|
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 September 14 2011 00:54 Legatus Lanius wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 00:48 JingleHell wrote: Uhm, so go AMD, get a massively worse CPU, spend more on the motherboard, end up saving $10-15, and getting ~25-30% worse performance in tasks the AMD does well at. Good idea.
I agree, 2400 is better than 2300, but AMD sucks right now, and isn't looking to get any better, sadly.
If you want a mobo that's safe for running the recent Ph2 CPUs, you aren't paying less than you would for a reasonable H61 or H67 board. bulldozer is going to claim lives my friend
Yeah, when people who bought AM3+ boards hoping BD would be competitive kill themselves.
Or are they constantly delaying so they can be fashionably late? Don't take me for an Intel fanboy, I'm a performance fanboy. I entirely wish AMD could compete, so prices would be lower.
|
On September 14 2011 00:56 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 00:54 Legatus Lanius wrote:On September 14 2011 00:48 JingleHell wrote: Uhm, so go AMD, get a massively worse CPU, spend more on the motherboard, end up saving $10-15, and getting ~25-30% worse performance in tasks the AMD does well at. Good idea.
I agree, 2400 is better than 2300, but AMD sucks right now, and isn't looking to get any better, sadly.
If you want a mobo that's safe for running the recent Ph2 CPUs, you aren't paying less than you would for a reasonable H61 or H67 board. bulldozer is going to claim lives my friend Yeah, when people who bought AM3+ boards hoping BD would be competitive kill themselves. Or are they constantly delaying so they can be fashionably late? Don't take me for an Intel fanboy, I'm a performance fanboy. I entirely wish AMD could compete, so prices would be lower.
Anyone else get the feeling that Intel is so far ahead and is just running away with it?
|
On September 14 2011 01:17 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 00:56 JingleHell wrote:On September 14 2011 00:54 Legatus Lanius wrote:On September 14 2011 00:48 JingleHell wrote: Uhm, so go AMD, get a massively worse CPU, spend more on the motherboard, end up saving $10-15, and getting ~25-30% worse performance in tasks the AMD does well at. Good idea.
I agree, 2400 is better than 2300, but AMD sucks right now, and isn't looking to get any better, sadly.
If you want a mobo that's safe for running the recent Ph2 CPUs, you aren't paying less than you would for a reasonable H61 or H67 board. bulldozer is going to claim lives my friend Yeah, when people who bought AM3+ boards hoping BD would be competitive kill themselves. Or are they constantly delaying so they can be fashionably late? Don't take me for an Intel fanboy, I'm a performance fanboy. I entirely wish AMD could compete, so prices would be lower. Anyone else get the feeling that Intel is so far ahead and is just running away with it?
Right now, Intel is kind of the Secretariat of CPU manufacturers, yes.
|
So after all this AMD bashing is this build better?
MOBO: GA-H55M-S2V LGA 1156 Intel H55 mATX Intel Motherboard CPU: Intel Core i5 2400 LGA 1155 Boxed Processor RAM: Signature Line 4GB DDR3-1333 (PC3-10600) CL9 Desktop Memory Module x 2 GPU: GV-R687OC-1GD AMD Radeon HD 6870 1024MB GDDR5 PCIe 2.1 x16 Video Card HD: Spinpoint F3 500GB 7,200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive HD502HJ – OEM PSU: High Current Gamer Series HCG-520 520W ATX Power Supply Case: Three Hundred ATX Mid Tower Computer Case
|
No. That motherboard is not compatible with that processor.
1155 != 1156
You should be looking for an H67 or H61
|
Thank you. Additionally, if I use the student discount to purchase the windows 7 upgrade for $30 do I need to find an older version of windows to install on the blank hard drive first?
|
is it even worth getting the hcg over the neo eco? in australia, its an extra 20-30 bucks
nevermind, make that 10 dollars lol
|
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157254
I guess this mobo would be good enough for you. You can get cheaper ones though if you don't mind m-ATX.
Also AMDs best processors actually go back-and-forth with i5 2400 but I guess you can just go with the intel cpu, AMDs best price-performance ratio CPUs are in a bit lower price range anyway.
|
On September 14 2011 01:39 PurpleStop wrote: Thank you. Additionally, if I use the student discount to purchase the windows 7 upgrade for $30 do I need to find an older version of windows to install on the blank hard drive first?
No it will work anyway.
|
|
Those are motherboards. I'd get either the Gigabyte H61M-S2H if you don't want USB3 or the MSI H61MU if you do want USB3. You can always buy an expansion card with USB3 ports if need be later on though. USB3 is for if you have something like an external hard drive, faster USB flash drive, TV tuner or other video input device, or something along those lines, that supports USB3, or if you plan to get one of those things.
Neo Eco is same as the lower-wattage HCG, but slightly worse (worse components, like 2% worse efficiency, no power cord included, but same design and performance more or less).
|
|
Mobo manufacturer PSU suggestions are even more useless than GPU manufacturer ones. Should be ignored completely, unless you're making fun of it.
They don't know what you're putting in the rig. That's why the difference is there.
|
On September 14 2011 02:15 JingleHell wrote:Mobo manufacturer PSU suggestions are even more useless than GPU manufacturer ones. Should be ignored completely, unless you're making fun of it. They don't know what you're putting in the rig. That's why the difference is there. Yeah the reason I was wondering is that it's perfectly viable to build a computer using that mobo that uses way less than 400W. I guess it's because of the additional expansion slots?
And yeah kind of making fun of it, just trying to think of the reasoning.
|
On September 14 2011 02:30 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 02:15 JingleHell wrote:Mobo manufacturer PSU suggestions are even more useless than GPU manufacturer ones. Should be ignored completely, unless you're making fun of it. They don't know what you're putting in the rig. That's why the difference is there. Yeah the reason I was wondering is that it's perfectly viable to build a computer using that mobo that uses way less than 400W. I guess it's because of the additional expansion slots? And yeah kind of making fun of it, just trying to think of the reasoning.
Same as the GPU manufacturers reasoning. Make sure that when you buy a garbage, overrated stick of dynamite mislabeled as a PSU, you at least get one that will make your PC turn on until it dies.
|
On September 14 2011 01:46 Shikyo wrote: Also AMDs best processors actually go back-and-forth with i5 2400 but I guess you can just go with the intel cpu, AMDs best price-performance ratio CPUs are in a bit lower price range anyway.
This has been repeated hundreds of times on this forum... it's not true, and the benchmarks don't lie... http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/203?vs=363
i5 2400 vs Phenom ii X6 1100T. Exact same price on newegg. The 1100T gets destroyed in most applications, especially gaming. 30% more FPS in SC2.
I'm still looking to Bulldozer for some hope...
Now with the release of the Celeron budget line of Sandy Bridge for ~$50, Intel will dominate even the lowest-budget market, where some Athlon II's made sense in some situations.
|
On September 14 2011 04:42 Wabbit wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 01:46 Shikyo wrote: Also AMDs best processors actually go back-and-forth with i5 2400 but I guess you can just go with the intel cpu, AMDs best price-performance ratio CPUs are in a bit lower price range anyway. This has been repeated hundreds of times on this forum... it's not true, and the benchmarks don't lie... http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/203?vs=363i5 2400 vs Phenom ii X6 1100T. Exact same price on newegg. The 1100T gets destroyed in most applications, especially gaming. 30% more FPS in SC2. I'm still looking to Bulldozer for some hope... Now with the release of the Celeron budget line of Sandy Bridge for ~$50, Intel will dominate even the lowest-budget market, where some Athlon II's made sense in some situations. It's black edition and those are stock frequencies... (not saying you're incorrect though but you can't compare exactly like that)
|
On September 14 2011 04:56 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2011 04:42 Wabbit wrote:On September 14 2011 01:46 Shikyo wrote: Also AMDs best processors actually go back-and-forth with i5 2400 but I guess you can just go with the intel cpu, AMDs best price-performance ratio CPUs are in a bit lower price range anyway. This has been repeated hundreds of times on this forum... it's not true, and the benchmarks don't lie... http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/203?vs=363i5 2400 vs Phenom ii X6 1100T. Exact same price on newegg. The 1100T gets destroyed in most applications, especially gaming. 30% more FPS in SC2. I'm still looking to Bulldozer for some hope... Now with the release of the Celeron budget line of Sandy Bridge for ~$50, Intel will dominate even the lowest-budget market, where some Athlon II's made sense in some situations. It's black edition and those are stock frequencies...
Ok, so if we get good mobo, swap up to a 2500k and a decent P67, who wins?
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_corei7_2600k_and_corei5_2500k/13.htm
Apparently not AMD.
|
It doesn't astonish me that for the individual who doesn't know anything about power consumption also doesn't know anything about modern CPUs.
|
On September 14 2011 04:56 Shikyo wrote:
It's black edition and those are stock frequencies... (not saying you're incorrect though but you can't compare exactly like that)
Well, you sort of have to, because OC'ing adds additional cost. Assuming mobo prices would be the same, adding a $30 cooler to the 1100T and overclocking it to 4GHz still puts it behind or barely equal in most/all games (compared to a stock 2500k, which is only 200MHz higher than the 2400).
Not to mention you probably can't overclock a 1100T on a low-priced mobo, but you can get that performance with the i5 on any low-end $50 1155 mobo.
No matter which way we look at it, sadly, the Intel chips come ahead. It's not that we're fanboys (I personally dislike Intel), but we're very-well informed informed consumers.
|
|
|
|