TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
Xyth said:
Don't get a power supply >600watts; 520W at around ~60-70$ is good
I can't disagree strongly enough here. Personally, for any workhorse/'gamer' system, I won't go below a 750W PSU. It's one of the most fundamental parts of your system; without clean, reliable power, you'll run into ALL kinds of issues. Have a buddy who worked for EVGA tech support, and easily 90% of his calls were someone who bought a mid-top tier graphics card and was getting constant crashes/artifacting/problems, due to having skimped and bought a crappy 500W bargain-bin PSU. A larger PSU isn't going to draw its max rating all the time. It will throttle itself back if the system power requirements are lower. It won't be as efficient as a smaller unit, but the delta between the two will be minimal. For example, my Thermaltake unit idles at around 140-160W at the outlet (ps- invest in a kill-a-watt, they're useful!) and goes up to about 550 under full CPU/GPU/disk load. Normal gaming is closer to 350. But in that, I have a significant margin that ensures my PSU won't dip the voltage on the rails, causing erratic problems. Also, if I felt like going SLI down the line, I'd (arguably) have the headroom to do so, without re-buying a new PSU.
Xyth said:
Don't get a power supply >600watts; 520W at around ~60-70$ is good
I can't disagree strongly enough here. Personally, for any workhorse/'gamer' system, I won't go below a 750W PSU. It's one of the most fundamental parts of your system; without clean, reliable power, you'll run into ALL kinds of issues. Have a buddy who worked for EVGA tech support, and easily 90% of his calls were someone who bought a mid-top tier graphics card and was getting constant crashes/artifacting/problems, due to having skimped and bought a crappy 500W bargain-bin PSU. A larger PSU isn't going to draw its max rating all the time. It will throttle itself back if the system power requirements are lower. It won't be as efficient as a smaller unit, but the delta between the two will be minimal. For example, my Thermaltake unit idles at around 140-160W at the outlet (ps- invest in a kill-a-watt, they're useful!) and goes up to about 550 under full CPU/GPU/disk load. Normal gaming is closer to 350. But in that, I have a significant margin that ensures my PSU won't dip the voltage on the rails, causing erratic problems. Also, if I felt like going SLI down the line, I'd (arguably) have the headroom to do so, without re-buying a new PSU.
You don't need a 750W PSU unless your planning on going SLI/CF at some point. What you need is a high quality 500-600W PSU (you could get away with lower but I've not found a quality PSU below 500W). These do exist but you typically have to search for them (don't just grab the first Corsair PSU you can find).
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817703038 Are shell shockers sometimes really good? I don't know about this one too much but would you say sites like hardwaresecrets,guru3d, and tweaktown are reputable reviewers. I think I'll look up reviews on them and whatever google finds for me. XD I didn't really read their reviews for this one but if a couple of reviewers say something is good its gotta be, right?
edit: oops, I seemed to messed up the formatting but it seems mostly legible to me.
Xyth said:
Don't get a power supply >600watts; 520W at around ~60-70$ is good
I can't disagree strongly enough here.
Ill agree that skimping out on a PSU is a bad idea.
However, 70-80$ will get you an excellent quality 480-550W supply which will perfectly cover the consumption of the average gaming computer. I personally recommend Antec Earthwatts, excellent engineering quality all around. No need for 200W of headroom.
The 650W Earthwatts is on sale for $80 right now. Honestly though 650 is overkill and it might be worth trying to track down their 480W model for $60-70 when it comes on sale.
Would that run sli/cf and 16gb in the future? Pretty neat power supply. The style looks like something from the 80s or 90s. I can't help but notice a lot of PLUS bronze psu's, the higher levels really that worth it? Or would you get one with a larger budget and thats why I've been seeing a lot of bronze? Edit:Are power supplies that are "compatible" with the haswell intel really that important if I get the chip when it comes out? Is that just marketing jibber jabber? Edit of Edit: Might I be able to save a lot of money on the intel generation(I7 or whatever it is) before haswell was announced, if I buy the older gen after haswell releases?
Xyth said:
Don't get a power supply >600watts; 520W at around ~60-70$ is good
I can't disagree strongly enough here. Personally, for any workhorse/'gamer' system, I won't go below a 750W PSU. It's one of the most fundamental parts of your system; without clean, reliable power, you'll run into ALL kinds of issues. Have a buddy who worked for EVGA tech support, and easily 90% of his calls were someone who bought a mid-top tier graphics card and was getting constant crashes/artifacting/problems, due to having skimped and bought a crappy 500W bargain-bin PSU. A larger PSU isn't going to draw its max rating all the time. It will throttle itself back if the system power requirements are lower. It won't be as efficient as a smaller unit, but the delta between the two will be minimal. For example, my Thermaltake unit idles at around 140-160W at the outlet (ps- invest in a kill-a-watt, they're useful!) and goes up to about 550 under full CPU/GPU/disk load. Normal gaming is closer to 350. But in that, I have a significant margin that ensures my PSU won't dip the voltage on the rails, causing erratic problems. Also, if I felt like going SLI down the line, I'd (arguably) have the headroom to do so, without re-buying a new PSU.
I can't disagree even more strongly!
No need to go above 500W on a single graphics card. Definitely not above 600w.
Edit of Edit: Might I be able to save a lot of money on the intel generation(I7 or whatever it is) before haswell was announced, if I buy the older gen after haswell releases?
Yes, this is an excellent idea.
Ill go ahead and sum up all the advice I would give to someone building a computer:
-500W supply, no more than $80
-Previous generation GPU ($260-300 is fine)
-Previous generation CPU ($250-320 is a good range)
-SSD!! ($80 to 150)
-Avoid SLI/CF. When you need more power just sell your old card and pick up a single new one.
-Definitely get aftermarket CPU cooling. Hyper 212 for example.
-Consider aftermarket GPU cooling as well, this is more tricky though because the compatibility lists of most coolers are not complete or accurate or up to date.
-Possibly consider replacing the stock fans in your computer case with higher quality/quieter ones.
-I prefer Micro-ATX motherboards and cases, the smaller tower size is nice for desk space/discreteness, also sometimes cheaper.
-Previous generation CPU ($250-320 is a good range)
-SSD!! ($80 to 150)
-Definitely get aftermarket CPU cooling. Hyper 212 for example.
-Consider aftermarket GPU cooling as well, this is more tricky though because the compatibility lists of most coolers are not complete or accurate or up to date.
-Possibly consider replacing the stock fans in your computer case with higher quality/quieter ones.
I see that for the moment the samsung drives are getting a lot of coverage. Tempting but I kinda want to divvy out the $ among the other parts. But I might get one if they have an insane sale or somthing. GPU cooling is something that I have seen or heard of. From a couple people that I know that have built computers I only hear of the case fan or cpu fan upgrades. Wouldn't I not need that intensive of cooling for stock clocked parts?
Did you mean something like the nvidia 500 series for "older" gpu? I am going to aim for 600 or the radeon 7000 series for gpu. I'm 50% sure I am getting an ivy bridge cpu. I have read that smaller ssd s have shorter life spans.
I think you missed my questions because I accidently added them in the quote. Probably not too much extra cooling since I'll keep everything stock speed.
If you go for performance in any game, most of the times you should go for good CPU, great GPU.
BUT then there was NS2.
If you want NS2 on high fps, get this:
CPU
Get the best 4-core CPU you can afford. NS2 uses 4 cores max, so an i5 3750 (4 cores) @ 3,2 GHz (and clockable) will give you MUCH better performance than any i7 with 8 cores @ 2,2 GHz. No doubt about that.
GPU
It doesn't really matter that much, any mid- to high-end card will do.
RAM
Always get at least 8 GB or something. It is soooo cheap to double your RAM these days.
SSD
Yeah it does help your LOADING times if you have an SSD. It's really fast, so get one for your mostly used software if you want. But it hardly affects your in game performance!
Conclusion:
NS2 is all about CPU. The FPS is greatly depending on the speed of your first 4 cores.
I regret to inform the internet but I do not have plans to get a ssd right away. I have never had to much powerful of a computer(all pre built) up until now so I think a 7200 hd will do just fine. Who really needs an ssd unless you have ants in your pants. I cant really see anything other than maybe corporate computers or someone with extra pocket change.
Thanks for the info anyways!
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147160 Very tempting despite lack of other parts. I do have 2 ram sticks 8gb, and a seagate hard drive but I guess some mobos might not fit. (Still waiting for haswell to buy the mobo and basically everything else).
I regret to inform the internet but I do not have plans to get a ssd right away. I have never had to much powerful of a computer(all pre built) up until now so I think a 7200 hd will do just fine. Who really needs an ssd unless you have ants in your pants. I cant really see anything other than maybe corporate computers or someone with extra pocket change.
Thanks for the info anyways!
I'd reconsider, SSDs are an order of magnitude faster than HDDs, especially in reading.
A comparison of the two drives I have:
Left: Crucial M4 128GB CT128M4SSD2, Right: WD Caviar Green WD20EARX 2TB (5400RPM)
I regret to inform the internet but I do not have plans to get a ssd right away. I have never had to much powerful of a computer(all pre built) up until now so I think a 7200 hd will do just fine. Who really needs an ssd unless you have ants in your pants. I cant really see anything other than maybe corporate computers or someone with extra pocket change.
Thanks for the info anyways!
I'd reconsider, SSDs are an order of magnitude faster than HDDs, especially in reading.
A comparison of the two drives I have:
Left: Crucial M4 128GB CT128M4SSD2, Right: WD Caviar Green WD20EARX 2TB (5400RPM)
Regardless of how much faster they are, SSDs will always be a luxury rather than a necessity. It's something you can dump from a build and spend the money elsewhere, especially on a budget.
Regardless of how much faster they are, SSDs will always be a luxury rather than a necessity. It's something you can dump from a build and spend the money elsewhere, especially on a budget.
You could say that about a lot of PC component choices (16GB ram instead of 4GB? GTX 670 instead of GTX 660 ti?). The key is getting the most performance gain per dollar, which can involve any component in your system. Traditionally, SSD's have been poor performance/$ choices because they weren't much faster than HDDs, but were much more expensive. However, with the regular price drops/increases in size/better performance, they are getting to become better deals that may start to outperform a slightly better GPU or more RAM.
I'd argue that shaving off some cost in the other parts for an SSD is worth it for a budget of $1200: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/11Zie
ScardyBob seems that you missed the link for that 1k$ build unless you meant to do that.
And I don't think anyone noticed I'll probably use photoshop and some 3d program like Maya on the computer. But It seems that the only difference would be to get a workstation gpu, which will probably not be the case because I want to game as well as use said programs.
Update: I already have some parts that include: 8gb of corsair ram, 1tb seagate, Asus dvdrw, windows 7!, and a mid tower case. Still waiting on haswell to see what happens with prices to older cpu's and waiting on final budget for everything else.
Regardless of how much faster they are, SSDs will always be a luxury rather than a necessity. It's something you can dump from a build and spend the money elsewhere, especially on a budget.
You could say that about a lot of PC component choices (16GB ram instead of 4GB? GTX 670 instead of GTX 660 ti?). The key is getting the most performance gain per dollar, which can involve any component in your system. Traditionally, SSD's have been poor performance/$ choices because they weren't much faster than HDDs, but were much more expensive. However, with the regular price drops/increases in size/better performance, they are getting to become better deals that may start to outperform a slightly better GPU or more RAM.
I'd argue that shaving off some cost in the other parts for an SSD is worth it for a budget of $1200: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/11Zie
No you couldn't. Ram is a requirement (amount depending on what you want your machine to do), graphics cards are a requirement. Both improve the quality and the maximum FPS of a game (and potentially things like PhysX, folding@home etc), an SSD makes things load faster. The graphics card and memory are necessities to get anything to run so you can't compare them to an SSD, which is therefore a luxury replacement or top up for a traditional HDD.
No you couldn't. Ram is a requirement (amount depending on what you want your machine to do), graphics cards are a requirement. Both improve the quality and the maximum FPS of a game (and potentially things like PhysX, folding@home etc), an SSD makes things load faster. The graphics card and memory are necessities to get anything to run so you can't compare them to an SSD, which is therefore a luxury replacement or top up for a traditional HDD.
A storage device is a necessity, but it can either be a HDD or SSD. Its the same as a GPU being necessary, but it can be an integrated GPU just as much as a dedicated GPU. It just so happens that going from an integrated to dedicated GPU is a much better performance/$ deal than going from a HDD to SSD.
No you couldn't. Ram is a requirement (amount depending on what you want your machine to do), graphics cards are a requirement. Both improve the quality and the maximum FPS of a game (and potentially things like PhysX, folding@home etc), an SSD makes things load faster. The graphics card and memory are necessities to get anything to run so you can't compare them to an SSD, which is therefore a luxury replacement or top up for a traditional HDD.
A storage device is a necessity, but it can either be a HDD or SSD. Its the same as a GPU being necessary, but it can be an integrated GPU just as much as a dedicated GPU. It just so happens that going from an integrated to dedicated GPU is a much better performance/$ deal than going from a HDD to SSD.
A storage device is necessary, but an SSD isn't bought for simply storage, it's bought for it's speed potential, which makes it a rather niche item compared to a better GPU. It's a luxury. Period.
No you couldn't. Ram is a requirement (amount depending on what you want your machine to do), graphics cards are a requirement. Both improve the quality and the maximum FPS of a game (and potentially things like PhysX, folding@home etc), an SSD makes things load faster. The graphics card and memory are necessities to get anything to run so you can't compare them to an SSD, which is therefore a luxury replacement or top up for a traditional HDD.
A storage device is a necessity, but it can either be a HDD or SSD. Its the same as a GPU being necessary, but it can be an integrated GPU just as much as a dedicated GPU. It just so happens that going from an integrated to dedicated GPU is a much better performance/$ deal than going from a HDD to SSD.
A storage device is necessary, but an SSD isn't bought for simply storage, it's bought for it's speed potential, which makes it a rather niche item compared to a better GPU. It's a luxury. Period.
And a dedicated GPU isn't bought for its speed potential?
The biggest issue for SSD-only builds is 'size anxiety'. We've all become so accustomed to having 500GB+ amount of storage space that 60-256GB seems limiting. Once we start seeing reasonably prices 480GB+ SSD's, I suspect we'll start seeing people forgoing HDD's entirely.
No you couldn't. Ram is a requirement (amount depending on what you want your machine to do), graphics cards are a requirement. Both improve the quality and the maximum FPS of a game (and potentially things like PhysX, folding@home etc), an SSD makes things load faster. The graphics card and memory are necessities to get anything to run so you can't compare them to an SSD, which is therefore a luxury replacement or top up for a traditional HDD.
A storage device is a necessity, but it can either be a HDD or SSD. Its the same as a GPU being necessary, but it can be an integrated GPU just as much as a dedicated GPU. It just so happens that going from an integrated to dedicated GPU is a much better performance/$ deal than going from a HDD to SSD.
A storage device is necessary, but an SSD isn't bought for simply storage, it's bought for it's speed potential, which makes it a rather niche item compared to a better GPU. It's a luxury. Period.
And a dedicated GPU isn't bought for its speed potential?
The biggest issue for SSD-only builds is 'size anxiety'. We've all become so accustomed to having 500GB+ amount of storage space that 60-256GB seems limiting. Once we start seeing reasonably prices 480GB+ SSD's, I suspect we'll start seeing people forgoing HDD's entirely.
It's bought for maximum prettiness at playable FPS within your budget. SSDs are bought to load things a bit faster. One directly affects the immersion, impact and quality of the game you're playing, one means you're shooting bad guys a few seconds sooner than you would have been. They're apples and oranges. You need a dedicated GPU to run a game, you do not need an SSD. That by definition means it's optional and can be dropped from a gaming system if your budget is limited.
Would that PSU be too long? There are pads that the psu sits on in the case but measuring I found out that it might go over a inch or so. Unless anyone knows of another crazy deal like that for the psu. I know its modular but the price with rebate seems insane and that its probably over wattage.
Or maybe I could cook bacon on the psu. XD
Edit: I do not have the cpu yet but that price seems to be what I can get locally. Everything else is truly purchased.
Update Update: I might be able to get the 4770k after all!
Final Build
Asus Z87-A
I7 4770K
Two 2 corsair 1333 4gb
Evga 660 FTW
720 watt Coolmaster Silent Pro M2
1 tb seagate 7200
Rosewill Redbone U3
Microcenter almost makes no sense about 100 some dollar savings but I'll take it.
60fps on most max graphics settings, NS2 is so much easier with fps over 20.
Comments
I can't disagree strongly enough here. Personally, for any workhorse/'gamer' system, I won't go below a 750W PSU.
It's one of the most fundamental parts of your system; without clean, reliable power, you'll run into ALL kinds of issues. Have a buddy who worked for EVGA tech support, and easily 90% of his calls were someone who bought a mid-top tier graphics card and was getting constant crashes/artifacting/problems, due to having skimped and bought a crappy 500W bargain-bin PSU.
A larger PSU isn't going to draw its max rating all the time. It will throttle itself back if the system power requirements are lower. It won't be as efficient as a smaller unit, but the delta between the two will be minimal. For example, my Thermaltake unit idles at around 140-160W at the outlet (ps- invest in a kill-a-watt, they're useful!) and goes up to about 550 under full CPU/GPU/disk load. Normal gaming is closer to 350.
But in that, I have a significant margin that ensures my PSU won't dip the voltage on the rails, causing erratic problems. Also, if I felt like going SLI down the line, I'd (arguably) have the headroom to do so, without re-buying a new PSU.
Edit:Are power supplies that are "compatible" with the haswell intel really that important if I get the chip when it comes out? Is that just marketing jibber jabber?
Edit of Edit: Might I be able to save a lot of money on the intel generation(I7 or whatever it is) before haswell was announced, if I buy the older gen after haswell releases?
I can't disagree even more strongly!
No need to go above 500W on a single graphics card. Definitely not above 600w.
BUT then there was NS2.
If you want NS2 on high fps, get this:
CPU
Get the best 4-core CPU you can afford. NS2 uses 4 cores max, so an i5 3750 (4 cores) @ 3,2 GHz (and clockable) will give you MUCH better performance than any i7 with 8 cores @ 2,2 GHz. No doubt about that.
GPU
It doesn't really matter that much, any mid- to high-end card will do.
RAM
Always get at least 8 GB or something. It is soooo cheap to double your RAM these days.
SSD
Yeah it does help your LOADING times if you have an SSD. It's really fast, so get one for your mostly used software if you want. But it hardly affects your in game performance!
Conclusion:
NS2 is all about CPU. The FPS is greatly depending on the speed of your first 4 cores.
Thanks for the info anyways!
I'd reconsider, SSDs are an order of magnitude faster than HDDs, especially in reading.
A comparison of the two drives I have:
Left: Crucial M4 128GB CT128M4SSD2, Right: WD Caviar Green WD20EARX 2TB (5400RPM)
Benchmark of the Seagate st2000dm001, one of the faster 7200RPM HDDs:
Source: http://www.tomshw.it/forum/hard-disk-ssd-e-raid/288934-seagate-st2000dm001-01-2013-prestazioni-non-ottimali.html#post2909348
I'd argue that shaving off some cost in the other parts for an SSD is worth it for a budget of $1200: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/11Zie
Its only if I had to keep it under $1000 that I'd drop the SSD and go down to the 3570k: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1206Z
Edit: Sorry, link fixed.
And I don't think anyone noticed I'll probably use photoshop and some 3d program like Maya on the computer. But It seems that the only difference would be to get a workstation gpu, which will probably not be the case because I want to game as well as use said programs.
Update: I already have some parts that include: 8gb of corsair ram, 1tb seagate, Asus dvdrw, windows 7!, and a mid tower case. Still waiting on haswell to see what happens with prices to older cpu's and waiting on final budget for everything else.
The biggest issue for SSD-only builds is 'size anxiety'. We've all become so accustomed to having 500GB+ amount of storage space that 60-256GB seems limiting. Once we start seeing reasonably prices 480GB+ SSD's, I suspect we'll start seeing people forgoing HDD's entirely.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130910
Would that PSU be too long? There are pads that the psu sits on in the case but measuring I found out that it might go over a inch or so. Unless anyone knows of another crazy deal like that for the psu. I know its modular but the price with rebate seems insane and that its probably over wattage.
Or maybe I could cook bacon on the psu. XD
Edit: I do not have the cpu yet but that price seems to be what I can get locally. Everything else is truly purchased.
Update Update: I might be able to get the 4770k after all!
Asus Z87-A
I7 4770K
Two 2 corsair 1333 4gb
Evga 660 FTW
720 watt Coolmaster Silent Pro M2
1 tb seagate 7200
Rosewill Redbone U3
Microcenter almost makes no sense about 100 some dollar savings but I'll take it.
60fps on most max graphics settings, NS2 is so much easier with fps over 20.
Thanks for all the info internet folk!