New High-End Build

[jurge92]

Hi.

I'm planning on buying myself a brand new high-end gaming PC. The price tag is around $3 500 USD(have earned up some money in military service). I live in Norway, so the prices are way higher than in the US and mostly the rest of the world.

Approximate Purchase Date: Most likely june

Budget Range: ~$3 500

System Usage from Most to Least Important: Gaming, small programming

Preferred Website(s) for Parts: Norwegian site named www.dustinhome.no

Country: Norway

Parts Preferences: Intel, Asus

Overclocking: Maybe

SLI or Crossfire: Maybe

Monitor Resolution: 1920x1080 120Hz

Additional Comments: The PC will mainly be used for gaming, and some programming. Not much video editing and so on.



My current list:

DVD-ROM: Asus DRW-24B5ST DVD±R/RW/RAM DL 24X SATA Black Retail

GPU: Asus GeForce GTX 690 4GB PCI-E DVI/DP

Motherboard: Asus P8Z77-V Deluxe Z77 S-1155 ATX IVY

Monitor: BenQ XL2420T 24" Wide TFT LED 120Hz Black

RAM: Corsair 8GB DDR3 XMS3 Vengeance PC3-12800 1600Mhz CL9 (2X4GB)

PSU: Corsair AX 850W Professional Series Modular PSU

CPU Cooling: Corsair H100 Hydro CPU Cooler S-775/1155/1366/2011/AM3

Case: Corsair Miditower Carbide 500R ATX White

SSD: Intel 520 Series 2.5" 120GB SSD SATA/600 MLC 25NM BULK

CPU: Intel Core i7 3770K 3.5Ghz 8MB S-1155 IVY

Keyboard: Microsoft Sidewinder X4

Mousepad: SteelSeries QCK

Mouse: QPAD |5K L.E. Pro Gaming Laser Mouse, or Razer Naga Hex

HDD: Seagate Barracuda 7200RPM SATA/600 64MB

Any thoughts?

 

[azeem40]

Two GTX 680s will outperform one GTX 690 and require 200W less power.

 

[skiim]

Two GTX 680s will outperform one GTX 690 and require 200W less power.

Umm what? Totally wrong. A gtx 690 runs about 90w lower than 2 680's in SLI....Each 680 is 195W, so 390W in SLI, and one 690 is 300W at under load. At idle they'll run pretty much the same.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-690-benchmark,3193-14.html

 

[azeem40]

Where is your proof? Everywhere I have read on this forums is that a single 690 needs a 650W PSU whereas two GTX 680 also requires a 650W PSU.

 

[skiim]

Where is your proof? Everywhere I have read on this forums is that a single 690 needs a 650W PSU whereas two GTX 680 also requires a 650W PSU.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-690-benchmark,3193-14.html
What have you been reading?

 

[azeem40]

If you read the very page you linked, it will say that the 690 uses more power, and btw, those are idle temps.

 

[skiim]

Dude are you slow? Did you even read the article? You said 2 Gtx 680's will out perform a 690. Thats true (by 5-10%). Running 680s in sli requires more power. Read the article!

"Each GeForce GTX 680 is rated with a 195 W maximum board power. Each Radeon HD 7970 is rated for 250 W. The GeForce GTX 690’s board power is set at 300 W.

It makes sense, then, that it’d use less power under load compared to twin GeForce GTX 680s. Two Radeons in CrossFire are noticeably more egregious power consumers. Even the GeForce GTX 590 averages higher use than the new GeForce GTX 690.

Truly, this is where the Kepler architecture’s emphasis on performance/watt shines. It would have been nice to see Nvidia spend more time cutting power at idle, like AMD, given the majority of time we spend not gaming. However, the savings under load are certainly impressive. "

 

[jurge92]

I would prefer not to have SLI or CrossFire.
I can't see the differences being big enough for choosing an SLI setup rather than a single card solution... Also, if(when) Asus releases their Direct CU 690 cards, I think it probably will outperform the 680 SLI.

 

[vrumor]

You do realize that by buying a 690 its an SLI'd card? Since you said you would prefer not to SLI or xfire.

 

[jurge92]

You do realize that by buying a 690 its an SLI'd card? Since you said you would prefer not to SLI or xfire.

I should have said I don't want a double card solution then...

Btw, I found this graph from another forum:

You can clearly see the 690 suffers less stuttering compared to 680 SLI and AMD CrossFire. That's also something to have in consideration.