Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

REBUILD ADVICE PLZ

Last response: in Systems
Share
November 4, 2012 11:03:19 PM

i have a few very basic questions first of all my mobo is http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?cc=us&lc=en... and i have a hp m9517c cmputer. my harddrive crashed so i decided to upgrade more before i put a new one in. my newegg cart is getting expensive . anyway i was wondering if a gtx 560 ti would work my computer if i bought a new power supply to go with it. the main problem i was wondering is size it seems the width of the gtx is to much to fit my mobo but idk cause all i ahve to go bye is pictures.

More about : rebuild advice plz

November 4, 2012 11:10:11 PM

Seagate Barracuda ST31000524AS 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive

EVGA SuperClocked 01G-P3-1461-KR GeForce GTX 560 (Fermi) 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video ..



Thermaltake TR2 TR-700 700W ATX 12V V2.3 & EPS 12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready Active PFC Power Supply


Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit - OEM

thats what im ordering tmmrw night if i do not recieve help =P

November 4, 2012 11:13:24 PM

I honestly have no flipping clue what you are trying to say. I'd recommend you re-fill out you question using this http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/353572-31-build-upgra... because we have no basis to go buy to help you with your build. Also if THAT hunk of junk is your motherboard, you'd be better off just to rebuild a whole computer.
Related resources
November 4, 2012 11:18:03 PM

lol you have my mobo specs the graphics card i want with the powersuply going to it. someone who knows what there talking about would be able to help the barracuda is the new harddrive and the windows 7 is because its a new harddrive.
November 4, 2012 11:54:02 PM

What are you gonna do? Argue with me like a 10yr old kid or work with me here? What are you using this PC for? What is your budget? What gives will you be playing? If you aren't going to work with me here, I'm not going to help you and neither is anyone else. Now I already notice tons of things wrong with your build. And until you correctly ask this forum for advice, I'm not helping you at all.

Now if you think your are all smart, if you are an expert, if you are a person who's spent hours upon hours every day doing research and using your expertise to help other people, by all means go ahead and order all of your parts. It's your choice.
November 5, 2012 12:15:06 AM

Tylerlehman said:
http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx...

? how about this build


For $20 more you can get a Radeon 7850 and that's a far better card than the 6870. And then for another $20 you can get the FX-4170 and that's a slightly better CPU than the 965 is, otherwise that's not a bad build.
November 5, 2012 12:20:20 AM

g-unit1111 said:
For $20 more you can get a Radeon 7850 and that's a far better card than the 6870. And then for another $20 you can get the FX-4170 and that's a slightly better CPU than the 965 is, otherwise that's not a bad build.


cool could you modify the wishlist for me with those on it. i think i figured that build i had used 440w would i need to upgrade my psu at all? and i need an operating system to im guessing ill add that on before i buy it. this build will run the new games on med to low settings right
November 5, 2012 12:31:21 AM

I would change your CPU to an FX-4300 , since it is 2 generations newer, has a faster clock speed, it's TPD uses 50W less than the Phenom II. Also th FX has tons of overclocking headroom.

I would also change your RAM to this G.SKILL Ripjaws X Memory as I prefer the look of it. But if you like the way the Ballistix looks, just make sure you get 1600 clocked RAM.

As ^^ they said, a few more bucks will buy you a 7850 which will outperform that 6870 in darn near everything.

Everything else seems fine.
November 5, 2012 12:39:19 AM

k i upgraded to the 7850 seemed better uhm the cpu fx4300 im trying to find on newegg still it would be extremely helpfull if you could modify this http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx... to what your talking about it will most likely end up being what i buy if it doesnt cost to much i realized my 500$ range was a bit shy so im looking at around 700 now with operating system involved i realy appriciate the help this is my first build ever want to make it nice and sexy =P
November 5, 2012 1:26:35 AM

I'd just go with the 4300. The 4170 uses the Bulldozer (Zambezi) architecture, while the 4300 uses the new and revamped Piledriver (Vishera) architecture. As you should know, Bulldozer failed miserably. Piledriver greatly improved upon Bulldozer. Just because the 4170 is clocked .4 higher by no means means that it is any better. Some Xeon processors clocked at 2GHz beat out i5 processors at 3.5+ GHz. Just stick with my suggestion and get the 4300.
Anonymous
November 5, 2012 5:41:01 AM

BreadWhistle said:
I'd just go with the 4300. The 4170 uses the Bulldozer (Zambezi) architecture, while the 4300 uses the new and revamped Piledriver (Vishera) architecture. As you should know, Bulldozer failed miserably. Piledriver greatly improved upon Bulldozer. Just because the 4170 is clocked .4 higher by no means means that it is any better. Some Xeon processors clocked at 2GHz beat out i5 processors at 3.5+ GHz. Just stick with my suggestion and get the 4300.

the 4300 is a horrible processors for the price!
AMD Vishera FX-6300 & FX-4300 Review
piledriver is ~7% performance increase in general applications and barely any in gaming performance; the 4300 will not beat a cheaper phenom x4 in gaming.




clock for clock and "core" for core it still doesn't beat the older arch of deneb(x4) and thurban(x6)



Quote:
Simply put, the FX-4300’s $122 price smells of protectionism in an effort to insulate the A10-5800K’s sales from internal competition. AMD may have been worried that a lower cost would have cut into their APU sales and shuffled things around accordingly. This “robbing from Peter to pay Paul” mentality means the FX-series’ quad core lines up very close to the excellent $132 FX-6300 and that’s a fight it will never win.

and what is this crap about a xeon @2Ghz beating an i5 @3.5Ghz+???
November 5, 2012 8:12:48 PM

^ Well, I could be wrong about the performance, but a swear I saw multiple benchmark results showing the the 4300 beats out the Phenom II 965 by some margin. Also, the 4300 is somewhat better for overclocking. AND you can future proof your rig more by getting it. The Phenom is too old. That's like going to the store and buying a Radeon 5850 for your brand new build. Useless.

And here is your crap about a Xeon beating out an i5
Intel Xeon E5-2620 2.0GHz
Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz

Now (of course) the Xeon probably won't beat out a 3570K on gaming, but anything else, the 3570K won't come close to performing at the level of the Xeon.

But back to the benchmarks, you say that the 4300 is a terrible CPU for the price, but it is on par with the i3 3220. These are about the same in performance, but the 4300 has more cache and 2 more cores (which helps it stay on par with the i3) Of course, the FX-4300 is an overclocking machine. Now for $10 your can get the 6300, which has 2 more cores, and as your benchmarks show, there is somewhat of an improvement over the 4300. So, as we all know the i3 3220 is better for gaming than the 965BE. So if a i3 is better than a 965BE, and the 4300 is on par with the i3, and the 6300 is even better than the 3220, how the hell is Piledriver a bad buy?
Anonymous
November 5, 2012 11:48:38 PM

BreadWhistle said:
^ Well, I could be wrong about the performance, but a swear I saw multiple benchmark results showing the the 4300 beats out the Phenom II 965 by some margin. Also, the 4300 is somewhat better for overclocking. AND you can future proof your rig more by getting it. The Phenom is too old. That's like going to the store and buying a Radeon 5850 for your brand new build. Useless.

And here is your crap about a Xeon beating out an i5
Intel Xeon E5-2620 2.0GHz
Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz

Now (of course) the Xeon probably won't beat out a 3570K on gaming, but anything else, the 3570K won't come close to performing at the level of the Xeon.

But back to the benchmarks, you say that the 4300 is a terrible CPU for the price, but it is on par with the i3 3220. These are about the same in performance, but the 4300 has more cache and 2 more cores (which helps it stay on par with the i3) Of course, the FX-4300 is an overclocking machine. Now for $10 your can get the 6300, which has 2 more cores, and as your benchmarks show, there is somewhat of an improvement over the 4300. So, as we all know the i3 3220 is better for gaming than the 965BE. So if a i3 is better than a 965BE, and the 4300 is on par with the i3, and the 6300 is even better than the 3220, how the hell is Piledriver a bad buy?


future proof better by getting a 4300?
ah, that doesn't make any sense at all because they fit on the same socket/chipset, such as the one the OP is getting, so getting a PII x4 still gives the option of getting a FX-8350 later. (and btw, steamroller won't be out until after 2013 so what would there be to upgrade to other than that?)
Quote:
And here is your crap about a Xeon beating out an i5
Intel Xeon E5-2620 2.0GHz
Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz

Now (of course) the Xeon probably won't beat out a 3570K on gaming, but anything else, the 3570K won't come close to performing at the level of the Xeon.

well in price :lol:  . .but where is any proof of performance? such as benchmarks or reviews? (not kjust talk, actual proof of a comparison)

you can compare X to Y to Z all day long. what matters is head to head benchmarks. and for a 6300 to beat a 4300 by 10%-20% for just $10 more makes the 4300 a terrible cpu (i didn't say piledriver, i said the FX-4300); not just gaming but terrible period. now if you could spend more time reading an article instead of just looking at benchmarks you could wrap your head around it. (thats why i linked it!)

good luck with that. ;) 
November 6, 2012 12:44:32 AM

Look you may have your benchmarks, and you may have your smart remarks, but one thing you obviously don't have in common sense. Take $400 server CPU with 6 cores and compare it to an i5. It doesn't take a genius to guess that the Xeon is a better processor, even without benchmarks, and that is your problem. You rely to heavily on benchmarks, even if the difference is night and day. Do you need your precious benchmarks to see the difference between a 3960X and a Core2Duo? Oh, since I have no proof that the 3960X is better, the winner is undefined. C'mon man!

And you should really re-choose your choice of words. No, the 4300 in NOT a "terrible" CPU. It may not be the best, heck It may not even be good, but it isn't just plain garbage. There is a reason that you can buy some CPU's off of Microcenter for $10. And if the 4300 is terrible, then what is the 4100? It's mentally challenged younger brother?
Anonymous
November 6, 2012 2:35:44 AM

BreadWhistle said:
Look you may have your benchmarks, and you may have your smart remarks, but one thing you obviously don't have in common sense. Take $400 server CPU with 6 cores and compare it to an i5. It doesn't take a genius to guess that the Xeon is a better processor, even without benchmarks, and that is your problem. You rely to heavily on benchmarks, even if the difference is night and day. Do you need your precious benchmarks to see the difference between a 3960X and a Core2Duo? Oh, since I have no proof that the 3960X is better, the winner is undefined. C'mon man!

And you should really re-choose your choice of words. No, the 4300 in NOT a "terrible" CPU. It may not be the best, heck It may not even be good, but it isn't just plain garbage. There is a reason that you can buy some CPU's off of Microcenter for $10. And if the 4300 is terrible, then what is the 4100? It's mentally challenged younger brother?

common sense? wow kettle meet pot.
ok, take a low speed 6 core cpu with hyper threading and 2.5x the cache against a higher clock quad core. which one will have better performance?
depends what: in a use such a rendering farm where there are more threads than you can shake a stick at the more expensive server cpu would perfom much better. but in general applications, which are single threaded, or gaming, which uses 4 cores at the most, the higher clocked quad core would leave the server cpu in the dust.
so to say:
Quote:
Some Xeon processors clocked at 2GHz beat out i5 processors at 3.5+ GHz.

is complete nonsense.
:pfff: 
oh, and where are $10 cpus on microcenter? :o  more of just your babbling? you just spew a bunch of gobbledygook that has absolutely no basis in fact, just your opinion as you see it.

as i said before the 4300 is a horrible cpu and you can certainly add the 4100 in the same boat. neither of them offer nothing better than a pentium or i3 at their price points in all but a very few instances at a much high power consumption.
November 6, 2012 3:29:26 AM

When will you learn? Every argument you state I easily prove against you. Give up. You obviously don't know the smallest of things you talk about. Here I go again proving you wrong:

Do you not read? I obviously stated that in my first reply to your argument. Did I not say that in gaming, the i5 reigns superior? Did I not? The whole point of me saying that was to show the OP that clock speed isn't anything, not to get in a sissy fight with some 10 year old kid who thinks he knows a thing about computers.

And here is your $10 CPU. I even outdid myself, as this one costs only $2.95
http://www.microcenter.com/product/385084/253GHz_Socket...

Lick 'em :kaola: 
November 6, 2012 4:06:25 AM

BreadWhistle said:
There is a reason that you can buy some CPU's off of Microcenter for $10. And if the 4300 is terrible, then what is the 4100? It's mentally challenged younger brother?


Uh.......... what??????? :heink:  :heink:  :heink:  :heink: 

Quote:

And here is your $10 CPU. I even outdid myself, as this one costs only $2.95
http://www.microcenter.com/product [...] efurbished


Keyword: Refurbished :lol: 

And where's the $4 case, $5 PSU, $6 motherboard, $1 RAM, $8 hard drive, and $9 GPU to go with it? It's the $40 build! :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
Anonymous
November 6, 2012 11:09:43 AM

BreadWhistle said:
When will you learn? Every argument you state I easily prove against you. Give up. You obviously don't know the smallest of things you talk about. Here I go again proving you wrong:

Do you not read? I obviously stated that in my first reply to your argument. Did I not say that in gaming, the i5 reigns superior? Did I not? The whole point of me saying that was to show the OP that clock speed isn't anything, not to get in a sissy fight with some 10 year old kid who thinks he knows a thing about computers.

And here is your $10 CPU. I even outdid myself, as this one costs only $2.95
http://www.microcenter.com/product/385084/253GHz_Socket...

Lick 'em :kaola: 

pardon me you didn't prove anything wrong, just posted your fallacious opinion. the question is when will you learn? apparently you will hang on to your argument in the face of proven facts. you were shown that a PIIx4 that costs less can perform better and a xeon is not better than an i5 so in the meantime you are digging a bigger hole for yourself.
Quote:
clock speed isn't anything


ok, let me give you clock speed isn't necessarily everything; because that statement taken at face value is pure ignorance.

nice $10 cpu; gonna build a box for your grandma's recipes with that? you're gonna have some problems!
November 6, 2012 4:23:52 PM

Quote:
you were shown that a PIIx4 that costs less can perform better


Just where? Almost all of your benchmarks show that there is a slight improvement over the 965BE. NOT the 980, not the 1100T, the 965(Which doesn't show in your benchmarks; speculation) Yes, the FX-4300 may not be good, it may be very disappointing. But $10 fixes that to get the FX-6300, in which some of your benchmarks plays greater then or equal to the 980BE. But lets remember: The FX is great for overclocking, and these are just the fist versions. When the 4350 comes out, operating at 4.3GHz stock, I believe that it would be a no-brainer to get the 4350. I know I said that operating frequency isn't everything, but honesty, with how bad the core-per-core performance is on Bulldozer and Piledriver, it almost is. And remember, the FX series has tons of overclocking headroom. So what's better, a 4350 overclocked to 4.7GHz, or a 965BE stock?
Anonymous
November 6, 2012 7:06:13 PM

BreadWhistle said:
Quote:
you were shown that a PIIx4 that costs less can perform better


Just where? Almost all of your benchmarks show that there is a slight improvement over the 965BE. NOT the 980, not the 1100T, the 965(Which doesn't show in your benchmarks; speculation) Yes, the FX-4300 may not be good, it may be very disappointing. But $10 fixes that to get the FX-6300, in which some of your benchmarks plays greater then or equal to the 980BE. But lets remember: The FX is great for overclocking, and these are just the fist versions. When the 4350 comes out, operating at 4.3GHz stock, I believe that it would be a no-brainer to get the 4350. I know I said that operating frequency isn't everything, but honesty, with how bad the core-per-core performance is on Bulldozer and Piledriver, it almost is. And remember, the FX series has tons of overclocking headroom. So what's better, a 4350 overclocked to 4.7GHz, or a 965BE stock?

:lol:  now comes the "overclocking argument" :lol: 
really for an honest comparison; if you are going to overclock one processor then you need to overclock the other and keep the playing field level.

if you look at a bigger picture with so many PIIx4 still holding their own at a much cheaper cost and the 6300 giving a much better performance at just a few dollars more; it leaves the 4300 out in the cold. it seems that AMD made them just to have a product for a SKU and nothing else.

with that being said i'll redefine my comment by saying for the price/performance the 4300 is a horrible cpu.

if you want to believe or saying any different, well that is your right, have at it dude. but i don't see the benefit of going on for pages of discussion esp. when it appears the OP is gone.


cheers
November 7, 2012 2:18:00 PM

i chose to save more money and go with the intel i5 with the hd7850 not worth going cheap on a computer
!