BWAHAHAHAHAHA I converted him to the dark side.
|
|
11-30-2011
BWAHAHAHAHAHA I converted him to the dark side.
11-30-2011
BLAH! AMD would be a cheaper build / bang for buck build. I'm more of a Intel / Nvidia guy myself but the ATI/AMD video cards let you run more than 2 monitors on one card unlike the Nvidia's.
11-30-2011
AMD is no doubt decently price for decent performance. Like Ryan said, cheaper build, best bang for you buck.
11-30-2011
Really though if you build a high-endish computer. i7-2600k or AMD 8-core, you are good for 5-6 years, with an upgrade of the graphics card after 3 years. My current desktop is 2 years and I'm gonna upgrade the 4870 and go SSD and thats about it. I have a phenom ii x4 black and 790gx chipset. Its still a good setup, hell we've only just started coming out with software to utilize the 4 cores.
Just my opinion
11-30-2011
Hell I still have an Intel E8400 OC'd and runs great on my desktop. I bought the whole board and processor off a friend like 2 years ago. But I'm gonna be getting a 2nd gen i7 sometime though. My laptop has more HP than my desktop does.
11-30-2011
For my puter' I just have a squirrel in cage, he runs around in circles and provides the power to run my apple 2 ckt board with of course coool green neon type monitor.
11-30-2011
:| <<<< Evil death stare.
Dislike button.
11-30-2011
despite the fact that for games, the FX does not impress.
It merely caught up with the 2600K/2500K.
Oh AMD, giving us things we dont need to increase your price and thus your profit. ( 8 cores)
11-30-2011
In terms of synthetics, Zambezi won't give you anything. Real world performance you won't notice that it's not the cream of the crop.
Personally, I'd stay away from it. Matt had it right, 2500k Intel and overclock it to 4.5ghz
Memory timing doesn't matter much because so much latency is introduced with DDR3 that unless you can get a CAS 7 or lower it won't really benefit much unless you run the same benchmark 10 times in a row. At that point, who cares?
11-30-2011
I thought it was cheaper than the 2600K?Originally Posted by matt5112
It really isn't designed for linear logic. That's where they jacked upGreat platform though. Kind of like a commodore 64 from back in the day(built before it's time) D:
11-30-2011
Its going for $100 less than the 2600k at some vendors recently.In terms of synthetics, Zambezi won't give you anything. Real world performance you won't notice that it's not the cream of the crop.
Personally, I'd stay away from it. Matt had it right, 2500k Intel and overclock it to 4.5ghz
Memory timing doesn't matter much because so much latency is introduced with DDR3 that unless you can get a CAS 7 or lower it won't really benefit much unless you run the same benchmark 10 times in a row. At that point, who cares?
There have been people crankin' up the speed and hittin' 5ghz with air cooling.
This war will rage on. I can play crysis at full specs with my current rig at 2 years old and I can play 90% high specs on Crysis 2 just fine. Its all a brainwash to make us want something.
Like I said software has not been utilized for more then 4 cores as of lately
11-30-2011
I actually want to buy the new FX. I know what it is and what it can't do but it kind of has a cool factor about it. I've always owned Intel and purchased AMD for select family. Maybe it's time for me to own one? I can't justify it though. My daily driver is at 4.4ghz on air and ambient noise is absolutely silent.
I have a MSI w/ P55 chipset and an i5
11-30-2011
I buy AMD for my desktop rigs
and Intel for laptops, only because Intels get the specs of 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 on 15" screens.
11-30-2011
If I needed to build a new PC now, I would get 2500K, 8GB cheap G.Skill, MSI P67 board and MSI GTX560 Ti.
As for SSD, buy one, now. I bought an OCZ Vertex 2 120GB last year for $220. Best money I ever spent PC related. It holds the OS and my commonly used apps. Games and media are installed/stored on a 1TB WD Black HD. I used to have the games on the SSD, but they used up space quickly and there was little gain in load times compared to the regular HD.
For a power supply, I recommend Cooler Master Silent Pro.
Also, even though I'm not into overclocking, I went with a Zalman CNPS9900NT. It keeps the temps low on my quad core.
11-30-2011
Love my rig
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIECG...e_gdata_player
60fps locked full time. My gpu peaks at 80% usage and gpu memory usage around 65%
CPU never stressed.
Ram is never fully used hence why I choose only 4 to start with
Play games like Rage, Fallout new Vegas, skyrim,Etc...
Don't forget to get a nice keyboard and mouse. I like Razor brand
Last edited by CrazyGuy03; 11-30-2011 at 01:25 PM.
11-30-2011
It seems that an SSD is recommended by most of us (me included), but what size do we recommend him to get and what price range per GB?
11-30-2011
If it were my system I'd shoot for the 128GB ballpark. It's plenty for the OS alone and would even store some games/programs if you wanted to. Heck even on my WD Black 1TB (my main C: drive) that I have now I'm only using 168GB. I store more stuff on my other drive but I'd say that 128GB would be plenty big for a SSD as long as you didn't put absolutely everything on it. Besides, get too much bigger than 128GB and you start talking some serious $$.
11-30-2011
It's usually $1 per gig on SSD, or at least the deals that i've been seeing lately. 120g is plenty, he could probably go lower to save some money. Honestly how much of it do you guys with operating systems on it actually use?
AMD is "not competing with intel anymore" according to as of late, wonder what this will do to prices as well, may be time to buy a processor.
12-01-2011
I could get by just fine with a 60 GB SSD as long as I had a secondary storage drive. I'm currently using about 45 GB of my SSD with no real expectation of expansion. I already have all the software I need installed. If I started adding games to it now though, it would fill up quick, especially with the average game coming out these days being 10-15GB each.
12-01-2011
maxing out a 580 is easy though.
I have a 60 GB vertex 3.
55.7 GB available to windows. 35.8 GB in use, 19.9 free with windows 7 ultimate with a few features trimmed, hibernate disabled, 8 gb page file and BF3.
BF3 being 11.4 GB.
Could install skyrim on it but its not worth it. Loading screens are so brief I can't finish reading some of them.
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
| Tags for this Thread |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
