|
When using this resource, please read the 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. |
United Kingdom20341 Posts
As for two loops vs one, it doesn't really matter. The difference in water temperature between any two points in the loop should be a fraction of a degree -- 0.1 or 0.2C delta basically: the water moves quite quickly. Additionally, it's usually one component or the other that's being stretched to the limit, not both. Think of how some games are CPU-bound while others are GPU-bound, or how e.g. encoding cranks the CPU but doesn't touch the GPU much/at all.
The difference in water temp between different places in the loop is not the concern - the entire loop will heat up to a large delta temp. The "rule of the thumb" that i've heard a lot, is 240mm + 120mm per "component", so 360 for using for example, a 3770k and 680. That's like 350w at load - it's hardly comparable to 1200. I'm not sure how temps actually are, but i know that you can't run push/pull with three long rads in an air540. I think that with 2x 240mm and a 360mm, playing Crysis 3 or bf4 with 1200w going into loop - delta T would be quite extreme
You can measure dissapation at X water temp delta with a given rad and fan+fan speed, but i don't remember any numbers atm
|
Just grab some of these:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FIDswBQ.jpg)
|
United Kingdom20341 Posts
On May 06 2014 06:14 Craton wrote:Just grab some of these:
That's what i would do 
If i ran a water loop it'd probably be something like 360+240+240 + an external rad for a pair of high end GPU's and a CPU.. Not really a pair of high end dual-gpu's.
Getting a 360 rad for CPU is tempting too, but then again costs are so high and gains are small enough that you're probably better off rotating CPU's to get one that clocks well
|
The reason you would want 2 loops is because the CPU temps are deltaT sensitive and GPU temps are not. So having a 5C deltaT loop for your CPU and a 15C deltaT loop for your GPU your watercooling setup will be higher performance than a single loop at 10C deltaT.
As for me. I would go dual loops in a 350D. 280rad front intake would be for the CPU and 280rad top exhaust for the GPU.
Also I was going to post about how I can't get some RAM I bought to work regardless of latency/voltage/speed/#of sticks but that would be fruitless in harboring a solution because those are all the variables I can control...
On a side note I can measure my RAM Voltage with a DMM. Pin #151 (I think, it's the first pin after the divider on the back side) and using a neutral from a molex connector (inner 2 connectors). On my old ram it gave me 1.56v @1067c7 and 2v @1333c? using my boards auto voltage. On a side note of that Pin #120 (last pin front row) gives you a reading of exactly half your RAM voltage.
|
United Kingdom20341 Posts
http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/9/2856795/microsoft-high-performance-touch-research
This is an excellent article comparing input latency
for record, 144hz with clean input can be down to about ~15-20ms. A normal 60hz system is often around 50, going higher with bad settings or games
As for actual touchscreens: There's no way i'd pay for a pretty premium device with such laggy input, i've been waiting for better since the first iphone release. Where are the smartphones that are not dependent on laggy touchscreens? Maybe i'm just not aware of them because i didn't look at many phones recently, but it seems everyone i know has a rectangular object where 90% of the front is a touchscreen and there is no other interface. These things don't have terrible CPU's any more, there's no reason or excuse for it to be that bad. There's no way that people don't notice, looking at the above vid or using a device, so i'm curious why there are so few complaints about it~
|
On May 06 2014 06:46 Cyro wrote:That's what i would do If i ran a water loop it'd probably be something like 360+240+240 + an external rad for a pair of high end GPU's and a CPU.. Not really a pair of high end dual-gpu's. Getting a 360 rad for CPU is tempting too, but then again costs are so high and gains are small enough that you're probably better off rotating CPU's to get one that clocks well
Seeing that picture makes me wonder when we'll see more "cooling tower" style set ups that try to duplicate the thermal dissipation properties found in the new Mac Pro design - despite it looking like a trash can and having only one fan, it seems able to cope with twin Radeon FirePro cards alright according to the "tech press".
|
On May 06 2014 11:45 Cyro wrote:http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/9/2856795/microsoft-high-performance-touch-researchThis is an excellent article comparing input latency for record, 144hz with clean input can be down to about ~15-20ms. A normal 60hz system is often around 50, going higher with bad settings or games As for actual touchscreens: There's no way i'd pay for a pretty premium device with such laggy input, i've been waiting for better since the first iphone release. Where are the smartphones that are not dependent on laggy touchscreens? Maybe i'm just not aware of them because i didn't look at many phones recently, but it seems everyone i know has a rectangular object where 90% of the front is a touchscreen and there is no other interface. These things don't have terrible CPU's any more, there's no reason or excuse for it to be that bad. There's no way that people don't notice, looking at the above vid or using a device, so i'm curious why there are so few complaints about it~
Most people just use their phone for browsing, texting, and occasional gaming (think Candy Crush) so no one really notices or cares? I certainly don't.
|
United Kingdom20341 Posts
On May 06 2014 12:11 skyR wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2014 11:45 Cyro wrote:http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/9/2856795/microsoft-high-performance-touch-researchThis is an excellent article comparing input latency for record, 144hz with clean input can be down to about ~15-20ms. A normal 60hz system is often around 50, going higher with bad settings or games As for actual touchscreens: There's no way i'd pay for a pretty premium device with such laggy input, i've been waiting for better since the first iphone release. Where are the smartphones that are not dependent on laggy touchscreens? Maybe i'm just not aware of them because i didn't look at many phones recently, but it seems everyone i know has a rectangular object where 90% of the front is a touchscreen and there is no other interface. These things don't have terrible CPU's any more, there's no reason or excuse for it to be that bad. There's no way that people don't notice, looking at the above vid or using a device, so i'm curious why there are so few complaints about it~ Most people just use their phone for browsing, texting, and occasional gaming (think Candy Crush) so no one really notices or cares? I certainly don't.
I found it very difficult to type on and generally interact, given the fact that it's not just a small difference and aside from the loss or accuracy, latency is like 5-8x higher than just typing on a keyboard. Feels like we went backwards in that regard because phones are mostly for talking to people, typing at people and more recently, web browsing?
|
You said you don't own a phone so is this an old or recent experience? Things are a lot different now than they were back than, I mean it wasn't until like Ice Cream Sandwich and Jelly Bean that the first generation of aftermarket keyboards came to the Android Market and they've vastly improved since than, even Google has vastly improved the stock keyboard though I can't say the same for Apple. Don't even know how we typed back than without Swiftkey, Swype, Minuum, etc.
Typing on a phone is very different than typing on a keyboard. You don't need accuracy on a phone due to word prediction, shortcuts, and auto-correct features, most of which are very good once the keyboard has learned how you type.
|
On May 06 2014 11:49 felisconcolori wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2014 06:46 Cyro wrote:That's what i would do If i ran a water loop it'd probably be something like 360+240+240 + an external rad for a pair of high end GPU's and a CPU.. Not really a pair of high end dual-gpu's. Getting a 360 rad for CPU is tempting too, but then again costs are so high and gains are small enough that you're probably better off rotating CPU's to get one that clocks well Seeing that picture makes me wonder when we'll see more "cooling tower" style set ups that try to duplicate the thermal dissipation properties found in the new Mac Pro design - despite it looking like a trash can and having only one fan, it seems able to cope with twin Radeon FirePro cards alright according to the "tech press".
Doubt it. It's likely very cost inefficient, not to mention all the form factor changes and differently produced hardware that would be required. The Mac tower is like $4k. They probably added $1000 in costs just to make it a small cylinder.
|
United Kingdom20341 Posts
On May 06 2014 13:10 skyR wrote:
You said you don't own a phone so is this an old or recent experience? Things are a lot different now than they were back than, I mean it wasn't until like Ice Cream Sandwich and Jelly Bean that the first generation of aftermarket keyboards came to the Android Market and they've vastly improved since than, even Google has vastly improved the stock keyboard though I can't say the same for Apple. Don't even know how we typed back than without Swiftkey, Swype, Minuum, etc.
Typing on a phone is very different than typing on a keyboard. You don't need accuracy on a phone due to word prediction, shortcuts, and auto-correct features, most of which are very good once the keyboard has learned how you type.
Just from seeing some "recent" phones. Almost everyone i know has galaxy s3/s4 but some have iphone ~3-5. I never got anywhere near 100wpm on a touch-keyboard (maybe like 15 tops) though i can imagine having half of my normal keyboard typing speed on an actual hardware keyboard, because i don't type very efficiently here
|
On May 06 2014 13:11 Craton wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2014 11:49 felisconcolori wrote:On May 06 2014 06:46 Cyro wrote:That's what i would do If i ran a water loop it'd probably be something like 360+240+240 + an external rad for a pair of high end GPU's and a CPU.. Not really a pair of high end dual-gpu's. Getting a 360 rad for CPU is tempting too, but then again costs are so high and gains are small enough that you're probably better off rotating CPU's to get one that clocks well Seeing that picture makes me wonder when we'll see more "cooling tower" style set ups that try to duplicate the thermal dissipation properties found in the new Mac Pro design - despite it looking like a trash can and having only one fan, it seems able to cope with twin Radeon FirePro cards alright according to the "tech press". Doubt it. It's likely very cost inefficient, not to mention all the form factor changes and differently produced hardware that would be required. The Mac tower is like $4k. They probably added $1000 in costs just to make it a small cylinder.
I remember I've seen articles that did research about that. They came to the conclusion that it's actually a very good price for the parts used, to the point where it might actually be cheaper than what you'd pay if you'd build it yourself.
The downside it has is that the parts aren't actually running at full speed, the way I remember. There's issues with temperatures like in a notebook and things are clocked lower.
The form factor changes I actually like a lot. I want tiny graphics cards and boards like they used! Things could be connected by cables. You could arrange the parts side by side and then use a similar tower style air cooler on the graphics card as on the CPU. Or you could hold off on the OC shenanigans, arrange things a bit like Apple did, use smaller coolers and build some tiny box. Or someone might build a monstrous air cooler that has more than one base plate but shares the heat-sink.
|
On May 06 2014 12:27 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2014 12:11 skyR wrote:On May 06 2014 11:45 Cyro wrote:http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/9/2856795/microsoft-high-performance-touch-researchThis is an excellent article comparing input latency for record, 144hz with clean input can be down to about ~15-20ms. A normal 60hz system is often around 50, going higher with bad settings or games As for actual touchscreens: There's no way i'd pay for a pretty premium device with such laggy input, i've been waiting for better since the first iphone release. Where are the smartphones that are not dependent on laggy touchscreens? Maybe i'm just not aware of them because i didn't look at many phones recently, but it seems everyone i know has a rectangular object where 90% of the front is a touchscreen and there is no other interface. These things don't have terrible CPU's any more, there's no reason or excuse for it to be that bad. There's no way that people don't notice, looking at the above vid or using a device, so i'm curious why there are so few complaints about it~ Most people just use their phone for browsing, texting, and occasional gaming (think Candy Crush) so no one really notices or cares? I certainly don't. I found it very difficult to type on and generally interact, given the fact that it's not just a small difference and aside from the loss or accuracy, latency is like 5-8x higher than just typing on a keyboard. Feels like we went backwards in that regard because phones are mostly for talking to people, typing at people and more recently, web browsing?
I hate typing on a touch screen device (phone or tablet)! Gaming is similarly limited for me because of the lack of tactile feedback (as well as so many games requiring me to cover the screen with my fingers in order to interact). I know you can use BT but carrying around a controller or keyboard to play games defeats half the purpose of having a mobile device :D
|
|
|
|
|
You can save a lot of money if you want, and LoL will not run any different (I mean literally no difference). Other than that, everything looks like it fits together well except for the CPU cooler being budget while everything else is the opposite of budget.
Needing 16 GB of RAM is very rare. 8 GB is nearly always enough. The motherboard is very likely overkill, not any better than something for $120 or so. For this price, I feel you should get everything you might possibly need on the board like for example wireless. The only thing this board has special that seems interesting to me is better audio than normal.
|
On May 07 2014 00:26 Ropid wrote:
You can save a lot of money if you want, and LoL will not run any different (I mean literally no difference). Other than that, everything looks like it fits together well except for the CPU cooler being budget while everything else is the opposite of budget.
Needing 16 GB of RAM is very rare. 8 GB is nearly always enough. The motherboard is very likely overkill, not any better than something for $120 or so. For this price, I feel you should get everything you might possibly need on the board like for example wireless. The only thing this board has special that seems interesting to me is better audio than normal.
Well, my iMac came with 8 GB, and I when I changed to 16 GB I feel like I can tell a difference, but maybe it is just in my head. I listen to A LOT of music while working or gaming, so having better audio sounds good, however I must admit I only chose that motherboard because it was highly rated by other users, I had no idea about its audio specs. I understand that LoL can run okay with less, but I don't want to buy something that I will have to upgrade in a couple of years and end up having to spend more money in the aggregate. In truth, my 2011 iMac still runs LoL fine, one of the major reasons I am buying a new computer I because I want at least one windows machine in my home (My fiance and I both use macbooks as well).
What cooler would you recommend? I chose that one because it was the one used in the recommend build for me a couple pages back.
Thanks for the feedback!
|
I would definitely get 8 Gb of RAM and another, cheaper motherboard (z87x-d3h). Use the money to get a better CPU cooler, perhaps even a 120 Hz monitor. But that system is ... hardcore overkill if you just want to play LoL. This rig is enough to to run most games at close-to-max settings at 1080p.
This would be a nice rig to stream LoL or SC2 at 1080p60 though.
E: Careful with placebo it can be hard on the wallet sometimes. Getting a better monitor is a much better investment than getting double the RAM you need. RAM should be a solid RAM kit btw, 2 x 4 Gb of 2133 or 2400 MHz RAM at 1.65V. That ought to feel snappier than 16 GB of slower RAM.
A good CPU cooler would be the Thermalright Macho Rev.A. It's mid-ranged but performs admirably for its price.
|
|
|
On May 07 2014 00:55 yokcounty wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2014 00:26 Ropid wrote:
You can save a lot of money if you want, and LoL will not run any different (I mean literally no difference). Other than that, everything looks like it fits together well except for the CPU cooler being budget while everything else is the opposite of budget.
Needing 16 GB of RAM is very rare. 8 GB is nearly always enough. The motherboard is very likely overkill, not any better than something for $120 or so. For this price, I feel you should get everything you might possibly need on the board like for example wireless. The only thing this board has special that seems interesting to me is better audio than normal. Well, my iMac came with 8 GB, and I when I changed to 16 GB I feel like I can tell a difference, but maybe it is just in my head. I listen to A LOT of music while working or gaming, so having better audio sounds good, however I must admit I only chose that motherboard because it was highly rated by other users, I had no idea about its audio specs. I understand that LoL can run okay with less, but I don't want to buy something that I will have to upgrade in a couple of years and end up having to spend more money in the aggregate. In truth, my 2011 iMac still runs LoL fine, one of the major reasons I am buying a new computer I because I want at least one windows machine in my home (My fiance and I both use macbooks as well). What cooler would you recommend? I chose that one because it was the one used in the recommend build for me a couple pages back. Thanks for the feedback!
I assume you're not overclocking because you have not explicitly mentioned it. By the way, paying more so you "can have the option" to overclock "later" has always been a waste of money from my personal observations.
- Get a rosewill capstone 450w for $60. It's more appropriate for a low power draw like a 770 and 4670. If you care about semimodular, the 450m is $70 iirc.
- Get a 4670 if it's cheaper than the 4670k. They're the same (except the 4670 has better virtualisation features QQ) if you're not overclocking.
- The cooler you have is fine for a non overclocked configuration.
- The "feeling" you got from adding more ram is just the placebo effect. If you want to find out if you need 16GB of ram, disable the pagefile with 8GB, and if your computer ever tells you it's running out of ram, consider adding more (or re-enabling the pagefile lol).
- Get a h87 board. It's the same as z87 for the typical user but without overclocking features.
- Insofar as the gpu goes (assuming you don't want to max out new demanding titles), it's more cost efficient to buy a midrange card, ie 750ti/760 with a better price/performance ratio, and slap in a new card if you feel you need the upgrade. If you're playing league of legends only, you don't even need a gpu...
Aside:
If you care about sound quality, you wouldn't be using onboard sound. A more expensive motherboard does not mean a better audio experience, onboard can have a lot of interference on even the most expensive motherboards. Anecdotal evidence: my p8p67 (which is decent) onboard sound had so much interference (yes the back panel and especially front panel) that I needed to get a soundcard. I had very sensitive iems at the time though.
On May 07 2014 01:03 Incognoto wrote:
That ought to feel snappier than 16 GB of slower RAM.
Is this a joke or metaphor I'm missing? RAM speed does not affect the "snappiness" of anything, unless you mean the shininess of your benchmark scores, or extra 1-2% fps gains in a handful of games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
Thanks. 
