Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Need Advice on My new Build

Last response: in Systems
Share
January 27, 2013 9:47:18 AM

Hello and thanks in advance

i am building a new pc and i dont have all the money i need yet so i want to buy some of the parts now and some later but i dont know which to buy first

plus i was wondering if this build is very good and will be future proof in the next 3 years and still be able to play games on high

also wondering if i should replace all the stock fans with new and better case and if so which ones

here is my build i am thinking of getting

Corsair Vengeance Series C70 Gunmetal Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case
$139.99 -$30.00 Instant $109.99


GIGABYTE GA-Z77X-UD5H LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
$199.99 -$10.00 Instant $189.99


XFX PRO850W XXX Edition Semi-Modular 80 Plus Silver Certified 850 Watt Active PFC Power Supply
$154.99 $154.99


Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy Bridge 3.4GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 1155 77W Quad-Core Desktop Processor Intel HD Graphics 4000 BX80637I53570K
$229.99 $229.99


G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL9D-8GBRL)
$47.99 $47.99


G.SKILL Phoenix III FM-25S3-120GBP3 2.5" 120GB SATA III Internal 7mm Solid State Drive (SSD)
$109.99 -$5.00 Instant $104.99


Western Digital WD Black WD1002FAEX 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
$149.99 -$45.00 Instant $104.99


ASUS DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS Black SATA 24X DVD Burner - Bulk - OEM
$19.99 $19.99


Arctic Silver Arctic Alumina 1.75g Premium Ceramic, Polysynthetic thermal compound AA-1.75G
$4.99 -$1.00 Instant $3.99


CORSAIR Hydro series H50 High Performance CPU Cooler
$64.99 $64.99

GIGABYTE GV-R795WF3-3GD Radeon HD 7950 3GB 384-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card
$300.00

Subtotal: $1,331.90

More about : advice build

January 27, 2013 9:52:12 AM

Not too shabby! But get more than a H50 if you plan on overclocking. At least a H80i or a Noctua um... what's it called. I'd go with the H100i if it were me :D 

I don't like Radeon cards, either. I'd get a nice GTX 670 and enjoy the PhysX.
January 27, 2013 12:27:03 PM

i am not an overclock-er. i have not do so for the sheer fact that i might destroy my system i am afraid to.

as for the h100i i think is is over kill if i was going for a i7 then i might have but i still am thinking about the cpu cooler maybe a h60 or noctua still unsure.

the only reason i have choosen the 7950 is that it is 60-100 bucks cheaper and 7950 is little bit better plus you can get a physx on amd just need to be down loaded to it.
Related resources
January 27, 2013 12:48:29 PM

The case is your preference, The CM Storm Enforcer got the approved award from tomshardware for it's cooling efficiency and it's much cheaper than the Corsair's. Also there are HAF XM, HAF X, Storm Stryker and Storm Trooper all decent cases from CM.

You don't need the extra features from the Gigabyte board, you could have gone with the UD3H.
ASRock Z77 Extreme4 is a great value & the most pick for all the Z77 systems.

You don't need a 850W PSU, 500W is all what you need, 750W for future upgrades and SLI/CF.

WD Blues is almost the same performance as the black, actually SSD is what's gonna make a difference.

Samsung 830/840 are the fastest and most reliable SSDs out there.

H50 isn't gonna add any difference from the Hyper 212 EVO, unless you go H80 or H100i.
Cooler Master Seidon is a great unit, has almost the same price of H60 and performs as great as H100!!!
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

HD 7970 GHz is the fastest single GPu around, no need for thermal compound the stock one is great.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($189.99 @ Microcenter)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($33.24 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Extreme4 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($124.99 @ Microcenter)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($47.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 830 Series 128GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($109.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition 3GB Video Card ($449.99 @ Amazon)
Case: Cooler Master Storm Enforcer ATX Mid Tower Case ($79.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: SeaSonic M12II 750W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($115.17 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Sony AD-7280S-0B DVD/CD Writer ($25.97 @ Newegg)
Total: $1247.31
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-01-27 09:48 EST-0500)
January 27, 2013 1:01:52 PM

joshua-10000 said:
i am not an overclock-er. i have not do so for the sheer fact that i might destroy my system i am afraid to.

as for the h100i i think is is over kill if i was going for a i7 then i might have but i still am thinking about the cpu cooler maybe a h60 or noctua still unsure.

the only reason i have choosen the 7950 is that it is 60-100 bucks cheaper and 7950 is little bit better plus you can get a physx on amd just need to be down loaded to it.

Nah, sorry, no Radeon card can use PhysX.
January 27, 2013 1:21:29 PM

7950 is slower than 670, 7970 is faster.

Case looks great but i was disappointed in the thermals but since you're not overclocking it doesnt matter.

Speaking of which, no need to spend more than $85 (asrock z75) a board - unless you'll sli, then go about $150 (asrock z77).

No cpu cooler needed beyond stock, and dont need a k model cpu.



January 27, 2013 1:54:43 PM

quilciri said:
Acc. to tom's 7950 = 670. If the 670 is any faster, it's by so small of a margin it doesn't matter, and the much lower price of the 7950 makes it a better value.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-car...

SLI > Crossfire, less 99% time frame delay, better drivers, less power consumption, PhysX.
January 27, 2013 1:58:28 PM

Drives me nuts that SSD manufacturers don't list the type of flash memory used in their drives. Couldn't find out whats inside the phoenix 3 on a quick google search. Long story short, it's got a second-gen sandforce controller, which is good. If it has toggle NAND memory, then it's a good value. If it only has synchronous, or heaven forbid asynchronous RAM then look elsewhere for your SSD.

good luck!
January 27, 2013 2:03:55 PM

quilciri said:
Drives me nuts that SSD manufacturers don't list the type of flash memory used in their drives. Couldn't find out whats inside the phoenix 3 on a quick google search. Long story short, it's got a second-gen sandforce controller, which is good. If it has toggle NAND memory, then it's a good value. If it only has synchronous, or heaven forbid asynchronous RAM then look elsewhere for your SSD.

good luck!

I know the feel. I build custom computers for a living and having to go out of your way to find information they should tell you is aggravating.

Tell me what's in your product! >_>
January 27, 2013 2:21:00 PM

MatildaPersson said:
SLI > Crossfire, less 99% time frame delay, better drivers, less power consumption, PhysX.


Sorry, have to address this, seems to be a bit wrong here. The 7950 uses slightly less power than the 670.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-670-rev...

"99% time frame delay"? I don't know what you're trying to refer to here. If it's what I think it is, then this is more of a CPU issue than video card.

Nvidia had more stable drivers on launch of their 600 series than AMD did when launching the 7000 series. However, Nvidia tends to stagnate on new driver releases, while AMD's team releases new drivers very regularly that have not only increased stability, but vastly increased performance (10% for the 7800's and 8% for the 7900's in the 12.1 drivers, and from what i hear yet another bump in 13.1), which is more than any NVIDIA driver update has done since the 8800GT era.

Where are you getting your information from regarding SLI being better than crossfire? On launch of a new card series, more games tend to support SLI than support crossfire, thats just the nature of NVIDIA's larger market share. At this point in the cards life cycle, however, just as many games support crossfire as SLI.

From a performance standpoint when both are supported, crossfire wins over SLI. Nvidia has improved quite a bit since the 200 series, where it only gave a 50% performance increase with two cards, but it still lags behind the scaling of amd cards.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crossfire-sli-3-way...

The 600 series also has improved SLI scaling over the 500, but hasn't quite caught up to amd yet. NTM, if you're going to use multiple cards, then the greater memory bandwidth and capacity on the AMD card will come into play as well.

If the prices were closer, I'd be reccommending a 670 right alongside you, but the 670 costs $50 more than the 7950, which isn't worth what little more the 670 has to offer - I do reccommend the 660 over the 7870 for exactly the same reason.
January 27, 2013 2:36:24 PM

Ah - may newer drivers? At launch the 670 beat the 7950 across the board and was close to 7970, but that was almost a year ago so my info may be dated. :) 
January 27, 2013 2:53:01 PM

J_E_D_70 said:
Ah - may newer drivers? At launch the 670 beat the 7950 across the board and was close to 7970, but that was almost a year ago so my info may be dated. :) 


Yeah, at launch the 670 curbstomped everybody, even Nvidia's own product lineup :D 

This is at least the third hardware cycle that AMD's driver team had a large performance/stability gap between initial and optimal drivers, and didn't get to optimal drivers til 6 months after release (5000, 6000, 7000). The end result is nice, though.

No idea what the team spent their time on before launch >.<

Now is a great time to buy a 7000 series card. If you want to wait til the 700 / 8000 series, you'll probably be better off with an Nvidia card then.
January 27, 2013 4:24:31 PM

thank you guys/ladies for the help i do appreciate the advice so i guess i will go with a asrock z77 extreme 4

but should i get the ssd from gskill or samsung 840/830 as suggested in the above al so is 750 watt enough for 2 7950 cuz i am thinking of getting one more in the future and i have done my home work the 670 and 7950 go head to head plus 7950 is cheaper and if any body can back me up on the physx for amd cuz i have read about it being downloadable on the amd card recently.
January 27, 2013 4:48:03 PM

I can't reccommend the pheonix 3, as I have no idea what's inside of it. It's also a largely untested and unreviewed drive. It could be good, but we have no information to go on.

At this point, I think the best performance and reliability ssd's for the dollar are the Samsung 830 and the Sandisk extreme. Unfortunately the 830 is out of production so you may have a hard time finding one.
(I don't particularly like the 840 drives, as the 840 performs worse than the 830 ,but costs just as much, and the 840 pro costs too much.) The Sandisk Extreme is the cheapest & most reliable toggle NAND, second gen sandforce drive out.

SSD prices have actually gone up a bit in the last couple months, no idea why >.<
January 27, 2013 6:30:58 PM

What's the hell is going on this thread :D  lots of wrong information are going on;

For the GPU stuff, GTX 670 is as powerful as the reference HD 7970 and HD 7950 with boost is as powerful as GTX 670 (still GTX 670 is 2% faster).

For the SSDs, G.SKILL is not a famous brand of SSDs, SSDs from Intel, OCZ, Mushkin, Corsair, Plextor and Samsung are the most reputable and reliable SSDs. The top tier SSDs are shown in the hierarchy chart of Tomshardware which includes Samsung 840, OCZ Vector. Samsung 840 is a great performer and great price. There's no real world difference between Samsung 830 & 840 if you find 830 in stock grab it.

For the Physx thing, talking about Physx is a wide open topic, in short;
There's CPU accelerated Physx which mainly depends on the CPU power which most games support and there's GPU accelerated Physx and few games support it, talking about Physx nowadays is useless, I'm expecting the technique to be shut down soon.
review this thread about Physx;
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/334948-33-8800gt-phys...
January 27, 2013 6:57:33 PM

ilysaml said:

The top tier SSDs are shown in the hierarchy chart of Tomshardware which includes Samsung 840, OCZ Vector. Samsung 840 is a great performer and great price. There's no real world difference between Samsung 830 & 840 if you find 830 in stock grab it.


Sorry to correct your correction, but this is wrong. The 840 pro is top tier, not the 840; and the 830 outpaces the 840, as SSD's go.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-...

It's a large enough performance difference that the 64gb 830 is in a higher tier than the 120gb 840. toggle-NAND second gen sandforce SSD are likewise considerably faster than the regular 840.

The regular 840 performs on par with intel's 330 several tiers down - a value drive, not a performance drive. Granted, they're both far faster than an HDD, but given there's not much price difference between the 840 and the 830 (when you can find one), buying an 840 makes no sense.

Samsung appears to know this and has stopped making the 830 >.<
January 27, 2013 7:05:03 PM

ok sir

how about this setup i would really like your feed back and opinion


LITE-ON DVD Burner - Bulk Black SATA Model iHAS124-04 - OEM
$16.99 $16.99


GIGABYTE GV-R795WF3-3GD Radeon HD 7950 3GB 384-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card
$299.99 $299.9

COOLER MASTER Seidon 120M RL-S12M-24PK-R1 Water Cooler
$71.99 -$7.00 Instant $64.99


Intel Core i5-3570K Ivy Bridge 3.4GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 1155 77W Quad-Core Desktop Processor Intel HD Graphics 4000 BX80637I53570K
$229.99 $229

Rosewill CAPSTONE Series CAPSTONE-750 750W Continuous @ 50°C, 80 PLUS GOLD Certified, Single +12V Rail, ATX12V v2.31 / EPS12V ...
$139.99 -$30.00 Instant $109.99


Western Digital WD Blue WD10EZEX 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive)
$109.99 -$25.00 Instant $84.99


ASRock Z77 Extreme4 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
$134.99 $134.99


Corsair Vengeance Series C70 Military Green Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case
$139.99 -$10.00 Instant $129.99



G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL9D-8GBXL

$47.99 $47.99


Noctua NF-P12-1300 120mm Case Fans
$26

SAMSUNG 840 Series MZ-7TD120KW 2.5" 120GB SATA III Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
January 27, 2013 7:22:28 PM

Almost all the part choices are either decent or excellent. Even that particular model of Rosewill PSU is a great unit (I steer folks clear of some of their lower end PSU's). Once again, I don't reccommend the Samsung 840 - for the same price the 830 or a second gen sandforce toggle nand drive will be faster, and one from a reputable company will be just as reliable.

Do you plan on buying a second video card? I ask because 500w is more than enough for any single GPU system.

Other than that, looks good!

enjoy!
January 27, 2013 7:40:46 PM

quilciri said:
Almost all the part choices are either decent or excellent. Even that particular model of Rosewill PSU is a great unit (I steer folks clear of some of their lower end PSU's). Once again, I don't reccommend the Samsung 840 - for the same price the 830 or a second gen sandforce toggle nand drive will be faster, and one from a reputable company will be just as reliable.

Do you plan on buying a second video card? I ask because 500w is more than enough for any single GPU system.

Other than that, looks good!

enjoy!



yes i do want to cross fire but i been thinking of getting the 7970 so i dont have to for a while what do u think

plus just wondering what is decent on the list and is there anything i can improve on

i also want to raid o the ssd
January 27, 2013 8:09:20 PM

Here's your build for cheaper. I changed a bit - I swapped the RAM to the patriot viper series, changed to the modular version of the PSU you picked, and stuck in a Sandisk extreme SSD


PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($219.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Extreme4 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($124.99 @ Microcenter)
Memory: Patriot Viper 3 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($38.50 @ NCIX US)
Storage: Sandisk Extreme 120GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($105.59 @ NCIX US)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card ($297.98 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: Corsair C70 Military Green (Green) ATX Mid Tower Case ($129.99 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: Rosewill Capstone 750W 80 PLUS Gold Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($89.99 @ Amazon)
Optical Drive: Lite-On iHAS124-04 DVD/CD Writer ($15.98 @ Outlet PC)

Total: $1093.00 (Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)

+$26 for noctua case fans & $64 for water cooler (couldn't find water coolers on pcpartpicker) for $1183 actual total. (your original build would have come to $1243 including the 840 - if you still want the 840, the 120gb can be had for $98)
http://pcpartpicker.com/part/samsung-internal-hard-driv...

Also, ignore that microcenter listing by the motherboard. I dunno why pcpartpicker includes microcenter for parts that they don't ship. It's the same price & rebate at newegg.

have fun!
January 27, 2013 10:15:31 PM

quilciri said:
Sorry to correct your correction, but this is wrong. The 840 pro is top tier, not the 840; and the 830 outpaces the 840, as SSD's go.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-...

Mate when I talked, I talked about the "SERIES" so I said "Samsung 840" meaning the series. And if you review my post, I mentioned the OCZ Vector beside the 840, the chart shows only the vector and 840 pro in the top tier. And according to the theoretical performance gain read this;
At the end of the day, the real-world differences between SSDs in a desktop environment aren't altogether very large. The most important jump happens when you go from a hard drive to (almost) any SSD. With that said, there are measurable attributes that separate one SSD from another. However, they have to be digested as a sum of many parts. Within individual apps, you'll hardly notice the difference between a Vertex 2 and Samsung's 830. But if you look at performance over an entire month, you will find the 830 to be a better performer.

So at the end, whether it's 830 or 840 or 840 Pro it's not gonna make a difference, they are all reliable SSDs.
January 27, 2013 10:25:08 PM

Sandisk over the Samsung or Crucial or the OCZ? WTF?
January 27, 2013 10:34:11 PM

ilysaml said:
Mate when I talked, I talked about the "SERIES" so I said "Samsung 840" meaning the series. And if you review my post, I mentioned the OCZ Vector beside the 840, the chart shows only the vector and 840 pro in the top tier. And according to the theoretical performance gain read this;
At the end of the day, the real-world differences between SSDs in a desktop environment aren't altogether very large. The most important jump happens when you go from a hard drive to (almost) any SSD. With that said, there are measurable attributes that separate one SSD from another. However, they have to be digested as a sum of many parts. Within individual apps, you'll hardly notice the difference between a Vertex 2 and Samsung's 830. But if you look at performance over an entire month, you will find the 830 to be a better performer.


Then I think you may have misead the first post you were correcting earlier. I said the 830 was faster than the 840, and I was talking about the actual 840 model, not the series. So if you say you were talking about the series when you corrected that post, then you indeed misread it. I've always been mentioning the 840 and the 840 pro seperately, since my reason for not recommending each drive is different.

I already mentioned that both ssd's were far faster than an HDD, and when talking about the performance differences between SSDs, my post is sprinkled with phrases like "as ssd's go" so that long quote from tom's hardware ssd roundup you put in bold is not a revelation, its simply repeating what I've already said.

However, If you're going to spend $100, I think we can agree you should get the most for your money. Even if one $100 ssd is only a little better than another $100 ssd when compared to HDD's, you'd still want the better one.
January 27, 2013 10:39:08 PM

ilysaml said:
Sandisk over the Samsung or Crucial or the OCZ? WTF?


Indeed. the Crucial M4 was beast in it's heyday, and is still a reliable drive, but many faster drives have overtaken it for performance, including the sandisk extreme and any other toggle-nand, second gen sandforce drive.

Samsung is a case by case. I've recommended the 830 over the sandisk extreme when they were the same price, but the 830 is hard to find now, and is expensive when you do. The sandisk extreme is faster than the 840 for the same price, and imo the 840 pro is overpriced.

The Vertex 4 has good reviews (as does the vector), I admit I only avoid recommending it because I don't trust OCZ. Too many problems with the vertex 2 coupled with OCZ denying that there were any problems for so long put me off that company altogether. The Vector, like the 840 pro, is also priced a bit too high for it's peformance difference.

Any toggle-nand, second gen sandforce drive will be just as fast as the extreme. I recommend it because Sandisk is the only SSD manufacturer that makes it's own memory; even intel skims off the top of Micron's NAND crop. They're also the only consumer SSD manufacturer that's been making enterprise SSD's for as long as intel, which speaks to the reliability of their drives. Finally, they're one of the cheapest toggle-nand 2g sandforce drives around.

So, yes, I'd recommend the Sandisk Extreme in a heartbeat.
January 28, 2013 6:25:08 AM

quilciri said:
Indeed. the Crucial M4 was beast in it's heyday, and is still a reliable drive, but many faster drives have overtaken it for performance, including the sandisk extreme and any other toggle-nand, second gen sandforce drive.

Samsung is a case by case. I've recommended the 830 over the sandisk extreme when they were the same price, but the 830 is hard to find now, and is expensive when you do. The sandisk extreme is faster than the 840 for the same price, and imo the 840 pro is overpriced.

The Vertex 4 has good reviews (as does the vector), I admit I only avoid recommending it because I don't trust OCZ. Too many problems with the vertex 2 coupled with OCZ denying that there were any problems for so long put me off that company altogether. The Vector, like the 840 pro, is also priced a bit too high for it's peformance difference.

Any toggle-nand, second gen sandforce drive will be just as fast as the extreme. I recommend it because Sandisk is the only SSD manufacturer that makes it's own memory; even intel skims off the top of Micron's NAND crop. They're also the only consumer SSD manufacturer that's been making enterprise SSD's for as long as intel, which speaks to the reliability of their drives. Finally, they're one of the cheapest toggle-nand 2g sandforce drives around.

So, yes, I'd recommend the Sandisk Extreme in a heartbeat.



ok so my last question is windows 8 or 7
January 28, 2013 8:57:45 AM

The term "Faster" is just theoretical, in real world performance there will be no difference between a Samsung 830 and Sandisk Extreme or even any SATA II drive, regarding speed, ATTO and Crystal Disk benches are theoretical numbers you never reach it in any case. But when it goes to reliability of the drives, Samsung, Crucial and Intel SSDs are the most reliable ones.

January 28, 2013 1:47:37 PM

ilysaml said:
The term "Faster" is just theoretical, in real world performance there will be no difference between a Samsung 830 and Sandisk Extreme or even any SATA II drive, regarding speed, ATTO and Crystal Disk benches are theoretical numbers you never reach it in any case. But when it goes to reliability of the drives, Samsung, Crucial and Intel SSDs are the most reliable ones.


I would add Sandisk to that list as well, for the above reasons.
January 28, 2013 1:50:51 PM

There is real world difference, even if it is small, else there would be no reason to sort SSD's into performance tiers.

Besides, at the same price and reliability, why would you get the lesser performing drive, even if it is just in artificial tests?
January 28, 2013 2:08:17 PM

No one from the top geek sites reviewed the Sandisk Extreme except for the Overclockers3d.
Quote:
I would add Sandisk to that list as well, for the above reasons.

That's your own assumption, it doesn't reflect any fact.
January 28, 2013 3:03:20 PM

ilysaml said:
No one from the top geek sites reviewed the Sandisk Extreme except for the Overclockers3d.
Quote:
I would add Sandisk to that list as well, for the above reasons.

That's your own assumption, it doesn't reflect any fact.


Fact: Sandisk has a long-established enterprise SSD footprint, as long as intel's.

Fact: Sandisk is the only SSD manufacturer than makes it's own memory.

Top geek sites? I hope you're not choosing to simply ignore the dozens of Sandisk extreme reviews out there because there isn't one on a site you frequent. It is highly unlikely that Sandisk would have the influence to astroturf all of those reviews :) 

http://thessdreview.com/our-reviews/sandisk-extreme-240...
http://www.storagereview.com/sandisk_extreme_ssd_review
http://reviews.cnet.com/internal-hard-drives/sandisk-ex...!
January 28, 2013 3:52:58 PM

That was the 240GB version, reviews.cnet and storagereview top geek for you?
Top geeks for me, Toms, anandtech, guru3d, hardwarecanuckus....
January 28, 2013 3:55:53 PM

I've always thought Corsair had the nicest SSDs.

But then again, they don't actually make any of them, do they? I imagine it has to be outsourced.
January 28, 2013 4:04:47 PM

Corsair, Intel, OCZ, Plextor, Sandisk and others all great SSDs but when it comes to durability and reliability it goes to specific models and specific companies.

January 28, 2013 4:09:01 PM

ilysaml said:
Corsair, Intel, OCZ, Plextor, Sandisk and others all great SSDs but when it comes to durability and reliability it goes to specific models and specific companies.

I hear bad things about the wuality of OCZ SSDs. I have one myself, thinking perhaps the forum rage was just that -- forum rage. But I'm not sure. It's not as good as I'd have thought. Not bad, but seems... mediocre.

I've also always wondered if it is responsible for my long boot times. See, my overclock is rock solid and I spent a good week straight tweaking every voltage, speed and timing in the entire computer. But of late, for no apparent reason, my boot times have stretched. Sometimes even taking a minute. Sometimes five seconds. Sometimes instant. Like I said, up until a little while ago they were all instant, all the time.

I've been through everything and can't come up with any solution, bar my SSD degrading. Checked every program, checked every launch application and resource, every... everything lol.

ANYWAY. Just throwing my experience out there.
January 28, 2013 4:27:49 PM

I'm not expert in the storage field generally but the load times of applications should be instant as long as you installed them on the SSD, the boot time of windows depends on how many programs installed that boot up with windows and how many resources and services loads with windows, from the startup configuration (msconfig) disable the startup applications, and from the service tab disable all the services associated with the programs but keep the Microsoft services, restart the PC and see if that helps, if not try to update your SSD to the latest firmware.
January 28, 2013 4:48:56 PM

ilysaml said:
That was the 240GB version, reviews.cnet and storagereview top geek for you?
Top geeks for me, Toms, anandtech, guru3d, hardwarecanuckus....


Has nothing to do with sites I like. The point is there are tons of reviews for the sandisk extreme out there, and the consesnsus paints a very bright picture for the drive, even if all those reviews aren't on the few sites that you like. I agree the sites yo mentioned are very reliable review sites, but the fact that the drive is highly reviewed on so many other sites is hard to dispute.

The fact that the drive isn't reviewed at all by your sites seems like more of an oversight on their part.

You mention the 240gb like it's a significantly different drive than the 120gb. I don't think there's ever been an SSD review of the same model SSD where the reveiwer has said "the 240gb model s great, but the 120gb is crap."

Pretty sure you can safely extrapolate that the 120gb is good from the reviews of the 240gb.
January 28, 2013 5:21:00 PM

Not that the smaller drive is terrible, but seen many cases where the smaller drive had half the controllers of the larger, resulting in lower numbers. Not bad, just not as fast.
January 28, 2013 5:51:51 PM

ok so what u think about the kingston hyper 3k 120g ssd

can you raid 0 it
January 28, 2013 6:37:49 PM

You can Raid 0 any SSD, and the Kingston is great go with it.
January 28, 2013 6:57:42 PM

J_E_D_70 said:
Not that the smaller drive is terrible, but seen many cases where the smaller drive had half the controllers of the larger, resulting in lower numbers. Not bad, just not as fast.


120 extreme is jsut a 240 with half the nand :) , and yes you can raid 0 ssd's.
!