Hardware Custom Built PC Time!

[Originality]

It's a shame to lose PCIe 3.0 support by getting the Maximus IV Gene (which I have) instead of the Maximus V Gene. Quote from nVidia:

GeForce GTX 670 supports PCI Express 3.0. The Intel X79/SNB-E PCI Express 2.0 platform is only currently supported up to 5GT/s (PCIE 2.0) bus speeds even though some motherboard manufacturers have enabled higher 8GT/s speeds.

EDIT (since it's not worth a separate post): there's no point talking about "green vs red" (nVidia vs AMD). AMD graphics are better at gaming and benchmarks, whilst nVidia graphics are better at graphics rendering and folding. AMD for gamers, nVidia for developers. It's always been like that (at least, for the last several years it has).

 

[olleb]

The nvidia GTX680 is a great card. i run two of them in SLI on my computer. (runs great on my 750w 80+ silver power supply)
A 550w 80+bronze certified power supply should be enough to run a system with one graphics card.

The GTX 660 ti is good enough for most people.
If you plan to use your computer for 3D rendering a intel i7 3770k is a great pick.

But i would go for a 250GB SSD and 16 GB of ram. (a 120 GB SSD is enough for windows and a couple of programs though)
16 GB ram is not needed, but good for rendering, video and image editing. but i would say a minimum of 8GB of ram.

AMD 7970 Ghz is also a great graphics card. but i like the green team more

Good luck

 

[Thanatos Telos]

Honestly, I might even switch to the 670 FTW. Based on what I play, I'm just looking forward to record 4D modeling and Photoshop work, as well as playing BO2, Crysis 3, and BF3 at reasonable FPS @ 1080p.

Think you mean 3D, unless you're messing with time of course. If so, no computer on Earth can do that job.

On Topic: In all honesty, I would wait until Haswell comes out to get an Intel-based machine. Rumors say it'll have better performance and power consumption than Ivy Bridge. But, if you need it now, then go ahead.

 

[Celice]

Just on the the topic of suggestions: I have never seen the need for an SSD, outside of want. As far as load times are concerned, yes, it speeds up, but as far as gaming goes, unless you're doing some backdoor method of streaming tons of mods/textures, games load pretty fucking fast enough as it is. There is a minority, as far as all my games go, that have benefited from an SSD.

Next to that, most people say it's best for the OS, but again, unless one has a ton of bloat going up on a system start up, I still have a really comfortable boot time. I suppose it's a hefty trade off though, in terms of cash, if one wishes to keep the bloat and still have fast access times.

You've set a budget height, and that's good, but remember also that that doesn't mean you have to meet that, nor that meeting it will give you a better computer. Yes, objectively it may be more powerful, but by the needs of you, the difference between a $1800 and a $1000 may be negligible, especially when you start choosing cheaper alternatives that, though there are less features, again make no difference because what they offer aren't necessary at the current time. Expensive computers either belong in enthusiast land, hard-core calculation/rendering land (not the common civilian stuff), or government land, where your local welfare office throws out and rebuys technology every couple years (at least in the U.S.).

Personnally, I like the idea of saving $900 for a computer that works more than enough for what I'd need out of it, and having that cost to rebuild again five years later if wanted, or else, you know, pay rent and stuff. Maybe buy that fancy bag of potato chips.

 

[The Riolu]

Alright, I might remove the SSD then. I really don't have a huge use for fast read/write speeds.

Also, would a 660 Ti handle 1080p gaming nicely? I'm trying to get my budget as low as possible.

 

[Originality]

...I did say a 660 Ti would be overkill. It will handle all games at 1080p without problems (my 560 Ti does as well).

 

[The Riolu]

...I did say a 660 Ti would be overkill. It will handle all games at 1080p without problems (my 560 Ti does as well).

Sorry about that, I'm really tired xD I forgot you stated that.

This is what I ended up with: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Hio4

 

[PolloDiablo]

AMD graphics are better at gaming and benchmarks, whilst nVidia graphics are better at graphics rendering and folding. AMD for gamers, nVidia for developers. It's always been like that (at least, for the last several years it has).

which brings me to this question... what about emulation? (Dolphin, PCSX2)

Lets compare my 3 options...

Spoiler: Zotac GTX660 ti (Overclocked) vs. Sapphire HD 7850 (Overclocked)

Spoiler: Zotac GTX660 ti (Overclocked) vs. Sapphire HD7870 (Overclocked)

Just assume we're not bottlenecked by the CPU (we have an Core i57 with 128 cores running at 27.5GHz). Which card will perform better rendering 4x/5x native resolution with 16X Anti aliasing?

I've read somewhere that, in both dolphin and pcsx2, what really matters is memory bandwidth (more=better). Feel free to correct me if am wrong

I noticed that the GTX660 memory is 192 bit while both HD78X0 are 256 bit, resulting in a higher bandwidth . But... since the 660 memory is overclocked as hell, it looses just by a little margin.
It's weird that the cheaper and less powerful card (the 7850) has the highest memory bandwidth.

I've also read that emulation hates Radeon's drivers, specially the HD7XXX series.


So far the 660 wins at everything.... BUT! when you see the prices, ATI's cards start to shine...

GTX660ti $333
HD7870 $300
HD7850 $260

So... the question is, if I'm buying the GPU for the sole purpose of emulation, which should I get?
If I choose ATI, should I pay the extra money ($40) and go with the 7870 instead of 7850?
Which card is enough and not overkill?

 

[The Riolu]

-snip-

Not being mean, but please make a new topic. This is my thread about building a custom PC, and I need to get advice on my custom PC only.

@Originality, do you think my latest build looks good? If I could hit maybe $1,000 that would be great. As long as it can handle great 1080p gaming and can keep up with me.

 

[Originality]

Emulation is heavily reliant on the CPU, so the GPU has little effect on performance. Many people can emulate just fine with Intel HD graphics.

If you want to get it down to $1000, then downgrade the CPU to either i5-3570K or 3550. You can also swap the CPU cooler with air cooling (Arctic Freezer 7 or i30) or just go with the stock Intel cooler (highest noise and temperature rating, but its free). A CPU cooler will make less noise, keep temperatures lower, and extend the lifespan of the CPU, but it is still optional.

Since you no longer seem to care about graphic design, and instead on gaming, then you don't need Core i7. HyperThreading has no real value to gamers, so it's not worth paying nearly double for it. There are several other areas that could be cut back to reduce costs whilst still making it good for gaming (since gaming isn't as demanding as people think it is), but I get the feeling if I go into detail, you'll end up going back and forth for a while longer.

 

[the_randomizer]

Emulation is heavily reliant on the CPU, so the GPU has little effect on performance. Many people can emulate just fine with Intel HD graphics.

If you want to get it down to $1000, then downgrade the CPU to either i5-3570K or 3550. You can also swap the CPU cooler with air cooling (Arctic Freezer 7 or i30) or just go with the stock Intel cooler (highest noise and temperature rating, but its free). A CPU cooler will make less noise, keep temperatures lower, and extend the lifespan of the CPU, but it is still optional.

Since you no longer seem to care about graphic design, and instead on gaming, then you don't need Core i7. HyperThreading has no real value to gamers, so it's not worth paying nearly double for it. There are several other areas that could be cut back to reduce costs whilst still making it good for gaming (since gaming isn't as demanding as people think it is), but I get the feeling if I go into detail, you'll end up going back and forth for a while longer.

I hope you're referring to the HD4000. The HD3000 GPUs can't run Dolphin or PCSX2 worth s**t.

 

[FireGrey]

7850 is the most you need for 1080p gaming.
I got the 7870 because of the $30 difference.

 

[The Riolu]

@Originality, I have a question that might literally devoid the point of this thread.

I am choosing between an iMac versus a custom built PC. At this point, I don't do extremely heavy gaming, and I need to focus on graphic design work. I will play games like BO2 and BF3, but I really am not bothered by FPS rates unless its like 20 FPS lol.

I have one choice to make, and I was wondering what would be better. However, I loved my iMac in the years I had it, and I was satisfied with it. I'm just wondering what would be better for my budget and would last longer.

Pros of an iMac:
- Warranty
- Compact, all-in-one system
- Already Built
- Good Quality

Cons:
- Non-Upgradeable in certain areas
- A little more expensive

Pros of a custom built PC:
- Always upgradeable
- warranty on parts
- Cheaper

Cons:
- May fail
- Only warranty on parts (not whole system)

 

[Originality]

I will say now, I have only two days worth of experience working with OSX. I cannot give advice on macs.

For graphic design, there are 3 main concerns. You already know your budget. I hope you know what software you need in order to do your graphic design work. The only part left is the hardware.

PC vs Mac for graphic designers comes down to budget and software. The hardware exists for both to get the work done. If you have a flexible budget, and know what software you're more comfortable using, then either will be fine. Just keep in mind that HyperThreading means multi-threaded tasks get done faster, more RAM is needed for bigger/more complex projects (I've never seen someone need more than 8GB so far), and the more TeraFLOPs the graphics card processes, the faster it will render your projects. And AMD drivers are terrible.

That's it.

 

[The Riolu]

I will say now, I have only two days worth of experience working with OSX. I cannot give advice on macs.

For graphic design, there are 3 main concerns. You already know your budget. I hope you know what software you need in order to do your graphic design work. The only part left is the hardware.

PC vs Mac for graphic designers comes down to budget and software. The hardware exists for both to get the work done. If you have a flexible budget, and know what software you're more comfortable using, then either will be fine. Just keep in mind that HyperThreading means multi-threaded tasks get done faster, more RAM is needed for bigger/more complex projects (I've never seen someone need more than 8GB so far), and the more TeraFLOPs the graphics card processes, the faster it will render your projects. And AMD drivers are terrible.

That's it.

Oh yes, definitely. AMD Drivers have been a nuisance since who knows when... My mid-2010 iMac has the ATI Radeon HD 5670 and it is not compatible AT ALL with the new drivers (always crashes, etc). I will probably get the new iMac, as it has the NVidia card line, which I heard is way more stable.

Thanks for your help!

 

[the_randomizer]

Oh yes, definitely. AMD Drivers have been a nuisance since who knows when... My mid-2010 iMac has the ATI Radeon HD 5670 and it is not compatible AT ALL with the new drivers (always crashes, etc). I will probably get the new iMac, as it has the NVidia card line, which I heard is way more stable.

Thanks for your help!

nVidia has been more stable; never once had I experience driver issues.

 

[Originality]

Oh I should also add one thing at this point. My iPod 2G will crash any Mac it's plugged into within 5 minutes. This is one of the reasons I have low opinions on macs.

 

[The Riolu]

Oh I should also add one thing at this point. My iPod 2G will crash any Mac it's plugged into within 5 minutes. This is one of the reasons I have low opinions on macs.

Well, not offending your opinion on Macs, but I never had any issues with my Mac, and also I have better experience on OS X (less crashing and instability) although I will still dualboot with Windows for various reasons.