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.
On October 08 2014 08:04 Firkraag8 wrote: Decided to benchmark the 980 too, don't know if this is good or bad but it was a bit odd that my lowest point was 8fps something must have activated in the background for a split second or something:
Neither the CPU or GPU is overclocked and I haven't formatted the computer since upgrading from 670 to 980 I think I'll wait for Windows 10.
Clock it up, i've hit 84.4 on a 970 when i'm not power limited but 82fps or a hair over is easy to reproduce :D
Your temp says 80c. At about 74-79c, they start to throttle away from boost clocks. I had no trouble staying waaaaaaay below those values with twin frozr 5 cooler.
I think most or all of these cards can set 8000mhz memory without big issues, but you start to get very small errors and artifacts that can be invisible to human eye, i've been using the OCCT gpu 3d test, with a tdp limit so that my core clock runs lower and nowhere near power limit (it's a very power intensive test) and memory clock stays high. That tells you easily where errors are getting through and where they are not
^errors fast at 4000mhz (*2 = 8000mhz effective) but none for 10 min test on 3900mhz (7800)
You're wrong, GPU boost 2.0 targets 80 degrees on reference design. They do not throttle at this point. At 80c it will only adjust fan speed up or down to hit this mark and in my case it does 80c at 45% fanspeed.
Also did a unigine valley, do preferr that one since it has 1080p in Extreme HD setting. + Show Spoiler +
As you can see there also it maintains its 1400 boost clock and 3500(7000) memory clock at 80.
On October 08 2014 08:04 Firkraag8 wrote: Decided to benchmark the 980 too, don't know if this is good or bad but it was a bit odd that my lowest point was 8fps something must have activated in the background for a split second or something:
Neither the CPU or GPU is overclocked and I haven't formatted the computer since upgrading from 670 to 980 I think I'll wait for Windows 10.
Clock it up, i've hit 84.4 on a 970 when i'm not power limited but 82fps or a hair over is easy to reproduce :D
Your temp says 80c. At about 74-79c, they start to throttle away from boost clocks. I had no trouble staying waaaaaaay below those values with twin frozr 5 cooler.
I think most or all of these cards can set 8000mhz memory without big issues, but you start to get very small errors and artifacts that can be invisible to human eye, i've been using the OCCT gpu 3d test, with a tdp limit so that my core clock runs lower and nowhere near power limit (it's a very power intensive test) and memory clock stays high. That tells you easily where errors are getting through and where they are not
^errors fast at 4000mhz (*2 = 8000mhz effective) but none for 10 min test on 3900mhz (7800)
You're wrong, GPU boost 2.0 targets 80 degrees on reference design. They do not throttle at this point. At 80c it will only adjust fan speed up or down to hit this mark and in my case it does 80c at 45% fanspeed.
Also did a unigine valley, do preferr that one since it has 1080p in Extreme HD setting. + Show Spoiler +
As you can see there also it maintains its 1400 boost clock and 3500(7000) memory clock at 80.
I've had two cards with GPU boost 2.0, this one i've never let reach ~75-80c so i dunno, but my last one behaved exactly like that.
If it approached 80c (there's a sensor in the GPU that checks this like 10-100x per second, IIRC) then it would very quickly throttle away from boost clocks - that was about 1293mhz, to around 1150mhz - and when it got there, it would ramp up fans further. The performance loss would come before the fan speed increase, and it caused some annoying issues for me for a little while. As far as nvidia is concerned, officially, boost clocks are not really supposed to be maintained, and they are the first thing to go AFAIK as soon as stuff gets hot or hits TDP limits. There might be some variance in behavior based on bios, i know for a fact that there's an MSI thing that lets you set if the default behavior is fans ramping up or clock speeds dropping, there's a Gaming, Silent and OC mode selectable
Also, the Unigine clock speed report for me is not only inaccurate, but it never updates after i launch the program, ever (with my windforce 770 or msi gaming 970) so i can't use that as a judge of if clock speeds are being maintained. I'm using MSI Afterburner and GPU-Z for that
Also did a unigine valley, do preferr that one since it has 1080p in Extreme HD setting.
I'l run Valley too - on Overclock.net, people running Heaven 4.0 usually manually took the Extreme preset, AFAIK, and then set it to 1920x1080. That's a 1.44x increase in resolution over 1600x900, so it does significantly affect performance and change things like GPU scaling
I'm getting ~65fps on Valley 1080p extreme HD preset with 1500/7800 (my super stable settings) so yours is a bit stronger there, i think you can hit above 75 though with manually set clock speeds. I think some people might do 80 on 980's on air, with around 1550 or maybe close to 1600mhz if it's neccesary to hit that high, but 75 seems much more achievable
On October 08 2014 08:41 Sentenal wrote: My current toaster is finally being unable to play some of the newer games coming out, so I'm probably going to upgrade fairly soon. So right now, I'm looking to build a new computer. I've already assembled a build, with most of what I think I might want: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/kzyKNG
I'm not buying a new GPU with this, as I already have one I have bought fairly recently, which is a Radeon R9 270.
The thing I'm most concerned about with this build is whether or not the Heat Sink will be too big for my case. The thing is big as hell in its preview picture, at least. I suppose the same goes for my Power Supply as well, since I'm wondering if it would fit in my case gracefully.
And I guess as an extra, I'll have two free slots of RAM with this build, and I have some extra 2 GB sticks of memory from my current machine. Would it be a bad idea to run like two 8GB sticks and then two 2GB sticks of memory?
You have some big issues aside from just stuff fitting.
Firstly PSU and mobo should fit, they are built to ATX standard, the case probably fits the CPU heatsink too but i'm not certain on supported heights etc. Google should be able to tell you this.
You have a h97 board paired with a 4670k and a hyper 212. You don't need the hyper 212 or a -k CPU unless you're overclocking, but you need a z-series board to overclock (z87/z97) - and on top of that, 4670k is last gen, you would get a 4690k because they have a few features that make them OC better (they're more strictly binned, so clock higher on average with the same voltages, and also have better temperatures due to IHS design changes)
Adding the extra RAM like that, to have 20GB instead of 16GB would probably cost a marginal amount of memory performance (if it's also ddr3-1600) and might be worth doing if you want to use over 16GB of RAM regularly. If not though, it's probably best to leave it - it's only 4GB, and it's more awkward for the system to use and bring all of the memory timings from your faster kit down to the slower one, etc. It's DDR3 so it'd still sell for an ok amount to someone trying to build a cheap system, too.
There's no need for a 750w PSU. Unless you're pushing a quad core i5 and a 270(x) very hard, you probably wont even hit 350w under simultaneous full load for entire system. A good quality 450w PSU is a little overkill for a build like that. The Rosewill Capstone 450w is $60 on newegg, but the 550w-modular one is the same price as that other unit you have selected, but otherwise better.
If you do plan on overclocking a 4690k, it's probably wise to take a better cooler than a 212 because they're more thermally limited than something like a 1'st-2'nd gen core CPU and there's not as much reason to be tight with budget as there would be if you was building with something cheap like an fx6300 for ok performance.
On October 08 2014 08:04 Firkraag8 wrote: Decided to benchmark the 980 too, don't know if this is good or bad but it was a bit odd that my lowest point was 8fps something must have activated in the background for a split second or something:
Neither the CPU or GPU is overclocked and I haven't formatted the computer since upgrading from 670 to 980 I think I'll wait for Windows 10.
Clock it up, i've hit 84.4 on a 970 when i'm not power limited but 82fps or a hair over is easy to reproduce :D
Your temp says 80c. At about 74-79c, they start to throttle away from boost clocks. I had no trouble staying waaaaaaay below those values with twin frozr 5 cooler.
I think most or all of these cards can set 8000mhz memory without big issues, but you start to get very small errors and artifacts that can be invisible to human eye, i've been using the OCCT gpu 3d test, with a tdp limit so that my core clock runs lower and nowhere near power limit (it's a very power intensive test) and memory clock stays high. That tells you easily where errors are getting through and where they are not
^errors fast at 4000mhz (*2 = 8000mhz effective) but none for 10 min test on 3900mhz (7800)
You're wrong, GPU boost 2.0 targets 80 degrees on reference design. They do not throttle at this point. At 80c it will only adjust fan speed up or down to hit this mark and in my case it does 80c at 45% fanspeed.
Also did a unigine valley, do preferr that one since it has 1080p in Extreme HD setting. + Show Spoiler +
As you can see there also it maintains its 1400 boost clock and 3500(7000) memory clock at 80.
I've had two cards with GPU boost 2.0, this one i've never let reach ~75-80c so i dunno, but my last one behaved exactly like that.
If it approached 80c (there's a sensor in the GPU that checks this like 10-100x per second, IIRC) then it would very quickly throttle away from boost clocks - that was about 1293mhz, to around 1150mhz - and when it got there, it would ramp up fans further. The performance loss would come before the fan speed increase, and it caused some annoying issues for me for a little while. As far as nvidia is concerned, officially, boost clocks are not really supposed to be maintained, and they are the first thing to go AFAIK as soon as stuff gets hot or hits TDP limits. There might be some variance in behavior based on bios, i know for a fact that there's an MSI thing that lets you set if the default behavior is fans ramping up or clock speeds dropping, there's a Gaming, Silent and OC mode selectable
Also, the Unigine clock speed report for me is not only inaccurate, but it never updates after i launch the program, ever (with my windforce 770 or msi gaming 970) so i can't use that as a judge of if clock speeds are being maintained. I'm using MSI Afterburner and GPU-Z for that
Also did a unigine valley, do preferr that one since it has 1080p in Extreme HD setting.
I'l run Valley too - on Overclock.net, people running Heaven 4.0 usually manually took the Extreme preset, AFAIK, and then set it to 1920x1080. That's a 1.44x increase in resolution over 1600x900, so it does significantly affect performance and change things like GPU scaling
I'm getting ~65fps on Valley 1080p extreme HD preset with 1500/7800 (my super stable settings) so yours is a bit stronger there, i think you can hit above 75 though with manually set clock speeds. I think some people might do 80 on 980's on air, with around 1550 or maybe close to 1600mhz if it's neccesary to hit that high, but 75 seems much more achievable
You were right in that the clock count in unigine was false. My card runs at 1253 fully boosted, and when it hits 80 it shifts up and down between 1227 and 1253 which is hardly a throttle to care about but still it's there. The image is after looping valley a few times.
On October 08 2014 08:41 Sentenal wrote: My current toaster is finally being unable to play some of the newer games coming out, so I'm probably going to upgrade fairly soon. So right now, I'm looking to build a new computer. I've already assembled a build, with most of what I think I might want: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/kzyKNG
I'm not buying a new GPU with this, as I already have one I have bought fairly recently, which is a Radeon R9 270.
The thing I'm most concerned about with this build is whether or not the Heat Sink will be too big for my case. The thing is big as hell in its preview picture, at least. I suppose the same goes for my Power Supply as well, since I'm wondering if it would fit in my case gracefully.
And I guess as an extra, I'll have two free slots of RAM with this build, and I have some extra 2 GB sticks of memory from my current machine. Would it be a bad idea to run like two 8GB sticks and then two 2GB sticks of memory?
You have some big issues aside from just stuff fitting.
Firstly PSU and mobo should fit, they are built to ATX standard, the case probably fits the CPU heatsink too but i'm not certain on supported heights etc. Google should be able to tell you this.
You have a h97 board paired with a 4670k and a hyper 212. You don't need the hyper 212 or a -k CPU unless you're overclocking, but you need a z-series board to overclock (z87/z97) - and on top of that, 4670k is last gen, you would get a 4690k because they have a few features that make them OC better (they're more strictly binned, so clock higher on average with the same voltages, and also have better temperatures due to IHS design changes)
Adding the extra RAM like that, to have 20GB instead of 16GB would probably cost a marginal amount of memory performance (if it's also ddr3-1600) and might be worth doing if you want to use over 16GB of RAM regularly. If not though, it's probably best to leave it - it's only 4GB, and it's more awkward for the system to use and bring all of the memory timings from your faster kit down to the slower one, etc. It's DDR3 so it'd still sell for an ok amount to someone trying to build a cheap system, too.
There's no need for a 750w PSU. Unless you're pushing a quad core i5 and a 270(x) very hard, you probably wont even hit 350w under simultaneous full load for entire system. A good quality 450w PSU is a little overkill for a build like that. The Rosewill Capstone 450w is $60 on newegg, but the 550w-modular one is the same price as that other unit you have selected, but otherwise better.
If you do plan on overclocking a 4690k, it's probably wise to take a better cooler than a 212 because they're more thermally limited than something like a 1'st-2'nd gen core CPU and there's not as much reason to be tight with budget as there would be if you was building with something cheap like an fx6300 for ok performance.
But I'm a bit unsure about the CPU Cooler. If I am planning on overclocking, what sort of cooler should I be going for? The OP lists Noctua as the brand of choice, and of those recommended heatsinks, only the NH-U12S and the NH-D14 are listed as compatible with what I have so far. I'm not knowledgable at all in coolers, so I'm not sure which one is better. The 212 in my original build was recommended to me by a friend, who got that type for his i7.
On October 08 2014 08:04 Firkraag8 wrote: Decided to benchmark the 980 too, don't know if this is good or bad but it was a bit odd that my lowest point was 8fps something must have activated in the background for a split second or something:
Neither the CPU or GPU is overclocked and I haven't formatted the computer since upgrading from 670 to 980 I think I'll wait for Windows 10.
Clock it up, i've hit 84.4 on a 970 when i'm not power limited but 82fps or a hair over is easy to reproduce :D
Your temp says 80c. At about 74-79c, they start to throttle away from boost clocks. I had no trouble staying waaaaaaay below those values with twin frozr 5 cooler.
I think most or all of these cards can set 8000mhz memory without big issues, but you start to get very small errors and artifacts that can be invisible to human eye, i've been using the OCCT gpu 3d test, with a tdp limit so that my core clock runs lower and nowhere near power limit (it's a very power intensive test) and memory clock stays high. That tells you easily where errors are getting through and where they are not
^errors fast at 4000mhz (*2 = 8000mhz effective) but none for 10 min test on 3900mhz (7800)
You're wrong, GPU boost 2.0 targets 80 degrees on reference design. They do not throttle at this point. At 80c it will only adjust fan speed up or down to hit this mark and in my case it does 80c at 45% fanspeed.
Also did a unigine valley, do preferr that one since it has 1080p in Extreme HD setting. + Show Spoiler +
As you can see there also it maintains its 1400 boost clock and 3500(7000) memory clock at 80.
I've had two cards with GPU boost 2.0, this one i've never let reach ~75-80c so i dunno, but my last one behaved exactly like that.
If it approached 80c (there's a sensor in the GPU that checks this like 10-100x per second, IIRC) then it would very quickly throttle away from boost clocks - that was about 1293mhz, to around 1150mhz - and when it got there, it would ramp up fans further. The performance loss would come before the fan speed increase, and it caused some annoying issues for me for a little while. As far as nvidia is concerned, officially, boost clocks are not really supposed to be maintained, and they are the first thing to go AFAIK as soon as stuff gets hot or hits TDP limits. There might be some variance in behavior based on bios, i know for a fact that there's an MSI thing that lets you set if the default behavior is fans ramping up or clock speeds dropping, there's a Gaming, Silent and OC mode selectable
Also, the Unigine clock speed report for me is not only inaccurate, but it never updates after i launch the program, ever (with my windforce 770 or msi gaming 970) so i can't use that as a judge of if clock speeds are being maintained. I'm using MSI Afterburner and GPU-Z for that
Also did a unigine valley, do preferr that one since it has 1080p in Extreme HD setting.
I'l run Valley too - on Overclock.net, people running Heaven 4.0 usually manually took the Extreme preset, AFAIK, and then set it to 1920x1080. That's a 1.44x increase in resolution over 1600x900, so it does significantly affect performance and change things like GPU scaling
I'm getting ~65fps on Valley 1080p extreme HD preset with 1500/7800 (my super stable settings) so yours is a bit stronger there, i think you can hit above 75 though with manually set clock speeds. I think some people might do 80 on 980's on air, with around 1550 or maybe close to 1600mhz if it's neccesary to hit that high, but 75 seems much more achievable
You were right in that the clock count in unigine was false. My card runs at 1253 fully boosted, and when it hits 80 it shifts up and down between 1227 and 1253 which is hardly a throttle to care about but still it's there. The image is after looping valley a few times.
I can do about 1500 on 1.2v, you have plenty of room for more performance there - i'm curious why it's so hot, though, those temperatures are awful for a 970/980.
On October 08 2014 10:35 Cyro wrote: I can do about 1500 on 1.2v, you have plenty of room for more performance there - i'm curious why it's so hot, though, those temperatures are awful for a 970/980.
I'm guessing since it's a reference card, and fanspeed is only running at 50%? Perhaps I should install a fan on the top of the case as exhaust. You're right I could overclock it, and when I feel the need to I will and install the extra fan.
Hi there, I need some advice to decide the graphic card. 1080p and mostly playing old games like sc2, dota2 and civ4, maybe some newest games from time to time. My initial plan is to pick a gtx970, but the price is so damn high here. The red cards are actually better for boinc, in which i am interested atm. They are much cheaper, but it seems like they suck at anything except for gpu computing, and they draw more power. Is super flower gx550 enough to deal with r9 290 and i7 4790k?
On October 08 2014 08:41 Sentenal wrote: My current toaster is finally being unable to play some of the newer games coming out, so I'm probably going to upgrade fairly soon. So right now, I'm looking to build a new computer. I've already assembled a build, with most of what I think I might want: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/kzyKNG
I'm not buying a new GPU with this, as I already have one I have bought fairly recently, which is a Radeon R9 270.
The thing I'm most concerned about with this build is whether or not the Heat Sink will be too big for my case. The thing is big as hell in its preview picture, at least. I suppose the same goes for my Power Supply as well, since I'm wondering if it would fit in my case gracefully.
And I guess as an extra, I'll have two free slots of RAM with this build, and I have some extra 2 GB sticks of memory from my current machine. Would it be a bad idea to run like two 8GB sticks and then two 2GB sticks of memory?
You have some big issues aside from just stuff fitting.
Firstly PSU and mobo should fit, they are built to ATX standard, the case probably fits the CPU heatsink too but i'm not certain on supported heights etc. Google should be able to tell you this.
You have a h97 board paired with a 4670k and a hyper 212. You don't need the hyper 212 or a -k CPU unless you're overclocking, but you need a z-series board to overclock (z87/z97) - and on top of that, 4670k is last gen, you would get a 4690k because they have a few features that make them OC better (they're more strictly binned, so clock higher on average with the same voltages, and also have better temperatures due to IHS design changes)
Adding the extra RAM like that, to have 20GB instead of 16GB would probably cost a marginal amount of memory performance (if it's also ddr3-1600) and might be worth doing if you want to use over 16GB of RAM regularly. If not though, it's probably best to leave it - it's only 4GB, and it's more awkward for the system to use and bring all of the memory timings from your faster kit down to the slower one, etc. It's DDR3 so it'd still sell for an ok amount to someone trying to build a cheap system, too.
There's no need for a 750w PSU. Unless you're pushing a quad core i5 and a 270(x) very hard, you probably wont even hit 350w under simultaneous full load for entire system. A good quality 450w PSU is a little overkill for a build like that. The Rosewill Capstone 450w is $60 on newegg, but the 550w-modular one is the same price as that other unit you have selected, but otherwise better.
If you do plan on overclocking a 4690k, it's probably wise to take a better cooler than a 212 because they're more thermally limited than something like a 1'st-2'nd gen core CPU and there's not as much reason to be tight with budget as there would be if you was building with something cheap like an fx6300 for ok performance.
But I'm a bit unsure about the CPU Cooler. If I am planning on overclocking, what sort of cooler should I be going for? The OP lists Noctua as the brand of choice, and of those recommended heatsinks, only the NH-U12S and the NH-D14 are listed as compatible with what I have so far. I'm not knowledgable at all in coolers, so I'm not sure which one is better. The 212 in my original build was recommended to me by a friend, who got that type for his i7.
Still needs a z97 mobo~
Something like an NH-D15 or h105 is high end, but probably really expensive and overkill. There should be coolers between that and the $25 hyper212 though. $35 is too much for a hyper 212, the evo edition isn't that much better. It was mainly bought when CPU's were less thermally limited, or just because $20-25 wasn't expensive.
I guess a u14s at ~$70 is usable but that price is still pretty painful compared to other hardware prices in the US. If you're not bothered about pushing overclocks, a $25 hyper 212+ is ok for an i5.
On October 08 2014 10:41 heaveshade wrote: Hi there, I need some advice to decide the graphic card. 1080p and mostly playing old games like sc2, dota2 and civ4, maybe some newest games from time to time. My initial plan is to pick a gtx970, but the price is so damn high here. The red cards are actually better for boinc, in which i am interested atm. They are much cheaper, but it seems like they suck at anything except for gpu computing, and they draw more power. Is super flower gx550 enough to deal with r9 290 and i7 4790k?
Yes, but it'd be at high load for simultaneous 100% load on CPU and GPU at the same time with very aggressive OC's on both
On October 08 2014 08:41 Sentenal wrote: My current toaster is finally being unable to play some of the newer games coming out, so I'm probably going to upgrade fairly soon. So right now, I'm looking to build a new computer. I've already assembled a build, with most of what I think I might want: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/kzyKNG
I'm not buying a new GPU with this, as I already have one I have bought fairly recently, which is a Radeon R9 270.
The thing I'm most concerned about with this build is whether or not the Heat Sink will be too big for my case. The thing is big as hell in its preview picture, at least. I suppose the same goes for my Power Supply as well, since I'm wondering if it would fit in my case gracefully.
And I guess as an extra, I'll have two free slots of RAM with this build, and I have some extra 2 GB sticks of memory from my current machine. Would it be a bad idea to run like two 8GB sticks and then two 2GB sticks of memory?
You have some big issues aside from just stuff fitting.
Firstly PSU and mobo should fit, they are built to ATX standard, the case probably fits the CPU heatsink too but i'm not certain on supported heights etc. Google should be able to tell you this.
You have a h97 board paired with a 4670k and a hyper 212. You don't need the hyper 212 or a -k CPU unless you're overclocking, but you need a z-series board to overclock (z87/z97) - and on top of that, 4670k is last gen, you would get a 4690k because they have a few features that make them OC better (they're more strictly binned, so clock higher on average with the same voltages, and also have better temperatures due to IHS design changes)
Adding the extra RAM like that, to have 20GB instead of 16GB would probably cost a marginal amount of memory performance (if it's also ddr3-1600) and might be worth doing if you want to use over 16GB of RAM regularly. If not though, it's probably best to leave it - it's only 4GB, and it's more awkward for the system to use and bring all of the memory timings from your faster kit down to the slower one, etc. It's DDR3 so it'd still sell for an ok amount to someone trying to build a cheap system, too.
There's no need for a 750w PSU. Unless you're pushing a quad core i5 and a 270(x) very hard, you probably wont even hit 350w under simultaneous full load for entire system. A good quality 450w PSU is a little overkill for a build like that. The Rosewill Capstone 450w is $60 on newegg, but the 550w-modular one is the same price as that other unit you have selected, but otherwise better.
If you do plan on overclocking a 4690k, it's probably wise to take a better cooler than a 212 because they're more thermally limited than something like a 1'st-2'nd gen core CPU and there's not as much reason to be tight with budget as there would be if you was building with something cheap like an fx6300 for ok performance.
But I'm a bit unsure about the CPU Cooler. If I am planning on overclocking, what sort of cooler should I be going for? The OP lists Noctua as the brand of choice, and of those recommended heatsinks, only the NH-U12S and the NH-D14 are listed as compatible with what I have so far. I'm not knowledgable at all in coolers, so I'm not sure which one is better. The 212 in my original build was recommended to me by a friend, who got that type for his i7.
Still needs a z97 mobo~
Something like an NH-D15 or h105 is high end, but probably really expensive and overkill. There should be coolers between that and the $25 hyper212 though. $35 is too much for a hyper 212, the evo edition isn't that much better. It was mainly bought when CPU's were less thermally limited, or just because $20-25 wasn't expensive.
I guess a u14s at ~$70 is usable but that price is still pretty painful compared to other hardware prices in the US. If you're not bothered about pushing overclocks, a $25 hyper 212+ is ok for an i5.
On October 08 2014 08:41 Sentenal wrote: My current toaster is finally being unable to play some of the newer games coming out, so I'm probably going to upgrade fairly soon. So right now, I'm looking to build a new computer. I've already assembled a build, with most of what I think I might want: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/kzyKNG
I'm not buying a new GPU with this, as I already have one I have bought fairly recently, which is a Radeon R9 270.
The thing I'm most concerned about with this build is whether or not the Heat Sink will be too big for my case. The thing is big as hell in its preview picture, at least. I suppose the same goes for my Power Supply as well, since I'm wondering if it would fit in my case gracefully.
And I guess as an extra, I'll have two free slots of RAM with this build, and I have some extra 2 GB sticks of memory from my current machine. Would it be a bad idea to run like two 8GB sticks and then two 2GB sticks of memory?
You have some big issues aside from just stuff fitting.
Firstly PSU and mobo should fit, they are built to ATX standard, the case probably fits the CPU heatsink too but i'm not certain on supported heights etc. Google should be able to tell you this.
You have a h97 board paired with a 4670k and a hyper 212. You don't need the hyper 212 or a -k CPU unless you're overclocking, but you need a z-series board to overclock (z87/z97) - and on top of that, 4670k is last gen, you would get a 4690k because they have a few features that make them OC better (they're more strictly binned, so clock higher on average with the same voltages, and also have better temperatures due to IHS design changes)
Adding the extra RAM like that, to have 20GB instead of 16GB would probably cost a marginal amount of memory performance (if it's also ddr3-1600) and might be worth doing if you want to use over 16GB of RAM regularly. If not though, it's probably best to leave it - it's only 4GB, and it's more awkward for the system to use and bring all of the memory timings from your faster kit down to the slower one, etc. It's DDR3 so it'd still sell for an ok amount to someone trying to build a cheap system, too.
There's no need for a 750w PSU. Unless you're pushing a quad core i5 and a 270(x) very hard, you probably wont even hit 350w under simultaneous full load for entire system. A good quality 450w PSU is a little overkill for a build like that. The Rosewill Capstone 450w is $60 on newegg, but the 550w-modular one is the same price as that other unit you have selected, but otherwise better.
If you do plan on overclocking a 4690k, it's probably wise to take a better cooler than a 212 because they're more thermally limited than something like a 1'st-2'nd gen core CPU and there's not as much reason to be tight with budget as there would be if you was building with something cheap like an fx6300 for ok performance.
But I'm a bit unsure about the CPU Cooler. If I am planning on overclocking, what sort of cooler should I be going for? The OP lists Noctua as the brand of choice, and of those recommended heatsinks, only the NH-U12S and the NH-D14 are listed as compatible with what I have so far. I'm not knowledgable at all in coolers, so I'm not sure which one is better. The 212 in my original build was recommended to me by a friend, who got that type for his i7.
Still needs a z97 mobo~
Something like an NH-D15 or h105 is high end, but probably really expensive and overkill. There should be coolers between that and the $25 hyper212 though. $35 is too much for a hyper 212, the evo edition isn't that much better. It was mainly bought when CPU's were less thermally limited, or just because $20-25 wasn't expensive.
I guess a u14s at ~$70 is usable but that price is still pretty painful compared to other hardware prices in the US. If you're not bothered about pushing overclocks, a $25 hyper 212+ is ok for an i5.
If you're just going to game you won't need more than 8gb of ram and be prepared to update the firmware of your SSD once samsung fixes the problem it currently has. I know nothing about that case, but other than that it all looks good.
On October 08 2014 10:41 heaveshade wrote: Hi there, I need some advice to decide the graphic card. 1080p and mostly playing old games like sc2, dota2 and civ4, maybe some newest games from time to time. My initial plan is to pick a gtx970, but the price is so damn high here. The red cards are actually better for boinc, in which i am interested atm. They are much cheaper, but it seems like they suck at anything except for gpu computing, and they draw more power. Is super flower gx550 enough to deal with r9 290 and i7 4790k?
Yes, but it'd be at high load for simultaneous 100% load on CPU and GPU at the same time with very aggressive OC's on both
On October 08 2014 08:41 Sentenal wrote: My current toaster is finally being unable to play some of the newer games coming out, so I'm probably going to upgrade fairly soon. So right now, I'm looking to build a new computer. I've already assembled a build, with most of what I think I might want: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/kzyKNG
I'm not buying a new GPU with this, as I already have one I have bought fairly recently, which is a Radeon R9 270.
The thing I'm most concerned about with this build is whether or not the Heat Sink will be too big for my case. The thing is big as hell in its preview picture, at least. I suppose the same goes for my Power Supply as well, since I'm wondering if it would fit in my case gracefully.
And I guess as an extra, I'll have two free slots of RAM with this build, and I have some extra 2 GB sticks of memory from my current machine. Would it be a bad idea to run like two 8GB sticks and then two 2GB sticks of memory?
You have some big issues aside from just stuff fitting.
Firstly PSU and mobo should fit, they are built to ATX standard, the case probably fits the CPU heatsink too but i'm not certain on supported heights etc. Google should be able to tell you this.
You have a h97 board paired with a 4670k and a hyper 212. You don't need the hyper 212 or a -k CPU unless you're overclocking, but you need a z-series board to overclock (z87/z97) - and on top of that, 4670k is last gen, you would get a 4690k because they have a few features that make them OC better (they're more strictly binned, so clock higher on average with the same voltages, and also have better temperatures due to IHS design changes)
Adding the extra RAM like that, to have 20GB instead of 16GB would probably cost a marginal amount of memory performance (if it's also ddr3-1600) and might be worth doing if you want to use over 16GB of RAM regularly. If not though, it's probably best to leave it - it's only 4GB, and it's more awkward for the system to use and bring all of the memory timings from your faster kit down to the slower one, etc. It's DDR3 so it'd still sell for an ok amount to someone trying to build a cheap system, too.
There's no need for a 750w PSU. Unless you're pushing a quad core i5 and a 270(x) very hard, you probably wont even hit 350w under simultaneous full load for entire system. A good quality 450w PSU is a little overkill for a build like that. The Rosewill Capstone 450w is $60 on newegg, but the 550w-modular one is the same price as that other unit you have selected, but otherwise better.
If you do plan on overclocking a 4690k, it's probably wise to take a better cooler than a 212 because they're more thermally limited than something like a 1'st-2'nd gen core CPU and there's not as much reason to be tight with budget as there would be if you was building with something cheap like an fx6300 for ok performance.
But I'm a bit unsure about the CPU Cooler. If I am planning on overclocking, what sort of cooler should I be going for? The OP lists Noctua as the brand of choice, and of those recommended heatsinks, only the NH-U12S and the NH-D14 are listed as compatible with what I have so far. I'm not knowledgable at all in coolers, so I'm not sure which one is better. The 212 in my original build was recommended to me by a friend, who got that type for his i7.
Still needs a z97 mobo~
Something like an NH-D15 or h105 is high end, but probably really expensive and overkill. There should be coolers between that and the $25 hyper212 though. $35 is too much for a hyper 212, the evo edition isn't that much better. It was mainly bought when CPU's were less thermally limited, or just because $20-25 wasn't expensive.
I guess a u14s at ~$70 is usable but that price is still pretty painful compared to other hardware prices in the US. If you're not bothered about pushing overclocks, a $25 hyper 212+ is ok for an i5.
If you're just going to game you won't need more than 8gb of ram and be prepared to update the firmware of your SSD once samsung fixes the problem it currently has. I know nothing about that case, but other than that it all looks good.
Out of curiosity, what current problem Samsung has?
On October 08 2014 08:41 Sentenal wrote: My current toaster is finally being unable to play some of the newer games coming out, so I'm probably going to upgrade fairly soon. So right now, I'm looking to build a new computer. I've already assembled a build, with most of what I think I might want: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/kzyKNG
I'm not buying a new GPU with this, as I already have one I have bought fairly recently, which is a Radeon R9 270.
The thing I'm most concerned about with this build is whether or not the Heat Sink will be too big for my case. The thing is big as hell in its preview picture, at least. I suppose the same goes for my Power Supply as well, since I'm wondering if it would fit in my case gracefully.
And I guess as an extra, I'll have two free slots of RAM with this build, and I have some extra 2 GB sticks of memory from my current machine. Would it be a bad idea to run like two 8GB sticks and then two 2GB sticks of memory?
You have some big issues aside from just stuff fitting.
Firstly PSU and mobo should fit, they are built to ATX standard, the case probably fits the CPU heatsink too but i'm not certain on supported heights etc. Google should be able to tell you this.
You have a h97 board paired with a 4670k and a hyper 212. You don't need the hyper 212 or a -k CPU unless you're overclocking, but you need a z-series board to overclock (z87/z97) - and on top of that, 4670k is last gen, you would get a 4690k because they have a few features that make them OC better (they're more strictly binned, so clock higher on average with the same voltages, and also have better temperatures due to IHS design changes)
Adding the extra RAM like that, to have 20GB instead of 16GB would probably cost a marginal amount of memory performance (if it's also ddr3-1600) and might be worth doing if you want to use over 16GB of RAM regularly. If not though, it's probably best to leave it - it's only 4GB, and it's more awkward for the system to use and bring all of the memory timings from your faster kit down to the slower one, etc. It's DDR3 so it'd still sell for an ok amount to someone trying to build a cheap system, too.
There's no need for a 750w PSU. Unless you're pushing a quad core i5 and a 270(x) very hard, you probably wont even hit 350w under simultaneous full load for entire system. A good quality 450w PSU is a little overkill for a build like that. The Rosewill Capstone 450w is $60 on newegg, but the 550w-modular one is the same price as that other unit you have selected, but otherwise better.
If you do plan on overclocking a 4690k, it's probably wise to take a better cooler than a 212 because they're more thermally limited than something like a 1'st-2'nd gen core CPU and there's not as much reason to be tight with budget as there would be if you was building with something cheap like an fx6300 for ok performance.
But I'm a bit unsure about the CPU Cooler. If I am planning on overclocking, what sort of cooler should I be going for? The OP lists Noctua as the brand of choice, and of those recommended heatsinks, only the NH-U12S and the NH-D14 are listed as compatible with what I have so far. I'm not knowledgable at all in coolers, so I'm not sure which one is better. The 212 in my original build was recommended to me by a friend, who got that type for his i7.
Still needs a z97 mobo~
Something like an NH-D15 or h105 is high end, but probably really expensive and overkill. There should be coolers between that and the $25 hyper212 though. $35 is too much for a hyper 212, the evo edition isn't that much better. It was mainly bought when CPU's were less thermally limited, or just because $20-25 wasn't expensive.
I guess a u14s at ~$70 is usable but that price is still pretty painful compared to other hardware prices in the US. If you're not bothered about pushing overclocks, a $25 hyper 212+ is ok for an i5.
If you're just going to game you won't need more than 8gb of ram and be prepared to update the firmware of your SSD once samsung fixes the problem it currently has. I know nothing about that case, but other than that it all looks good.
Out of curiosity, what current problem Samsung has?
He said that originally but it's way too hard to justify a 5820k and expensive mobo, RAM, cooling over just a 4690k for a gaming system. Not sure why such high emphasis on additional CPU cores in the first place
Btw guys a few benchmarks for 970, msi gaming set to minimum sustained fan speeds (570rpm)
Unfortunately i'm lacking some controls so it's not as good as it could be. The stock voltage is rather high (gives me 1315mhz when i can run 1516 on it) but undervolt controls are not working right now, and clock offsets don't apply when you're below boost clock ranges so i can't adjust it and see if there's room for lower volts etc.
50% power limit - reporting ~57% under load, memory set to 6000mhz, core hovering around 1040: (max temp 54c)
---
I tried to target under 70c here, but i missed slightly. 83% power limit, core hovering around 1450mhz, memory at 7800mhz - with a ~70-75% power limit it would much more easily stay under 70c for very long periods of load. Max temp ~73-74c there.
Ignore the reported core clock speeds, they've been wrong for a ton of people on 700/900 series cards (not even close) and i'm quoting the correct speeds
I think you can easily get a system with something like a hr-02 macho, 2 case fans, an msi gaming 970 and then run everything at 600rpm with sound dampening and get pretty insane performance. This is just using dynamic clock speeds and voltages automatically set by gpu boost 2.0 controlled through target power, it seems very effective and easy to use.
Very nice. 1450 MHz with a fanspeed at 570 rpm gets you 73-74 ? That's pretty damn strong, you could definitely make a silent build from that. Though I'm thinking you could push fan speed a bit higher than that. Say, depending on the case you have, you could close the case and then ramp up fan speed until the fan becomes audible to you. Then you find that audible rpm and have your card run just under that setting. Then you overclock as best you can using that rpm setting to cool the card. Obviously, the more the case has sound dampening, the higher the audible rpm.
I do that with my card, except that instead of going for inaudible I just go for non-intrusive fan speeds. I have a weird fan curve but it basically has my card use a 1980 rpm setting whenever the core is between say 50°C to 75°C. The fact that the rpm is constant makes it much less noticeable than if the fan speed were constantly changing to take temperature change into account.
@Sentenal, why 16 Gb of RAM? Unless you're doing things that specifically call for having a lot of RAM, a good 2x4 Gb kit should be sufficient. I don't like the CM Evo as a CPU cooler, maybe get something else? I don't like investing so little a CPU cooler when you're investing a nice little sum of money into a nice Z97 board.
You have 3 140mm case fans included instead of 2 120mm fans. You have more clearance for tall CPU coolers as well. You get a window as well (if that floats your boat). More importantly, the case is a bit wider so it makes things like cable management easier. Basically for $10 more you get a better case and an extra fan.
Very nice. 1450 MHz with a fanspeed at 570 rpm gets you 73-74 ? That's pretty damn strong, you could definitely make a silent build from that. Though I'm thinking you could push fan speed a bit higher than that. Say, depending on the case you have, you could close the case and then ramp up fan speed until the fan becomes audible to you. Then you find that audible rpm and have your card run just under that setting. Then you overclock as best you can using that rpm setting to cool the card. Obviously, the more the case has sound dampening, the higher the audible rpm.
It would take only ~600-800rpm to comfortably be under 78c (or even 73c) at all times with a hair away from max oc possible (50mhz) but tdp limiting brings temperatures way down and the GPU is much more efficient closer to 1.0v than 1.2v. Keeping the GPU quiet is fortunately one of the easiest parts in a gtx970 silent PC build :D
Lol, Linus posted a video with 4-way SLI 980's. He was running them at ~1100mhz for some really odd reason even in 2-way SLI (say goodbye to a quarter to a third of your performance per card, lol) but lol - with a 5930k at 4ghz and four 980's.. 620w FROM THE WALL power draw in Far Cry 3 (gpu bound i assume, at 4k)
On October 08 2014 07:41 Dingodile wrote: I never did OC. I have amd x6 1055T 2.8Ghz. It's worth to overclock? I've heard you can go to 3.4Ghz or 4.0Ghz with that cpu. What about increased power consumption?
I found a nice yt video, should I just "copy&paste" from that video?
I dont need to go 3.4 or 4.0 but If I feel the difference already at ~3.1Ghz (example: playing sc2 or d3) thats pretty nice without paying new stuff for my pc.
Don't follow a youtube video, maybe follow a guide on www.overclock.net.
You need a suitable motherboard and cooling. For those CPU's, many mobo's allow you to OC, but not all of them are suited for it, some are various levels of good etc.
You'd probably hardly notice a 10% performance gain. 20-50% is where it really starts to be a big deal.
I found ASRock OC Tuner (Mainboard: Asrock SB870 Extreme3). It goes automatically to 3.3Ghz with default OC parameters. Funny thing is I can select speed of my2 3pin case fans, which all doesnt work at BIOS.
On October 08 2014 07:41 Dingodile wrote: I never did OC. I have amd x6 1055T 2.8Ghz. It's worth to overclock? I've heard you can go to 3.4Ghz or 4.0Ghz with that cpu. What about increased power consumption?
I dont need to go 3.4 or 4.0 but If I feel the difference already at ~3.1Ghz (example: playing sc2 or d3) thats pretty nice without paying new stuff for my pc.
Don't follow a youtube video, maybe follow a guide on www.overclock.net.
You need a suitable motherboard and cooling. For those CPU's, many mobo's allow you to OC, but not all of them are suited for it, some are various levels of good etc.
You'd probably hardly notice a 10% performance gain. 20-50% is where it really starts to be a big deal.
I found ASRock OC Tuner (Mainboard: Asrock SB870 Extreme3). It goes automatically to 3.3Ghz with default OC parameters. Funny thing is I can select speed of my2 3pin case fans, which all doesnt work at BIOS.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/T6qgttn.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mlJPDmb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XC7brdB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LmkCEIh.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/c3u1z.png)
![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/c3uff.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8aVftCS.png)
