Hardware Is this a good configuration?

[benno300]

Case: CM storm enforcer 75,-
CPU: Amd Phenom II X6 1045T 123,-
GPU:Asus Radeon HD 7850 DirectCU II Graphics Card 200,-
PSU: Cooler Master GX 550W 61,-
Motherboard: Asus M5A78L-M/USB3 62,-
RAM: Corasair 8GB vengeance 50,-
Memory: Crucial ssd 128GB+ Seagate barracuda 2TB 220,-
LG IPS 245v 145,-
Wi-fi adapter 20,-
Keyboard+mouse 24,-
Optical drive Sony 16,-
Windows OS 7 89,-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1085,-

So I changed almost everything in my build because of the price of my last one( which was more expensive thatn this on but less powerfull I think)
so I would really like to know what you guys think of it and if the price is right for the components.
Although I am not really sure if I want this case and I hope the AMD processor is good enough.
Thanks in advance,

Benno

its a really good build . i'm also an AMD user xD.

thank you for answering, my only concern is this AMD processor because I looked it up an it wasn't one of the best isn' this going to be a bottleneck for me?

 

[Originality]

For most games, the CPU isn't the bottleneck, so a weaker AMD CPU would be good enough. On the other hand, of you're worrying about your budget, why did you throw in a SSD? With the money used by the SSD, you could get a Phenom II 1090T instead.

 

[Alaude]

For most games, the CPU isn't the bottleneck, so a weaker AMD CPU would be good enough. On the other hand, of you're worrying about your budget, why did you throw in a SSD? With the money used by the SSD, you could get a Phenom II 1090T instead.

yea you could have got the 1090T . but benno300 you can save money for the piledriver which is supposed to release in this year ending or the beginning of next xD.
other than that you would not have problems on bottlenecking.the processor which you have bought is also a good one so you need not worry

 

[benno300]

For most games, the CPU isn't the bottleneck, so a weaker AMD CPU would be good enough. On the other hand, of you're worrying about your budget, why did you throw in a SSD? With the money used by the SSD, you could get a Phenom II 1090T instead.

I thought that with an ssd the pc would be a lot faster than by buying a better cpu or am I wrong here?
Would I be better by leaving out the ssd and change it to a better cpu?
And will the cpu slow my pc down in usual things like web browsing or multitasking?

 

[Originality]

Considering how Bulldozer didn't live up to expectations, I expect nothing from Piledriver. As I see it now, AMD is only good for budget systems or systems with lower needs, where as Intel is for stronger systems where money is less of an issue.

 

[benno300]

Considering how Bulldozer didn't live up to expectations, I expect nothing from Piledriver. As I see it now, AMD is only good for budget systems or systems with lower needs, where as Intel is for stronger systems where money is less of an issue.

Ok I mixed my first build woth my second build and your advices and what do you guys think of it?


case:CM storm enforcer 75
Processor:Intel core i5 3550 187
graphics card: amd Radeon HD7850 2gb gddr5 200,-
ram: corsair venguance 8gb 48
HDD: seagate 2TB 7200rpm 105
Energieaansluiting: Adata HM-650 70
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z77-DS3H 92
Windows 7 OS 89,-
wifi adapter 20
sony dvd drive 16
keyboard+mouse 24
monitor LG IPS235V 145
1073

 

[Originality]

Ivy Bridge and HD6870 or Phenom II and HD7850? For CPU intensive tasks (like my dad's chess program) the first one by a long shot. For gaming, the second build is better but not by as much.

Intel Core i5-3550 is much stronger than the outdated Phenom II X6 1045T (7587 vs 5023 in PassMark), but games don't use the CPU so much. The HD 7850 is a good step up from the HD6870, but it's only the difference between 3181 and 2827 in PassMark.

The reason why I keep asking everybody who asks these questions on these forums what their needs are, is precisely because games don't need as powerful a CPU as GPU, and people who only need a workstation (no games or 3D rendering) don't even need a graphics card. People who need both can work out a balance between the CPU and GPU against their budget, but people who do 3D rendering, animation and modelling need as powerful a PC as they can afford, because even that won't be enough.

EDIT: Ok, that build was added after I started on this post. It looks well balanced to me, so the only part left for me to question is the case. I'll go look up some reviews before I make any further comments.
EDIT2: Ok, got a review from one of my favourite sources, so I'll just post the conclusion.

Spoiler

While the CM Storm Enforcer is well built, and equipped with plenty of features and fairly appealing looks, the fact it doesn’t offer particularly great cooling out of the box takes the edge off of what is otherwise a very well-rounded case.

However, at this price point, there’s a lot of competition and the excellent Fractal Design Arc Midi Tower, for just £6 more, offers superior cooling and just as many features. While potential Enforcer owners won’t be disappointed, there are better options available.

 

[benno300]

Ivy Bridge and HD6870 or Phenom II and HD7850? For CPU intensive tasks (like my dad's chess program) the first one by a long shot. For gaming, the second build is better but not by as much.

Intel Core i5-3550 is much stronger than the outdated Phenom II X6 1045T (7587 vs 5023 in PassMark), but games don't use the CPU so much. The HD 7850 is a good step up from the HD6870, but it's only the difference between 3181 and 2827 in PassMark.

The reason why I keep asking everybody who asks these questions on these forums what their needs are, is precisely because games don't need as powerful a CPU as GPU, and people who only need a workstation (no games or 3D rendering) don't even need a graphics card. People who need both can work out a balance between the CPU and GPU against their budget, but people who do 3D rendering, animation and modelling need as powerful a PC as they can afford, because even that won't be enough.

EDIT: Ok, that build was added after I started on this post. It looks well balanced to me, so the only part left for me to question is the case. I'll go look up some reviews before I make any further comments.
EDIT2: Ok, got a review from one of my favourite sources, so I'll just post the conclusion.

Spoiler

While the CM Storm Enforcer is well built, and equipped with plenty of features and fairly appealing looks, the fact it doesn’t offer particularly great cooling out of the box takes the edge off of what is otherwise a very well-rounded case.

However, at this price point, there’s a lot of competition and the excellent Fractal Design Arc Midi Tower, for just £6 more, offers superior cooling and just as many features. While potential Enforcer owners won’t be disappointed, there are better options available.

Well I really like the look of this case so I think I'll stick to the enforcer, if it doesn't deliver me any cooling problems
Or do you guys have any suggestions?

 

[Alaude]

installing an aftermarket cpu cooler would be good enough . lets make one thing clear if you buy intel its good at multitasking and for amd its worth the money, i have my AMD Phenom x4 945 BE for bout 2 years and i can play my pc games at full speed note that i have an older gpu too i have an Nvidia GTX 460 . the games which i play are current not the old ones.

 

[alphamule]

Be worried more about your GPU than your CPU since GPUs are typically way over 10x faster than a CPU but only on certain things. Funny thing is, games do those 'certain things' most of the time and at ever higher percentages when you increase the resolution. It's when you run into bandwidth issues on the video card's RAM and the motherboard chipset/CPU/PCI-E, that you can't just throw a GPU at the problem.

 

[benno300]

Be worried more about your GPU than your CPU since GPUs are typically way over 10x faster than a CPU but only on certain things. Funny thing is, games do those 'certain things' most of the time and at ever higher percentages when you increase the resolution. It's when you run into bandwidth issues on the video card's RAM and the motherboard chipset/CPU/PCI-E, that you can't just throw a GPU at the problem.

Do you think my configuration has is a good one with this motherboard,CPU and GPU?

 

[Alaude]

Be worried more about your GPU than your CPU since GPUs are typically way over 10x faster than a CPU but only on certain things. Funny thing is, games do those 'certain things' most of the time and at ever higher percentages when you increase the resolution. It's when you run into bandwidth issues on the video card's RAM and the motherboard chipset/CPU/PCI-E, that you can't just throw a GPU at the problem.

Do you think my configuration has is a good one with this motherboard,CPU and GPU?

alphamule, i think you have a misunderstanding there . The CPU and GPU have completely different tasks. if what you say is true then why isn'nt there only GPU run systems now?.

benno300,
the config you want to ask about, is it the first config you mentioned or the second one?

 

[alphamule]

No I don't. I get it perfectly. The software that typically takes a LOT of CPU has mostly been rewritten to support offloading part of the task to the GPU. This includes even some movie transcoding tools. And yes, you still need a decent CPU. Who even said that you don't need a CPU at all? Not even nVidia is making that claim.

 

[Alaude]

No I don't. I get it perfectly. The software that typically takes a LOT of CPU has mostly been rewritten to support offloading part of the task to the GPU. This includes even some movie transcoding tools. And yes, you still need a decent CPU. Who even said that you don't need a CPU at all? Not even nVidia is making that claim.

haha. you claimed gpu's to be about 10x faster than cpu's what does that mean then?. and also you can never compare a cpu and a gpu. the fact that you claimed "Be worried more about your GPU than your CPU". is wrong, by this claim you say that even an Intel Celeron or and AMD Sempron with an amazing GPU is good enough!. what about bottlenecking then?

 

[benno300]

Be worried more about your GPU than your CPU since GPUs are typically way over 10x faster than a CPU but only on certain things. Funny thing is, games do those 'certain things' most of the time and at ever higher percentages when you increase the resolution. It's when you run into bandwidth issues on the video card's RAM and the motherboard chipset/CPU/PCI-E, that you can't just throw a GPU at the problem.

The last one I mentioned.

Do you think my configuration has is a good one with this motherboard,CPU and GPU?

alphamule, i think you have a misunderstanding there . The CPU and GPU have completely different tasks. if what you say is true then why isn'nt there only GPU run systems now?.

benno300,
the config you want to ask about, is it the first config you mentioned or the second one?

 

[alphamule]

Be worried more about your GPU than your CPU since GPUs are typically way over 10x faster than a CPU but only on certain things. Funny thing is, games do those 'certain things' most of the time and at ever higher percentages when you increase the resolution. It's when you run into bandwidth issues on the video card's RAM and the motherboard chipset/CPU/PCI-E, that you can't just throw a GPU at the problem.

Do you think my configuration has is a good one with this motherboard,CPU and GPU?

The nearer to the maximum power output you use, the more efficient the power supply, but the more likely it'll shorten the lifespan of the PSU. This is mostly because of capacitors and fans suddenly deciding they hate you. Also, it's often because you paid for a 750w power supply that is actually 450w.

From looking at the motherboard's manual, it seems that you shouldn't have any bandwidth issues. It's not like it's some ugly chipset like in my old laptop that deliberately is slow to sell newer CPUs. Intel liked to especially do that back in the Pentium through Pentium II days as well for the desktop boards. i5 CPU's should also have plenty of oooomph to keep up with the demands of current video cards. Overclocking is just asking for more crashes and strange errors that no one else sees, and disk corruption. That being said, you should try to get the CPU with the highest bus speed if you're thinking of high-speced 3D games.

8GB of RAM seems reasonable if you can afford the rest of this system. It's kind of the point of a 64-bit OS, by the way. They use more than 3GB of RAM a lot better than the old 32-bit OSes. 16GB would be nice, but not for what you want to do. For the price of 8GB more RAM, you could get more storage space or something like that.

No I don't. I get it perfectly. The software that typically takes a LOT of CPU has mostly been rewritten to support offloading part of the task to the GPU. This includes even some movie transcoding tools. And yes, you still need a decent CPU. Who even said that you don't need a CPU at all? Not even nVidia is making that claim.

haha. you claimed gpu's to be about 10x faster than cpu's what does that mean then?. and also you can never compare a cpu and a gpu. the fact that you claimed "Be worried more about your GPU than your CPU". is wrong, by this claim you say that even an Intel Celeron or and AMD Sempron with an amazing GPU is good enough!. what about bottlenecking then?

Actually, yes you can but only on the appropriate tasks. Why do you think people running Bitcoin or number theory applications or scientific computing (folding@home, etc.) buy high-end GPUs? And if you're running a CPU with a 16MHz, 16-bit bus, and no cache, then yeah, that's stupid.

Besides, you didn't let me finish up the more detailed response above to the original poster's questions. Ever heard of jumping to the end?

 

[Alaude]

just got a little carried away . now back to topic benno300 i think you change the motherboard of choice to this, its recommended if you ever think of upgrading the cpu. its supports the FX sereis and the Piledriver(If ever released!)

 

[alphamule]

For some good ideas of which games will cause you issues with CPU bottlenecks: http://forum.overclo...cpu-bottleneck/

And even they shouldn't have any issues with an i5. (LOL)

FYI: I used '3D game "CPU bottleneck"' in Google to find those examples. Just put the name of your game and the term "CPU bottleneck" to see if you'll have issues. Most games are going to be running into GPU limitations way before they run into the CPU.

 

[Originality]

Why do I feel alphamule's information is grossly out of date?
EDIT: That must be why. One of the posters in his linked thread sounds just like I was 4 years ago, with a E8400 (OCed to 4Ghz) and a G15 keyboard, using that to compare with a QX9650 (which my brother still has).

With PSUs, not using its maximum output doesn't reduce it's efficiency. In fact, optimal efficiency is usually found up to 80% of its stated output, after which what was 95% efficiency (at least for my PSU, usually 80+ for most) drops by 10-15%. Most good PSUs can also push up to 130% of its stated output, but that's when the power starts to become unstable and cause voltage droops.

Also, RAM is cheap. You can get 4GB for less than $20, and average price I see for 8GB is £38-45. That's why everybody gets 4GB minimum, and some get 8GB even though they can't use it all yet (RAM-drive excluded).

Now for Alaude (who posted after I started), the OP has posted 3 builds. The third one is a mix of the first two, including the Core i5-2550 and HD 7850. He also found a Gigabyte Z77 motherboard (which I definitely prefer over Asrock motherboards).

 

[Alaude]

For some good ideas of which games will cause you issues with CPU bottlenecks: http://forum.overclo...cpu-bottleneck/

And even they shouldn't have any issues with an i5. (LOL)

haha....yea with the iseries u need'nt have to worry about bottlenecks, but with AMD you have to consider .

Orignality: thx i did'nt notice that he change his config the third time.

benno300: i say go ahead with your third config its really good.