|
Advice on building a computer...
|
|
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
27. January 2009 @ 19:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. January 2009 @ 20:58 |
Link to this message
|
Ouch, a good few problems there.
First, if you have a limited budget, a Twelve Hundred is outrageous. This case does the same job for barely more than half the price:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811146047
Second, an Nforce 7 motherbord. Bad idea, very bad.
OCZ memory isn't that great, and that PSU is overkill, not to mention expensive for what you get (They're also not very quiet, despite the Silencer name)
Recommended parts:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102801
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128359
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139001
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145214
(Yes, DDR2, trust me, that's fine)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835608002
|
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
27. January 2009 @ 21:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Ouch, a good few problems there.
First, if you have a limited budget, a Twelve Hundred is outrageous. This case does the same job for barely more than half the price:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...1146047
Well, I wanted a full tower for expandability. I'm most likely going to dual SLi in the future and need all the space I can get. Nice tower though, looks almost exactly the same as the 1200 full tower! Only smaller...
Originally posted by sammorris:
Second, an Nforce 7 motherbord. Bad idea, very bad.
OCZ memory isn't that great, and that PSU is overkill, not to mention expensive for what you get (They're also not very quiet, despite the Silencer name)
Hm, well seeing as I have no experience with nforce 7 motherboards, what's wrong with them?
Originally posted by sammorris:
Recommended parts:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102801
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128359
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139001
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145214
(Yes, DDR2, trust me, that's fine)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...5608002
Well, I mainly wanted a future proof (3-5 years) PC, which is why I chose some of the components I did. My original plan, and I'd still like to stick to it, is to have a quad core, ddr3, dual sli set-up. That's why I picked out that motherboard. But if that series is no good, could you recommend something similar but better built?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. January 2009 @ 21:32
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. January 2009 @ 21:40 |
Link to this message
|
A mid tower can still support dual graphics or more. There is no difference in what they can support hardware-wise, only things like more hard disks and (arguably) better cooling. The cooling on the Tempest is superfluous anyway.
I don't really see dual graphics as futureproof, I see them as an excuse to get the best performance now rather than later, as typically they're more enthusiast-grade, than high end home user.
The problem with nforce boards is partly due to the SLI configuration. The only way you will get SLI without one is Core i7, which isn't really suited to gamers.
DDR3 also has no futureproofing whatsoever, think of it as the same as DDR2 but running on a faster bus. No performance gain, just compatibility with different CPUs.
Your best bet to get a fast PC is to get a better processor.
Swap the Q6600 for this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115041
This is a good 40% faster.
If you want dual graphics, why not use this?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131116
|
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
27. January 2009 @ 22:06 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
A mid tower can still support dual graphics or more. There is no difference in what they can support hardware-wise, only things like more hard disks and (arguably) better cooling. The cooling on the Tempest is superfluous anyway.
Ok, well I most likely will only ever have 2 HDD's in my system. So I suppose I should look for a really spacious mid-tower case. Thanks for the tip!
Originally posted by sammorris:
I don't really see dual graphics as futureproof, I see them as an excuse to get the best performance now rather than later, as typically they're more enthusiast-grade, than high end home user.
I'm pretty sure I can get a lot out of a single card now and hook another one up, or upgrade again to 1 or 2 later. Right now I can only afford one card, so 2 is definitely out of the picture.
Originally posted by sammorris:
The problem with nforce boards is partly due to the SLI configuration. The only way you will get SLI without one is Core i7, which isn't really suited to gamers.
Confused?
Originally posted by sammorris:
DDR3 also has no futureproofing whatsoever, think of it as the same as DDR2 but running on a faster bus. No performance gain, just compatibility with different CPUs.
No performance gain at all? Even more confused now...
Originally posted by sammorris:
Your best bet to get a fast PC is to get a better processor.
Swap the Q6600 for this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115041
This is a good 40% faster.
I actually selected that one first, but it was much too expensive so i took the next step down. The Q6600 seems okay for now and I will be overclocking it a little to get more speed. I'll probably go with the Q9550 in a few years when it's dirt cheap, or maybe another, better 755 processor.
Originally posted by sammorris:
If you want dual graphics, why not use this?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...4131116
Lol! Wayyy out of my price range! Is a beast though, but ATi isn't my cup o' tea.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. January 2009 @ 22:13 |
Link to this message
|
For reference, the NZXT Tempest fits 8 hard drives.
If you can only afford one card now, only ever buy one. By the time you need another technology will have changed so much that just buying a newer single card will do you far more good.
The only way to use SLI without a crap motherboard is to use a Core i7 CPU (1366) not Core 2 (775). Does that help?
You are right, DDR3 has ZERO effect on gaming performance, and very minor gains for video encoding / calculations.
The Q9550 is by far the better chip, but suit yourself.
If you don't want an HD4870X2 then try this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161247
I suggest ATI because right now, they destroy nvidia for value-for-money. That's not fanboyism, that's just the truth. A $220 HD4870 1GB generally matches or beats a $260 GTX260 216 core, and the $450 HD4870X2 compares to the GTX295 which is far more expensive.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. January 2009 @ 22:15
|
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
28. January 2009 @ 03:58 |
Link to this message
|
Ok, I've sat down, looked through all the parts you've listed and really thought hard about what I will be doing with this PC for the next 5+ years. I've actually decided to take nearly all of it, except the GPU. Adding everything up, it's the one thing that is easily upgradable in the future and doesn't need to be the best right now. I like nvidia, but I'm probably gonna go with ATi this time around. Now to find a cheaper GPU...
Think this will do for a while?
SAPPHIRE 100259L Radeon HD 4870 512MB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102810
It's the same model as the one you listed, only half the memory. I haven't played a PC game in quite a few years, do they really need 1GB on the GPU?
Originally posted by Me+Notepad:
$189.99 GPU - 15
$109.99 PSU - 20
$84.00 RAM - 30
$59.99 Cooling
$281.99 CPU
$119.99 MB - 15
$109.99 Case - 20
$24.99 Wi-Fi Card
$27.99 DVD+/-RW Drive
$119.99 HDD
1128.91
1028.91 - Rebates
Still need to find a way to trim $100 off this...
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. January 2009 @ 04:56
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. January 2009 @ 08:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
28. January 2009 @ 13:18 |
Link to this message
|
Western Digital Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136319
Would that be a better choice seeing as it has twice the cache size for $5.00? I just looked at that 1TB HDD I chose and it isn't even available anymore, so regardless I'm going with the 640GB drive. I don't see a need for any more space then that for a long time anyways.
I was looking through some of the specs of the new PSU you recommended, some things I didn't understand. Is the original one you recommended better/more stable?
I'm planning on using a 24" monitor with all this, will 2" be much of a difference in terms of RAM usage? The monitor I chose is 1920 x 1200, so that would be the max I will put my games up to. No 1080P HD TV for me yet...
Acer X243Wbd Black 24" 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor 400 cd/m2 3000:1 ACM with HDCP support
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009152
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. January 2009 @ 13:20
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. January 2009 @ 13:22 |
Link to this message
|
They are both powerful, stable units, but the HX520 is quieter (neither unit is loud), and has modular cabling, so you needn't clutter your case up with the cables you don't need.
As for the drive, there tends not to be too much of a difference between the Blue and Black drives in terms of performance, for $5 it doesn't seem much to ask, but on the other hand, I'm not sure you'll gain much either.
1920x1200 is quite stressful on graphics cards compared to 1680x1050. To use full graphics settings at that resolution I strongly recommend sticking with the 1GB card.
Oh, and 1080p is 1920x1080, so a slightly lower resolution than a 24" monitor offers.
|
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
28. January 2009 @ 15:55 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
They are both powerful, stable units, but the HX520 is quieter (neither unit is loud), and has modular cabling, so you needn't clutter your case up with the cables you don't need.
As for the drive, there tends not to be too much of a difference between the Blue and Black drives in terms of performance, for $5 it doesn't seem much to ask, but on the other hand, I'm not sure you'll gain much either.
Hmm, well... $5 isn't much, better safe then sorry I guess. I'm most likely going to stick with the HX520 seeing as it has modular cabling. Less mess and better air flow.
Originally posted by sammorris:
1920x1200 is quite stressful on graphics cards compared to 1680x1050. To use full graphics settings at that resolution I strongly recommend sticking with the 1GB card.
Oh, and 1080p is 1920x1080, so a slightly lower resolution than a 24" monitor offers.
Gotcha. Have you seen much of a difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 on a 24" monitor?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. January 2009 @ 18:39
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. January 2009 @ 18:23 |
Link to this message
|
Cooler link still works fine for me.
I'd strongly recommend using the correct resolution for your monitor, it has a big impact on image quality.
|
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
2. February 2009 @ 17:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
Took my tax return another week to arrive, so I'm still looking at parts, but thanks to sammorris I've pretty much been able to decide on every single part. Just hoping things drop in price soon (buying it all on Friday/Saturday). I was wondering what OS I should load up for this PC?
XP
Vista
???
I'm very experienced with XP, but know little of vista except from what I hear (and it's all bad). Nothing lately of course, but I'm still a bit wary. I hear a new M$ OS is coming out soon, Windows 7 I think? I hope that's a good successor to XP. But anyways, should I still stick with XP for the time being or upgrade to Vista Ultimate?
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
2. February 2009 @ 18:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
Up to you really. Vista is nowhere near as bad as it used to be, but it's still got plenty of issues. Windows 7 will probably be a good bet when it's released. For now, you may as well stick with XP.
|
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
2. February 2009 @ 18:06 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Up to you really. Vista is nowhere near as bad as it used to be, but it's still got plenty of issues. Windows 7 will probably be a good bet when it's released. For now, you may as well stick with XP.
I figured, just wanted to hear it from the man. I would figure since games are still XP compatible (and even if they're not, it's not hard to get them there), XP would be the better OS to load games on since it doesn't take up nearly the amount of system resources that Vista does.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
2. February 2009 @ 20:18 |
Link to this message
|
That's correct. Vista uses about double the RAM of XP.
|
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
5. February 2009 @ 18:09 |
Link to this message
|
Ok, strange... I'm receiving mixed messages here. I contacted a group at a forum I frequent often and asked them if there was any way to trim a few dollars off the PC I built based off the suggestions you gave me. For some strange reason one of them mentioned this combo:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealD...st=Combo.155233
He's pretty insistent that AMD is the better way to go right now and for the near future. Now looking at specs and everything, it does seem like the AMD chip is better then a 775 QXXXX chip except for the L2 Cache, which looks like it sucks compared to Intel, is that relevant? I'm confused...
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
5. February 2009 @ 18:46 |
Link to this message
|
|
Not really, I still stand by the build I stated being the better deal.
|
|
Saraph
Newbie
|
10. February 2009 @ 13:39 |
Link to this message
|
Well, after listening to my girlfriends advice (when it comes to technology, I usually go with the opposite suggestion she has), I chose AMD. So upon further research I discovered AMD sucks compared to the Intel Quad Cores, so I chose Intel. Wasn't able to buy a 9550 at this time, but I will get one later. I did get the 1GB ATi card though. Total was close to $1,300 for everything. I'll post specs later. Thank you!
[url=http://www.myspace.com/saraphxiii][color=gray]I Have Experimental Cold Emotion Energy.[/color][/url] |
|
Saraph13
Newbie
|
10. February 2009 @ 15:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
10. February 2009 @ 21:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
An all round nice build. But why the two usernames?
|
|
Saraph
Newbie
|
11. February 2009 @ 11:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
I totally forgot I signed up for this site a really long time ago. I'd delete 13 if I could...
[url=http://www.myspace.com/saraphxiii][color=gray]I Have Experimental Cold Emotion Energy.[/color][/url] |
|
Saraph
Newbie
|
13. February 2009 @ 23:22 |
Link to this message
|
Anyone know the settings to OC a Q6600 on a GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3R to 3GHz on air with an ARCTIC COOLING Freezer 7 Pro?
[url=http://www.myspace.com/saraphxiii][color=gray]I Have Experimental Cold Emotion Energy.[/color][/url] |
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
14. February 2009 @ 04:12 |
Link to this message
|
You should literally be able to just set the FSB to 334, and change the memory multiplier appropriately (no higher than 2.5, with either C or D). Auto voltage should take care of all that with that speed.
|
