EPTSo what is the difference between p67 and z68?
And which of these motherboards should i get?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157271
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157230
Simple Questions Simple Answers - Page 84
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
|
Makaveli1
United States118 Posts
So what is the difference between p67 and z68? And which of these motherboards should i get? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157271 or http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157230 | ||
|
phar
United States1080 Posts
| ||
|
Pokemonxoxo
United States217 Posts
| ||
|
iKill[ShocK]
Vietnam3530 Posts
On April 01 2012 06:33 Pokemonxoxo wrote: What is a good temperature that my CPU and GPU should be in to avoid overheating or damage of any kinds during running of a game or overclocking?? <80*C, imo. hell <70*C if you're paranoid | ||
|
SoulWager
United States464 Posts
On April 01 2012 06:17 Makaveli1 wrote: Hey im upgrading my motherboard and CPU (i5 2500k) So what is the difference between p67 and z68? And which of these motherboards should i get? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157271 or http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157230 Z68 is a newer chipset that allows SSD to cache a HDD volume, and allows for the use of the integrated GPU (for example, quick sync) If you are neither going to get a SSD nor do any transcoding, you can get p67, though there's not much price difference for z68 anymore (like $5). As for the difference between those 2 motherboards, the biggest difference is in the slots provided, the z68 one can take 2 graphics cards if needed. I would suggest a third option: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128495 | ||
|
Cerotix
Canada121 Posts
On April 01 2012 06:40 SoulWager wrote: Z68 is a newer chipset that allows SSD to cache a HDD volume, and allows for the use of the integrated GPU (for example, quick sync) If you are neither going to get a SSD nor do any transcoding, you can get p67, though there's not much price difference for z68 anymore (like $5). As for the difference between those 2 motherboards, the biggest difference is in the slots provided, the z68 one can take 2 graphics cards if needed. I would suggest a third option: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128495 I'm pricing out a new build to be bought may 1, was planning on getting a SSD but was also looking at a p67 board, should i be looking at z68s instead because i will be using a SSD? | ||
|
Nabutso
351 Posts
| ||
|
phar
United States1080 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On April 01 2012 08:35 phar wrote: Agreed. SSD caching is kinda gimmicky - it's good if you only have enough $$ to buy a small SSD that you can't really stick a lot of stuff on. But if you can get a 100+GB SSD, you can easily dump an OS, several games, and whatever else you want all on the SSD. Then there's literally 0 benefit from ssd caching. It's worse than that, though, because it has it's best benefit below 60GB (kinda the threshold for being able to run OS off of it effectively), which is a horrendous bracket for price point, and due to the way the controllers work, the SSDs that small have horrible performance compared to the bigger ones you can stick a whole OS on. It's paying extra money for a half-measure that's only effective if you make poor purchasing decisions. If your budget is small enough that you'd consider half-assing an SSD in a gaming rig, you should be getting H67 or H61 and an i3 or i5 non-K anyways, so you can stick a decent GPU in it. Not Z68 for those same CPUs, with a shitty, cost-inefficient SSD, and a bad GPU. The performance gains from it are very much NOT gaming oriented. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile519 Posts
My friend and I are trying to play Age of Empires online. I live in USA and he lives in Chile. He installed the game just fine through steam but when he logs into Games for Windows LIVE, it gives him an error and asks to check if his internet connection is working. He tries it on his laptop which uses the same internet and it logs in perfectly, however it's unplayable because it doesn't have a gpu. Things we have tried: Google extensively, both google.com and google chile. Didn't find anything. Reinstall Games for Windows LIVE. Same error Log into Games for windows live from the start menu. Same error Format PC, re install windows and update all drivers Same error Look at microsoft support, create regedit file to override connection and force it to use local area network. Same error I was thinking that maybe his router settings could be messed up, but then why would his laptop connect. We were sure that it would fix the problem to clean install windows but no success  . At that point I looked at his hardware to see if it was incompatible with live but it's a common ASUS board, which according to Microsoft is compatible.If you have any ideas let me know it would be greatly appreciated. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
On April 01 2012 08:35 phar wrote: Agreed. SSD caching is kinda gimmicky - it's good if you only have enough $$ to buy a small SSD that you can't really stick a lot of stuff on. But if you can get a 100+GB SSD, you can easily dump an OS, several games, and whatever else you want all on the SSD. Then there's literally 0 benefit from ssd caching. No, I think you're focusing on the wrong issue with regards to SSD caching. The main benefit is transparency to the end user--the user doesn't need to manage what goes where. If it works, then users don't need to change their behavior at all with SSD caching, and they get faster speeds. The most important thing about mainstream technologies is that users don't need to have any clue wtf is going on behind the scenes to use and benefit from them. I mean, most computer users probably have a concept that different data can be stored in different places, but handling programs vs. data might be too complicated for some. Even for expert computer users, there is more effort (not much but still) involved with keeping track of more logical storage devices. | ||
|
Artline
177 Posts
| ||
|
phar
United States1080 Posts
On April 01 2012 10:14 Myrmidon wrote:No, I think you're focusing on the wrong issue with regards to SSD caching. The main benefit is transparency to the end user--the user doesn't need to manage what goes where. If it works, then users don't need to change their behavior at all with SSD caching, and they get faster speeds. The most important thing about mainstream technologies is that users don't need to have any clue wtf is going on behind the scenes to use and benefit from them. I mean, most computer users probably have a concept that different data can be stored in different places, but handling programs vs. data might be too complicated for some. Even for expert computer users, there is more effort (not much but still) involved with keeping track of more logical storage devices. Yes I agree, that is a main benefit, but only insofar as you do not have enough SSD capacity to store basically everything you use (perhaps sans large numbers of pictures, music, and videos). If you cannot afford an SSD that will store everything you use, caching is a great way to go. For example, if you had 4GB of L2 cache somehow (not possible), you wouldn't really have much need for DRAM (assuming in this hypothetical, DRAM capacity is still the same). | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On April 01 2012 10:30 Artline wrote: If I buy a bigger screen with more resolution will it fit more units onto the screen or will the same image on the smaller monitor simply look clearer? Sorry if it's been answered before. That's based on aspect ratio, I believe 16: 9 is the ideal for most visible real estate. Any resolution fitting that aspect ratio will do. | ||
|
Artline
177 Posts
On April 01 2012 10:46 JingleHell wrote: That's based on aspect ratio, I believe 16: 9 is the ideal for most visible real estate. Any resolution fitting that aspect ratio will do. Oh okay. Thanks sir! | ||
|
Cerotix
Canada121 Posts
On April 01 2012 10:46 phar wrote: Yes I agree, that is a main benefit, but only insofar as you do not have enough SSD capacity to store basically everything you use (perhaps sans large numbers of pictures, music, and videos). If you cannot afford an SSD that will store everything you use, caching is a great way to go. For example, if you had 4GB of L2 cache somehow (not possible), you wouldn't really have much need for DRAM (assuming in this hypothetical, DRAM capacity is still the same). i've got 2tb of hdd storage that i'll be using for all my crap and then most likely a 60ish gb ssd for the OS and maybe some games if space permits -- would i benefit from having a motherboard that allows ssd caching? | ||
|
xasuma
Chile62 Posts
I have never replaced a HDD before. Do I backup everything and I guess it will be pretty much a like a new pc then? Would a 72rpm be good? Any brand recommended? | ||
|
alQahira
United States511 Posts
If you load the operating system and some programs onto the SSD, then by definition you are using the SSD as a primary drive, not a cache. | ||
|
phar
United States1080 Posts
On April 01 2012 11:30 Cerotix wrote: i've got 2tb of hdd storage that i'll be using for all my crap and then most likely a 60ish gb ssd for the OS and maybe some games if space permits -- would i benefit from having a motherboard that allows ssd caching? Depends - will 60GB fit everything? I believe it might be a bit tight (would be tight for me personally), in which case Myrmidon is spot on for you - just using a 60GB SSD as a cache is not a bad idea. You may still want to figure out some way of keeping any large amount of video, image, and audio files you have on a dedicated HDD (no ssd cache). Really depends on your use cases though. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On April 01 2012 11:35 xasuma wrote: After i ran CHKDSK /f , i still got a blue screen complainig about my disk... I have never replaced a HDD before. Do I backup everything and I guess it will be pretty much a like a new pc then? Would a 72rpm be good? Any brand recommended? Pricing is a bit funky right now but yes, 7200 RPM. Replacing HDD is fairly easy from a hardware point of view, and then you just install your OS fresh, install various motherboard drivers, then the rest of the drivers. Do NOT have the old HDD still plugged in during the install. Once it's installed, you can reconnect the old one to try and move stuff over. | ||
| ||
