|
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 Kingdom20340 Posts
On October 20 2014 01:13 neptunusfisk wrote:Show nested quote +On october bla 2014 01:38 Myrmidon wrote:On October 19 2014 06:53 neptunusfisk wrote:If this build was to be done today, a few months later, what would some reasonable changes be?  Nothing except browsing around for slightly better deals in case prices changed. There's been nothing relevant and new in the product categories you're looking at. And if you get the 840 EVO, first thing you want to do after install is run the update to correct the issue somewhat recently discovered and fixed. Some analysis and details, link to download here: http://techreport.com/review/27212/samsung-840-evo-update-fixes-slow-reads-with-old-data Oh, ok I'm wondering if changing CPU and RAM from 4590 + 2x4GB to Intel Core i5 4690K 3,5 GHz, 6MB - 1865 kr HyperX Fury (2x8GB) CL10 1600MHz - 1449 kr is a compatible and reasonable investment for the future. Any thoughts?
You can't OC 4690k without a z97 board, so it's kinda silly to get just one OC part.. yet if you buy two, it's kinda silly not to get all three (cooler as well, to run ~4.6ghz instead of ~4ghz). The performance improvements you'd get from OC vs stock are "only" around 20-25% or so for those CPU's, while a similar investment on graphics card can probably improve performance by a lot more than that in that area
Extra RAM only helps if you are using it, so if you want to regularly use over 8GB of RAM then it makes sense to buy. If not, it doesn't.
If you worry about the future then you can just buy a board with four RAM slots and use 2x4gb, so that you can run dual channel now and still get 16GB in the future with only the cost of adding 8GB of RAM
|
On October 19 2014 14:04 JustinR wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Hey Noob here , never built a computer . I have a 70$ pentium 4 that can't even run the most simple games All I want is a computer that can run games like Sc2 at medium or higher , LoL , and maybe the upcoming heroes of the storm game . Oh and get sales from steam . So I built this using this guide : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/closed-threads/201894-guide-to-building-a-budget-pcand this site http://pcpartpicker.com/I have a CD of windows 7 at home . I have a cheap monitor , I think its 720p Is this good ? total price on http://pcpartpicker.com/ is 412.50$ AMD Athlon X2 370K 4.2GHz Dual-Core Processor $56.23 Motherboard Gigabyte GA-F2A55M-S1 Micro ATX FM2+ Motherboard $44.69 Memory Kingston 4GB (1 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory $38.99 Hitachi Ultrastar 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive $38.50 $42.99 Video Card Galaxy GeForce GTX 460 768MB Video Card $110.00 NZXT Gamma Classic (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case $50.64 Power Supply Antec EarthWatts Green 380W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply $47.99 Sound Card Creative Labs Audigy SE 24-bit 96 KHz Sound Card Thank you
You don't need an external soundcard, motherboards come with onboard sound.
|
On October 20 2014 01:46 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2014 01:13 neptunusfisk wrote:On october bla 2014 01:38 Myrmidon wrote:On October 19 2014 06:53 neptunusfisk wrote:If this build was to be done today, a few months later, what would some reasonable changes be? Nothing except browsing around for slightly better deals in case prices changed. There's been nothing relevant and new in the product categories you're looking at. And if you get the 840 EVO, first thing you want to do after install is run the update to correct the issue somewhat recently discovered and fixed. Some analysis and details, link to download here: http://techreport.com/review/27212/samsung-840-evo-update-fixes-slow-reads-with-old-data Oh, ok I'm wondering if changing CPU and RAM from 4590 + 2x4GB to Intel Core i5 4690K 3,5 GHz, 6MB - 1865 kr HyperX Fury (2x8GB) CL10 1600MHz - 1449 kr is a compatible and reasonable investment for the future. Any thoughts? You can't OC 4690k without a z97 board, so it's kinda silly to get just one OC part.. yet if you buy two, it's kinda silly not to get all three (cooler as well, to run ~4.6ghz instead of ~4ghz). The performance improvements you'd get from OC vs stock are "only" around 20-25% or so for those CPU's, while a similar investment on graphics card can probably improve performance by a lot more than that in that area Extra RAM only helps if you are using it, so if you want to regularly use over 8GB of RAM then it makes sense to buy. If not, it doesn't. If you worry about the future then you can just buy a board with four RAM slots and use 2x4gb, so that you can run dual channel now and still get 16GB in the future with only the cost of adding 8GB of RAM
Ok so I gather that z97 is bigger and requires another case, and 4690K is not better/worth it if you don't overclock?
Are mATX and ATX power supplys different sizes?
Concerning ram: I know, I just find it so frustrating to have ram run out... perhaps better to only buy 8GB
|
I cant use 840 evo restoration -.-
I have to uninstall some stuff before and I am unable to find the latest ahci driver on asrock official page.
I have this mainboard: http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/870 Extreme3/index.de.asp
Edit: Does someone know which is the latest bios driver for my mainboard? I have BIOS 1.50
|
Z97 boards come in ATX, mATX and even mITX sizes. Though the go-to boards are generally ATX-sized.
If you aren't going to overclock, you're fine with an i5 4670 on an H87, H81 or B85 board. You could also get an i5 4690 with an H97 board if you aren't going to overclock. If you are going to overclock, you get an intel processor with a "k" suffix. e.g. you can overclock the i5 4690k but you can't overclock the i5 4690. There is no use getting a Z97 or Z87 board if you aren't going to overclock.
The i5 4670 is Haswell, clocked at 3.8 GHz and is compatible with Z87, H87, H81 and B85 boards.
The i5 4690 is Haswell refresh, clocked at 3.9 GHz and is compatible with H97 and Z97 boards.
The advantage of getting an i5 4670 over an i5 4690 is that the H81 and B85 boards are cheaper than H97 boards. You lose maybe 0.1 GHz but you save money.
PSUs come in different sizes but most cases will accommodate all the power supplies you'll probably need, so don't worry too much about it.
For RAM it's probably best to get a 2x4 Gb kit and then get some more if you ever actually need it. You won't though, not unless you're doing tasks that specifically require as much RAM as possible (if you aren't sure, it means you don't need more than 8 Gb).
|
United Kingdom20340 Posts
The i5 4670 is Haswell, clocked at 3.8 GHz and is compatible with Z87, H87, H81 and B85 boards.
The i5 4690 is Haswell refresh, clocked at 3.9 GHz and is compatible with H97 and Z97 boards
That's the turbo speed, so the base speed for 4690 is 3.5ghz - it'll do 3.7 max (if tdp allows) with all cores, or 3.9 with 1 core
|
On October 20 2014 02:42 Incognoto wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Z97 boards come in ATX, mATX and even mITX sizes. Though the go-to boards are generally ATX-sized.
If you aren't going to overclock, you're fine with an i5 4670 on an H87, H81 or B85 board. You could also get an i5 4690 with an H97 board if you aren't going to overclock. If you are going to overclock, you get an intel processor with a "k" suffix. e.g. you can overclock the i5 4690k but you can't overclock the i5 4690. There is no use getting a Z97 or Z87 board if you aren't going to overclock.
The i5 4670 is Haswell, clocked at 3.8 GHz and is compatible with Z87, H87, H81 and B85 boards.
The i5 4690 is Haswell refresh, clocked at 3.9 GHz and is compatible with H97 and Z97 boards.
The advantage of getting an i5 4670 over an i5 4690 is that the H81 and B85 boards are cheaper than H97 boards. You lose maybe 0.1 GHz but you save money.
PSUs come in different sizes but most cases will accommodate all the power supplies you'll probably need, so don't worry too much about it.
For RAM it's probably best to get a 2x4 Gb kit and then get some more if you ever actually need it. You won't though, not unless you're doing tasks that specifically require as much RAM as possible (if you aren't sure, it means you don't need more than 8 Gb).
Ok, thanks for the input! Sounds like 4670 is a better choice than 4690 and 4590 then. The B85 board in question and to only buy 8GB RAM also seems reasonable
|
On October 20 2014 03:36 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +The i5 4670 is Haswell, clocked at 3.8 GHz and is compatible with Z87, H87, H81 and B85 boards.
The i5 4690 is Haswell refresh, clocked at 3.9 GHz and is compatible with H97 and Z97 boards That's the turbo speed, so the base speed for 4690 is 3.5ghz - it'll do 3.7 max (if tdp allows) with all cores, or 3.9 with 1 core
Ah, so it would be 3.6 and 3.7 GHz respectively then, since there should be no problem with the tdp. As far as I know anyway, the i5 produces little heat at stock volts. I don't see the point of only one going being faster though, maybe that's just me. Perhaps for opening small, daily programs (web browsers, media players?).
Either way, still only .1 GHz of difference in speed between 4670 and 4690 as the main difference between the two. Obviously Haswell refresh has a better thermal solution but that matters more when thinking about overclocking rather than stock clocks, I guess.
|
|
|
United Kingdom20340 Posts
Obviously Haswell refresh has a better thermal solution
Devil's Canyon (4690k, 4790k) has better thermal solution, Haswell refresh (everything else) does not :D
Confusing, i know
|
On October 20 2014 18:00 Cyro wrote:Devil's Canyon (4690k, 4790k) has better thermal solution, Haswell refresh (everything else) does not :D Confusing, i know
I am going to blow my brains out
i'm never talking about haswell refresh again unless i specifically look it up and have a source
|
United Kingdom20340 Posts
On October 21 2014 02:19 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2014 18:00 Cyro wrote:Obviously Haswell refresh has a better thermal solution Devil's Canyon (4690k, 4790k) has better thermal solution, Haswell refresh (everything else) does not :D Confusing, i know I am going to blow my brains out i'm never talking about haswell refresh again unless i specifically look it up and have a source
It's usually better to pretend that they don't exist unless you want a 4690k/4790k :D :D
|
SYSTEM UPGRADE REQUEST[/b]
what is your current build?[/b]
i7 5820k
GTX 770 Asus OC edition
250GB samsung solid state
16GB of crucial RAM
Gigabyte UD4 Motherboard
What is your monitor's native resolution?
144HZ
Why do you want to upgrade? What do you want to achieve with the upgrade?
I lag in 3v3's when graphics are set to ultra I typically get 30fps or so
What is your budget?
Whatever it takes to play team games on ultra at 120 FPS at all times
What country will you be buying your parts in?
U.S.
If you have any brand or retailer preferences, please specify.
intel/Nvidia
|
On October 21 2014 04:54 PROconstantine wrote:
SYSTEM UPGRADE REQUEST
what is your current build?
i7 5820k
GTX 770 Asus OC edition
250GB samsung solid state
16GB of crucial RAM
Gigabyte UD4 Motherboard
What is your monitor's native resolution?
144HZ
Why do you want to upgrade? What do you want to achieve with the upgrade?
I lag in 3v3's when graphics are set to ultra I typically get 30fps or so
What is your budget?
Whatever it takes to play team games on ultra at 120 FPS at all times
What country will you be buying your parts in?
U.S.
If you have any brand or retailer preferences, please specify.
intel/Nvidia [/b][/b]
GTX 970 in SLI should push todays games which scales well in SLI on ultra @ 120fps. You won't get that kind of performance on single cards.
|
United Kingdom20340 Posts
Why do you want to upgrade? What do you want to achieve with the upgrade?
I lag in 3v3's when graphics are set to ultra I typically get 30fps or so
What is your budget?
Whatever it takes to play team games on ultra at 120 FPS at all times
You're CPU bound. Sc2 can't run at those framerates on any hardware today. It's heavily reliant on singlethreaded performance and will just max one core with minor load on a second core.
Clock CPU and RAM higher. 4.5ghz CPU core, more if possible. RAM at whatever is achievable without bad timings. 3000mhz? I dunno what's really achievable with ddr4 or whatever modules you have and how they run, respond to voltage etc. What OC's are you running atm?
Turn physics off, effects to medium and reflections of if you want maximum FPS, other graphics settings wont even really change your minimum FPS regardless of what they're set to - a 770 is more than enough for the best minimum FPS possible on sc2 at max settings.
GTX 970 in SLI should push todays games which scales well in SLI on ultra @ 120fps. You won't get that kind of performance on single cards.
Not much point adding graphical hardware, a single 760 can effortlessly hold game at max settings and be at low load during the periods of minimum FPS because it has so few frames to render
I just checked the toughest 1v1 replay i have (bc/raven fleet vs corruptors etc over a field of missile turrets which hurt performance a lot because they don't cost supply and they fire quickly with two projectiles per shot) Haswell at 4.5ghz with 2200c9 RAM could handle min FPS ~18 with physics on, 26 with it off. 970 was at ~1100mhz and ~10% load on max graphical settings (so underclocked from 1500 because it had no work to do) - in this case there's just no system upgrade to make for that engine, aside from running CPU/RAM at higher performance settings if you have not tuned them already
Even if you could maintain 120fps, the starcraft 2 engine (also used for heroes of the storm) has several motion quality issues that means you need about ~200-250+fps to get the motion quality that you'd normally get from a near-perfect 120fps game/video, so it's a pretty futile performance chase
|
Ok, so the B85 board that I was linked is no longer available anywhere it seems so I'm lost again.
What is a good board to go with a i5-4670 or similar that preferably has 4 ram slots?
edit: So I found it in a shop in my city. Will probably be ok.
|
On October 21 2014 05:16 Cyro wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Why do you want to upgrade? What do you want to achieve with the upgrade?
I lag in 3v3's when graphics are set to ultra I typically get 30fps or so
What is your budget?
Whatever it takes to play team games on ultra at 120 FPS at all times You're CPU bound. Sc2 can't run at those framerates on any hardware today. It's heavily reliant on singlethreaded performance and will just max one core with minor load on a second core. Clock CPU and RAM higher. 4.5ghz CPU core, more if possible. RAM at whatever is achievable without bad timings. 3000mhz? I dunno what's really achievable with ddr4 or whatever modules you have and how they run, respond to voltage etc. What OC's are you running atm? Turn physics off, effects to medium and reflections of if you want maximum FPS, other graphics settings wont even really change your minimum FPS regardless of what they're set to - a 770 is more than enough for the best minimum FPS possible on sc2 at max settings. GTX 970 in SLI should push todays games which scales well in SLI on ultra @ 120fps. You won't get that kind of performance on single cards. Not much point adding graphical hardware.. that's not where the problem is. A single 760 can effortlessly hold game at max settings and be at low load during the periods of minimum FPS because it has so few frames to render I just checked the toughest 1v1 replay i have (bc/raven fleet vs corruptors etc over a field of missile turrets which hurt performance a lot because they don't cost supply and they fire quickly with two projectiles per shot) Haswell at 4.5ghz with 2200c9 RAM could handle min FPS ~18 with physics on, 26 with it off. 970 was at ~1100mhz and ~10% load on max graphical settings (so underclocked from 1500 because it had no work to do) - in this case there's just no system upgrade to make for that engine, aside from running CPU/RAM at higher performance settings if you have not tuned them already Even if you could maintain 120fps, the starcraft 2 engine (also used for heroes of the storm) has several motion quality issues that means you need about ~200-250+fps to get the motion quality that you'd normally get from a near-perfect 120fps game/video, so it's a pretty futile performance chase
Of course if it was SC2 he meant, I thought by team games he just meant in general and would include like shooters and such. Of course he meant sc2.. Ya it's just CPU, I lagg a bit with my 980 in lategame or team games also lol.
|
United Kingdom20340 Posts
|
Hi,
I would like your help on building a new computer. I have never done this before, but it doesn't look that hard.
The build that I had in mind is below. My budget is about €700 which is roughly 900 US dollars.
My current computer is getting quite old. (GTS250, i2, 2x2GB RAM) Which is not good enough for Shadow of Mordor. I would like to play that game and future games on medium-high settings.
Before buying all the parts I thought I would ask for some advice. Concretely: Do you see any immediate flaws with this build? (or any easy improvements). And is any part substantially weaker than the other parts. Thanks in advance.
+ Show Spoiler +Motherbord + CPU:
MSI H87-G43 Gaming
Intel Haswell Core i5 4460
Ram:
Crucial 2x4GB, DDR3
Graphics card:
MSI Graphic card PCI-e GeForce GTX770 Gaming OC
Cooling and power supply:
Cooler Master Processor Koeler X Dream i117 Intel
Corsair Power Supply CX600 600W
Harddrive:
Western Digital 1TB SATA600
|
United Kingdom20340 Posts
On October 21 2014 23:32 indubitably wrote:Hi, I would like your help on building a new computer. I have never done this before, but it doesn't look that hard. The build that I had in mind is below. My budget is about €700 which is roughly 900 US dollars. My current computer is getting quite old. (GTS250, i2, 2x2GB RAM) Which is not good enough for Shadow of Mordor. I would like to play that game and future games on medium-high settings. Before buying all the parts I thought I would ask for some advice. Concretely: Do you see any immediate flaws with this build? (or any easy improvements). And is any part substantially weaker than the other parts. Thanks in advance. + Show Spoiler +Motherbord + CPU:
MSI H87-G43 Gaming
Intel Haswell Core i5 4460
Ram:
Crucial 2x4GB, DDR3
Graphics card:
MSI Graphic card PCI-e GeForce GTX770 Gaming OC
Cooling and power supply:
Cooler Master Processor Koeler X Dream i117 Intel
Corsair Power Supply CX600 600W
Harddrive:
Western Digital 1TB SATA600
Some of the Haswell CPU's that were not available at release require h97/z97 unless you have a bios update for support on previous boards, so they can be a bit tricky for compatibility. They're usually only 100mhz faster or maybe a little bit cheaper, so they're basically the same thing (unless you are buying overclocking parts) so it can be better to get one of the CPU's available on release (like a 4570 or 4670) and if not, then take note that you need a h97 board
You don't need 600w for that kind of system, power consumption at load would be only around 250w for everything. There's some good quality ~450w units that are better options, unless you can get a ~cx430 or similar PSU for way cheaper than a great quality PSU
you don't need to buy a CPU cooler (the i117) because the CPU comes with one; pretty much the only reason to buy a cooler with a non-overclocking CPU would be for quieter cooling (if cpu makes a lot of your system noise, which is unlikely.. it's usually gpu and case fans that make more) but for that you'd buy a bigger CPU cooler with something like a very slow 140mm fan. They're more expensive though.
A 280 might be better option because of the 3GB of VRAM and potentially lower prices. Incoming games from ~2014 onwards with this console gen are eating tons of VRAM - You need 4GB of VRAM to max Shadow of Mordor at 1080p. It's not a massive deal to drop a setting there, but 2GB isn't nearly as appealing as 3GB is
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
