New Job! Time for a new rig.

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

AndrewR69

Honorable
Nov 22, 2013
6
0
10,510
Got a new job so I'm rewarding myself with a new rig. I'm coming from a i7 880, GT 640 and 16gb RAM. But it's been years since I put together my own machine. So any advice or parts switching would be greatly appreciated. The main 'need' is to do heavy duty photo editing. But the main 'want' is to handle almost any game at high+ settings. So this is what I'm thinking.

- Intel i7-4770K 3.5
- EVGA GeForce GTX770 SuperClocked with ACX cooler
- ASUS Maximus VI Hero
- Ripjaws X Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3 2400 (PC3 19200)
- Seagate Barracuda 1 TB HDD SATA 6Gb/s
- Some kind of Blu-Ray Player
- BenQ XL2430TE 144Hz, 24-Inch
- Antec Three Hundred Two Case
- Antect HCG-750M PS
- Thermaltake NiC C5
- Windows 8.1

Thank in advance.
 
Solution
dannyboy2233
Sort by date Sort by votes
A

AndrewR69

Honorable
Nov 22, 2013
6
0
10,510


Thank you, I updated the original post.
(G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2400 (PC3 19200) Desktop Memory Model F3-2400C11D-16​GXM)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dannyboy2233

dannyboy2233

Honorable
May 24, 2013
1,599
0
12,160
One question; why the 144 Hz monitor? It would seem to me that if you're planning on intensive Photoshop, you might want two monitors or something so that you can run your tools on a separate. Not only that, but a high refresh rate is only helpful for gaming, and you said this is mainly for Photo-editing. Instead of a 770, I recommend an R9 280X, as it provides more performance and (more importantly) more VRAM, meaning you can run games at higher resolutions. If you're looking to spend a hundred dollars more, the R9 290X is the top-of-the-line card that will beast anything.
Also, for a rig of this caliber I recommend a 120GB SSD (Samsung 840 EVO) as a boot/programs drive.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

AndrewR69

Honorable
Nov 22, 2013
6
0
10,510


As far as the monitor, my primary is a NEC PA271W. A great monitor for photo editing. But it is certainly slow by gaming standards. I would keep both, but I'm not sure of the practicality of having both. Mainly because of desktop space.

I originally had the R9 280 spec'd. But after looking at real world performance charts, I got the impression the 770 performed better. Is that not true? But you're right, the R9 290 isn't that much more. (SAPPHIRE 100362SR Radeon R9 290 4GB @ $399 newegg.com)

I do like the idea of a SSD for boot/programs. Is the 120GB large enough? May just have to see what my budget allows.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dannyboy2233

dannyboy2233

Honorable
May 24, 2013
1,599
0
12,160


Ok... Your current monitor seems spectacular (not really relevant, just saying it's awesome haha). As for the SSD; if you just want to run Windows and your main programs, a 120GB will be fine. However, if the budget allows it, there's really no reason to not double the space and be able to put things like music on it.
Another thing; the reason that your current monitor isn't great for gaming is not due to the refresh rate, per se, but to many other things. First of all, 1440p will not get you very high FPS. Also, with 14-bit color, things that aren't properly optimized will appear weird. All you really need to game is a regular old 1080p monitor with a 60Hz refresh rate. However, your FPS might be affected by the fact that you'd essentially be running 5760x1080 (since 1440p is double 1080p). However, I think the 290X could handle it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
A

AndrewR69

Honorable
Nov 22, 2013
6
0
10,510
So then it seems I might be better off just keeping the same monitor. If I do want a second monitor, a cheap monitor that is just used for extra palettes would be fine. Using the money I save and go up to the 290X and a 240-256GB boot SSD.

As far as the performance of the PA271W. All the color calibration is handled through internal lookup tables on the monitor, not at the card level. With the 14-bit color, all the transitions are very clean. I can also run different profiles for different scenarios (photoshop/gaming/movies). So that shouldn't be an issue.

I'm just not sure then the hype of 'gaming' monitors. Where do faster refresh rates and Frequency come into play? Is there a true advantage in these features? Or is this just more marketing?

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dannyboy2233

dannyboy2233

Honorable
May 24, 2013
1,599
0
12,160


I am aware of how the monitor works, I have just heard from friends of mine who own monitor of 8-bit+ panels and they've said that all the colors look weird if the program isn't optimized for the full RGB spectrum.
As for gaming monitors; the point of having 144Hz is for VSync. What VSync does is it automatically sets your FPS at the refresh rate of your monitor. If, at a regular 60Hz, your card can run a game at 60+ FPS, then it will be great. However, if you can't reach that FPS, then it will look choppy. Essentially, unless you are positive that you can get 100-150 FPS on every AAA title, there is no point whatsoever in getting 144Hz; 60Hz will do you just fine.
Once again, no matter what card you get, 1440p gaming won't be super smooth. I recently saw an AC4 benchmark, and, at 1600p (slightly higher resolution than your monitor) the game was running at something like 30 FPS. Not SUPER terrible, but just thought I'd point it out.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom