High End Core i7 Gaming Rig $1000? Possible?

Nice build

ok a few fixes on that build. First off this HD down below is faster than that 750 for the fact the 640 Black uses 2x320 platters and that 750 uses 3x250. 640 Black ftw.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6822136319 $74.99 Free Shipping*
Western Digital Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive - OEM

Small case in your build, so go "modular" with your psu. Try this one down below.

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Prod [...] e=10009795 $74.99 ($49.99 after MIR) Free Shipping
OCZ OCZ550FTY 550W Active Power Supply Retail

Same psu as above, only this one's a newegg link...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6817341022 $79.99 ($54.99 after $25.00 Mail-In Rebate)
OCZ Fatal1ty OCZ550FTY 550W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready Modular Active PFC Power Supply - Retail

Ci7 isnt particularly good in games with only single gfx card .

You are better spending your money elsewhere if gaming is your only concern

LOL...???

I'm making a few changes to that build of yours with the "non micro atx case". Gimme about 10 min and I'l have ya a 750w psu...a good one, for future SLI, and a few other tweaks.

he has a point the i7 is awesome for heavy multi tasking and cpu intensive apps like video encoding and editing programs but for games or even other things other cheaper quads will do the job just fine and probably give you great performance in games too

You must have failed to read the rest of that article you linked...espeicially the conclusion.

http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 119-8.html <--- try this link

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipse [...] =3551&p=16 <--- or this...

If the OP had wanted inferior technology for a few less dollars then yes I can understand him going the AMD route. But this guy (or gal) seems to want the best that technology has to offer atm....sans the title of this thread. And if the OP decides to go Nvidea later on....well he can, unlike with the AMD rout which limits him.

The i7 matches (within reasonable margins of error) both the Phenom II and the Core 2 Quad in gaming for single GPU operation, and in many cases is quite a bit faster in multi GPU situations. It may not be the best value, but it is definitely not slower than a 720 BE.

Over clock the i7 to 3.6 - 3.8 and it will mop the floor with any AMD. These new D0 stepping i7's are doing an easy 4.0 - 4.4 on air according to reviews.

Mop the floor in what? how much of a real world difference do you think you gain(zero)? FYI 3.6-3.8 ghz is a very easy over clock for both the 955 and the 940 heck even the x2 550 can be pushed to those numbers lol you really don't know what you are talking about you really think that an overclocked i7 with a weaker graphics card would outperform a 955 on a better graphics solution when it comes to gaming? and in multi tasking you really think 3 less minutes in video encoding is considered "mopping the floor" with any AMD....lol the fan boyism never ends

I posted the link as to both of those cpu's being over clocked, and the i7 cleaned the AMD's clock. Now you post a link refuting that or save it. And no I don't post sh*tty builds on here, so you can save your bs anytime soon. Now go help on an AMD thread. If your so worried about AMD, go buy more of their stock. If someone wants the best of the best ...good for them. If they ask for an AMD build, good for them. This person asked for an i7 build, and he/she has a good one posted on here.

Heres the final build!

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/ [...] er=6979489

$5 under $1000 hehe. IM thinking about saving an extra 100 dollars for a 4890 and a cpu cooler+bracket

Interesting you say that because in the benchmarks I have linked you'd be dead WRONG .

The i7 cant compete with the 720 be's performance .

if the OP was building a multi gfx card computer the results could be different , but any one suggesting that the highest gaming performance for $1000 is an intel would be a fanboy , and not even a well informed one at that

true in some aspects...
1) its same speed or faster in games at same clock speed
2) wrong... or y would they sell
3) true... i agree with u their... if he wanted best gaming performance FOR PRICE, he would go amd, but as he says, he wants i7... (get it in ur thick skull, and read his opening title!)

lol cleaned what? like i said, three or four minutes less in the real world mean nothing,lol best of the best? right show me gaming benchmarks where the i7 shows major dominance not the same old multi tasking benchmarks that we have all seen already. so someone who is not going to really benefit from a high end quad core should spend extra money for one too according to your logic? you really think an i7 with the gtx 260 would be able to compete with and amd 955 or even a core 2 quad or duo running with a gtx 295 or hd4890 when it comes to gaming? The only thing that the i7 is better than others in is multi tasking and cpu intensive apps, for gaming a cheaper set up with a better graphics card would destroy an i7 with a gtx 260 any day of the week. You look at what's the latest and most talked about product and base your opinion on that (check the term "fanboysm" ) i base mine based on actual functionality. I suggested the truth, if he wants to enjoy gaming his main concern is not the cpu but the graphics,if he works with demanding multi threaded apps and multi tasks heavily then the i7 is the way to go, i7 is the best cpu but far from the best cpu in gaming especially if you only couple it with a single gtx260...unless you actually believe that an i7 with a gtx 260 would be a better gamer than a 720 BE with the 4890 or even two gtx 260 in sli...instead of trying to sound more intelligent than you really are you ought to think more before posting and giving bad advice.

Anyways to answer your question if you are set on the i7 and you are sure that's what you want then go for the 4890 if you can afford it,if gaming is your main concern then you should always make sure you get the best graphics avaliable in you budget,it also depends on what resolutions you will be playing at, at 1680x1050 the difference between the 4870 and the 4890 isn't too much both cards should max out all if not almost all current games at that resolution but at 1920x1200 the 4890 is the best choice and probably will serve you well for a longer period of time.

Still spamming the OP's thread eh ? If I need advice on a crap cpu, I'l be sure to PM you so as not to end up spamming this persons thread like I am now replying to your post on here.

your comments are out of line

you may think intel is wonderful and can do no wrong
You may even work for them promoting their cpu's

but high end gaming is not an i7 with a gtx 260 [ or 4870]

Im sure if you thought it was then you'd have given us a benchmark showing that that is the case .

So why not try some facts instead of hotheaded abuse ?

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/ [...] er=6979489

Yea but what sucks is, all these parts will become obselete in like a year and their will be like 5870s, and 5850s haha.

IM thinking about saving an extra 100 dollars for a 4890 and a cpu cooler+bracket

This is my current rig.

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/ [...] er=8748814

The CPU is currnently at 3.0 OCed

Do you think adding these upgrades will make it on par with the Core i7 rig? Assuming that the i7 920 is on stock settings?

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/ [...] er=8748834

No I didn't say a i7 with a 260 would be better than an AMD with something like a 4890. I pointed out that the i7 with the same card was no push over. Yes the OP could knock off a few dollars with an AMD build and move up to a better graphics card, but it's obvious he wants an i7 build. Later on he might add another 260 and go SLI ...if he changes his psu to a 750w which cost only a few dollars more than the 550w he has now. If you wanted to convince the OP you might have posted a build on here to give him an idea of what your talking about instead of bumping your gums on this thread. Your more focused on what I think than the OP...and it's his thread.

I don't understand what you mean by "on par" with the i7 920, the i7 is superior to others because of hyperthreading,D0 stepping,triple channel memory and QPI but these features do not affect gaming. An i7 with a gtx 260 would get outperformed in games even by an E8400 core 2 duo if such core 2 duo came with a better graphics card (like the 4890) moreover only a handful of games are optimized to take advantage of multiple cores and even then they still depend mostly on how powerful your graphis card is.

If gaming is your main concern then the 4890 will give you a huge improvement in performance,the Q6600 is a very good chip older but still a powerful quad core nonetheless,of course updrading to the i7 will show some improvements in cpu intensive tasks (assuming you do a lot of video editing and encoding) but if you do not do tasks that would actually benefit from the i7 you won't really notice much. Gaming is primarily affected by your graphical power as long as your cpu is fast enough to not bottleneck the gpu then you are good to go. If anything you would be better off getting the 4890 now and upgrading to the core i5 later on if you want to buy an intel chip otherwise you are fine with just the upgrades you listed

core i5? i havnt been keeping up with stuff lately can u give me a link or somtinw here i can read about it

You know what would have been helpful? Posting a decent Phenom II build instead of ragging on Why_Me. Sure you have a point, but so does he. You know how to make your case? Post a good build instead of starting a flame war. Sheesh.

Before this gets locked, here are the facts to anyone who cares.

The Core i7 gets an unfair bad rap. It had issues with a single GTX 280 that gave it a very poor showing in some early reviews. In most single card configurations, it should show (very slightly) higher framerates, with it's lead expanding more significantly with each additional card. It's hyperthreading allows it to prioritize andhandle SLI/Crossfire overhead more effectively, resulting in higher framerates, even when there is still a GPU bottleneck.

Secondly, it OCs like a son of a bitch. It is usually benchmarked at stock in reviews, and while it doesn't go to exhorbitantly higher OCs than Core and Phenom 2s, it is clocked lower at stock.

On the other hand, the Phenom II 940 is a killer deal right now. It's a full $90 cheaper than the i7 920, and $55 cheaper than the Phenom II 955 lots of people like to recommend. On top of that, it uses an AM2+ chipset, which uses DDR2-1066 and has little negative impact in the real world. (Sure, you can have triple-channel DDR3-2000, you'll hardly ever saturate dual-channel DDR2-1066, and it has lower latencies.) A hundred bucks is the difference between a 4850 and a 4890, and that will have a much bigger impact on your gaming than an i7 920 and over a Ph2 940. On he other hand, CPUs age more gracefully than video cards. It all comes down to what you value more, CPU or graphics horsepower.