Read the whole article...specifically the test setup page
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5850,2433-3.html
Intel Core i7-975 Extreme (Bloomfield) 3.33 GHz, 6.4 GT/s, 8 MB L3 Cache, power-saving settings disabled
Overclocked to 4 GHz (25 * 160 MHz)
I dunno why you think PC components use so much power. They don't especially now with 34 and 42 nm processed on everything. Read articles carefully... you're taking
total system power numbers and assuming they're power usage for a single component.
1. Modern CPU is never gonna go above 300 watts no matter how much you OC it. In fact, x58 is designed for 130W, P55 95W. Anything over those numbers voids warranty and exceeds the recommended numbers. Also the root of the Foxconn MOBO issues. Ppl taking P55 way above 95W thinking it's built for 130W like i7-920. It's not, and since Foxconn wasn't expecting ppl to push watts so far above specs, you get dead MOBO's after 4.0 ghz (admittedly they screwed up their pins as well, but it only fails when you exceed specs by a lot).
Take an i5 extreme OC to 4.2 ghz only 280 watts. An i7-920 will be less power as you don't need anywhere near the voltage increase to get an OC.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-750-overclock,2438-11.html
i7 4.o ghz only uses 217.6 watts
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/overclock-core-i7,2268-11.html
btw, those numbers are TOTAL system power draw at the plug numbers, not CPU by itself.
2. GPU's have a 300watt ATX limit. Impossible to go above that w/o an industry standard change. That's the reason why the 5970 doesn't have the clock speeds of a 5870, it can't get enough pwer to do so.
Read this article for more info
http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3679
3. Add those up your 2 main pwr drawing components can not possibly go over 600 watts.
4. HD, fans, DVD etc are like 5-10 watts each max. SSD is like 2 watts.
You're never gonna get to 750 watts never mind 1000...
As for y you need USB 3.0 and SATA 6.0
read
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/usb-3.0-performance,2490.html
1. It's called future proofing. In a year or so time everything is gonna be on those 2 standards. Saying 3.0 isn't needed is like the idiots 4 yrs ago who said USB 2.0 is stupid cuz we're never gonna utilize it's full bandwidth.
2. Tech moves fast, give it 2 years and everything today will be outdated.
3. SSD's already have hit the SATA ceiling. There's a reason why companies are making PCI slot SSD's, they've maxed SATA bandwidth.
See the wall at around 260MB/s? We're hitting the limit of what's possible over 3Gbps SATA. Expect read speeds to go up once we start seeing SATA 6Gbps drives and controllers to support them.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3631&p=21
4. Triple channel vs dual channel offers no performance advantage. Tom's or anandtech did a full test on that issue a while ago, go look it up if you want the details.
5. The limited PCI Express slots on P55 aren't an issue either.
i5 and i7 have very close average FPS, but min FPS is much higher for an i5, and slowdowns really hurt the gaming experience.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3634&p=8
Also Tom's posted a nice article a few months ago addressing the whole issues. They noted that while there was a difference, in P55 vs X58, it wasn't anything noticeable.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-lynnfield,2379-10.html
Are eight lanes per card enough? Almost certainly, yes
With two cards installed, Core i5 simply didn’t gain as much performance as Core i7 at high resolutions. It wasn’t, however, noticeably handicapped
high resolution in this case being 30" 2560x 1600" which your monitor doesn't support anyway.
Honestly, if you're gonna come here asking for advice and ignore everyone when they tell you you don't need a 1k watt PSU, then just go ahead and waste your money, we're not gonna care.
I"ll give you everything this time, but don't expect people on the forums to walk you through every benchmark and give rationale and research for every suggestion. If you want every detail, go do your own research. Read the links we give (the whole article) and read the other benchmarks on Tom's and on Anandtech. All the advice we give is based on those tests, our own builds and other hardware reviews.
Edit: Since I'm posting everything, might as well add y everyone should get a SSD, and y it's totally worth the price premium. Though if you're really worried, Kingston is offering a 30GB one for $84.99 after MIR. It uses the Intel controller, which is the best one atm.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3667&p=4
I bring you Anand Lai Shimpi, probably the best known and most respected hardware reviewer in the world. In comparing SSD's to normal HD's:
n every major article I’ve written about SSDs I’ve provided at least one benchmark that sums up exactly why you’d want an SSD over even a RAID array of HDDs...it’s an order of magnitude faster than a hard drive. It’s the difference between a hang glider and the space shuttle; both will fly, it’s just that one takes you to space. And I don’t care that you can buy a super fast or high flying hang glider either.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3631&p=20
Lastly, as to y Intel's controller is the best, here's anand again. Read the full article for all the details.
Is Intel still my overall recommendation? Of course. The random write performance is simply too good to give up and it's only in very specific cases that the 80MB/s sequential write speed hurts you. Is Indilinx a close runner up? Absolutely. It's truly a lower cost alternative.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3631&p=27