Announcement

**Sunshine1709Str** · 09-29-2008, 10:31 PM

when do you want a pc, which shoulds run games after 2 years, you should buy an intel quad core, never amd. Furthermore a geforce is the best, radeon 5uck5. also i recommend the gtx 260 if you wont play with AA and AF. if you want to than gtx 280.

**Benfica** · 09-29-2008, 11:16 PM

I can help a bit on more esoteric stuff, anyone will pwn me on the usual cpu/mem/ gfx so I don't go into that too much

Originally posted by Brad.G View Post

Hard drives
I was contemplating these 10000RPM Sata hard drives. they sound good transferring 300MBps

All of them are rated for 300MBps max, between the drive cache and the computer. Today's best reach at most 70 to 100 from the surface of the platter to the program. Random access is usually more important for the initial program loading and multitasking, it is measured in miliseconds. Most drives manage 13 ms, the Velociraptor 10000RPM can get as low as 7.5ms (?) What matters really is the HD internal software (firmware) and the talent of the engineers to predict the best behaviour. See the benchmark below and look carefully at the iPeak graphics. Those are ones where intelligent programming matter a lot, and show the responsiveness and multitasking performance of the disk.

but having said that i havent compared them to the usual 7200RPM's Ideally im thinking of going for a 10000RPM for my C: drive, but only 7200RPM's for my extra couple for storage. couple of TB in size on those ones. your thoughts and experiances on these?

Well, I get better results with 2 drives like this:
1) OS, Desktop, Simple apps, Swap File, Temp, downloads and storage.
2) Heavy apps, work drive, Temporary Internet files, Virtual machine drives and media.
This is why:
* Program loading: you have load distribution between the 2 drives, the exclusive files load from drive 2 and system libs + app data load from 1
* Installing. The downloaded packages are read from drive 1 and installing goes to drive 2. The killer is decompressing to temp.
* Gaming: same as loading. When playing, all game related data has a dedicated drive, and all the OS related I/O has the other. The 2nd drive is "pure", swapping and background crapware doesn't touch it.
* Dev: doesn't matter, I redirected temporary compilation files to a Ramdrive
* Web: browser and OS runs on 1, cache files on 2
* Virtual machines: the OS inside the machine uses files on drive 2, the host uses drive 1. I have 2 GB of RAM and sometimes there's a bit of swapping which goes to drive 1.
* Typical file storage is on drive 1, but media is on 2. That's to avoid stuttering that could be created by the OS on drive 1.
I have 4 partitions per disk, it's OTT. But you should have at least 2 dedicated partitions for gaming and for Temporary IEFiles. The reason is to force game files to be physical "nearby" and to contain fragmentation.

Anyway, even with a (Veloci)raptor 10000RPM drive, the OS & games on 1 + 7200 for storage creates great inbalance. That would kill the performance of the fast drive and making it extremely busy and the other mostly idle that isn't helping you at all. It defeats the purpose of investing on an high-end disk in the first place and that's the reason why some gamers experience so much stuttering. Bad storage strategy

In your case, and for pure gamers, avoid putting files on the 2nd drive that trigger antivirus, anti-malware, indexing, etc... That's why it's better to download to drive 1. Use drive 2 to put games, and avoid files there that are indexing by content or change too often.

The above may be picky, but hey gamers buy high-end kit for high-end performance. So ...

I have a nice 80$ drive. Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD6400AAKS 640GB: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136218
There's also this one: Seagate ST3640323AS 640GB : 85$http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822148335
Take a look at this good benchmark. These are the top desktop drives you currently can buy: http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/15588/3.
Other drives are better for loading games, but they are either too expensive for my taste or aren't really that good for a lot of other scenarios

Hand-picked from 20, but it is average or near the top on all the others. And this:

Note the Seagate 640GB is not there, I've already seen a good benchie, but ffs I can't find it now!

Motherboard
Quite a shady area for me.... i know they vary in price quite alot, but does spending out on them really make a difference?

Same here. But a mid-range to high-end Asus board with Intel chipset is usually a safe bet.

Graphics cards
Ok.. well its going to be SLI.. but the question is what cards are people going for nowadays.. are the 8800GT's still fantastic bang for the buck or have they now been superceeded? i had a brief look around ebuyer but was gobsmacked to find graphics cards around £375 each! (double it for dollars) some how i dont think i need those to play games lol.

The 8800gt reach scary temperatures which kill electronic components. And THEN they are single-slot which recicle the air inside the case. And then you want to SLI them, which does the rest! Ouuuuuch!!!
For that price I'd go for a single GTX260 - 216 shaders, but hey. Or if you really want SLI, take a look at any dual-slot card, like the 9800GTX or 8800gts-512

PSU
Well, i understand about it being about the AMPS on the 12V rails.. so il wait until i have decided on all the other parts before deciding what PSU would be best for the rig.

There's the amps, but take a serious look at this review of my PSU: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...ly-review.html

Look at the efficiency, and the RIPPLE EFFECT. That's the major thing that creates instability and degrades components. Look how **** poor the OCZ 600 is with SLI, being still decent with a single card. While the 2 others, rated for 600 and 650W do just fine.

**Vidiot** · 09-30-2008, 12:34 AM

Originally posted by Sunshine1709Str View Post

when do you want a pc, which shoulds run games after 2 years, you should buy an intel quad core, never amd. Furthermore a geforce is the best, radeon 5uck5. also i recommend the gtx 260 if you wont play with AA and AF. if you want to than gtx 280.

Wow...Nvidia fanboy. As a matter of fact, Nvidia is getting extremely pwned right now. The 4870's are pwning Nvidia's "best cards" and are half the cost!

And the Phenom 9850 Black Edition is a great quad core and is equal to the intel q6600 in benchmarks

. Exactly equal as a matter o fact

**Brad.G** · 09-30-2008, 11:20 AM

Benfica, thank you for taking the time with such a detailed post. losts of useful information there

**Cobi^^** · 09-30-2008, 04:07 PM

Agree, nice post by Benfica.

A few hints by me:

CPU: When I set up my new rig, I finally chose Intel. Why? Because AT THAT TIME Intel produced the chips with less thermal power loss. Makes the chip cooler. I am not sure about how this is today, but afaik intel still produces the cooler chips.

Mainboard: check out those made by Gigabyte. They are producing some top notch boards. The exact choice is strongly dependent of you using SLI, Firewire etc. I can help you on choosing one when you tell me the exact things you wanna have.

VCard: I am planning on upgrading my card as well (have the same like yours except half the memory), so I read a lot of articles n stuff. Finally, I will order the ATI 4850 Golden Sample by Gainward. It is a factory overclocked card with a new fan/heatsink design, that reduces temperatures about 20° comnpared to stock-cooling. It is a decision (in my case) that tried to balance price, performance, temperature, noise.
Personally, I think you might be better off with a single card like the gtx 280 or the 4870x2 (or the one I described), and not using sli (only heard about problems with sli and ut3). You might want to take a look here. This article is in german, but you will understand anyway.

PSU: this is maybe the most critical part of your rig. Do NOT save money on this one. I´d recommend an Enermax Liberty PSU, the total power needed is dependent whether you use SLI or not.

If you need some more assistance, grab me on ICQ (84413303).

**Sincreator** · 09-30-2008, 04:28 PM

When exactly are you going to be getting this computer? The new 45nm phenoms will be out in early 2009. Thats what I'm currently waiting on. Right now though the intel's are the cpu's to get. Hopefully the new phenoms will catch AMD up in this case.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-0...Hz-83973.shtml
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,8106.html

I've always went asus with my mainboards, and I've never had any issues. My 2 brothers also use asus mobo's. No problems for them either.

Right now the best bang for the buck is found with 2 4850's in crossfire(300$ or less), but if you rather Nvidia then 2 9800GTX+ will do a better job than the GTX280. Its realy a mater of preferance. Either way is good. 2X4850=300$

, and 2X9800GTX=350$

. GTX280=450$

(These prices are just estimates, if you shop around you may find some very decent deals) http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...rd,2011-4.html

Like someone said earlier, dont cheap out on the PS, but be carefull and do some research, because some manufacters are still selling crappy PS's for alot of money. If it were me, I would go with Thermaltake/Antec/Enermax. If you are using crossfire/Sli, I would recommend at least a 750w power supply from one of these manufacturers. Sure you may be able to get away with a little less, but it never hurts to have extra headroom in the future. http://www.anandtech.com/casecooling...oc.aspx?i=3413

If you run XP 2gb of ram should be fine, and if Vista 4gb is recommended.

I have a raptor 73gb 10,000rpm drive, and have had it for 4-5 years. Very depenable, and fast. Still pretty expensive for a 73gb HDD though, but I have a 320gb for movies/music, and an old 7200rpm 80gb for drivers/updates/fixes...etc. http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/3...hmarks,24.html

The zalman 9700 NT is a decent option for a cpu cooler, but it is huge, and you may have problems with certain mainboards/cases. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ts,1967-8.html

**Sincreator** · 09-30-2008, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by Vidiot View Post

Wow...Nvidia fanboy. As a matter of fact, Nvidia is getting extremely pwned right now. The 4870's are pwning Nvidia's "best cards" and are half the cost!

And the Phenom 9850 Black Edition is a great quad core and is equal to the intel q6600 in benchmarks

. Exactly equal as a matter o fact

Lol the GTX280 is faster than the Ati 4870, by about 10-15% in most cases, but it costs 150-200$ more. So the question is, is it worth 200$ extra for 5-10 extra fps.

The 9850 BE is not very good actually. At STOCK it's equal to the q6600, but the q6600 can be OC'd to 3.8ghz or higher. The 9850 tops out around 3.0-3.1ghz. The 9850 also runs 20 degrees hotter, and uses 125w under load. This is why i've been holding on to my 6400+. Ill wait for the cooler more high performance phenoms, that should be available in the early part of 2009.

PS: By no means is the 9850BE garbage or anything, it's just that the intel alternative is much better right now. This coming from an AMD/ATI user. I try to stay unbiased, but at times the obvious prevails. Look at some comparison reviews between the Q6600, and the 9850 BE, you will see.

9850 vs q6600 http://www.techspot.com/review/93-am...on/page11.html
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=3272&p=14
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=12648&page=9

**Benfica** · 09-30-2008, 07:48 PM

Originally posted by Brad.G View Post

Benfica, thank you for taking the time with such a detailed post. losts of useful information there

Thanks

A few more things that I remembered...

If you want to go for the Velociraptor, but don't really need the largest 300GB, there are now 150 and 74 GB models available: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/search...h=velociraptor
The 74GB is really not good value, ffs there are SSD with comparable price/GB! But the 150 may be interesting, it's up to you. I'm not tempted anymore, because of the way I use my 2 disks for work, UT3 is not bottlenecked, and at least the main disk is pretty decent already. RAID0 or mixed RAID also lost the appeal for me. Why? Besides oldkawman1's advice, imagine that what fails isn't a disk, but it's the motherboard. I can plug single drives on the older Athlon XP machine, but where is the Intel RAID controller?

Still, for speed without looking at cost, consider the 1TB WD Caviar Black instead of the Velociraptor and then create a partition with the size you would like the VR to have. Even with a 80$/65€/50£ system disk, look at the results:

On the left, the benchmark tests the full disk, from the outer to the inner track, the full 640GB. The heads must travel all that distance. But on the right, logical c: is a partition with only 80 GB. Even if the bench program asks the disk to access the full partition, the heads don't move much, because it is a much more contained area! The result is outstanding, 8.4 vs 12.8 ms, that a 50% improvement. Look at the random read values, they are also 50% higher! Overall score 1490 vs 907

OTOH, the way lower linear reads in the beginning, I suppose are mostly Windows overhead because the benchmark program bypasses it on the physical test, but doesn't on the logical.

Then complement with another, I recomend that Seagate 640GB. It also has just 2 platters with high density, which has a lot of advantages. The same data is physically more packed together. That means more data transferred per rotation and the head doesn't need to move so far away to get the next file. Often it doesn't need to move at all compared to lower density platters, because the odds that the next file is on the same track is now higher. Less platters also mean less heat, manufacturing cost, power, noise, stress on the motor, etc....

Edit: just found the Seagate 640 benchmark: http://uneit.com/2008/07/12/short-re...011-640gb-hdd/

IMHO you should buy 2 different reliable brands because of redundancy, it's safer to have disks from 2 different manufacturers, if batches are defective, you risk to have both disks start degrading at the same time. Create backups of the important stuff of one disk on the other, and you should be fine.
But really, what doesn't cut it at all, is a single disk, or 1 for all the hard work and the other for storage just idling there.

Ah, about RAM: stay away from massively pre-overclocked/overvolted RAM, they are not giving you anything that you can't do yourself. With the risk of crashes and data corruption loss when they start to degrade, obviously that always happens after the warranty period expires

Edit2: doh, how can someone do SLI with an Intel chipset board? Clever

**Brad.G** · 09-30-2008, 10:23 PM

Sin, thats interesting about a new phenom. Im open minded as to if i go for intel or AMD, nvidia, or ATI. I will start buying parts at the back end of october, and should have all the pieces for january so with this in mind im making sure i dont pick a socket type which will go obsolete over night.

Here is a bit of background.

The system i have is nothing to write home about, but as far as upgrades go im kinda at a limit now. with a 754 socket, and an AGP slot with 2 GB of DDR memory which wasnt cheap it leaves me in a position of having to get a new motherboard, the memory to go with it, then of course a new processor.. so as you all know too well, a new system.

So i want to make sure what ever i decide on, will leave me future proof for an acceptable duration. i figure that although DDR3 may be a little more pricey oppose to two, im assuming its the new type of DDR, and eventually DDR2 will be phased out just as DDR has been. as for the socket types well the last time i checked the best was 939 ... now i think its AM2? but again,.. is this the one for the future. I will certainly be googling this new phenom.

I especially like the knowledge Benfica has shared with the storage, and his approach is one i would like to adopt. rather than slapping in a couple of large storage devices i would like to make sure i get best performance and i will take the time to sit down and re-read the posts so i am clear on how i should design this part. Data transfer speeds is very important to me as i am constantly transferring large files around on my computer. a GBps network switch will also be on the list but thats another story..

I have noticed I presume 4GB is the highest we can go on 64bit?

Has anyone had much experiance with water cooling too.. ive heard alot of horror stories, and others which mention its only practical for over clocking, but never the less your two cents worth would be appreciated on this too

**Vidiot** · 09-30-2008, 10:41 PM

Originally posted by Brad.G View Post

Sin, thats interesting about a new phenom. Im open minded as to if i go for intel or AMD, nvidia, or ATI. I will start buying parts at the back end of october, and should have all the pieces for january so with this in mind im making sure i dont pick a socket type which will go obsolete over night.

Here is a bit of background.

The system i have is nothing to write home about, but as far as upgrades go im kinda at a limit now. with a 754 socket, and an AGP slot with 2 GB of DDR memory which wasnt cheap it leaves me in a position of having to get a new motherboard, the memory to go with it, then of course a new processor.. so as you all know too well, a new system.

So i want to make sure what ever i decide on, will leave me future proof for an acceptable duration. i figure that although DDR3 may be a little more pricey oppose to two, im assuming its the new type of DDR, and eventually DDR2 will be phased out just as DDR has been. as for the socket types well the last time i checked the best was 939 ... now i think its AM2? but again,.. is this the one for the future. I will certainly be googling this new phenom.

I especially like the knowledge Benfica has shared with the storage, and his approach is one i would like to adopt. rather than slapping in a couple of large storage devices i would like to make sure i get best performance and i will take the time to sit down and re-read the posts so i am clear on how i should design this part. Data transfer speeds is very important to me as i am constantly transferring large files around on my computer. a GBps network switch will also be on the list but thats another story..

I have noticed I presume 4GB is the highest we can go on 64bit?

Has anyone had much experiance with water cooling too.. ive heard alot of horror stories, and others which mention its only practical for over clocking, but never the less your two cents worth would be appreciated on this too

64-bit OS can handle way more than 4gigs. I think it's 8gigs but it might be even higher.

**gargorias** · 10-01-2008, 05:43 AM

For your Hard drive/s I highly recommend you use a raid 0 setup.

Tested on Vista 64 (80gb Vista Partition)

4 x 320 GB Seagate 320gb Single Platter (ST3320613AS) in Raid 0 on the Intel Matrix Storage and I use Paragon for all my backup needs.
No greater chance of losing my data on this raid system then if I were using a single 1TB drive and it died, in truth less of a chance considering the workload is spread over 4 drives instead of one.
The good thing is that if 1 of my 320's fail then I still have three left, if my single 1TB drive failed then its off to the shop immediately. The bad thing is that four 320gb's will cost more then one 1TB but the speed increase is well worth the extra cost and the comfort of knowing you have more then one drive if one were to fail.

**alcom77** · 10-01-2008, 05:59 AM

The Unreal Engine 3 does not take fully advantage of multi-gpu systems as far as my testing is concerned. The benefit is 20% at best. You're much better off getting a single card in the latest generation. I'll leave the ATI/nVdida battle out of my advice. You can't really go wrong with the latest and greatest of either.

**MTL** · 10-01-2008, 06:01 AM

DDR3 is pretty cheap now, but most people havent looked into it. 2x1GB sets range from $65-150.
That is the reason why I sold my ASUS P5Q ($130) that supported DDR2 1200Mhz for an Intel Extreme DP45SG with much better specs ($150), which supports DDR3 1333, 2x PCIe both running 16x. Not that big of a jump from the most common DDR2 1066Mhz RAM, but hey, "if DDR3 is the same price as DDR2 and faster, why not DDR3?" is what I was thinking.
There are mobo's out there from MSI and Gigabyte that support DDR3 1900-2000Mhz, but those modules are the pricey ones.

Yeah, I would say even just a single ATI4850 will last you for years to come. You can find them on newegg as low as $169.99 before rebates and BestBuy has them on sale sometimes for $149.99~!

CPU's....well any quad core will last you for years. The prices of Intel socket 775 CPU's will drop around the end of the year or early next year when the new Intel socket i7 CPU's are released. When those CPU's are going to be released, expect to pay alot. So I would say grab a socket 775 quad with an up to date mobo that supports DDR2 1200Mhz or DDR3.

**Cobi^^** · 10-01-2008, 07:18 AM

Personally, I do not have practical experience with water cooling (I had a fish tank though, and many parts used for water cooling like the Eheim pump are used for both applications, so I think if you di it right, there should be no threat to your parts). I only read a lot about it. Are you planning on massive overclocking? Or are you thinking about the occurring noise when using a fan-cooler? The radiator used in water cooling is usually cooled with fans anyway, and I dont know if you can leave them out (regarding the noise part).
I decided against a water cooling solution and went for a scythe mine cooler which has almost no noise and nice cooling performance. I overclocked my cpu a bit, but it did not make a lot (rather none at all) of difference in temperature (and noise).

Announcement

your opinion on computer parts

your opinion on computer parts

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment