Help Needed with a New setup

[black.hat]

Hey Guys,

I am new in this forum, Hopefully I can get some help with my new setup,

I am working on setting up a new PC, I'll list my specs below, Please let me know what do you guys think and if should make any changes. the PC is going to be mainly for gaming and secondary for some internet use:

MotherBoard: ASUS Maximus V EXTREME
Monitors: 3x BenQ xl2420tX 24"
Processor: Core i7-3960X
Memory: 16GB CORSAIR DOMINATOR GT DDR3
Graphic: 2x EVGA GeForce GTX 690
1x 256 Samsung SSD
2x 2TB WD Black Edition Drive
Hardware RAID 0
Power: Corsair Professional Series Gold 1200-Watt 80

Also do you guys think ASUS Rampage IV Extreme X79: motherboard might be better?

Thanks!

 

[Dangman]

Please answer the stickied "ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS FIRST" so that we can help you better. In addition to those 10 questions, please answer the following questions:
11) Did you already buy the parts or something?
12) Are you going for balls to the wall gaming PC that'll do fantastic in synthetic benchmarks with ZERO care about bang for the buck and how much it costs or do you want good bang for the buck parts that are still high performance that'll still get you the same level of real performance as that PC?

 

[black.hat]

Please answer the stickied "ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS FIRST" so that we can help you better. In addition to those 10 questions, please answer the following questions:
11) Did you already buy the parts or something?
12) Are you going for balls to the wall gaming PC that'll do fantastic in synthetic benchmarks with ZERO care about bang for the buck and how much it costs or do you want good bang for the buck parts that are still high performance that'll still get you the same level of real performance as that PC?

A:

11) No, I have not yet bought any parts, Planning to buy within next few days.
12) I need the BEST parts, i dont care about the money BUT i still want to be a little bit smart on this, e.g. i find the speed difference between Intel Core i7-3930K and my current choice (Core i7-3960X) is VERY little bit, while there is big difference in price, almost $500! so that's what i meant to be a little bit smart. as it does not really worth paying more $500 for a little bit speed difference its simply stupidity .

Thanks.

 

[Dangman]

Please answer the other 10 questions.

Also, if you know full well that there's a small difference in performance between the Core i7-3960X and Core i7 3930K, why do you still have the 3960X in your build list? That's not smart at all.

 

[black.hat]

Please answer the other 10 questions.

Also, if you know full well that there's a small difference in performance between the Core i7-3960X and Core i7 3930K, why do you still have the 3960X in your build list? That's not smart at all.

I find that only today and there is no way to edit my topic and change that

Where can find those questions?

 

[Dangman]

It's the sticky linked here:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1349433

 

[black.hat]

Most of those questions are answered in my posts above, No i am not a big fun of overclocking but i will do it in future if needed, my budget is $7K, i am in US and i do have a legit OS 7 64bit thx!

 

[Dangman]

No you did not answer all of those questions in your OP:
8) When do you plan on building/buying the PC?
9) What features do you need in a motherboard? RAID? Firewire? Crossfire or SLI support? USB 3.0? SATA 6Gb/s? eSATA? Onboard video? UEFI? etc.

Also which Windows 7 64bit do you have?

 

[Dan_D]

Hey Guys,

I am new in this forum, Hopefully I can get some help with my new setup,

I am working on setting up a new PC, I'll list my specs below, Please let me know what do you guys think and if should make any changes. the PC is going to be mainly for gaming and secondary for some internet use:

MotherBoard: ASUS Maximus V EXTREME
Monitors: 3x BenQ xl2420tX 24"
Processor: Core i7-3960X
Memory: 16GB CORSAIR DOMINATOR GT DDR3
Graphic: 2x EVGA GeForce GTX 690
1x 256 Samsung SSD
2x 2TB WD Black Edition Drive
Hardware RAID 0
Power: Corsair Professional Series Gold 1200-Watt 80

Also do you guys think ASUS Rampage IV Extreme X79: motherboard might be better?

Thanks!

The first problem is that the Maximus V Extreme is an LGA1155 chipset based board which uses the Z77 Express chipset. This is incompatible with the Core i7 3960X which is an LGA2011 CPU which requires an X79 based motherboard. All arguments aside about value, this simply won't work. And I think the video card setup would be best served by 3 GTX 680 4GB cards rather than dual GTX 690's. The latter have gimped clock speeds compared to the former, and only 2GB of VRAM per GPU. Performance is also slightly less centered around scaling. The GTX 680 3-Way SLI setup should be faster most of the time.

And keep in mind that you will not be doing a hardware based RAID. You will be using the motherboard's firmware and OpROMs to manage the array, but it will not be a real "hardware" RAID. Memory will have to be done in quald channel, so you'll need 4x4GB modules for 16GB of RAM. I wouldn't bother with spending money on ultra low latency stuff or for anything a lot faster than DDR3 1600MHz. Finally the comments concerning the value of the 3960X over the 3930K are valid. Sure if you want the best and can afford it, go for it, but your spending $500 or so more for very little gain.

 

[black.hat]

8) within next few days.
9) Yeah RAID and SLI and USP 3 sata 6GB eSATA are very important, i am not familiar with those other features, but would prefer that i can still have them.

I have the ultimate version.

Thanks!

 

[Dan_D]

8) within next few days.
9) Yeah RAID and SLI and USP 3 sata 6GB eSATA are very important, i am not familiar with those other features, but would prefer that i can still have them.

I have the ultimate version.

Thanks!

My question is this: How do you know you need features you aren't familiar with? eSATA is largely unnecessary due to the existance of USB 3.0, especially when external enclosures exist to facilitate use of SATA drives via docking stations which use USB 3.0 connections. On either ASUS board you have an option for UASP transfers instead of BOT transfers. When used right, it's about as fast as eSATA is. Though you still get eSATA on the Rampage IV Extreme anyway, I'm just saying. eSATA is easily attained by using an internal to external bracket which can be made to work on any board. I wouldn't let eSATA ever be a total deal breaker.

SLI is for multiple GPUs and I'm guessing by your monitor choice that surround gaming is one goal you have. That's fine and you will need SLI for that. RAID support will be a virtual given with any of the boards you'll find recommended on the site. Anything with a Z77 Express or X79 Express chipset will have that.

 

[black.hat]

I am familiar with eSATA, but i never tested it personally, I want it in cause i needed it. I have not tested USB 3.0 either, thats why i needed them both, but thanks for clearing this up.

 

[Dan_D]

I am familiar with eSATA, but i never tested it personally, I want it in cause i needed it. I have not tested USB 3.0 either, thats why i needed them both, but thanks for clearing this up.

You've never used it, so that's why you needed it? This makes no sense.

 

[Dangman]

Assuming that you're not gonna need eSATA, I recommend the following prelimnary setup:
$495 - Intel Core i7 3770K + Asus P8Z77-V Intel Z77 ATX Motherboard Combo
$90 - 2 x Samsung 2 x 4GB MV-3V4G3D/US DDR3 1600 RAM
$1734 - 3 x eVGA 04G-P4-2686-KR GTX 680 4GB PCI-E Video Card
$400 - Crucial M4 CT512M4SSD2 2.5" 512GB SSD
$360 - 2 x Western Digital Caviar Black WD2002FAEX 2TB 7200 RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Drive (For data storage)
$18 - Samsung DVD Burner
$170 - Seasonic X850 Gold 850W Modular PSU
-----
Total: $3087 plus tax and shipping

As for cases, I recommend the following cases:
$119 - Corsair Carbide Series 500R ATX Case
$140 - Corsair Vengeance Series C70 Arctic White ATX Case
$140 - Corsair Vengeance Series C70 Gunmetal Black ATX Case
$160 - Corsair Graphite Series 600TM ATX Case
$160 - Thermaltake VN300M1W2N Chase MK-1 ATX Case
$160 - Silverstone TJ04B-EW ATX Case

Since you're only gaming, no good reason IMO for you to go withe X79/socket 2011 platform. You won't notice a difference between the Core i7 3930K and Core i7 3770K. In fact, you probably won't notice a difference between the 3770K and the $100 cheaper Core i5 3470 or Core i5 3570K in gaming. But I went a tad overkill on the CPU anyway. As Dan_D noted earlier, you really are better off with tri-GTX 680 4GB SLI over GTX 690 SLI. Current GPUs use relatively lower amounts of power than past GPUs. As such, you really don't need a 1200W PSU when a 850W PSU will do the job just fine. In addition, current Intel platforms do not benefit from higher speed RAM when it comes to gaming or other real world apps. Nor do Dominator RAM offer any sort of massive jump in quality to justify their price. As such, the high price for that Dominator RAM is completely unjustified since you're not seeing ANY benefits from it besides higher synthetic benchmark scores.

EDIT: For monitors, do you really want 3D Gaming? For about $600 less than your planned monitors, you can get 3 x 27" Korean LCD monitors that have a resolution 2560x1440 each:
http://techreport.com/review/23291/those-27-inch-ips-displays-from-korea-are-for-real

 

[black.hat]

Assuming that you're not gonna need eSATA, I recommend the following prelimnary setup:
$495 - Intel Core i7 3770K + Asus P8Z77-V Intel Z77 ATX Motherboard Combo
$90 - 2 x Samsung 2 x 4GB MV-3V4G3D/US DDR3 1600 RAM
$1734 - 3 x eVGA 04G-P4-2686-KR GTX 680 4GB PCI-E Video Card
$400 - Crucial M4 CT512M4SSD2 2.5" 512GB SSD
$360 - 2 x Western Digital Caviar Black WD2002FAEX 2TB 7200 RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Drive (For data storage)
$18 - Samsung DVD Burner
$170 - Seasonic X850 Gold 850W Modular PSU
-----
Total: $3087 plus tax and shipping

As for cases, I recommend the following cases:
$119 - Corsair Carbide Series 500R ATX Case
$140 - Corsair Vengeance Series C70 Arctic White ATX Case
$140 - Corsair Vengeance Series C70 Gunmetal Black ATX Case
$160 - Corsair Graphite Series 600TM ATX Case
$160 - Thermaltake VN300M1W2N Chase MK-1 ATX Case
$160 - Silverstone TJ04B-EW ATX Case

Since you're only gaming, no good reason IMO for you to go withe X79/socket 2011 platform. You won't notice a difference between the Core i7 3930K and Core i7 3770K. In fact, you probably won't notice a difference between the 3770K and the $100 cheaper Core i5 3470 or Core i5 3570K in gaming. But I went a tad overkill on the CPU anyway. As Dan_D noted earlier, you really are better off with tri-GTX 680 4GB SLI over GTX 690 SLI. Current GPUs use relatively lower amounts of power than past GPUs. As such, you really don't need a 1200W PSU when a 850W PSU will do the job just fine. In addition, current Intel platforms do not benefit from higher speed RAM when it comes to gaming or other real world apps. Nor do Dominator RAM offer any sort of massive jump in quality to justify their price. As such, the high price for that Dominator RAM is completely unjustified since you're not seeing ANY benefits from it besides higher synthetic benchmark scores.

EDIT: For monitors, do you really want 3D Gaming? For about $600 less than your planned monitors, you can get 3 x 27" Korean LCD monitors that have a resolution 2560x1440 each:
http://techreport.com/review/23291/those-27-inch-ips-displays-from-korea-are-for-real

Thanks Danny, There is kind of big difference between 3770K and 3930K, so i would prefer to stick with 3930K.

Why do you prefer Asus P8Z77-V Intel Z77 ATX over ASUS Rampage IV Extreme X79?

and why do you prefer 2 x Samsung 2 x 4GB MV-3V4G3D/US DDR3 1600 over CORSAIR DOMINATOR GT 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133?

Those are even cheaper!

Thanks!

 

[Dangman]

Thanks Danny, There is kind of big difference between 3770K and 3930K, so i would prefer to stick with 3930K.

No there isn't any big difference between the 3770K and 3930K in gaming:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/551?vs=552

In fact, in some of the games listed in the above comparison, the 3770K outperformed the 3930K. You're not overclocking, you're not doing extensive amounts of video/3D/audio editing/rendering nor are you doing a ton of virtualization work. As such, the extra two cores of the Core i7 3930K will not benefit you in any way at all.

Why do you prefer Asus P8Z77-V Intel Z77 ATX over ASUS Rampage IV Extreme X79?

Because you're not doing anything that would justify the extra $240 for that Asus Rampage IV Extreme X79. You're not overclocking, you're not doing extensive amounts of video/3D/audio editing/rendering nor are you doing a ton of virtualization work. As such, outside of "I just want to spend money and don't want to be smart about it" reasoning, I don't see any reason for you to get that Asus Rampage mobo over the Asus P8Z77-V.

and why do you prefer 2 x Samsung 2 x 4GB MV-3V4G3D/US DDR3 1600 over CORSAIR DOMINATOR GT 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133?

Dan_D and I have already explained twice already why that Corsair Dominator is a poor choice outside of "I want to spend money for nonething". Please read our posts thoroughly. In fact, my answer to that question was in the damn post you quoted

 

[black.hat]

No there isn't any big difference between the 3770K and 3930K in gaming:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/551?vs=552

In fact, in some of the games listed in the above comparison, the 3770K outperformed the 3930K. You're not overclocking, you're not doing extensive amounts of video/3D/audio editing/rendering nor are you doing a ton of virtualization work. As such, the extra two cores of the Core i7 3930K will not benefit you in any way at all.

Because you're not doing anything that would justify the extra $240 for that Asus Rampage IV Extreme X79. You're not overclocking, you're not doing extensive amounts of video/3D/audio editing/rendering nor are you doing a ton of virtualization work. As such, outside of "I just want to spend money and don't want to be smart about it" reasoning, I don't see any reason for you to get that Asus Rampage mobo over the Asus P8Z77-V.

Dan_D and I have already explained twice already why that Corsair Dominator is a poor choice outside of "I want to spend money for nonething". Please read our posts thoroughly. In fact, my answer to that question was in the damn post you quoted

You better stop using terms such "damn" and trying to tell me that i am a fkn schnook, Just because i am a new user here and asked questions here, does not mean i am a "dumb-ass" and you're the god, I work in a hosting company and i deal with server since 11 years now, but i do always prefer to hear other comments,

THERE IS a noticeable different between those two processors, Please use a more trusted source to compare between two processors:
cpubenchmark.net

I stated that i WILL OVERCLOCK in future when needed, no base to overclock now when i am on open-budget.

Moreover the PC that you suggested wont last for long time.

As for you the ram, consider the hibernate wake up time when hibernating over 4GB of data from a premium ssd drive to those shitty samsung rams.

Don't keep telling me i am doing nothing, you think a heavy pc should run a specific thing such max, auto-cad, photoshop, audio/video rendering, virtualization or whatever?

Why the hell do you think i am going to need 512GB SSD?

the windows 7 is going to take LESS than 10GB of the drive, and in future its going to be increased to MAXIMUM of 100GB, what the heck am i going to do with 512GB SSD?

256GB SSD is going to be fair enough for drive C which will host the OS and some small software, other partitions would use the WD SATA III drives which will host the games.

Dan_D: you better stop asking stupid questions as "Whats your windows version" before being able to post your hardware suggestions. when i am saying that i considered $7K budget for this pc, do you think i am going to use the home version?

>>You've never used it, so that's why you needed it? This makes no sense.

I needed it so i can test it and tell if i will use it or not.

But whatever you say, you're right and i am wrong. You do make the sense.

Danny Bui, I can't believe you you trolled people since 6.8 Years now. congrats!

Please close this topic / delete it or do whatever you want.

 

[beto]

lol....is this dude for real? He comes on here asking for help and then doesn't want any? This guy has to be some kinda troll.

 

[Dangman]

That escalated quickly.

You better stop using terms such "damn"

Only used it once.

and trying to tell me that i am a fkn schnook,

Now where did I say you were a "fkn schnook"?

does not mean i am a "dumb-ass" and you're the god,

Now where I did say you were a "dumb-ass" and that I am a god?

THERE IS a noticeable different between those two processors, Please use a more trusted source to compare between two processors:
cpubenchmark.net

I could say the same for you: That's a synthetic benchmark. It has no bearing whatsoever when it comes to VIDEO GAMES or any real world apps and games. I've seen plenty of times where a CPU was good in all the benchmarks but was pure crap in actual real-world applications. In addition, how is Anandtech not a trusted source? It may not be as good as HardOCP of course but it's definitely better than THG or that Passmark.

I stated that i WILL OVERCLOCK in future when needed, no base to overclock now when i am on open-budget.

Fair enough.

Moreover the PC that you suggested wont last for long time.

How so? Games won't be using the extra cores for a long time. The Core i7 3770K already has extra threads just in case games do. In addition, both CPUs are based on the same Sandy Bridge platform so the clock for clock performance is gonna be the same. As such, unless games start taking full advantage of the 6 cores plus extra threads, your planned system won't last any longer than the setup I proposed. With that said, your argument does hold weight if you're planning on running 6 or more MMORPG clients at the same time. In that case, yes you probably should go for those extra cores.

As for you the ram, consider the hibernate wake up time when hibernating over 4GB of data from a premium ssd drive to those shitty samsung rams.

Unless you have empirical proof showing that the higher speed RAM will speed up recover from hibernate, I can't take that seriously.

Don't keep telling me i am doing nothing, you think a heavy pc should run a specific thing such max, auto-cad, photoshop, audio/video rendering, virtualization or whatever?

Yes. All you said you were using the PC for was gaming and web browsing. Gaming isn't that heavy duty enough to require spending more than $3 to $4 grand on a PC, let alone $7 grand.

Why the hell do you think i am going to need 512GB SSD?

Because you can afford it, it's faster than than 256GB version, and it means that you can install more games straight to the SSD.

Dan_D: you better stop asking stupid questions as "Whats your windows version" before being able to post your hardware suggestions. when i am saying that i considered $7K budget for this pc, do you think i am going to use the home version?

That wasn't Dan_D: That was me. I have to ask that because I've seen it multiple times here on the forums where people actually use the Home version with the X79 platform.

Danny Bui, I can't believe you you trolled people since 6.8 Years now. congrats!

Uh huh.

Please close this topic / delete it or do whatever you want.

I'm gonna assume that you had a bad day or something and leave this thread open just in case you change your mind. If you're serious, say the word and I'll lock the thread.

 

[Suprfire]

THERE IS a noticeable different between those two processors, Please use a more trusted source to compare between two processors:
cpubenchmark.net

Passmark =/= Gaming

As for you the ram, consider the hibernate wake up time when hibernating over 4GB of data from a premium ssd drive to those shitty samsung rams.

Samsung RAM is not shitty.
Hibernate wake up time? i lol'd.

Don't keep telling me i am doing nothing, you think a heavy pc should run a specific thing such max, auto-cad, photoshop, audio/video rendering, virtualization or whatever?

See your own post:

the PC is going to be mainly for gaming and secondary for some internet use

----

Why the hell do you think i am going to need 512GB SSD?

the windows 7 is going to take LESS than 10GB of the drive, and in future its going to be increased to MAXIMUM of 100GB, what the heck am i going to do with 512GB SSD?

256GB SSD is going to be fair enough for drive C which will host the OS and some small software, other partitions would use the WD SATA III drives which will host the games.

If you care about hibernation times, why don't you care about game load times? Putting your games on that "shitty" WD SATA "III"... (mechanical drives don't saturate SATA 3 , by the way)


edit: dang, Danny's quick.

 

[Dan_D]

>>You've never used it, so that's why you needed it? This makes no sense.

I needed it so i can test it and tell if i will use it or not.

But whatever you say, you're right and i am wrong. You do make the sense.

USB 3.0 is available on every Z77 and X79 chipset based board. So you will always get that. Though performance varies by controller and implemetation. The ASUS boards give you multiple controllers and dedicated ports for each set rather than VIA VL810 hubs or something which multiplex the Intel ports. So your fine there. eSATA can be added via an internal to external bracket. Again, having it on the back plane shouldn't be a deal breaker.

 

[black.hat]

SSD is not designed as a spot for LARGE files, the average life of an SSD is about 5-6 years before it become extremely slow, using it for installing/uninstalling large games will cut those 5-6 years to 2-3 years and maybe less depends on the gaming/usage level.

You're absolutely correct on the cpu, in term of gaming, they are the same, but what about the internet activity? i leave DOZEN of browser tabs, couple of FTP-clients software plus at least 6-7 other programs open all time when i use the pc for internet. Do you think that cpu will still function the same after couple of years?

You know how cpu usage go crazy high when leaving dozen of browser tabs open for long time?

the RAM case does need a prove, when hibernation the computer (which i do all time), the data will be saved from the memories into disk, when waking up the pc back from hibernate, the data will be restored back to the rams from the disk, when using a slower memories the process would take longer.

I appreciate your help and i apologize if i was rude.

 

[Dan_D]

SSD is not designed as a spot for LARGE files, the average life of an SSD is about 5-6 years before it become extremely slow, using it for installing/uninstalling large games will cut those 5-6 years to 2-3 years and maybe less depends on the gaming/usage level.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Gaming doesn't benefit a ton from SSD use other than it reducing level load times, but it can handle being used for virtually anything for a 5 year time span. Your information is out of context at best and outdated at worst. Concerns about how SSD's were used were with older generation controllers and flash memory modules. Newer generation SSD's should be fine for almost anything.

You're absolutely correct on the cpu, in term of gaming, they are the same, but what about the internet activity? i leave DOZEN of browser tabs, couple of FTP-clients software plus at least 6-7 other programs open all time when i use the pc for internet. Do you think that cpu will still function the same after couple of years?

You know how cpu usage go crazy high when leaving dozen of browser tabs open for long time?

Either CPU is fine for that. Browser windows aren't all that demanding. The gaming is far more demanding and that won't leverage more than 4 cores or 4 total threads. Internet browsing on a 3770K is the same as browsing on a Core i7 3960X. You will not see any difference doing that.

the RAM case does need a prove, when hibernation the computer (which i do all time), the data will be saved from the memories into disk, when waking up the pc back from hibernate, the data will be restored back to the rams from the disk, when using a slower memories the process would take longer.

I appreciate your help and i apologize if i was rude.

Yeah, we know how it works. However, data copied from the hibernation file on to the disk will be bottlenecked at several points before hitting the system RAM. Hibernation files and their performance will be limited by the I/O of the disk controller, disk platter's, firmware, flash memory, etc. and then limited by the bus it's attached to, then the controller on the motherboard, then to the RAM and CPU. DDR3 1600MHz vs. DDR3 2133MHz will perform the SAME when it comes to resuming from standby because the RAM isn't the limiting factor in regard to performance. Period, end of story. We know this. That's why Danny said "Prove it." Because your assertion that the RAM will make a difference in that task is dead wrong. It's based on false assumptions about how things work and ignoring most of the variables involved.

 

[rastaban]

LOL....my troll radar beeps whenever someone puts up a "can you tell me if my price-maxed build is good?" thread. After post #12 I was really hoping one of you would shout troll haha.

But seriously black.hat, Danny and Dan have been VERY patient with you. All the questions they are asking are valid. They need that information because there are considerations to be made that you are not aware of. They are trying to make this process smooth for you.

Building a computer is not hard. Anyone can order parts and slap them together. Suggestions are given on the forums to maximize performance for cost. If you have really worked with servers for 11 years now, it should be a no brainer to you what this means. Excessive parts make for more power draw, more heat, and more noise. Now who wants that?

There is no reason for anyone to be spending $7000 for a gaming computer unless there is custom metalwork/paintwork/watercooling/circuitry involved. $3000 will get you more than you need. Spending more than that and you are LITERALLY THROWING IT AWAY as you won't see any difference in normal usage. If you like throwing money away, I'd say the casino or a penny stock is more fun than excessive heat and noise produced by your machine.

I've watched this thread from the start and everything that has been suggested to you makes a lot of sense. Just listen to the advice being given.

 

[black.hat]

Passmark =/= Gaming

I did stated that the PC is going to be used for gaming AND INTERNET USE, what makes you think i should consider the CPU to be used for gaming only?

Samsung RAM is not shitty.
Hibernate wake up time? i lol'd.

Excuse me? do you wake up your computer when its on hibernate via your graphic card?

What the heck makes you think you should be lol'd? the hibernate process depends mainly on the RAM.

Do you transfer your hibernated data from HDD to your graphic card? lol. as i explained before, when hibernating the computer (which i do all time), the data will be saved from the memories into disk, when waking up the pc back from hibernate, the data will be restored back to the rams from the disk, when using a slower memories the process would take longer.

the WHOLE process depends on the speed of the ram.

See your own post:

----

If you care about hibernation times, why don't you care about game load times? Putting your games on that "shitty" WD SATA "III"... (mechanical drives don't saturate SATA 3 , by the way)

edit: dang, Danny's quick.

You suggest that i use SSD to install/uninstall/play games on it mainly? lol

SSD is not designed as a spot for LARGE files, the average life of an SSD is about 5-6 years before it become extremely slow, using it for installing/uninstalling large games will cut those 5-6 years to 2-3 years and maybe less depends on the gaming/usage level.

Even for servers (which host less smaller files than games pcs), they use the SSD to host ONLY the OS.

WD Black Edition SATA III drives are not "shitty". they are premium drives and everybody loves them
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004CSIG1G/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&seller=

 

[black.hat]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Gaming doesn't benefit a ton from SSD use other than it reducing level load times, but it can handle being used for virtually anything for a 5 year time span. Your information is out of context at best and outdated at worst. Concerns about how SSD's were used were with older generation controllers and flash memory modules. Newer generation SSD's should be fine for almost anything.

I do clearly understand what i am talking about. the SSD is most effective in load time, mostly you would notice it in windows start up and when starting up the game. or when moving large files. thats it.

SSD drive last based on total number of sectors read and written during drive's life.

I am not sure about your newer generation of SSD, but at least i am pretty damn sure that crucial ssds are all like that, i'll be happy to continue this subject in crucial forum if you would like.

Yeah, we know how it works. However, data copied from the hibernation file on to the disk will be bottlenecked at several points before hitting the system RAM. Hibernation files and their performance will be limited by the I/O of the disk controller, disk platter's, firmware, flash memory, etc. and then limited by the bus it's attached to, then the controller on the motherboard, then to the RAM and CPU. DDR3 1600MHz vs. DDR3 2133MHz will perform the SAME when it comes to resuming from standby because the RAM isn't the limiting factor in regard to performance. Period, end of story. We know this. That's why Danny said "Prove it." Because your assertion that the RAM will make a difference in that task is dead wrong. It's based on false assumptions about how things work and ignoring most of the variables involved.

Thats not true. Would like me explain you in depth with DETAILS how the process works?

 

[black.hat]

LOL....my troll radar beeps whenever someone puts up a "can you tell me if my price-maxed build is good?" thread. After post #12 I was really hoping one of you would shout troll haha.

Do you always start start your first post with "LOL", i think that explain who is troll lol.

But seriously black.hat, Danny and Dan have been VERY patient with you. All the questions they are asking are valid. They need that information because there are considerations to be made that you are not aware of. They are trying to make this process smooth for you.

Well i dont understand what do you mean by "being patient with you", I know you're trying to a smart-lalala here, nice try, however, this has already been discussed before, so no base to be a troll and trying to be a smart and repeat what already been discussed.

Nice try anyway, keep up.

Building a computer is not hard. Anyone can order parts and slap them together. Suggestions are given on the forums to maximize performance for cost. If you have really worked with servers for 11 years now, it should be a no brainer to you what this means. Excessive parts make for more power draw, more heat, and more noise. Now who wants that?

This has already been discussed too rastaban.

There is no reason for anyone to be spending $7000 for a gaming computer unless there is custom metalwork/paintwork/watercooling/circuitry involved. $3000 will get you more than you need. Spending more than that and you are LITERALLY THROWING IT AWAY as you won't see any difference in normal usage. If you like throwing money away, I'd say the casino or a penny stock is more fun than excessive heat and noise produced by your machine.

There will be watercooling, a $230 worth case tower, 3x BenQ 3d monitors, ASUS Xonar dac, these will bring the price higher than what you think mr genius. pc does not mean a mother board, ram, and graphic card, there are other parts to buy too.

I've watched this thread from the start and everything that has been suggested to you makes a lot of sense. Just listen to the advice being given.

Thats correct, I do appreciate some of the recommendations here. but that does not mean you are not a troll

Danny Please close this topic. Thank you!