i7-920 Built Help Needed (the proper way)

[JYeager11]

Okay, let's do this the proper way. Apologies for not having read the sticky 'til now.

1) What will you be doing with this PC? Gaming? Photoshop? Web browsing? etc
The computer will be used as a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation), as well as handle ridiculously large and high-resolution Photoshop PSD files.

2) What's your budget? Are tax and shipping included?
Let's say a flexible $2,000 everything included.

3) Where do you live?
Montreal, QC (Canada)

4) What exact parts do you need for that budget? CPU, RAM, case, etc. Please be very specific.
I'm pretty much sold on the i7 920, nVidia's GFX 260, and Windows 7 (Pro or Ultimate, for the additional ram capabilities) 64-bit Edition. I'm also thinking at least 1TB HD space, ideally on two physical 500GB physical drives to improve performance. As for the rest, I'd need as much ram as I can afford, a DVD burner, a case, a PSU, and anything else I may be forgetting *except* monitor/kb/mouse, which I have.

5) If reusing any parts, what parts will you be reusing? Please be especially specific about the power supply. List make and model.
See #7.

6) Will you be overclocking?
No.

7) What size monitor do you have and/or plan to have?
I'm using a Dell 2407WFP-HC monitor running at 1920 x 1200px. I *may* buy a second one for my XBOX 360.

8) When do you plan on building/buying the PC?
ASAP.

9) What features do you need in a motherboard? RAID? Firewire? Crossfire or SLI support? etc.
More than anything, to be able to go to 16GB ram (or more) some day when the need arises.

10) Do you already have a legit and reusable/transferable OS key/license?
No. Which is one of the reasons why I was considering a pre-built system. The license is usually included.

I would *prefer* finding all/most of these things in a pre-built Dell or HP (or even Acer), but I'm not *completely* opposed to building my own. The Acer Aspire the office bought me for work last year was great. It was a Q9300, never had a problem no matter what I threw at it, and was ridiculously silent.

 

[tiraides]

Why, again, the GTX 260? Is it for CUDA?

Do you need Windows XP Mode? Remote Desktop support? BitLocker drive encryption? Support for 35 different languages? The first two questions include the primary features of Windows 7 Professional, and the last two include features unique to only Windows 7 Ultimate. You can replicate Windows XP Mode and BitLocker using freeware programs. Have you used more than 16GB of RAM in your earlier systems? Why do you feel the need to use more now?

Since it's been a while since I've made an on-budget Canadian-based build, I'll list out some parts, and you tell me whether or not they exceed your $2000 CAD limit.

Intel Core i7 920
Asus P6T SE X58 ATX motherboard
Two sets of Corsair XMS3 3x2GB DDR3 1333 CL9 tri-channel RAM
Two Seagate 7200.12 500GB HDDs
Samsung SH-S223x DVD burner ("x" means any version)
EVGA GeForce GTX 260 video card
Antec TruePower New TP-650 650 watt power supply
Cooler Master Centurion 690 (or RC-690) ATX mid-tower case
Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64-bit OEM DVD

You should also read up on RamDisk and see whether or not it would suit your needs. The long story short is that RamDisk is a program that allows you to turn some of your RAM into a very fast "swap disk."

 

[JYeager11]

Why, again, the GTX 260? Is it for CUDA?

Because I've been loyal to nVidia most of my professional life.
Because it has always served me well. (Shouldn't that count for something?)
Because I like their display properties software.
Because I enjoy their website driver update mechanisms.
Because most "Radeon vs nVidia" comparison articles I've read give neither brand a decided edge over the other (in fact, the last one I read gave it to nVidia).
And lastly, because I need an actual REASON to drop one brand in favor of another - not the other way around.

If you can give me such a reason, I am not 100% opposed to anything. I just won't switch "just because".

Do you need Windows XP Mode? Remote Desktop support? BitLocker drive encryption? Support for 35 different languages? The first two questions include the primary features of Windows 7 Professional, and the last two include features unique to only Windows 7 Ultimate. You can replicate Windows XP Mode and BitLocker using freeware programs.

I want the ability to go higher than 8GB RAM when the need arises, and Ultimate is only $20 more expensive than Pro. Doesn't that make your entire line of questioning a little moot?

Have you used more than 16GB of RAM in your earlier systems? Why do you feel the need to use more now?

That question is backwards and has no relevance. It's like if I asked you : have you ever used more cpu power than the best of what's available right now? No, you haven't. Because it wasn't available until now. Does that mean you won't from this point onward? Of course you will. It's available and software will very quickly make use of it.

There was also a time when 128MB ram was considered overkill. Did that stop all of us from eventually buying 4GB?

So let's keep our eye on what's relevant, here. I'm not buying a new computer to satisfy what my needs were 5 years ago. I'm buying a new computer to satisfy my needs for the next 5 years.

And I don't know why you're using the 16GB figure instead of 8GB. Windows Home Edition is limited to 8GB, not 16. The question, if anything, should be whether I plan on using more than 8GB in the next 5 years... and the answer is yes, I do.

Since it's been a while since I've made an on-budget Canadian-based build, I'll list out some parts, and you tell me whether or not they exceed your $2000 CAD limit.

Intel Core i7 920
Asus P6T SE X58 ATX motherboard
Two sets of Corsair XMS3 3x2GB DDR3 1333 CL9 tri-channel RAM
Two Seagate 7200.12 500GB HDDs
Samsung SH-S223x DVD burner ("x" means any version)
EVGA GeForce GTX 260 video card
Antec TruePower New TP-650 650 watt power supply
Cooler Master Centurion 690 (or RC-690) ATX mid-tower case
Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64-bit OEM DVD

Well, I was kind of hoping someone informed on Canadian prices and parts availability would chime in. No offense.

You should also read up on RamDisk and see whether or not it would suit your needs. The long story short is that RamDisk is a program that allows you to turn some of your RAM into a very fast "swap disk."

Someone told me abour RamDisk in another thread, and yes, it may eventually be used as a scratch disk. Just another reason why 8GB is too low a ceiling for ram. It'll be fine for now, but probably not 3-4 years from now.

 

[JYeager11]

Incidentally, someone forwarded me to this machine :
http://www.studiocat.com/index.php?...-pro-studio-daw&catid=37:tower-daws&Itemid=78

It was specifically created for DAW use. It would be perfect if not for the fact that I don't trust pre-builts other than major brands (and some stranger putting it together for me and loading it up with who-knows-what makes me nervous).

But parts-wise... that looks very much like the ideal system for my usage.

 

[Master Bob]

I want the ability to go higher than 8GB RAM when the need arises, and Ultimate is only $20 more expensive than Pro. Doesn't that make your entire line of questioning a little moot?

Not at all. Windows 7 Pro and Ultimate support the same amount of RAM.

That question is backwards and has no relevance. It's like if I asked you : have you ever used more cpu power than the best of what's available right now? No, you haven't. Because it wasn't available until now. Does that mean you won't from this point onward? Of course you will. It's available and software will very quickly make use of it.

...

So let's keep our eye on what's relevant, here. I'm not buying a new computer to satisfy what my needs were 5 years ago. I'm buying a new computer to satisfy my needs for the next 5 years.

Really? Oh, my bad. I thought you were building a computer to use Windows 3.1. woops. I'd even written out a whole build for it. =-/

In this age, you can build a computer that will last 5 years. On the other hand, building a computer that will not be an antique in 5 years will cost a small fortune.

Just grab the 3x4GB DDR3 1600 kits out there for $800. It'll totally be worth it.

 

[JYeager11]

Not at all. Windows 7 Pro and Ultimate support the same amount of RAM.

Where have I so much as hinted otherwise?

Tiraides was pointing out the differences between the 3 versions of Windows 7 to me, to find out which one I needed. I responded saying that I need more than 8GB ram (which automatically eliminates Home Edition), and the remaining 2 versions of the OS are only $20 apart in pricing. Whether it's Pro or Ultimate, $20 isn't going to affect my bottom line, and we probably shouldn't be wasting as much energy as we have on the question.

Why you're pointing out to me that both Pro and Ultimate support the same amount of ram, however, is a mystery to me.

EDIT: Apologies to both of you, Tiraides just pointed out to me that I've been misinformed. Home Premium can do 16GB, not just 8. Your questions make a lot more sense now. ;-)

In this age, you can build a computer that will last 5 years. On the other hand, building a computer that will not be an antique in 5 years will cost a small fortune.

If you buy smart, not necessarily expensive, you can do it. I've been doing it my whole life. It's just a matter of making sure you can ADD (upscale) individual parts before having to replace the whole thing becomes unavoidable. When I bought my current computer 4-5 years ago, it wasn't an Opteron 180. I eventually just replaced the chip with an Opteron 180. I also added ram along the way. Kept the machine alive and relevant for half a decade, and did so affordably.

Just grab the 3x4GB DDR3 1600 kits out there for $800. It'll totally be worth it.

I'm not against that idea at all. My budget is flexible for a reason just like that one. ;-)

 

[JYeager11]

Sorry, entered the same reply twice. Trying to delete this one, but despite the "edit/delete" link suggesting we can, it doesn't appear so.

 

[Dangman]

Because I've been loyal to nVidia most of my professional life.
Because it has always served me well. (Shouldn't that count for something?)
Because I like their display properties software.
Because I enjoy their website driver update mechanisms.
Because most "Radeon vs nVidia" comparison articles I've read give neither brand a decided edge over the other (in fact, the last one I read gave it to nVidia).
And lastly, because I need an actual REASON to drop one brand in favor of another - not the other way around.

What reviews have you been reading? Ok, the main reason why the majority of us do not recommend the GTX 260 at all is due to its price, plain and simple. The HD 4870 1GB, which has been shown many times to have performance equal if not better than the GTX 260, costs $175 CAD on NCIX.com. The cheapest GTX 260 on NCIX.com with lifetime warranty is $210 CAD. However the significantly faster HD 4890, shown in reviews that it just outperforms the GTX 260, will costs only $25 CAD more than the eVGA GTX 260 with a lifetime warranty.

So from a price to performance standpoint, the GTX 260 is a bad buy. But if you're that hardcore loyal, that afraid of ATI, like their software better (that I agree with), go for the GTX 260.

Well, I was kind of hoping someone informed on Canadian prices and parts availability would chime in. No offense.

PM hossdaddy or HardwareGuru as they're more familiar with Canadian prices and availability.

 

[tiraides]

The question about your NVIDIA preference was asked because right now, ATI has the high end locked up with its 58xx cards. While the GTX 260 is likely more than enough for your needs, the HD4870 or HD4870 could also work in your favor while costing you comparatively less. I asked about CUDA because it's often one of the reasons many people stick with NVIDIA nowadays. No offense.

And there was no offense taken about wanting Canadian links and prices. While I do have a list of Canadian retailers for build lists -- the GenHard FAQ sticky has some of the more frequently referenced sites available -- right now, I don't have the time to research parts and give you the "best bang for your buck" components available with your budget amount.

The whole point of the Windows 7 question was to determine which version would suit you. If we were talking about retail versions -- which I only recommend those who frequently upgrade their systems (or build, like, at least three different systems in a five-year period) -- then there is little difference between buying the Professional and Ultimate editions of Windows 7. With a tighter budget, and considering the price between OEM verisons, the $20 extra that you don't spend on Windows 7 Ultimate could be used towards something else. FWIW, Windows 7 Home Premium supports up to 16GB of RAM, but Professional and Ultimate supports up to 192GB.

As for the i7 Pro + Studio DAW, the specs list is nice, but I'd like to know about the video card and PSU used before I could give a better "assessment." (That's not a knock on you, but, rather, the vendor. I believe that more boutique vendors should give a full list of the components that they use to alleviate the fears of pickier customers.)

 

[JYeager11]

The question about your NVIDIA preference was asked because right now, ATI has the high end locked up with its 58xx cards. While the GTX 260 is likely more than enough for your needs, the HD4870 or HD4870 could also work in your favor while costing you comparatively less. I asked about CUDA because it's often one of the reasons many people stick with NVIDIA nowadays. No offense.

None taken, I just don't understand why anyone would push one manufacturer over another for only a $20 price difference. I would totally understand for a $100 price difference... but for $20? It just sounds like Radeon loyalists wanting to convert nVidia loyalists to me.

I mean, even if my preference for the 260 WAS solely out of blind loyalty for years of dependable service, or simply for appreciating their driver update & display software... at equal performance, isn't that worth an extra $20 every 4-5 years? We're talking $4-5 a year, here. ;-)

Now, if the GTX 260 has ISSUES I don't know about... or if the Radeon offers something the 260 doesn't... even if it's just a TV tuner... hey, I'll switch. But I need something more than saving $20 to switch brands. If that makes me a fanatic, so be it. ;-)

And there was no offense taken about wanting Canadian links and prices. While I do have a list of Canadian retailers for build lists -- the GenHard FAQ sticky has some of the more frequently referenced sites available -- right now, I don't have the time to research parts and give you the "best bang for your buck" components available with your budget amount.

Hey, no worries. I appreciate whatever time you already put in this.

The whole point of the Windows 7 question was to determine which version would suit you. If we were talking about retail versions -- which I only recommend those who frequently upgrade their systems (or build, like, at least three different systems in a five-year period) -- then there is little difference between buying the Professional and Ultimate editions of Windows 7. With a tighter budget, and considering the price between OEM verisons, the $20 extra that you don't spend on Windows 7 Ultimate could be used towards something else. FWIW, Windows 7 Home Premium supports up to 16GB of RAM, but Professional and Ultimate supports up to 192GB.

Then I owe Bob an apology, because I was misinformed. I was told Home Premium does not exceed 8GB ram.

If there's one thing we never have too much of in my line of work, it's ram. So 8GB, to me, was a good amount to START with. As for using more than 16GB in the coming few years... that is indeed a question worth asking. I think I might, but I may very well not.

As for the i7 Pro + Studio DAW, the specs list is nice, but I'd like to know about the video card and PSU used before I could give a better "assessment." (That's not a knock on you, but, rather, the vendor. I believe that more boutique vendors should give a full list of the components that they use to alleviate the fears of pickier customers.)

I believe that's obtainable... but I wouldn't buy from him anyway. I just don't trust "mom n' pop" pre-builts. I want a name brand behind my pre-built, if I'm going that route. Not someone who can disappear overnight.

I posted the link because I was certain that someone could match those parts and beat that price, since the guy probably keeps a cut of it for himself for BUILDING the thing. The parts must be otherwise obtainable, and cheaper.

 

[JYeager11]

What reviews have you been reading?

To prove that I didn't go out looking for specific reviews that favored nvidia -- or even a specific model of video card -- I googled "radeon vs nvidia" and clicked on the very first link I saw.

http://www.techspot.com/review/164-radeon-4890-vs-geforce-gtx275/page11.html

"Even when taking overclocking into account, we don't feel the HD 4890 is worth the price premium over the Radeon HD 4870. For now we feel the Radeon HD 4870 ($185) and GeForce GTX 260 ($180) are far better value alternatives, while the GeForce GTX 275 is the best graphics card $250 can get you."

It's not saying nvidia is better than radeon, or vice versa... but it does seem to make a case for the GTX 260 and 4870 both being good buys for the buck, not really favoring either one in any significant way.

Other reviews I googled went along the same lines.

So given this context, yes, I'll usually stick to the brand I'm used to. Wouldn't you?

 

[tiraides]

Many of us, when we work on creating build lists, look at the entire point of the build itself. While $20 doesn't make much of a difference between video cards and operating systems in general, for the budget conscious, that $20 or $40 saved in one area could be used to improve another area, like a beefier processor or more RAM. All that I was trying to do was figure out why you want particular parts and the "customize" my future responses based on your needs.

I'm not trying to insult or question your decision-making progress. I'm just trying to figure out a few things about your needs and wants so I can better tailor my responses and recommendations.

 

[Dangman]

It's not saying nvidia is better than radeon, or vice versa... but it does seem to make a case for the GTX 260 and 4870 both being good buys for the buck, not really favoring either one in any significant way.

Other reviews I googled went along the same lines.

So given this context, yes, I'll usually stick to the brand I'm used to. Wouldn't you?

Me? No. As tiraides mentioned, price does make a huge part of my decision making as well as recommendation process. While the case you mentioned was true when both cards were the same price, it's not true when there's $35 CAD price gap between the two cards.

Anyway, as long as you know what ou're paying for..

 

[JYeager11]

So given this context, yes, I'll usually stick to the brand I'm used to. Wouldn't you?

Me? No. As tiraides mentioned, price does make a huge part of my decision making as well as recommendation process.

If $20 spread across several years is enough for you to leave a company that has always delivered for you, and never given you a reason to complain -- be it performance-wise, software-wise, or support-wise -- then more power to you.

Me? At equal performance, I don't mind taking the $20 hit for a name I know and trust, especially if that $20 will be spread across several years.

it's not true when there's $35 CAD price gap between the two cards.

Everyone I've read has quoted a $20 price difference between the two cards. Which year of the Disco era did you get your $35 CND figure from?

From http://www.xe.com/ucc/
$20 USD = $21.13 CND.

Care to revise your math? Almost doubling your figures to prove your point is arguing in bad faith. If you can't do it with legit figures, then just don't do it.

Anyway, as long as you know you're paying more for less performance..

Just because you write that doesn't make it true, Danny. Nothing in any of the reviews I've read suggests that there's an across-the-board performance advantage going to Radeon for the same category card as nvidia.

You'd probably be able to dig long enough to find a review that gives Radeon the advantage in one game or another... but I could do the same with nvidia. The bottom line is that there is no clear consensus on one being remarkably superior to the other.

Give me tangibles, like the $20 price difference. Or a couple of trusted reviews that make the statement "Radeon will give you better performance at the same price and offer no disadvantages whatsoever when compared with nvidia", which you've implied above, true.

Otherwise, just throwing out statements like that to make the other guy look like an idiot does nothing to help. And isn't help what we're all here to do?

EDIT: Well, looks like someone edited their controversial statement, doesn't it?

 

[Dangman]

EDIT: Well, looks like someone edited their message, doesn't it?

Yeah, because it was waay too harsh.

 

[JYeager11]

Many of us, when we work on creating build lists, look at the entire point of the build itself. I'm not trying to insult or question your decision-making progress. I'm just trying to figure out a few things about your needs and wants so I can better tailor my responses and recommendations.

Understood. But it's becoming a bit frustrating that we've spent a large portion of this thread arguing over $20. I'm sure if I was leaning towards Radeon instead of nvidia, no one would be arguing with me. Radeon is the flavor of the day, and most of you are sold to it... I get that. And likewise, if you were to find me, say, a pre-built HP or Dell that was exactly what I was looking for, except for a 4860 instead of a GTX 260, I wouldn't balk at it. I'd go ahead and buy that machine with the Radeon card. But if you're going to give me a choice, and I'm building the rig myself, at equal performance and only $20 difference, I'll go for the devil I know.

And unless someone has factual links explaining why Radeon is so much better than nvidia aside from the $20 difference, I really think ALL of us should just accept that it's probably going to be a GTX 260 and just move on to the other parts.

With that in mind...

I believe we can all agree on the i7 920 being good enough to last me a while. And from what I gathered in these boards, I should be looking at a X58 motherboard because it will give me 4 triple channel slots. Meaning I can fill 3 of those slots now, and leave a 4th for whenever the need arises. Am I understanding this well so far?

This leaves the HD (I'll probably choose this last, because I'll take as much space as whatever's left of my budget will allow), the PSU, DVD burner, and case.

Is that about right?

 

[GeForceX]

Depending on which reviews you look at, the HD4870 marginally performs better than the GTX260. Judging from the lowest prices on NewEgg, the difference between the two GPUs is only $10 dollars (USD). If NVidia had always worked well for the OP, then he should choose the brand he knows well - the GTX 260.

 

[Dangman]

And unless someone has factual links explaining why Radeon is so much better than nvidia aside from the $20 difference, I really think ALL of us should just accept that it's probably going to be a GTX 260 and just move on to the other parts.

Dude, that's the only reason why I'm recommending the HD4870 over the GTX 260. If you're ok with the price, go for it.

Anyway....

I believe we can all agree on the i7 920 being good enough to last me a while. And from what I gathered in these boards, I should be looking at a X58 motherboard because it will give me 4 triple channel slots. Meaning I can fill 3 of those slots now, and leave a 4th for whenever the need arises. Am I understanding this well so far?

No. Triple channel means three sticks of RAM working in unison for additional performance (theoretically). So an X58 motherboard can only have a max of six RAM slots which means two sets of triple-channel RAM. But yes you can just fill three of those slots and add a 4th stick of RAM later on. However at that point it'll either run in dual-channel or flex channel. With that said, there's not much of a performance difference between triple channel and dual channel or even flex channel.