apparently some kind of Sirfa unit.
I don't think there's an available sub-500W unit between the XFX Pro (Antec High Current Gamer / Seasonic S12II) and the Seasonic X Series in quality. Sad huh.
FSP Aurum is 80 plus gold, but not better. Super Flower Golden Green is not available in many countries at those wattages under any label, though maybe this is the closest thing. Although the lower-wattage variants definitely perform better all around than Seasonic S12II and are also 80 plus gold, components are a bit worse (edit: nevermind that's only the 350W version with the CapXons I think). I guess the old Corsair HX units (tweaked Seasonic S12II I think) at that wattage count, but those are long discontinued. There's also some EOL Enermax units I guess, but those are expensive too.
Yea, I was expecting something that would compete with the golden green line. Only with better availability, which would allso lower the prices. I was hoping for something that could compete(price and quality wise) with the xfx pro series. I see the prices of the xfx pro series going up and up and up. the 450W version used to be 42-45 euro, now its at the 50+ mark. Weird they outsourced it though, since they have their own production facilities.
I am ready, as this is my final build for my father!
Intel Core i3 2100 Nvidia GT 520 OR GT 430 4 GB DDR3 RAM Windows 7 64 Bit
I have no idea whether to get the 430 or 520. I did some Googling, and they both look even in comparison. 520 wins in core/shader clock and power, while the 430 wins in memory interface, bandwidth, and clock. For non-gaming, which of these GPUs would be better?
HDMI is a requirement, so taking out the GPU is not an option, sorry.
After having gone out there in the big scary interweb I have to say I've gotten the most sensible advice here on TL by far. I can't even tell you how many water cooling, sli performing, massive psu powering recommendation I've got...
People seem to ignore what you actually want with the computer and recommend something "awesome." within the budget.
On August 17 2011 16:22 epikAnglory wrote: I am ready, as this is my final build for my father!
Intel Core i3 2100 Nvidia GT 520 OR GT 430 4 GB DDR3 RAM Windows 7 64 Bit
I have no idea whether to get the 430 or 520. I did some Googling, and they both look even in comparison. 520 wins in core/shader clock and power, while the 430 wins in memory interface, bandwidth, and clock. For non-gaming, which of these GPUs would be better?
HDMI is a requirement, so taking out the GPU is not an option, sorry.
?
A lot of H series motherboards have HDMI. Low end GPUs do absolutely nothing these days unless you are a day trader and need to pump like 6 displays at once. Heck, Intel integrated graphics is actually better than discrete graphics at many things these days.
I was looking at the Asus P8P67 Pro B3 board and noticed that some said B3.0 and some B3.1, the latter being more expensive on the sites I found. The only difference I found is the following:
REV 3.0 – NEC USB 3.0 controllers REV 3.1 – ASMedia USB 3.0 controllers
What's the difference and is there any other differences between the revisions? The only thing I've read is that supposedly ASMedia controller should be cheaper than the NEC, which means it's pretty weird that those are more expensive if there aren't any difference in performance.
Maybe you are only paying more to have the 1 at the end.
Pricing often just doesn't make sense, so don't think too much about it. New revisions often cost more even if they're not any better or are worse.
As for GT 430 vs. GT 520, the GT 430 is significantly faster. The most important parameters in terms of graphics performance are number of shaders (and texture mapping units and raster output units) and memory interface speed, and the GT 430 is superior or equivalent in all of those. Architecture and what "shaders" refers to also make a big difference, but GeForce 4xx and 5xx are the same Fermi architecture, so it's mostly a fair comparison.
However, I still think you should just get a H61/H67 board and run HDMI off of that. If somehow that turns out not to be enough, it's not the end of the world since you can always drop in a discrete video card to upgrade.
Right after I changed my CPU and Motherboard, my Windows Vista says I need to reactivate my copy. I check the Windows website but there is no buy and download option through internet (the local Turkish website tells me to buy a whole new computer, lol). Is there really no way to get one through internet? Or can I get one by the US website etc.? What will happen if I don't reactivate? I actually have a genuine copy, it came with the bundle which this original (now with different cpu, motherboard, ram etc.) came with, but I guess greedy Microsoft needs to sell more copies.
On August 18 2011 01:12 Bleak wrote: Right after I changed my CPU and Motherboard, my Windows Vista says I need to reactivate my copy. I check the Windows website but there is no buy and download option through internet (the local Turkish website tells me to buy a whole new computer, lol). Is there really no way to get one through internet? Or can I get one by the US website etc.? What will happen if I don't reactivate? I actually have a genuine copy, it came with the bundle which this original (now with different cpu, motherboard, ram etc.) came with, but I guess greedy Microsoft needs to sell more copies.
The version of windows is tied to the motherboard, so if you change that you generally need a new copy. However usually they will allow you to change it once if you call them up and say your motherboard broke and you needed a new one. You'll need to have the original license key ready for them.
On August 18 2011 00:22 Myrmidon wrote: Pricing often just doesn't make sense, so don't think too much about it. New revisions often cost more even if they're not any better or are worse.
Letting it go, thanks. The more I look the more I tend to get stuck in the details (usually not what's really important).
On another note, I've also been looking for a high end amd card for eyefinity and games as 1080 resolution. The advice I've been given is that I should not be looking at the 6970's as the you can fairly easy flash them to 6970 and also oc so you get a similar performance. I've been looking at the card below
It holds up in performance to other 6950's, has nice cooling, you get dirt 3 and a hdmi cable with it, which is nice. (Dues ex as well from newegg but I'll be ordering in EU if I decide to, so that isn't included).
Any opinions about that card specifically? My open question is what you guys think about flashing cards and whether it's wise/worth it. I suspect that it's mostly for enthusiasts chasing those small increases in performance but I don't mind trying to fiddle a little bit to get a little more out of it.
Maybe I shouldn't think too much about this either?
Not all HD 6950 video card models can be flashed, and not all HD 6950 GPU chips come out of the factory clean enough (in terms of defects and performance characteristics) to run as HD 6970s.
A quick check says that that particular model has pretty good cooling performance and lower-than-typical noise for a card of that level.
Eyefinity resolutions (say 3 x 1920x1080) have quite a bit different requirements than just 1920x1080. Which are you talking about?
Yeah that's probably right. I did find a few posts/articles about people flashing the card successfully so at least it's possible with that model. I saw an extensive article about the basic model of the same card and it did perform pretty well, though at a cost of increased power consumption and heat.
I have two 1900x1080 monitors right now with my current computer and I am thinking of adding a third if I get a card that support eyefinity. Using dirt3 as an example:
So basically 5700 x 1080. I've also have some lose ideas how I could take advantage of it when I do some cad and programming work. At least there I'd be ok.
All Radeon HD6 series cards support Eyefinity. You're not going to get acceptable performance in most games on high settings at Eyefinity resolutions with a single 6950 just fyi.
EPT
