New Build

TechLarry

TechLarry

RIP [H] Brother - June 1, 2022
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
30,481
It's been a few years so I'm considering a new build.

This is going to be an all-in machine. Gaming. Work. Personal. I want ONE machine that does it all.

I want it to be as up to date as possible because I want 5 years out of it.

I am far more concerned with stability and included features than with overclocking. I will NOT be overclocking anything.

I want fast, stable and feature laden :) I want it ALL !

Here is what I've built up so far:

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DpgMyf
 
TechLarry said:
It's been a few years so I'm considering a new build.

This is going to be an all-in machine. Gaming. Work. Personal. I want ONE machine that does it all.

I want it to be as up to date as possible because I want 5 years out of it.

I am far more concerned with stability and included features than with overclocking. I will NOT be overclocking anything.

I want fast, stable and feature laden :) I want it ALL !

Here is what I've built up so far:

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DpgMyf
Click to expand...

If it's going to be your workstation too I would have a separate spinny drive as well just to keep nightly incremental backups on and copy them to a nas someplace weekly or something.

That is waaaay more power supply than you need unless you are planning on doubling up on those video cards in the future.

I think you might be able to get more out of 2x 500gb ssd's in a raid 0 config than a single m.2 but someone with more experience with that will have to say for sure. It would be much cheaper though. I use my m.2 ssd for vm's which brings me to #3.

Why do you need 64gb of ram? I have barely broke 44gb running 3 vm's and autocad at the same time. If you are doing that much heavy lifting, do the [H]ard thing and get the 6/8 core :p
 
KarsusTG said:
If it's going to be your workstation too I would have a separate spinny drive as well just to keep nightly incremental backups on and copy them to a nas someplace weekly or something.

That is waaaay more power supply than you need unless you are planning on doubling up on those video cards in the future.

I think you might be able to get more out of 2x 500gb ssd's in a raid 0 config than a single m.2 but someone with more experience with that will have to say for sure. It would be much cheaper though. I use my m.2 ssd for vm's which brings me to #3.

Why do you need 64gb of ram? I have barely broke 44gb running 3 vm's and autocad at the same time. If you are doing that much heavy lifting, do the [H]ard thing and get the 6/8 core :p
Click to expand...

Yeah, I didn't include spinners as I have several already I plan on using.

I may drop the PS to 800-1000. I know I want a modular and I want either a Seasonic or a Corsair.

Aren't M2's way faster than SATA SSD's ? Numbers are in excess of 2000MB/Sec that I've seen. The best Sata's in Raid 0 can't top 12, and will most likely end up around 900 or so MB/Sec. That said, I may go with an Evo and save $150. The performance difference isn't that great. Warranty is 2 years less though.

I do indeed run several VM's. VBox based. I could probably cut down to 32GB though.

I'd like to be done at $2500, and I'm $500 over that right now. If I trim back the PS, go to an Evo M2 and drop the RAM to 32GB I'd be there.
 
There is some serious overkill here for little or no gain.

CPU cooler: That's the wrong type of cooler for the case chosen. Something in a tower orientation (e.g., Noctua NH-U12S) would work much better. Since you're not overclocking you don't need anything huge or water cooling.

Mainboard: Super-high-end mainboards are generally a waste, especially if you're not going to be overclocking/SLI/etc. Look for something in the $100-200 range that has the features you need.

RAM: Unless you're working with large graphics/video, a number of simultaneous virtual machines, or some other specialty application that just eats memory, scale back here. 32 GB (2x16) is more than plenty, and if needed you can add on later.

PSU: Massive overkill here. The parts you list will have a hard time topping 400 W, much less 1200. Look for something gold+ rated in the 500-600 W range.

Storage: NVMe drives provide no discernible real-world advantage over SATA units and cost a lot more, but I can't really fault you for wanting one. Maybe consider scaling back to a 500 GB-class unit and then get a large HDD for media/scratch/etc. storage. There's never any kind of benefit to putting SSDs into a RAID 0 config.

GPU: Without info on your display it's hard to say. If you're still on 1080p with no plans to upgrade a 1070GTX will more than sufficient for a long time.

***

In general, trying to create a build for >3 years and dumping a bunch of money into it is foolish. It's better to do a 2-3 year build and spend far less. When that system has outlived its usefulness there will be faster systems with new features, and you can put the cash saved on the last build towards it.
 
TechLarry said:
Yeah, I didn't include spinners as I have several already I plan on using.

I may drop the PS to 800-1000. I know I want a modular and I want either a Seasonic or a Corsair.

Aren't M2's way faster than SATA SSD's ? Numbers are in excess of 2000MB/Sec that I've seen. The best Sata's in Raid 0 can't top 12, and will most likely end up around 900 or so MB/Sec. That said, I may go with an Evo and save $150. The performance difference isn't that great. Warranty is 2 years less though.

I do indeed run several VM's. VBox based. I could probably cut down to 32GB though.

I'd like to be done at $2500, and I'm $500 over that right now. If I trim back the PS, go to an Evo M2 and drop the RAM to 32GB I'd be there.
Click to expand...

Rgr. Completely get you on Seasonic and Corsair. Most people want to skimp on the PSU but it's just too damn important imo.

Something you might want to take into consideration is it's almost always better to keep your VM's on a separate drive from your host OS. When the VM is doing work and the Host is doing work you don't want them competing for your drives resources.
 
KarsusTG said:
Something you might want to take into consideration is it's almost always better to keep your VM's on a separate drive from your host OS. When the VM is doing work and the Host is doing work you don't want them competing for your drives resources.
Click to expand...

Meh, with an SSD (particularly a NVMe unit) IOPS and throughput are high enough that it won't matter.
 
PSU is way, way overkill. 600W tops it all you need.
You're not overclocking but you want to spend $100 on a CPU cooler that's not even the best design for your use? You could get an AIO water cooler for half the price or a 212+ cooler for 1/3 of the price. You're not overclocking. No need to go all out on a CPU cooler.
Again, you're not overclocking so use the stock thermal compound included with whatever cooler you end up going with. It'll work.
Why do you need a $300+ motherboard? I guarantee that anything it has over a budget ~$150 board you wont be using. So what exactly do you need on this motherboard that a $150 board wont offer?
1080 GPU? What kind of gaming do you do and at what resolution? I get you want it to last 5 years, but depending on what you're doing with the GPU you will probably make it with a 1070. Chances are if a 1070 wont last 5 years neither will a 1080. So you'll be upgrading the GPU around the same time anyway. If you're on 1080P then you'll get the most out of a 1070 until you upgrade vs a 1080.

Spending $2k+ on a LGA1151 setup just doesn't make sense when you can get a 2011v3 setup for the same price and have more cores.
 
BlueLineSwinger said:
There is some serious overkill here for little or no gain.

CPU cooler: That's the wrong type of cooler for the case chosen. Something in a tower orientation (e.g., Noctua NH-U12S) would work much better. Since you're not overclocking you don't need anything huge or water cooling.

Mainboard: Super-high-end mainboards are generally a waste, especially if you're not going to be overclocking/SLI/etc. Look for something in the $100-200 range that has the features you need.

RAM: Unless you're working with large graphics/video, a number of simultaneous virtual machines, or some other specialty application that just eats memory, scale back here. 32 GB (2x16) is more than plenty, and if needed you can add on later.

PSU: Massive overkill here. The parts you list will have a hard time topping 400 W, much less 1200. Look for something gold+ rated in the 500-600 W range.

Storage: NVMe drives provide no discernible real-world advantage over SATA units and cost a lot more, but I can't really fault you for wanting one. Maybe consider scaling back to a 500 GB-class unit and then get a large HDD for media/scratch/etc. storage. There's never any kind of benefit to putting SSDs into a RAID 0 config.

GPU: Without info on your display it's hard to say. If you're still on 1080p with no plans to upgrade a 1070GTX will more than sufficient for a long time.

***

In general, trying to create a build for >3 years and dumping a bunch of money into it is foolish. It's better to do a 2-3 year build and spend far less. When that system has outlived its usefulness there will be faster systems with new features, and you can put the cash saved on the last build towards it.
Click to expand...

Good stuff. Exactly the common sense hammer upside the head I needed :)

Will adjust and re-post.
 
KarsusTG said:
Rgr. Completely get you on Seasonic and Corsair. Most people want to skimp on the PSU but it's just too damn important imo.

Something you might want to take into consideration is it's almost always better to keep your VM's on a separate drive from your host OS. When the VM is doing work and the Host is doing work you don't want them competing for your drives resources.
Click to expand...

Very good point. Will adjust.
 
Skillz said:
PSU is way, way overkill. 600W tops it all you need.
You're not overclocking but you want to spend $100 on a CPU cooler that's not even the best design for your use? You could get an AIO water cooler for half the price or a 212+ cooler for 1/3 of the price. You're not overclocking. No need to go all out on a CPU cooler.
Again, you're not overclocking so use the stock thermal compound included with whatever cooler you end up going with. It'll work.
Why do you need a $300+ motherboard? I guarantee that anything it has over a budget ~$150 board you wont be using. So what exactly do you need on this motherboard that a $150 board wont offer?
1080 GPU? What kind of gaming do you do and at what resolution? I get you want it to last 5 years, but depending on what you're doing with the GPU you will probably make it with a 1070. Chances are if a 1070 wont last 5 years neither will a 1080. So you'll be upgrading the GPU around the same time anyway. If you're on 1080P then you'll get the most out of a 1070 until you upgrade vs a 1080.

Spending $2k+ on a LGA1151 setup just doesn't make sense when you can get a 2011v3 setup for the same price and have more cores.
Click to expand...

I've used the hyper 212before. In fact my current game machine has one.

LGA1152 is the latest chipset, right ? Kaby Lake ?

I guess I could go sky lake.

It's clear I need MB help. It's been so long I've lost the handle on it.

I want stock speed (no over clocking will be done)

I want absolute stability.

Minimum 32g RAM, prefer 64 at least in capability.

Shitloads of Sata 6 ports.

Shitloads of USB 3 ports, and some 2.0 ports as well.

A thunderbolt or two would not kill me, but not a requirement.

Etc.... I want a Bently motherboard :)

So, what do I want. A Z170 based board lake anAsus Z170 Deluxe ?
 
Round 2 !!!

Took everything above into consideration, and revised as needed:

https://pcpartpicker.com/user/TechLarry/saved/dHjJxr

I think that ASUS TUF board meets my reliability requirements but remains a good performing board. I didn't see any obvious features missing.

Yes, I need the 1080. I currently have a 2K monitor (2560 X 1440) and plan on adding 2 more as soon as they go on sale somewhere (I have the Acer, and it's served me quite well).

The heat sink compound is just so I have some.

Since Im now under $2500, I may add new spinners. I just realized my 300GB Velociraptors are going on 4 years old now, and the 1TB WD Black I have in there is ancient.

If I wanted to have, say, 3 or 4 4TB WD Reds in RAID 5 or 10 for data and storage, would it be ok internally, or would it be better to go with an external USB 3 box or maybe even a LAN based box ?
 
Is there anyway to lock that thing into pulling prices from only ONE vendor?

I wouldn't mind paying a percent or two more to get everything from some place I really ltrust, like Amazon (Prime) and knowing exactly when it will show up.
 
Short summary: How to spend $900 more than you need to!

EDIT: missed the second attempt, looks more reasonable now.
 
Last edited:
The Asus TUF line seems a bit dubious to me. Extra plastic shrouding, LED lighting, etc. You're paying extra for fluff. Go through tables of mainboards (Asus, Gigabyte, etc.) and find the ones that match the minimums you need, eliminate those with features and fluff you don't, and start pricing things out.

The PSU is still overkill and costs way too much. Look at something like the Seasonic SSR-550RM instead. It's gold-rated and much cheaper. It's not completely modular, but the only attached cables are ones that can't you can't do without anyways so no loss there.

A 1 TB SSD still seems like a bit much, particularly if you plan on having internal HDD storage as well.

TechLarry said:
If I wanted to have, say, 3 or 4 4TB WD Reds in RAID 5 or 10 for data and storage, would it be ok internally, or would it be better to go with an external USB 3 box or maybe even a LAN based box ?
Click to expand...

Almost certainly a NAS, especially if you have multiple devices that need to access the data.
 
Running RAID on your main box will decrease boot time while the RAID controller loads. Completely kills one of the main benefits of having a fast SSD. Even if you only reboot occasionally (software updates for example) you'll appreciate the extremely fast reboot time. If you want to run a RAID array then build a separate box for it. Actually if you want to have more than one "storage" drive storing documents, files, etc... then IMHO it's best to not have that on your main rig.

What does that motherboard have that you MUST need? More money doesn't equal more reliable.

I second hat Seasonic SSR-550RM. It's a good unit. I know you want modular and that PSU is only semimodular, but the "permanent" cables are the motherboard and CPU connections. You'll need those regardless.

If you click "edit build" and look at the icon next to the vendor name you can manually edit the vendor to select Amazon if you want.
 
Good point on the raid.

Now that I've read Kyles Kaby Lake review, I'm wondering if I shouldn't just stick with the 2600k core and upgrade around it.

New SSD
32g RAM
1080 Video

And hold off on the MB and Processor until we see what Ryzen does.
 
TechLarry said:
It's been a few years so I'm considering a new build.

This is going to be an all-in machine. Gaming. Work. Personal. I want ONE machine that does it all.

I want it to be as up to date as possible because I want 5 years out of it.

I am far more concerned with stability and included features than with overclocking. I will NOT be overclocking anything.

I want fast, stable and feature laden :) I want it ALL !
Click to expand...

If you're not going to overclock I'd probably go for a Xeon-based workstation build with ECC RAM.

Edit: after checking Intel's site, the low-end Xeon platform is really disappointing. It's just the consumer Skylake platform with a new name, lower stock clocks on CPUs, and not even a single extra PCIe lane. Not worth it just for ECC RAM, which should be an option on every motherboard and CPU.

The power supply in your list is a massive overkill unless you're planning a quad-SLI setup, which the motherboard in your list can't handle anyway. A quality 500w PSU is plenty, though you might have better luck in the 650w range due to market factors.

Some may try to talk you out of 64GB of RAM. Not me. Of course you don't need that much, but what's that got to do with anything? At minimum, it's more space to cache content from much slower storage devices.
 
Last edited:
When it comes to power supplies, I like at least a wee bit of overkill :)

I used to work on power supplies that were literally capable of erasing your ass from existence in a puff of smoke and dust if you were stupid, so I have a fondness for them :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top