|
When using this resource, please read FragKrag's 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. |
@invictus - As to cyberpowerPC, you can probably save ~$500 or get a significantly better computer by building on your own. This is pretty much always the case with pre-build sites like that. In your price range, now is a fine time to buy all the components, except hard drive (but that won't change for months & months). In a year you can probably get a better or cheaper video card, but then you'd have to wait a year.
Perhaps the thing I'd point out the most is that, in a lot of cases, you really can't spend more money to get more performance.
Take processors for instance. What's the difference between an i5-2500k and an i7-2600k? Most people have no idea, but assume the i7 is a significant upgrade. In fact, the i5 is a four-core processor, while the i7 is a four-core processor with hyperthreading - the ability to simulate additional cores useful for a few programs (mostly used in professional applications). They are basically the same speed. For gamers, I know of no game that uses more than 4 cores, so the 'upgrade' to an i7 is basically worthless. The new Intel processors coming out are essentially the same technology as an i5 & i7, but with more actual cores. Again, useful for some purposes but essentially no better than an i5-2500k for gaming. There's just no real way to spend more money to get more performance in gaming beyond an i5-2500k. That's also why so many people overclock an i5-2500k. That'll increase speed (and maybe make a noticeable difference in performance), but spending more money won't.
Video cards run into the same problem. With a single screen, unless you buy a $1000+ giant resolution screen, there's a maximum amount of performance you can use. A 560Ti or a 6950 can pretty much do everything you want and blow away all your games. Yes you can spend more or double up cards - but unless you're running games on three screens or something the vast majority of people don't do, you can't really buy more performance. Maxxed-out graphics is called maxxed-out graphics for a reason: if a card can wring every possible shiny pretty out of a game, a more expensive card simply can't do better. This is the very reason your resolution is one of the questions in the OP survey.
You can't really buy longevity either. Once you hit maximum performance for current generation, it's pointless to spend more. Essentially, a $3,000 computer purchased today won't feel any better in 5 years than a $1,000 computer. Get the $1,000 computer every time. You can always spend money on peripherals or buy another $1,000 computer every few years if you want to feel like you're running the best of the best.
And this is coming from a guy who likes to fantasy window-shop computer parts with a theoretically infinite budget.
What's the point of my post? Here's my advice Invictus: build your own computer. If you're that into a new one, it'll be fun and save you money. Ask here for a list of parts for everything you need, but don't ask for that specific advice until the week you want to buy (the best posters here will actually know what stuff is on special that week, and it's rude to ask over and over). Buy those parts. As long as you outlined exactly what you want your computer to do, even if it's 'be a generically kick-ass computer for all kinds of games and general purposes,' the best posters here will get you exactly the right parts.
Enjoy, and for gods' sake, don't worry that it costs way less than you expected.
If you just want a generic baseline for general pondering, PM me and I'll give you one for a current top-of-the line gaming tower. (Although it won't almost certainly be as good price-wise as an optimized SkyR or other major poster build if you decide you're ready to buy.)
|
On November 11 2011 02:04 Invictus212 wrote:
You mentioned that a core i5 2500K would be an excellent choice for a gamer for the next six months. I reread your line carefully, so I don't take your words out of context. I hope I didn't. Regardless, I want to point out that (ideally) I would like my CPU to be relevant for more than six months (is that possible?) Saying that's it is good enough for another six months, doesn't sell it to me. On the contrary, it makes me wonder if I should get something else.
You also mentioned that the IvyBridge, along with a lot of other components are come out with new generations in the first part of next year. This is why I made my build date around May. I would like to get the newest generation of hardware, if possible. And if it's overpriced, I'm sure a lot of the good hardware that we all drool over today, would go down in price due to the new releases.
I'm pretty sure he meant that for the next 6 or so months, it's the best gaming CPU you could buy. There will be a slightly "better" one at the same price point when Ivy Bridge comes, but there's always "better" hardware just around the corner. That does NOT mean a 2500k will not be competent in performance in 6 months (Ivy Bridge is reportedly at most 10-20%? performance increase, and most people don't even need the full power of the 2500K). Most likely, you won't need to upgrade it for several years. I'm willing to bet at LEAST 3 (but I'm feeling strongly for 5+ since it's such a strong CPU and easy to get to 4.0-4.5GHz), and by that time there will be a new socket and you'll need an entirely new motherboard.
Point being you can keep on waiting forever, and newer and better stuff will always come out, but that doesn't mean that today's hardware won't be competent for several years.
|
Well you can get the best performance by going for a 2700k along with a custom liquidcooling loop with a crazy highflow radiator setup. That way you can spend more money for more performance, but of course there's heavy diminishing returns.
|
On November 11 2011 02:37 Shikyo wrote:
1556$ PC with just a 560 ti? I could probably give you a build with that for like 850 or something
Haha, I didn't know it was a bad GPU. T_T
Like I said, I'm a newb when it comes to this. I made that configuration based on the FPS for SC2 (Ultra Settings) that they reported just so I can benchmark the price of a "good" (good as defined by performance using the metric of FPS) computer.
I really don't have the expertise to say which part is good or bad.... what to include in the build and what not... and so on. This is why I am coming to you guys.
On November 11 2011 02:48 MisterFred wrote:
@invictus - As to cyberpowerPC, you can probably save ~$500 or get a significantly better computer by building on your own. This is pretty much always the case with pre-build sites like that. In your price range, now is a fine time to buy all the components, except hard drive (but that won't change for months & months). In a year you can probably get a better or cheaper video card, but then you'd have to wait a year.
Perhaps the thing I'd point out the most is that, in a lot of cases, you really can't spend more money to get more performance.
Take processors for instance. What's the difference between an i5-2500k and an i7-2600k? Most people have no idea, but assume the i7 is a significant upgrade. In fact, the i5 is a four-core processor, while the i7 is a four-core processor with hyperthreading - the ability to simulate additional cores useful for a few programs (mostly used in professional applications). They are basically the same speed. For gamers, I know of no game that uses more than 4 cores, so the 'upgrade' to an i7 is basically worthless. The new Intel processors coming out are essentially the same technology as an i5 & i7, but with more actual cores. Again, useful for some purposes but essentially no better than an i5-2500k for gaming. There's just no real way to spend more money to get more performance in gaming beyond an i5-2500k. That's also why so many people overclock an i5-2500k. That'll increase speed (and maybe make a noticeable difference in performance), but spending more money won't.
Video cards run into the same problem. With a single screen, unless you buy a $1000+ giant resolution screen, there's a maximum amount of performance you can use. A 560Ti or a 6950 can pretty much do everything you want and blow away all your games. Yes you can spend more or double up cards - but unless you're running games on three screens or something the vast majority of people don't do, you can't really buy more performance. Maxxed-out graphics is called maxxed-out graphics for a reason: if a card can wring every possible shiny pretty out of a game, a more expensive card simply can't do better. This is the very reason your resolution is one of the questions in the OP survey.
You can't really buy longevity either. Once you hit maximum performance for current generation, it's pointless to spend more. Essentially, a $3,000 computer purchased today won't feel any better in 5 years than a $1,000 computer. Get the $1,000 computer every time. You can always spend money on peripherals or buy another $1,000 computer every few years if you want to feel like you're running the best of the best.
And this is coming from a guy who likes to fantasy window-shop computer parts with a theoretically infinite budget.
What's the point of my post? Here's my advice Invictus: build your own computer. If you're that into a new one, it'll be fun and save you money. Ask here for a list of parts for everything you need, but don't ask for that specific advice until the week you want to buy (the best posters here will actually know what stuff is on special that week, and it's rude to ask over and over). Buy those parts. As long as you outlined exactly what you want your computer to do, even if it's 'be a generically kick-ass computer for all kinds of games and general purposes,' the best posters here will get you exactly the right parts.
Enjoy, and for gods' sake, don't worry that it costs way less than you expected.
If you just want a generic baseline for general pondering, PM me and I'll give you one for a current top-of-the line gaming tower. (Although it won't almost certainly be as good price-wise as an optimized SkyR or other major poster build if you decide you're ready to buy.)
Thank you very much for your post MisterFred. I found it very informative, and helpful. I am definitely taking your advice and I will PM you soon to discuss builds. Perhaps, SkyR and other major posters can weigh in with respect to price when I am ready to buy.
You touched upon an important point with respect to high prices and performance. In addition to the performance that I need in general. Even if I was a billionaire, I don't want to spend more than I have to... It makes a lot of sense, and my wallet will thank you for knocking that point home. 
|
It's a very good GPU, actually, very near top end. (And priced to match.) The build from cyberpower is just ridiculously expensive. For future reference, SC2 doesn't need a smoking hot video card. SC2 at its most resource-demanding (high graphics, big-ass 4v4 battles, some customs) requires a good processor, not graphics card, for FPS performance (if you want to know why, it's because drawing 1 zergling is about as hard as drawing 29384737 zerglings, but it's much harder for your computer to figure out pathing for 23948737 zerglings than to draw them). Graphics card for SC2 basically sets the level of graphics you can run, but not framerate (the cyberpower marketing team is full of shit or copying more useful Frame-Per-Second comparisons for First-Person-Shooter games).
P.S. On a shitty-enough computer, you can actually detect a difference in performance based on late-game army composition, haha.
|
Windows told me that there were problems with my HDD so I did an online check with SpeedFan. I'm getting Raw Read Error Rate value at 42, and it tells me that threshold is 51. It tells me that I should immediately replace it. How critical is this and how long of a time do I have? I'm really worried about this.
|
On November 11 2011 03:05 MisterFred wrote:
It's a very good GPU, actually, very near top end. (And priced to match.) The build from cyberpower is just ridiculously expensive. For future reference, SC2 doesn't need a smoking hot video card. SC2 at its most resource-demanding (high graphics, big-ass 4v4 battles, some customs) requires a good processor, not graphics card, for FPS performance (if you want to know why, it's because drawing 1 zergling is about as hard as drawing 29384737 zerglings, but it's much harder for your computer to figure out pathing for 23948737 zerglings than to draw them). Graphics card for SC2 basically sets the level of graphics you can run, but not framerate (the cyberpower marketing team is full of shit or copying more useful Frame-Per-Second comparisons for First-Person-Shooter games).
P.S. On a shitty-enough computer, you can actually detect a difference in performance based on late-game army composition, haha.
It explicitly said 95 FPS for SC2 on Ultra settings, but I'll believe you more readily than a corporation whose motivating purpose is to have me buy products with higher margin.
Thanks for the detailed information about running SC2. I never knew that.
That being said, would you recommend the 560 ti? Or should I get something less high end?
RE: Your P.S.
My current computer is shitty enough that I experience that lag during that scenario!
On November 11 2011 02:50 Wabbit wrote:
I'm pretty sure he meant that for the next 6 or so months, it's the best gaming CPU you could buy. There will be a slightly "better" one at the same price point when Ivy Bridge comes, but there's always "better" hardware just around the corner. That does NOT mean a 2500k will not be competent in performance in 6 months (Ivy Bridge is reportedly at most 10-20%? performance increase, and most people don't even need the full power of the 2500K). Most likely, you won't need to upgrade it for several years. I'm willing to bet at LEAST 3 (but I'm feeling strongly for 5+ since it's such a strong CPU and easy to get to 4.0-4.5GHz), and by that time there will be a new socket and you'll need an entirely new motherboard.
Point being you can keep on waiting forever, and newer and better stuff will always come out, but that doesn't mean that today's hardware won't be competent for several years.
You're absolutely right man.
I'm not trying to constantly wait for better things. It's a perpetual cycle, I understand. But, at the same time, I don't want to gather all the parts and then, all of a sudden, a new 'something awesome' comes out the next day. I don't want to get screwed over like that too soon! 
Ideally, I want to go in knowing that regardless of what comes out that year, I have what I need and that it will be awesome for the 3+ years. And then three years later, when I'll probably be an expert on all of this after this grueling experience, I'll build a new one!
|
From what I've seen, the i7 2700k is only 100MHz better than the i7 2600k, but it's $50 more on newegg. Besides the turbo boost also being 100MHz higher, is there any other actual benefit? Are the chips themselves higher quality to the point you'd also achieve 100MHz+ better overclocks or something? Everything else seems identical besides the clock... which isn't worht $50.
|
On November 11 2011 02:37 Shikyo wrote:
1556$ PC with just a 560 ti? I could probably give you a build with that for like 850 or something
Money where your mouth is.
|
On November 11 2011 02:04 Invictus212 wrote:I am now going to reply to all the awesome feedback that I've received thus far! I'm starting from oldest to most recent. Keep in mind that I am a complete newbie, so if you don't agree with component "ABC", I cannot really weigh in. So, if you feel strongly about keeping or replacing certain components, please make it clear. I won't know otherwise. And although I am replying to comments left by a specific user, everyone is obviously free to weigh in. It's not just for the OP of the quoted text. Thanks all <3 P.S. Just for kicks, I went onto CyberPowerPC to get a benchmark price for a "dream PC." I got the best (from my limited knowledge) products that they offered and tried to max out as much as good within reason. The prices that I got ranged from $1,500 - $2,000 for the computer alone. I am going to include two sample builds at the bottom of my post, so you know what I've been doing. Keep in mind, I'm used i7 instead of i5 into my build as I was trying to max things out. I've gleamed some helpful advice from DONTPANIC's post, and I would be willing to i5. Nonetheless, I just used the i7s to get the worst case price scenario. Let me know what you think about that too. Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 16:03 FabledIntegral wrote:+ Show Spoiler +There's no reason to throw $100 into a blu-ray burner unless he'll really want it. I don't agree with your PSU either, spending far too much money, at this point it feels he's spending extra money not for performance but for ease of use in assembly. If he's ok with spending more for that, then fine. Iffy on the graphics card.
You also forgot to include a HDD, unless you expect him to spend $1800 and have a capacity of 120GB.
Not bad choices though, otherwise.
I just hope the OP is aware for most current games you don't need to spend anywhere near as much to max shit out on ultra, cept maybe BF3 (I still haven't looked into the requirements, but I've seen it argued over all the fucking time). Hey FabledIntegral, SUBJECT 1: BLU-RAY
The Blu-ray drive only serves to read Blu-ray movies (and CDs) right? Perhaps, in the future games might be going to Blu-ray, due to their higher storage capacity, so it might make sense to invest in the drive. I understand, and agree with your point about the blu-ray burner though. I don't really need it, and at the end of the build (depending on the price) that is the first thing I would chop-off. I rarely use my CD ROM drive on my computer today in the first place, so I doubt I'd suddenly use it more. Is there a difference in price between a Blu-ray burner and a Blu-ray reader? That might be a good compromise. SUBJECT 2: PSU
I'm not really qualified to weigh in on that. I don't really understand the difference between the various power supplies, besides the obvious -- different degrees of power supply! If you disagree with DONTPANIC's recommendation, do you (or anyone else with the same opinion) have another one in mind so I can make a comparison? SUBJECT 3: GPU
I agree with you about the graphics card. I was also a little iffy as well, but I don't know too much about them. I've always leaned towards NVEDIA based on brand alone. I don't know if it's substantiated or just stupid. I'm open-minded, and I'll follow the advice on the boards, as you guys know way more about this then I do -- hence why I am posting my build request in the first place. Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 16:05 Womwomwom wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Spending $2000 on a whole computer system in general isn't a bad idea - spending the whole thing on the desktop itself is stupid however. You've got to do it sensibly: 1) 27" TN panels suck because the pixel pitch is huge, the resolution is awful, and its large enough that TN's weak viewing angles will probably come into play. The given 1ms figure is definitely going to be false or a half truth. No doubt about it. 2) When the Blu-Ray drive itself is $100, you might as well just get a PS3 at that point. $150 more and you get a console and something that can definitely read ALL Blu-Ray movies, something old Blu-Ray drives had problems with. 3) Fractal Design Arc is terrible value. Kind of flimsy, internal design isn't different from any other manufacturer, external aesthetic has that cheap faux metal finish which looks terrible on everything. Just get a Corsair 500R at that price. Battlefield 3 is easy to run at close to max settings with a little bit above typical hardware (HD6950 + i5 2500k). You just have to optimize it a little but it isn't as demanding as a lot of people say it is. The same thing happened with Bad Company 2...everyone hyped it up as some demanding PC game but it ran extremely well on my HD5850...turning off AA tends extremely to be beneficial. You don't even have to do that in BF3. BF3 has this new AA method called FXAA which is advertised to be able to apply decent quality AA with close to zero performance hits. That seems to be true so far since AMD cards like the HD6870 can pretty much run BF3's FXAA without taking huge performance hits so there's no reason to get hugely powerful systems unless you want to run obscene resolutions. Yeah OK Hardocp isn't the best website but it illustrates how overblown the whole "BF3 will kill PCs" is: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/02/battlefield_3_single_player_performance_iq_review/4A single HD6970 can run BF3 (high FXAA, ultra textures, 16xAF) at a resolution of 2560x1600 at an average FPS of 41 without taking many sharp FPS drops. Most of the time it stays above 30 FPS. Yeah, I know he wants to run BF3 at 100 FPS but you have to ask the question: what do you want 100FPS for? Hey Womwomwom! Thanks for your response, by the way. Let's start from the top. In response to your #1 (27'' monitors):
That's a very interesting point about the pixels. How does that come into play? If the pixel pitch is huge, how does that affect the experience of using the monitor? I googled pixel pitch, so I have an understanding of what it is. I just don't understand how a large pitch is a bad thing. Is there a larger risk for pixel problems to occur with larger monitors, or is the risk the same regardless of monitor size? All this talk about pixels made me remember about dead pixels. I've experienced it once on an old mobile phone that I had a long time ago. I do understand your point about the viewing angles. Are there 27'' monitors that solved the viewing angle problem? For the record, I am not trying to be difficult. I ask questions, just so I can make sure that I understand everything. I have no problem going down to a 24'' monitor (I do plan on getting at least two, so that should be plenty), but I just like to know why. I don't like to blindly do things. In response to your #2 (Blu-ray):
I agree with you, and I've covered that point in my response to Fabled's post. In response to your #3 (Fractal Design Arc): I googled that. It's a case, correct? I agree with you on that point, and DONTPANIC did as well. He changed it to the Corsair. I don't have much of an opinion of cases. I know very little about it, but based on my quick google search I do agree with you on the Fractal Design Arc. I won't get that for sure, thanks! In response to your #4 (GPU):This is a big one in general. Like I said earlier, I'm a newbie, so I cannot truly weigh in here. I just know brands. I stated that I wanted 100 FPS (or close to it) since I figured that would be an amazing benchmark for a quality performance computer. I apologize for my vaguness, but in my head I meant 100 FPS for Starcraft 2 at ultra. That's my primary game of choice as of late. As long as BF3 and other games run well, than I'm good. I didn't benchmark or even do research for what kind of FPS is excellent for BF3. I did not mean across the board 100 FPS, but hey, that would be cool. The configurations that I've played with on CyberPowerPC come to 95 FPS (SC2 on ultra) according to their tests based on the GPU that I selected (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 1GB 16X PCIe Video Card). I know I am probably going overboard with all this, but this was all done prior to receiving your advice. If you all recommend a different GPU, then I am all ears. I am just trying to get the best within reason. Right now I've been wondering between... fuck, I don't know what is is called, but you see the NVEDIA card that I just listed. It has 1GB. Other cards have 2GB, 2.5GB, etc. How important is that when making my decision? Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 21:37 skyR wrote:On November 10 2011 15:40 Invictus212 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Thank you to all the community members keeping the Tech Support section going. I've found this thread, among many others, to be extremely useful and education. I am far from a computer expert, but I am eager to learn more through experience. Thanks <3 I am looking forward to your feedback. Build Request for InvictusWhat is your budget?The maximum I would be comfortable spending is approximately $1,500* for the computer. Like most of us here, we have a strong sense of value. This is why we are exploring building the computer ourselves to escape the hefty premiums charged by various corporations. Additionally, I want to have this PC for a long time without becoming obsolete. I am seeking true power -- I've never had a powerful, multi-tasking desktop before. I'm itching to really tap into the potential. I can be quite impatient and I hate waiting. Time is money after all! *This price is for the computer only. I would be willing to spend an additional amount to acquire two monitors, mechanical keyboard and Razer mouse. What is your resolution?
I don't have a desktop right now, so I would also be in the market for a monitor. I've always wanted at least two for multi-tasking. That being said, I would like to have 1920 X 1200 resolution per monitor. I am honestly not familiar with the technical aspects behind supporting two monitors and how it functions, so I don't know if I'll want them split or not. As far as gaming goes, I think it would be strange to combine the monitors due to the width of the monitor's frame. And which ever configuration supports moving files, graphs, Chrome windows from one monitor to the other seamlessly, I would be content. What are you using it for?
This would be my workstation, gaming station and "ultimate" media center. WorkstationA lot of multi-tasking would be clearly involved. I won't be using anything graphically intensive since I am not pursuing a career in architecture, film editing, or the like. However, I do a lot of financial trading. As you know, speed/timing is crucial. Lag can make or break your day! Windows on my laptop can be so $#%$ing slow, so I really don't want to deal with that anymore. To illustrate my point, I cannot even open Chrome while running SC2 on the background. Thus, being able to have at least 4 programs (i.e. SC2, a website such as streaming CNBC, my trading platform, music from iTunes or something) running in the background without affecting computer performance, would be perfect! I am also a very passionate photography. I use Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop (although, I've been using it less since Lightroom has been sufficient as of late -- and I've been quite busy with schoolwork as well). I'm comfortable using external harddrives to store/back-up my photos. And I don't plan on doing a 1v1 in SC2 while editing photos anytime soon.... GamingI love SC2 and First Person Shooters. -SC2 on High/Ultra with close to 100FPS would be ideal. -BF3/Call of Duty on highest settings, or close to it would be ideal. Ultimately, I want to enjoy the beautiful artwork of the game without sacrificing in-game performance. I don't want to lag anymore (and I lag on the lowest settings in SC2! -- especially when my army gets larger). It would be cool to have a stream, so I can showcase my progression in SC2 from Gold to Masters on the TL streams, but for the sake of $$ if it poses to much of a problem to support streaming, then it's alright. Multi-tasking is key for me, so I don't want to be memory capped (if that's the proper term?) streaming and playing SC2. I still would like to have my trading program up, and the news up, if need be. Media Center (more of a dream... let me know if any of this is possible...) I don't really watch TV. I rarely do. My new computer would be my all-in-one for me. Perhaps, through my home network, I can even connect the TV to my computer, so I can watch MLG on the big screen for example? I haven't thought this part through. It's the least important, but if you have any ideas, please do not hesitate to suggest them. If I land my dream job (::crosses fingers:: I'm going to get my own place -- in dorms now -- and I envision a fully integrated home all revolving around my home computer and several other pieces of technology. I'll figure it out! What is your upgrade cycle?I am comfortable spending more right now for a longer upgrade cycle. I don't want to have to upgrade my computer in order to play the next generation game. I know I will have to at some point, but the longer I can wait to upgrade the better. I really want to get longevity out of my build. Life cycle of 3+ years is my goal. When do you plan on building it?
I am completely flexible. I do not have to build it this second. I've read around that Intel, for example, is coming out with some new products soon (Sandybridge?). I am willing to wait until the newest generation of the components that I need come out (assuming that they are better of course). Furthermore, prices also go down over time. If waiting 6 months to get the best deal on those newly released products ends up saving me the most money on my build, then perfect. I'll do it. My focus is getting the best computer possible, and for the best price possible. Time will be our variable. We can manipulate that anyway we want to optimize our output. Do you plan on overclocking?Sure, if it doesn't harm the computer and improves performance! Would you recommend liquid-cooling? I've heard great things about it, and it seems like the most effective way to keep the computer cool. Do you need an Operating System?
My University provides me with a free copy of Windows 7 Ultimate. Do you plan to add a second GPU for SLI or Crossfire?
In short, I do not plan on it, but I am not opposed to adding it if you deem it necessary. Based on the little research that I've done ( http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/918485-Two-video-cards-or-one), it doesn't seem to be worth it according to several posters in that forum. However, I am no expert, so I come to you guys! I am not sure if it is necessary for multiple monitors. Where are you buying your parts from?NCIX US, newegg, tigerdirect, amazon, etc. I am in the USA, so I will utilize all websites and stores that I can in search of the best deal. If you can recommend particular sites/stores that have not been mentioned in the OP, that would be great as well. ConclusionWhen it comes to constructing it, I would like to build it as clean and organized as the pros at cyberpower, etc (if not even better). I have not built a computer before, so it's a little daunting. It seems easier to have a company do it, but if you can guide me on how to set up the computer the same way these professional companies do, then I am pumped! ---- Thank you for your time reading and responding to my aforementioned post. You guys mentioned that the more detailed I can be, the better. I strived to be as detailed as possible. If you need any additional information, feel free to PM me. Additionally, I am open to having a dialogue with you guys in further length if you feel that it would be helpful. So shoot me a PM for that reason as well. Thanks again and much <3 to you all. Unless your software is well multi-threaded (which gaming is not), there is no point in waiting for the Sandybridge-E processors to be released next week as you will get little to no benefit from having a hex core. It's a bad idea to purchase a Sandybridge-E anyways with your budget if gaming is your primary concern because the core i7 3930k is going to be 1/3 of your budget and adding the X79 board, it's going to be 1/2 your budget. Sandybridge-E is also not set to replace Sandybridge, it's replacing the three year old LGA1366 Bloomfield. Intel just did a price drop on several processors and introduced a new core i7 2700k so there is no chance that Intel will be dropping pricing on its line of processors anytime soon when there is absolutely zero competition from AMD. They also have never dropped pricing on EOL processors so waiting for price drops is only going to net you with better performance at the same price. You can keep waiting forever but this isn't what most people tend to do. Other components (primarily SSDs, GPUs, and memory) do tend to drop over time but the next generation of GPUs aren't going to be out until the first half of next year. Not to mention Ivybridge is also going to be due out in March / April of next year. So like you said, pricing isn't static. You need to decide on a timeframe to purchase and come back for advice so we can recommend a configuration when pricing and components are both relevant. A core i5 2500k would be capable of streaming decently and is the best choice and for the next six months for any individual whose primary concern is gaming. If you want your computer to act as a television as well, you will need a TV tuner. Liquid cooling, especially enclosed ones such as the ones offered by Corsair are waste of money. The top-end air coolers perform just as well if not better at a similar or lower price. There is no way you will achieve a 100 frames per second average in Starcraft II on ultra or high unless of course you cheese / all-in every single ladder game maybe. You'll need to overclock the processor if you want to achieve the highest possible average frames per second. Overclocking isn't going to harm the computer unless you want it to by doing some absurd overclock. SLI / CrossfireX isn't worth it unless you are playing at large resolutions (eg. across multiple screens). On November 10 2011 15:45 DONTPANIC wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Here is a $2000.00 build that you can upgrade if you want another GPU in the future. It's not a money saving build, it's not the most insane build you could possibly make... it's just a cool fast supercomputer you'll be able to game on for at least 4 years. SONY Black Blu-ray Burner SATA BWU-500S http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827118049Blu-ray is pretty awesome to have if you're going to have a monitor that is probably better than your TV. Blu-ray discs also hold more information. CORSAIR Professional Series Gold AX750 (CMPSU-750AX) 750W ATX12V v2.31 / EPS12V v2.92 80 PLUS GOLD Certified Modular http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139016More power than you need but it's nice and modular and super efficient. If you end up going dual GPU it'll still be pleanty of power. SAPPHIRE 100311-2SR Radeon HD 6970 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.1 x16 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102918Probably going to be the most argued part of the build. There are faster bigger cards out there... but this video card will be more than enough for everything you want to play. Two of them will be awesome when you have three monitors to play on. Windows 7 64 bit. What other options are there? Only nerds know... http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116986You can spend more on a monitor if you want. This one is pretty good. SAMSUNG P2770FH ToC Rose Black 27" 1ms Full HD HDMI LCD Monitor http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001431Woah this sucker is fast... If you fill up the 120GB get a storage drive when the prices are reasonable. Kingston HyperX SH100S3B/120G 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) (HyperX Upgrade Kit) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820139601I think this case looks classy. I changed it to this Corsair one because it's really nice. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811139009This mother board actually has a button on it that you press before start up that automatically overclocks your computer. You literally just push one button and your computer is faster. It's awesome. Might not be pushing any limits but it's pretty darn hard to mess up. Also it has all sorts of extra things you probab;y won't use but if you have a card reader or anything like that it can take it. MSI P67A-GD55 (B3) LGA 1155 Intel P67 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130573OMG it's not an i7! What the heck?! Well let me tell you something about that... (read like 500 of the 700 pages on this thread). Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz (3.7GHz Turbo Boost) LGA 1155 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115072This ram is BY FAR the best ram to buy. Not only is it 1600 but it's also BLUE... which I don't know if you noticed yet... it's the SAME COLOR AS YOUR MOTHERBOARD! It's going to look amazing. (seriously it doesn't matter what speed you get). Patriot Signature 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220570This is so you can keep that automatically overclocked CPU cool. Pretty basic. Super awesome. COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 Plus RR-B10-212P-G1 "Heatpipe Direct Contact" http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103065Total: $1,811.89 before MIR. Add your favorite keyboard and mouse. Haters gotta hate... I say get it and play some bad ass games at ultra max super settings. The monitor is 27" at 1080p. Unless you're blind as a bat, this screen is going to look terrible. The Dell U2412M is probably one of the best options right now if you are looking for a 1920x1200 resolution. It's IPS, low input lag, adjustable, and affordable: http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&cs=04&l=en&sku=320-2676Kingston HyperX is a stupid choice. OCZ Vertex 3, Corsair Performance 3, and Crucial M4 are all similar in performance / if not faster and is less expensive as well. Not to mention Sandforce has / is still having reliability issues so getting a non-Sandforce based SSD such as the Crucial M4 is probably the best choice for many individuals and most of everyone you ask is going to recommend this SSD over anything else. Having a Corsair AX or Seasonic X makes sense I guess if you are lazy with hiding the unused cables. Planning for a SLI / CrossfireX upgrade is usually a bad idea since performance with multi-GPU configurations are inconsistent and in three years time, you'll likely be able to purchase a card in the same price range that offers better performance than the older multi-GPU configuration. Hey SkyR. Amazing and informative post. Thank you. You covered a lot, so I'm going to start from the top. In regards to the fluctuation of prices, if it helps to pick a definitive date, let's say that I would like to start building this computer by May 2012 at the latest. In the meantime, I can gather parts for it if the prices are great. You mentioned that a core i5 2500K would be an excellent choice for a gamer for the next six months. I reread your line carefully, so I don't take your words out of context. I hope I didn't. Regardless, I want to point out that (ideally) I would like my CPU to be relevant for more than six months (is that possible?) Saying that's it is good enough for another six months, doesn't sell it to me. On the contrary, it makes me wonder if I should get something else. You also mentioned that the IvyBridge, along with a lot of other components are come out with new generations in the first part of next year. This is why I made my build date around May. I would like to get the newest generation of hardware, if possible. And if it's overpriced, I'm sure a lot of the good hardware that we all drool over today, would go down in price due to the new releases. With respect to FPS, please check out the CyberPowerPC config on the bottom. Perhaps, it is reaching such levels because of over-clocking... I'm not too sure how it works, but I know that they state that based on my configuration (I was just messing around on the website) I should get 95 FPS on SC2 ultra. And no, I don't plan on cheesing. I play honorably! I would really like my build to meet that FPS criteria. It's a good way to benchmark performance imo. The components can sound good, but the bottom line is does it perform well enough. FPS, I think, provides a good barometer for that. About liquid cooling: Have you had first-hand experience with liquid cooling by any chance? From googling, I got the sense that it's possibly the future of cooling. Fans seem so 'old school.' I've read your other suggestions about the monitors, the drives and the SLI. I only have one question about the SLI. You wrote: Show nested quote +you'll likely be able to purchase a card in the same price range that offers better performance than the older multi-GPU configuration. I completely agree. But... In the future, couldn't I simply buy two new GPU's to replace my old one if I needed to? Why is planning for it a bad idea? I don't quite understand how planning for it can be inconsistent. Thank you for the informative post. I've learned a lot from you, and everyone else. ConclusionThanks for the feedback. Please keep them coming. CyberPowerPC Configurations for Price Benchmarking #1 @ $1,556 + Show Spoiler +Case: * Corsair Carbide Series 400R Mid-Tower Gaming Case
Laser Engraving: NONE
Laser Engraving Message:
Internal USB Extension Module: None
Neon Light Upgrade: None
Extra Case Fan Upgrade: Default case fans
Noise Reduction Technology: None
CPU: Intel® Core™ i7-2600K 3.40 GHz 8M Intel Smart Cache LGA1155 (All Venom OC Certified)
Venom Boost Fast And Efficient Factory Overclocking: Pro OC (Performance Overclock 10% or more)
Cooling Fan: CoolIT ECO II-240 Extreme Performance Liquid Cooling System 240MM Radiator & Dual Fans
Coolant for Cyberpower Xtreme Hydro Water Cooling Kits: Standard Coolant
Motherboard: * [CrossFireX/SLI] GigaByte Z68X-UD3H-B3 Intel Z68 Chipset DDR3 ATX Mainboard w/ Lucid Virtu Intel Smart Response Technology & 7.1 Dolby Home Theater Audio, GbLAN, USB3.0, 4x SATA-III RAID, 2 Gen2 PCIe, 3 PCIe X1 & 2 PCI (All Venom OC Certified) [+66]
Intel Smart Response Technology for Z68: 60 GB OCZ Agility 3 SATA III 6.0Gb/s SSD - 525MB/s Read & 475MB/s Write [+106] (Single Drive)
Memory: 8GB (2GBx4) DDR3/1600MHz Dual Channel Memory Module (Corsair XMS Gaming Memory with Heat Spreader)
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 2GB 16X PCIe Video Card [+128] (Major Brand Powered by NVIDIA)
Freebies: None
Video Card 2: None
Video Card 3: None
Power Supply Upgrade: 700 Watts - XtremeGear SLI/CrossFireX Ready Power Supply
Hard Drive: 120 GB OCZ Agility 3 SATA-III 6.0Gb/s SSD - 525MB/s Read & 500MB/s Write [-5] (Single Drive)
Data Hard Drive: 1TB SATA-III 6.0Gb/s 32MB Cache 7200RPM HDD [+175] (Single Drive)
Hard Drive Cooling Fan: Vigor iSURF II Hard Disk Drive Cooling System [+21] (1 x System)
External Hard Drive (USB3.0/2.0/eSATA): None
USB Flash Drive: None
Optical Drive: 24X Double Layer Dual Format DVD+-R/+-RW + CD-R/RW Drive (BLACK COLOR)
Optical Drive 2: None
Sound: HIGH DEFINITION ON-BOARD 7.1 AUDIO
3D Vision Glasses: None
LCD Monitor: None
2nd Monitor: None
3rd Monitor: None
Speakers: None
Network: Onboard Gigabit LAN Network
Network Switch: None
Keyboard: Xtreme Gear (Black Color) Multimedia/Internet USB Keyboard
Mouse: XtremeGear Optical USB 3 Buttons Gaming Mouse
Freebies: None
Mouse Pad: None
Gaming Gear: None
Extra Thermal Display: None
Wireless 802.11B/G Network Card: None
External Wireless Network Card: None
Wireless 802.11 B/G/N Access Point: None
Bluetooth: None
Flash Media Reader/Writer: INTERNAL 12in1 Flash Media Reader/Writer (BLACK COLOR)
Video Camera: None
Headset: None
Printer: None
Cable: None
Power Protection: None
Surge Protector: None
IEEE1394 Card: None
Internal USB Port: Built-in USB 2.0 Ports
USB Port: None
Operating System: Microsoft® Windows 7 Home Premium (64-bit Edition)
Media Center Remote Control & TV Tuner: None
Office Suite: None
Games: None
Ultra Care Option: None
Service: STANDARD WARRANTY: 3-YEAR LIMITED WARRANTY PLUS LIFE-TIME TECHNICAL SUPPORT
Rush Service: NO; READY TO SHIP IN 5~10 BUSINESS DAYS I went all out with that one. I was clueless when choosing a motherboard though, and I picked the video card based on the FPS that they reported for SC2 on Ultra. For an additional $99 I can get Pioneer BDR-206BK 12X Blu-Ray Writer (Black Color). Based on the builds, and stuff that I've received as part of feedback has been hovering around this price range. Do you think this build that I did in several minutes is a good baseline. Is it worth buying this, if it's awesome? Can I build this same computer on my own for cheaper (with over clocking too). My intentions has been to build a computer. It's generally cheaper, and a fun process. You get to really customize your own product and call it your own! But based on this price that I got at CyberPower, and with the prices that I am seeing with the components, it's surprisingly similar. I've heard talk about bottlenecking and stuff. I want to avoid all the pitfalls with my new PC, so please help! Thanks again. I am looking forward to writing up a blog to document all my progress. You'll get to see the finished product!
1. A blu-ray reader is cheaper than a burner.
2. You could get a PSU for a third of the price that would work fine. That's a high quality PSU for sure, but you don't need to pay the premium for GOLD quality. You just need a quality PSU. You also have NO need for 750W. A large reason for the expensive price is that it's modular. Modular makes the actual computer construction easier as it's easier to manage your cables. This does not improve the performance of your computer, but rather just makes, as said, cable management, and potentially airflow, better. You have to ask yourself if you want to pay an extra $50-80 for that.
3. The i5 2500k and i7 2600k are essentially identical in performance. Generally speaking, ihe i7 offers identical gaming performance as the i5 2500k, but performs better in other areas such as video encoding, etc. If you do not use these featuers, there is no reason to get the i7, as it won't help your gaming performance, unless out of nowhere games are able to make use of hyperthreading, which it doesn't look like they will anytime soon before you'd upgrade again anwyays (we're talking years from now). What SkyR meant by it's the best choice for the next six months is that "if you're going to be building a gaming computer within the next six months, the i5 2500k is the best choice." NOT that it's only going to be relevant for 6 months. That would be awful.
4. Once again, I've looked at the build and it still doesn't have a hard drive...
5. The NVIDIA GTX 560ti is a vastly inferior card to the 6970 from the other build, just so you know. It would still max SC2 on ultra no problem and play high/ultra on BF3. It's a top of the end card, about $120 or so cheaper though than the AMD card. You can use anandtech.com to look at benchmarks.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/330?vs=292
In fact, my GTX 460 1GB can play SC2 on ultra, and is still a solid card. Sells for about $115-130 now after rebate. Just to give you a picture, although SC2 isn't a very demanding game in terms of graphics. If you really want to spend that much money, then go for it, but realize you could spend around $700 (not including monitor) and max out most current and future (within next six months or so) games on ultra. Computer tech has really gone far in the past few years that unless you really want to shell out $2,000, there isn't much gain from doing so. Not including monitor I'd personally recommend not spending more than $1,200.
On November 11 2011 03:59 DONTPANIC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 02:37 Shikyo wrote:
1556$ PC with just a 560 ti? I could probably give you a build with that for like 850 or something Money where your mouth is.
He's right.
i5 2500k $205
p67 board ~$105
560ti ~$215
PSU ~$50 (Antec Neo Eco 520w or something)
Case ~$50 (Antec Illusion 300 or something alnog those lines)
HDD ~$70 (I believe 1TB 7200RPM drives are giong for these prices now, but not sure)
SSD ~$120 (probably a 90GB or so drive if you're going with OCZ drives, they're super cheap)
RAM ~$40 (8GB of 1600MHz RAM on sale or 1333MHz RAM standard, any major brand)
Windows ~$30 (if you go the upgrade method, which is kind of cheating, otherwise $85)
Optical Drive ~$20
It's similar price and performance.
|
On November 11 2011 03:48 FabledIntegral wrote:
From what I've seen, the i7 2700k is only 100MHz better than the i7 2600k, but it's $50 more on newegg. Besides the turbo boost also being 100MHz higher, is there any other actual benefit? Are the chips themselves higher quality to the point you'd also achieve 100MHz+ better overclocks or something? Everything else seems identical besides the clock... which isn't worht $50.
Wasn't this discussed a few pages back? I think someone said they are 2600k's that's been screen for higher frequencies. So if you want a i7 2600k and want a high oc, the 2700k would be "safer" bet. I could be wrong though.
|
On November 11 2011 04:05 nam nam wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:48 FabledIntegral wrote:
From what I've seen, the i7 2700k is only 100MHz better than the i7 2600k, but it's $50 more on newegg. Besides the turbo boost also being 100MHz higher, is there any other actual benefit? Are the chips themselves higher quality to the point you'd also achieve 100MHz+ better overclocks or something? Everything else seems identical besides the clock... which isn't worht $50. Wasn't this discussed a few pages back? I think someone said they are 2600k's that's been screen for higher frequencies. So if you want a i7 2600k and want a high oc, the 2700k would be "safer" bet. I could be wrong though.
I didn't read a few pages back  . Which is why I asked if the chips were higher quality to the piont you'd also achieve better OC's .
|
On November 11 2011 03:48 FabledIntegral wrote:
From what I've seen, the i7 2700k is only 100MHz better than the i7 2600k, but it's $50 more on newegg. Besides the turbo boost also being 100MHz higher, is there any other actual benefit? Are the chips themselves higher quality to the point you'd also achieve 100MHz+ better overclocks or something? Everything else seems identical besides the clock... which isn't worht $50.
Well 2700ks are basically handpicked 2600ks so they should have better binning leading to better overclocking headroom.
In europe they're only 10-15€ costier, I didn't know it was 50 in US. Intels suggested pricing is like 12$ above 2600k.
|
On November 11 2011 06:14 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:48 FabledIntegral wrote:
From what I've seen, the i7 2700k is only 100MHz better than the i7 2600k, but it's $50 more on newegg. Besides the turbo boost also being 100MHz higher, is there any other actual benefit? Are the chips themselves higher quality to the point you'd also achieve 100MHz+ better overclocks or something? Everything else seems identical besides the clock... which isn't worht $50. Well 2700ks are basically handpicked 2600ks so they should have better binning leading to better overclocking headroom. In europe they're only 10-15€ costier, I didn't know it was 50 in US. Intels suggested pricing is like 12$ above 2600k.
Ya it's $50 difference on newegg, that's the only place I've looked.
|
On November 11 2011 02:04 Invictus212 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On November 10 2011 16:05 Womwomwom wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Spending $2000 on a whole computer system in general isn't a bad idea - spending the whole thing on the desktop itself is stupid however. You've got to do it sensibly: 1) 27" TN panels suck because the pixel pitch is huge, the resolution is awful, and its large enough that TN's weak viewing angles will probably come into play. The given 1ms figure is definitely going to be false or a half truth. No doubt about it. 2) When the Blu-Ray drive itself is $100, you might as well just get a PS3 at that point. $150 more and you get a console and something that can definitely read ALL Blu-Ray movies, something old Blu-Ray drives had problems with. 3) Fractal Design Arc is terrible value. Kind of flimsy, internal design isn't different from any other manufacturer, external aesthetic has that cheap faux metal finish which looks terrible on everything. Just get a Corsair 500R at that price. Battlefield 3 is easy to run at close to max settings with a little bit above typical hardware (HD6950 + i5 2500k). You just have to optimize it a little but it isn't as demanding as a lot of people say it is. The same thing happened with Bad Company 2...everyone hyped it up as some demanding PC game but it ran extremely well on my HD5850...turning off AA tends extremely to be beneficial. You don't even have to do that in BF3. BF3 has this new AA method called FXAA which is advertised to be able to apply decent quality AA with close to zero performance hits. That seems to be true so far since AMD cards like the HD6870 can pretty much run BF3's FXAA without taking huge performance hits so there's no reason to get hugely powerful systems unless you want to run obscene resolutions. Yeah OK Hardocp isn't the best website but it illustrates how overblown the whole "BF3 will kill PCs" is: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/02/battlefield_3_single_player_performance_iq_review/4A single HD6970 can run BF3 (high FXAA, ultra textures, 16xAF) at a resolution of 2560x1600 at an average FPS of 41 without taking many sharp FPS drops. Most of the time it stays above 30 FPS. Yeah, I know he wants to run BF3 at 100 FPS but you have to ask the question: what do you want 100FPS for? Hey Womwomwom! Thanks for your response, by the way. Let's start from the top. In response to your #1 (27'' monitors):
That's a very interesting point about the pixels. How does that come into play? If the pixel pitch is huge, how does that affect the experience of using the monitor? I googled pixel pitch, so I have an understanding of what it is. I just don't understand how a large pitch is a bad thing. Is there a larger risk for pixel problems to occur with larger monitors, or is the risk the same regardless of monitor size? All this talk about pixels made me remember about dead pixels. I've experienced it once on an old mobile phone that I had a long time ago. I do understand your point about the viewing angles. Are there 27'' monitors that solved the viewing angle problem? For the record, I am not trying to be difficult. I ask questions, just so I can make sure that I understand everything. I have no problem going down to a 24'' monitor (I do plan on getting at least two, so that should be plenty), but I just like to know why. I don't like to blindly do things.
A 27" with a 1080p resolution is using a TN panel which has terrible viewing angles regardless of what size the screen is. A IPS panel has great viewing angles and a 27" IPS to my knowledge always has a 2560x1440 resolution. Popular examples include Apple's Thunderbolt Display and Dell's Ultrasharp.
A large screen having a low pixel density (or a large pixel pitch) is going to be great for viewing at a distance. That's why television sets are 40" and larger in size and have a 1920x1080 resolution. A high pixel density (or a low pixel pitch) screen is meant for viewing up close, that's why monitors that are 21" - 24" in size often have a resolution of 1920x1080.
If you've ever sat up close to a large 1080p television, you'll realized how shit (pixelated) the image is. It's like viewing a newspaper through a magnifying glass and seeing all the microscopic fibers that make up the ink and paper.
Like I said before - unless you're blind as a bat, you don't want a 27" 1080p screen.
+ Show Spoiler +On November 10 2011 21:37 skyR wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 15:40 Invictus212 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Thank you to all the community members keeping the Tech Support section going. I've found this thread, among many others, to be extremely useful and education. I am far from a computer expert, but I am eager to learn more through experience. Thanks <3 I am looking forward to your feedback. Build Request for InvictusWhat is your budget?The maximum I would be comfortable spending is approximately $1,500* for the computer. Like most of us here, we have a strong sense of value. This is why we are exploring building the computer ourselves to escape the hefty premiums charged by various corporations. Additionally, I want to have this PC for a long time without becoming obsolete. I am seeking true power -- I've never had a powerful, multi-tasking desktop before. I'm itching to really tap into the potential. I can be quite impatient and I hate waiting. Time is money after all! *This price is for the computer only. I would be willing to spend an additional amount to acquire two monitors, mechanical keyboard and Razer mouse. What is your resolution?
I don't have a desktop right now, so I would also be in the market for a monitor. I've always wanted at least two for multi-tasking. That being said, I would like to have 1920 X 1200 resolution per monitor. I am honestly not familiar with the technical aspects behind supporting two monitors and how it functions, so I don't know if I'll want them split or not. As far as gaming goes, I think it would be strange to combine the monitors due to the width of the monitor's frame. And which ever configuration supports moving files, graphs, Chrome windows from one monitor to the other seamlessly, I would be content. What are you using it for?
This would be my workstation, gaming station and "ultimate" media center. WorkstationA lot of multi-tasking would be clearly involved. I won't be using anything graphically intensive since I am not pursuing a career in architecture, film editing, or the like. However, I do a lot of financial trading. As you know, speed/timing is crucial. Lag can make or break your day! Windows on my laptop can be so $#%$ing slow, so I really don't want to deal with that anymore. To illustrate my point, I cannot even open Chrome while running SC2 on the background. Thus, being able to have at least 4 programs (i.e. SC2, a website such as streaming CNBC, my trading platform, music from iTunes or something) running in the background without affecting computer performance, would be perfect! I am also a very passionate photography. I use Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop (although, I've been using it less since Lightroom has been sufficient as of late -- and I've been quite busy with schoolwork as well). I'm comfortable using external harddrives to store/back-up my photos. And I don't plan on doing a 1v1 in SC2 while editing photos anytime soon.... GamingI love SC2 and First Person Shooters. -SC2 on High/Ultra with close to 100FPS would be ideal. -BF3/Call of Duty on highest settings, or close to it would be ideal. Ultimately, I want to enjoy the beautiful artwork of the game without sacrificing in-game performance. I don't want to lag anymore (and I lag on the lowest settings in SC2! -- especially when my army gets larger). It would be cool to have a stream, so I can showcase my progression in SC2 from Gold to Masters on the TL streams, but for the sake of $$ if it poses to much of a problem to support streaming, then it's alright. Multi-tasking is key for me, so I don't want to be memory capped (if that's the proper term?) streaming and playing SC2. I still would like to have my trading program up, and the news up, if need be. Media Center (more of a dream... let me know if any of this is possible...) I don't really watch TV. I rarely do. My new computer would be my all-in-one for me. Perhaps, through my home network, I can even connect the TV to my computer, so I can watch MLG on the big screen for example? I haven't thought this part through. It's the least important, but if you have any ideas, please do not hesitate to suggest them. If I land my dream job (::crosses fingers:: I'm going to get my own place -- in dorms now -- and I envision a fully integrated home all revolving around my home computer and several other pieces of technology. I'll figure it out! What is your upgrade cycle?I am comfortable spending more right now for a longer upgrade cycle. I don't want to have to upgrade my computer in order to play the next generation game. I know I will have to at some point, but the longer I can wait to upgrade the better. I really want to get longevity out of my build. Life cycle of 3+ years is my goal. When do you plan on building it?
I am completely flexible. I do not have to build it this second. I've read around that Intel, for example, is coming out with some new products soon (Sandybridge?). I am willing to wait until the newest generation of the components that I need come out (assuming that they are better of course). Furthermore, prices also go down over time. If waiting 6 months to get the best deal on those newly released products ends up saving me the most money on my build, then perfect. I'll do it. My focus is getting the best computer possible, and for the best price possible. Time will be our variable. We can manipulate that anyway we want to optimize our output. Do you plan on overclocking?Sure, if it doesn't harm the computer and improves performance! Would you recommend liquid-cooling? I've heard great things about it, and it seems like the most effective way to keep the computer cool. Do you need an Operating System?
My University provides me with a free copy of Windows 7 Ultimate. Do you plan to add a second GPU for SLI or Crossfire?
In short, I do not plan on it, but I am not opposed to adding it if you deem it necessary. Based on the little research that I've done ( http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/918485-Two-video-cards-or-one), it doesn't seem to be worth it according to several posters in that forum. However, I am no expert, so I come to you guys! I am not sure if it is necessary for multiple monitors. Where are you buying your parts from?NCIX US, newegg, tigerdirect, amazon, etc. I am in the USA, so I will utilize all websites and stores that I can in search of the best deal. If you can recommend particular sites/stores that have not been mentioned in the OP, that would be great as well. ConclusionWhen it comes to constructing it, I would like to build it as clean and organized as the pros at cyberpower, etc (if not even better). I have not built a computer before, so it's a little daunting. It seems easier to have a company do it, but if you can guide me on how to set up the computer the same way these professional companies do, then I am pumped! ---- Thank you for your time reading and responding to my aforementioned post. You guys mentioned that the more detailed I can be, the better. I strived to be as detailed as possible. If you need any additional information, feel free to PM me. Additionally, I am open to having a dialogue with you guys in further length if you feel that it would be helpful. So shoot me a PM for that reason as well. Thanks again and much <3 to you all. Unless your software is well multi-threaded (which gaming is not), there is no point in waiting for the Sandybridge-E processors to be released next week as you will get little to no benefit from having a hex core. It's a bad idea to purchase a Sandybridge-E anyways with your budget if gaming is your primary concern because the core i7 3930k is going to be 1/3 of your budget and adding the X79 board, it's going to be 1/2 your budget. Sandybridge-E is also not set to replace Sandybridge, it's replacing the three year old LGA1366 Bloomfield. Intel just did a price drop on several processors and introduced a new core i7 2700k so there is no chance that Intel will be dropping pricing on its line of processors anytime soon when there is absolutely zero competition from AMD. They also have never dropped pricing on EOL processors so waiting for price drops is only going to net you with better performance at the same price. You can keep waiting forever but this isn't what most people tend to do. Other components (primarily SSDs, GPUs, and memory) do tend to drop over time but the next generation of GPUs aren't going to be out until the first half of next year. Not to mention Ivybridge is also going to be due out in March / April of next year. So like you said, pricing isn't static. You need to decide on a timeframe to purchase and come back for advice so we can recommend a configuration when pricing and components are both relevant. A core i5 2500k would be capable of streaming decently and is the best choice and for the next six months for any individual whose primary concern is gaming. If you want your computer to act as a television as well, you will need a TV tuner. Liquid cooling, especially enclosed ones such as the ones offered by Corsair are waste of money. The top-end air coolers perform just as well if not better at a similar or lower price. There is no way you will achieve a 100 frames per second average in Starcraft II on ultra or high unless of course you cheese / all-in every single ladder game maybe. You'll need to overclock the processor if you want to achieve the highest possible average frames per second. Overclocking isn't going to harm the computer unless you want it to by doing some absurd overclock. SLI / CrossfireX isn't worth it unless you are playing at large resolutions (eg. across multiple screens). The monitor is 27" at 1080p. Unless you're blind as a bat, this screen is going to look terrible. The Dell U2412M is probably one of the best options right now if you are looking for a 1920x1200 resolution. It's IPS, low input lag, adjustable, and affordable: http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&cs=04&l=en&sku=320-2676Kingston HyperX is a stupid choice. OCZ Vertex 3, Corsair Performance 3, and Crucial M4 are all similar in performance / if not faster and is less expensive as well. Not to mention Sandforce has / is still having reliability issues so getting a non-Sandforce based SSD such as the Crucial M4 is probably the best choice for many individuals and most of everyone you ask is going to recommend this SSD over anything else. Having a Corsair AX or Seasonic X makes sense I guess if you are lazy with hiding the unused cables. Planning for a SLI / CrossfireX upgrade is usually a bad idea since performance with multi-GPU configurations are inconsistent and in three years time, you'll likely be able to purchase a card in the same price range that offers better performance than the older multi-GPU configuration. Hey SkyR. Amazing and informative post. Thank you. You covered a lot, so I'm going to start from the top. In regards to the fluctuation of prices, if it helps to pick a definitive date, let's say that I would like to start building this computer by May 2012 at the latest. In the meantime, I can gather parts for it if the prices are great. You mentioned that a core i5 2500K would be an excellent choice for a gamer for the next six months. I reread your line carefully, so I don't take your words out of context. I hope I didn't. Regardless, I want to point out that (ideally) I would like my CPU to be relevant for more than six months (is that possible?) Saying that's it is good enough for another six months, doesn't sell it to me. On the contrary, it makes me wonder if I should get something else. You also mentioned that the IvyBridge, along with a lot of other components are come out with new generations in the first part of next year. This is why I made my build date around May. I would like to get the newest generation of hardware, if possible. And if it's overpriced, I'm sure a lot of the good hardware that we all drool over today, would go down in price due to the new releases. With respect to FPS, please check out the CyberPowerPC config on the bottom. Perhaps, it is reaching such levels because of over-clocking... I'm not too sure how it works, but I know that they state that based on my configuration (I was just messing around on the website) I should get 95 FPS on SC2 ultra. And no, I don't plan on cheesing. I play honorably! I would really like my build to meet that FPS criteria. It's a good way to benchmark performance imo. The components can sound good, but the bottom line is does it perform well enough. FPS, I think, provides a good barometer for that. About liquid cooling: Have you had first-hand experience with liquid cooling by any chance? From googling, I got the sense that it's possibly the future of cooling. Fans seem so 'old school.' I've read your other suggestions about the monitors, the drives and the SLI. I only have one question about the SLI. You wrote: you'll likely be able to purchase a card in the same price range that offers better performance than the older multi-GPU configuration. I completely agree. But... In the future, couldn't I simply buy two new GPU's to replace my old one if I needed to? Why is planning for it a bad idea? I don't quite understand how planning for it can be inconsistent. Thank you for the informative post. I've learned a lot from you, and everyone else
It's too early to be asking for a build recommendation if you don't plan on building until May of next year since there will be new components out as you and I mentioned.
The new hardware we drool over today generally doesn't drop at all or not much at all when a new generation replaces it. And with a budget of your size, people don't typically buy previous generation components
When I mentioned that the 2500k would be the best choice for a gamer in the next six months. It meant that in six months (November, December, January, February, March, April), it will no longer be the best choice to purchase because the newer processors based on the Ivybridge architecture will be replacing it. Is it still going to be relevant in offering you acceptable performance? Yes. Will it be the newest? No. Will it be one of the best processors? No.
You don't purchase a brand new 2010 edition textbook for the same price as the 2011 edition textbook when the 2011 edition textbook has added new material and improved on the existing material.
You won't be averaging 100 FPS on ultra in this game regardless if you overclock the 2500k or not. Cyberpower is just lying to you to get your business, it's what most (all) businesses would do. I have an overclocked 2500k and you won't be seeing 100 FPS average unless you just enjoy cheesing all day long.
A multi-GPU configuration depends on drivers so the performance benefit from the second card is going to range from 0% to 100%. If a game does not support CrossfireX or SLI, you're screwed. If a game favors one technology over the other and you unfortunately have the other technology, you're screwed. Though games favoring one over the other also applies to single GPU configurations, you're not as screwed in this situation.
I should have been more specific when I mentioned planning for a multi-GPU configuration. I meant as an upgrade path (so if you were to purchase a GTX 560 Ti now, you would purchase another one sometime down the road).
Let's take an example from the past. The GTX 260 was released in 2008 and debuted at over $400 and the cards today are like non-existent in the marketplace. You can probably pick some up in BST forums for ~$100. Now we have the GTX 570 which was just released eleven months ago (in December 2010) which debuted at over $350 and it blows away a GTX 260 SLI configuration while at the same time consuming less power and producing less noise and heat.
I've never worked with a custom loop. I've only worked with closed loop liquid cooling such as the H50 and these are no better than the air heatsinks on the market.
If you want to start with a single GPU configuration and than be able to do a SLI GTX 870 configuration or whatever than that's fine. But by that time, it's likely you'll be wanting a new processor as well which will require a new motherboard. I just don't think a multi-GPU configuration is a good idea, let's just say it's more than what most people need.
+ Show Spoiler +CyberPowerPC Configurations for Price Benchmarking#1 @ $1,556 + Show Spoiler +Case: * Corsair Carbide Series 400R Mid-Tower Gaming Case
Laser Engraving: NONE
Laser Engraving Message:
Internal USB Extension Module: None
Neon Light Upgrade: None
Extra Case Fan Upgrade: Default case fans
Noise Reduction Technology: None
CPU: Intel® Core™ i7-2600K 3.40 GHz 8M Intel Smart Cache LGA1155 (All Venom OC Certified)
Venom Boost Fast And Efficient Factory Overclocking: Pro OC (Performance Overclock 10% or more)
Cooling Fan: CoolIT ECO II-240 Extreme Performance Liquid Cooling System 240MM Radiator & Dual Fans
Coolant for Cyberpower Xtreme Hydro Water Cooling Kits: Standard Coolant
Motherboard: * [CrossFireX/SLI] GigaByte Z68X-UD3H-B3 Intel Z68 Chipset DDR3 ATX Mainboard w/ Lucid Virtu Intel Smart Response Technology & 7.1 Dolby Home Theater Audio, GbLAN, USB3.0, 4x SATA-III RAID, 2 Gen2 PCIe, 3 PCIe X1 & 2 PCI (All Venom OC Certified) [+66]
Intel Smart Response Technology for Z68: 60 GB OCZ Agility 3 SATA III 6.0Gb/s SSD - 525MB/s Read & 475MB/s Write [+106] (Single Drive)
Memory: 8GB (2GBx4) DDR3/1600MHz Dual Channel Memory Module (Corsair XMS Gaming Memory with Heat Spreader)
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 2GB 16X PCIe Video Card [+128] (Major Brand Powered by NVIDIA)
Freebies: None
Video Card 2: None
Video Card 3: None
Power Supply Upgrade: 700 Watts - XtremeGear SLI/CrossFireX Ready Power Supply
Hard Drive: 120 GB OCZ Agility 3 SATA-III 6.0Gb/s SSD - 525MB/s Read & 500MB/s Write [-5] (Single Drive)
Data Hard Drive: 1TB SATA-III 6.0Gb/s 32MB Cache 7200RPM HDD [+175] (Single Drive)
Hard Drive Cooling Fan: Vigor iSURF II Hard Disk Drive Cooling System [+21] (1 x System)
External Hard Drive (USB3.0/2.0/eSATA): None
USB Flash Drive: None
Optical Drive: 24X Double Layer Dual Format DVD+-R/+-RW + CD-R/RW Drive (BLACK COLOR)
Optical Drive 2: None
Sound: HIGH DEFINITION ON-BOARD 7.1 AUDIO
3D Vision Glasses: None
LCD Monitor: None
2nd Monitor: None
3rd Monitor: None
Speakers: None
Network: Onboard Gigabit LAN Network
Network Switch: None
Keyboard: Xtreme Gear (Black Color) Multimedia/Internet USB Keyboard
Mouse: XtremeGear Optical USB 3 Buttons Gaming Mouse
Freebies: None
Mouse Pad: None
Gaming Gear: None
Extra Thermal Display: None
Wireless 802.11B/G Network Card: None
External Wireless Network Card: None
Wireless 802.11 B/G/N Access Point: None
Bluetooth: None
Flash Media Reader/Writer: INTERNAL 12in1 Flash Media Reader/Writer (BLACK COLOR)
Video Camera: None
Headset: None
Printer: None
Cable: None
Power Protection: None
Surge Protector: None
IEEE1394 Card: None
Internal USB Port: Built-in USB 2.0 Ports
USB Port: None
Operating System: Microsoft® Windows 7 Home Premium (64-bit Edition)
Media Center Remote Control & TV Tuner: None
Office Suite: None
Games: None
Ultra Care Option: None
Service: STANDARD WARRANTY: 3-YEAR LIMITED WARRANTY PLUS LIFE-TIME TECHNICAL SUPPORT
Rush Service: NO; READY TO SHIP IN 5~10 BUSINESS DAYS I went all out with that one. I was clueless when choosing a motherboard though, and I picked the video card based on the FPS that they reported for SC2 on Ultra. For an additional $99 I can get Pioneer BDR-206BK 12X Blu-Ray Writer (Black Color). Based on the builds, and stuff that I've received as part of feedback has been hovering around this price range. Do you think this build that I did in several minutes is a good baseline. Is it worth buying this, if it's awesome? Can I build this same computer on my own for cheaper (with over clocking too). My intentions has been to build a computer. It's generally cheaper, and a fun process. You get to really customize your own product and call it your own! But based on this price that I got at CyberPower, and with the prices that I am seeing with the components, it's surprisingly similar. I've heard talk about bottlenecking and stuff. I want to avoid all the pitfalls with my new PC, so please help!
Cyberpower is overpriced. You don't want to use them to price out a configuration.
I hate the word bottleneck. Some people which may include yourself may not agree with my point of view on a bottleneck but anyways... You are always going to have a hardware bottleneck with the latest games (I'm obviously not talking about 2D games but games such as Crysis, Battlefield, etc) - there is no way around this. You want a reasonable configuration for the task to alleviate the bottleneck. For example, if you were going to encode or render - you would want the best processor possible for the task and unless the task is accomplished in 0 seconds, you are still bottlenecked. If you were going to play the latest games - you would want a relatively strong GPU and CPU so that the GPU won't be holding you back in CPU intensive games and the CPU won't be holding you back in GPU intensive games. But unless you are getting a constant frames per second, you still have a bottleneck.
|
My view on bottleneck: a weak part of your computer holding back stronger parts.
For example, if you have GTX 580 and a celeron G530, you'll be CPU-bottlenecked a great deal of the time. Same with having 2500k and a 6450 - you'll be GPU-bottlenecked.
(CPU good enough for 20 fps, GPU good enough for 100 fps = bottleneck, CPU good enough for 120 fps, GPU good enough for 50 fps = bottleneck, CPU good enough for 60 fps, GPU good enough for 60 FPS = no bottleneck)
Not being able to perform a task in 0 seconds isn't bottlenecking it's a totally different thing.
|
On November 11 2011 06:43 Shikyo wrote:
My view on bottleneck: a weak part of your computer holding back stronger parts.
For example, if you have GTX 580 and a celeron G530, you'll be CPU-bottlenecked a great deal of the time. Same with having 2500k and a 6450 - you'll be GPU-bottlenecked.
(CPU good enough for 20 fps, GPU good enough for 100 fps = bottleneck, CPU good enough for 120 fps, GPU good enough for 50 fps = bottleneck, CPU good enough for 60 fps, GPU good enough for 60 FPS = no bottleneck)
Not being able to perform a task in 0 seconds isn't bottlenecking it's a totally different thing.
I have a similar view. The bottleneck as I see it is the part that, if replaced with a better part, would speed up your system. As Shikyo says, the GTX 580 isn't the bottleneck in that situation since even if you upgraded to SLI 580s, it wouldn't improve performance. It's the part that's limiting the performance increase.
Of course, I'm not trying to lecture SkyR by any means, just saying how I've viewed the definition of the word. I'd say that's how most people use it, at least.
|
EDIT: I added my response to FabledIntegral
On November 11 2011 06:23 skyR wrote:+ Show Spoiler +It's too early to be asking for a build recommendation if you don't plan on building until May of next year since there will be new components out as you and I mentioned.
The new hardware we drool over today generally doesn't drop at all or not much at all when a new generation replaces it. And with a budget of your size, people don't typically buy previous generation components
When I mentioned that the 2500k would be the best choice for a gamer in the next six months. It meant that in six months (November, December, January, February, March, April), it will no longer be the best choice to purchase because the newer processors based on the Ivybridge architecture will be replacing it. Is it still going to be relevant in offering you acceptable performance? Yes. Will it be the newest? No. Will it be one of the best processors? No.
You don't purchase a brand new 2010 edition textbook for the same price as the 2011 edition textbook when the 2011 edition textbook has added new material and improved on the existing material.
You won't be averaging 100 FPS on ultra in this game regardless if you overclock the 2500k or not. Cyberpower is just lying to you to get your business, it's what most (all) businesses would do. I have an overclocked 2500k and you won't be seeing 100 FPS average unless you just enjoy cheesing all day long.
A multi-GPU configuration depends on drivers so the performance benefit from the second card is going to range from 0% to 100%. If a game does not support CrossfireX or SLI, you're screwed. If a game favors one technology over the other and you unfortunately have the other technology, you're screwed. Though games favoring one over the other also applies to single GPU configurations, you're not as screwed in this situation.
I should have been more specific when I mentioned planning for a multi-GPU configuration. I meant as an upgrade path (so if you were to purchase a GTX 560 Ti now, you would purchase another one sometime down the road).
Let's take an example from the past. The GTX 260 was released in 2008 and debuted at over $400 and the cards today are like non-existent in the marketplace. You can probably pick some up in BST forums for ~$100. Now we have the GTX 570 which was just released eleven months ago (in December 2010) which debuted at over $350 and it blows away a GTX 260 SLI configuration while at the same time consuming less power and producing less noise and heat.
I've never worked with a custom loop. I've only worked with closed loop liquid cooling such as the H50 and these are no better than the air heatsinks on the market.
If you want to start with a single GPU configuration and than be able to do a SLI GTX 870 configuration or whatever than that's fine. But by that time, it's likely you'll be wanting a new processor as well which will require a new motherboard. I just don't think a multi-GPU configuration is a good idea, let's just say it's more than what most people need.
SkyR, you are awesome! No wonder you come so highly recommend on the forums. Your posts have been very helpful, and based on the feedback that I've been getting I am considering to push the computer build date to next month. I thought by prolonging the build day, I could capture some of the new edition stuff. Do you think it's worth the wait for the new processors that are based the IvyBridge architecture? I like your analogy with textbook editions. When it comes down to it, a 10th edition book is just as a good as an 11th edition as well... and the 10th edition is cheaper to boot.
Did you read MisterFred's post? Can you weigh in on his point about overspending for a computer? I was inspired by his post to look into cutting more costs. He suggested that my intentions of dumping money into a PC would not be worth it. Please read it. I am doing his post injustice by paraphrasing it.
Thanks for the clarification about the SLI topic and on the monitor. I learned a lot! I've decided not to pursue the multi GPU configuration. I will solely focus on having a single, and great enough GPU. I think it'll more than enough for what I need now. In three years, if I need multiple GPU's then I'll make a computer for that then as you suggested. I will also make dual monitor set-up. Just curious though... It is not feasible to run three monitors on a single GPU, correct? I will also go with the 24'' monitors as you recommended.
On November 11 2011 06:23 skyR wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Cyberpower is overpriced. You don't want to use them to price out a configuration.
I hate the word bottleneck. Some people which may include yourself may not agree with my point of view on a bottleneck but anyways... You are always going to have a hardware bottleneck with the latest games (I'm obviously not talking about 2D games but games such as Crysis, Battlefield, etc) - there is no way around this. You want a reasonable configuration for the task to alleviate the bottleneck. For example, if you were going to encode or render - you would want the best processor possible for the task and unless the task is accomplished in 0 seconds, you are still bottlenecked. If you were going to play the latest games - you would want a relatively strong GPU and CPU so that the GPU won't be holding you back in CPU intensive games and the CPU won't be holding you back in GPU intensive games. But unless you are getting a constant frames per second, you still have a bottleneck.
How would you go about deciding which components to get? GPU, CPU, and motherboard in particular. My definition of bottlenecking, by the way, is aligned with the response just below your post and it seems to be similar to your point of view as well. To summarize it, basically bottlenecking (imo) occurs when a component (i.e. CPU) holds back the performance of another component (i.e. GPU). If you don't think it is avoidable, there still must be an optimal point, right?
On November 11 2011 04:03 FabledIntegral wrote:1. A blu-ray reader is cheaper than a burner. 2. You could get a PSU for a third of the price that would work fine. That's a high quality PSU for sure, but you don't need to pay the premium for GOLD quality. You just need a quality PSU. You also have NO need for 750W. A large reason for the expensive price is that it's modular. Modular makes the actual computer construction easier as it's easier to manage your cables. This does not improve the performance of your computer, but rather just makes, as said, cable management, and potentially airflow, better. You have to ask yourself if you want to pay an extra $50-80 for that. 3. The i5 2500k and i7 2600k are essentially identical in performance. Generally speaking, ihe i7 offers identical gaming performance as the i5 2500k, but performs better in other areas such as video encoding, etc. If you do not use these featuers, there is no reason to get the i7, as it won't help your gaming performance, unless out of nowhere games are able to make use of hyperthreading, which it doesn't look like they will anytime soon before you'd upgrade again anwyays (we're talking years from now). What SkyR meant by it's the best choice for the next six months is that "if you're going to be building a gaming computer within the next six months, the i5 2500k is the best choice." NOT that it's only going to be relevant for 6 months. That would be awful. 4. Once again, I've looked at the build and it still doesn't have a hard drive... 5. The NVIDIA GTX 560ti is a vastly inferior card to the 6970 from the other build, just so you know. It would still max SC2 on ultra no problem and play high/ultra on BF3. It's a top of the end card, about $120 or so cheaper though than the AMD card. You can use anandtech.com to look at benchmarks. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/330?vs=292In fact, my GTX 460 1GB can play SC2 on ultra, and is still a solid card. Sells for about $115-130 now after rebate. Just to give you a picture, although SC2 isn't a very demanding game in terms of graphics. If you really want to spend that much money, then go for it, but realize you could spend around $700 (not including monitor) and max out most current and future (within next six months or so) games on ultra. Computer tech has really gone far in the past few years that unless you really want to shell out $2,000, there isn't much gain from doing so. Not including monitor I'd personally recommend not spending more than $1,200. i5 2500k $205 p67 board ~$105 560ti ~$215 PSU ~$50 (Antec Neo Eco 520w or something) Case ~$50 (Antec Illusion 300 or something alnog those lines) HDD ~$70 (I believe 1TB 7200RPM drives are giong for these prices now, but not sure) SSD ~$120 (probably a 90GB or so drive if you're going with OCZ drives, they're super cheap) RAM ~$40 (8GB of 1600MHz RAM on sale or 1333MHz RAM standard, any major brand) Windows ~$30 (if you go the upgrade method, which is kind of cheating, otherwise $85) Optical Drive ~$20 It's similar price and performance..
Hey again FabledIntegral. Thanks for the quick reply -- awesome post! I'm responding to your points in order. The numbers correspond to your comments.
1. That's excellent, so if push comes to shove, I could always settle on a reader to cut costs further. That way I could enjoy movies and such. I'm not opposed to having a writer though. I'm mainly worried about the other parts of the computer though. Once I've settled all of that, then I'll have decide between the reader or writer. Not too worried about that.
2. Thanks for the elaboration. I haven't decided yet, but I'm learning towards paying the premium for the cable management. I would like everything to be in order, and have optimal airflow to keep the system cool. Perhaps, once the build is complete, I will cut costs here if I am over budget. But, if I don't need to it would be nice to have it all neat!
3. Thanks for clarifying SkyR's point. I also read his post right after yours -- I think I forgot to comment on that -- but he also said the same thing. I apologize for taking that out of context, SkyR. I didn't mean too! It makes sense. It being the best option for the next 6 months made me wonder if I should wait for the 7th month to get the "new thing." But the more I think about it, the more I realize I want an awesome PC already so I can enjoy it!
I'm sold on getting the i5 over the i7. Thanks for explaining the differences.
4. That's funny. I think I selected a Hard Drive. What do you think about a SSD drive as a primary (to run SC2 and other commonly used applications), and a normal 1 Terabyte hard drive for data? I'm not interested in RAID. I did some research on that, and it doesn't appear to be worth it.
5. Interesting... I didn't realize that the TI was inferior to the AMD that you are referring to. How high-end should my GPU be? That's one of the "ultimate" questions remaining.
Nice sample build. That's an amazing price. Just curious, how did you go about choosing the motherboard? It's definitely not a one size fits all component. It seems like choosing a GPU is easier than a motherboard. Like some motherboards have integrated sound, wifi (?), SATA III, etc. So many options!!!
TL;DR
My most pressing questions are:
1. Is it worth waiting for the new processors that tap into the IvyBridge architecture? In addition to the other "new stuff" coming out soon?
2. What's the criteria for choosing a GPU, CPU, motherboard (and other components)? What would you recommend and why? The market is so saturated with products, it's hard for me (as a newbie) to make an informed decision.
I'm willing to make the computer ASAP, as long as you don't think I'm missing out on the upcoming product releases.
|
intel processor prices wont be lowered. Ivybridge is going to replace sandybridge.
However, I wouldn't really wait for ivybridge, but I definitely would like to wait for the nextgen graphics cards as they're supposed to be coming out very early next year.
Criteria is to get the cheapest mobo with the features you need, the CPU with the features you need, etc.
|
On November 11 2011 07:47 Shikyo wrote:
intel processor prices wont be lowered. Ivybridge is going to replace sandybridge.
However, I wouldn't really wait for ivybridge, but I definitely would like to wait for the nextgen graphics cards as they're supposed to be coming out very early next year.
Criteria is to get the cheapest mobo with the features you need, the CPU with the features you need, etc.
Okay, I can definitely wait for the new graphic cards. I am wondering why you wouldn't wait for ivybridge. Is the difference between sandy-bridge and ivy-bridge minimal?
With respect to motherboards, can a cheap motherboard bottleneck a GPU/CPU? Or does it not function in that way?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
