Advice on proposed new PC and HDDs

[backeberg]

I am planning to build the following system;

Gigabyte Setto 1000 Chassis, Gigabyte Odin 585 PSU, Gigabyte X58A-UD3R Motherboard, Intel i7 930 CPU, Transcend 2GB DDR3-1333 x3 RAM Kit, Gigabyte Nvidia GTS250 GPU, Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 iTB HDD, Liteon 24 speed DVD Super All-Write. Running Windows 7/64 OS, Windows Office 2007, Adobe Literoom and CS4. Some office work, photo and video editing, little gaming.

My questions are - 1. What do you think of the system? and 2. Should I consider 2 x 500GB HDDs instead of the single HDD?

Thanks

 

[ulysses35]

I can spot a couple of things I would recomend changing

Gigabyte Odin 585 PSU = they make great mobos, but not so sure aobut the PSU - best bet is to stick to sometihng by Corsair( or OCZ if you are on a tight budget)

Transcent 2gb DDR3-1333 = you would be safer going for 2 x triple channel kits, purely because they are designed to work with the i7 and also the X58 chipset.

Seagate Barracuda = either will work 1 x 1tb or 2 x 500gb - if you fancy something quickers then take a look at the Samsung Spin Point F3 1 TB drives.

 

[backeberg]

I can spot a couple of things I would recomend changing

Gigabyte Odin 585 PSU = they make great mobos, but not so sure aobut the PSU - best bet is to stick to sometihng by Corsair( or OCZ if you are on a tight budget)

Transcent 2gb DDR3-1333 = you would be safer going for 2 x triple channel kits, purely because they are designed to work with the i7 and also the X58 chipset.

Seagate Barracuda = either will work 1 x 1tb or 2 x 500gb - if you fancy something quickers then take a look at the Samsung Spin Point F3 1 TB drives.

Thanks for your advice, Ulysses35. I also think the Odin 585 may be the weak link in this build. The Transcend Ram is a triple channel kit comprising 3 x 2 GB (6GB total) matched triple channel modules with a latency of 7. They are apparently (according to the website) desined to work with the chipset and CPU.

I thought that having two HDDs may speed up the system is OS and programs were on one and data on the other. The difference may not be great and trhe single drive is the cheaper option.

Regards

 

[MadAdmiral]

You might want to follow the guidelines. If we had a budget and where to look for parts, we could probably put together a much better build.

Instead of that Gigabyte case, you should go with the HAF 922. It should be cheaper, and it's easily one of the best, if not the best, case out there.

Other PSUs to consider would be the Antec Earthwatts, SeaSonic, Silverstone or PC Power & Cooling. OCZ is a very last resort, as they aren't very high quality. You should get at least the 700W version if you go that route.

Instead of the GTS 250, you should get an HD 5770. It's a lot more powerful, and is just about the same price.

For the HDDs, if you're worried about cost, I would get 1x 1 TB, as the 2x 500 GB would be about $20 more expensive. However, if you've got less than 500 GB of data (not programs), you would see a slight speed increase from two drives. Not much, but a little. I honestly doubt that you'll notice any difference between the two setups.

 

[backeberg]

You might want to follow the guidelines. If we had a budget and where to look for parts, we could probably put together a much better build.

Instead of that Gigabyte case, you should go with the HAF 922. It should be cheaper, and it's easily one of the best, if not the best, case out there.

Other PSUs to consider would be the Antec Earthwatts, SeaSonic, Silverstone or PC Power & Cooling. OCZ is a very last resort, as they aren't very high quality. You should get at least the 700W version if you go that route.

Instead of the GTS 250, you should get an HD 5770. It's a lot more powerful, and is just about the same price.

For the HDDs, if you're worried about cost, I would get 1x 1 TB, as the 2x 500 GB would be about $20 more expensive. However, if you've got less than 500 GB of data (not programs), you would see a slight speed increase from two drives. Not much, but a little. I honestly doubt that you'll notice any difference between the two setups.

Hello, MadAdmiral. I am in South Africa so pricing and availability of certain components is a little different to the States. Locally the HD 5770 is about 30% more expensive than the GTS 250. Having said that, I do want the most bang for my bucks. My budget is =/- R12,000 or at current exchange rates about $1,600. My leaning towards Gigabyte products is because the local wholesaler is also the local Gigabyte agent. Other brands are available but at full retail this would increase prices by about a third.

 

[MadAdmiral]

Gigabyte makes a 5770 (here).

You might also want to check on the HD 4870, 5750 and 4850. The 4870 will have about the same performance as the 5770, but it's older. The 4850 will have the same performance of the 5750, but should be cheaper. Any of these would be better than the GTS 250.

 

[backeberg]

Gigabyte makes a 5770 (here).

You might also want to check on the HD 4870, 5750 and 4850. The 4870 will have about the same performance as the 5770, but it's older. The 4850 will have the same performance of the 5750, but should be cheaper. Any of these would be better than the GTS 250.

The HD 5750 is similar in price to the GTS 250. The 5770 is about $50 more, or similar to the GTX 260. Which would be the better performer for photo and video editing, the 5750 or GTS 250, bearing in mind that the GTS 250 supports CUDA?

 

[MadAdmiral]

If you use a lot of CUDA, then any nVidia card would be better. If you don't, ATI's current offerings are more powerful at pretty much every price range.

 

[backeberg]

Best answer selected by backeberg.