Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Building i7 what do you think?

Last response: in Systems
Share
June 27, 2010 4:12:19 PM

CASE-Sunbeam AC9B-T Transparent Clear Acrylic ATX Mid Tower Computer Case
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

HD-Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ST3500418AS 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

GPU-MSI N470GTX-M2D12-B GeForce GTX 470 (Fermi) 1280MB 320-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

PSU-OCZ ModXStream Pro OCZ600MXSP 600W ATX12V V2.2 / EPS12V SLI Certified CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Modular Active PFC Power Supply compatible with core i7
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

RAM-CORSAIR DOMINATOR 8GB (4 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model CMP8GX3M4A1600C8
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

MOBO-Intel BOXDP55KG LGA 1156 Intel P55 ATX Intel Motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

CPU-Intel Core i7-875K Lynnfield 2.93GHz LGA 1156 95W Quad-Core Unlocked Desktop Processor
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

CPUFAN-COOLER MASTER Intel Core i7 compatible V8 RR-UV8-XBU1-GP 120mm Rifle CPU Cooler
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

I will be using win 7 64 bit and im also going to scav my current dvd drive. my monitors are 22" 1680X1050 and i have a 19" as a secondary.

More about : building

June 27, 2010 4:23:13 PM

i wouldnt do that, especially some parts. here, think of this:

CPU: AMD 1090T or i5 750.

MOBO: depends on the cpu, but this respectively:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

GPU: id do a 5870 instead.

PSU: thats not a very high quality psu, id recommend getting a corsair, antec, silverstone, enermax, some ocz, and some cm.

RAM: 8 gigs of ram is really not necessary, but if u did get 8 gigs, there are better deals.

CASE: Horrid case, might look cool, but get a good quality case.

now heres my build:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... (x2 optional)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

thats 1205.92, and a very good build, much more value in it.
June 27, 2010 4:53:19 PM

i forgot to mention im an intel nvidia guy but i will be taking your advice and switching out some stuff from your build. that case and psu, the ram,cpu cooler,i have no need for 1tb of storage but it being only $15 more why not.

so it is currently


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

this totals $1,117.93 any other thoughts?
Related resources
June 27, 2010 4:59:26 PM

yeah, that cpu is a waste, and its a bad mobo. do you need it more for gaming, or more for work, applications, synthetics? the i5 750 is better for gaming, and the i7 930 is better for the apps and such.
June 27, 2010 5:05:15 PM

im planing on gaming with this the most. why do you say that the i5 is better for gaming im curious.
June 27, 2010 5:16:43 PM

well you see, the 875k, is 329$. it is a quad core with HT, so it has 8 threads. thats is NOT useful for gaming. the i5 750 is 199$, and a quad core WITHOUT HT. so basically u lose little to no performance, and save 130$. the reasons its better for gaming is because u put that 130$ to a 480, and an i5+480>i7+470 in gaming.
June 27, 2010 5:23:48 PM

ah cool ok so i5 750 and that msi mobo you posted? and then a 480.
June 27, 2010 5:35:12 PM

Yer definately go with i5 better for gaming and much cheaper
June 27, 2010 9:17:28 PM

I love the 875k and would have gotten one myself if it didn't come out just after I bought my 930. It is just as good in most games as the i5 750 though.

Hyperthreading is worthless in my eyes. It hardly ever proves to be an advantage. But the i7 875k's customisability makes it very nice cpu if you like fooling around with your pc. The customisable turbo makes it especially effective in apps where less threads are used like games. But as already mentioned that difference is pretty minimal due to the underpowered gpu. Probably around a few fps and if you customise the turbo a few more. If you add more cards the difference could be even greater. Although If you plan on going with more than 2 cards in the future I reccomend x58.

June 27, 2010 9:21:39 PM

If you don't plan on adding more cards and go with a 480 definately get this 480

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

It's to big for sli but is FAR FAR better than the stock 480. It's faster, quieter and cooler.

Also why get a flat cpu cooler when you can accomodate a bigger better one?

And if you don't want to add an ssd I'd get a WD caviar black which is often percieved as slow which it is in comparison to the f3 in reads and writes but it destroys the f3 in acces times making general usage(apps, bootup bassically everything) faster. Although it isn't as fast as the f3 in copying files(internally as an extarnal device would bottleneck the internal drive anyways)
June 27, 2010 9:32:14 PM

the f3 is better, the i5 750 is better, a normal 480 is better.
June 27, 2010 9:36:31 PM


eurm

Why?
why?
why?

How on earth is a lower class cpu with in this case no warrenty and no hyperthreading supposed to be better then a higher binned, higher end cpu with customisable settings with a warrenty?

I think I have covered the f3 and 480.
June 27, 2010 9:39:49 PM

the 875k is a waste of money over the 860, the 860 in gaming is a waste of money over the 750. the 750 and a 480 would beat a 875K and a 470 anyday, thats why. and if he had the money to get the 875K and a 480, its still a waste since then he should get the 930. i barely see the whole point in the 8xx series, unless it is to keep the 750 company.
June 27, 2010 9:42:43 PM

The differences during normal use between the 7200.12, F3, and Caviar Black are not that great. Personally, I would get whichever is cheapest, which I think is the 7200.12 right now (at Newegg at least).
June 27, 2010 9:45:10 PM

the f3 is cheapest, and seagate aint too good as far as reliability
June 27, 2010 9:49:00 PM

At US Newegg the F3 1TB is $70 while the 7200.12 1TB is $65 (there's a $15 promo code). As for the 7200.12, the reliability is fine. They get a bad rap because of the 7200.11. Take advantage of this, and get a great drive at a great price IMHO. I own 4 and not a problem yet.
June 27, 2010 9:49:32 PM

Do you even know what the k stands for? It's definately not a waste over the 860, not only is it binned like the i7 870 which is a very good cpu. It is a K edition which makes it amazing as I have stated before.

And your statement of a 875k+470 loses against an 480+750 is simply pathetic because you're not even mentioning an activity. the 480 will only prove an advantage over the 470 in the fps of a game which is not very cpu intensive. Most other activities like loading, rendering, compressing will be performed far better by a 875k+470.

And the 930 isn't as good as the 875k and intel x58 is expensive and the tripple channel and 16/16 benifits are very limited and do not justify the price in most occasions.

And can you please explain what makes the zotac amp"better" than the reference 480?

And how an f3 is "better" than a caviar black.
June 27, 2010 9:53:56 PM

Chuckles_ said:
At US Newegg the F3 1TB is $70 while the 7200.12 1TB is $65 (there's a $15 promo code). As for the 7200.12, the reliability is fine. They get a bad rap because of the 7200.11. Take advantage of this, and get a great drive at a great price IMHO. I own 4 and not a problem yet.


For the price the 7200.12 is a good drive. It's not as good as the black though

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16472/5 That is an old black btw the new ones are faster.

If you've got the money IMO get the black. If you're planning on adding an ssd anyways and are on a tight budget now then the 7200.12 might be a better choice.
June 27, 2010 9:56:37 PM

the 480 and i5 750 win in gaming, which is the purpose of the build to the op. so theres that one. and omg, theres a k after the 875????? EVERYBODY BUY 1, IT HAS A K AFTER THE NUMBERS! the cpu is a waste, maybe not over the 860, but the 860 is generally a waste too! cost of the i7 930-2 gigs of ram, for a dead socket, and nothing really good about it! and u realize the 875K costs more than every cpu you have compared it too, it better be better, and if it is better, its due to the bump in clock speed, which i can bump up in about 2 seconds with the i7 930. the zotac is fine, doesnt really matter, he can oc it himself, and zotac isnt exactly reliable. and do i have to explain everything to you?! look at a benchmark! the f3 is faster, and 20$ cheaper.
June 27, 2010 10:15:53 PM

The k is very important as is the 8 in 480.

Every pc is used for things other than gamin like bootup and ussually compression and other things. EVen considering he solely games than still the i7 will be faster in loading and be significantly faster when more cards are added. And the 1156 will be dead but everything will eventually die anyways 1156 maybe several months before 1366 but that is a small difference.

And do you know what binning means? the i7 875k is a high end cpu and is better than the 930 not just due to to the multiplier bit it simply performs better.

And now you claim that the zotac is fine? and that the i7 875k is better?
You've got a point with the i5 750 it all just depends on what the OP intends to with this system both cpu's are good buys. But you're f3 and 480 claims are just lame.

I have never had a problem with zotac and don't know of anyone who has.

And the benchmarks simply fortify what I have previoulsy mentioned. The f3 is faster in copying large files(it's got better read/write) but when it comes to every day performance the black is faster due to the better acces times. Computers are far more complicated than just mb/s or ghz frequecny. Please do some in DEPTH research before you claim that one thing is "BETTER" than another.
June 27, 2010 10:23:45 PM

do you have a clue what you are talking about? lets see the f3 wins 12 out of 21 by a large margin (against the 2tb version, which is faster than the 1 tb version i may add), and costs 20$ less. i cant see why its better... :pfff:  the 875K is better than both the i5, and maybe the 930, but guess what, IT ALSO COSTS 50-150$ MORE! and if it were me, i wouldnt buy the zotac and id buy this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

although they are all oc'able, so whats the big deal???
June 28, 2010 12:07:56 AM

Thanks a bunch ares you were a big help!
June 28, 2010 12:17:28 AM

you are very welcome!
June 28, 2010 6:05:54 AM

ares1214 said:
do you have a clue what you are talking about? lets see the f3 wins 12 out of 21 by a large margin (against the 2tb version, which is faster than the 1 tb version i may add), and costs 20$ less. i cant see why its better... :pfff:  the 875K is better than both the i5, and maybe the 930, but guess what, IT ALSO COSTS 50-150$ MORE! and if it were me, i wouldnt buy the zotac and id buy this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

although they are all oc'able, so whats the big deal???


The superclocked+ is also a good card but the reference one is really a bad buy considering the minor price you have to pay in addition for a custom cooling solution.

You can't say the f3 is better simply be looking at how many benchmarks it won. Not only are those not real world benchmarks but every benchmark has different importance in different tasks. The drives are different and one should chose the one that suit you best.
June 28, 2010 6:50:05 AM

fatcat332 said:
Thanks a bunch ares you were a big help!


so what's your final build?
June 28, 2010 4:50:15 PM

looks great to me!
June 28, 2010 5:55:02 PM

I still don't see why you would want to waste so much time waiting for your bottleneck(F3) to boot up your system and load apps. The black series are 10percent faster in loading starting up etc.

IMO it's well worth the price of course it's your wasted time and your money so go ahead.

Also why the cooler?
June 28, 2010 8:13:33 PM

the F3 is overall the fastest drive out there, quit denying it.
June 28, 2010 8:55:59 PM

ares1214 said:
the F3 is overall the fastest drive out there, quit denying it.


Speed isn't determined by one factor but by many and each of those speed factor's has a difference influence on performance. When you choose a component you should chose one that exels in speed factors which are good fot you. In other words the f3 is perfect for storage when you have an ssd or other faster boot drive and the black serves as a boot drive.
June 28, 2010 9:11:17 PM

Based on: http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-3.5-desktop-har... , the old WD Caviar Black 1 TB (WD1001FALS) has a read access time of 12.39 ms. The 1 TB Spinpoint F3 has a time of 13.6 ms.

If you can convince yourself that spending $20 more for a less than 10% improvement in random read speeds, then by all means, go for it.

EDIT: And note that's not 10% overall, just 10% on read access. As ares points out, the Samsung drive streams faster.

WD1001FALS currently $90 vs. Spinpoint F3 at $70 vs. Seagate 7200.12 $80 - $15 promo code.


In practice, I doubt that the average user will be able to tell the difference between a Samsung Spinpoint F3, a Seagate 7200.12, and a WD Caviar Black, so I'd just recommend going with whichever is cheapest.
June 28, 2010 9:18:39 PM

the F3 does have a slightly slower acces time, but lets not forget it has faster average read, average write, burst speed, and copying/creating speed.
June 28, 2010 9:20:50 PM

I saw benchmarks comparing the drives in real world apps and the difference really was 10percent. That saves you 5seconds every time in bootup and more precious seconds everytime you start a large app. I might be the only one here thinking this but IMO that really is worth the extra 20. As I said though this is personal.
June 28, 2010 9:21:27 PM

Yer build looks good have fun!!!
June 28, 2010 9:34:11 PM

Somebody_007 said:
I saw benchmarks comparing the drives in real world apps and the difference really was 10percent. That saves you 5seconds every time in bootup and more precious seconds everytime you start a large app. I might be the only one here thinking this but IMO that really is worth the extra 20. As I said though this is personal.


you are still ignoring the fact the F3 excels in everything else, saving you time there.
June 28, 2010 9:41:58 PM

ares1214 said:
you are still ignoring the fact the F3 excels in everything else, saving you time there.


Everything else? There are two basic things in an HDD random read/write and sustained read/write.

F3 exels at sustained make it transfer large files faster(making it better for storage)

Black exels at random read/write making it faster at loading apps and booting up.

I myself bootup several times a day and load many apps a day(inevitably) I rarely transfer large files(1gb+) maybe once a week.

So if you constantly copy/paste large files then yes an f3 will have an edge. But most users don't do that so for them a black is optimal.
June 28, 2010 10:33:17 PM

if your set on getting an i7 microcenter.com has the i7 930 for 200
June 30, 2010 3:27:24 AM

EDIT: Nvm
June 30, 2010 10:57:13 AM

stick with the other mobo, this mobo cant really do dual cards since it only operates at x16 x4. it also doesnt have sata 6 usb 3, which isnt a massive deal, but is always nice to have it.
!