EPTComputer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread - Page 592
| 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. | ||
|
bluegarfield
Singapore1128 Posts
| ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
I currently own a 2600k and a P67 board. I'd like to find a micro atx board that's compatible and can overclock. As far as I know, both P67,Z68 and Z77 boards are all compatible with sandy bridge generation cpu's, but I can't seem to locate any of them save non overclock versions. Happy bday btw. | ||
|
DickMcFanny
Ireland1076 Posts
"Hi everyone, I'm building a "future-proof" computer that I want to upgrade a tiny bit when the new generation of the GTX 70 Series comes out. So here's my idea: Owned: Case: Lian Li PC TU100A (stock case fan) HDD: Western Digital Blue, 3,5", 5400 RPM, 1 TB SSD: Samsung Evo 840, 256 GB OS: Windows 8.1 Need to buy: PSU: ??? CPU: i5-6500 (stock cooler) GPU: GTX 950 or GTX 750 TI, any sub 19 cm variant RAM: HyperX 2*8 GB, DDR4 MB: Gigabyte H170n-WIFI (I do need WiFi antennae, alas) Future upgrades: Noctua Case Fan Noctua NH9-LI GTX 1070 Gaming expectations: 1080p / 60 / Low - now 1440p / 60 / Medium - when the 1070 comes out Can you check for compatibility and recommend a PSU for me? I'm assuming the GTX 1070 won't have a higher TDP than the 970, so I think 450w or even 400w are fine. The i5-6500 is rated at 65w. Which GPU would you get for the interim? The 950 is good deal better, but the 750 TI can be had for like 70 € used. Between the i5-6500 and the new GTX 970, assuming a 10% performance increase, will either of them bottleneck the other to an unreasonable degree?" | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20341 Posts
 ----------------------------------------------------- "Between the i5-6500 and the new GTX 970, assuming a 10% performance increase, will either of them bottleneck the other to an unreasonable degree?" The "new" 1070 / 1080 cards are probably targetting ~980ti performance, which is about 50-70% faster than a 970 depending on the clock speeds (1.5x for low clocks on the 980ti, 1.7x for roughly matching clocks). They can probably do this while being at the 970 "tier" for die size and power consumption due to architectural and process node advancements. For the answer, it depends what you're trying to do. A better question is "can a 6500 run the games that i want at the FPS that i want?" - The CPU mostly decides the performance that you can get, then the graphics card will then usually decide the resolution and many of the applicable graphics settings. Going from 1080p to 1440p will increase the load on the GPU by 1.7x but barely affect the CPU. What a certain CPU can handle will change a lot depending on the game and what's happening in the game. A CPU might be able to handle 400fps in starcraft 2 when the game starts but only 40fps when there are hundreds of units, for example. Also take note if you're selecting the 6500 for price reasons, the 6600 and 6600k run about 8-9% faster at stock settings due to the increased turbo clock speed availability - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Skylake-S.22_.28quad-core.2C_14_nm.29 | ||
|
Yuljan
2196 Posts
I understand that the GPU is the main limiting feature for VR so I wanted to get a high end pascal once it comes out. Until then I wanted to get a gtx 970 as interim solution. Is it possible to build a computer around for the pascal and still use the gtx970 in the meantime? What is your budget? 2000-3000€ What is your monitor's native resolution? No monitor yet. I do have a beamer though. What games do you intend to play on this computer? What settings? VR games and the rest as well. Settings should be medium/high so its quite future proof for at least 2 years. What do you intend to use the computer for besides gaming? Not much Do you intend to overclock? Dont know how to do that and the benefits. Do you intend to do SLI / Crossfire? Dont know Do you need an operating system? Windows 11 would be the easiest I guess Do you need a monitor or any other peripherals and is this part of your budget? Maybe ill buy a monitor as well but that is not in the budget yet If you have any requirements or brand preferences, please specify. No What country will you be buying your parts in? Germany / the UK. Im moving to the UK in May so I could just wait 3 weeks before buying. If you have any retailer preferences, please specify. | ||
|
teddyoojo
Germany22369 Posts
thoughts? anything bad? anything improvable? probably hardest requirement is gonna be streaming without noticing any lag | ||
|
ezk
Canada239 Posts
MOTHERBOARD: MSI Z170A SLI Plus (or?) MSI Z170A Gaming M7 CPU: Intel Core i5 6600K PROCESSOR COOLING: Cryorig R1 Ultimate (plan to overclock to 4.5ghz) RAM: 16 GB [8 GB X2] DDR4-2800 VIDEO CARD: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 4GB POWERSUPPLY: EVGA 850W B2 HARDDRIVE: 240 GB Kingston HyperX Savage SATA-3 SSD (I have other drives for storage as well) DVD: 24x Dual Layer DVD±R/±RW + CD-R/RW DriveBlack AUDIO: ONBOARD NETWORK: ONBOARD I plan to play games on this computer; trying to get best bang for buck that can last me for a little while On the pre-built computers, there is no i5 6600K cpu for a reason?? | ||
|
Dingodile
4139 Posts
Minimum: Intel Core i3 or AMD Phenom X3 865 4 GB Ram Nvidia GeForce GTX 460, ATI Radeon HD 4850 or Intel HD Graphics 4400 (768 MB VRAM) Recommended: Intel Core i5 or AMD Phenom II X3, 2.8 GHz 6 GB Ram Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 or ATI Radeon HD 7950 (2 GB VRAM) What does "minimum" mean? fluently play is possible? I have X6 T1055, 4GB Ram and GTX 640 OC (1GB VRAM). | ||
|
DickMcFanny
Ireland1076 Posts
On April 09 2016 04:30 Cyro wrote: Thanks @^ ----------------------------------------------------- "Between the i5-6500 and the new GTX 970, assuming a 10% performance increase, will either of them bottleneck the other to an unreasonable degree?" The "new" 1070 / 1080 cards are probably targetting ~980ti performance, which is about 50-70% faster than a 970 depending on the clock speeds (1.5x for low clocks on the 980ti, 1.7x for roughly matching clocks). They can probably do this while being at the 970 "tier" for die size and power consumption due to architectural and process node advancements. For the answer, it depends what you're trying to do. A better question is "can a 6500 run the games that i want at the FPS that i want?" - The CPU mostly decides the performance that you can get, then the graphics card will then usually decide the resolution and many of the applicable graphics settings. Going from 1080p to 1440p will increase the load on the GPU by 1.7x but barely affect the CPU. What a certain CPU can handle will change a lot depending on the game and what's happening in the game. A CPU might be able to handle 400fps in starcraft 2 when the game starts but only 40fps when there are hundreds of units, for example. Also take note if you're selecting the 6500 for price reasons, the 6600 and 6600k run about 8-9% faster at stock settings due to the increased turbo clock speed availability - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Skylake-S.22_.28quad-core.2C_14_nm.29 Thanks so much for the quality response as per usual! I decided the 6600 is probably not worth the price premium of 80 € over the 6400, so I went with a used 6400. For 120 €, the 6400 is barely more expensive than the i3-6100 and I reckon it should get some more oomph in most games due to turbo-boost. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25561 Posts
On April 11 2016 20:43 Dingodile wrote: Overwatch system requirements: Minimum: Intel Core i3 or AMD Phenom X3 865 4 GB Ram Nvidia GeForce GTX 460, ATI Radeon HD 4850 or Intel HD Graphics 4400 (768 MB VRAM) Recommended: Intel Core i5 or AMD Phenom II X3, 2.8 GHz 6 GB Ram Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 or ATI Radeon HD 7950 (2 GB VRAM) What does "minimum" mean? fluently play is possible? I have X6 T1055, 4GB Ram and GTX 640 OC (1GB VRAM). Usually "minimum" means that you've met the minimal technical specifications to run the game without crashing. You should expect slowdowns and problems trying to play the game in any sort of stress (for example, lots of things on the screen, high resolution, wanting a fast framerate, etc). I would almost never play any real time or 3d game with just minimum settings. Basically just imagine a bunch of lawyers and salespeople in a room with some engineers. Businesspeople: So, what are the requirements for running the game? Engineering: Well, you want 4 cores, 6 gigs of ram.. Sales guy: Whoa, whoa whoa. We can't close down our market like that. We gotta sell to guys using older rigs. What if you run on low settings? Engineering: Well, there's still requirements. You really are going to need 6 gigs of ram, you see, because graphical settings.. Sales: WAIT! I've got it! What if you run the game on minimum settings? Engeineering: Well... Sales guy: Actually, even better: What's literally the slowest computer that can launch this game and play most of it with 10 fps or more without crashing more than, let's say, once per hour? Engineering: I mean, technically an i3 with 4 gigs of ram could run this without crashing... too often, I guess? Sales guy: Oh man, I'm so smart, time to give myself a raise. We'll just slap that on the box. Thanks, nerd! This btw is overestimation of how good things are because it's assuming sales takes feedback from engineering | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20341 Posts
The CPU is also dated but it was good at the time, unlike the 640. Specs say that one should be alright, though maybe not amazing. | ||
|
DickMcFanny
Ireland1076 Posts
On April 12 2016 04:34 Blazinghand wrote: Usually "minimum" means that you've met the minimal technical specifications to run the game without crashing. You should expect slowdowns and problems trying to play the game in any sort of stress (for example, lots of things on the screen, high resolution, wanting a fast framerate, etc). I would almost never play any real time or 3d game with just minimum settings. Basically just imagine a bunch of lawyers and salespeople in a room with some engineers. Businesspeople: So, what are the requirements for running the game? Engineering: Well, you want 4 cores, 6 gigs of ram.. Sales guy: Whoa, whoa whoa. We can't close down our market like that. We gotta sell to guys using older rigs. What if you run on low settings? Engineering: Well, there's still requirements. You really are going to need 6 gigs of ram, you see, because graphical settings.. Sales: WAIT! I've got it! What if you run the game on minimum settings? Engeineering: Well... Sales guy: Actually, even better: What's literally the slowest computer that can launch this game and play most of it with 10 fps or more without crashing more than, let's say, once per hour? Engineering: I mean, technically an i3 with 4 gigs of ram could run this without crashing... too often, I guess? Sales guy: Oh man, I'm so smart, time to give myself a raise. We'll just slap that on the box. Thanks, nerd! This btw is overestimation of how good things are because it's assuming sales takes feedback from engineering That's maybe the case at Ubisoft... | ||
|
parkufarku
882 Posts
| ||
|
EmKey
Korea (South)631 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25561 Posts
Personally, I've found that open source tools on Linux have met all my needs on my custom-built PC. If you do not have any particular need to use OS X-locked software, you should almost certainly use a PC running Windows or Linux rather than a PC running OS X-- it will be much cheaper. If there's software only available on on OS X that you need, then you should buy a PC from Apple. This is a valid and common reason to pick an Apple computer. Basically, that's what it breaks down to-- do you need OS X specific software or not? | ||
|
parkufarku
882 Posts
| ||
|
bluegarfield
Singapore1128 Posts
On April 17 2016 03:12 parkufarku wrote: thanks for the above post. That makes the decision easier, since I just have to research those mac apps. Ultrabook / Macbook cant handle those professional apps...can they? May be you check this out, I skim through it but seem like it covers most of your common questions on the problem | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25561 Posts
On April 17 2016 03:12 parkufarku wrote: thanks for the above post. That makes the decision easier, since I just have to research those mac apps. Ultrabook / Macbook cant handle those professional apps...can they? Macbooks (the laptops made by Apple) range in specs from "can only barely run basic video editors" to "you can do very good video editing on them"-- but they also get quite expensive. This is also true for laptops made by other manufacturers: many are able to edit videos quite well, but they are also cheap crappy ones. For a given amount of cash, other manufacturers will typically have more powerful laptops, but these laptops will be unable to run OS X. Therefore, if you do not want OS X, you should buy a laptop not made by Apple, since they are cheaper. If the software you need is only available for OS X, you should by an Apple Macbook Pro. Probably, you will need to get an expensive one if you want to edit video. I know many programmers who use Apple Macbook Pros, and the high-end ones they use easily cost over $2,000 USD. However, for a variety of reasons, they prefer OS X, and that is only available on computers manufactured by Apple, so they eat the cost. The first step is to determine if your particular software needs mean OS X is right for you. | ||
|
Craton
United States17294 Posts
| ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
Installation Failure: Windows failed to install the following update with error 0x800F0922: Cumulative Update for Windows 10 for x64-based Systems (KB3147461). I've deleted files and folders from: C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution\Download C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution\DataStore The problem is still not fixed though. I bought a really cheap Windows 7 before to upgrade to Windows 10, could it be the key is fishy or is this a legitimate Windows failure? I've not got any popups which deny activation though. The easiest solution might be to reinstall, but I'd rather avoid it if possible. | ||
| ||
