Hardware Another PC Build thread

[luke_c]

So here's what I'm looking at getting:

Spoiler

The parts I'm 90% sure on.

Case: Coolermaster Storm Enforcer Mid-Tower, I think this case is pretty much final for me. It has everything I need/want and it's quite cheap and looks nice too.
Hard Drive: 2TB Western Digital Caviar Green SATA 6GB/s, Again I think I'm pretty much certain with this choice, I just wanted a cheap 2TB WD drive, it's SATA 6GB/s as well.
RAM: 2x2GB Corsair DDR3 XMS3 Classic 1.50v , It's either these or the Gripjaws, I made sure it was 1.50v as I heard there was some issues with RAM that had a voltage higher than that with Sandy Bridge CPUs (Apparently 1.50v is the recommended.)
CPU: Intel i5 2500k, This is a certainty, I can overclock this a fair bit too from what I have read, although I would imagine I will need to buy another CPU fan as the stock one would not suffice.

The parts I'm really not sure on.

GPU: Here I'm stuck between the 1GB XFX Radeon 6870 Black Edition, the 2GB XFX Radeon 6950 which is £50 more but from the benchmarks offers performance gains of about 20%~ and the 1GB MSI GTX 560 Ti. I'm leaning towards the 6870 at the moment.
PSU: I really have no idea on this, I might end up doing CrossFire or SLI though. I just choose this on a guestimate, Corsair Gaming Series GS700 700W. I don't think I need more than 650W.
Motherboard: I'm stuck between the Asus P8P67 LE Rev3 and the MSI P67A-GD53 (B3), it'll most likely be the latter.


Now for the questions: My GPU needs something like two 6-pin cables that attach to the Motherboard and in an unboxing video of the 6870 I saw that it doesn't come with these, where can I find them?
Is there any other cables I will need? Like SATA power cables or a 6GB/s data cable for my HDD?

 

[Originality]

All modern PSUs should come with at least a 6+2 pin 12V PCIe connector and a 6 pin of the same. Higher end PSUs often come with double or triple that, especially if they're modular. This is specifically to suit multi-GPU builds. It's just recommended to get any PSU from a famous brand (like Antec, Tagan and Enermax) that provides more power than your computer actually needs. 650+W is a good Mark to aim for.

The HD6950 gets the best performance out of games, but it's up to you how you balance the budget. I strongly recommend against multi-GPU setups. Even dual HD6990/GTX590 (with combined 4 GPU setups) have WORSE performance in games than a single HD6970. This is due to micro stuttering, which is an issue that has never been fixed.

For the HDD, all 2TB drives have worse performance than 1TB drives. 6Gbs SATA helps access times slightly, but it will still not saturate a 3Gbs SATA connection. Also, WD green series has much worse performance than their Blue and Black series. I recommend using either WD black 1TB or Samaung Spinpoint F3 1TB for your boot drive (I prefer Samsung) then you can use anything you like for a data drive.

All SATA cables will be provided in your motherboard. Btw, CPC magazine recommends the MSI motherboard because it's a great over clocker and, more importantly, the VRMs scarcely heat up when over clocking. This means you can expect the motherboard not to die a couple months after a moderate over clock (this is an exaggeration).

 

[PettingZoo]

Everything you have picked is nearly spot on.

Originality is also very much right, get yourself a PSU from a reliable brand (Modular PSU's if you can are highly versatile and simple to manage) 650w is a good choice as it leaves a good amount of leeway.

Out of those GPUs I'd be leaning toward either the 560 Ti or the 6950 2GB. I myself own a 6950 and have similar specs can run most video games maxed/high @ 1920x1080. Though a 560 Ti is to my experience Nvidia's near equivalent, and being Nvidia you get some nifty features like PhysX in certain games and what not, it's up to you on what you're using your computer for.

As Originality has mentioned again, a WD Caviar Black/F3 Spinpoint would be recommended. Greens are on the lower end and are geared more toward storage rather than running an OS and whatnot. I myself have a Caviar Black, although at the time there were no F3 Spinpoints in stock which was the cheaper option.

 

[qlum]

msi doesn't have a great reputation when it comes to motherboard quality, not saying they are bad but generally asus makes better quality or at least thats what I've heard.
If there isn't a big difference between them I would go for the asus.

even if 2tb drives are a little slower than 1tb ones like Originality claims the difirence wont be that big and you wont really have problems with it in games other than 2 seconds extra loading time at most.

 

[luke_c]

Thanks for all the advice, I appreciate it.

Due to Originality's and PettingZoo's recommendation I've been looking for a modular PSU, they're a little bit more costly than I wanted to pay but I like the idea of cable management and being able to detach cables I do not need. There was some cheap PowerCool modular PSU I was looking at but searching around doesn't give me alot of information about the reliability of the PSU so I'm thinking about getting this Antec 'True Power' 750w modular PSU.

EDIT: I'll get a 1TB Spinpoint F3 and then a cheap 2TB storage drive.

 

[Joe88]

the Caviar Green is mainly meant for data storage rather then running an operating system off it along with programs

I use a Caviar Blue as my boot drive

 

[Originality]

Just did a quick and dirty internet search on the Asus P8P67 LE (since I've not seen that particular model yet) and it seems it's the cut-back budget version of the P8P67 base model.

The MSI P67A-GD53 is also cut back to save on price, but their "Military Class II" components make it much better for overclocking. Unfortuantely the higher end MSI motherboard (GD65) isn't such good value, although they'll be releasing the GD80 in a while which is supposed to compete with the Maximus IV Extreme (or so I hear).

 

[luke_c]

Just did a quick and dirty internet search on the Asus P8P67 LE (since I've not seen that particular model yet) and it seems it's the cut-back budget version of the P8P67 base model.

The MSI P67A-GD53 is also cut back to save on price, but their "Military Class II" components make it much better for overclocking. Unfortuantely the higher end MSI motherboard (GD65) isn't such good value, although they'll be releasing the GD80 in a while which is supposed to compete with the Maximus IV Extreme (or so I hear).

I've decided on the MSI P67A-GD53 (B3), just subscribed for 3 issues of CPC mag for £1 as well.

 

[luke_c]

Thought it would be better if I bumped this rather than create a new topic, I have all my parts chosen except for the GPU and Heatsink.

For the GPU I'm stuck between the MSI GTX 1GB 560 Ti and the MSI HD 2GB 6950. Is the 6950 worth the extra £35? Going by hwcompare they are near enough the same performance wise. I don't mind paying the extra £35 if it will actually be worth it, but if not I could spend that money on another HDD for storage. I know there are some 6950s that can be overclocked into 6970 territory but I don't know if this card is one of them, if it is then I will probably go for it.

The other part I can't decide on is the Heatsink. I'm stuck between the Hyper 212+, which I heard doesn't have the best of fans and the Be Quiet! Dark Rock Advanced. I'll be overclocking my i5 2500k so CPU cooling is quite crucial and I want to make sure I make the right decision.

Thanks.

 

[Originality]

Which do you prefer, AMD or nVidia? Internet lore states that nVidia have better drivers but AMD have more raw graphical power, and that brings better performance in games. NVidia also have CUDA and PhysX and all kinds of random names used for marketing.

For the heatsink, consider also a Be Quiet! dark Rock Pro. It costs a lil more and has a lil better cooling. It's also CPC recommended.

EDIT: correction

 

[luke_c]

Which do you prefer, AMD or nVidia? Internet lore states that nVidia have better graphics but AMD have more raw graphical power, and that brings better performance in games. NVidia also have CUDA and PhysX and all kinds of random names used for marketing.

For the heatsink, consider also a Be Quiet! dark Rock Pro. It costs a lil more and has a lil better cooling. It's also CPC recommended.

Well to be honest I've only really been looking at AMD cards, I was set on the 6950 until I saw the 560 Ti. I realise nVidia cards have PhysX, but from my understanding only a few games actually use it. I've heard that AMD have better AA as well. I really don't know which one to choose, I'm leaning towards the 560 Ti because it's cheaper and seems to have a slight performance advantage gaming wise.

EDIT: Then again, two of the games on the benchmark I was looking at always seem to run better on nVidia cards (DiRT 3 and Just Cause 2)

 

[Originality]

I edited my above post with a correction. Stupid iPad...

I'm sure you've seen the "nVidia, the way it's meant to be played" slogan. That's a sign that a game was designed specifically with nVidia in mind, usually with the help of nVidia technicians providing graphics cards for testing. That fully explains the trend you mentioned.

Realistically speaking, there's no difference between two mid/high end graphics cards in gameplay performance. Both max out, and the only time you ever need more is if you want AA on 30"+ resolutions.

 

[luke_c]

I edited my above post with a correction. Stupid iPad...

I'm sure you've seen the "nVidia, the way it's meant to be played" slogan. That's a sign that a game was designed specifically with nVidia in mind, usually with the help of nVidia technicians providing graphics cards for testing. That fully explains the trend you mentioned.

Realistically speaking, there's no difference between two mid/high end graphics cards in gameplay performance. Both max out, and the only time you ever need more is if you want AA on 30"+ resolutions.

I'll only have a 21" screen and be running 4xAA at most, I think I will just go for the cheaper 560 Ti then. One thing I'm not sure about is what the size of the GPU actually affects, the 560 Ti has 1GB whereas the 6950 has 2GB, would the 6950 be more 'future-proof' with the extra Gigabyte? Thanks for all the help so far.

 

[Originality]

VRAM relates to the amount of graphical information the card can store for quick rendering. This means things like models and textures and random other stuff that I clearly do not know enough about. As long as it's at least 512MB, it'll be plenty for your needs. What matters more is how much graphical processing power the GPU has.

In the end, benchmarks are the only thing you can go by. Don't pay attention to the VRAM, just the benchmarks and framerates in the type of games you want to play. And also, pick your favourite. Red Team vs Blue Team. AMD vs nVidia.

 

[luke_c]

VRAM relates to the amount of graphical information the card can store for quick rendering. This means things like models and textures and random other stuff that I clearly do not know enough about. As long as it's at least 512MB, it'll be plenty for your needs. What matters more is how much graphical processing power the GPU has.

In the end, benchmarks are the only thing you can go by. Don't pay attention to the VRAM, just the benchmarks and framerates in the type of games you want to play. And also, pick your favourite. Red Team vs Blue Team. AMD vs nVidia.

Well I decided on the GTX 560 Ti, seems to run a bit better than the 6950 on most games and has a few other bonuses like less power consumption as well, I don't really have a 'favorite' at the moment though, I'll probably be skipping back and forth between them when I decide to upgrade again

Here's my final build, should be ordering some time in the next week or two.

Spoiler