re: PC Discussion - Gaming, Performance and Enthusiasts

Yes mostly gaming. I thought about sharing it to do some graphic design. Mostly photoshop and SOME 3d work that im using an older iMac to do now but it is struggling to keep up. I figured gaming these days would be more taxing on resources than the design work so I didn't mention it.

If you are doing 3d work then the extra RAM will come in handy. Programs like solidworks are memory hogs.

If you aren't overclocking you could "technically" just use the stock fan. However, a cheap alternative could be something like the 212 Evo.

LINK

That being said, there is nothing wrong with overclocking and if done correctly it is perfectly safe for the CPU. You can also unlock a lot of additional performance for a fraction of the cost of getting a more powerful cpu out of the bag.

You could definitely do some overclocking with the 212 Evo. For a single 780 GPU you could probably get away with just a 750W gold PSU and be fine.

Any of the offerings from the mainstream PSU manufactures would suffice.

A good one would be

LINK

or

LINK

Oh, and as for the 1440 monitor I have ordered 3 of these:

LINK

They are dirt cheap and have received really good reviews. Apparently the manufacture is using the same monitor as the more mainstream brands and just charging a lot less. This is apparently because they receive monitors that have extremely minor defects that are oftentimes not even detectable. Most of the reviewers state that there are only 1 or 2 dead pixels, and many state that there are none. For me, saving half the cost is worth the potential for a dead pixel or two. I'll be sure to post in the forum about how the look once they arrive. :)

great, thanks so much for the help

I have to actually shut down my miner long enough to play with the overclock settings for my CPU but mining sweet sweet DOGE is so fulfilling.

I've actually managed to mine nearly 1.6 million DOGE in the last couple of weeks. Looks like a lot of people are selling them for 1 buck per thousand so it's been a healthy profit so far!

...of course that would involve me actually selling them. I'm sitting on most in hopes that it continues to rise.

quote:

---

ILikeLSUToo

---

Can't wait

Have to divide this into two posts because of the character limit


I must say, for starters, your part list is very well done. There's nothing in the build that's outlandishly off-base, except maybe the PSU (the one you chose is excellent, but just a little much for this build).

So, I'll go part by part.

Intel Core i7-4770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor
A fine choice if you are planning to do video editing/encoding and streaming, on top of gaming. The question is how much of that other stuff you plan to do. There are games (and even more games on the horizon) that take advantage of more than 4 threads, but they aren't the norm yet. However, given that the new gen consoles use x86 architecture with weak multi-core CPUs, game developers will be paying closer attention to taking advantage of as many threads as are available rather than relying on the raw clock speed to execute linear commands in a single thread. The multi-threaded advantage will be similar on PC as these games are ported.

I'm not suggesting that the 4770k will give you a huge advantage over a 4670k, but it will give you some -- eventually, I believe you'll get your extra $100 worth out of that CPU, assuming your son plays all the major titles released each year. If you were on a tighter budget, I'd immediately tell you to downgrade this to the 4670k or lower, but looking at your part-list it appears you have room to play. We can make concessions elsewhere, but I think the 4770k has a rightful place in this build.

Corsair H100i 77.0 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler
Here's thing about the 4770k or any haswell chip: They run hot -- the same size die as Ivy Bridge, but more functions crammed into that die. Regarding heat, it's very sensitive to voltage increases. Over a certain threshold, an H100i is not going to be anymore effective than a Hyper 212 EVO (by that, I mean at some point in upping the vcore, the temps are going to skyrocket, and the temp difference between the evo and the H100 are going to be irrelevant, as both numbers will be unsafe.

I've overclocked two 4770Ks using the hyper 212 EVO, and in both I was able to quickly and easily achieve 4.1GHz. If you get lucky enough to have an above-average chip, the H100 might allow you to get 4.5-4.7, but since you're working with a 4770k, the performance gain you might get from the liquid cooler doesn't justify the price for it. BUT, if you're a hobbyist who likes the idea of water cooling, tweaking your bios for the best overclock, etc., then the H100i will be great. It doesn't sound like that's your plan, though, in which case you can spend $30 on the EVO and get at least another 500MHz of easy, free performance out of your 4770k.

MSI Z87-GD65 Gaming ATX LGA1150 Motherboard
This is a good pick, and I like MSI's higher end motherboards a lot. However, I want to make sure you understand what you're getting out of this motherboard versus, say, an ASrock Extreme4 which is $40+ cheaper. (I pimp the ASRock brand a lot because they are consistently the best bang for buck in mainstream/mid-range boards, and of all the brands I've used in my builds and client builds in the past, it's the only brand I've never had to RMA).

These are the advantages of that MSI board over the ASRock Extreme4:
1. Two additional PCIe x1 slots for a total of 4
2. An onboard mSATA port.
3. Coaxial S/PDIF Output.
4. Slightly better quality VRMs and capacitors, which matters only for extreme/enthusiast level overclocks.

That's about it. The rest of the extra features are merely marketing jargon or won't even be used. So, it's likely you'd be spending $40 more for a motherboard and never actually get a dime's worth of use from that extra $40. However, the board does have a particular aesthetic to it that some may like, so if that is part of the reason you chose it, no problems there. It's a great board.

Corsair Vengeance Pro 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-1866 Memory
It's true that there is not a single game out there that will benefit from more than 8GB of total system memory. And considering that the new gen consoles are sharing 8GB total, I don't foresee the triple A ports being designed for more than that anytime soon. Where the extra RAM would come handy is in your other tasks, like image/video editing (depending on the software you use) and in extreme multi-tasking. I personally have 16GB in my machine, and there are many occasions where I'm using more than 50% of my physical memory. That tends to happen when at the same time I'm gaming, running Citrix for work, skyping, and I still have photoshop open because I'm in the middle of a project, several MS office applications running, on top of having firefox or chrome or both running with dozens of tabs running in multiple sessions. So, I certainly understand the use for 16GB.

But, the memory you chose is too expensive for what it is. For the most part, RAM is RAM, and there's a healthy list of reliable brands -- corsair being the most popular. In gaming and generally most other applications, you won't notice the difference between 1600, 1866, and 2133. The “sweet spot” is generally 1600MHz and usually has some of the best pricing due to its popularity. Save yourself $40 with zero hit to performance and go with GSkill Ripjaws X 1600 or the older Corsair Vengeance models. You can save another $20 on top of that by going with 4 sticks of 4GB rather than 2 sticks of 8GB. There would be no disadvantage to that unless you're shooting for high CPU overclocks with liquid cooling (has a mild impact on the IMC and high OC potential when all four DIMM slots are occupied).

Samsung 840 EVO 250GB 2.5" Solid State Disk
Right on.

Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Honestly, these drives need to be taken off the market. They have not been updated for a while. You've probably read all over the internets that the Caviar Blacks are the fastest 7200rpm drives, and that used to be true. But since then, Seagate and WD have started making their Barracudas and Caviar Blues with higher platter densities. Hard drives can have several platters stacked on top of each other as a means of cramming as much capacity into one unit as possible. Higher density platters (i.e., higher storage capacity) allow more data to be read per revolution. The Caviar Blue and the most recent versions of Barracudas use 1TB platters, while the Black still uses 500GB platters (i.e., that 2TB Caviar Black has 4 platters). The advantage that the Black has over the others is the longer warranty, but I consider all hard drives to be equally untrustworthy and prefer an effective backup solution regardless. The warranty only covers the hardware, of course.

If you don't mind the 2-year warranty, Seagate's latest 2TB Barracuda would actually be a little faster than the Black, and the Barracuda is roughly $90 rather than $150 for the Black. The 3TB Barracuda would have similar or better performance than the 2TB Black, and the 3TB is only $105. Honestly, unless the 5 year warranty is important to you, the Black is just priced way out of market.