I7-860 Build vs i7-860 Build (Epic Battle Help Please)

1st build

So, the list narrows down to the fact that you're deciding between:

Graphics: Radeon HD-5870 vs Radeon HD-5850
PSU: 850W vs 650W
CPU Cooling: Hyper 212 or Stock
RAM: Corsair or G-Skill
HD: Seagate or WD

In terms of graphics, unless you are truly an enthusiast, I don't think that the HD-5870 is worth the extra money. The HD-5850 comes close in performance. You're talking about the difference between 40 and 60fps here. This is a minor luxury.

Since Corsair PSUs are of excellent quality, the 650W PSU will be more than enough for your build. However, if the 850W is within $10 or cheaper, it might be worth it for future upgrade options.

RAM: both brands are excellent, go with whatever is cheaper -- however, I'd look for a deal on DDR3-1333 because you won't be able to use the 1600 without overclocking.

Cooling: get the Hyper 212 -- the stock heatsink is tiny and the fan that comes with it is loud; in contrast, the Hyper 212 is an excellent cooler that will get you at least some quietness

Hard Drive: get whatever is cheaper; the 10K performs better, but it'll mainly contribute to lower loading times

I believe this review shows that older VRs are not worth the price over modern 7200 rpm drives.

So my vote goes to the first build.

If you are thinking about adding another 5870 later, then you should know that you'll only need a 750W. This one is really good and a lot cheaper after the rebate: Antec TruePower New 750W Modular 80Plus Bronze $110 ($20 rebate)

That motherboard lists 1600mhz as supported out of the box (note the lack of (O.C.) next to it on the newegg page). And even if it wasn't supported out of the box it would be easy enough to set it at that speed in the bios.

Ok, So I have decided the 5870 is a bit overkill and am going to stick with the 5850. But now I have 110$ to work with would a 30g ssd be a good option in your guys' opinions or is that money better spent elsewhere on the build?

The SSD will give a greater impact than any of the other options you considered.

For OS and app loading (if you can get any programs onto the size of SSD that can be afforded for $100.
I don't think there are many SSDs at $100 or below that are worth getting.

A good 650W PSU is plenty for two 5850s. However it is not a simple situation, you should find one that can deliver almost all the 650W on the 12V rail(s) and has enough power connectors for two 5850s, and then is reliable. The only one that is easy to find out is the PCI-E connectors. I'm also not sure if you are going to take advantage of rebates. Here's two good ones: XFX 650W XXX Edition $100
Corsair TX650 $90 ($5.99 shipping, $20 rebate)
All in all it might be wiser to stick with a 750W PSU.

Either build is fine, but at the risk of confusing you a bit, read the following article which compares i7-860 performance with other cpu's using a 5850.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i3-gaming,2588...

Also, if you are near a microcenter, you can get a i7-930 for $199 which might change some of your options.

As to the original question, I would pick option 1 based on the graphics card. It is THE most important component for performance in a gaming system, and XFX has a very good warranty.

I cannot disagree more here. Even if you arent a true "enthusiast" the difference between 40 and 60 fps is huge, especially in the fact of minimum FPS. Now, I probably am more so of an enthusiast than the OP, being that I have been around the scene for a while, but I cannot say that at any point during my transition from casual/novice to enthusiast did I all of the sudden have a want for more frames. In fact it has diminished a bit over time, but thats a different discussion.

What I am trying to say is, depending on what you are wanting to play (ex: bad company 2), I would recommend getting the 5870 and going with build 1. Just for reference, the build in my sig/config area does not max out bc2. I do run full res (1920x1080, 4xAA, 16xAF), but with HBAO turned off, and that gives me frames from around 40 - 45 minimum to upside of 100 at max, averaging right around 55 - 60 (During normal gameplay, explosions can drop me very much so lower than that). I can easily tell at all times when I am near the minimum of 40 - 45 instead of the average of 60ish.

If you could lock the frames at 40 all of the time, then the 5850 would be a good option, but when the the frames fluctuate the experience is not nearly as enjoyable. Minimum FPS is what matters, not average or max. If it were me, and I were spending a decent chunk of change on the machine as you are, then I would get the 5870 and build 1. Just my two cents.

Best,

3Ball

according to this article an i7-930 (aka i7-920 at 2.8) performs the same as a Phenom II x4 955 (not the 965 in that article you linked).
http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/cpu_scalin...

Either way, its a 3.4% difference at most, I'm too lazy to crunch the numbers, but that's difference is probably very close to the experimental error range, and the a student's T would demonstrate the difference to be statistically insignificant.

Basically, what that both articles show is that bottleneck is heavily on GPU, not CPU in gaming.


5870 vs 5850 is a 10%-15% FPS increase for a 30% price increase.



http://anandtech.com/show/2848/14

Everyone likes to recommend ssd's but keep in mind windows 7 64 bit requires 20gb of space. That's half your ssd on the OS alone. Honestly these days a 40gb drive isn't really gonna last all that long. Steam alone on my system is taking up 60gb.

Yes, that SSD would have to be strictly OS + apps, no games.

However, games don't benefit much from SSD's anyway. It's system response speed, boot speed and reliability(boot sector anyway) that are drastically changed.

For what it is worth:

Windows-7 home premium 64 bit takes 14.4gb which includes microsoft security essentials, cpu-z, and acronis true image.

Best answer selected by Sykes77.