Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

*How To Ask For New Build Advice*

Last response: in Systems
Share
February 8, 2011 5:28:15 PM

Hello,

Trying to figure out a good gaming build for AMD 1090T.
Have a full ATX case - HAF 932 by CoolerMaster.
Speculated on the Gigabyte 890FX mobo.

The rest I have no idea...

Funds is not an issue, but would rather not build a power devourer.

Also have the PSU a Corsair 750W. Did not buy, friend's present...650 would have been enough as it was.

Any ideas?

More about : build advice

February 8, 2011 5:34:09 PM

Fill out the form in the sticky, link in my sig.

You copied the title of the post correctly at least.
February 8, 2011 10:04:19 PM

I need at least budget and country to get started
Related resources
February 8, 2011 10:04:56 PM

resolution would be nice too, please fill out the entire thing to get the best advice
February 9, 2011 11:21:06 AM

Sorry about that, new to the whole posting in forum thing.


Approximate Purchase Date: Plan to purchase parts this week.


Budget Range: 800-1500


System Usage from Most to Least Important: Gaming, multimedia editing, web surfing


Parts Not Required: Keyboard, mouse, headphones with mic, webcam, psu (Corsair CMPSU-750TX 750w), AMD 1090T BE, and Cooler Master HAF 932.

Preferred Website(s) for Parts: Been using newegg, microcenter, tigerdirect, and even amazon.


Country of Origin: US


Parts Preferences: Coolermaster, Gigabyte, Corsair, etc...I am unsure of the brands so you can throw anything at me.

Overclocking: Maybe, a possibility.


SLI or Crossfire: Yes


Monitor Resolution: 1920x1080


Additional Comments: Not looking for a 'showy' computer, but one that will blow everything away...for atleast a couple months.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Parts already have:

Cooler Master HAF 932
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

AMD Phenom II x6 1090T
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Corsair CMPSU-750TX PSU
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

2x SAMSUNG BX2431 24" LED HD Monitors
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


Hope this is better than my previous post.

Thanks for the help.
February 9, 2011 12:10:30 PM

assumming you want to spend that $800+ on all remaining parts, here is my suggestion:

AS Rock 870 Extreme 3: $89.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
a solid motherboard with 8x/8x crossfire, USB 3.0 and SATA 3.

2x Sapphire HD6870 ($219.99 ea): $439.98 (1 $20 rebate)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Samsung Spinpoint F3 1 TB HDD: $64.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Patriot 8 GB DDR3-1600: $96.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Hyper 212+ CPU Cooler: $29.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

OCZ Agility 2 90 GB SSD: $179.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


total $901.93

The paired 6870s should handle gaming at your potential 3840x1080 gaming just fine, and are more powerful than a GTX 580 anyway. While this doesn't leave an 'upgrade path' by the time this system as is can't handle games, it'll be time to upgrade anyway.
February 9, 2011 12:55:06 PM

Thanks. Just had a question.

Would this board be a better fit?
Had a lot of experience with Asus and Gigabyte, kind of nervous with another brand mobo.
I appreciate you comments. Just want to get opinions.

GIGABYTE GA-890FX
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Yes, no?

February 9, 2011 7:01:40 PM

that gigabite will only be useful if you run 3 or more graphics cards. the difference between 16x/16x crossfire and 8x/8x crossfire is less than 2%. If 16x/16x gives 100FPs, 8x/8x gives 98. It's not worth doubling your mobo price for 1-2 fps.

AS Rock was spun off from ASUS in 2002, and is probly the best of the 'middle-tier' of motherboard builders around. (AS Rock, MSI, Zotac)
February 9, 2011 10:03:17 PM

I'd actually recommend you buy a 6950 2gb, unlock it to a 6970 (google it) then sell it as soon as the 6990 comes out and run your monitors off that 1 6990= 2 6950s
February 10, 2011 11:57:09 AM

I spent last night reading up on AS Rock and a lot of things in the few articles I read made them sound pretty good.
They are very affordable and can do a lot of the same things as the top tier mobo.
I was also looking into the 6950 just a little while ago. Read a blog about unlocking the 6950 to reach 6970. Crazy stuff. That is the card I kept seeing people using in 'youtube' videos using 3 screens in eyefinity. Not sure I will be up to do something like that yet, haha. Been playing on two moniters with Guild Wars and MW2 for a while, who knows maybe eventually I will do something like that.
Jeez, 98 fps? I only get 40 fps on my current system.

Screwy, the ssd you mentioned, what is the difference between mlc and slc?
Joel, will the 6950 support 2 monitors with 1 card or 2 cards needed?
February 10, 2011 3:59:22 PM

The OCZ Agility 2 uses a Sandforce controller, easily the top performing model in terms of price/performance. $2/gig is about par for sandforce model, though which company has that varies with a sandforce (Sometimes its OCZ, sometimes Mushkin, sometimes G.Skill)

SLC is single layer, while MLC is multi-layer control

full details here:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/hardware-components-aft...

regardless of that article, the Agility 2 has an estimated lifespan of 3-5 years, under normal usage.
February 10, 2011 4:54:51 PM

I may be wrong but an article I read before said SSD have a lifespan of 110 years or some crazy number like that. I understand wear and tear and reinstallations and common everyday use throughout multiple programs could lessen that greatly, but why is it only lasting 3-5 years? I mean I will more than likely have a new piece of technology by then, but just curious. No moving parts you would think it would last longer than that.
Is there any differences in SLC and MLC performances? Other than OS, what should be placed on the SSD? Anything?
In your opinion, on another topic....the graphics card that Joel mentioned, the 6950...would that be a wise buy considering the price and what I will get out of it? I play currently Guild Wars, Counter Strike, and GW 2 when it arrives. And use programs such as Creative Suite light use and Solidworks for work.
Not to over rule Joel, just figured I would get more than one opinion on the matter. I looked at the one you mentioned and cannot seem to figure out which one can do what I need without spending huge amount on something I will use half of.
February 10, 2011 5:03:55 PM

what causes the lifespan limit is there are a limited number of times each cell can be written to, after which point the SSD response times rise immensely. The data is still there and probly will last that 110 years, but as a high-speed device, its useless. SLC is generally preferable over MLC.

As for the GPU, the 6950 is more powerful than a single 6870, less powerful than a GTX 570. SOME can be unlocked into 6970s (what percentage I don't know, and remember, there usually a reason it gets binned down) which are about even with a 570. a pair of 6950s will be more powerful than the pair of 6870s I mentioned, but running about $100 more for the pair ($540 vs $440).


February 10, 2011 5:09:45 PM

So upon buying this SSD device, what programs should be most important to store on it? Or would it be wiser to run with Raid 0?
Do you feel the 6950 is overkill for me?
February 10, 2011 7:18:40 PM

the OS and ones that you use most often. loading times will be faster.
February 10, 2011 9:34:39 PM

Don't use RAID 0 it doubles failure rate and eliminates TRIM support. Get a 6950 percentage unlock is really high the difference between the binnings is the temp, you need good cooling to run an unlocked 6950 and you probably won't be able to OC it much once you unlocked it. http://www.techpowerup.com/articles/overclocking/vidcar... depends on brand I'd go with HIS
February 10, 2011 9:59:55 PM

ScrewySqrl said:
what causes the lifespan limit is there are a limited number of times each cell can be written to, after which point the SSD response times rise immensely. The data is still there and probly will last that 110 years, but as a high-speed device, its useless. SLC is generally preferable over MLC.


Where are you getting this info from?

The best estimates I have seen so far come from Anandtech's SSD Relapse, about 10 years with high usage.

SLC is certainly preferable if cost is no issue, but it's not a reasonable price point for most consumers.
February 10, 2011 10:27:46 PM

I was getting the 3-5 years estimate from 2010 SSD articles. Obviously, Anand has gone into more research since.
February 11, 2011 11:14:45 AM

Coldsleep: Cost is not a problem when the money is being spent for a purpose. lol, I am not going to spend the money for slc, because honestly, it will not be useful to me.
Thanks for the knowledge though, I appreciate it.
February 11, 2011 11:16:33 AM

Joel: I only asked about raid 0 because a buddy of mine told me with a convincing argument (he is typically very convincing) that raid 0 is faster tan SSD. I am not sure I would trust myself running it that way but this is the info he gave me, of course he never mentioned life span of the products when done this way.
February 11, 2011 11:18:20 AM

Screwy: Thanks for the consistent amount of help through all my questions. I understand it can be difficult dealing with all this. As I am sure many other people need help I will not hold you up anymore lol, I will let you know when it is completely built. Thanks a lot everyone.
February 11, 2011 7:16:16 PM

k10man said:
Joel: I only asked about raid 0 because a buddy of mine told me with a convincing argument (he is typically very convincing) that raid 0 is faster tan SSD. I am not sure I would trust myself running it that way but this is the info he gave me, of course he never mentioned life span of the products when done this way.


RAID 0 is definitely not going to be faster than an SSD by most measures.

You could possbily get a RAID 0 drive to stream data around the disk more quickly (copying a 2 GB file from one folder to another), but a RAID 0 array isn't going to have the near-instantaneous access that you get from an SSD, which is typically how you experience "speed" as it relates to hard drives in your computer. A RAID 0 array still has to spin up the drives and experiences latency because of that. An SSD, with no moving parts, has no such latency.

The best article I have been able to find comparing RAID 0 and SSDs is actually about 2 SSDs in RAID 0 vs. 8 HDDs in RAID 0, so it's not exactly what you're looking for. But even so, the conclusion says a lot: "The SSDs are better in almost every benchmark with the exception of throughput, which typically scales nicely with the number of drives used. This is where the hard drives won through sheer force of numbers."

Generally, I think the best bet for most users today (with the money for an SSD) is to get a 60-120 GB SSD and a 1 TB (or larger) HDD. Use the SSD for your commonly used programs, store everything else on the HDD.
February 14, 2011 12:47:45 PM

Coldsleep: That helped me out understanding it a lot. I appreciate the time you took to help me. I have a OCZ Agility 2 coming in delivery today, only 90gb but it is a start. From this point forward it is safe to say that I will be using people on here to help me with information. Thanks.
February 14, 2011 2:11:22 PM

Had another question, Optical drives...what to get and what not to get...

Looking at dvd/cd and bd burner.
Any guidance on any brands to focus on let me know.

Thanks.
February 14, 2011 2:16:41 PM

Just get cheapest SATA optical. Asking the best optical drive is like going into staples and asking them what their best No 2 pencil for sale it.

Yes you can probably justify one as better, but in practice they all do the same thing equally as well.
February 14, 2011 2:24:09 PM

Alright, understood...just went on newegg.com and people going crazy on commenting which drive is better and so on. Thanks.
February 14, 2011 3:12:01 PM

You should be able to find something for around $16-17 with free shipping. Just get that one. :)  As banthracis is implying, DVD drives have been around long enough at this point that there aren't any real differences. In the unlikely event you get a dud, just RMA it.

And 90 GB should be more than fine for an SSD. I have a 60 GB in my HTPC, and a 128 GB in my gaming machine. I just wouldn't go lower than 60 GB for a standard use PC. Maybe for a netbook or something similar.
February 14, 2011 4:30:22 PM

Yeah, I am not worried as much about the dvd...found one on amazon for 19 with shipping included. The BD burner was more concerning, first time buyer for one of those. Most of them have the same stuff, but people seem to have complained about certain brands more than others, just was not sure if one brand was better than another for overall quality.
February 14, 2011 5:04:32 PM

Do you really need a Blu-ray burner? Unless you have a true need for it or have money burning a hole in your pocket, I'm not sure they're worth the cost right now. I'd stick with a Blu-ray reader or combo drive (Blu-ray reader, DVD burner).
February 14, 2011 5:11:20 PM

Not convinced I have the need, or want for one. Just figured I would ask to see. Rather spend the money elsewhere if not needed.
February 14, 2011 5:47:30 PM

Very few people need Bu-ray burners right now. Unless you're making video content that is intended to be on Blu-ray, or you have the need to store over 8 GB (up to 25ish GB) on a single disc for some reason, I would advise against them for the time being.

Blu-ray readers can be had for $50ish, and combo drives tend to be around $80 or 90. If you want the ability to watch Blu-ray movies, that's what I would recommend.
February 16, 2011 2:10:40 PM

Just getting the dvd burner. I have PS3 for blu-ray anyways.
I am only waiting on a few more parts to be delivered so I can build.
Only thing I have not bought yet is a graphics card because I am still looking around for deals on a few. I like the sounds of the 6950 on amazon for 269 USD.
February 22, 2011 10:51:37 AM

Well, finally done the build. Works good with a few minor kinks. For some reason it does not like the Mozilla Firefox to be installed, turned off firewall and error comes up saying it is a corrupt file...hmm. Would say it is a website issue but continued on to Raptr.com to download and install that program and it came up with one as well. Are they designed for 64-bit OS? Installed Itunes, MS Office, Safari, AIM, drivers, Nero, CS5, etc without issue.
February 22, 2011 11:23:32 AM

Firefox should work ok. check the mozilla forums
February 22, 2011 4:10:16 PM

I will have to play around with the computer when I get out of work and try to figure it out. I am sure it is something small that I did to have it not work. Thanks for the help Screwy. And thanks to everyone for all the help with the build.
!