ScardyBobScardyBobJoin Date: 2009-11-25Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
Looking at the <a href="http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html" target="_blank">PassMark list</a>, you could get a more powerful GTX 660 or GTX 570 for just about the same price as that HD 7870. That would get you an overall solid build for most games.
However, if you're looking something to play NS2 well (and don't care as much about getting top-of-the-line performance in other games). I'd go with - GTX 560 Ti = Performs slightly better than the HD 7870 and would save you roughly $60 - Overclock = Put that cash towards getting a more serious air CPU cooler (Thermaltake Frio is a good one or the Noctua NH-D14 if your more adventurous).
Getting the 3570k into the 4.2-4.5GHz range will give you the most boost to FPS in NS2.
New build, didnt change much, but it saves me a fair amount of money <a href="http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oCqg" target="_blank">http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oCqg</a>
*edit* I also have a spare Windows 7 laying around, so dont worry about that.
<!--quoteo(post=2030683:date=Nov 20 2012, 05:30 PM:name=purephoenix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (purephoenix @ Nov 20 2012, 05:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030683"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Who cares? It's still toned-down graphics etc because it has to run on the Xbox, i'm still right.
What part of "It's designed to run on a ###### console 9 years old" are you too dumb to understand?
REAL Directx11 games have no hope of acheiving 30+ frames on current hardware at max settings.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No you're actually you're 100% completely wrong. The PC version of BF3 is a completely different beast entirely, for starters it's designed for DX11, not that what version of DirectX you're running is going to change a ton other than some of the more specific effects. NS2 for example actually runs on DX9 and so does Skyrim so you may start eating your foot now. Also you clearly don't know what you're talking about because BF3 is actually used alongside Crysis and Farcry on every benchmark site. The XBox version is crap and it's well known, it only runs at 30 fps compared to the PC version which can run well above 60 depending on your hardware. And you're still completely wrong because guess what? Many DX11 games can go above 60fps on cards like the gtx 590 so maybe do some research.
<!--quoteo(post=2030937:date=Nov 20 2012, 10:19 PM:name=schkorpio)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (schkorpio @ Nov 20 2012, 10:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030937"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->btw (Australians only) I run an online store doing high end PCs with all of the bells and whistles, so if anyone wants a super beast for xmas, I will do it without charging you for the labour - for NS2 players only :)
PM me. I'll send you the link (dunno if its ok to advertise on the forums).
here is one I was 1/2 way through building last week. Yes the letters on the card are glowing :)
OP, go to a site like hardforum or overclock.net, because almost everything said in this thread has been wrong.
<!--quoteo(post=2030654:date=Nov 20 2012, 04:03 PM:name=purephoenix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (purephoenix @ Nov 20 2012, 04:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030654"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That motherboard is trash, pick a more expensive one. Mate's got it and is limitted to 4.2/4.6 ghtz OC because FSB only goes to 105 or 110mhtz.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If Ivy Bridge is like Sandy Bridge, and I think it is, you don't touch the FSB to do overclocking, you adjust the multiplier. You friend could go up to IIRC 6.3ghz by doing 100x63 as a max multiplayer. So again, unless they changed the entire way IB works, your friend doesn't know what he's doing.
I have a p67 asrock extreme4 and it's awesome. So unless they decided to suck in their z77 version, it's probably good.
<!--quoteo(post=2030677:date=Nov 20 2012, 04:26 PM:name=purephoenix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (purephoenix @ Nov 20 2012, 04:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030677"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I priced a UD3 yesterday, $99.... if it's specifically for best NS2 performance tho you'll want a bulldozer, since it uses all 8 cores. The 8150 black you can get for $200. Rest you can research yourself :P Worked out to be almost 800 with a 660ti 2gb and 1gb seagate hdd, generic case, low-end corsair 700w case (Still certified)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This, I suspect, is nonsense. I don't think NS2 even uses 2 cores significantly, let alone 8. I suspect he's just an AMD fanboy. I like AMD and I wish they were better, but right now Intel absolutely crushes them in the $200 market. 3750k or 2500k (the k part is important, that's the unlocked multiplyer) is the way to go.
<!--quoteo(post=2030683:date=Nov 20 2012, 04:30 PM:name=purephoenix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (purephoenix @ Nov 20 2012, 04:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030683"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Who cares? It's still toned-down graphics etc because it has to run on the Xbox, i'm still right.
What part of "It's designed to run on a ###### console 9 years old" are you too dumb to understand?
REAL Directx11 games have no hope of acheiving 30+ frames on current hardware at max settings.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ironically, the main reason for DX10 was to simplify coding and re-align our libraries to all the new technology we've developed over the years that got added piecemeal to dx9. DX10 was actually about efficiency rather than new features. So if anything, true DX10/11 games should run faster vs their graphics level. BF3 is a true DX10 game as far as I can tell, just because they made a crippled version dumbed down for xbox doesn't mean it's an xbox port. If every game did that, we'd be in great shape as PC gamers.
<!--quoteo(post=2030726:date=Nov 20 2012, 05:03 PM:name=rmbrown09)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rmbrown09 @ Nov 20 2012, 05:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030726"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor $219.99 <!--coloro:#FF8C00--><span style="color:#FF8C00"><!--/coloro-->I would say spend the extra dough and get an i7. You don't get hyperthreading with i5's and because of that NS2 and future games + applications will run slower than they would have. Things like Photoshop, After Effects, Premiere, Maya, etc etc all use as many cores as you can throw at it. Future games will start utilizing hyperthreading as well, and because an i7 is so close to that price point I say save up and get that instead. Having the extra horsepower down the line is going to prove to be a wise decision.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You don't want an I7. You pay 50% more for maybe 2-4% more performance on average. Only a few types of programs benefit from hyperthreading. The extra money for an i7 is much better spent on a higher tier video card. <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory $39.99 [color="#FF8C00"]This is fine OP, but I would consider taking this to the next level with some 2133 or 2400Mhz stuff. Quicker ram is always advantageous. See here: <a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820313236" target="_blank">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16820313236</a><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Quicker stuff is not always advantageous, actually. SB/IB aren't really memory limited in any meaningful way and you don't need faster ram to overclock because cpu clock speed isn't tied to memory clock speed. Most people don't even know how to make their ram run faster than 1333 anyway.
Now ram is so chea that getting 1866 or 2133 stuff may only be an extra $5-10, so it wouldn't hurt if you got it, but 1600 would be fine.
I would spend the extra to get the WD Black series, it will be both faster and more reliable. The extra $15 it costs would be a significant improvement.
Ignore the people who said it isn't worth overclocking. SB/IB overclocking is simple and you can usually increase speeds by 600-800 mhz easily. A CM 212+ is a fine enough cooler and can get you there cheap. Who wouldn't want an easy extra 600-800mhz?
I would wait for black friday and see if you can snag a 7950 for $250. The 7950 is a significant upgrade from the 7870, partly because they're reputed to be very overclockable - often 20-30% overclocks with those things. Overclocked, they beat even the $500 cards from Nvidia.
You're more or less on the right track OP, but spend a little extra to get a western digital black series hard drive (IMO, it's absolutely worth getting a 128gb SSD for your OS and your 5-10 favorite games and store everything else on the 1TB hard drive) and try to get a 7950 over a 7870, but everything else looks fine. Well, except I didn't really look at the case - make sure it moves a decent amount of air.
There's little point getting the 3770k. Most games still do not benefit from having more than 2 cores. By the time games start demanding 8 cores your 3770k will be hopelessly obsolete and you could just buy a much faster chip with significantly better IPC and 8 or more physical cores.
Hyperthreading has been known to cause annoying stuttering in certain games. By what mechanism I do not know, but I would just disable it in BIOS if I was using that CPU mostly for gaming.
<!--quoteo(post=2030634:date=Nov 21 2012, 12:48 AM:name=Sockem)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sockem @ Nov 21 2012, 12:48 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030634"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I am currently trying to build a budget pc that will average 60 FPS and get 30 MINIMUM on medium textures.
Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor $219.99 Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler $28.98 ASRock Z77 Extreme4 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel $105 Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory $39.99 Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive $69.99 XFX Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition 2GB Video Card $231.98 Cougar Solution (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case $39.99 XFX Core 550W PSU. $70 Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer $19.99 Total: about $754<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Whoa, you call that a budget pc? Thats upper class actually. In case you didn't buy yet: <ul><li>I have a 3570k and there is nothing I could complain about even if I had to. For NS2 this CPU is absolutely sufficient and I don't even know my min. Framerate because I turned net_stats off since I bought this CPU. I'd guess it never goes under 60.</li><li>ASrock is a good brand. Originally it was a low-cost brand of Asus but they split off and developed. Their products are actually mostly better than Asus or at least just as good. For MoBos I'd take ASrock or Gigabyte. I have a Z77 Pro4 and everything's fine here. I don't know what you need the Extreme4 for, epecially if it's supposed to be a budget PC...maybe you should consider getting the Pro4 - it costs less. The only thing I found not so good is that the Items delivered with the Pro4 are really few...2 SATA3 cables and ...that's it (Not counting the manual, driver cd and the obligatory "faceplate"). The Extreme4 has probably more goodies but again...what for?</li><li>The SandyBridge/IvyBridge System doesn't benefit much from fast RAM. So all you need is 1333 RAM. Benefits from 1600 or above are so low that they MAYBE can be measured but you'll never feel it.</li><li>Don't OC. The 3570 is good for anything currently existing. You don't need to OC in the next 2 years. And even then it's useless because, honestly the effort investment and cost for cooling hardware fitting for OCing makes it pointless. It's better just to buy a new CPU. And don't forget the noise and power consumption of OC'd Chips.</li><li>A 500w PSU from a good brand will be enough. I don't know much about XFX but I'd prefer BeQuiet, Enermax, Seasonic or Cougar.</li><li>Can't say anything about the case...and the Cooler. I never used the Intel Stock cooler... but the broad agreement is that Stock Coolers can be pretty noisy. I have a Mugen2 (now outdated) in a Antec P183 with custom case fans and my PC is VERY quiet. Yours will probably be a lot noisier...</li></ul>
<!--quoteo(post=2031272:date=Nov 21 2012, 05:39 PM:name=SenorBeef)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SenorBeef @ Nov 21 2012, 05:39 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031272"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->OP, go to a site like hardforum or overclock.net, because almost everything said in this thread has been wrong.
If Ivy Bridge is like Sandy Bridge, and I think it is, you don't touch the FSB to do overclocking, you adjust the multiplier. You friend could go up to IIRC 6.3ghz by doing 100x63 as a max multiplayer. So again, unless they changed the entire way IB works, your friend doesn't know what he's doing.
I have a p67 asrock extreme4 and it's awesome. So unless they decided to suck in their z77 version, it's probably good.
This, I suspect, is nonsense. I don't think NS2 even uses 2 cores significantly, let alone 8. I suspect he's just an AMD fanboy. I like AMD and I wish they were better, but right now Intel absolutely crushes them in the $200 market. 3750k or 2500k (the k part is important, that's the unlocked multiplyer) is the way to go.
Ironically, the main reason for DX10 was to simplify coding and re-align our libraries to all the new technology we've developed over the years that got added piecemeal to dx9. DX10 was actually about efficiency rather than new features. So if anything, true DX10/11 games should run faster vs their graphics level. BF3 is a true DX10 game as far as I can tell, just because they made a crippled version dumbed down for xbox doesn't mean it's an xbox port. If every game did that, we'd be in great shape as PC gamers.
You don't want an I7. You pay 50% more for maybe 2-4% more performance on average. Only a few types of programs benefit from hyperthreading. The extra money for an i7 is much better spent on a higher tier video card.
Quicker stuff is not always advantageous, actually. SB/IB aren't really memory limited in any meaningful way and you don't need faster ram to overclock because cpu clock speed isn't tied to memory clock speed. Most people don't even know how to make their ram run faster than 1333 anyway.
Now ram is so cheap that getting 1866 or 2133 stuff may only be an extra $5-10, so it wouldn't hurt if you got it, but 1600 would be fine.
I would spend the extra to get the WD Black series, it will be both faster and more reliable. The extra $15 it costs would be a significant improvement.
Ignore the people who said it isn't worth overclocking. SB/IB overclocking is simple and you can usually increase speeds by 600-800 mhz easily. A CM 212+ is a fine enough cooler and can get you there cheap. Who wouldn't want an easy extra 600-800mhz?
I would wait for black friday and see if you can snag a 7950 for $250. The 7950 is a significant upgrade from the 7870, partly because they're reputed to be very overclockable - often 20-30% overclocks with those things. Overclocked, they beat even the $500 cards from Nvidia.
You're more or less on the right track OP, but spend a little extra to get a western digital black series hard drive (IMO, it's absolutely worth getting a 128gb SSD for your OS and your 5-10 favorite games and store everything else on the 1TB hard drive) and try to get a 7950 over a 7870, but everything else looks fine. Well, except I didn't really look at the case - make sure it moves a decent amount of air.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You want to listen to this guy. Everything he said is spot on. I came to similar conclusions after "extensive research".
The rig I build myself in May this year looks like this:
- Lian-Li pc v600fb m-ATX Mini Tower Case (Not the most cost effective but I wanted it to be a bit more that just a box for my hardware...) - Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 600W - Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor - Gelid Tranquillo Rev.2 CPU Cooler (because it just fitted in the case with about 3 mm spare :) ) - ASRock Z77 Extreme4-m LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 m-ATX Intel (Don't need a big tower and while I could still add another videocard, I will never do that... Going for ITX would have made the rig more expensive) - Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory - Crucial m4 128 GB SSD - 2x Western Digital Scorpio Black 750GB 2.5" 7200RPM RAID0 Internal Hard Drives (only because I got them for free from brother) - Gigabyte HD 7950 3GB 900 mhz Video Card (Good HD7950 version that also JUST fitted my case without me having to remove a HDD bay)
If I were to build a rig NOW I would only change the following:
- Crucial m4 128 GB SSD ---> Samsung 830 series 256GB SSD (I have like 80% of my SSD occupied atm) - Some quieter case or case fans. (fans I might still swap out for PWM fans) - Asrock Extreme4-m ---> Pro4-m (saves 30 euro's and wouldn't make a difference for what I do with it)
The CPU you selected is (for the money) the best single thread performing CPU of this moment which is what NS2 needs. You can even overclock the cpu to give a linear increase to your FPS. (assuming your videocard will pull the load which is not always the case with my HD7950....) Going for AMD cpu just wouldn't make sense as its single thread performance is like at least 25% worse at the same clocks.
ScardyBobScardyBobJoin Date: 2009-11-25Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
<!--quoteo(post=2031272:date=Nov 21 2012, 08:39 AM:name=SenorBeef)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SenorBeef @ Nov 21 2012, 08:39 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031272"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You don't want an I7. You pay 50% more for maybe 2-4% more performance on average. Only a few types of programs benefit from hyperthreading. The extra money for an i7 is much better spent on a higher tier video card.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The major exception to this rule of thumb is livestreaming. i7 is almost a must for decent 720p livestreaming of NS2 (though I've been able to barely make it work with an OCd 2500k).
<!--quoteo(post=2031395:date=Nov 21 2012, 07:46 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Nov 21 2012, 07:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031395"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The major exception to this rule of thumb is livestreaming. i7 is almost a must for decent 720p livestreaming of NS2 (though I've been able to barely make it work with an OCd 2500k).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How come this is the case? How many extra threads does live streaming require anyway?
I don't notice a drop in performance in NS2 when I set processor affinity from 4 to 2 CPU cores. Setting it to just 1 core does result in a severe drop in FPS :). Last time I tried this was a few months ago so maybe things have changed regarding CPU utilization.
<!--quoteo(post=2031395:date=Nov 21 2012, 10:46 AM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Nov 21 2012, 10:46 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031395"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The major exception to this rule of thumb is livestreaming. i7 is almost a must for decent 720p livestreaming of NS2 (though I've been able to barely make it work with an OCd 2500k).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What makes you think hyperthreading is a big deal for livestreaming? You still have 2-3 idle cores when the game is running, I doubt it matters if you have an extra 4 virtual cores.
<!--quoteo(post=2031371:date=Nov 21 2012, 10:26 AM:name=Zeno)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zeno @ Nov 21 2012, 10:26 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031371"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->[*]Don't OC. The 3570 is good for anything currently existing. You don't need to OC in the next 2 years. And even then it's useless because, honestly the effort investment and cost for cooling hardware fitting for OCing makes it pointless. It's better just to buy a new CPU. And don't forget the noise and power consumption of OC'd Chips.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who can't use 20-30% more CPU performance? No one "needs" it maybe, but who wouldn't want their system to be more responsive and faster? The cost is negligible (the 212+ mentioned in this thread is $20-30 and capable), the increase in power consumption is probably like 50 cents a month on your power bill, and since aftermarket coolers can generally run larger fans at lower RPMs, it can actually decrease system noise.
<!--quoteo(post=2031457:date=Nov 21 2012, 09:11 PM:name=SenorBeef)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SenorBeef @ Nov 21 2012, 09:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Who can't use 20-30% more CPU performance? No one "needs" it maybe, but who wouldn't want their system to be more responsive and faster? The cost is negligible (the 212+ mentioned in this thread is $20-30 and capable), the increase in power consumption is probably like 50 cents a month on your power bill, and since aftermarket coolers can generally run larger fans at lower RPMs, it can actually decrease system noise.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> More responsive and faster? Can you prove me that you would feel something like that? Not a single program exists for normal users that would seem unresponsive or not fast enough on a 3570 nowdays. 95% of what OC does is placebo, probably caused my advertising and hype. AND power consumption, which is way more than just 50ct/month. And what it also does is reducing the lifetime of your hardware. And I don't even mean the CPU itself but especially the Mainboard. 20-30% of performance (if you even get so far) is only visible in benchmarks, extremely cpu-heavy niche programs (like video editing) and games. But again, there is no game yet that the stock cpu wouldn't master easily...so you get 110 fps with OC as compared to stock 85fps? What for? E-Penis of course, and placebo.
<!--quoteo(post=2031468:date=Nov 21 2012, 09:20 PM:name=Zeno)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zeno @ Nov 21 2012, 09:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031468"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->More responsive and faster? Can you prove me that you would feel something like that? Not a single program exists for normal users that would seem unresponsive or not fast enough on a 3570 nowdays. 95% of what OC does is placebo, probably caused my advertising and hype. AND power consumption, which is way more than just 50ct/month. And what it also does is reducing the lifetime of your hardware. And I don't even mean the CPU itself but especially the Mainboard. 20-30% of performance (if you even get so far) is only visible in benchmarks, extremely cpu-heavy niche programs (like video editing) and games. But again, <b>there is no game yet that the stock cpu wouldn't master</b> easily...so you get 110 fps with OC as compared to stock 85fps? What for? E-Penis of course, and placebo.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree, it runs NS2 great. But in some situations FPS can go as low as 40 (when there is lots of stuff on the map or the server is a bit crappy and your own CPU has to fill in the blanks). If in that case your CPU would have been running at 4.5 Ghz instead of 3.8 (max. with turbo boost) your performance would only drop to 47 FPS, hence feeling a bit smoother/ more responsive.
That said, I'm only running mine at 4.0 ghz as it was easy and it could be attained with stock voltage. Going higher than this resulted in an unstable NS2 experience and I didn't feel like turning off the power saving modes just to reach a little higher clocks / fps. If I were a competitive player it might pay off to do these things
<!--quoteo(post=2031468:date=Nov 21 2012, 12:20 PM:name=Zeno)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zeno @ Nov 21 2012, 12:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031468"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->More responsive and faster? Can you prove me that you would feel something like that? Not a single program exists for normal users that would seem unresponsive or not fast enough on a 3570 nowdays. 95% of what OC does is placebo, probably caused my advertising and hype. AND power consumption, which is way more than just 50ct/month. And what it also does is reducing the lifetime of your hardware. And I don't even mean the CPU itself but especially the Mainboard. 20-30% of performance (if you even get so far) is only visible in benchmarks, extremely cpu-heavy niche programs (like video editing) and games. But again, there is no game yet that the stock cpu wouldn't master easily...so you get 110 fps with OC as compared to stock 85fps? What for? E-Penis of course, and placebo.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, first, power consumption. The TDP - the maximum design wattage at stock clocks of the 3570 at stock clocks, is 77w. Wattage doesn't scale linearly with clock speed, but neither does it from voltage, so it's tricky. Let's say it ups the wattage requirement by 20%. 15.4 watts. But this is using all 4 cores and all the cache and stuff to their maximum, which only really happens rarely. Most programs only use 1 core, and they don't even max it out. But let's say that you max out 2 cores for 3 hours a day. That's a pretty generous estimate. So now we've got half of 15.4 watts for 2 hours a day, or 15.4 watt hours per day. Multiply that by 30 days, and you get 462 watt-hours a month. Whes that cost? Well, 1000 watt hours costs roughly a dime, so you're looking at an extra nickel on your power bill at the end of month.
Let's say my estimate is wrong and you use all 4 cores maxed out 8 hours a day. No one actually does this unless you're doing folding @ home or something (and then it makes no sense to whine about power bill), but let's use an extreme case. ANd let's say my 20% number is conservative and use 30%. Now you're using 5.5 KW/h per month, or about 60 cents.
As for the actual performance, I don't know how it's not self evident. So maybe some operation takes a quarter second with a stock 3570 and feels faster to you than your old computer by a lot, so it seems fast enough. But overclocking it takes it under 200 milliseconds. Not a big difference, but every single thing is just a little bit snappier and more responsive.
It may be true that OCing reduces the life of your hardware - theoretically - from maybe about 50 years to 30 or so. No one really knows for sure, but what people do know is absent doing something very wrong, CPUs never die of old age in their useful lifetimes.
You should have a decent aftermarket cooler anyway, so OCing at that point is pretty much free. I can't believe how many idiots there are out there that say "oh no, don't take a free 30% performance upgrade!"
ScardyBobScardyBobJoin Date: 2009-11-25Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
<!--quoteo(post=2031457:date=Nov 21 2012, 12:11 PM:name=SenorBeef)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SenorBeef @ Nov 21 2012, 12:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What makes you think hyperthreading is a big deal for livestreaming? You still have 2-3 idle cores when the game is running, I doubt it matters if you have an extra 4 virtual cores.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Because encoding (which is the CPU hungry process in livestreaming) will consume as many threads as you can throw at it. I also suspect the higher cache in the i7's help also. The i7's regularly beat i5's in encoding performance (look at Handbreak and MainConcept benchmarks <a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-benchmark-core-i7-3770k,3181-19.html" target="_blank">here</a>). They are also the <a href="http://www.xsplit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=13243" target="_blank">recommended CPUs for high-quality streams</a>.
<!--quoteo(post=2031691:date=Nov 22 2012, 12:59 AM:name=SenorBeef)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SenorBeef @ Nov 22 2012, 12:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031691"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You should have a decent aftermarket cooler anyway, so OCing at that point is pretty much free. I can't believe how many idiots there are out there that say "oh no, don't take a free 30% performance upgrade!"<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I thought it was a normal discussion, but now I see that I am apparently an idiot bcase I don't OC my hardware... anyway I won't discuss it further, that's getting ridiculous.
Btw the lifetime difference is not 50-30 years but rather 20 to 4 years.
I don't care if you OC your own hardware. <!--coloro:orange--><span style="color:orange"><!--/coloro-->I disagree with your policy of<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--> telling people that there's no performance gain from boosting CPU speed 25% and that a big reason not to do it is to avoid a few cents on your power bill. And CPUs dying due to age related degradation, even massively overclocked, is exceedingly rare. I've certainly never seen it, and you almost never hear about it either. If CPUs aren't defective in the first place, and you don't do something retarded like drop a big gulp into your case, they never die.
<!--coloro:orange--><span style="color:orange"><!--/coloro-->Have a nice day.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
<!--quoteo(post=2032040:date=Nov 22 2012, 02:52 AM:name=Zeno)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zeno @ Nov 22 2012, 02:52 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032040"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I thought it was a normal discussion, but now I see that I am apparently an idiot bcase I don't OC my hardware... anyway I won't discuss it further, that's getting ridiculous.
Btw the lifetime difference is not 50-30 years but rather 20 to 4 years.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who the ###### keeps computers past 4 years even if that was the case? I upgrade like every 3.
<!--quoteo(post=2032114:date=Nov 22 2012, 01:59 PM:name=Davil)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Davil @ Nov 22 2012, 01:59 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032114"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Who the ###### keeps computers past 4 years even if that was the case? I upgrade like every 3.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Tentative prognosis: ###### ######loads of people. Like, incredibly massive mountains of people.
I kinda loathe those people who tells not to OC (because of the ######ups themselves have created and experienced during it, most likely) when it clearly is proven to be highly beneficiary and completely safe in most cases. I OC'd my phenom x6 from 3.3 to 4 recently, and it has been noticeable.
<!--quoteo(post=2032163:date=Nov 22 2012, 09:42 AM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lolfighter @ Nov 22 2012, 09:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032163"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->How about this then: Don't OC unless you're aware of the risk that you ###### it up and fry your electronics, and that it'll be your fault.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's why I don't want to overclock :3
I have never built or upgraded a pc, and I have certantly never overclocked. I am also afraid of liquid cooling and Liquid nitrogen cooling, so i will just NOT overclock.
<!--quoteo(post=2030654:date=Nov 21 2012, 02:03 AM:name=purephoenix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (purephoenix @ Nov 21 2012, 02:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030654"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That motherboard is trash, pick a more expensive one. Mate's got it and is limitted to 4.2/4.6 ghtz OC because FSB only goes to 105 or 110mhtz.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Since no-one else replied to this, I felt compelled to.
You don't overclock Sandy or Ivy Bridge CPUs by using the FSB (Being 100mhz on this architecture). This is due to the bus being directly tied not only to the CPU frequency, but to other buses as well, including the SATA and PCIe-buses. If you overclock the bus too far, there's a risk of actually damaging these parts of the motherboard, or even the components attached to them as well (Harddrives and GPUs, in this case), not to mention general system instability. So, in order to overclock a Sandy or Ivy Bridge, you get a CPU labelled "K", for instance the 3570K. These CPUs have an unlocked multiplier that you alter to overclock. I for, for example, have my CPU running at 4,2ghz with a 100 mhz bus and 42x multiplier.
I noticed that you guys were talking about a pro4 so i included it into the build <a href="http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oOmV" target="_blank">http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oOmV</a>
Risk of blowing on your hardware with an overclock is pretty minimal. And you don't need water cooling. CPUs will shut down long before they take any damage from too much voltage or heat. I've never fried a part and I've overclocked at least a dozen CPUs in my time as well as video cards. You'd have to be wildly irresponsible to damage the hardware I think. Almost no danger from doing it correctly.
<!--quoteo(post=2032318:date=Nov 22 2012, 06:55 PM:name=Sockem)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sockem @ Nov 22 2012, 06:55 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2032318"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I noticed that you guys were talking about a pro4 so i included it into the build <a href="http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oOmV" target="_blank">http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oOmV</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's a H77, better get a Z77. More possibilities. Though H77 is also ok if you don't want to OC or some other stuff...
@OC: I don't have anything against OCing itself but you should consider WHO you recommend it to. If a user is inexperienced (and never even built an own PC) you don't recommend OC for the same reason you don't recommend tuning a car with turbos and other serious ###### to a 18 years old girl, who just made her licence. And you should consider that people who don't OC (although they could) might do so because they have other priorities - like silence, low temperature and lifetime. You are here in a thread where an inexperienced user asks for help, so please help him accordingly.
Short story: I lost 2 mainboards to a power-consuming CPU (both from MSI thoug, so maybe that was the problem). When OCing you indeed don't need to worry about your CPU much, but your Mainboard will be hurt.
Comments
However, if you're looking something to play NS2 well (and don't care as much about getting top-of-the-line performance in other games). I'd go with
- GTX 560 Ti = Performs slightly better than the HD 7870 and would save you roughly $60
- Overclock = Put that cash towards getting a more serious air CPU cooler (Thermaltake Frio is a good one or the Noctua NH-D14 if your more adventurous).
Getting the 3570k into the 4.2-4.5GHz range will give you the most boost to FPS in NS2.
<a href="http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oCqg" target="_blank">http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oCqg</a>
*edit* I also have a spare Windows 7 laying around, so dont worry about that.
What part of "It's designed to run on a ###### console 9 years old" are you too dumb to understand?
REAL Directx11 games have no hope of acheiving 30+ frames on current hardware at max settings.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No you're actually you're 100% completely wrong. The PC version of BF3 is a completely different beast entirely, for starters it's designed for DX11, not that what version of DirectX you're running is going to change a ton other than some of the more specific effects. NS2 for example actually runs on DX9 and so does Skyrim so you may start eating your foot now. Also you clearly don't know what you're talking about because BF3 is actually used alongside Crysis and Farcry on every benchmark site. The XBox version is crap and it's well known, it only runs at 30 fps compared to the PC version which can run well above 60 depending on your hardware. And you're still completely wrong because guess what? Many DX11 games can go above 60fps on cards like the gtx 590 so maybe do some research.
PM me.
I'll send you the link (dunno if its ok to advertise on the forums).
here is one I was 1/2 way through building last week. Yes the letters on the card are glowing :)
<img src="http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/5535/jeremycomp.png" border="0" class="linked-image" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Looks like a Thermaltake HAF case, I have a level 10 GT it's awesome.
<!--quoteo(post=2030654:date=Nov 20 2012, 04:03 PM:name=purephoenix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (purephoenix @ Nov 20 2012, 04:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030654"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That motherboard is trash, pick a more expensive one. Mate's got it and is limitted to 4.2/4.6 ghtz OC because FSB only goes to 105 or 110mhtz.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If Ivy Bridge is like Sandy Bridge, and I think it is, you don't touch the FSB to do overclocking, you adjust the multiplier. You friend could go up to IIRC 6.3ghz by doing 100x63 as a max multiplayer. So again, unless they changed the entire way IB works, your friend doesn't know what he's doing.
I have a p67 asrock extreme4 and it's awesome. So unless they decided to suck in their z77 version, it's probably good.
<!--quoteo(post=2030677:date=Nov 20 2012, 04:26 PM:name=purephoenix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (purephoenix @ Nov 20 2012, 04:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030677"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I priced a UD3 yesterday, $99.... if it's specifically for best NS2 performance tho you'll want a bulldozer, since it uses all 8 cores. The 8150 black you can get for $200. Rest you can research yourself :P Worked out to be almost 800 with a 660ti 2gb and 1gb seagate hdd, generic case, low-end corsair 700w case (Still certified)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This, I suspect, is nonsense. I don't think NS2 even uses 2 cores significantly, let alone 8. I suspect he's just an AMD fanboy. I like AMD and I wish they were better, but right now Intel absolutely crushes them in the $200 market. 3750k or 2500k (the k part is important, that's the unlocked multiplyer) is the way to go.
<!--quoteo(post=2030683:date=Nov 20 2012, 04:30 PM:name=purephoenix)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (purephoenix @ Nov 20 2012, 04:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030683"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Who cares? It's still toned-down graphics etc because it has to run on the Xbox, i'm still right.
What part of "It's designed to run on a ###### console 9 years old" are you too dumb to understand?
REAL Directx11 games have no hope of acheiving 30+ frames on current hardware at max settings.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ironically, the main reason for DX10 was to simplify coding and re-align our libraries to all the new technology we've developed over the years that got added piecemeal to dx9. DX10 was actually about efficiency rather than new features. So if anything, true DX10/11 games should run faster vs their graphics level. BF3 is a true DX10 game as far as I can tell, just because they made a crippled version dumbed down for xbox doesn't mean it's an xbox port. If every game did that, we'd be in great shape as PC gamers.
<!--quoteo(post=2030726:date=Nov 20 2012, 05:03 PM:name=rmbrown09)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rmbrown09 @ Nov 20 2012, 05:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030726"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor $219.99
<!--coloro:#FF8C00--><span style="color:#FF8C00"><!--/coloro-->I would say spend the extra dough and get an i7. You don't get hyperthreading with i5's and because of that NS2 and future games + applications will run slower than they would have. Things like Photoshop, After Effects, Premiere, Maya, etc etc all use as many cores as you can throw at it. Future games will start utilizing hyperthreading as well, and because an i7 is so close to that price point I say save up and get that instead. Having the extra horsepower down the line is going to prove to be a wise decision.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You don't want an I7. You pay 50% more for maybe 2-4% more performance on average. Only a few types of programs benefit from hyperthreading. The extra money for an i7 is much better spent on a higher tier video card.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory $39.99
[color="#FF8C00"]This is fine OP, but I would consider taking this to the next level with some 2133 or 2400Mhz stuff. Quicker ram is always advantageous.
See here: <a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820313236" target="_blank">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16820313236</a><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Quicker stuff is not always advantageous, actually. SB/IB aren't really memory limited in any meaningful way and you don't need faster ram to overclock because cpu clock speed isn't tied to memory clock speed. Most people don't even know how to make their ram run faster than 1333 anyway.
Now ram is so chea that getting 1866 or 2133 stuff may only be an extra $5-10, so it wouldn't hurt if you got it, but 1600 would be fine.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive $69.99
<!--coloro:#FF8C00--><span style="color:#FF8C00"><!--/coloro-->Cool beans<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would spend the extra to get the WD Black series, it will be both faster and more reliable. The extra $15 it costs would be a significant improvement.
Ignore the people who said it isn't worth overclocking. SB/IB overclocking is simple and you can usually increase speeds by 600-800 mhz easily. A CM 212+ is a fine enough cooler and can get you there cheap. Who wouldn't want an easy extra 600-800mhz?
I would wait for black friday and see if you can snag a 7950 for $250. The 7950 is a significant upgrade from the 7870, partly because they're reputed to be very overclockable - often 20-30% overclocks with those things. Overclocked, they beat even the $500 cards from Nvidia.
You're more or less on the right track OP, but spend a little extra to get a western digital black series hard drive (IMO, it's absolutely worth getting a 128gb SSD for your OS and your 5-10 favorite games and store everything else on the 1TB hard drive) and try to get a 7950 over a 7870, but everything else looks fine. Well, except I didn't really look at the case - make sure it moves a decent amount of air.
Hyperthreading has been known to cause annoying stuttering in certain games. By what mechanism I do not know, but I would just disable it in BIOS if I was using that CPU mostly for gaming.
Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor $219.99
Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler $28.98
ASRock Z77 Extreme4 LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel $105
Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory $39.99
Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive $69.99
XFX Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition 2GB Video Card $231.98
Cougar Solution (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case $39.99
XFX Core 550W PSU. $70
Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer $19.99
Total: about $754<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whoa, you call that a budget pc? Thats upper class actually.
In case you didn't buy yet:
<ul><li>I have a 3570k and there is nothing I could complain about even if I had to. For NS2 this CPU is absolutely sufficient and I don't even know my min. Framerate because I turned net_stats off since I bought this CPU. I'd guess it never goes under 60.</li><li>ASrock is a good brand. Originally it was a low-cost brand of Asus but they split off and developed. Their products are actually mostly better than Asus or at least just as good. For MoBos I'd take ASrock or Gigabyte.
I have a Z77 Pro4 and everything's fine here. I don't know what you need the Extreme4 for, epecially if it's supposed to be a budget PC...maybe you should consider getting the Pro4 - it costs less. The only thing I found not so good is that the Items delivered with the Pro4 are really few...2 SATA3 cables and ...that's it (Not counting the manual, driver cd and the obligatory "faceplate"). The Extreme4 has probably more goodies but again...what for?</li><li>The SandyBridge/IvyBridge System doesn't benefit much from fast RAM. So all you need is 1333 RAM. Benefits from 1600 or above are so low that they MAYBE can be measured but you'll never feel it.</li><li>Don't OC. The 3570 is good for anything currently existing. You don't need to OC in the next 2 years. And even then it's useless because, honestly the effort investment and cost for cooling hardware fitting for OCing makes it pointless. It's better just to buy a new CPU. And don't forget the noise and power consumption of OC'd Chips.</li><li>A 500w PSU from a good brand will be enough. I don't know much about XFX but I'd prefer BeQuiet, Enermax, Seasonic or Cougar.</li><li>Can't say anything about the case...and the Cooler. I never used the Intel Stock cooler... but the broad agreement is that Stock Coolers can be pretty noisy. I have a Mugen2 (now outdated) in a Antec P183 with custom case fans and my PC is VERY quiet. Yours will probably be a lot noisier...</li></ul>
If Ivy Bridge is like Sandy Bridge, and I think it is, you don't touch the FSB to do overclocking, you adjust the multiplier. You friend could go up to IIRC 6.3ghz by doing 100x63 as a max multiplayer. So again, unless they changed the entire way IB works, your friend doesn't know what he's doing.
I have a p67 asrock extreme4 and it's awesome. So unless they decided to suck in their z77 version, it's probably good.
This, I suspect, is nonsense. I don't think NS2 even uses 2 cores significantly, let alone 8. I suspect he's just an AMD fanboy. I like AMD and I wish they were better, but right now Intel absolutely crushes them in the $200 market. 3750k or 2500k (the k part is important, that's the unlocked multiplyer) is the way to go.
Ironically, the main reason for DX10 was to simplify coding and re-align our libraries to all the new technology we've developed over the years that got added piecemeal to dx9. DX10 was actually about efficiency rather than new features. So if anything, true DX10/11 games should run faster vs their graphics level. BF3 is a true DX10 game as far as I can tell, just because they made a crippled version dumbed down for xbox doesn't mean it's an xbox port. If every game did that, we'd be in great shape as PC gamers.
You don't want an I7. You pay 50% more for maybe 2-4% more performance on average. Only a few types of programs benefit from hyperthreading. The extra money for an i7 is much better spent on a higher tier video card.
Quicker stuff is not always advantageous, actually. SB/IB aren't really memory limited in any meaningful way and you don't need faster ram to overclock because cpu clock speed isn't tied to memory clock speed. Most people don't even know how to make their ram run faster than 1333 anyway.
Now ram is so cheap that getting 1866 or 2133 stuff may only be an extra $5-10, so it wouldn't hurt if you got it, but 1600 would be fine.
I would spend the extra to get the WD Black series, it will be both faster and more reliable. The extra $15 it costs would be a significant improvement.
Ignore the people who said it isn't worth overclocking. SB/IB overclocking is simple and you can usually increase speeds by 600-800 mhz easily. A CM 212+ is a fine enough cooler and can get you there cheap. Who wouldn't want an easy extra 600-800mhz?
I would wait for black friday and see if you can snag a 7950 for $250. The 7950 is a significant upgrade from the 7870, partly because they're reputed to be very overclockable - often 20-30% overclocks with those things. Overclocked, they beat even the $500 cards from Nvidia.
You're more or less on the right track OP, but spend a little extra to get a western digital black series hard drive (IMO, it's absolutely worth getting a 128gb SSD for your OS and your 5-10 favorite games and store everything else on the 1TB hard drive) and try to get a 7950 over a 7870, but everything else looks fine. Well, except I didn't really look at the case - make sure it moves a decent amount of air.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You want to listen to this guy. Everything he said is spot on. I came to similar conclusions after "extensive research".
The rig I build myself in May this year looks like this:
- Lian-Li pc v600fb m-ATX Mini Tower Case (Not the most cost effective but I wanted it to be a bit more that just a box for my hardware...)
- Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 600W
- Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor
- Gelid Tranquillo Rev.2 CPU Cooler (because it just fitted in the case with about 3 mm spare :) )
- ASRock Z77 Extreme4-m LGA 1155 Intel Z77 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 m-ATX Intel (Don't need a big tower and while I could still add another videocard, I will never do that... Going for ITX would have made the rig more expensive)
- Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory
- Crucial m4 128 GB SSD
- 2x Western Digital Scorpio Black 750GB 2.5" 7200RPM RAID0 Internal Hard Drives (only because I got them for free from brother)
- Gigabyte HD 7950 3GB 900 mhz Video Card (Good HD7950 version that also JUST fitted my case without me having to remove a HDD bay)
If I were to build a rig NOW I would only change the following:
- Crucial m4 128 GB SSD ---> Samsung 830 series 256GB SSD (I have like 80% of my SSD occupied atm)
- Some quieter case or case fans. (fans I might still swap out for PWM fans)
- Asrock Extreme4-m ---> Pro4-m (saves 30 euro's and wouldn't make a difference for what I do with it)
The CPU you selected is (for the money) the best single thread performing CPU of this moment which is what NS2 needs. You can even overclock the cpu to give a linear increase to your FPS. (assuming your videocard will pull the load which is not always the case with my HD7950....)
Going for AMD cpu just wouldn't make sense as its single thread performance is like at least 25% worse at the same clocks.
The major exception to this rule of thumb is livestreaming. i7 is almost a must for decent 720p livestreaming of NS2 (though I've been able to barely make it work with an OCd 2500k).
How come this is the case? How many extra threads does live streaming require anyway?
I don't notice a drop in performance in NS2 when I set processor affinity from 4 to 2 CPU cores. Setting it to just 1 core does result in a severe drop in FPS :). Last time I tried this was a few months ago so maybe things have changed regarding CPU utilization.
What makes you think hyperthreading is a big deal for livestreaming? You still have 2-3 idle cores when the game is running, I doubt it matters if you have an extra 4 virtual cores.
<!--quoteo(post=2031371:date=Nov 21 2012, 10:26 AM:name=Zeno)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zeno @ Nov 21 2012, 10:26 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2031371"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->[*]Don't OC. The 3570 is good for anything currently existing. You don't need to OC in the next 2 years. And even then it's useless because, honestly the effort investment and cost for cooling hardware fitting for OCing makes it pointless. It's better just to buy a new CPU. And don't forget the noise and power consumption of OC'd Chips.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who can't use 20-30% more CPU performance? No one "needs" it maybe, but who wouldn't want their system to be more responsive and faster? The cost is negligible (the 212+ mentioned in this thread is $20-30 and capable), the increase in power consumption is probably like 50 cents a month on your power bill, and since aftermarket coolers can generally run larger fans at lower RPMs, it can actually decrease system noise.
More responsive and faster? Can you prove me that you would feel something like that? Not a single program exists for normal users that would seem unresponsive or not fast enough on a 3570 nowdays. 95% of what OC does is placebo, probably caused my advertising and hype. AND power consumption, which is way more than just 50ct/month. And what it also does is reducing the lifetime of your hardware. And I don't even mean the CPU itself but especially the Mainboard.
20-30% of performance (if you even get so far) is only visible in benchmarks, extremely cpu-heavy niche programs (like video editing) and games. But again, there is no game yet that the stock cpu wouldn't master easily...so you get 110 fps with OC as compared to stock 85fps? What for? E-Penis of course, and placebo.
20-30% of performance (if you even get so far) is only visible in benchmarks, extremely cpu-heavy niche programs (like video editing) and games. But again, <b>there is no game yet that the stock cpu wouldn't master</b> easily...so you get 110 fps with OC as compared to stock 85fps? What for? E-Penis of course, and placebo.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NS2 benefits for one :)
I have the same CPU...it runs NS2 great. No Problems at all.
But in some situations FPS can go as low as 40 (when there is lots of stuff on the map or the server is a bit crappy and your own CPU has to fill in the blanks). If in that case your CPU would have been running at 4.5 Ghz instead of 3.8 (max. with turbo boost) your performance would only drop to 47 FPS, hence feeling a bit smoother/ more responsive.
That said, I'm only running mine at 4.0 ghz as it was easy and it could be attained with stock voltage. Going higher than this resulted in an unstable NS2 experience and I didn't feel like turning off the power saving modes just to reach a little higher clocks / fps. If I were a competitive player it might pay off to do these things
20-30% of performance (if you even get so far) is only visible in benchmarks, extremely cpu-heavy niche programs (like video editing) and games. But again, there is no game yet that the stock cpu wouldn't master easily...so you get 110 fps with OC as compared to stock 85fps? What for? E-Penis of course, and placebo.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, first, power consumption. The TDP - the maximum design wattage at stock clocks of the 3570 at stock clocks, is 77w. Wattage doesn't scale linearly with clock speed, but neither does it from voltage, so it's tricky. Let's say it ups the wattage requirement by 20%. 15.4 watts. But this is using all 4 cores and all the cache and stuff to their maximum, which only really happens rarely. Most programs only use 1 core, and they don't even max it out. But let's say that you max out 2 cores for 3 hours a day. That's a pretty generous estimate. So now we've got half of 15.4 watts for 2 hours a day, or 15.4 watt hours per day. Multiply that by 30 days, and you get 462 watt-hours a month. Whes that cost? Well, 1000 watt hours costs roughly a dime, so you're looking at an extra nickel on your power bill at the end of month.
Let's say my estimate is wrong and you use all 4 cores maxed out 8 hours a day. No one actually does this unless you're doing folding @ home or something (and then it makes no sense to whine about power bill), but let's use an extreme case. ANd let's say my 20% number is conservative and use 30%. Now you're using 5.5 KW/h per month, or about 60 cents.
As for the actual performance, I don't know how it's not self evident. So maybe some operation takes a quarter second with a stock 3570 and feels faster to you than your old computer by a lot, so it seems fast enough. But overclocking it takes it under 200 milliseconds. Not a big difference, but every single thing is just a little bit snappier and more responsive.
It may be true that OCing reduces the life of your hardware - theoretically - from maybe about 50 years to 30 or so. No one really knows for sure, but what people do know is absent doing something very wrong, CPUs never die of old age in their useful lifetimes.
You should have a decent aftermarket cooler anyway, so OCing at that point is pretty much free. I can't believe how many idiots there are out there that say "oh no, don't take a free 30% performance upgrade!"
Because encoding (which is the CPU hungry process in livestreaming) will consume as many threads as you can throw at it. I also suspect the higher cache in the i7's help also. The i7's regularly beat i5's in encoding performance (look at Handbreak and MainConcept benchmarks <a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-benchmark-core-i7-3770k,3181-19.html" target="_blank">here</a>). They are also the <a href="http://www.xsplit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=13243" target="_blank">recommended CPUs for high-quality streams</a>.
I thought it was a normal discussion, but now I see that I am apparently an idiot bcase I don't OC my hardware... anyway I won't discuss it further, that's getting ridiculous.
Btw the lifetime difference is not 50-30 years but rather 20 to 4 years.
<!--coloro:orange--><span style="color:orange"><!--/coloro-->Have a nice day.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Btw the lifetime difference is not 50-30 years but rather 20 to 4 years.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who the ###### keeps computers past 4 years even if that was the case? I upgrade like every 3.
Tentative prognosis: ###### ######loads of people. Like, incredibly massive mountains of people.
That's why I don't want to overclock :3
I have never built or upgraded a pc, and I have certantly never overclocked. I am also afraid of liquid cooling and Liquid nitrogen cooling, so i will just NOT overclock.
Since no-one else replied to this, I felt compelled to.
You don't overclock Sandy or Ivy Bridge CPUs by using the FSB (Being 100mhz on this architecture). This is due to the bus being directly tied not only to the CPU frequency, but to other buses as well, including the SATA and PCIe-buses. If you overclock the bus too far, there's a risk of actually damaging these parts of the motherboard, or even the components attached to them as well (Harddrives and GPUs, in this case), not to mention general system instability. So, in order to overclock a Sandy or Ivy Bridge, you get a CPU labelled "K", for instance the 3570K. These CPUs have an unlocked multiplier that you alter to overclock. I for, for example, have my CPU running at 4,2ghz with a 100 mhz bus and 42x multiplier.
Interesting read: <a href="http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/01/03/intel-sandy-bridge-review/5" target="_blank">http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011...bridge-review/5</a>
<a href="http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oOmV" target="_blank">http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oOmV</a>
<a href="http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oOmV" target="_blank">http://pcpartpicker.com/p/oOmV</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's a H77, better get a Z77. More possibilities. Though H77 is also ok if you don't want to OC or some other stuff...
@OC: I don't have anything against OCing itself but you should consider WHO you recommend it to. If a user is inexperienced (and never even built an own PC) you don't recommend OC for the same reason you don't recommend tuning a car with turbos and other serious ###### to a 18 years old girl, who just made her licence.
And you should consider that people who don't OC (although they could) might do so because they have other priorities - like silence, low temperature and lifetime.
You are here in a thread where an inexperienced user asks for help, so please help him accordingly.
Short story: I lost 2 mainboards to a power-consuming CPU (both from MSI thoug, so maybe that was the problem). When OCing you indeed don't need to worry about your CPU much, but your Mainboard will be hurt.