|
Another build for AMD
|
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
26. October 2010 @ 19:49 |
Link to this message
|
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. October 2010 @ 19:59
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. October 2010 @ 07:37 |
Link to this message
|
Well, you can use two nvidia cards if you like, but you need to consider the fact that most nvidia cards typically only last 2-3 years tops. If this is a long-term system that might not be such a good idea. Also, it depends on your budget, if you're going to be using two midrange cards like the GTX460s, you may as well wait until next month when the HD6970 appears (a single GPU card, not like the HD5970) which will perform similarly if not better, but without needing to use two GPUs, which is still potentially problematic.
The CPU is pretty pointless for games, unless you're running workstation tasks like video encoding, you will be much better off with this pairing:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115067
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128412
also, Asus boards are terrible, you will regret buying one. Stick with Gigabyte. I'd also recommend changing RAM from G-Skill to Corsair, G-Skill have had a few compatibility problems of late.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145285
or if you want 8GB:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145313
I'm not sure which controller the G-Skill SSD uses, but I would strongly recommend this one, in case the G-Skill isn't up to date:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227551
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
27. October 2010 @ 10:25 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah I know that intel CPU is much better than AMD...But I already have the intel CPU extreme i7 965...So this time I would like to try AMD...So not sure what you think of the six core of AMD...Is it better than the i5 or is it worse than i5?
Another reason why I choose AMD is because it is easily overclockable, which is good. Unless it is not any better than the i5...So I might wanna try AMD.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. October 2010 @ 10:28 |
Link to this message
|
per-core, it's much worse. If you're only going to use 4 cores (games do not use more than 4 cores at all at this point), which is very likely, then the Phenom II X6 is much worse than the Core i5.
AMD CPUs are more difficult to overclock than Intel CPUs, considerably so. Both are easy, but where you may struggle to get a 3.2Ghz AMD to 4GHz, getting a 2.66Ghz Intel over 4Ghz is a doddle, I achieved it with my i5 750 in 30 seconds flat.
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
27. October 2010 @ 19:19 |
Link to this message
|
Would you please tell me a little more about the hex-core of the AMD? SO I really hope you could point out the pro and con of both CPU.
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
30. October 2010 @ 18:04 |
Link to this message
|
Sam, but I heard a lot of people said that they could easily achieve 4.0ghz with AMD six core. So I think I am gonna stick with this CPU.
The one you suggested doesn't have hyperthreading though it does have integrated turbo boost.
What I would like you to give advice on are
Motherboard.
Graphic card : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125321
Case.
I will buy the RAM you suggested and will stick with gigabyte mobo, but I am not really sure what gigabyte mobo to get as the one you suggested last time is a bit difficult to overclock although I could achieve 3.70 with the CPU multiplier.
So hopefully you could guide me and teach me something. Thanks in advance SAM.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. October 2010 @ 18:37
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. October 2010 @ 18:06 |
Link to this message
|
4.0Ghz but no further, and remember, at 4.0Ghz an AMD Phenom II is only as fast as a 2.9Ghz Core i5/i7. So a 4Ghz i5/i7, easily doable, and they will go even higher still, is considerably faster than the Phenom.
Hyperthreading is useless for games, CPUs are faster with it off in gaming scenarios. In much the same way that having an extra two cores is useless.
In every game I can think of, a Core i5/i7 is ultimately around 40-45% faster than a Phenom II X6 1090T when overclocked, due to how much better i5 CPUs are.
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
30. October 2010 @ 20:19 |
Link to this message
|
What if I go for i7 950? What do you think of this? I am willing to spend my bucks on CPU and the max is $300 and I think i7 950 is around $29X...
What I use this PC for is not gaming that much, but huge editing, creating database, and video or music encoding...
Another question is why AMD when overclocked to 4.0ghz is as fast as 2.9ghz of i5/i7? I really wanna know more and learn more about it.
I also checked the benchmark. In certain scenarios, Phenom II X6 1090T is faster than i5/i7 of intel?
This is an issue that keeps bugging me. I really hope there would be a comparison of the pro and con of these two processors.
Please help me with mobo and graphic card sam if possible.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. October 2010 @ 20:37 |
Link to this message
|
Essentially it's down to how the CPUs are designed. Believe it or not, the Phenom II X6 1090T is actually 6 old Athlon64s from 6 years ago, clocked higher and made smaller so they use little enough power for 6 of them to fit in a CPU.
The Core i7 architecture is much newer and more efficient [sort of].
The i7 950 CPUs are good, but if the program you use does actually use 6 cores, it's a much closer run between the X6 and the i7. If you ever do something that's only single-threaded often, I'd still say the i7 is the better buy, as the 4-core i7 and 6-core AMD are about comparable for the reasons I've stated.
If we're going into this level of detail, one thing at a time :P
Now I know the PC's not for games, the parts you will need will change.
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
30. October 2010 @ 21:53 |
Link to this message
|
You know I have to create, probably a huge database in the future (what it means is I gotta keep track of and store records and information of a millions people), and then do H.264 video encoding and editing, photoshop, and 3D gaming projects.
So I still cannot decide which one to buy. U know, whenever I try to decide which CPU to buy, it is really gonna give me headache.
Anyway, I have also read about the benchmarks. Intel i7 surpasses AMD in all aspects but when it comes to rendering and multi-threaded application, AMD takes the lead.
So when you said "it is a much closer run between the X6 and i7"...Do you mean they are just about the same?
Consider that is a workstation PC...
But if choosing AMD what would be the difference in gaming? Is it slower by 10 minutes or 5 minutes --- Because that's a huge difference.
Please help me choose the proper components, and I really appreciate this.
Please note: I would like to have a MOBO and CPU that is easily overclockable.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. October 2010 @ 23:02 |
Link to this message
|
For rendering, it really depends which program. Some are biased towards Intel, others towards AMDs. If all the programs you use will work with 6 cores, the AMD is possibly going to be a better bet, as it will likely to be cheaper to setup. However, if any of the stuff you regularly use is going to run on 4 cores or less, the Intel will be better. While the Intel is a much better gaming CPU, it's very rare that a game is more demanding than the AMD X6 can deal with, that's really more of a future-thinking perspective.
I'm confused how you could ever measure gaming performance in minutes though?
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
31. October 2010 @ 00:15 |
Link to this message
|
I don't think a program could ever use up six cores even by now...Probably use three or four cores, which is the max...
Can MEGUI, a editing video program and adobe master suites as well as 3D Maya use up all four cores? That's the question and I really doubt it.
for gaming, I think I was going to talk about how fast the game can be rendered (framerates...).
So with no fanboy perspective, if you were to buy a CPU, which one would you buy if your purpose was to use this CPU for work rather than gaming? (once in a while would be good to play game on this CPU).
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
31. October 2010 @ 08:07 |
Link to this message
|
Actually, a few applications are effectively omni-threaded, so they will use as many cores as you have, 16 or more in some cases. Don't ask me which programs these are though, as I don't use them. You'll have to do a bit of research on that.
As for games, think of it from the perspective of, the GPU controls how fast the game runs, up to a certain ceiling which cannot be exceeded. Unless the game engine has an automatic limiter, this limit is as fast as the CPU can go. In most games with a decent CPU (which encompasses any of the Phenom IIs as well as most Core 2s, not just the i5s and i7s) this limit is well above the 60fps you need for fluid gameplay, in almost every game. However, there are a small number of exceptions where an overclocked i7 can only manage about 55, and a Phenom II can only manage about 40. That is where it starts to get noticeable.
For me, it would really come down to if the programs I used could actually run on 6 cores, if they couldn't, i7 hands down. If they could, I'd think very seriously about the Phenom II X6.
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
31. October 2010 @ 10:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well I think I will switch to i7 950...
SAM, would you please recommend a good mobo that could be paired up with two Nvidia cards 470? I really appreciate it.
|
|
ps355528
Senior Member
|
31. October 2010 @ 11:20 |
Link to this message
|
I don't think a program could ever use up six cores even by now..
never seen a 64 node supercomputer then eh? .. I (before selling it) could transcode 3 hours of 1080p video to a different size and format (stock dvd mpeg2 720x576 from 1080p h264) in under 3 minutes... .. using all 64 processors at my disposal..
you have to write your own software to do that.. never did upscale to the 512 nodes I wanted.
This multi cpu/core crap on one chip is a complete dead end technology .. same as ppc and sparc .. dead end.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
31. October 2010 @ 12:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
GTX470s use an astronomical amount of power and really aren't that fast. I would take two HD6870s over the 470s any day of the week. The scaling of the new HD6 series is such that two HD6870s will often outperform two GTX470s, they cost $480 for the pair, and they only use 290-300W at full load - two GTX470s use almost 500W.
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
31. October 2010 @ 18:23 |
Link to this message
|
So if I go for the i7 950, what mobo should I use? Heatsink and fan? I know you prefer Cosair, so I think for RAM I will go for brand Cosair, but what kind of rams are good for this build?
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
31. October 2010 @ 18:25 |
Link to this message
|
Corsair XMS3, 1600mhz should be fine. Latency is relatively unimportant for Intels.
As for the board, a Gigabyte X58A-UD3R will do fine.
|
|
Jinkazuya
Member
|
31. October 2010 @ 22:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
And I am just wondering which internal harddrive do you recommend as a storage drive for music and videos?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
31. October 2010 @ 23:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
Just music and videos, a WD Caviar Green. If installing games to it as well, a WD Caviar Black.
|
