Please help review my build

M

monday2222

n00b
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
4
My laptop died and I have decided to build a desktop:


Questions:
1) What will you be doing with this PC? Gaming? Photoshop? Web browsing? etc

I will use it mostly for gaming. Right now, I play WoW and I plan to play diablo 3 when it comes out. We will also be using it for web browsing and watching movies.
.
2) What's your budget? Are tax and shipping included?

Ideally, under $1000, but a little over it is ok.

3) Which country do you live in? If the U.S, please tell us the state and city if possible.

Raleigh, NC

4) What exact parts do you need for that budget? CPU, RAM, case, etc. The word "Everything" is not a valid answer. Please list out all the parts you'll need.

CPU: the i5 2500 $209
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115073
RAM: No idea yet which to get
Mobo: z68 from gigabyte $115
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128495
Video card: gigabyte 6950 $240
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125372

PSU: seasonic 650w $100
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151088
Lian li k59w case $90
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811112322

I also need a harddrive, and a 24 monitor. I hope to get the dynax one which will be on sale on black friday for $ 80.

5) If reusing any parts, what parts will you be reusing? Please be especially specific about the power supply. List make and model.
no reusable parts

6) Will you be overclocking?
No

7) 7) What is the max resolution of your monitor? What size is it?
not sure, but going to be using a 24- monitor

8) When do you plan on building/buying the PC?
Right now

9) What features do you need in a motherboard? RAID? Firewire? Crossfire or SLI support? USB 3.0? SATA 6Gb/s? eSATA? Onboard video? etc.
I need:
z68 model
usb 3.0
dr3 1333 or better
be able to handle 6950 card



10) Do you already have a legit and reusable/transferable OS key/license? If so, what OS? Is it 32bit or 64bit?
yes, 64 windows 7
 
hard drives have gone up in price recently, so i don't know whats a good deal as of right now, but for ram i've read that intel doesn't play too nicely with 1.65v, and that while they have stated it will work, i've read many posts saying that they've had issues with 1.65v ram.

some cheap 4gb sticks of 1333 or 1600 at 1.5v would be fine for you
 
I would go with this slightly shorter HD 6950 1GB for $2 more instead:
$250 - XFX HD-695X-ZNDC Radeon HD 6950 1GB PCI-E Video Card

RAM wise, I recommend this:
$45 - G.Skill Sniper F3-12800CL9D-8GBSR 2 x 4GB DDR3 1600 RAM

Hard drive wise, I recommend this:
$156 - Hitachi Desktar 7K1000.D HDS721010DLE630 1TB SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Drive
 
Also, the plain non-K i5-2500 is priced in no-man's land: At $210, it is only $5 less than the highly overclockable i5-2500K but a whopping $20 more than an i5-2400 that's clocked only 200MHz lower.
 
Thanks guys for all your inputs. I might go with the i5 2500k, but I have never OCed before. As for the harddrive, i was hoping to get something around 500gb for around 100. I will have to do some more research. The reason I was planning on getting the gigabyte video card was because the motherboard is also from gigabyte so I won't have a lot of issues with incompatibilities.
 
monday2222 said:
Thanks guys for all your inputs. I might go with the i5 2500k, but I have never OCed before. As for the harddrive, i was hoping to get something around 500gb for around 100. I will have to do some more research. The reason I was planning on getting the gigabyte video card was because the motherboard is also from gigabyte so I won't have a lot of issues with incompatibilities.
Click to expand...

You won't have any compatibility issues with any video card manufacturer - they are all made to the same specs (and in many cases are just rebadged versions of the same card).

Edit: And overclocking the 2500K is dead simple, so for $5 the 2500K is the right choice (plus it will have better resale value).
 
monday2222 said:
As for the harddrive, i was hoping to get something around 500gb for around 100. I will have to do some more research.
Click to expand...
Do note that the 1TB drive I recommended is actually faster than many 500GB drives. Considering that the hard drive is usually the slowest part in a PC, you really should be looking at the above Hitachi.
monday2222 said:
The reason I was planning on getting the gigabyte video card was because the motherboard is also from gigabyte so I won't have a lot of issues with incompatibilities.
Click to expand...
Yeah you're worrying about nothing.
 
Danny Bui said:
Do note that the 1TB drive I recommended is actually faster than many 500GB drives. Considering that the hard drive is usually the slowest part in a PC, you really should be looking at the above Hitachi.
Click to expand...
Hey Danny! Been a while, but I'm getting the bug again, lately, so I've started to frequent these forums more and more. Just posting here because this is the first time I recall seeing you recommend a Hitachi drive over a Seagate/WD/Samsung. I know the hard drive landscape is kind of nuts right now (I actually found myself perusing the 120GB SSD's), but has Hitachi always been good quality/speed, or are they surfacing of late?
 
Last edited:
TheQuestian said:
Hey Danny! Been a while, but I'm getting the bug again, lately, so I've started to frequent these forums more and more. Just posting here because this is the first time I recall seeing you recommend a Hitachi drive over a Seagate/WD/Samsung. I know the hard drive landscape is kind of nuts right now (I actually found myself perusing the 120GB SSD's), but has Hitachi always been good quality/speed, or are they surfacing of late?
Click to expand...
Hitachi drives have been of good quality but only recently, AFAIK, have they hit the good price to performance ratio.
 
TheQuestian said:
Hey Danny! Been a while, but I'm getting the bug again, lately, so I've started to frequent these forums more and more. Just posting here because this is the first time I recall seeing you recommend a Hitachi drive over a Seagate/WD/Samsung. I know the hard drive landscape is kind of nuts right now (I actually found myself perusing the 120GB SSD's), but has Hitachi always been good quality/speed, or are they surfacing of late?
Click to expand...

The HDD that Danny is recommending is a relatively new model; it is a SATA 6Gb/s drive (whereas the oft-lauded Samsung HD103SJ is an over-two-year-old SATA 3Gb/s drive). What's notable about the Hitachi is that it's one of the first single-platter 1TB drives available. (Remember a couple of years ago, when we were lauding the then-recently-released single-platter drives like the Western Digital WD5000AAKS?)
 
tiraides said:
The HDD that Danny is recommending is a relatively new model; it is a SATA 6Gb/s drive (whereas the oft-lauded Samsung HD103SJ is an over-two-year-old SATA 3Gb/s drive). What's notable about the Hitachi is that it's one of the first single-platter 1TB drives available. (Remember a couple of years ago, when we were lauding the then-recently-released single-platter drives like the Western Digital WD5000AAKS?)
Click to expand...
Ah, very cool. Yes, I do remember that, and I guess I can't believe so much time has passed! I'll read up a bit, but that's great to know about these new Hitachi drives.
 
I am confused, why go with a 6950 1GB when you could get a 6950 2GB for not much more?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102929

For mechanical HDDs, I wouldn't bother with 6GB/s drives. The mechanical HDDs barely make use of the 3GB/s much less 6GB/s. Personally I would go with more drives at lower SATA speeds and put them in RAID then one bigger drive at a higher SATA speeds.

If you are going to use a 64bit system I would go with more RAM as well. 6-8GB is what I suggest. You can certainly get along fine with 4GB, but I prefer 64bit and 8GB. RAM is fairly cheap, not too much reason to skimp there.

Also definitely get the 2500k over the 2500. Makes no sense to me to get the non-k 2500.
 
As most stated, the 2500k is a definite improvement over the 2500, and overclocking is retarded easy, all you need to do is drag a slider to change multipliers and hit test to find a stable point. Intel has essentially trolled the entire overclocking scene, taking something that used to take hours of time and detailed knowledge to sth a monkey can be trained to do.

As for graphics card, if you know what your doing, you can unlock a 6950 to a 6970, since the two use the exact same hardware, just the 6970 clocks higher.

Ram is also retarded cheap now. Get 8GB (2x4GB) Corsair Vengeance for 40-50 bucks, or Gskill. Also, if you use newegg, keep an eye on the shell shocker/daily deals. They have sales on "gaming" ram every other day.

Hard drive, if you aren't over concerned with boot times, honestly any 7200RPM drive will do. You can shell out for a 6GB/s if you want for a slight increase in performance, but that's not as important.

AS for a monitor, I'd recommend either ASUS or Samsung. They do cost more, but have much better image quality.


HOWEVER, for your stated purposes for this new computer, ANY of the above would be serious overkill IMHO. You definitely don't need an i5 and a 6950 to play WoW/ Diablo III. In fact, if you get the i5, the built in HD 3000 will run both of these games on high just fine, and you can save 250 on a discrete card, to buy one down the road once you decide to play more demanding games. I know most people avoid integrated graphics like the devil, but the new Intel 3000 that comes with i5/i7 really are amazing, surpassing previous integrated ones by over 200% and matching entry level discrete cards in performance.

If you insist on getting the 6950 for future gaming needs or just because you prefer discrete, then you don't really need the i5 OR the Z68 MoBo. The entire point of a Z68 over a P67 MoBo is that it allows you to use the on board graphics on an i5/i7 chip, which is pointless if you have a discrete. Also, for games such as WoW/Diablo and web surfing, a Phenom IIx4 would be plenty, and that's $100 cheaper. I doubt you NEED to overclock either, so a lower end i5 would also be sufficient.

Of course, it all hinges on your desires. I know I'm going to be spending 2k on a rig even though 90% of the time I won't need its specs =P
 
Tsuyoi said:
As most stated, the 2500k is a definite improvement over the 2500, and overclocking is retarded easy, all you need to do is drag a slider to change multipliers and hit test to find a stable point. Intel has essentially trolled the entire overclocking scene, taking something that used to take hours of time and detailed knowledge to sth a monkey can be trained to do.

As for graphics card, if you know what your doing, you can unlock a 6950 to a 6970, since the two use the exact same hardware, just the 6970 clocks higher.

Ram is also retarded cheap now. Get 8GB (2x4GB) Corsair Vengeance for 40-50 bucks, or Gskill. Also, if you use newegg, keep an eye on the shell shocker/daily deals. They have sales on "gaming" ram every other day.

Hard drive, if you aren't over concerned with boot times, honestly any 7200RPM drive will do. You can shell out for a 6GB/s if you want for a slight increase in performance, but that's not as important.

AS for a monitor, I'd recommend either ASUS or Samsung. They do cost more, but have much better image quality.


HOWEVER, for your stated purposes for this new computer, ANY of the above would be serious overkill IMHO. You definitely don't need an i5 and a 6950 to play WoW/ Diablo III. In fact, if you get the i5, the built in HD 3000 will run both of these games on high just fine, and you can save 250 on a discrete card, to buy one down the road once you decide to play more demanding games. I know most people avoid integrated graphics like the devil, but the new Intel 3000 that comes with i5/i7 really are amazing, surpassing previous integrated ones by over 200% and matching entry level discrete cards in performance.

If you insist on getting the 6950 for future gaming needs or just because you prefer discrete, then you don't really need the i5 OR the Z68 MoBo. The entire point of a Z68 over a P67 MoBo is that it allows you to use the on board graphics on an i5/i7 chip, which is pointless if you have a discrete. Also, for games such as WoW/Diablo and web surfing, a Phenom IIx4 would be plenty, and that's $100 cheaper. I doubt you NEED to overclock either, so a lower end i5 would also be sufficient.

Of course, it all hinges on your desires. I know I'm going to be spending 2k on a rig even though 90% of the time I won't need its specs =P
Click to expand...

Okay first off, using onboard video is NEVER a substitute for discrete graphics for any kind of gaming, especially with games like Diablo 3. The onboard graphics don't come anywhere close to the same capability of discrete graphics. If they did then Intel's discrete card would be out and dominating the market, instead where is it? Does anyone even remember what they were going to call it? Larra-Who?

Also the 6GB/s is a waste, waste, waste. You don't really get much performance increase at all. Mechanical HDDs can't even saturate SATA II, why would you spend more to still not saturate SATA II speeds? The only reason to go SATA 6 GB/s is if you get one of the new SSDs. Otherwise stick with mature mechanical 3GB/s HDDs with NCQ.

Your points on Z68 are just completely off as well. There are a number of differences in Z68 over P67 that someone might want. Z68 doesn't 'just' allow onboard graphics.
 
Buy something cheap or used on craigslist for a case, fancy cases don't make pcs faster.
 
NoOther said:
I am confused, why go with a 6950 1GB when you could get a 6950 2GB for not much more?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102929
Click to expand...
Well because that's a Sapphire card? Only a two year warranty and relatively crappy customer support. Not worth buying IMO. With that said, if the OP doesn't mind spending the extra $25 for a solid HD 6950 2GB, then by all means he should get it:
$275 - XFX HD-695X-CDFC Radeon HD 6950 2GB PCI-E Video Card

NoOther said:
Also the 6GB/s is a waste, waste, waste. You don't really get much performance increase at all. Mechanical HDDs can't even saturate SATA II, why would you spend more to still not saturate SATA II speeds? The only reason to go SATA 6 GB/s is if you get one of the new SSDs. Otherwise stick with mature mechanical 3GB/s HDDs with NCQ.
Click to expand...
Due to rising hard drive costs, those SATA 3.0Gb/s drives now cost just as much as SATA 6.0Gb/s hard drives in many cases. You are correct in that SATA 6.0Gb/s interface means nothing for hard drives. However, right now one of the fastest consumer grade hard drives out now happens to have SATA 6.0Gb/s interface for marketing purposes:
$156 - Hitachi Desktar 7K1000.D HDS721010DLE630 1TB SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Drive

Yes the above Hitachi would still outperform many current SATA 3.0Gb/s and SATA 6.0Gb/s hard drives even if that Hitachi was using the SATA 3.0Gb/s interface.
 
Danny Bui said:
Well because that's a Sapphire card? Only a two year warranty and relatively crappy customer support. Not worth buying IMO. With that said, if the OP doesn't mind spending the extra $25 for a solid HD 6950 2GB, then by all means he should get it:
$275 - XFX HD-695X-CDFC Radeon HD 6950 2GB PCI-E Video Card
Click to expand...

I have had no problems with Sapphire myself, but he could also get XFX or MSI or anything. I just don't see the sense in getting 1GB when you can get a 2GB for not much more.

Danny Bui said:
Due to rising hard drive costs, those SATA 3.0Gb/s drives now cost just as much as SATA 6.0Gb/s hard drives in many cases. You are correct in that SATA 6.0Gb/s interface means nothing for hard drives. However, right now one of the fastest consumer grade hard drives out now happens to have SATA 6.0Gb/s interface for marketing purposes:
$156 - Hitachi Desktar 7K1000.D HDS721010DLE630 1TB SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Drive

Yes the above Hitachi would still outperform many current SATA 3.0Gb/s and SATA 6.0Gb/s hard drives even if that Hitachi was using the SATA 3.0Gb/s interface.
Click to expand...


I had no problem with the drive itself, my only concern is with people assuming 6GB/s is going to be faster and then spending a premium for it. Also I would still usually recommend 2 640GB SATA 1 in RAID over 1 1TB SATA 3GB/s. For mechanical drives the more drives for the least amount of money in a striped RAID will always outperform a single larger drive of a higher SATA spec. That is all I am trying to get at here, don't waste the money on ultra big drives of high SATA spec when you can easily get cheaper drives and RAID them for better performance.

And for the best HDDs, I usually check up on storagereview: http://www.storagereview.com/best_drives
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top