Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

First build: 3D/general graphic design, could you check my components?

Tags:
  • Homebuilt
  • Systems
  • Product
Last response: in Systems
Share
December 8, 2011 8:34:31 PM

Hey everyone, I'm building a "budget" 3D/general graphic design computer and I've come up with the following components. I'm most unsure of the motherboard, but if there's anything else I could be doing cheaper or better, let me know. Thanks!

Case: Fractal Design Arc Midi $110

MoBo: ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 $125

CPU: i7-2600k $315

CPU cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 $21

SSD: Crucial 64GB $110

HDD: waiting for prices to go down, might reuse an old 2.5'' temporarily

PSU: FSP Aurum Gold 700W $126

GPU: EVGA GTX 560 ti $240

RAM: 2x G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB $60

CD/DVD: ASUS 24X DVD Burner $20

Monitor: Asus VW246H $180

Total: $1315

More about : build general graphic design check components

a c 93 B Homebuilt system
December 8, 2011 10:08:22 PM

I love that Fractal Design case - the look is definitely very designer-ish.

Component selection is pretty good for the most part except for your PSU. Go with the Seasonic X750 Gold or the PC Power & Cooling Silencer series.

If you're concerned about HD prices - you might want to look at possibly getting a 500GB - I have that same SSD and I will tell you that 64GB will fill up quickly and then you'll regret not having the extra space. I'd recommend getting a mechanical 500GB now (which you can get for ~$110) then add the SSD later on.
m
0
l
Related resources
December 8, 2011 10:20:09 PM

Thanks for the input!

I haven't been able to find any real reviews or many product reviews for the Intel BOXDZ68BC mobo, so I'm not sure I'd go for that.

g-unit1111, are there any particular reasons why the FSP PSU isn't a good choice? For an 80 plus gold efficiency, it's cheaper than the Seasonic, and I haven't found any negative reviews for it. The Silencer Mk II looks good, but it's a little more expensive than the FSP and only 80 plus silver rated.
m
0
l
a c 93 B Homebuilt system
December 9, 2011 4:38:44 AM

Quote:
I haven't been able to find any real reviews or many product reviews for the Intel BOXDZ68BC mobo, so I'm not sure I'd go for that.


Yeah you're right. Most Intel boards are about as generic as you can get - they're meant for people who don't want to mess around with their systems. They generally lack a lot of overhead features, have no UEFI, no extra tweaking features, and Intel generally frowns on overclocking.

Quote:
g-unit1111, are there any particular reasons why the FSP PSU isn't a good choice? For an 80 plus gold efficiency, it's cheaper than the Seasonic, and I haven't found any negative reviews for it. The Silencer Mk II looks good, but it's a little more expensive than the FSP and only 80 plus silver rated.


I'm not going to say they're a bad PSU maker but I've used PSUs that have resulted in random system shutdowns, BSODs, all that stuff. When I first got my gaming system back in 2009 I had a supposedly "top rated" Ultra X3 850W power supply. That thing crashed my system left and right. I swapped it for a Corsair TX 750, been problem free ever since. I'm really particular about the power supplies I choose for my systems as a result.

I'd suggest reading this article about choosing a good, reliable PSU: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/power-supply-psu-re...
m
0
l
a c 136 B Homebuilt system
December 9, 2011 4:58:53 AM

If you are not gaming then do not use a gaming graphics card . Use a quaddro or firepro instead

The psu wattage can be much lower . 500 - 550 watt is appropriate as the build stands but it cold be less if you use the right graphics card

For graphics and productivity usage then RAM with lower timings is going to improve performance . Spend some of the money you dont waste on the power supply here
m
0
l
a c 93 B Homebuilt system
December 9, 2011 4:44:26 PM

Quote:
If you are not gaming then do not use a gaming graphics card . Use a quaddro or firepro instead

The psu wattage can be much lower . 500 - 550 watt is appropriate as the build stands but it cold be less if you use the right graphics card


I'll disagree with that one. Where I work we have a wide variety of system configurations and we use a variety of graphics cards - both "gamer" graphics cards (like the Radeon 6850, mine uses a GTX 470) and "professional" graphics cards (ATI Fire Pro, NVIDIA Quaddro). I've honestly noticed no difference between the two - and if you're going with say a Fire Pro you're actually going to be paying between 2 - 3x as much for the comparable "gamer" graphics card, Quaddros are ridiculously overpriced.

As far as PSU goes you could get by with a 600W PSU, but with the hardware the OP plans to run I'd make sure it's future proof by going with a 650 - 700W PSU.

Quote:
For graphics and productivity usage then RAM with lower timings is going to improve performance . Spend some of the money you dont waste on the power supply here


I thought all RAM 1333 and 1600 had the same timings, no? And I thought that most motherboards would default to the lowest speeds and timings it could handle, and that the factory speeds and timings were just a guideline, am I wrong on that?
m
0
l
a c 136 B Homebuilt system
December 9, 2011 8:43:20 PM

Workstation cards are usually clocked lower for stability and the drivers are optimized for rendering and similar tasks rather than blasting a few extra fps at a gamer . Toms did an article a few years back comparing performance of gamer cards vs workstation and in workstation applications the game cards fell well short . But I cant find the article .

I did find this though
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4CoFyMaBVA
and its worth watching .


As for RAM timings .
You can get 1333 MHz RAM with the same timing as 1600MHz , but thats not always true .
7-7-7-21 RAM will always be faster in applications than 9-9-9-24 ,if they are at the same frequency, because its using fewer of its clock cycles to process data .

What may be confusing you is that lots of 9-9-9-24 1600 MHz RAM is identical chips to 7-7-7-21 1333 MHz RAM . They have slackened the timings to get it to run stable at the higher frequency
m
0
l
a c 93 B Homebuilt system
December 10, 2011 5:38:04 AM

Quote:
Workstation cards are usually clocked lower for stability and the drivers are optimized for rendering and similar tasks rather than blasting a few extra fps at a gamer . Toms did an article a few years back comparing performance of gamer cards vs workstation and in workstation applications the game cards fell well short . But I cant find the article .

I did find this though
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4CoFyMaBVA
and its worth watching .


The bad thing with the workstation cards is that they're so expensive. I see the need for them but if you can't afford them the gamer cards are the way to go. A Fire Pro will run like I said - 2 - 3x more than the comparable cards.
m
0
l
a c 136 B Homebuilt system
December 10, 2011 6:06:10 AM

For a professional the cost is far far less over the life cycle of the computer . If they save you 5 minutes an hour by rendering faster

then each week you are wasting over 3 billable hours if you are using a gaming card .
I have no idea what a pro charges for that kind of work in the US but even if it was $50 an hour the work station graphics card pays for itself in less than a month
m
0
l
!