Thoughts on my PC build.

Wagzy on 06/07/2013 - 09:28

So this is my first time building a pc, I currently have an asus G74sx laptop and I'm wanting to upgrade to a higher end pc.

These are the parts I have chosen so far, though I don't plan to build it until the start of next year.

https://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=wish_lists&wl…

Main Components

GPU: EVGA GTX 770 Superclocked ACX 2GB - $529
CPU: intel core i7 4770k - $385
Motherboard: Asrock Z87 Extreme4 - $199
PSU: Cooler master silent pro M2 720W - $135
RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x8GB - $169
Case: Coolermaster cm storm Stryker - $185

Total for everything is $2,317

I'd like to have the option to OC, don't know much about it at this stage. I'm looking to SLI 2x GTX 770's down the track when I need more performance. I'd like the price to be a bit closer to $2,000 but I don't want to loose to much performance.
I also do a bit of 3d editing and rendering, film making.

So what are your thoughts on my build so far?

Computing

Comments

  • _Bruce_ on 06/07/2013 - 11:14
    +20

    I don't plan to build it until the start of next year.

    Then there is no point picking parts. By then every thing will be different.

    Also:

    1: i7 is (almost) a complete waste of money.

    2: If you aren't overclocking just for fun then don't bother.

    3: Even one of these video cards is more than you are likely to need for one screen (current day, next year will be totally different anyway). How many screens are you planning to run off this anyway?

      • Aids on 06/07/2013 - 15:17
        +11

        Its true, unless you're doing heaps of 3d rendering then i5 is more than enough for everything else.
        An SSD would make a much more noticeable difference.

        • Aids on 06/07/2013 - 17:51
          +9

          Why don't you list them all, and miss the point while you're at it.

        • Finde on 08/07/2013 - 00:00
          +4

          That is true. It is also good for video editing, calculating mathematical equations and a few other bits and pieces.
          The point is, for the majority of people it is just a massive waste of money and it would be better spent in other areas of the computer.

      • Gina Rinehart on 07/07/2013 - 12:58
        +2

        As someone with an i7, it is a complete waste of money. Only once in the 2 years I've owned hit have I hit anywhere near 50% cpu usage, even in intense gaming and stuff like that.

        Unless you're going to be rendering images or videos very often, or working in CAD or some other intensive programs, an i7 is not worth the extra over an i5, particularly for gaming.

        • Skinnerr on 11/07/2013 - 12:54
          +2

          Just cos you dont have a use for it, doesnt mean its a waste of money. Its like saying merc or an automatic CNC lathe is a waste of money. Just an observation.

    • Riczter on 06/07/2013 - 14:57
      +4

      If the OP is willing to pay 2k for a system, isn't an i7 perfectly reasonable for the extra performance it will give him? If his budget was under 1500 then i would suggest an i5..

      Also OP, i dont see any SSDs in that list…

      • Wagzy on 06/07/2013 - 16:01

        If you go into the link provided I have a Samsung SSD 128gb and a 2TB hard drive. Going to use the SSD for boot up and such.

        Also I'm still unsure between i5 and i7, there's been a lot about which to get so I'm still undecided.

      • _Bruce_ on 07/07/2013 - 07:58
        +3

        If the OP is willing to pay 2k for a system, isn't an i7 perfectly reasonable for the extra performance it will give him? If his budget was under 1500 then i would suggest an i5..

        Think of it like putting a huge spoiler on your car. If it makes you happy, whatever, but don't think it is going to help you corner.

        • Agarwal on 08/07/2013 - 15:33

          So what happens when programs requiring more power are made? Wouldn't it make sense to buy the most powerful you can afford now, so you don't have to upgrade again soon?

        • _Bruce_ on 08/07/2013 - 15:45
          +1

          Hyperthreading does NOT equal more power. It is a trick for efficiency in certain circumstances (ie: keeping the CPU core active while refilling the instruction queue).

          By the time you 'need' more power, you could just by a newer CPU that is better for far less. There isn't much indication that CPUs are going to be much of a bottleneck in the near future though.

        • BeefBiryani on 08/07/2013 - 22:52
          -1

          Then there would be more powerful hardware. Today's top hardware would not make much difference compared to mediocre hardware then. I remember buying a dual cpu (not core) xeon based computer @450MHz each. Back in the time it meant a lot of power but all it did was cost me electricity bill. Now it sits in a pile of junk. I never really could use it as a LAMP server I intended it to be and ended up using my P II for that purpose.

        • ProjectZero on 09/07/2013 - 08:43
          +1

          I believe the OP did say he will be doing editing which can use the hyper threading… if he can afford to buy an i7, why not… performance wise an i5 (quad threads) clocked at 4.5Ghz will be below an i7 (Octo threads) clocked at 4.5Ghz for programs that allow for HT.

          whilst i know HT does not equate power in most normal circumstances, the OP will be using it when he does excel work and video editing etc.

      • Skinnerr on 11/07/2013 - 13:04
        +1

        He says he does a bot of 3D rendering so yes and no, If he wants to pay that extra for the performance then thats his choice. If it was purely for gaming then obviously its not needed. Also OP keep in mind that even buying the creme de la creme of pc parts, its still gonna be a 2k + footstool in 4-5 years time, so I'd say aim for better than average rather than top of the line. Ditch the $40 fan, there was an $8 arctic cooling fan that I got that works sweet. Trim what you can and if you have $$$ to burn put them into things you can use in your next build 5 years down the track.These being mainly cases, peripherals (Id look at getting a decent monitor like 27") and PSU's, even look at getting a bigger SSD rather than flashy crap (that mobo is excessive and the case is overkill imo, but cases are subjective ((but there are cheaper and better ones)). Also research into if you even need to SLI or not as cards now are extremely powerful.

        Lastly Id seriously reccomend going to whirlpool rather than a bargain site, as those guys really keep their ears to the ground in terms of pricing parts and best bang for your buck. Good luck.

    • Wagzy on 06/07/2013 - 16:04

      1: I've heard a lot between i5 and i7, the reason I went i7 is for performance wise. But if its not needed I'd gladly save a bit of money and get an i5

      2: well in that case guess ill stick to not over clocking.

      3: at first only one monitor, later ill be buying a second monitor.

      • _Bruce_ on 07/07/2013 - 08:00
        +1

        3: at first only one monitor, later ill be buying a second monitor.

        Even in this case you generally aren't gaming on two monitors as the split is in the middle, so it tends to be 3 or nothing. If you do want to game in high detail on three monitors you need some serious performance, otherwise don't even think about SLI.

    • netsurfer on 08/07/2013 - 12:04

      If you don't plan to build it until next year, it is best to choose your parts next year.

      1. You probably want a good SSD. My i7 with an older SSD takes longer to boot than my i5 with a newer SSD (so recently I swapped them around).
      2. The current intel 87 series chipset has the USB3 sleep/wake up issue. I would wait for the next revision.

      As you do a bit of 3D rendering and film (High Def) rendering, choosing an i7 is justified.

      Good setup overall (no cutting corners for an i7 build - the correct way).

      • Flyingmoo on 09/07/2013 - 10:04
        +1

        The USB3 sleep/wake issues only are effecting a tiny amount of users. Unless you are using a USB3 Harddrive as you boot drive (lol) no home user will run into issues.

        • netsurfer on 09/07/2013 - 14:50

          According to PC Authority Web site, the USB drive does not wake back up with the system, and you need to reconnect the drive in order to continue working with it.

          It might be okay for front USB3 ports, but back USB 3.0 ports, it may not be that pleasant.

          Anyway, good to know most people don't care about it. For me, personally, if I am paying $199 for a motherboard, I prefer it not to have that issue (I use sleep/wake up feature a lot on all my desktop PCs, but then again, I know a lot of people don't).

  • TheBean on 06/07/2013 - 13:03

    If you're waiting till next year then yeah it's no point. There will be other cards out and probably cheaper than that GTX770 you're looking at. If you do 3D editing and rendering, shouldn't you be getting something with more VRAM anyway? Maybe get an 8000 series AMD card by then.

  • Aragami on 06/07/2013 - 16:18
    +4

    Sorry to say, but scrap the whole plan. The bit where you said you wont be starting this project till next year means prices will change a bunch, and also you have ddr4 to consider. Ivy bridge-e coming out as well as haswell-e. Not to mention possibility of the new 9XXX ATI GPU's rumoured for end of 2013 release. There is way too much happening for the consumer computer market to plan a build now when it wont be due till 5/6 months time. All I can really say is "wait" and when you're putting together your build, do your research then.

    The biggest difference is ddr4 and which architecture it'll be compatible with when its released - depends massively on which socket they'll be releasing it with.

    • Wagzy on 06/07/2013 - 16:46

      I guess your right. Just hope most of the new stuff comes out at the start of the year rather than a few months in. My Gtx 560m is getting a bit out of date but and can't max most games with decent frame rates, let alone trying on high/medium settings and rendering takes forever. I'd rather stick with Nvidia for my gpu, I'm more familiar with the brand, and I'd say by 2014 they'll at least release another round of GPU's.

      Id say I'd need to wait till the new stuff is release before picking a case right? Or would the ones now still be alright?

      • ozhunter on 06/07/2013 - 17:18

        Id say I'd need to wait till the new stuff is release before picking a case right? Or would the ones now still be alright?

        The ones out now are fine, but just wait until you get the rest of the computer. There will be newer designs and the price drops later on in the year.

        • Wagzy on 06/07/2013 - 18:42

          Alright :) thanks for the tip

      • Yuri Lowell on 06/07/2013 - 17:32
        +1

        In terms of the video card; the 9xxx may be faster but you have to remember that the 770 is basically a rebadged 680 which is a top tier graphics card so I wouldn't expect anything but the top tier 9xxx to beat it. Also you need to factor in that it can take a few months for prices to stabilize when a new video card series launches so if they come out at the end of year I wouldn't expect them to be affordable until a few months later.

        The 770/780 will certainly still be popular cards for a while but it may be a bit cheaper by the end of the year as AMD doesn't exactly offer anything in that performance range right now.

        As for the CPU; I would go for an i5 if you primarily game as the i7 doesn't offer much benefit especially if you plan to overclock the i5.

        Also go for the non-pro series of Samsung SSD, that's a saving of $50 right there. Everything else looks good.

        • Aragami on 06/07/2013 - 18:20
          +4

          The main thing I disagree about in your post is "go for the non-pro series of Samsung SSD". There is a very good reason the "pro" version costs more. Take the time to google the specs of an 840 pro and a standard 840, you'll notice the pro has almost double the sequential writes of a standard 840. The main difference however is that the 840 pro uses MLC memory which pretty much means it lasts a lot longer than the 840 standard which uses TLC NAND. The offset of this being that the sequential writes are faster on the pro.

          Worth 50$? I definitely think so, up to you though, just food for thought.

          The 2nd most important thing i'll disagree with in your post is that you think nothing from ATI compares to a 680/770. Check out the benchmark results that compare 7970's to 680's and come back to me on that one, you might be surprised. Let me be clear about this: ATI and Nvidia still compete neck and neck when it comes to GPU's. The main differences between the two? Nvidia generally run cooler as they don't draw as much electricity as ATI GPU's. Nvidia do however charge a premium price compared ATI, so whilst Nvidia run cooler, they don't differ in performance much from the respective ATI GPU (aside from drawing less wattage from your psu and running cooler).

          That's pretty much it, don't assume that a 7970 isn't a top teir graphic card because it doesn't have an Nvidia badge on it, that's just silly.

        • ProjectZero on 08/07/2013 - 09:08
          +1

          … don't assume that a 7970 isn't a top teir graphic card because it doesn't have an Nvidia badge on it, that's just silly.

          Lol agreed, I personally use Nvidia, but ATI has more vram and the performance is mostly similar to the GTX 680. If you want value for money go ATI… really looking forward to seeing what the 8000/9000 series do against the 780 and titan

        • Wagzy on 08/07/2013 - 10:10

          Yeah I lean more towards Nvidia, just a personal preference. Haven't done much research on AMD cards though. Will look up some benchmarks and reviews when the time comes to buy a GPU.

        • ProjectZero on 08/07/2013 - 11:52

          In terms of performance, 7970 GE is closer GTX680. TBH, that should be enough esp if you are looking to get another GPU.

          Problem is that the 7970 GE is around 450, last i checked… 7950 should be more within your budget of <400 but i don't remember what it is comparable to at this point, sorry.

  • Lucky13 on 06/07/2013 - 18:27

    Am researching to make my own system at the moment, yours looks pretty good. Dont know much about Asrock motherboards, but the ASUS motherboards have got pretty good reviews. The i7 and 16GB RAM sounds good, but when youre talking about x2 graphics cards I only think you do that if youve got 2 monitors set up but I dont know you may want to look into that. And may need an SSD there too. But looks good and will keep an eye on the thread for any tips for my system too :)

    • Wagzy on 06/07/2013 - 18:41

      I've heard a bit about Asus motherboards being relatively good but haven't done to much research on them yet. Really only done research on Asrock motherboards. Yeah I'd only go 2x GPU's if I did 2 monitor setup. Also I have a Samsung SSD in the build as well :)

      • Aragami on 06/07/2013 - 19:06
        +1

        2 gpu's =/= 2 monitors.

        I, and many other multi-monitor setup users will testify to using 1 GPU for 2 or 3 monitors usually (more is a possibility, just that 2 or 3 is the usual).

        I use to run a single 6970 with 3 monitors attached, each running 1920x1200 resolution. I could also play most games on max or near max settings whilst having 3 monitors attached, to be clear, only one of them would have the game playing (so the game would be running on a single 1920x1200 monitor). Most people don't run games across multiple screens because it looks terrible and the big black gap inbetween the monitors never looks good. In saying that, people with ultrasharp 30" dell screens at 2560x1440 resolution would need dual gpu setups or very current high end gpu's to run games at that resolution at max settings.

        Anyway. Moral of the story = multiple monitors doesn't mean multiple gpu's. Higher resolutions (high may or may not be due to multiple monitors) may mean multiple gpu's, if you're chasing after maximum graphics settings.

        FYI, I've currently got a 7950 which runs 3x 1920x1200 displays and I still get to enjoy max settings games on 1 monitor, whilst the other monitor usually has a full screen video stream (via twitch) and the last monitor handles a websites + Skype chats. All very possible and all works well without any issues.

        • compugrid on 09/07/2013 - 23:06

          How did you connected 3 monitors to 7950? it has just 1 plug Do u use a splitter?

        • _Bruce_ on 10/07/2013 - 07:04

          How did you connected 3 monitors to 7950? it has just 1 plug Do u use a splitter?

          What are you on about? All current AMD cards support 3 screens and have 3 outputs.

        • Aragami on 10/07/2013 - 08:02

          One via dvi, one with DP and the other also with DP.

          No splitters, they usually diminish colour quality substantially and not to mention, they usually just clone the screen. Each of my screens acts as an individual screen, extended either left or right of the main screen.

        • compugrid on 10/07/2013 - 09:00

          pls see below

        • compugrid on 10/07/2013 - 09:03

          Gigabyte Radeon 7950 has just 1 port:

          http://www.mwave.com.au/product/sku-aa78414-gigabyte_radeon_…

          1 x HDMI
          2 x mini DisplayPort
          1 x DVI

        • compugrid on 10/07/2013 - 09:42

          Well , how many monitors you can connect to 1 single DVI?

        • _Bruce_ on 10/07/2013 - 09:50

          Two technically, if is is dual channel. Also HDMI is DVI with a different plug. And you just don't like displayport? it even has 'port' in the name!

        • compugrid on 10/07/2013 - 14:15

          :) thanks, got it!

        • Aragami on 10/07/2013 - 14:26

          How are people not understanding that i use DP (display port) to connect my monitors to my GPU. I don't understand how they were failing to understand this o.o … what's happening…

          Wait.. it's cloudy outside… people aren't thinking logically … my coffee is a bit too watery… Holy shit the zombie apocolypse is happening - RUN

  • gimli on 06/07/2013 - 23:49
    -1

    consider adding a 2nd mother board.

    double moboing is the planking of 2013

    • ProjectZero on 08/07/2013 - 09:05

      lol how does that work? I'm curious, mind explaining?

      • Aragami on 08/07/2013 - 09:56
        +8

        The way this technology works is rather interesting. First the consumer must travel far and wide to reach a very specific bridge, then the consumer must travel under the bridge. If the consumer looks hard enough (not difficult at all) then the consumer will notice a big ugly and usually green monster under the bridge. This green monster will often have moles or warts on its face, with extremely messy hair and a horrible BO, usually referred to as a troll. You may purchase your dual-motherboard setup from this mythical creature.

        • ProjectZero on 10/07/2013 - 10:12

          LOL nice i'll do that

  • srhardy on 07/07/2013 - 08:57

    Faced with a similar delimia I came to the conclusion the new xbox1 is a better bet for gaming bang for buck and that a tablet and/or ultrabook a better spend together than a mega desktop. The graphics card for a desktop is as much as the gaming console, that's just insane! The console also does way more now as it will inc TV (but no pvr function which I see its achellies heel) as well as web browser. As much as I have spent my whole life building my own desktops I just don't see it as very good return on investment, bang for buck.

    One last thought is gaming is becoming more a community, interactive event, a tower in a basement just dosent cut it any more.

    • _Bruce_ on 07/07/2013 - 19:20

      The graphics card for a desktop is as much as the gaming console, that's just insane!

      Only a lot of the over the top builds that people like to list here. I have time and time again listed this:

      http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&c…

      Which is a very impressive card.

      The console also does way more now as it will inc TV

      Be careful as the details are not really known yet, particularly outside of the US expect Australia to get screwed.

      One last thought is gaming is becoming more a community, interactive event, a tower in a basement just dosent cut it any more.

      I don't follow your point here. Is steam so different to Xbox Live?

  • Gina Rinehart on 07/07/2013 - 13:00
    +2

    Why get 2x 8gb ram? I would suggest trying 2x4gb as it is considerably cheaper, and if you really find you need 16gb of ram (you don't), you can always buy some more.

    Also I've found there is no point in buying expensive ram, it's all more or less the same. As long as you find one with the same clock speeds and timings, it won't make a difference and you don't need big heat sink things unless you're going to overclock your ram, which I doubt seeing as you're posting this thread.

    • Lucky13 on 07/07/2013 - 13:44

      8GB RAM'd probably be alright if he was just using it for gaming but he spoke of doing editing/rendering graphic stuff so you'd really need to be looking at the 16GB RAM

    • ZRXS12 on 08/07/2013 - 00:03
      -2

      Spoken like someone who sticks to the standard 4gb and gets by.

      • Gina Rinehart on 08/07/2013 - 13:33

        When I first built my computer I put 16gb of "good" ram in it (ie. the typical 1600mhz shit), nothing wrong with it.. it's just it was waaay too much, so I got rid of half of it to ebay and 8gb has proven to be plenty, even with a high end cpu.

        There is almost no reason the majority of users need 16gb of ram. Maybe eventually, but this generation of computing really does not require it yet.

        Obviously there are some exceptions, like people using intensive software or who like to have hundreds of tabs & windows open, it is pretty much a waste of the extra money. Why would you go for 16 straight away without even trying 8gb? It's not like you have to rip out half the computer to upgrade it later…

        • _Bruce_ on 08/07/2013 - 15:46

          Hundreds of tabs doesn't really matter - most browers are still capped at 4GB.

        • Aragami on 08/07/2013 - 15:59

          It sure would be relevant for hundreds of VM's definitely matters however =). Or multiple VM's at least.

        • Gina Rinehart on 09/07/2013 - 12:51

          Yes but is OP going to be running multiple VMs? Probably not.

  • Briefcase Mong on 07/07/2013 - 13:54
    -2

    EVGA cards are overpriced go for ASUS or Gigabyte

  • jc8 on 07/07/2013 - 16:40

    If you're going for one monitor then ensure you allocate enough budget for a quality monitor.

    • gimli on 07/07/2013 - 22:01

      as the saying goes don't cook your eggs before you buy a monitor

  • ProjectZero on 08/07/2013 - 08:52
    +1

    Hey mate,

    the build looks pretty decent… though i would recommend the following.

    GPU: Probably get a graphics card that is future proof (i.e. get one with 3Gb of vram) because whilst you may not play Crysis 2, the high res textures for that game and a heavily modded Skyrim (personally experience) hits 2Gb+. Once your vram runs out, then you will see stutters. So my choice would be a ATI card at this point unless you wanna fork out for the GTX 780 (good card as i have two myself) and higher. Maybe a 7950 or 7970, they should be roughly under 400 dollars right now.

    PSU: If you're looking for something that's good for power and runs quiet, i wouldn't recommend the CM silent pro. My mates 1300w version runs so loud it drowns out his case fans… Probably go for the silverstone strider series or maybe if budget allows for it a corsair AX860i. Theres also the OCZ ZX series but i cant seem to find the 850w from that series at all…

    Monitor: Go for the IPS monitors if you are looking to do photo editing LG produced some that are quite cheap look for the IPS237 or the EA63's. They're like around 200.

    SSD: They're not necessary but i suppose if you want them go for the sandisk xtreme ones as they seem to be the best when it comes to value for money. Similar read and write to the Samsung Pro but cheaper… i think 99 for 120Gb and <200 for a 240Gb

    Also, for help with overclocking guides and help, I'm sure there are people on whirlpool, overclock.net and OCAU that can help.

    Just my 2 cents.

    Cheers

    P.S. @swiffty-13
    have you seen the prices for the EVGA cards compared to Gigabyte or Asus?
    Check their reference cards… when i bought my GTX 780 SC w/ ACX they were under 800… compare that to Asus reference (850+) and the Gigabyte reference and WF (800+). I don't mean to sound like a fan boy… but EVGA does sell some cheaper cards… the only ones they overprice are the FTW, classified and so on… but thats because they're non reference cards…

    • Aragami on 08/07/2013 - 10:09
      +1

      Pretty much agree on everything said here, though on the note of PSU's, i'll just add that if the guy is looking to OC and add multi-gpu's into his rig at a later date, he should be careful about what PSU he buys, probably something at or around 800-1000w for efficiency purposes if he wants to SLI later on. Antec is selling a decent little bronze 80+ 900w psu at the moment with enough pcie power connectors for 2 GPU's in sli/xfire for like.. 130 or 140 i think? Decent price for what it is, i bought 2 a little while back, have no complaints regarding them, they run quiet as well which is nice.

      I should add at this point that the best idea is to put the project on hold regardless, as posted above.

      Another note i'll had is on the monitors and IPS. There is often a bunch of discussion regarding 120hz monitors vs dell ultrasharp IPS (best quality of the IPS monitors out there). On threads i've read and of people i know, i dont know anyone who has stuck with 120hz monitors vs the ultrasharps. Dell 2412m IPS monitors (24inch @ 1920x1200) often go on sale by dell for 280$ delivered with warranty i believe, which is brilliant for what the monitor is. However if you want more of a gamut for legitimate photo editing then i believe the new 2413 comes with adobe rgb which does look brilliant - but has no impact on gaming (seen for myself). Problem is that the 2413 goes for +400 i believe.

      • Wagzy on 08/07/2013 - 10:16

        Thanks both for your input :)

        I agree that the build will change over the months and I should wait till i'm going to build but it's good to get other peoples thought before I spend the money. I've gotta start writing some notes down, everyone has been giving my so awesome points to consider :)

      • ProjectZero on 08/07/2013 - 11:50

        The OCZ ZX 850w should see him through if the OP is only looking to use 2 GPUs and the cost is quite cheap for what it is (80+ Gold certified)

        Regarding the IPS monitors, Dell would be a good choice seeing as it has (from what i've heard) quite good customer service, whether thats true i don't know). But if you want a budget IPS monitor then the LGs are the way to go as its almost always <$200… i believe the EA63 are like $181 or so…

        I actually have the IPS237 and its really good… i've OC'd it to 75Hz. Stunning colours when playing Skyrim with ENB and such. ENB kills the Frames though lol…

        Hope this helps

  • porkupine888 on 08/07/2013 - 13:37

    try the business DELL XPS 8700 at ~2000 with crazy specs 32gb ram , monitor included and more..

    • Finde on 08/07/2013 - 14:11
      +2

      That is crazy. $2000 and only a GTX 650? Rip off.

    • Wagzy on 08/07/2013 - 16:39

      Yeah im not a really big fan of pre-built pc's. I like the customization in building your own. The parts I've chosen so far are still better than that one and mines only couple hundred dearer.

  • urzu on 08/07/2013 - 16:50

    You should probably go for an unlocked i5 instead of an i7. If it's mainly gaming you're after, you wont see the difference. Even the previous generation Ivy bridge CPUs would be good (cheaper motherboards with 1155 socket, and cheaper CPUs overall). If money permits it, then waste it on an i7, why not? As said before too: 8Gb of good RAM (2133 Mhz) would suffice.

  • T1OOO on 08/07/2013 - 18:14

    i7 makes no sense, if your that keen, id go for the i9's 6 core for $600 bucks, id rather that, ull need the lg2011 mother boards though.

    having said that you can pick up a second hand 980x for about the same price as a i7 .. i know which i want, my 980x was the best pc i have ever owed in terms of performance.

    • ProjectZero on 09/07/2013 - 08:47

      Erm… i believe you meant the SB-E which is still an i7… also, the OP said he would be doing video editing but he also has a budget… i7 (Haswell/Ivy bridge) seems to be the most sensible choice if he were to try to stay within budget.

      As for the price of Haswell and Ivy bridge CPUs dont seem to differ by much… i'd actually go for the Haswell.

  • SydStrand on 08/07/2013 - 19:22
    +1

    Again with the "I don't plan to build it until the start of next year."

    Don't bother. Everything will change, the higher end components will become cheaper and replacing them will be a raft of new ones. Just set a budget and when it's closer to the date, ask again.

  • Shwayne on 08/07/2013 - 20:35
    +1

    Not once do you mention if this is a gaming rig or not, which is hugely relevant;

    GPU: EVGA GTX 770 Superclocked ACX 2GB - $529

    Partially excessive by today's standards, but if you've got money to dump here, go ahead. (Again I assume you're gaming and 60 fps simply isn't good enough?)

    CPU: intel core i7 4770k - $385

    For Games, you want an i5. (You should otherwise turn off HT in the i7 for performance.)
    You are over-clocking it anyway, so the clock difference is irrelevant.

    Motherboard: Asrock Z87 Extreme4 - $199

    You will never notice the difference between this board and a $120 board.

    PSU: Cooler master silent pro M2 720W - $135

    Stay away from Coolermaster, and you need less than 600W.
    I recommend Corsair or Seasonic.

    RAM: Corsair Vengeance 2x8GB - $169

    It's usually hard to go wrong here, I'll leave it alone.

    Case: Coolermaster cm storm Stryker - $185

    Entirely up to preference, but my experience with Coolermaster cases has been nothing but pain.

    • ProjectZero on 09/07/2013 - 14:27
      +1

      The OP plans on going SLI so i think he should go for 750+ so as to avoid wasting money in the future to get a new PSU.

      But i agree with the Corsair remark, maybe even Silverstone Striders series or OCZ.

      I'd recommend the following PSU

      Corsair AX850i (Overpriced though…)
      Silverstone Strider Gold Evolution (Haven't seen any around)
      OCZ ZX 1000 (Available at Mwave through order, i believe it was around $210, planning on getting the OCZ ZX 1250 for myself which is $225)

      There are plenty of other PSUs but those are the ones i can think of off the top of my head.

      Edit Just a note, they're all single rail PSUs… if you prefer the safety of a short circuit switch around 300W instead of the max wattage, i would recommend a multi rail.

  • p1 ama on 08/07/2013 - 20:43
    +1

    These would be my suggestions regarding your build. If you're looking to spend spot on $2000, I think you can probably do a bit of cutting and dicing here and there, though you should note that a $2000 PC is very high end.

    1. CPU
      People might tell you to get an i5 processor, but I reckon you should stick with an i7. For a $2000 PC, the $100 price difference isn't a big deal and even if you don't get much out of the i7, it is a little bit quicker with video rendering and compression/encryption type stuff which scales to multiple threads well.

    2. Cost Cutting
      In order to cost cut, I think you should shop around. Use StaticIce and find out where the cheapest things are. Also be aware of specials. For example you're thinking of getting a GTX770, which is essentially equal in performance to a GTX680. You're paying $539. MSY has a Gigabyte Super Overclocked GTX680 for $399.

    3. HDD
      The best value hard drives at the moment are no longer 2TB HDDs. They have become 3TB HDDs, you'll find that on a per terabyte basis, it is cheaper to grab a 3TB. Thus, if you're thinking of adding more HDDs later on, get a 3TB now.

    4. RAM
      Not many people need 16GB of RAM. This is funny because I have 16GB of RAM. I don't really need 16GB of RAM, but it does help when I have many big programs open at the same time. I also do a lot of programming and run databases and virtual machines and stuff like that, so I do find that sometimes my usage does bump above 8GB. But how often? Not often. Can I rectify it? Yeah, I can just close programs that I'm not using.

    I know sometimes we have to get to a budget, but my advice is that it's okay to exceed it a little. A computer is an investment, if you build a good computer that makes you happy, it'll last you many, many years before needing an upgrade and even then, most of the parts are still re-usable. So if you find that you want to spend a $300 or so extra, keep in mind that it's a small investment over the years the computer will be serving you.

    • Shwayne on 08/07/2013 - 20:47
      +1

      16 GB of ram is more useful than an i7.

      • p1 ama on 08/07/2013 - 21:47
        +1

        Should add that it is relatively easy to throw in 8GB more of RAM any time, not so easy to upgrade an i5 to an i7, as you would probably have to sell the i5…etc. i.e. you end up losing money if you choose to upgrade.

    • _Bruce_ on 08/07/2013 - 22:08

      Can I rectify it? Yeah, I can just close programs that I'm not using.

      Actually you don't even have to do this. Windows will swap it out for you. 16GB of RAM is only need if you have so much stuff you are using.

  • cheec on 08/07/2013 - 22:43

    Budget PC upgrade for about $300

    I was thinking of spending $300 to see if I can get a workable upgrade.
    After searching for a combination of components, I have put together such a possible configuration.
    Most parts are sourced from MSY.

    For a detailed list of the components, see
    http://xtechnotes.blogspot.com.au/2013/06/build-budget-pc-le…

  • mrmarkau67 on 09/07/2013 - 00:07

    Here are a few thoughts on your wish list:
    - SSDs are the biggest leap in PC technology, but are constrained by SATA. I'd go for 256GB in a lower spec rather than your chosen 128GB. 256GB seems the sweet spot for value now.
    - Windows 8 performs a lot better on key tasks such as sleep, startup and shutdown. You are gimping your performance by choosing an old OS like Windows 7. If you really miss your Start menu, there are options available.
    - 16GB is probably overkill unless you plan to run VMs and so on. If some future application really needs it, upgrade then.

    A couple of other thoughts:
    - your current laptop is actually pretty good. I upgraded a laptop of similar vintage to Windows 8 and threw in a couple of SSD drives and it runs very nicely now
    - PC gaming tends to fade when a new console generation arrives, and comes back towards the end of the generation as PC technology overtakes what's built into the consoles. Watch to see if this happens again with this generation before dropping almost 2.5K on a gaming rig.

    • _Bruce_ on 09/07/2013 - 07:38

      SSDs are the biggest leap in PC technology, but are constrained by SATA.

      On paper sure, but not so much in the real world.

      http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/storage-controller-perfo…
      http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-upgrade-sata-3gbps,3…

      • [Deactivated] on 09/07/2013 - 11:02
        +1

        On paper sure, but not so much in the real world.

        In summary: No real-world difference between SSDs on SATA 3Gb/s vs SATA 6Gb/s port. The most important part of the SSD is the I/O.

        Note: Any SSD will annihilate mechanical drives, including WD 10k raptors.

      • mrmarkau67 on 09/07/2013 - 11:30

        Yes, there is very little real world difference between any kind of SSDs, so you are better off buying a bigger one than a "faster" one.

    • ProjectZero on 09/07/2013 - 09:08
      -1

      PC gaming tends to fade when a new console generation arrives, and comes back towards the end of the generation as PC technology overtakes what's built into the consoles. Watch to see if this happens again with this generation before dropping almost 2.5K on a gaming rig.

      Whilst thats true, current PC technology has already overtaken the technology used in the Xbone and PS4, they are running an equivalent of a GTX 580 or a 7950 or below. Also, even for games that are ported over from console, having a gaming rig allows for better performance regardless.

      Secondly, comparing performance of a console to a PC is like comparing apples and oranges, easiest to compare is Crysis 2 for 360 or PS3 against PC. They run on the lowest settings and have almost no AA and it only runs at <30fps. With a PC with a decent GPU (price range from 400 - 1300), you'd have AA and medium settings and still have >40fps. Whilst the components used by consoles and PCs are essentially the same, consoles are built to be cheaper and run the bare minimum for games, they're not meant to perform at a gaming rig's level.

      • scrimshaw on 09/07/2013 - 11:22
        +3

        And lets not forget the other perks of PC gaming.

        1. Cheap Humble Bundle games for less than a fiver, none of which are DRM!
        2. FREE downloadable content from the Steam workshop (Skyrim Mods, L4D mods etc.)
        3. A modding community for all kinds of games (Mod DB, Minecraft forums)
        4. Winter and Summer steam sales (where else can you buy a pack of 20 games for less than $50?)
        5. You get to play with a USB controller, Joystick, Keyboard and mouse — much larger variety of input
        6. Games can run on maximum settings rather than a predetermined FPS and at lower than native resolution.
        7. Take part in free betas of games and play free-to-play games like TF2
        8. You never have to worry about scratched discs and optical media..
        • ProjectZero on 09/07/2013 - 12:12

          lol i covered #6 in my essay XD… but there are also free betas for PS3 that i know of so yeah…

        • p1 ama on 10/07/2013 - 09:25

          You forgot another pretty big perk which is the fact that you can use your gaming rig for day-to-day work when you're not gaming! :P

        • ProjectZero on 10/07/2013 - 10:12

          True my bad XD

  • sgaheer on 09/07/2013 - 07:31
    +1

    CPU: i5 4670k $269
    MOTHERBOARD: Asus Z87-A $199
    GRAPHICS: Gigabyte gtx770 $485
    MEMORY: corsair vengence 8 gb 1600Mhz (single) $89
    HDD: seagate barracuda 3TB $135
    PSU: Corsair HX650 $137
    CASE: Antec three hundred two $77
    DVD Drive: Asus black 24x $22

    COST: $1413

    Thats is the build I made just last week, perfect for gaming runsevery game at 1080p smoothly (most at around 60fps).
    Also saves you around $900

  • compugrid on 10/07/2013 - 00:06

    Re: wait till next year. I was looking to build a system around $2000 since February. The prices went up $10-35 per part coz the AUD went down recently. If AUD will still go down I doubt that the prices will be much cheaper by the end of the year. Saying that I'd like to ask opinion about the similar system to the one OP introduced:

    NZXT Phantom 820 Case Gun Metal
    Price: $265.00

    Pioneer BDR-208DBKS 15x Internal SATA OEM Blu-Ray Burner Drive w/Software
    Price: $89.00

    Thermaltake NiC F4 Dual 120mm CPU Cooler
    Price: $49.00

    Intel Core i7 4770 Quad Core LGA 1150 3.4GHz (3.9GHz Turbo) Processor
    Price: $342.00

    Samsung 840 Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive/SSD
    Price: $189.00

    Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x 8GB) CMZ16GX3M2A1600C10 DDR3 RAM
    Price: $159.99

    Thermaltake Toughpower GOLD 750W Modular Power Supply
    Price: $159.00

    Gigabyte Radeon HD 7950 OC 3GB Video Card
    Price: $319.00

    Western Digital WD Blue WD10EZEX 3.5" 1TB SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Drive
    Price: $69.00

    ASUS Z87-PRO Motherboard
    Price: $269.00

    total $1910

    Questions:
    1. The 1G blue WD for documents coz they have a better rating on newegg. Wait a bit till 3T is $100 :) for videos and music and other crap. Am I correct?
    2. WOULD BE Thermaltake 850 GOLD A BETTER CHOICE/INVESTMENT than 750 gold? The difference is $30
    3. What do you think about AUD in conjunction that parts are going to be more expensive?
    4. Is Sandisk Xtreme 250G is much better and worth 20+ to compare to Samsung 256G SSDz? And Pioneer BD writer or LG BD writer for the similar price?
    5. Why Pro Motherboard ? Coz it has WiFi! isn't it cool? What are the minuses in my system?
    6. MWAVE charges $100 to build it. No one else in Sydney is selling NZXT 820 towers (not even MSY). I like the look of it and nice to have removable filters. Hope it is as good as it looks, is it?

    • _Bruce_ on 10/07/2013 - 07:18

      NZXT Phantom 820 Case Gun Metal
      Price: $265.00

      Crazy amount of money for a case.

      Pioneer BDR-208DBKS 15x Internal SATA OEM Blu-Ray Burner Drive w/Software
      Price: $89.00

      Does anyone ever burn blu rays? Even if you did you can get a burner cheaper.

      Thermaltake NiC F4 Dual 120mm CPU Cooler
      Price: $49.00

      Baically a complete waste for $50.

      Intel Core i7 4770 Quad Core LGA 1150 3.4GHz (3.9GHz Turbo) Processor
      Price: $342.00

      As discussed at length, unless you have a good reason for the i7, get an i5.

      Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x 8GB) CMZ16GX3M2A1600C10 DDR3 RAM
      Price: $159.99

      Not as bad as your other items, but why not get 8GB for now at least? (16 is not useful to most people)

      Gigabyte Radeon HD 7950 OC 3GB Video Card
      Price: $319.00

      http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&c…
      Almost as good.

      ASUS Z87-PRO Motherboard
      Price: $269.00

      Complete waste. Any motherboard will perform exactly the same.

      1. The 1G blue WD for documents coz they have a better rating on newegg. Wait a bit till 3T is $100 :) for videos and music and other crap. Am I correct?

      For this use Green/Blue will make no difference, just get a green 3TB one now it makes more sense.

      1. WOULD BE Thermaltake 850 GOLD A BETTER CHOICE/INVESTMENT than 750 gold? The difference is $30

      Nope. Unless you plan to put lots of video cards in, which is a bad choice/investment anyway.

      1. What do you think about AUD in conjunction that parts are going to be more expensive?

      I suspect some parts will go up a little but video cards will go down as Nvidia release more of their new range and AMD release their range. Overall probably not much change, but who knows?

      1. Is Sandisk Xtreme 250G is much better and worth 20+ to compare to Samsung 256G SSDz? And Pioneer BD writer or LG BD writer for the similar price?

      I would get the Sandisk over the 240. Note that the 240 Pro is a different model entirely, but often too expensive to be worthwhile. Optical drives are all the same.

      1. Why Pro Motherboard ? Coz it has WiFi! isn't it cool? What are the minuses in my system?

      USB wifi devices cost almost nothing and can be replaced/upgraded. Large board. WAY too expensive. Same performance. Also use Ethernet not Wifi if you can.

      1. MWAVE charges $100 to build it. No one else in Sydney is selling NZXT 820 towers (not even MSY). I like the look of it and nice to have removable filters. Hope it is as good as it looks, is it?

      The reason to spend such crazy amounts on a case is usually becuase it is easy to build. If you aren't going to build it, might as well get something cheap?

      • Aragami on 10/07/2013 - 08:26

        Glad there is someone else that browses ozbargain with a bit of IT knowledge to help out others, was getting sick of all the random misinformation being spread around.

        I'll just add onto the wifi part, personally i wouldn't get a motherboard with onboard wifi unless i knew it was amazing, or i was making a mini-ITX box for some sort of htpc style setup (or maybe i just want a tiny pc). I recently discovered something about wifi products and how odd they are, i had bought a variety of pcie wireless cards from a few different brands over the past 2 years and frankly, they all seemed to suck. As an FYI, each card was N capable and supported anywhere from 150 - 300 Mbps.

        My house happens to be a great test for wifi products as my wifi router happens to be a few rooms away, separated by a bunch of walls, boxes and other storage. So i bought a couple cheap pcie wifi cards and they only gave me half or below half signal strength, but no drops which was good. The 300Mbps card i bought was pretty beefy and cost a bit extra. When testing it, it gave me dropouts and minimal signal strength, even when closer to the router by 2meters. Eventually after a bunch of adjustment to the antennae, i managed to stabilise it without packet loss - but signal strength never went above 2 bars.

        About 3 months ago i needed to setup a few extra computers and needed a quick networking solution, wanted to get a router but the one i wanted wasn't in stock at my local comp store. So i said stuff it, i'll just buy a bunch of cheap <20$ tp-link 150Mbps wifi usb sticks. These things were so amazing in terms of signal strength that i removed all my pcie cards and just put these sticks in each of my computers, i've now got 4 computers at home running with usb wifi sticks, all have 5 bars. Even the ones in the room which previously only got 1-2 bars with pcie wifi cards.

        Now, i understand antennae positioning, and i'll be clear as to say that i'd spent a couple hours on various machines testing out various computer tower positions and antennae positions just to eliminate that factor. I have a feeling tp-link just made their usb sticks exceptionally well. A couple of the pcie cards were tplink as well by the way, so i'm not trying to be brand biased.

      • p1 ama on 10/07/2013 - 09:37

        Agreeing with you here, but disagreeing on some points.

        1. The case is expensive, but I view cases as an investment. They're low depreciation (meaning that a good case today and a good case in a few years won't be too different in terms of features and price), they last a very long time (many, many builds and upgrades) and if you upgrade your hardware regularly, like I do, a good case will make everything easier. You can either get a $200 case now, or stick with a $100 case and get another $100 case in a few years for your next build.

        2. Yeah, the blu-ray burner is a complete waste. Combo drive is better. The CPU cooler is also a waste of $50 on an un-overclocable CPU. If it were a 4770K, I'd suggest a Noctua NH-D14.

        3. I disagree with all motherboards performing exactly the same. Whilst you can cut corners and get a $70 motherboard, I find that if you spend a little on a quality motherboard, you will get more features. E.g. more SATA ports, onboard RAID, more PCI/PCIe expansion slots, CF or SLI support, more overclocking stability due to MOSFETs…etc. On my previous build, I cheaped out with the motherboard and got one with only 4 SATA slots, had to end up getting a PCIe expansion card for $70 or so to get myself 4 more SATA ports. Learnt my lesson and went with a quality board this time, 8 SATA ports onboard.

        4. With SSDs, they're more about brand loyalty than anything much. You'll find that most top-tier SSDs perform the same in day to day applications and you won't notice the difference unless you look at IOPS and benchmark your SSDs. I usually go with Intel but that's just because I've always used Intel SSDs.

        • _Bruce_ on 10/07/2013 - 09:59

          I disagree with all motherboards performing exactly the same.

          Sorry, but this is fact. Different features perhaps, but performance is the same. On features:

          more SATA ports

          All current Intel boards have 6. Some boards may have more if they add extra controllers. The difference is only that in the cheap boards 4 of the 6 ports are slower (but that doesn't really matter much http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sata-6gbps-performance-s…)

          onboard RAID

          Super pointless. In most cases software raid performs just as well, it has more features and recovery is much easier.

          more PCI/PCIe expansion slots

          Mostly needed if you want more than one GPU, which is rarely useful.

          more overclocking stability due to MOSFETs…etc.

          Overclocking ability at all. But given this is not an overclockable CPU.. no point. Even if it was this doesn't gain you much.

          had to end up getting a PCIe expansion card for $70 or so to get myself 4 more SATA ports.

          http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&c…
          http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&c…

          You'll find that most top-tier SSDs perform the same in day to day applications

          Yes, but the 840 (non pro) is not a top-teir SSD. I agree it doesn't matter that much though.

        • ProjectZero on 10/07/2013 - 10:17

          For the SSDs why not just go for Sandisk… they're cheap (generally) and perform similar to the pro version of samsung 840…

          If you must get a SSD just get the cheapest one with R/W speeds of >400… brand really doesn't matter IMO

        • Aragami on 10/07/2013 - 10:54

          I disagree with all motherboards performing exactly the same.

          Sorry, but this is fact. Different features perhaps, but performance is the same. On features:

          — Different motherboards = different chipsets = different performance and different features. Fact = False.

          onboard RAID

          Super pointless. In most cases software raid performs just as well, it has more features and recovery is much easier.

          — Onboard raid is often times software raid, or only capable of basic raid levels and not the more advanced stuff (5/6 for example). Also, never ever compare software raid to hardware raid so simply, its silly to do so. For a gaming machine, a software raided setup would end up using a whole bunch more system resources than a hardware raided setup. Difference between HW raid and SW raid is pretty much that HW raid = uses the raid card to do all the processing. SW raid = uses system CPU + RAM for processing.

          more PCI/PCIe expansion slots
          Mostly needed if you want more than one GPU, which is rarely useful.

          — Or a pcie sound card, or a pcie wireless card, or a pcie network adapter, or a pcie infiband connection, or a pcie raid card, or a pcie expansion card of some sort for usb3/esata/firewire connectivity.

        • _Bruce_ on 10/07/2013 - 11:20

          — Different motherboards = different chipsets = different performance and different features. Fact = False.

          Wrong. All intel chipsets of the same generation perform the same. Only features are different.

          For a gaming machine, a software raided setup would end up using a whole bunch more system resources than a hardware raided setup

          'Whole bunch more' really? It hardly makes any differnce on a modern system. Also by your own admission on board RAID does basically nothing in hardware anyway, it is the worst of all options.

          Or a pcie sound card, or a pcie wireless card, or a pcie network adapter, or a pcie infiband connection, or a pcie raid card, or a pcie expansion card of some sort for usb3/esata/firewire connectivity.

          USB is pretty nifty you know? Sure there are some cases where people might need add on cards, but they are pretty rare these days.

        • Aragami on 10/07/2013 - 15:04

          Wrong. All intel chipsets of the same generation perform the same. Only features are different.

          I phrased myself incorrectly, i'll apologise for that. What i had meant to say was that each motherboard has different chips performing different tasks. Different chips or "controllers" if you want to call them that, meaning: audio, ethernet, usb and sata chips which are added to the motherboard to expand it's features. It's pretty much what differentiates high priced motherboards from cheaper ones.

          'Whole bunch more' really? It hardly makes any differnce on a modern system. Also by your own admission on board RAID does basically nothing in hardware anyway, it is the worst of all options.

          Yes. Really. It depends on what software raid you're using. If you have a couple disks in a raid 0 array to make your computer a bit faster will you notice a difference? No. If you have 16 disks in a software raid array, then yes. You will notice a difference.

          USB is pretty nifty you know? Sure there are some cases where people might need add on cards, but they are pretty rare these days.

          I personally tried pcie wifi cards before usb wifi cards - why? It keeps everything neatly tucked inside the case. I dont want to have my usb ports filled constantly. I use my usb ports for a variety of other things, and many of those are i use concurrently. Not to mention i move my PC around a lot, so having dongles or usb things to plug in constantly and pack up adds a bit of extra drag. Why go usb when something works perfectly fine in pcie? What if you really like your audio and you want to buy an asus xonar essence STX, you'll need a pcie slot for that. Do you really want a cheap usb sound card? Most likely not. But wait, there are some really amazing usb DAC/AMPs out there as well - for example the asus essense one, costs a lot more than the STX though. And again, lugging that around as opposed to having a card inside your computer is an extra hassle if you move your computer frequently.

          Find a solution to meet your needs. There's no reason for someone to think "oh hey, only go with usb controllers because usb rox y0." - thats called stupidity.

        • _Bruce_ on 10/07/2013 - 15:26

          phrased myself incorrectly, i'll apologise for that. What i had meant to say was that each motherboard has different chips performing different tasks. Different chips or "controllers" if you want to call them that, meaning: audio, ethernet, usb and sata chips which are added to the motherboard to expand it's features. It's pretty much what differentiates high priced motherboards from cheaper ones.

          Audio, Ethernet, USB and SATA are all standard in the intel chipset (at any level). Only if you have more than the standard kit would this make any difference.

        • Aragami on 10/07/2013 - 15:51

          The chips used in each motherboard are different. You'll notice for example that the audio chip in a 130$ 1150 asus motherboard is different to the one used in 260$ 1150 asus motherboard.

          Their pressence is standard. Their quality/features/amount differ.

          FYI, an audio chip isnt "standard" in a z87 chipset, the z87 chipset doesn't encompass things like audio or ethernet at all. The motherboard manufacturers add these separate chips into their design. Hence why a lot of motherboards come with marvell chip/controllers for some extra SATA ports.

        • p1 ama on 12/07/2013 - 12:45

          This is correct, the chipset is only responsible for USB and SATA, networking and audio are separate. You'll find that different motherboards use different brands and models, e.g. Realtek, Ralink, Marvell, NEC…etc.

          But I completely agree that expensive motherboards have their benefits. Whether these benefits are worth it or not, of course, is dependent upon the user and their usage scenario. E.g. building a PC for my grandparents who just use the internet and watch movies and nothing else, I can buy the cheapest motherboard available.

          But that motherboard might not have features I want. Extra SATA ports, 4 DIMM slots (most cheaper motherboards only have 2), extra PCI and PCI-e slots, stable power supply to the CPU for overclocking…etc.

          I also agree with you on PCI/PCI-e slots being good. In my computer, I have a graphics card, Wireless NIC, TV Tuner card, USB 3.0 Card and I might have to add in a RAID card in the future. Things like TV tuner and wireless I can add via USB, but that's a clunky solution. It's messy and inelegant. But then there are things that have to be internal, such as a RAID card.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join