Getting the EVGA GTX 1070 FTW graphics card when it is released, what would be a good quality CPU cooler? Not sure if a liquid cooler or not is better. I don't have a budget, but not necessarily looking for an extreme overpriced one. If its worth it then I will look into it.
Need a CPU Cooler for my graphics card
- Thread starter Kman2639
- Start date
Solution
DonkeyOatie
Champion
- Sep 16, 2014
- 12,141
- 1
- 50,960
DonkeyOatie
Champion
- Sep 16, 2014
- 12,141
- 1
- 50,960
How much do you plan to overclock? 4.5Ghz or to the max? Where are you?
A Noctua D15 or (S) version is very good and will do the job easily and overclock as far as you can go with the CPU.
A cheaper good alternative with a little less cooling power, is the RAIJINTEK Pallas.
At the budget end, a CRYORIG H7 will allow for a decent overclock.
Liquid cooling is not needed with that CPU, and is less efficient and noisier than air, in general. The only reason to consider a liquid cooler is if you move the computer around a lot and frequently.
A Noctua D15 or (S) version is very good and will do the job easily and overclock as far as you can go with the CPU.
A cheaper good alternative with a little less cooling power, is the RAIJINTEK Pallas.
At the budget end, a CRYORIG H7 will allow for a decent overclock.
Liquid cooling is not needed with that CPU, and is less efficient and noisier than air, in general. The only reason to consider a liquid cooler is if you move the computer around a lot and frequently.
The S version looks like it doesn't do as good of a job but allows more room to install other components. I would not really mind the D15 as long as it still had a snug fit in my tower, but do you know of any issues to why they downgraded that extra fan in the S version?
DonkeyOatie
Champion
- Sep 16, 2014
- 12,141
- 1
- 50,960
The D15 may not fit on your motherboard/CPU/Case combination. For that reason, I use D15S myself on an i7 4970K overclocked at 4.6Ghz. It will run cool at 4.8Ghz, but the voltage is higher than I like.
Check on the Noctua site for the specific motherboard you have.
The single fan of the D15S is better than the single fans on the D15.
Check on the Noctua site for the specific motherboard you have.
The single fan of the D15S is better than the single fans on the D15.
http://pcpartpicker.com/list/TVwzM8
These are currently the components I'm expecting to get. I will upgrade my case if need to but I will look for the specifications of that. I figured 650 watts was enough and that the 750 watt would be unnecessary.
These are currently the components I'm expecting to get. I will upgrade my case if need to but I will look for the specifications of that. I figured 650 watts was enough and that the 750 watt would be unnecessary.
DonkeyOatie
Champion
- Sep 16, 2014
- 12,141
- 1
- 50,960
Nice system. If you can afford it, consider an NVMe M.2 SSD. It's substantially faster than a SATA SSD.
650W is plenty.
650W is plenty.
DonkeyOatie
Champion
- Sep 16, 2014
- 12,141
- 1
- 50,960
I didn't say it was cheap, but 6 second boots makes thing feel VERY fast. 
This is a decent price. PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor ($329.99 @ Newegg)
CPU Cooler: CRYORIG H5 Ultimate 76.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($46.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 5 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($159.99 @ B&H)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($75.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung SM951 256GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($167.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($47.49 @ OutletPC)
Case: NZXT S340 (Black/Red) ATX Mid Tower Case ($62.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA P2 650W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($79.99 @ NCIX US)
Monitor: Asus VG248QE 24.0" 144Hz Monitor ($229.99 @ Amazon)
Keyboard: Corsair K70 RGB Wired Gaming Keyboard ($169.99 @ Amazon)
Other: EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
Total: $1371.40
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-06-24 19:27 EDT-0400
This is a decent price. PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor ($329.99 @ Newegg)
CPU Cooler: CRYORIG H5 Ultimate 76.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($46.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 5 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($159.99 @ B&H)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($75.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung SM951 256GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($167.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($47.49 @ OutletPC)
Case: NZXT S340 (Black/Red) ATX Mid Tower Case ($62.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA P2 650W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($79.99 @ NCIX US)
Monitor: Asus VG248QE 24.0" 144Hz Monitor ($229.99 @ Amazon)
Keyboard: Corsair K70 RGB Wired Gaming Keyboard ($169.99 @ Amazon)
Other: EVGA GTX 1070 FTW
Total: $1371.40
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-06-24 19:27 EDT-0400
synphul
Champion
- Mar 11, 2011
- 9,477
- 7
- 54,965
Something to consider, the extreme cost for fast boot up times and is it worth it to you? Let's say a system took 10s to boot. If you spent as little as 30min on the pc during that session that means you spent half of 1% of that half hour 'waiting' on the pc to boot. If it took 20s (so slow) to boot, that would be 1% of your time on the pc. Assuming the m.2 drive were 3x faster and boot in 5s, that works out to a quarter of a per cent of that 30min time frame.
How much faster is your system going to feel for even 30min of use before you forget that you shaved a quarter of a percent of your time by booting faster? What other productive things could you have done with 'all' that time you saved? And is it worth spending twice the price of a standard high quality ssd of the same size. The time savings becomes even less if you shave off a couple seconds but spend an hour on the pc. Just trying to incorporate some common sense and real world rationale when it comes to picking parts. If you can blink and nearly miss the benefit of paying double for something it may not be worth it.
How much faster is your system going to feel for even 30min of use before you forget that you shaved a quarter of a percent of your time by booting faster? What other productive things could you have done with 'all' that time you saved? And is it worth spending twice the price of a standard high quality ssd of the same size. The time savings becomes even less if you shave off a couple seconds but spend an hour on the pc. Just trying to incorporate some common sense and real world rationale when it comes to picking parts. If you can blink and nearly miss the benefit of paying double for something it may not be worth it.
DonkeyOatie
Champion
- Sep 16, 2014
- 12,141
- 1
- 50,960
I would not put the cost as extreme. It's hardly more than what I paid for a 250GB SATA drive 18 months ago. $90 vs $170 is OK for me.
I made a personal suggestion ('consider' as opposed to 'you should' or 'you need') and expect the OP to see if it is worth it to them.
I made a personal suggestion ('consider' as opposed to 'you should' or 'you need') and expect the OP to see if it is worth it to them.
Does the cost difference only relate to the amount of seconds it takes to start a computer? If it is, I have no issue with keeping the $90 SSD but if it makes a significant difference with the $170 for the overall function of the computer, obviously I would do it.
DonkeyOatie
Champion
- Sep 16, 2014
- 12,141
- 1
- 50,960
In most gaming, it will make little difference, especially if you have software or players running across the Internet. For 'local' gaming, it will give faster level and cut-scene loads. It makes the system 'feel' a lot faster'. some non-gaming software, like rendering, can take advantage of it.
If it's a stretch to your budget, don't do it, but you need to have made the positive decision. (You know about it and have chosen not to buy it, rather than going with SATA out of ignorance))
If it's a stretch to your budget, don't do it, but you need to have made the positive decision. (You know about it and have chosen not to buy it, rather than going with SATA out of ignorance))
synphul
Champion
- Mar 11, 2011
- 9,477
- 7
- 54,965
I was only pointing out that ssd's are already pretty fast. Of course it's down to perception but I have both an hdd and ssd based system, one barely feels faster than the other and the ssd is supposed to be something like 20x faster than an hdd? If the nvme is only roughly 3x faster than an ssd real world 'feel' is liable to be nonexistent.
Here's a nice review TH did and the real world performance is interesting. In power point, almost no difference, excel no difference, word no difference, adobe illustrator no difference, indesign less than 2 seconds (I believe is the unit of measure) difference, photoshop heavy workload was 10s difference which equated to less than 3% faster (10s spread over 6min), 3% difference in photoshop light workload, bf3 no difference, world of warcraft no difference.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-sm951-nvme-versus-ahci-sata,4137.html#p13
Best case scenario of real world applications, 3% speed improvement for twice the price. I agree it's important to know the details before making a decision. If someone hardly uses photoshop then there went the performance difference almost entirely. Percentages of service time are only when a drive is active which in the overall scheme of things is only a fraction of the time spent using the pc. It ends up being 3% of 20% which only further emphasizes the thin performance improvements.
Most drive activity for the typical user is short burst activity rather than sustained data transfer. The reason my pc running an hdd isn't so 'dog slow' compared to an ssd system, both drives are idling more times than not (which is typical) and a bicycle and a ferrari both sit at a red light just as fast. For someone constantly moving large files or large amounts of data from drive to drive the benefits would much much more noticeable. Then there's the issue of when transferring data are both drives as fast? If not it won't matter. Data won't transfer from a thumb drive or dvd drive any faster because those drives are the bottleneck.
Here's a nice review TH did and the real world performance is interesting. In power point, almost no difference, excel no difference, word no difference, adobe illustrator no difference, indesign less than 2 seconds (I believe is the unit of measure) difference, photoshop heavy workload was 10s difference which equated to less than 3% faster (10s spread over 6min), 3% difference in photoshop light workload, bf3 no difference, world of warcraft no difference.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-sm951-nvme-versus-ahci-sata,4137.html#p13
Best case scenario of real world applications, 3% speed improvement for twice the price. I agree it's important to know the details before making a decision. If someone hardly uses photoshop then there went the performance difference almost entirely. Percentages of service time are only when a drive is active which in the overall scheme of things is only a fraction of the time spent using the pc. It ends up being 3% of 20% which only further emphasizes the thin performance improvements.
Most drive activity for the typical user is short burst activity rather than sustained data transfer. The reason my pc running an hdd isn't so 'dog slow' compared to an ssd system, both drives are idling more times than not (which is typical) and a bicycle and a ferrari both sit at a red light just as fast. For someone constantly moving large files or large amounts of data from drive to drive the benefits would much much more noticeable. Then there's the issue of when transferring data are both drives as fast? If not it won't matter. Data won't transfer from a thumb drive or dvd drive any faster because those drives are the bottleneck.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question Using cloning software for a dying HDD which shows only 10% health ?- Started by Mashuumatics
- Replies: 1
-
Question Wifi card speed fluctuating on my Lenovo Ideapad pro 5 16APH8- Started by sirdariush
- Replies: 6
-
News Windows 11 will reportedly display a watermark if your PC does not support AI requirements- Started by Admin
- Replies: 23
-
Question Recovering an old version of a Notepad file in Windows 10 ?- Started by MC72
- Replies: 2
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram