| Forum Index > Tech Support |
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. | ||
|
Alabasern
United States4005 Posts
On May 16 2014 16:21 iTzSnypah wrote: Just get the Silverstone Strider 450 SFX Fully Modular PSU. I'm 99% sure it comes with a ATX Bracket and it has short cables so you wouldn't need to stash cables everywhere. This is my first build so thank you very much for any insight. | ||
|
Alabasern
United States4005 Posts
This is my first custom build, and I don't need a monitor, but I'll be getting this as a significant upgrade. Monitor - SAMSUNG S23C450D Matte Black 23" 5ms - $190 Case - SilverStone SG06BB-LITE - $50 PSU - SILVERSTONE ST45SF-G 450W - $95 Mobo - GIGABYTE GA-H97N-WIFI LGA 1150 Intel H97 - $120 RAM - ADATA XPG V1.0 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 - $64 SSD - SAMSUNG 840 EVO MZ-7TE250BW 2.5" 250GB - $150 CPU - Intel Core i3-4360 Haswell 3.7GHz LGA 1150 54W - $160 GPU - SAPPHIRE DUAL-X 100365L Radeon R9 270 2GB 256-Bit - $180 OS - Windows 7 Home 64-bit - $100 Total ~ $1,100 w/o shipping. tax, or rebates received | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
I bet a different graphics card from AMD would be a better choice for the money, but I don't know anything about AMD so you should wait for someone to suggest something similar to a GTX 750 Ti or GTX 760. The only arguments for NVIDIA that I can think about are a game capture feature for streaming/recording where the card does all the work, and their Linux driver support being the best, and then simply being afraid to switch to something unknown. Other than that, I don't really see AMD users being unhappy with their choice and I got the impression that their cards are generally more powerful for the same money. The GTX 750 Ti's special thing is that it uses very little power for the performance it has. Its price feels a little suspicious. About the particular card you chose, I don't know what the deal is with this $180 model. There's a whole bunch of $150 models. Can you see if you can get Windows cheaper somewhere, like through school or work? I'd buy a crappier USB stick if that one will be reserved for only Windows installation and never used for anything else, something 8GB and slow.  | ||
|
Alabasern
United States4005 Posts
No problems with the maximum requirements with the Radeon R9 270 on a 450W PSU? | ||
|
Trevo
41 Posts
my specs CPU i7 4th generation SSD 256gb + 2tb 8gb corsair | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On May 16 2014 20:08 Alabasern wrote: Why a 8GB USB drive? Isn't Windows 7 Home 64-Bit 20GB? No problems with the maximum requirements with the Radeon R9 270 on a 450W PSU? Man your load power consumption would be like, 50% load on the PSU with simultaneous maxed CPU+GPU If 270 only takes one 6-pin, you could even crossfire them @stock settings on a nice 450 unit with an i3. Why that monitor for $190? It doesn't look like anything special to me (looking at stats, 170/160 viewing angles, tn? 5ms rated response time, 60hz) | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On May 16 2014 22:13 Trevo wrote: what is the best GPU for my 750w corsair and a 1080p monitor under $500? Thanks guys! my specs CPU i7 4th generation SSD 256gb + 2tb 8gb corsair Whatever fits, nvidia side fastest gpu is power limited to ~250w at stock and red side isn't much higher. You can look at, in order of approximate performance; gtx760, r9 280, gtx770/r9 280x ------ gtx780/r9 290. 780ti is a step above the top of that, but worse in value and i'd assume outside of budget. 290x is almost never worth buying, because in many places it costs 1.3x more than 290, yet it only performs ~3-4% better than 290 at the same clock speeds | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
On May 16 2014 20:08 Alabasern wrote: Why a 8GB USB drive? Isn't Windows 7 Home 64-Bit 20GB? No problems with the maximum requirements with the Radeon R9 270 on a 450W PSU? That's only after installation on the C: drive. The files on the installation media are compressed and use between 3 GB and 4 GB of space. I suggested 8 GB just to be safe and not run out of room. You can also throw a bunch of your own files and folders on the stick and the installation will still work as long as you don't touch its files. Here's a collection of disc images for download: http://www.w7forums.com/threads/official-windows-7-sp1-iso-image-downloads.12325/ The file for Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit English is 3.1 GB according to my browser when I click to start the download. I think it would fit on a 4 GB stick. | ||
|
Alabasern
United States4005 Posts
On May 16 2014 23:39 Ropid wrote: That's only after installation on the C: drive. The files on the installation media are compressed and use between 3 GB and 4 GB of space. I suggested 8 GB just to be safe and not run out of room. You can also throw a bunch of your own files and folders on the stick and the installation will still work as long as you don't touch its files. Here's a collection of disc images for download: http://www.w7forums.com/threads/official-windows-7-sp1-iso-image-downloads.12325/ The file for Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit English is 3.1 GB according to my browser when I click to start the download. I think it would fit on a 4 GB stick. Thank you very much for the iso location, I bought a Sandisk 16 GB Flash Drive today in person for $7. | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
Looking to overclock a Pentium to decent speed if I can. I can't find phase counts for this motherboard though. Atm it's attractive at "only" ~€100. Thinking that it might be better to dish out €30 more to get the ATX version of this board. You get Xfire/SLI support as well. hmm | ||
|
Alabasern
United States4005 Posts
I reduced the size of my SSD therefore, and reverted back to the Crucial M550 for the extra 8 GB vs. the Samsung EVO 120GB. Choosing an IPS panel is similar to creating a cheap stable build; I don't need a high-end gaming screen immediately. My pre-sale build is < $1,000 and I feel very confident in the support I received. Thank you very much Ropid, skyR, Cyro and iTzSnypah. Monitor - ASUS VS239H-P Black 23" 5ms IPS - $160 Case - SilverStone SG06BB-LITE - $50 PSU - SILVERSTONE ST45SF-G 450W - $95 Mobo - GIGABYTE GA-H97N-WIFI LGA 1150 Intel H97 - $120 RAM - ADATA XPG V1.0 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 - $64 SSD - Crucial M550 2.5" 128GB - $100 CPU - Intel Core i3-4150 Haswell 3.5GHz LGA 1150 54W - $130 GPU - SAPPHIRE DUAL-X 100365L Radeon R9 270 2GB 256-Bit - $180 OS - Windows 7 Home 64-bit - $100 Total ~ $1,000 w/o shipping. tax, or rebates received | ||
|
HaloLegend98
United States54 Posts
I also noticed this video recently that surprised me: I basically want to do this, but ONLY be able to play SCII at 60 FPS at least. The 'Basic Gamer' sample build in OP seems great, but I'm wondering if an even cheaper build can be completed. What is your budget? $300-$400 (or as cheap as possible) What is your monitor's native resolution? 1366x768 What games do you intend to play on this computer? What settings? Only SCII. Would accept lowest for everything, but would prefer medium. What do you intend to use the computer for besides gaming? Youtube, TL.NET, and browsing. Do you intend to overclock? No. Do you intend to do SLI / Crossfire? No. Do you need an operating system? Yes, either W7 or W8 (exclude this from price) Do you need a monitor or any other peripherals and is this part of your budget? No. If you have any requirements or brand preferences, please specify. I prefer AMD and ATI, but will accept the cheapest option. What country will you be buying your parts in? US If you have any retailer preferences, please specify. None. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
I am looking to build a computer that ONLY plays SCII at >=60 FPS. Turning up graphics settings on sc2 to whatever you want is not difficult. Maintaining 60fps with hundreds of units IS, and is an unrealistic goal, though you can get way more performance with some setups than with others. Intel CPU is mandatory here and i think that sc2 runs substantially better with an nvidia GPU under CPU bound conditions, but not certain if that's true or how much difference that is - i just base that from seeing confusingly bad performance numbers from Gumbi using a 4770k+7950 and a guy i met on OCN who was using an 8320 and an AMD GPU. On May 17 2014 20:17 Incognoto wrote: Starting to set my sights on this little bugger: http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4964#ov Looking to overclock a Pentium to decent speed if I can. I can't find phase counts for this motherboard though. Atm it's attractive at "only" ~€100. Thinking that it might be better to dish out €30 more to get the ATX version of this board. You get Xfire/SLI support as well. hmm 100 euro seems expensive, given that the full-atx z87x-d3h has been around 110-115 euro - that's an 8-phase board capable of holding up decently under 250w cpu power loads, so running a Pentium at up to ~1.4v in a normal load i can't imagine it hitting even 100w unless you ran insane tests*, you should be fine with substantially less. You obviously need the z97 chipset though and i've not seen any other prices for those - and we still lack a lot of data for potential OC-ability on the Pentiums, what kind of cooling demands they have, and more importantly if they respond well to additional cooling budget. I'l maybe run some 4 core vs 2 core tests on to see if temps change significantly, i didn't see much data on dual core vs quad and heatsink requirements. *Is that even possible, lacking avx, avx2 and Hyperthreading? On that note, i'm concerned for Pentium performance in some tasks if Intel decides that the unlocked dual core will not have avx support. I can test that too, 4770k with HT and AVX disabled @4.5g. | ||
|
Tileks
Brazil74 Posts
The prices are strange here in Brazil so my options are 4gb ram + gtx 650 Ti for +- R$500,00 or the GTX 660 for R$600,00. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
| ||
|
Tileks
Brazil74 Posts
On May 18 2014 00:52 Cyro wrote: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1140?vs=1129 Thanks Cyro, that site is very helpful. | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
On May 17 2014 20:17 Incognoto wrote: Starting to set my sights on this little bugger: http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4964#ov Looking to overclock a Pentium to decent speed if I can. I can't find phase counts for this motherboard though. Atm it's attractive at "only" ~€100. Thinking that it might be better to dish out €30 more to get the ATX version of this board. You get Xfire/SLI support as well. hmm In the past, on the boards that looked like that and had no heat-sink for the VRM, Gigabyte typically had no voltage settings in the BIOS. I don't know what that might mean for Haswell as the CPU itself does Vcore and stuff like that, but perhaps VRIN settings are unavailable as that's the last voltage done by the motherboard? If that's locked, that would limit you. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
In cases where they would limit vcore control, it's mostly to limit the power draw through the mobo - they have the same motivation and ability to do it with z97 as they do on the previous platforms, unless ~12v to ~1.8v is significantly easier than ~12v to ~1.35v is | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
On May 18 2014 02:02 Cyro wrote: [...] unless ~12v to ~1.8v is significantly easier than ~12v to ~1.35v is I think there was something about current being the thing that's causing heat. Power is voltage times current, and if you have lower voltage, the current goes up. But that's the story for analog stuff and things today do some sort of switching where the formulas don't really work like that or something? I couldn't ever get into physics, never felt I understood what's going on, gave up and just tried to not fail tests and forgot everything afterwards. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
Higher output voltage does mean lower load current for the same power delivery (current and voltage being inversely proportional for a given amount of power delivered), and that does mean lower power consumption. Also, changing the output voltage changes how much power is drawn by the high side MOSFET as opposed to the low side MOSFET. However, the difference in power consumption itself in the conversion process doesn't make all that much of a difference. If the design with the lower voltage is 85% efficient and the design with the higher voltage is 90% efficient (actually, I think the numbers are often higher and I wouldn't expect that much of a difference either), that's not actually changing the power delivery requirements by much. Send 100W to the CPU on 85% efficiency and you're putting 118W through the parts. Send 100W to the CPU on 90% efficiency and that's 111W. Who cares. The bigger deal is actually the fact that the higher output voltage means lower current; the MOSFETs, chokes, etc. are rated on output current and temperature. So yes, it's easier on some of the hardware. Which means they can get away with using weaker parts and saving money. Nobody guaranteed that all else was equal, right? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Other Games |
|
Big Brain Bouts
Elazer vs Nicoract
Reynor vs Scarlett
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Krystianer vs TBD
TriGGeR vs SKillous
Percival vs TBD
ByuN vs Nicoract
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
|
|
|
EPT
