Time for a new gaming rig

[Pez]

Okay Dangman, keep up the streak. You helped me in 2008, then again in 2011. My current rig is experiencing some issues I haven't been able to diagnose/resolve on my own, but I'll create a separate thread for that later.

1) What will you be doing with this PC?
Gaming (air cooled)
2) What's your budget? Are tax and shipping included?
About $2,000 total (Prime member)
3) Which country do you live in?
Suburb of Chicago, IL, so I have access to Fry's and Microcenter - shame TD's closed
4) What exact parts do you need for that budget?
Case, motherboard, cpu, ram, video card, modular psu, system fans, cables, OS, hard drives (good size SSD for OS drive) - no monitor or peripherals
5) If reusing any parts, what parts will you be reusing?
I will most likely be reusing a sound card (ASUS Xonar)
6) Will you be overclocking?
No
7) What is the max resolution of your monitor? What size is it?
30 inch - 2560 x 1600
8) When do you plan on building/buying the PC?
Soon-to-immediately
9) What features do you need in a motherboard?
USB 3.0, SATA 6Gb/s - Crossfire or SLI support may be nice
10) Do you already have a legit and reusable/transferable OS key/license?
I need a new OS key, I suspect Windows 7 Home Premium might be the best, but open to suggestions.

Just some pricing research:
Mobo: ASUS Sabertooth X99 @ Microcenter for $319 ($10 more than Amazon)
CPU: Intel Core i5-4690K 3.5GHz LGA 1150 Boxed Processor @ Microcenter for $199 ($30 less than Amazon)

OS: Is Win10 recommended? Fry's has it in the Prof OEM 64 bit for $130 (deal ends today). Also, Fry's has Intel Core i7-4790K Processor & MSI Z97-G45 Motherboard combo deal at $400. This seems like a decent deal with the i7 from price comparing Amazon and Microcenter. I also believe this deal may end today. The mobo has good reviews on Amazon.

I know that certain SSD's are garbage, so I'll need to rely on those more knowledgeable. I also know nothing about good PSU or Ram. All I know is that I'd love a modular PSU.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Deleted member 126051]

That board and the CPU don't go together.

Here's something just a bit above your budget. It can be brought down though. You have access to MicroCenter, and some of the prices from PCHound are NOT the lowest (You can get the video card cheaper on Amazon and Newegg, the CPU as well).

PC Hound Part List

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 8M ($369.9 @ B&H)
Motherboard: ASUS Z170 PRO GAMING ($172.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.SKILL 16GB (2 x 8GB) Ripjaws V Series ($154.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 06G-P4-4998-KR ($785.59 @ B&H)
Power Supply: SeaSonic 1000W Platinum-1000 ($217.04 @ Newegg)
Storage: SAMSUNG 256GB SM951 ($204 @ NCIX US)
Storage #2: HGST 4TB Deskstar NAS H3IKNAS40003272SN (0S03664) ($169.99 @ Newegg)
Case: NZXT CA-S340W-B1 ($71.99 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: NZXT Kraken X60 RL-KRX60-01 ($0 - Unavailable)
Windows: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit ($89.99 @ TigerDirect)
Mouse: Microsoft D66-00066 ($0 - Unavailable)
Keyboard: Logitech G710 ($89.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $2,326.46
Price may include shipping, rebates, promotions, and tax
Generated by PC Hound

 

[Pez]

Thanks Chas. I'll do some looking. If I go ASUS, I think I'd want a bit of a higher end board. I know the brand has gotten better, but I think I'd want a higher end board. Also, I've been using AMD cards for so long, I think I'd want to stick with them. It's funny, back in the day, I ran AMD cpu's and NVIDIA gpu's, and now it's Intel for cpu and AMD for gpu. Also, water cooling? I plan on doing air only. I'm also not certain I need such a high end cpu, especially since I won't be OC'ing and just gaming.

This has been an absolutely horrible week. First, I get sick on the tail end of a vacation, then my PC starts failing. Then, yesterday, I get rear ended and pushed into another car, and have significant front end damage. At least they had insurance.

But after posting my request, I was actually able to figure out that the SATA port on the mobo my OS drive was using is going bad. So far, my system's been as responsive as it used to be, and no lock ups or blue screens. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

While I still want to replace this rig, this should buy me some more time. I unfortunately don't have the disposable income I used to have.

 

[Dangman]

But after posting my request, I was actually able to figure out that the SATA port on the mobo my OS drive was using is going bad. So far, my system's been as responsive as it used to be, and no lock ups or blue screens. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

While I still want to replace this rig, this should buy me some more time. I unfortunately don't have the disposable income I used to have.

Yup, that should buy you some time. Now while Skylake is a decent upgrade from Sandy Bridge, it isn't a huge upgrade where you have to upgrade ASAP. So yeah use your PC as is until it really is dying and then upgrade. Hopefully by the time that you have to replace your current setup, the pricing of the LGA 1151 motherboards, LGA 1151 CPUs, and DDR4 RAM should stabilize and the major release kinks of Windows 10 will be worked out. In addition, we would also get a better idea by then which LGA 1151 mobos are en route to being reliable motherboards.

If you haven't already, I would just add a SSD to your current setup. It's a great stop-gap upgrade and will definitely make the system feel "new". I recommend this SSD:
$85 - Crucial BX100 250GB SSD

And before you ask, I wouldn't recommend either Chas or Nasgul's setups.

 

[Deleted member 126051]

Yup, that should buy you some time. Now while Skylake is a decent upgrade from Sandy Bridge, it isn't a huge upgrade where you have to upgrade ASAP. So yeah use your PC as is until it really is dying and then upgrade. Hopefully by the time that you have to replace your current setup, the pricing of the LGA 1151 motherboards, LGA 1151 CPUs, and DDR4 RAM should stabilize and the major release kinks of Windows 10 will be worked out. In addition, we would also get a better idea by then which LGA 1151 mobos are en route to being reliable motherboards.

If you haven't already, I would just add a SSD to your current setup. It's a great stop-gap upgrade and will definitely make the system feel "new". I recommend this SSD:
$85 - Crucial BX100 250GB SSD

And before you ask, I wouldn't recommend either Chas or Nasgul's setups.

If you've gotten your system issues stabilized, I'd recommend following his advice and simply upgrading your OS drive to an SSD. This, alone, will make the system "feel" different. Faster boot times, faster load times. And it's not as if your existing system is THAT far off today's bleeding edge.

So it should extend the usability of the system until such a time as you REALLY need an upgrade. By which time prices should come down, and bleeding edge performance should go up. And by waiting a bit longer, you should be in a better financial position to trick out a system.

Oh, and an SSD's far more economical than completely replacing your whole system...

 

[Pez]

Actually, my OS is already on an SSD. When I first built this rig 4 years ago, I had it on a 64GB Crucial SSD. It was later learned that that particular SSD had a firmware issue that, if I remember correctly, it rebooted after 5 minutes of usage once the drive it a certain power on hours (or something like that). I fixed that problem (thanks to H, of course), and later upgraded that drive to an Intel 520 (180GB). 64GB just wasn't enough for Windows and a few apps anymore. CrystalDiskImage rates my OS drive at 100% still (with 20427 power on hours), so I don't need to upgrade that.

I actually would have picked up a refurb or two from the Hot Deals section last week, but I was a bit late seeing it (don't check that or SD too often these days, as I don't have the extra cash anymore).

With all that stated, I'll shelve my need to buy a rig for now. That will give me time to read up more on the new tech out there. I remember a time when people came to me for advice for computer parts. I'm so behind the times.

 

[Deleted member 126051]

Heh! It's called "life" dude.

Once Upon A Time I was God's Own Hardware Junkie for anything PC. My apartment looked like an episode of Hoarders: Gone Geek and I could pretty much rattle off the specs of every CPU and chipset in the last 5-7 years and give you a dissertation on the relative merits.

Then "life" happened. Dumb life!

I now have nearly no "shit" in my life and a LOT less "stuff". Ironically, I have more space to indulge it now than I ever did. Just...no time...Hell, the "Beginners Guide to LN2 Cooling" has got my inner Cave Nerd beating it's chest and going "WE COULD GET A ZILLION GIGAHERTZ! GO NOW!"

But my days of spending 3 days dialing in a system for Ludicrous Speed are pretty much over.
The advent of AIO water cooling has helped pull the teeth on my extreme cooling fixation.

 

[TheEschaton]

What about this build, to get yourself ready for games that can use more than 4 threads efficiently while not exactly breaking the bank and avoiding the aging AM3+ platform? Also a Fury X in it, which is kind of crazy (but really nice for those higher-res screens such as the one you have):

PC Hound Part List

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1230V3 ($249.99 @ TigerDirect)
Motherboard: ASUS Z87-A (NFC EXPRESS EDITION) ($59 @ Newegg)
Memory: Patriot 8GB (2 x 4GB) Signature ($36.99 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: XFX Radeon R9 Fury X R9-FURY-4QFA ($649.99 @ TigerDirect)
Power Supply: EVGA 750W 110-B2-0750-VR ($49.99 @ NCIX US)
Storage: PNY 240GB CS1100 SSD7CS1111-240-RB (CS1111) ($69.99 @ TigerDirect)
Storage #2: Western Digital 1TB Blue WD10EZEX ($44.99 @ Best Buy)
Case: Antec Gaming Series One ($30.99 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: COOLER MASTER Hyper T4 RR-T4-18PK-R1 ($14.99 @ Amazon)
Windows: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit ($89.99 @ TigerDirect)
Case Fan: COOLER MASTER R4-L2R-20AC-GP ($4.99 @ Newegg)
Case Fan #2: COOLER MASTER R4-L2R-20AC-GP ($4.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $1,306.89
Price may include shipping, rebates, promotions, and tax
Generated by PC Hound

 

[horrorshow]

You can get the E3-1231V3 for $5 more
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117316

 

[Dangman]

What about this build, to get yourself ready for games that can use more than 4 threads efficiently while not exactly breaking the bank and avoiding the aging AM3+ platform? Also a Fury X in it, which is kind of crazy (but really nice for those higher-res screens such as the one you have):

PC Hound Part List

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1230V3 ($249.99 @ TigerDirect)
Motherboard: ASUS Z87-A (NFC EXPRESS EDITION) ($59 @ Newegg)
Memory: Patriot 8GB (2 x 4GB) Signature ($36.99 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: XFX Radeon R9 Fury X R9-FURY-4QFA ($649.99 @ TigerDirect)
Power Supply: EVGA 750W 110-B2-0750-VR ($49.99 @ NCIX US)
Storage: PNY 240GB CS1100 SSD7CS1111-240-RB (CS1111) ($69.99 @ TigerDirect)
Storage #2: Western Digital 1TB Blue WD10EZEX ($44.99 @ Best Buy)
Case: Antec Gaming Series One ($30.99 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: COOLER MASTER Hyper T4 RR-T4-18PK-R1 ($14.99 @ Amazon)
Windows: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit ($89.99 @ TigerDirect)
Case Fan: COOLER MASTER R4-L2R-20AC-GP ($4.99 @ Newegg)
Case Fan #2: COOLER MASTER R4-L2R-20AC-GP ($4.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $1,306.89
Price may include shipping, rebates, promotions, and tax
Generated by PC Hound

That's not really a good setup. There's no guarantee that either Xeons will be supported by that motherboard. Speaking of which, the reliability of that motherboard is questionable considering the low ratings it is getting. The RAM is also too limiting as it means that you're only limited to 24GB of RAM max in the future before you'd have to replace RAM. Not worth it IMO. Then there's the video card: The R9 Fury X is a failure of a video card considering that there are better, cheaper, and faster options available. Plus the required liquid cooler means that it's basically going to be incompatible with a lot of cases when used in conjunction with a 3rd party CPU HSF. In fact, it's completely incompatible with your choice of case.

Getting to the case: that case is only a good choice if you've never worked with a good case before. Basically, any time you see tear-off expansion slot covers on a case, that case is more than likely very low quality. Combined that key sign of low quality with the fact that the case is cramped, has limited space for cable management, and a less than optimal fan setup means that it's just a bad choice for a case all around. Plus the extra costs of shipping as well as the extra costs of fans means that it ends up being just as pricey as a higher quality case. In other words, not a good choice under most circumstances

As for the HSF, at $25 (I don't factor in MIR until they're actually received), it's a horrible purchase considering that significantly better cooling Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo is like $6 to $10 more that's more than justified. In addition, why Windows 7 HP when Windows 8.1 available? Windows 8.1 has some under-the-hood performance improvements that actually allows it to be faster than Windows 7. Especially with games and SSDs. Any start menu complaint is easily rectified with 3rd party programs.

Fianlly the SSD: The PNY SSD lacks free shipping and even when looking at the cheapest shipped option, it's still not that much cheaper than a more reputable Crucial BX100 250GB SSD.

 

[TheEschaton]

That's not really a good setup. There's no guarantee that either Xeons will be supported by that motherboard. Speaking of which, the reliability of that motherboard is questionable considering the low ratings it is getting. The RAM is also too limiting as it means that you're only limited to 24GB of RAM max in the future before you'd have to replace RAM. Not worth it IMO. Then there's the video card: The R9 Fury X is a failure of a video card considering that there are better, cheaper, and faster options available. Plus the required liquid cooler means that it's basically going to be incompatible with a lot of cases when used in conjunction with a 3rd party CPU HSF. In fact, it's completely incompatible with your choice of case.

Getting to the case: that case is only a good choice if you've never worked with a good case before. Basically, any time you see tear-off expansion slot covers on a case, that case is more than likely very low quality. Combined that key sign of low quality with the fact that the case is cramped, has limited space for cable management, and a less than optimal fan setup means that it's just a bad choice for a case all around. Plus the extra costs of shipping as well as the extra costs of fans means that it ends up being just as pricey as a higher quality case. In other words, not a good choice under most circumstances

As for the HSF, at $25 (I don't factor in MIR until they're actually received), it's a horrible purchase considering that significantly better cooling Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo is like $6 to $10 more that's more than justified. In addition, why Windows 7 HP when Windows 8.1 available? Windows 8.1 has some under-the-hood performance improvements that actually allows it to be faster than Windows 7. Especially with games and SSDs. Any start menu complaint is easily rectified with 3rd party programs.

Fianlly the SSD: The PNY SSD lacks free shipping and even when looking at the cheapest shipped option, it's still not that much cheaper than a more reputable Crucial BX100 250GB SSD.

Well, of course you know I disagree with your assertions, and I do have reasons for suggesting them.

First of all, it's very disingenuous of you to suggest that the Xeon I suggest is even possibly not supported by that board - of COURSE it is. PC Hound found no problems; PCPP didn't either, CPU-Upgrade thinks so as well: http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-ASUS/Z87-A.html, and I can find numerous examples of people running that chip in boards very similar to that ASUS. So unless you have some specific reason why you think it would specifically not work in that ASUS board, I think it's pretty easy to see there's no reason to say the two parts are not compatible.

The motherboard is getting some iffy reviews, but it's also a budget choice and frankly I trust ASUS to handle the RMA process if that's something that needs to be done. It seems to be working pretty well for the people who got a working board.

"Only" 24gb of RAM is a non-issue in a gaming/general use rig, so I won't even bother to address that criticism.

Then you get into this hilarious suggestion that the Fury X is a "failure of a video card" - this is false; it is a monster of a card that does very well at higher resolutions and should improve over time as AMD slowly gets their driver game in gear - just like with every other AMD GPU release that I care to remember. Perhaps the 980 Ti or 980 would be a good choice, but when you start going into the higher resolutions - such as 4K - the Fury X actually pulls ahead in price/perf over those cards. The Rad fits in this case chosen as well, btw - don't be ridiculous. It's a small rad (120mm), and there's a conveniently placed side exhaust port available right next to where the GPU will sit, so there's literally no chance the setup's hoses won't reach it. This will also have absolutely no bearing on the CPU HSF, as the entire assembly rides far below where any tower HSF might impinge on it.

The case is certainly not a "good" case - but I'll tell you what it DOES do - it keeps costs down and has the airflow and the setup necessary for the build at hand (although you failed to notice that, I suppose). It's a very common case and is quite widely available, so finding a seller that isn't charging shipping (or one whose total price is so low shipping doesn't matter) shouldn't be an issue at all.

The HSF is a valid choice for a chip that won't be overclocked; all we need to do is get to turbo, and we can shave off a few bucks here and there by making choices like this. I understand by this point in the conversation that you may not be a budget oriented kind of designer, but I'm hoping you can see that for the cash-constrained this is a valid sort of choice.

Windows 7 is suggested because it is the cheapest way to get to Windows 10 and all that DX12 goodness.

The PNY SSD is a fine SSD and is right up there at the top in term of Gbs/$. I've used one in a past build for one of my customers, and it performed admirably as a boot drive.

 

[doug_7506]

I'll take a stab at it:

PC Hound Part List

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 8M ($369.9 @ B&H)
Motherboard: ASUS Z170-A ($158.99 @ TigerDirect)
Memory: G.SKILL 16GB (2 x 8GB) Ripjaws V Series ($154.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 06G-P4-4993-KR ($668.99 @ TigerDirect)
Power Supply: EVGA 850W 110-B2-0850-V1 ($87.28 @ Mwave)
Storage: SAMSUNG 500GB 850 EVO MZ-75E500B/AM ($172.81 @ Amazon)
Storage #2: Seagate 1TB Barracuda ST1000DM003 ($49.2 @ Amazon)
Case: Corsair Carbide Series Air 540 (CC-9011048-WW) Air 540 ($139.99 @ Amazon)
CPU Cooler: CORSAIR Hydro Series H100i GTX H100i GTX ($104.99 @ Newegg)
Windows: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 64-bit ($89.99 @ TigerDirect)
Total: $1,997.13
Price may include shipping, rebates, promotions, and tax
Generated by PC Hound

Notes:
CPU: I know you wont be overclocking, but the 6700k comes with the highest turbo boost. Also, when you are spending this much money, I would hate to close you off form that option later on. Also, Amazon had them at 350 yesterday. YMMV
SSD: Not sure what size you want. But you can drop down to a 250 and pump to a 3TB HDD for the same price.
CASE: I LOVE the air 540. But that is really up to you. Also going for a subtle white/black theme.
Cooler: The h100i is great. And if you decide to OC, it'll give you all the cooling you need to do so. But if you want, you could save $80 and grab an evo 212 and add that $80 a bigger HDD.
OS: W7 HP --> free upgrade to W10.

Everything else is self explanatory.

 

[TheEschaton]

That's a pretty unbeatable setup at the top end of your range; I like it. I'm not sure I'd spend so much on the SSD or RAM - but then again I'd be overclocking the shit out of it and probably jumping on the X99 platform instead at that price point .

 

[Dangman]

I understand by this point in the conversation that you may not be a budget oriented kind of designer,

I want to address this point first: If you actually look through this subforum, you can certainly see that this is not the truth. I aim for the best bang for the buck parts possible that both fits the budget and my quality/reliability/performance standards of "not being crap". In addition, I look at the total up front price the person or myself will be paying, not the AR price or shipping not factored in price. Just because the part is cheap does not mean it's a good buy even with tight budgets. Not to mention that a savings of a few dollars often do not equal "good" or "viable purchase" as I shall show.

Well, of course you know I disagree with your assertions, and I do have reasons for suggesting them.

First of all, it's very disingenuous of you to suggest that the Xeon I suggest is even possibly not supported by that board - of COURSE it is. PC Hound found no problems; PCPP didn't either, CPU-Upgrade thinks so as well: http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-ASUS/Z87-A.html, and I can find numerous examples of people running that chip in boards very similar to that ASUS. So unless you have some specific reason why you think it would specifically not work in that ASUS board, I think it's pretty easy to see there's no reason to say the two parts are not compatible.

There is reason: There's no info whatsoever which BIOs version that motherboard will ship with. Yes that mobo will support Xeon CPUs but only with the right BIOs version. Unfortunately, from what I've seen personally, it can take months for motherboards to ship with updated BIOs. At my work, we were still updating X79 motherboards (Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, AsRock, didn't matter the manufacturer) to work with Ivy Bridge CPUs about 9 months after the release of Ivy Bridge. So unless you have specific information showing that motherboard will in fact ship with the right BIOs (specifically 1405 or higher), that's the second reason why I don't recommend that motherboard. As for the first reason...

The motherboard is getting some iffy reviews, but it's also a budget choice and frankly I trust ASUS to handle the RMA process if that's something that needs to be done. It seems to be working pretty well for the people who got a working board.

Considering the large number of complaints being seen right here on the forums in regards to Asus support, it doesn't seem like Asus will handle the RMA process all that well. Just because it's a budget motherboard does not absolve it of all those bad reviews. There are plenty of budget motherboards that have far higher reported rates of success in that same ~$90 to $100 price range.

"Only" 24gb of RAM is a non-issue in a gaming/general use rig, so I won't even bother to address that criticism.

It does not hurt to think about potential future needs. Not everyone's usage will stay the same over time. Or even software for that matter.

Then you get into this hilarious suggestion that the Fury X is a "failure of a video card" - this is false; it is a monster of a card that does very well at higher resolutions and should improve over time as AMD slowly gets their driver game in gear - just like with every other AMD GPU release that I care to remember. Perhaps the 980 Ti or 980 would be a good choice, but when you start going into the higher resolutions - such as 4K - the Fury X actually pulls ahead in price/perf over those cards.

At 4K, the Fury X's 4GB of VRAM is a major limitation. As HardOCP showed, the Fury X was slower than the similar priced 980Ti in almost every game tested at 4K except for one:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/07/26/amd_radeon_r9_fury_x_4k_video_card_review/8#.Vd0jEvlViko

So yes, it's a failure of a video card: It costs the same as a 980 Ti but is slower, has only 4GB of VRAM, uses more power, and requires the use of a rad that limits the number of cases that you can use with it.

The case is certainly not a "good" case - but I'll tell you what it DOES do - it keeps costs down and has the airflow and the setup necessary for the build at hand (although you failed to notice that, I suppose). It's a very common case and is quite widely available, so finding a seller that isn't charging shipping (or one whose total price is so low shipping doesn't matter) shouldn't be an issue at all.

............

The Rad fits in this case chosen as well, btw - don't be ridiculous. It's a small rad (120mm), and there's a conveniently placed side exhaust port available right next to where the GPU will sit, so there's literally no chance the setup's hoses won't reach it. This will also have absolutely no bearing on the CPU HSF, as the entire assembly rides far below where any tower HSF might impinge on it.

The failures and low quality of case overshadows ANY viable usage of that case. Even using the cheapest shipped option, $47 shipped via Amazon, it's still a terrible case for the money. I say that because for $3 more you can get the NZXT Source 210 Elite:
$50 - NZXT Source 210 Elite White with Black Front Trim ATX Case

It does not have any of the quality issues, cooling issues, or cable management issues like the Antec One does yet is only $3 more. In fact, it's also more accommodating of longer video cards than the Antec One. I do not have a problem with budget cases in general. I only have a problem when they're ridiculously overpriced compared to a better option.

With that said, the NZXT Source 210 Elite does share the same issue as the Antec One: It still won't fit the Fury X with the rad installed on the side panel. Both cases have roughly the same width of space between the side panel and the expansion slots: 2.3 to 2.4inches or 5.842 cm to 6.096 cm respectively. The radiator on the Fury X is 6.5cm deep. Since the video card itself is actually wider than the expansion slot by a few extra mm, that already decreases the space between the side panel and expansion slot. So no, the Fury X will not fit inside either case if you mount the radiator on the side panel. Neither case have the 6.6cm minimum or more of space between the side panel and the expansion slots.

The HSF is a valid choice for a chip that won't be overclocked; all we need to do is get to turbo, and we can shave off a few bucks here and there by making choices like this..... but I'm hoping you can see that for the cash-constrained this is a valid sort of choice.

It still isn't a valid choice at its $25 shipped price. $6 more gets you this:
$31 - Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo HSF

$6 gets you a quieter and better cooling HSF. That's more than justified. Considering that we're talking about $600+ video cards here, $6 is a drop in the bucket. If that T4 was actually cheaper up front and the 212 Evo was back at its normal $35 price tag, I'd totally agree with the choice of the T4. But that's not the case here.

Windows 7 is suggested because it is the cheapest way to get to Windows 10 and all that DX12 goodness.

You haven't shown that it's the cheapest way though: The NCIX price doesn't include shipping. The lowest shipped price for that OS is $100. That's a terrible buy considering that you can Windows 8.1 (which supports more than 16GB of RAM out of the box) for $100 shipped right now:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00F3ZN2W0/?tag=extension-kb-20

The PNY SSD is a fine SSD and is right up there at the top in term of Gbs/$. I've used one in a past build for one of my customers, and it performed admirably as a boot drive.

Considering PNY's past incident of swappying controllers as well as my own personal experiences as well as my work's experiences with PNY's support, I'm not in favor of recommending PNY. Especially since this Crucial SSD isn't that much more:
$85 - Crucial BX100 250GB SSD

 

[TheEschaton]

I want to address this point first: If you actually look through this subforum, you can certainly see that this is not the truth. I aim for the best bang for the buck parts possible that both fits the budget and my quality/reliability/performance standards of "not being crap". In addition, I look at the total up front price the person or myself will be paying, not the AR price or shipping not factored in price. Just because the part is cheap does not mean it's a good buy even with tight budgets. Not to mention that a savings of a few dollars often do not equal "good" or "viable purchase" as I shall show.

I think your standards are too high - it's that simple. I think you have certain beliefs and criteria that are artificially inflated for some reason - and I think the rigs in your signature bear out that belief. They each feature design choices that just do not make sense from a budget-oriented standpoint - your are not getting the most "bang for your buck" by any means. That being said, it's pretty obvious right from the get-go that neither of us is going to convince the other of our choices, because it is immediately apparent that our very philosophies vary so extremely from one another, and yet we both think we are doing the same thing. We are not even communicating properly - it is highly likely that we have goals so vastly different from one another that any agreement would in itself likely be some kind of misunderstanding. Nevertheless, I will answer your criticisms to show others that it is not so clear cut as you would have us believe.

There is reason: There's no info whatsoever which BIOs version that motherboard will ship with. Yes that mobo will support Xeon CPUs but only with the right BIOs version. Unfortunately, from what I've seen personally, it can take months for motherboards to ship with updated BIOs. At my work, we were still updating X79 motherboards (Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, AsRock, didn't matter the manufacturer) to work with Ivy Bridge CPUs about 9 months after the release of Ivy Bridge. So unless you have specific information showing that motherboard will in fact ship with the right BIOs (specifically 1405 or higher), that's the second reason why I don't recommend that motherboard. As for the first reason

The board and chip in question have been on the market now for quite some time; any remaining issues are issues that would also plague a variety of other boards. The Q/A section on Newegg shows that people are generally getting BIOS revisions much higher than 1405 of late; I would not worry - but then you've made that your job, to cast FUD on this build, so I don't suppose I can get you to agree to that.

Considering the large number of complaints being seen right here on the forums in regards to Asus support, it doesn't seem like Asus will handle the RMA process all that well. Just because it's a budget motherboard does not absolve it of all those bad reviews. There are plenty of budget motherboards that have far higher reported rates of success in that same ~$90 to $100 price range.

Well that's as may be - your word against mine, and while I come from another forum where quite the opposite is held to be true, you do have quite a bit of seniority here so I'll defer to your opinion so long as you can show me a board in a similar price range with similar features and better reviews. I certainly do understand that the reviews for the board are not perfect (far from it); but I figured it was an acceptable risk given the company name and the value it would represent should it work (which honestly it probably would; I'd put money on that).

It does not hurt to think about potential future needs. Not everyone's usage will stay the same over time. Or even software for that matter.

It is not even close to fair to ask people to design rigs for any and all possible future needs; if it does come to that, the board has 32gb possible RAM; he could drop the small sticks that he started out with and get a full 4x8 configuration (and probably find a good use for those smaller sticks in the process). There's a whole lot of "coulds" but really only OP can illuminate whether you or I are more on target here; he didn't provide enough information to decide one way or another.

At 4K, the Fury X's 4GB of VRAM is a major limitation. As HardOCP showed, the Fury X was slower than the similar priced 980Ti in almost every game tested at 4K except for one:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/...8#.Vd0jEvlViko

With immature drivers on a radically new platform, against a card that does still on average cost more, heat up more, and is louder. I think the situation was summarized nicely at Anandtech (http://www.anandtech.com/show/9390/the-amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review/27) - although I disagree with their conclusion that the card is a bad choice. You've got what amounts to performance and feature parity with the 980 Ti, on a quieter, cooler platform, for cost parity, and on top of that the thing hasn't even had a chance to show what it can do with mature drivers. The design of the card is in some ways radically new; it would make sense that the GPU really does have some room to grow on the driver side, as its GCN ancestors before it did. Another major release problem with the card is that despite wonderful temps thanks to the AIO water cooler, AMD did not fully unleash the overclockability of these cards - once that is ironed out I see no reason to suppose a little overclock on the GPU couldn't push this card up further. To be fair to Nvidia, the GTX 980 Ti is a great overclocker RIGHT NOW, with about 20% more performance potential on a serious overclock, but I really do think that the end of this race is not yet in sight, and I'm betting on the new tech. Even if I'm wrong, it's not like it's a terrible choice.

The failures and low quality of case overshadows ANY viable usage of that case. Even using the cheapest shipped option, $47 shipped via Amazon, it's still a terrible case for the money. I say that because for $3 more you can get the NZXT Source 210 Elite:
$50 - NZXT Source 210 Elite White with Black Front Trim ATX Case

It does not have any of the quality issues, cooling issues, or cable management issues like the Antec One does yet is only $3 more. In fact, it's also more accommodating of longer video cards than the Antec One. I do not have a problem with budget cases in general. I only have a problem when they're ridiculously overpriced compared to a better option.

With that said, the NZXT Source 210 Elite does share the same issue as the Antec One: It still won't fit the Fury X with the rad installed on the side panel. Both cases have roughly the same width of space between the side panel and the expansion slots: 2.3 to 2.4inches or 5.842 cm to 6.096 cm respectively. The radiator on the Fury X is 6.5cm deep. Since the video card itself is actually wider than the expansion slot by a few extra mm, that already decreases the space between the side panel and expansion slot. So no, the Fury X will not fit inside either case if you mount the radiator on the side panel. Neither case have the 6.6cm minimum or more of space between the side panel and the expansion slots.

First of all, the Source 210 IS a great case, and another great option. But the Antec One does not have quality issues, cooling issues, etc. - it has wonderful reviews by hundreds of users, and I, as one of those users, would agree. Cable management beyond a certain basic level is entirely aesthetic; not worried about that. I do see and greatly regret that NCIX does not in fact offer free shipping; I am new to the whole PC Hound thing (I've been using PCPP up until now) - why does it incorrectly say that shipping is free for NCIX?

Anyway, thanks for the math on the width - I had not considered that. To keep using the GPU in this case, or in the 210, you could simply connect the Rad to the top or bottom, couldn't you? Sure, you might have to go with something other than a tower cooler for the CPU, but since we are not OCing the CPU...

Final note: OP wants USB 3.0, so it would be nice if the case chosen supported front-facing USB 3.0 ports, like the Antec One does...

It still isn't a valid choice at its $25 shipped price. $6 more gets you this:
$31 - Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo HSF

$6 gets you a quieter and better cooling HSF. That's more than justified. Considering that we're talking about $600+ video cards here, $6 is a drop in the bucket. If that T4 was actually cheaper up front and the 212 Evo was back at its normal $35 price tag, I'd totally agree with the choice of the T4. But that's not the case here.

Except there's literally no reason to spend that additional $6 in this instance: first of all it is NOT a quieter HSF; CM themselves list it with a higher max dBA reference than the T4. My own experience with my Hyper 212 Evo in my living room tells me the same story - the fan is not quiet. You may think it is, because it's ensconced within your top-end case, but that's not how it is down here in budget-conscious land. Finally, there's no real reason to worry too much about how well it cools, because we are not overclocking here. All it has to do is ensure prolonged turbo times, and frankly that's probably something the stock solution can almost pull off in this case; I'm just playing it safe with a cheap add-on HSF to make sure. Spending any more than this is really starting to strain reason.

Final note: the Evo does not fit in the Antec One. It's 5mm too tall. If we disregard OP's wishes for easily accessible USB 3.0 and go with your NZXT 210 then it will work, but that's for OP to decide.

You haven't shown that it's the cheapest way though: The NCIX price doesn't include shipping. The lowest shipped price for that OS is $100. That's a terrible buy considering that you can Windows 8.1 (which supports more than 16GB of RAM out of the box) for $100 shipped right now:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00F3ZN2W0/...xtension-kb-20

Your problems are with the vendor, not the product - OP can easily leverage his Amazon Prime to get even better options with Windows 7 at lower prices: http://www.amazon.com/Windows-Profe...sbs_147_4?ie=UTF8&refRID=0C43E51VY36H0T7N6HNA. And from there, he upgrades to Windows 10 no sweat. Buying Win 7 cheap and then upgrading is definitely the way to go. I'd recommend 8 if I thought he could get it cheaper, but I doubt it.

Considering PNY's past incident of swappying controllers as well as my own personal experiences as well as my work's experiences with PNY's support, I'm not in favor of recommending PNY. Especially since this Crucial SSD isn't that much more:
$85 - Crucial BX100 250GB SSD

Again, you have wonderful opinions, thank you for sharing... but that's basically FUD. The drives get great reviews, and while they are not as fast as the Crucial drive you're recommending, they are also not as expensive. Since OP isn't doing anything that relies on the absolute best drive I/O, I again do not think it makes sense to spend even that additional $15. I sincerely doubt you'd notice the difference in performance between the two drives for gaming.

In the end, you do have some valid concerns about my build - it would probably be very difficult to go with the Fury X and a tower CPU HSF together, unless you removed the fan on the GPU rad and put another one on the outside of the grille - an ugly, accident-prone solution and not one I'd recommend. But I still think the build as a concept is sound; pairing this CPU, RAM, board, and GPU together makes a lot of sense to me. Quite honestly, and it pains me to say this since you are one of the first experiences I've had interacting with a forum vet on this board, everything else you're saying is patently FUD and dilutes the real points you had to make.

 

[doug_7506]

That's a pretty unbeatable setup at the top end of your range; I like it. I'm not sure I'd spend so much on the SSD or RAM - but then again I'd be overclocking the shit out of it and probably jumping on the X99 platform instead at that price point .

That is the cheapest ddr4 16gb set that has an xmp profile for 3200. It is excellent name brand ram for only a few more $$ than the budget stuff. Several reviewers have already found that there is material benefits from having higher speed DDR4 (2800+ seems to be the magic number).

That is pretty much THE ssd to get. Perfect blend of performance and value.

x99 has no use for OP. This is a gaming build and will last him 4 years easily. We MAY start seeing the use of more than 4 cores and 8 threads in 4 years, maybe. For now, OP will benefit more from a better platform feature set (z170), higher non OC turbo clock (4.2 vs 3.6 since he is NOT oc'ing), and better clock for clock performance (IPC improvement).

 

[TheEschaton]

Agreed, that's why I said all of those things were choices I would make for my own personal system - not ones I think are very appropriate for OP.

 

[Pez]

I think your standards are too high

If you think these standards are too high, buy a subscription to the GM forum.

I have to ask, why are you offering choices for your own system in a thread about someone else's system?

When I do buy, I believe I will splurge for the case. I've been very happy with my Corsair cases in the past, so I will be looking for something like the Carbide Air 540.

For the GPU, I will probably go with whichever card performs the best for the money based on the H reviews, as they are quite reliable.

 

[TheEschaton]

If you think these standards are too high, buy a subscription to the GM forum.

I have to ask, why are you offering choices for your own system in a thread about someone else's system?

When I do buy, I believe I will splurge for the case. I've been very happy with my Corsair cases in the past, so I will be looking for something like the Carbide Air 540.

For the GPU, I will probably go with whichever card performs the best for the money based on the H reviews, as they are quite reliable.

lol. Well I wasn't offering my own choices - the build list I put together is really what I would suggest for you. The other part about what I would do if I was dropping 2+ thousand dollars on a rig was just as a sort of aside.

If you're the type to splurge on the case and buy solely based on reviews, you will want to ignore my build advice going forward. It's really not geared toward that sort of consumer. Still, I hope the discussion added to your knowledge. As he made quite clear, Dangman knows a lot about builds, and our criticisms and counter-criticisms did a lot to clarify the pros and cons of various options in the high-end build space right now, I think.

 

[Dangman]

I think your standards are too high - it's that simple. I think you have certain beliefs and criteria that are artificially inflated for some reason - and I think the rigs in your signature bear out that belief. They each feature design choices that just do not make sense from a budget-oriented standpoint - your are not getting the most "bang for your buck" by any means.

Too high? Dude, adding most of my recommendations increases the total cost of the build by like $10 to $40. That's not "high" standards. Considering that the OP had a budget of $2000, again, drop in the bucket.

Nor do the rigs in my system actually bear out your belief as you do not the context or background for my purchases. First and foremost: I live in CA where ~10% sales tax is charged for online purchases from stores with a presence in California. As such, any deal that include free shipping and a price lower than the taxed price is a deal in my book. Any of the shipped prices I mention includes that 10% sales tax or something that mitigated it

For my main gaming PC, due to my work qualifying for Intel Retail Edge, I was able to buy the 4770K for $140 shipped, well below the $340 + tax for that CPU at the time. The two Antec 750W PSUs for the gaming PC and server? I got them for free when Antec was doing their forum review program. Their marketing guy at the time knew of my posting history here on the forums and offered me the chance to review them for free. Because of a connection at work, I got that NZXT Phantom for $80 total brand new when buying online without the connection meant an extra $40 to $50. I got that R9 280X for free from my uncle's downsizing of his bitcoin mining setup. Since I already had the R9 280 as well as a case, PSU, and motherboard that supports Crossfire, why not Crossfire the two cards? I paid $140 total for 32GB of RAM which I actually do need.

As for the server, the CPU, mobo, and RAM were the main guts from my old gaming PC. I got that HAF 932 for free from work because it was missing a side panel and had some cosmetic damage from its previous user. I bought 7 of those WD Red 3TB drives when they were on sale for $100 shipped each. I only paid full price for one WD 3TB drive because I needed it right away. I paid $105 total for the server's IBM M1015 with two SFF-8087 to SATA multi-lane cables and it was already flashed to IT mode. Compare that to the $130 + shipping and tax if bought from a normal etailer online + the hours I would have spent finding and learning how to flash the firmware to IT mode. It's now currently running FreeNAS, a free OS.

When I started on the HTPC build, I made it a point to only get each part if they were around $50. Again, due to a connection at work, I got that AsRock mobo for $22 total. The case, SSD, and PSU were bought for $50 shipped each during Black Friday 2014. The G3258 was $55 shipped. That Sapphire HD 7770 card was something I had laying around from a friend's upgraded PC. It's now currently running SteamOS, another free OS.

So no, I did not pay full price for many of those parts. Due to a combination of luck, deal hunting, and connections, I paid far far less for those parts than you thought. I mean, how is getting and using two high quality 750W PSUs for free not count as "bang for the buck"? or saving $200+ on a CPU? Or waiting around for Black Friday deals?

If you have questions about any other part of my sigged rigs, feel free to ask.

That being said, it's pretty obvious right from the get-go that neither of us is going to convince the other of our choices, because it is immediately apparent that our very philosophies vary so extremely from one another, and yet we both think we are doing the same thing. We are not even communicating properly - it is highly likely that we have goals so vastly different from one another that any agreement would in itself likely be some kind of misunderstanding. Nevertheless, I will answer your criticisms to show others that it is not so clear cut as you would have us believe.

In addition to what I said earlier about what I aim for, I also try to minimize as much risk as possible. Which means I tend to be more conservative with my recommendations than others. After all, people worked hard to earn the money for this new gaming PC. Whether at $600 or $2000, I don't want people wasting money on parts that are questionable. At the same time, I've learned from a young age that "Cheap isn't always good" still applies to computer hardware. As such, I will scrutinize more heavily when I can. For example, how I caught that Fury mounting Issue that you missed.

With that said, I fully admit that I can utterly wrong sometimes. Hence why whenever someone PMs me for advice on hardware, I always have them make a public thread. Again, as I said before, people worked hard for that money. So I do actually want others to double check my advice. Again, I want to minimize risks as possible.

Well that's as may be - your word against mine, and while I come from another forum where quite the opposite is held to be true, you do have quite a bit of seniority here so I'll defer to your opinion so long as you can show me a board in a similar price range with similar features and better reviews. I certainly do understand that the reviews for the board are not perfect (far from it); but I figured it was an acceptable risk given the company name and the value it would represent should it work (which honestly it probably would; I'd put money on that).

As noted above, I have a lower accommodation of risk than you. As such, for me, the number of bad reviews represents an unacceptable risk.

Do note that your recommended mobo is now OOS at Newegg. But my alternative motherboard recommendations would be:
$68 - ASRock H97M Pro4 Intel H97 mATX Motherboard
$92 - MSI Z97 PC MATE Intel Z97 ATX Motherboard
$105 - Asus H97-PRO GAMER Intel Z97 ATX Motherboard

It is not even close to fair to ask people to design rigs for any and all possible future needs; if it does come to that, the board has 32gb possible RAM; he could drop the small sticks that he started out with and get a full 4x8 configuration (and probably find a good use for those smaller sticks in the process). There's a whole lot of "coulds" but really only OP can illuminate whether you or I are more on target here; he didn't provide enough information to decide one way or another.

This is where our experiences really differ: At least on this forum, I've seen too many cases where people ended up needing far more RAM than they previously thought. Not to mention that dropping the small sticks he started out with is a waste of money if he can't afford to find a good use for that RAM. Considering that a single 8GB stick of RAM is like $2 to $3 more, I'd rather spend the extra cash to avoid any uncertainty about future RAM upgrades. Also, your RAM choice is now out of stock.

With immature drivers on a radically new platform, against a card that does still on average cost more, heat up more, and is louder. I think the situation was summarized nicely at Anandtech (http://www.anandtech.com/show/9390/the-amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review/27) - although I disagree with their conclusion that the card is a bad choice. You've got what amounts to performance and feature parity with the 980 Ti, on a quieter, cooler platform, for cost parity, and on top of that the thing hasn't even had a chance to show what it can do with mature drivers. The design of the card is in some ways radically new; it would make sense that the GPU really does have some room to grow on the driver side, as its GCN ancestors before it did. Another major release problem with the card is that despite wonderful temps thanks to the AIO water cooler, AMD did not fully unleash the overclockability of these cards - once that is ironed out I see no reason to suppose a little overclock on the GPU couldn't push this card up further. To be fair to Nvidia, the GTX 980 Ti is a great overclocker RIGHT NOW, with about 20% more performance potential on a serious overclock, but I really do think that the end of this race is not yet in sight, and I'm betting on the new tech. Even if I'm wrong, it's not like it's a terrible choice.

Again, 4GB of VRAM for a ~$660 card for 4K gaming. No matter what, that's going to hurt. NO amount of driver improvements is going to fix that issue for 4K gaming. In addition, waiting for and hoping that AMD will get their shit together in regards to the Fury X card is too much of a gamble as there is little actual info showing that it's indeed possible that the Fury X's 4GB VRAM limitation WON'T be a limitation for the majority of games out there at 4K. So rather than take the risk and bet with other people's money, I'd rather go for what is confirmed good right now.

The 980TI can be had for as low as $660 shipped at the moment. The cheapest known shipped price for the R9 Fury X card is $680. So yes, that Fury X is a terrible choice. Again, other people's money we're talking about here. You really want to take unnecessary and unfounded risks with that?

First of all, the Source 210 IS a great case, and another great option. But the Antec One does not have quality issues, cooling issues, etc. - it has wonderful reviews by hundreds of users, and I, as one of those users, would agree. Cable management beyond a certain basic level is entirely aesthetic; not worried about that. I do see and greatly regret that NCIX does not in fact offer free shipping; I am new to the whole PC Hound thing (I've been using PCPP up until now) - why does it incorrectly say that shipping is free for NCIX?

Anyway, thanks for the math on the width - I had not considered that. To keep using the GPU in this case, or in the 210, you could simply connect the Rad to the top or bottom, couldn't you? Sure, you might have to go with something other than a tower cooler for the CPU, but since we are not OCing the CPU...

Final note: OP wants USB 3.0, so it would be nice if the case chosen supported front-facing USB 3.0 ports, like the Antec One does....

Dude, I was talking about the Source 210 ELITE. Notice the "Elite" in the name. You are absolutely right that the Source 210 does not have front panel USB 3.0. Hence why I was recommending the Source 210 Elite which does have front panel USB 3.0 as well as a top mounted 140mm exhaust fan and tool-less drive installation. As is, just with the fan layout alone, the Source 210 Elite's rear 120 and top 140 exhaust fans will lower CPU and GPU cooling compared to Antec One's front intake and rear exhaust 120mm fan setup as shown by bit-tech.net's investigation:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/02/10/the-big-cooling-investigation/5

That's not accounting for the possibility that the Source 210 Elite will end up being quieter and/or cooling better due to the larger 140mm fan.

Nor could you mount the FuryX's radiator at either the bottom or top of the case due to, against, the depth of the radiator. Nor is quite possible to mount it to the rear of the case. That's why at work we generally recommend going with larger cases whenever someone orders a Fury X or any other liquid cooled video card.

The quality of that case is something we're not going to agree on. I've worked with that Antec One and it really felt like crap compared to the similar priced Source 210 Elite. Which again, reaffirms my experiences with cases with tear-off expansion slots: They're generally going to be low quality cases. PCHound is still in beta of sorts so it's still sorting out the bugs.

Except there's literally no reason to spend that additional $6 in this instance: first of all it is NOT a quieter HSF; CM themselves list it with a higher max dBA reference than the T4. My own experience with my Hyper 212 Evo in my living room tells me the same story - the fan is not quiet. You may think it is, because it's ensconced within your top-end case, but that's not how it is down here in budget-conscious land. Finally, there's no real reason to worry too much about how well it cools, because we are not overclocking here. All it has to do is ensure prolonged turbo times, and frankly that's probably something the stock solution can almost pull off in this case; I'm just playing it safe with a cheap add-on HSF to make sure. Spending any more than this is really starting to strain reason.

It's $6. We're not talking about an ultra budget $600 gaming PC here. You literally just recommended a $660 video card and you scoff at another $6 for better temperatures? Seriously? Especially considering that the OP lives in Chicago where it can get rather hot sometimes? $6 in a $1400 to $2000 PC build?

In addition, dBA by itself does not actually accurately represent the actual sound level of a HSF/fan. The shape of the fan blades, the HSF's mounts, etc are all factors in how "loud" a HSF is.

Your problems are with the vendor, not the product - OP can easily leverage his Amazon Prime to get even better options with Windows 7 at lower prices: http://www.amazon.com/Windows-Profe...sbs_147_4?ie=UTF8&refRID=0C43E51VY36H0T7N6HNA. And from there, he upgrades to Windows 10 no sweat. Buying Win 7 cheap and then upgrading is definitely the way to go. I'd recommend 8 if I thought he could get it cheaper, but I doubt it.

A bit iffy on the legality of that software but you have a point here.

Again, you have wonderful opinions, thank you for sharing... but that's basically FUD. The drives get great reviews, and while they are not as fast as the Crucial drive you're recommending, they are also not as expensive. Since OP isn't doing anything that relies on the absolute best drive I/O, I again do not think it makes sense to spend even that additional $15. I sincerely doubt you'd notice the difference in performance between the two drives for gaming.

So my own experiences (in both a personal and professional way) with PNY's customer support is FUD? Really now? And your positive experience trumps my experience?

That PNY SSD isn't in stock in Amazon at $70 so that $70 price tag is still very tentative. Again, I err on the side of caution. $15 more gets me the SSD in two days as well as far larger record of success which increases peace of mind. With that said, if you have had great experiences with PNY's customer support and if that PNY SSD is truly $70 shipped, by all means, get it. That's on you.

 

[TheEschaton]

quite a lot of stuff

As I said before, you think so differently from me that you believe you are in favor of budget building just like me, and yet you find almost everything about my build offensive to your sensibilities, while I find nearly every recommendation of yours offensive to my sensibilities. I do not see the point in responding further. As I told the OP, I think our discussion has nicely elucidated some of the issues surrounding a build of this magnitude at this time in the market. I do not really think me rebutting your various spurious issues with the build philosophy is of use here - the OP has already dropped a message in the thread indicating that he thinks more along your line of thought than mine - which I respect, and respectfully disagree with. But minds have been made, and I don't think further discussion of the errors of thought that have been committed (to my mind) is going to be very useful.

I am from nearby Chicago as well, as it happens, so hi to the OP! You may see some of my builds floating around in your area if you look hard enough, lol.

 

[Dangman]

As I said before, you think so differently from me that you believe you are in favor of budget building just like me, and yet you find almost everything about my build offensive to your sensibilities, while I find nearly every recommendation of yours offensive to my sensibilities. I do not see the point in responding further. As I told the OP, I think our discussion has nicely elucidated some of the issues surrounding a build of this magnitude at this time in the market. I do not really think me rebutting your various spurious issues with the build philosophy is of use here - the OP has already dropped a message in the thread indicating that he thinks more along your line of thought than mine - which I respect, and respectfully disagree with. But minds have been made, and I don't think further discussion of the errors of thought that have been committed (to my mind) is going to be very useful.

I am from nearby Chicago as well, as it happens, so hi to the OP! You may see some of my builds floating around in your area if you look hard enough, lol.

I don't like seeing bad recommendations being made. Hence the lengthy replies.

Although hopefully you weren't surprised that the OP would be thinking along the same lines as myself considering that this was his very first sentence in the OP:

Okay Dangman, keep up the streak. You helped me in 2008, then again in 2011.

And now slightly again in 2015

 

[TheEschaton]

I don't like seeing bad recommendations being made. Hence the lengthy replies.

Although hopefully you weren't surprised that the OP would be thinking along the same lines as myself considering that this was his very first sentence in the OP:

And now slightly again in 2015

There were no bad recommendations being made; I've made my opinion on that subject clear. You're just being deliberately combative about it now.

I knew that you were his favored builder, but I liked the challenge the build presented and I knew also that the OP stated he was put off from building due to the cost of the machines people were steering him towards - yourself included. So I figured it was worthwhile to offer a build that was significantly cheaper and yet would operate within spitting distance of what others were recommending at least when it came to gaming performance, just so he knew it was possible.

If I viewed this as a zero-sum game where one designer wins and the other loses - like if he was paying you instead of me to build this for him - then perhaps I would be unhappy with the outcome. But we are not (AFAIK) doing this out of any motivation other than the joy of the build, and I am happy to have at least shown him it is POSSIBLE to go much lower in cost and still get what you wanted.

I am a little sad that you did not throw together a complete PC Hound list as a result of your recommendations with me - that thought did just strike me. Going back over our conversations, I think your build would end up looking something like this?

PC Hound Part List

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1230V3 ($249.99 @ TigerDirect)
Motherboard: ASUS Z87-PLUS ($83.06 @ Amazon)
Memory: Team 8GB Dark ($35.99 @ Newegg)
Memory #2: Team 8GB Dark ($35.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: ZOTAC GeForce GTX 980 Ti ZT-90503-10P ($648.95 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: EVGA 750W 110-B2-0750-VR ($49.99 @ NCIX US)
Storage: Crucial 250GB BX100 CT250BX100SSD1 ($84.99 @ Amazon)
Storage #2: Western Digital 1TB Blue WD10EZEX ($44.99 @ Best Buy)
Case: NZXT Source 210 Elite ($47.99 @ B&H)
CPU Cooler: COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 EVO RR-212E-20PK-R2 ($24.99 @ Newegg)
Windows: Microsoft Windows 10 Home - 64-bit - OEM ($94.99 @ NCIX US)
Case Fan: COOLER MASTER R4-L2R-20AC-GP ($5.99 @ NCIX US)
Case Fan #2: COOLER MASTER R4-L2R-20AC-GP ($5.99 @ NCIX US)
Total: $1,413.90
Price may include shipping, rebates, promotions, and tax
Generated by PC Hound

Before tax and shipping, it's about $100 more than my recommendation, if you take my prices at the value they were in my original post (I since shewed that Windows 7, for example, could be had for less than seen in the list).

In my opinion, this is also a great build - its primary benefit is the choice of CPU at the price point we find it at. It's only issue (that I can tell) is that the GPU is long enough to block some of the drive slots, but not all, so not a big deal. My biggest issue with it is that you're basically dropping extra money on meme products. But if that's what helps you sleep at night, then it's a great build for you.

I am much more comfortable with taking risks when I know I have the savvy and the know-how to mitigate them - I would imagine my recommendations fit for that kind of user as well. The build in my signature features a CPU that was found in the dump, a motherboard that was sold with bent pins on ebay (which I repaired), one or two found fans, two found HDDs, and a secondary GPU bought used off craigslist. I had to do a minor case mod to get the cooling system to where I want it, but temps are great and the system produces the performance I need at 1080p (substantially more whenever I'm able to leverage SLI). For just about $650-700 total, I have had a fantastic system - but then that's the reward of knowing what you're about and taking the risks you know you can take.

 

[Dangman]

There were no bad recommendations being made; I've made my opinion on that subject clear. You're just being deliberately combative about it now.

As you did earlier, just showing others that your criticisms aren't as clear as you would have the rest of us believe. Considering that there are already 880+ views of this thread alone and assuming that the majority of those views were not from the few posters in this thread, I think it's fair to say that we have a relatively decent sized audience pool in the hundreds. With that many eyes on either of us, it's doesn't hurt to have a healthy debate to occur considering that other people will end up buying what either of us are recommending besides just the OP. Or even develop similar lines of thinking.

I am a little sad that you did not throw together a complete PC Hound list as a result of your recommendations with me - that thought did just strike me.

Didn't see the point. The OP already noted earlier in the thread that his current system was working-ish for the most part.

Going back over our conversations, I think your build would end up looking something like this?

PC Hound Part List

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1230V3 ($249.99 @ TigerDirect)
Motherboard: ASUS Z87-PLUS ($83.06 @ Amazon)
Memory: Team 8GB Dark ($35.99 @ Newegg)
Memory #2: Team 8GB Dark ($35.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: ZOTAC GeForce GTX 980 Ti ZT-90503-10P ($648.95 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: EVGA 750W 110-B2-0750-VR ($49.99 @ NCIX US)
Storage: Crucial 250GB BX100 CT250BX100SSD1 ($84.99 @ Amazon)
Storage #2: Western Digital 1TB Blue WD10EZEX ($44.99 @ Best Buy)
Case: NZXT Source 210 Elite ($47.99 @ B&H)
CPU Cooler: COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 EVO RR-212E-20PK-R2 ($24.99 @ Newegg)
Windows: Microsoft Windows 10 Home - 64-bit - OEM ($94.99 @ NCIX US)
Case Fan: COOLER MASTER R4-L2R-20AC-GP ($5.99 @ NCIX US)
Case Fan #2: COOLER MASTER R4-L2R-20AC-GP ($5.99 @ NCIX US)
Total: $1,413.90
Price may include shipping, rebates, promotions, and tax
Generated by PC Hound

Before tax and shipping, it's about $100 more than my recommendation, if you take my prices at the value they were in my original post (I since shewed that Windows 7, for example, could be had for less than seen in the list).

Nope. Not that close. Again, I don't factor in MIR until I actually receive them. Many of those parts are AR prices. Also again, I look at the total up-front costs which includes the shipping costs as well. With the exception of the PSU, the NCIX links do not have shipping listed or free shipping available. In addition, some of those brands I do not trust or find cost-effective. Not to mention there's still 1 to 2 risks that I would not take.

Not to mention that with a $2000 budget, Skylake would be the better choice IMO. But for comparison purposes and boredom, I shall do a Haswell setup:

$250 - Intel Xeon E3-1230V3 CPU
$130 - MSI Z97S SLI Krait Edition Intel Z97 ATX Motherboard
$78 - Crucial BLS2KIT8G3D1609DS1S00 Ballistix Sport 2 x 8GB DDR3 1600 RAM
$660 - MSI Geforce GTX 980 TI GAMING 6G LE 6GB PCI-E Video Card
$85 - Crucial BX100 250GB SSD
$53 - Toshiba DT01ACA100 1TB 7200RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s Hard Drive
$117 - eVGA SuperNOVA 750G2 750W Modular PSU
$70 - Corsair Graphite Series 230T Black ATX Case
$100 - Windows 8.1 64bit
$31 - Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo HSF
-----
Total: $1574 shipped

Yes it does look a lot more expensive. But unlike either of the lists you've posted so far, the above list is a bit more accurate in terms of what you or anybody else for that matter actually end up paying up front as shipping costs have been factored in and MIR pricing ignored. Walking through the build:

Without the MIR factored in, that Asus Z87-PLus mobo was $119 shipped. IMO too expensive for an older platform. I'd rather spend the extra $10 for a newer motherboard based on a newer chipset as well as a slightly better reputation for customer support compared to MSI. It also doesn't hurt that we use hundreds of that exact same MSI motherboard at work with little to no issues so my opinion of them are high. With that said, another reason why I chose that motherboard is for SLI support. Without that SLI requirement, I would have gone with one of the three motherboards I mentioned in the earlier post.

I don't trust Team for my RAM. I mainly stick to Kingston, Crucial, G.Skill, Mushkin, Corsair, and occasionally Patriot in that order. I've had the unfortunate experiences of RMAing RAM to all of those listed manufacturers but my experiences with them were generally good with Kingston being slightly ahead of the pack.

Not a fan of Zotac either. Past QC issues with their motherboards as well as the relative lack of good responses with their support department does not make me a Zotac admirer. I'd rather just spend the $11 extra for a card from a manufacturer I know is good rather than save $11 with a card that seems sketchy. Unless we're on a massively strict budget that is.

The Toshiba drive took some time getting around to but thanks to efforts of one particular poster in the past few days, I've changed my general tune about them. Once you factor in shipping costs, that WD 1TB Blue drive is $53 shipped. BackBlaze recently showed that Toshiba drives tended to have slightly better reliability rates over WD drives at worst. Since both drives are effectively the same costs, I'm going to aim for the better reliability.

The above setup is more or less geared towards the possibility of a future 980TI SLI setup as noted above. So since there's a possibility of $1200+ worth of video cards being crammed into this system, it seems rather odd not to spend the extra $37 for a significantly higher quality PSU that allows for a lower chance of PSU failure killing the system and $1200 worth of video card. Not to mention that HardOCP found that even high quality PSus can degrade in output and output quality by as much as 25% over time. Therefore, it still pays off in the long run to spend more money for a higher quality PSU up front:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015...1000w_power_supply_7_year_redux/#.Vd6tRflViko

You're probably more confused about the case recommendation than the other parts. This goes back to what I earlier said about looking at the total upfront costs. No guarantee that B&H will offer the Source 210 Elite with free shipping when it finally gets back in stock. $2 more gets you two shipping from Amazon.com anyway. In addition, the fans don't have shipping costs which means that you may end up paying more than the listed $12 for those fans. So you're looking at a total of $62 to $67 (using lowest known shipped costs for the fans) for that case + fan setup. IMO, that's not a good bang for the buck choice considering that $3 more gets you this case:
$70 - Corsair Graphite Series 230T Black ATX Case

Unlike the Source 210 Elite, the 230T has actual mounts for SSDs included. Unless one is fine ghetto-modding a bracket or leaving it at the bottom of the case or DVD area (honestly my preferred ghetto route), getting a SSD bracket usually costs $5 shipped. Now while you may end up with one less fan than the Source 210 Elite + Coolermaster fans setup, the open front mesh nature of the 230T means that you'll end up getting near equal levels of cooling. Not to mention the higher quality, even more space for cable management, pre-installed standoffs, and arguably more secure HDD and SSD mounts. All that for just $3 to $7 more.

OS wise, Windows 10 is still relatively new and therefore will have teething issues. As such, I'd rather stick with tried and proven Windows 8.1.

If you add in the rebates and shipping charges, the differences would probably be around $100 between both your builds and my build.

I am much more comfortable with taking risks when I know I have the savvy and the know-how to mitigate them - I would imagine my recommendations fit for that kind of user as well. The build in my signature features a CPU that was found in the dump, a motherboard that was sold with bent pins on ebay (which I repaired), one or two found fans, two found HDDs, and a secondary GPU bought used off craigslist. I had to do a minor case mod to get the cooling system to where I want it, but temps are great and the system produces the performance I need at 1080p (substantially more whenever I'm able to leverage SLI). For just about $650-700 total, I have had a fantastic system - but then that's the reward of knowing what you're about and taking the risks you know you can take.

That's great to hear. It's your money and you can do what you want with it. But others aren't quite as big of a risk taker as you are. In addition, it's a lot easier for you to "disappear' if you've made a bad recommendation (whether based on faulty information, flawed logic, and/or by mistake) considering how new you are to this forum and the ease of which it is these days to get a new username. Look at what my role in this forum is. Note the tag. Far harder for me to hide from a bad or poor recommendation. Therefore another reason for why I have to be more conservative and more scrutinizing.

 

[diizzy]

@ Dangman
Please knock it off with your zealotry that Asus is bad, because they aren't in general. ASRock which you recommend have a higher RMA rate than Asus based on all data I've provided you earlier. All you have a bunch of forum posts which doesn't say much as you're missing out on a lot of data and they have a much larger market share than Asrock so more reports are expected. All manufacturers have good and bad models, can we leave it at that unless you can provide solid facts about your claims.

There has been numerous of reports between Win 7 - 8/8.1 - 10 showing about 1 fps difference in gaming in general so going for Win 7 is fine and I would also go that route. Downside is that it doesn't support the latest DirectX version (which most games doesn't use / generate any visual difference anyway) but you do have the option to go Win 10 later on if you want to. That said, Windows 7 supports more than 16Gb ootb since it's a 64-bit OS.

The last build looks good to me overall, I do have a few issues with that SSD and you can probably find a better deal on a PSU. Not sure if everything is available at Newegg (Amazon being very expensive on this model) but I'm going suggest the ASUS H97M-PLUS as an alternative mobo but the MSI is fine too.

@TheEschaton
While not your idea is bad there are a few valid points that Dangman has...
The BIOS issue is an important matter as if you get a motherboard with an older BIOS you'll end up with an unbootable machine.

That mobo also has a rather old chipset and non Intel LAN which at least I have as a requirement these days.

Grabbing anything else than 8Gb sticks is just a bad idea, sure if you get one you wont get dual channel but it's not much of a performance penalty compared to being limited to hardware slots later on.

As for SSDs, Crucial/Micron (BX200 or M600), Plextor (M6-series), Intel (not really a fan but they do work, all models are a bit old by now) and Samsung (Pro series only) are solid choices. As long as you go for a Marvell, Intel or Samsung controller you're fine in general.

Seagate have major reliability issues unfortunately, go with Toshiba (perferably), HGST/WD instead.

As for AMD vs nVidia part, I would honestly go for nVidia any day of the week even if they were slightly slower and more expensive for the simply fact that their drivers are a lot better than AMD although I'm not going to claim that they're bug free. Intel in that regard are extremely good but they don't really have the performance for hardcore gaming... ;-)

@ All

The Antec One series aren't bad, although I do think that Corsair's mid-range series and Fractal Designs R4/5 series are considerably better but they to cost slightly more so it's a tradeoff like everything else...

As for memory,
Going stock (JEDEC) memory is the way to go, you won't run into compatibility issues and other fun(tm) stuff. The Ballistix Sport-series are great in all ways, Crucial Value Select, Kingstong ValueRAM series are fine too but they usually have slower specs and cost about the same. Mushkin are pretty good too, as long as you stick the models that follow JEDEC standards.

@ Nasgul
Micron makes a lot of memory chips, you have most likely have some at home. Crucial is a very solid choice even if you don't think so.
//Danne

 

[TheEschaton]

As you did earlier, just showing others that your criticisms aren't as clear as you would have the rest of us believe.

Ah yes, tit-for-tat; eye for an eye. A good role model for the rest of us.

With that many eyes on either of us, it's doesn't hurt to have a healthy debate to occur considering that other people will end up buying what either of us are recommending besides just the OP. Or even develop similar lines of thinking.

Yes. My point is that the healthy debate part of the thread - up until I made a concerted effort to revive it by actually making you post a suggestion instead of simply critiquing other builds. was dead. Thanks moderator for helping with that.

Didn't see the point. The OP already noted earlier in the thread that his current system was working-ish for the most part.

Hard to believe you would rather there be no information than some information. Or was it the source of the information that bothered you? What, can't new forum members attempt to contribute?

Nope. Not that close. Again, I don't factor in MIR until I actually receive them. Many of those parts are AR prices. Also again, I look at the total up-front costs which includes the shipping costs as well. With the exception of the PSU, the NCIX links do not have shipping listed or free shipping available. In addition, some of those brands I do not trust or find cost-effective. Not to mention there's still 1 to 2 risks that I would not take.

Not to mention that with a $2000 budget, Skylake would be the better choice IMO. But for comparison purposes and boredom, I shall do a Haswell setup:

So many things I don't understand about you. If you know what you're doing, MIR is not that hard to get; it's reliable enough that I use it to get most of my profit on my custom building hobby. You have to abide by the rules and read them closely - at this point I can see where the fault in your process might lie - and as for the shipping, are you telling me you'd spend another $161 just to avoid shipping costs? Wherever you are are from, shipping must be much crazier than it is here in northern Illinois. I suppose OP and I might benefit from living near a major transportation hub (Chi-town). The easier suspicion to have is that you place far too much weight on unseen shipping costs.

Yes it does look a lot more expensive. But unlike either of the lists you've posted so far, the above list is a bit more accurate in terms of what you or anybody else for that matter actually end up paying up front as shipping costs have been factored in and MIR pricing ignored. Walking through the build:

That's some great spin. Look more expensive? It IS more expensive.

I'd rather spend the extra $10 for a newer motherboard based on a newer chipset as well as a slightly better reputation for customer support compared to MSI. It also doesn't hurt that we use hundreds of that exact same MSI motherboard at work with little to no issues so my opinion of them are high. With that said, another reason why I chose that motherboard is for SLI support. Without that SLI requirement, I would have gone with one of the three motherboards I mentioned in the earlier post.

First of all, the board I suggested you would take, the Asus Plus model, does support SLI. It even says very clearly on its Newegg page that it ships with an SLI bridge, and there are plenty of reviews stating that both Crossfire and SLI work on that board. For that matter, even the Asus board I chose in the first place supports SLI. I would not recommend suggesting that this system can actually DO SLI on these setups, though, for reasons which will become clear as we move through your post.

I don't trust Team for my RAM. I mainly stick to Kingston, Crucial, G.Skill, Mushkin, Corsair, and occasionally Patriot in that order. I've had the unfortunate experiences of RMAing RAM to all of those listed manufacturers but my experiences with them were generally good with Kingston being slightly ahead of the pack.

That's wonderful that you've priced yourself out of some bargain RAM. Meanwhile back here on the ground, Team is a company that has been around for a long time. They're not going to get that far if their products don't generally work. Team RAM was tested on the motherboard that I put it on for you, and while that particular SKU wasn't tested because it was not available at the time of release, it is extremely similar to RAM from Team that was tested. Finally, Team RAM is often a rebrand of Crucial or Hynix.

Not a fan of Zotac either. Past QC issues with their motherboards as well as the relative lack of good responses with their support department does not make me a Zotac admirer. I'd rather just spend the $11 extra for a card from a manufacturer I know is good rather than save $11 with a card that seems sketchy. Unless we're on a massively strict budget that is.

I do agree with you here; I was just trying to find some way to make the 980 Ti look remotely price-competitive to the Fury X

The Toshiba drive took some time getting around to but thanks to efforts of one particular poster in the past few days, I've changed my general tune about them. Once you factor in shipping costs, that WD 1TB Blue drive is $53 shipped. BackBlaze recently showed that Toshiba drives tended to have slightly better reliability rates over WD drives at worst. Since both drives are effectively the same costs, I'm going to aim for the better reliability.

I saw the same BackBlaze report you did, but you're operating on old information: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/02/17/backblaze_how_not_to_evaluate_disk_reliability/. Unfortunately that studies' results are not worth basing an opinion on. That being said, Toshiba and WD both have excellent reliability in my opinion; as a dumpster diver, I can tell you that out of all the drives I pull from ancient PCs, these two brands are consistently among the most likely to still be functional. Hitachi is also pretty good, but it seems to be line-dependent for them.

The above setup is more or less geared towards the possibility of a future 980TI SLI setup as noted above. So since there's a possibility of $1200+ worth of video cards being crammed into this system, it seems rather odd not to spend the extra $37 for a significantly higher quality PSU that allows for a lower chance of PSU failure killing the system and $1200 worth of video card. Not to mention that HardOCP found that even high quality PSus can degrade in output and output quality by as much as 25% over time. Therefore, it still pays off in the long run to spend more money for a higher quality PSU up front:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015...1000w_power_supply_7_year_redux/#.Vd6tRflViko

You would not want to do that. With just the CPU, two potential GPUs, and the motherboard, PC Hound estimates that the wattage requirement for the build will exceed 750W. The second 16x slot should be used for a lower-end PhysX card, a lower-power professional card, or perhaps one of the higher-end PCI-E SSDs, but definitely not for another 980 Ti.

You're probably more confused about the case recommendation than the other parts. This goes back to what I earlier said about looking at the total upfront costs. No guarantee that B&H will offer the Source 210 Elite with free shipping when it finally gets back in stock. $2 more gets you two shipping from Amazon.com anyway. In addition, the fans don't have shipping costs which means that you may end up paying more than the listed $12 for those fans. So you're looking at a total of $62 to $67 (using lowest known shipped costs for the fans) for that case + fan setup. IMO, that's not a good bang for the buck choice considering that $3 more gets you this case:
$70 - Corsair Graphite Series 230T Black ATX Case

I'm not ata all confused about the case recommendation; when it comes right down to it you recommend "meme" products - those things which in the eyes of the most users and review sites are "in" right now. This is not a budget choice; it has no place in a budget build when there are cheaper options that will do the job just fine, such as the Antec or NZXT cases previously discussed (and which were partially suggested by yourself). It does, however, make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that you are recommending a case that gets all the accolades.

The NZXT Source 210 Elite is available shipped from Newegg at 49.99. and ultimately has better cooling potential than the Graphite, as well as more drive bays should you wish to repurpose the case down the road.

OS wise, Windows 10 is still relatively new and therefore will have teething issues. As such, I'd rather stick with tried and proven Windows 8.1.

Windows 7 is even more stable by that logic.

That's great to hear. It's your money and you can do what you want with it. But others aren't quite as big of a risk taker as you are. In addition, it's a lot easier for you to "disappear' if you've made a bad recommendation (whether based on faulty information, flawed logic, and/or by mistake) considering how new you are to this forum and the ease of which it is these days to get a new username. Look at what my role in this forum is. Note the tag. Far harder for me to hide from a bad or poor recommendation. Therefore another reason for why I have to be more conservative and more scrutinizing.

Thank you for the condescension, mod. You represent the forums here well. And the rest of this? My god, the hubris is practically Shakespearian in scale. As for myself, I don't need the imagined threat of people hating me on an internet forum to always be trying to improve my design sense - I do it out of love for the hobby.

Please, let's stop talking about ourselves and focus on the builds. It would be much more comfortable for both our senses of modesty, and I trust far more informative to the legions of rapt lurkers who are going to run to the stores and make purchasing decisions based on your hallowed words.

 

[Pez]

I am from nearby Chicago as well, as it happens, so hi to the OP! You may see some of my builds floating around in your area if you look hard enough, lol.

I don't really look for builds, only advice. I build my own.

The sad funny part about this thread.
The OP just needs a SSD.

I do? I have 4 drives on my current rig, 2 are SSD's (1 for OS, 1 for Steam). I know I said I use a SSD for my OS when someone previously said that.

Again, I don't factor in MIR until I actually receive them.

Likewise. I've had a small amount of purchases where my MIR was denied, but my most recent ones were all accepted.


I'm looking for a larger, great air flow case, which is why I was looking at the Corsair Carbide Air 540. I watched a video review, and really liked what I saw. Any similar case recommendations? Or should I go to the case forum? I've had good luck with Corsair cases, but I'm not against other brands.


In regards to ASUS motherboards, I've I've been reading the same criticism of them in our mobo forum. The board on my current rig is an ASUS, and the only issue I've had is the sata port failing. I do know if I get an ASUS board, it would need to me at least mid level (if not higher). That will help prevent issues. The mobo is, in my opinion, the most important part of any build. I never understood why people would spend $1000+ on GPU/CPU, and put them on a subpar $75 mobo.

 

[diizzy]

@ Pezzy
Whether you need one or two SSDs I strongly recommend you to avoid RAID0 especially if you're going to use the builtin. Run two SSDs as standalone drives instead, it'll be much better in the end.

A few adjustments I'd do on the build by Dangman... unless you're not dead set buying from Amazon

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1231V3 Haswell 3.4GHz
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...16&cm_re=intel_xeon_e3-_-19-117-316-_-Product
Slightly newer model, 100Mhz extra per core...
258$ incl shipping

Mobo: Asus H97M-PLUS
Does pretty much the same thing as the MSI board except it being mATX instead.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132119
105$ incl shipping

RAM: Crucial Ballistix Sport 16GB (2 x 8GB)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...=BLS2KIT8G3D1609DS1S00-_-20-148-545-_-Product
It's a solid choice, no surprises really
79.99$ incl shipping

Video card: MSI GeForce GTX 980 Ti GTX 980Ti GAMING 6G LE
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127895
Same card as Dangman recommended
665$ incl shipping

SSD: Crucial MX200 CT250MX200SSD1 2.5" 250GB SATA
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148948
Well worth spending 10$ bucks and getting a solid SSD with a Marvell controller instead of a Silicon Motion one (BX100).
95$ incl shipping

HDD: Toshiba DT01ACA100 1TB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...49382&cm_re=DT01ACA100-_-22-149-382-_-Product
Solid drive, might not give the best bang for the buck though... (2-3TB usually do that)
53$ incl shipping (70$ incl shipping 2TB with code)

PSU: Rosewill Capstone-G750
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817182358
A unit made by Enhance that produces very good PSUs (Cooler Master V750 comes to mind)
110$ incl shipping

Case: Fractal Design Define R4
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...0&cm_re=fractal_design-_-11-352-020-_-Product
Great case, good ventilation and very silent.
79.99$ incl shipping, great deal.

OS: Windows 7 Home 64-bit OEM
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832416806
103$ incl shipping (Windows 10 is 100 incl shipping)

CPU Cooler: ZALMAN CNPS10X OPTIMA
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA24G36F9529
Less noisy (quite a bit) compared to the Evo, 2-3C more at 125W (much more than your CPU).
http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2658&page=4
33$ incl shipping
//Danne

 

[Dangman]

I'm looking for a larger, great air flow case, which is why I was looking at the Corsair Carbide Air 540. I watched a video review, and really liked what I saw. Any similar case recommendations? Or should I go to the case forum? I've had good luck with Corsair cases, but I'm not against other brands.

To me, the Air 540 looks fugly. I recommend any of these other cases instead:
$100 - Phanteks Enthoo Pro Full Tower Case
$110 - Phanteks Enthoo Pro PH-ES614P_WT White Full Tower Case
$103 - Antec 1100 V2 ATX Case
$110 - NZXT Phantom PHAN-001WT White Full Tower ATX Case
$110 - NZXT Phantom PHAN-001BK Black Full Tower ATX Case
$120 - Corsair Vengeance Series C70 Gunmetal Black ATX Case
$120 - Corsair Obsidian Series 450D ATX Case
$136 - NZXT Phantom 530 Black Full Tower ATX Case
$140 - Corsair Obsidian Series 750D ATX Case
$140 - Corsair Graphite Series 730T ATX Case
$150 - NZXT Phantom 630 White Windowed Full Tower ATX Case
$150 - Phanteks Enthoo Luxe Full Tower Case
$158 - NZXT Phantom 630 Gunmetal Full Tower Case
$170 - Corsair Graphite Series 600T Arctc White Full Tower Case
$180 - Corsair Graphite Series 760T Black Full Tower Case
$180 - Corsair Graphite Series 760T White Full Tower Case
180 - Corsair Graphite 780T Black ATX Full Tower Case
$190 - Corsair Graphite 780T White ATX Full Tower Case
$230 - Phanteks Enthoo Primo Full Tower Case


And if you're looking for significantly lower noise albeit at the cost of cooling:
$84 - Fractal Design Define R4 Black ATX Case
$124 - Fractal Design Define R5 Black ATX Case

Hard to believe you would rather there be no information than some information. Or was it the source of the information that bothered you? What, can't new forum members attempt to contribute?

Huh? I don't know how you got all that from my response. Again, I did not see, at the time, why I should post up my own list considering that the OP already said no to a new system. I don't always have the time for that. I only posted a system because I had unexpected free time on my hands and that you posted a system that you thought that I would build/recommend.

So many things I don't understand about you. If you know what you're doing, MIR is not that hard to get; it's reliable enough that I use it to get most of my profit on my custom building hobby. You have to abide by the rules and read them closely - at this point I can see where the fault in your process might lie

I've had great success with MIR. But from experience, I know many others who aren't that good with MIR due to a variety of reasons. As a result, when I recommend parts to other people, it's simpler, faster, and more accurate for me to assume that the MIR won't be done properly. If they were 100% reliable, they wouldn't be MIR in the first place.

- and as for the shipping, are you telling me you'd spend another $161 just to avoid shipping costs? Wherever you are are from, shipping must be much crazier than it is here in northern Illinois. I suppose OP and I might benefit from living near a major transportation hub (Chi-town). The easier suspicion to have is that you place far too much weight on unseen shipping costs.

Even if you factor in MIR up front, you still have to pay the before rebate price in order to get the rebate in the first place. Combined with what I said earlier, I see no reason to outright count the MIR as something I already got when that clearly isn't the case. You're misconstruing what that extra $161 actually means.

Let's do the numbers. Remove the factored in rebates from your 2nd list and the price of that system is $1480 as of this post. Again, that's the minimum you will have to pay no matter what. You don't get the rebate price before you pay. Now that's only a $100 difference between my recommended setup and your second list. But that $1480 price does not include shipping prices from NCIX.

To recap what you actually get for that extra $100 as is:
- RAM from a more reputable manufacturer
- GPU from a more reputable manufacturer
- A higher quality PSU that'll last longer. This makes up for most of the price increase actually.
- A higher quality and more suitable case
- A newer motherboard
- A potentially more reliable HDD
- Two-day shipping on most of those parts

The difference is even lower once shipping costs are factored in for your second list. So for a PC with a $2000 budget, the extra money has been put to good use.

That's some great spin. Look more expensive? It IS more expensive.
Yes but not as overly expensive once you compare the pre-rebate prices and shipping costs involved.

First of all, the board I suggested you would take, the Asus Plus model, does support SLI. It even says very clearly on its Newegg page that it ships with an SLI bridge, and there are plenty of reviews stating that both Crossfire and SLI work on that board. For that matter, even the Asus board I chose in the first place supports SLI. I would not recommend suggesting that this system can actually DO SLI on these setups, though, for reasons which will become clear as we move through your post.

I did not imply that either of your Asus motherboard recommendations had no SLI support. Here's exactly what I said:

With that said, another reason why I chose that motherboard is for SLI support. Without that SLI requirement, I would have gone with one of the three motherboards I mentioned in the earlier post.

Show me where I implied that your Asus mobos did not support SLI.

That's wonderful that you've priced yourself out of some bargain RAM. Meanwhile back here on the ground, Team is a company that has been around for a long time. They're not going to get that far if their products don't generally work. Team RAM was tested on the motherboard that I put it on for you, and while that particular SKU wasn't tested because it was not available at the time of release, it is extremely similar to RAM from Team that was tested. Finally, Team RAM is often a rebrand of Crucial or Hynix.

I've seen plenty of shitty computer hardware manufacturers still survive to this day even after a decade+ of releasing crap products. Not to mention that the price difference between your Team RAM recommendation and my Crucial RAM recommendation is literally $6 as of this post. $6 more in a $2000 PC for RAM from a company that I can confirm has good support with my own experience vs RAM from a company I have zero experience with and won't save me enough money to justify the gamble. IMO, you're making way too much of a big deal over $6 in a $2000 PC.

I saw the same BackBlaze report you did, but you're operating on old information: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/02/17/backblaze_how_not_to_evaluate_disk_reliability/. Unfortunately that studies' results are not worth basing an opinion on. That being said, Toshiba and WD both have excellent reliability in my opinion; as a dumpster diver, I can tell you that out of all the drives I pull from ancient PCs, these two brands are consistently among the most likely to still be functional. Hitachi is also pretty good, but it seems to be line-dependent for them.

The BackBlaze is flawed yes. But considering that the other consumer methods of determining reliability are user reviews and personal anecdotes, both of which have their own flaws in determining reliability, I will still continue to factor in BackBlaze reports.

You would not want to do that. With just the CPU, two potential GPUs, and the motherboard, PC Hound estimates that the wattage requirement for the build will exceed 750W. The second 16x slot should be used for a lower-end PhysX card, a lower-power professional card, or perhaps one of the higher-end PCI-E SSDs, but definitely not for another 980 Ti.

Like any other PSU calculators on the net, PC Hound will over-estimate how much wattage you need due to the fact that there are thousands of shitty power supplies out there. Not to mention that even among computer hardware enthusiasts, people don't know what's the difference between a good PSU and a shitty PSU. They just see the price and thats it. As such, it's a safe bet to assume that the user has a shitty PSU rather than a good PSU.

HardOCP's own numbers shows that GTX 980 TI SLI is possible with a good quality 750W PSU. With a Core i7 3770K that's been overclocked to 4.8Ghz and a single SSD, an overclocked GTX 980 SLI setup uses ~589W:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...980_sli_overclocked_gpu_review/6#.Vd-8b_lViko

In the same graph, you'll also that a non-overclock GTX 980 SLI setup uses 446W. Now, a single 980TI uses 52W more than a single GTX 980:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015..._980_ti_video_card_gpu_review/11#.Vd-8c_lViko

Therefore, a GTX 980TI SLI setup will use roughly 104W more than a GTX 980 SLI. Even if we started from the overclocked GTX 980 SLI setup power usage figures, that totals up to 693W at load. That's still well within the 750W capability of that eVGA PSU. But since both our builds include a non-overclock capable Xeon CPU, that means that the power usage is going to be significantly lower than a Core i7 3770K overclocked to 4.8Ghz. Then combined with the fact that the OP isn't overclocking which means that the GPUs aren't going to be overclocked, that drops the power use even further. As such, it's going to be well below 750W. If I had to guesstimate, probably at most he'll see 550W of power used.

I'm not ata all confused about the case recommendation; when it comes right down to it you recommend "meme" products - those things which in the eyes of the most users and review sites are "in" right now. This is not a budget choice; it has no place in a budget build when there are cheaper options that will do the job just fine, such as the Antec or NZXT cases previously discussed (and which were partially suggested by yourself). It does, however, make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that you are recommending a case that gets all the accolades.

The NZXT Source 210 Elite is available shipped from Newegg at 49.99. and ultimately has better cooling potential than the Graphite, as well as more drive bays should you wish to repurpose the case down the road.

....You're making the mistake again of assuming what my thought processes or beliefs are in regards to computer hardware. Especially when I already explained why the Corsair case is a better bang for the buck value. Not to mention that I've actually worked with the Corsair 230T and can absolutely confirm that it is a better case than the Source 210 Elite if one can afford it. But I shall reiterate again:

Your NZXT Source 210 Elite + 2 Coolermaster 120mm fans totals up to around $62 to $67 shipped
The Corsair 230T costs $70 shipped.

The Corsair 230T has the following advantages over the Source 210 ELite:
- Actual SSD mounts
- Higher quality
- More space for cable management
- Pre-installed standoffs which savbes time and effort
- MOre secure SSD and HDD mounts.

So walk me through your logic: How is all of the above not worth an extra $3 to $7 in a PC that has a budget of $2000? Hell even lower at $1000? Is $3 to $7 that much of a difference to you that it means the difference between what's a budget case and not a budget case?

@ Dangman
Please knock it off with your zealotry that Asus is bad, because they aren't in general. ASRock which you recommend have a higher RMA rate than Asus based on all data I've provided you earlier. All you have a bunch of forum posts which doesn't say much as you're missing out on a lot of data and they have a much larger market share than Asrock so more reports are expected. All manufacturers have good and bad models, can we leave it at that unless you can provide solid facts about your claims.

I'm more than willing to leave it at that.

 

[TheEschaton]

I don't really look for builds, only advice. I build my own.

I meant you might see someone else owning one of my rigs - highly unlikely given the volume of work I do, but possible.

 

[TheEschaton]

I've had great success with MIR. But from experience, I know many others who aren't that good with MIR due to a variety of reasons. As a result, when I recommend parts to other people, it's simpler, faster, and more accurate for me to assume that the MIR won't be done properly. If they were 100% reliable, they wouldn't be MIR in the first place.

OK, fine, but I do factor it in - for those of us who are competently literate up to say, about the 6th grade reading level. I'm not going to sacrifice maximizing savings because it's simpler (it's not any faster) for me to be lazy and not factor in all possible avenues of savings.

Even if you factor in MIR up front, you still have to pay the before rebate price in order to get the rebate in the first place.

If you're dropping on a gaming computer of any kind, you likely have some degree of liquidity in your budget. You can stand to lose some up front so long as you get it back down the road. It's the overall cost that hurts the most.

To recap what you actually get for that extra $100 as is:
- RAM from a more reputable manufacturer
- GPU from a more reputable manufacturer
- A higher quality PSU that'll last longer. This makes up for most of the price increase actually.
- A higher quality and more suitable case
- A newer motherboard
- A potentially more reliable HDD
- Two-day shipping on most of those parts

What you get is memes and two day shipping. Not what I'd spend $100 on.

Show me where I implied that your Asus mobos did not support SLI.

When you say "With that said, another reason why I chose that motherboard is for SLI support," in the context of a conversation about why you chose a different board over the one I thought you'd go for, the implication is that SLI support is one of the defining reasons. This is standard composition and rhetoric 101. Since you apparently didn't mean it that way, the correct thing to do would have been to put that statement in a separate paragraph/section, under a different topic sentence.

I've seen plenty of shitty computer hardware manufacturers still survive to this day even after a decade+ of releasing crap products.

OK, point taken - although a lot of these aren't "shitty" so much as "below your kinda high standards." A capitalist market naturally evolves to feed all of its segments from the bottom to the top. One interesting thing is that Dell and HP sometimes go for the Bestec/Logisys PSUs, and I have formed a highly negative opinion of both brands. However, I'll be damned if those same PSUs don't usually still function in the builds Dell and HP put them in, even after I get them out of the trash. The point is that they know what to expect from the equipment; they're big enough to do the MTBF studies and the load studies, and they know how to get the most out of the product. In other words, there's sometimes a valid market even for the lowliest of parts.

Not to mention that the price difference between your Team RAM recommendation and my Crucial RAM recommendation is literally $6 as of this post. $6 more in a $2000 PC for RAM from a company that I can confirm has good support with my own experience vs RAM from a company I have zero experience with and won't save me enough money to justify the gamble. IMO, you're making way too much of a big deal over $6 in a $2000 PC.

The BackBlaze is flawed yes. But considering that the other consumer methods of determining reliability are user reviews and personal anecdotes, both of which have their own flaws in determining reliability, I will still continue to factor in BackBlaze reports.

It's nice to think you have good data because it makes you feel good about your choices. But the truth is that, especially down at the consumer level, it's basically a crap shoot when it comes to drive purchases, especially because individual use environments vary so much from one another that it's easy to see the results could be totally different in a different ambient temp, under a different workload.

Like any other PSU calculators on the net, PC Hound will over-estimate how much wattage you need due to the fact that there are thousands of shitty power supplies out there. Not to mention that even among computer hardware enthusiasts, people don't know what's the difference between a good PSU and a shitty PSU. They just see the price and thats it. As such, it's a safe bet to assume that the user has a shitty PSU rather than a good PSU.

HardOCP's own numbers shows that GTX 980 TI SLI is possible with a good quality 750W PSU. With a Core i7 3770K that's been overclocked to 4.8Ghz and a single SSD, an overclocked GTX 980 SLI setup uses ~589W:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...980_sli_overclocked_gpu_review/6#.Vd-8b_lViko

In the same graph, you'll also that a non-overclock GTX 980 SLI setup uses 446W. Now, a single 980TI uses 52W more than a single GTX 980:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015..._980_ti_video_card_gpu_review/11#.Vd-8c_lViko

Therefore, a GTX 980TI SLI setup will use roughly 104W more than a GTX 980 SLI. Even if we started from the overclocked GTX 980 SLI setup power usage figures, that totals up to 693W at load. That's still well within the 750W capability of that eVGA PSU. But since both our builds include a non-overclock capable Xeon CPU, that means that the power usage is going to be significantly lower than a Core i7 3770K overclocked to 4.8Ghz. Then combined with the fact that the OP isn't overclocking which means that the GPUs aren't going to be overclocked, that drops the power use even further. As such, it's going to be well below 750W. If I had to guesstimate, probably at most he'll see 550W of power used.

It's an odd reversal of the situation to have you telling me to take a risk, especially after just going through the rigamarole of explaining that PSUs degrade over time. I will note the bit about the PC Hound overestimating the voltage requirements, though. It's something that PCPP doesn't do (or at least, it's estimate is much less conservative). I should have checked the numbers outside of the system. Not really liking PC Hound as much as I thought I would. But I think it's still best to look for a slightly higher wattage PSU than a 750 if SLI is something your really would consider. CPU upgrades might also be in the cards, for example.

Over the course of this whole discussion between you and I, you've frequently said again and again "why not just spend $6 more here" or "for just a little bit more you get a product that is so much better" (not actual quotes, just paraphrasing because I'm too lazy to go back and find them and you know what I'm talking about). The trouble is, with that mindset you end up spending that "little bit more" in a lot of places, and eventually you end up with a noticeably more expensive system. That might not be a problem for Pezzy or you; both of you are consumers that seem to really get a kick out of buying into the memes fully and feeling good about the purchase primarily based on whether or not you got the "best" as it was determined by review sites, etc. And that's fine; it's your money.

The other option, though - and it is a valid option - is to cut costs, no matter how small, where you can, so long as it doesn't cut into anything absolutely essential. That was the purpose of the build, from the Xeon on up. I mean, if you're going to be going for the Xeon, under your philosophy of "hey it's within my budget of $2000 so why not" you might as well spring for an i7 - why even bother with the Xeon when it lacks some functionality that, even if you don't want it now, you might want later, and anyway it turbos higher.

I end my assessment of the situation where I began, really: you do not understand a good budget build when you see one, and I don't think you understand how to build on a budget. This is not really a bad thing; I mean obviously you know how to put together good builds that are properly suited to their intended use, and you are helping a person who particularly likes the kind of thought process you employ. But budget building is really not your forte.

 

[Pez]

I'm really surprised by this thread. Despite stating a few times I'm looking at the Corsair Carbide Air 540, people keep throwing builds with cases not even close to it.

To me, the Air 540 looks fugly. I recommend any of these other cases instead:

While I like some of those cases, and were looking at them, I like the larger feel of the 540. Big and bulky, yes, but seems to meet some needs I have. Also, I don't find it too unpleasant to the eyes.

@ Pezzy
Whether you need one or two SSDs I strongly recommend you to avoid RAID0 especially if you're going to use the builtin. Run two SSDs as standalone drives instead, it'll be much better in the end.

Who ever mentioned Raid 0? Or any Raid? I don't really plan on doing that. Maybe when I have extra money, and can put all my media in a NAS instead of keeping it all on my main rig.

Honestly, the biggest decision I have is really on the GPU. Do I go with AMD or Nvidia? Between all the fanboys out there, it's hard to decide. I'm inclined to stick with AMD, but I'm not opposed to switching. I've been running 2 6970's in Xfire for four years with no issue (other than some coil whine, which I always seem to suffer from on any build), and any game I play at 2560x1600 still looks good (though not always maxed, but I don't care about such things so much).

 

[TheEschaton]

Honestly, the biggest decision I have is really on the GPU. Do I go with AMD or Nvidia? Between all the fanboys out there, it's hard to decide. I'm inclined to stick with AMD, but I'm not opposed to switching. I've been running 2 6970's in Xfire for four years with no issue (other than some coil whine, which I always seem to suffer from on any build), and any game I play at 2560x1600 still looks good (though not always maxed, but I don't care about such things so much).

Pezzy, the long and short of it between Dangman's bitching and mine is that whether you go with the Fury X or the 980 Ti, both are fantastically powerful cards and they perform within a few percentage points of each other. Either one is probably your best choice within the design and budget constraints you have set up for us here.

 

[diizzy]

@ Pezzy
Sorry bout that RAID part, I read that in another (different thread).
About the case I assume all of us think it's a bad choice, why do you think you need it in the first place?

and about the video card I stated my opinion about it here
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041819237&postcount=27

Stability > Performance in short...

//Danne

 

[Pez]

About the case: I like it. It's large, easy to hide cables, and promotes good air flow. The fact that it's a giant cube doesn't bother me.

In regards to CPU's, I take it the order of performance is the below, and Xeon was recommended because it's better than the i5 but priced almost the same.
i7 > Xeon > i5 > i3

 

[Dangman]

Thought I posted this last night but apparently I didn't:

I'm really surprised by this thread. Despite stating a few times I'm looking at the Corsair Carbide Air 540, people keep throwing builds with cases not even close to it. .

It looks reaaaaaly fugly that I ignored it......

While I like some of those cases, and were looking at them, I like the larger feel of the 540. Big and bulky, yes, but seems to meet some needs I have. Also, I don't find it too unpleasant to the eyes.

Fair enough. Beauty in the eye of the beholder and all that. Besides the look, I don't have any major objections to it in regards to cooling capability, quality, or accommodations.

Honestly, the biggest decision I have is really on the GPU. Do I go with AMD or Nvidia? Between all the fanboys out there, it's hard to decide. I'm inclined to stick with AMD, but I'm not opposed to switching. I've been running 2 6970's in Xfire for four years with no issue (other than some coil whine, which I always seem to suffer from on any build), and any game I play at 2560x1600 still looks good (though not always maxed, but I don't care about such things so much).

Depends on how much you're willing to spend. Though I would recommend the GTX 970 or R9 390 8GB at a minimum for 2560x1600 gaming. At the higher-end, I would look at the GTX 980. Honestly, you really don't need the GTX 980 TI for 2560x1600 gaming. Nor would I recommend the R9 Fury X for that matter for reasons already discussed.

I recommend whatever shows the best bang for the buck value possible for the budget with the available information. So doesn't matter if it's AMD, Nvidia, or Intel.

If you're dropping on a gaming computer of any kind, you likely have some degree of liquidity in your budget. You can stand to lose some up front so long as you get it back down the road. It's the overall cost that hurts the most.

That's the thing: you're determining the overall cost down the road. I'm looking at the overall cost up front.

What you get is memes and two day shipping. Not what I'd spend $100 on.

Again with the memes shit.

When you say "With that said, another reason why I chose that motherboard is for SLI support," in the context of a conversation about why you chose a different board over the one I thought you'd go for, the implication is that SLI support is one of the defining reasons. This is standard composition and rhetoric 101. Since you apparently didn't mean it that way, the correct thing to do would have been to put that statement in a separate paragraph/section, under a different topic sentence.

Regardless, I did not say or imply those Asus mobos did not support SLI.

OK, point taken - although a lot of these aren't "shitty" so much as "below your kinda high standards." A capitalist market naturally evolves to feed all of its segments from the bottom to the top. One interesting thing is that Dell and HP sometimes go for the Bestec/Logisys PSUs, and I have formed a highly negative opinion of both brands. However, I'll be damned if those same PSUs don't usually still function in the builds Dell and HP put them in, even after I get them out of the trash. The point is that they know what to expect from the equipment; they're big enough to do the MTBF studies and the load studies, and they know how to get the most out of the product. In other words, there's sometimes a valid market even for the lowliest of parts.

But not for a gaming PC or for the people of HardForum. We're not Reddit buildaPC where we'll recommend the cheapest crap because it's cheap.

It's nice to think you have good data because it makes you feel good about your choices. But the truth is that, especially down at the consumer level, it's basically a crap shoot when it comes to drive purchases, especially because individual use environments vary so much from one another that it's easy to see the results could be totally different in a different ambient temp, under a different workload.

Yes, and? At the end of the day people don't like uncertainty. Considering that we're talking about hard drives here, it's not an end of the world situation recommending drives based on flawed data unless you do unsafe data usage practices.

It's an odd reversal of the situation to have you telling me to take a risk, especially after just going through the rigamarole of explaining that PSUs degrade over time. I will note the bit about the PC Hound overestimating the voltage requirements, though. It's something that PCPP doesn't do (or at least, it's estimate is much less conservative). I should have checked the numbers outside of the system. Not really liking PC Hound as much as I thought I would. But I think it's still best to look for a slightly higher wattage PSU than a 750 if SLI is something your really would consider. CPU upgrades might also be in the cards, for example.

PCPP does the same over-estimation from the times I've used it. Yes I made an effort to show that PSU degrade over time. I did so in order to justify the higher costs for a higher quality PSU. A higher quality PSU degrades lesser and slower than a lower quality PSU. Look at the numbers I posted and note what the OP said about not overclocking. A high quality 750W is more than enough.

Unlike AMD FX CPUs, Intel CPU power consumption has been on a downward trend. Considering the overall popularity and profitability in the mobile market, it doesn't make sense for Intel to release CPUs that uses significantly more power unless the justification is "more cores". Not to mention that by the time there's even a small justifiable reason for a new CPU and mobo from a performance standpoint, the GPUs would already be outdated. GPUs are also seeing a similar trend in downward power usage. So a future new PC could potentially end up using less power than the PC of today.

Over the course of this whole discussion between you and I, you've frequently said again and again "why not just spend $6 more here" or "for just a little bit more you get a product that is so much better" (not actual quotes, just paraphrasing because I'm too lazy to go back and find them and you know what I'm talking about). The trouble is, with that mindset you end up spending that "little bit more" in a lot of places, and eventually you end up with a noticeably more expensive system.

There's a thing called "restraint". Not every single situation is going to be where the poster or recommender can't hold back and go willy nilly far above the budget. If you can afford it without hurting yourself financially and if it's completely justified, then I see no harm spending a bit more for justified improvements.

That might not be a problem for Pezzy or you; both of you are consumers that seem to really get a kick out of buying into the memes fully and feeling good about the purchase primarily based on whether or not you got the "best" as it was determined by review sites, etc. And that's fine; it's your money.

YOu're missing the nuance here: Best for the money. Not just the "best". Also, trying to paint us as some sort of "followers" or "sheeple" with your memes comment is total bull. So justifying a purchase based on its actual value is suddenly "oh you can't think for yourself" or "you're buying into memes"?

Again, bang for the buck VALUE.

The other option, though - and it is a valid option - is to cut costs, no matter how small, where you can, so long as it doesn't cut into anything absolutely essential. That was the purpose of the build, from the Xeon on up. I mean, if you're going to be going for the Xeon, under your philosophy of "hey it's within my budget of $2000 so why not" you might as well spring for an i7 - why even bother with the Xeon when it lacks some functionality that, even if you don't want it now, you might want later, and anyway it turbos higher.

So let me get this straight: Your philosophy is more or less "the lowest cost possible regardless of the product's value no matter what." Would that be a fair assessment? Here's the thing: I switch between both philosophies depending on the circumstances and the actual dollar value of the budget. Did you not know you don't have to go and stick with one philosophy for every single situation?

I keep it loose. If I'm helping a person out with a severely restricted budget and a higher part count demand, of course I'll cut costs where ever possible as long as nothing essential is effected in order to cram in as good of a gaming PC as possible into that budget. It may not be the best bang for the buck PC but it's within budget. I've done exactly that countless times in the past in this subforum. Just like you would if you were here for that long.

But in situations where there is a higher budget, I'm not going to be so stingy. I'll try to fit in the best bang for the buck parts possible because they're worth getting. Not for the sake of "ooh it's awesome" but because it actually offers things that justifies the price increases. In other words, unlike you, I do not ignore bang for the buck value unless warranted.

Again, you're assuming what my thought processes or beliefs are in regards to computer hardware. In this case, there is no justification for the the Core i7 4790 or Core i7 4790K that would justify the massive increase in price even with a higher budget. If there's an increase in price, I will try to justify it. If I can't justify it, then I won't recommend the more expensive part. Not every single price increasing part in the world is overly too much money.

I end my assessment of the situation where I began, really: you do not understand a good budget build when you see one, and I don't think you understand how to build on a budget. This is not really a bad thing; I mean obviously you know how to put together good builds that are properly suited to their intended use, and you are helping a person who particularly likes the kind of thought process you employ. But budget building is really not your forte.

You've only been here less than a week. You've already made the mistake of assuming things that are not true. i.e the bang for the buck value of my PCs in my rig. Are you really sure that you're not making the same mistake again of assuming what people can and can't do? I highly recommend that you actually spend more time on this forum and actually see what's up rather than judge from one thread about a NON-BUDGET gaming PC using incomplete information.

 

[TheEschaton]

That's the thing: you're determining the overall cost down the road. I'm looking at the overall cost up front.

I hope that was more meaningful to you than it was to anyone else who reads it.

Again with the memes shit.

Try to imagine how I feel when you repeatedly suggest these parts and actually believe that they have justifiable added value.

Regardless, I did not say or imply those Asus mobos did not support SLI.

I literally showed you that you did. Whether it was because you made an error of knowledge or an error of composition I leave up to you, but you can't bring yourself to admit to either? Too sad.

But not for a gaming PC or for the people of HardForum. We're not Reddit buildaPC where we'll recommend the cheapest crap because it's cheap.

A gross oversimplification of my position and you know it.

Yes, and? At the end of the day people don't like uncertainty. Considering that we're talking about hard drives here, it's not an end of the world situation recommending drives based on flawed data unless you do unsafe data usage practices.

I cannot believe I have to spell this out: if the data is flawed, so is the recommendation that is based upon it. You're paying more for nothing. And as you say (I can't believe YOU bring this up given that it undermines your position) - if you have safe data usage practices, it really doesn't matter. The products are not far enough apart in terms of reliability for the average consumer to care.

Unlike AMD FX CPUs, Intel CPU power consumption has been on a downward trend. Considering the overall popularity and profitability in the mobile market, it doesn't make sense for Intel to release CPUs that uses significantly more power unless the justification is "more cores". Not to mention that by the time there's even a small justifiable reason for a new CPU and mobo from a performance standpoint, the GPUs would already be outdated. GPUs are also seeing a similar trend in downward power usage. So a future new PC could potentially end up using less power than the PC of today.

The justification would be new cores, yes. Or overclocking. Or maybe (shocker) just playing it safe and not asking your PSU to go all the way up to its maximum rating.

So let me get this straight: Your philosophy is more or less "the lowest cost possible regardless of the product's value no matter what." Would that be a fair assessment? Here's the thing: I switch between both philosophies depending on the circumstances and the actual dollar value of the budget. Did you not know you don't have to go and stick with one philosophy for every single situation?

Great, now we get into the straw-man full-on. Trust me, it doesn't make you look convincing, and it's a bore to refute. I am aware that you can change the criteria used to suggest new hardware according to the nature of the need/budget, but as I've already patiently explained to you, the entire reason I came into this thread was to see how low I could get it for the OP without really sacrificing the critical gaming performance he'd expect from the system. That approach warrants penny pinching; we are trying to see how far down we can get the cost before something is really unacceptable.

Again, you're assuming what my thought processes or beliefs are in regards to computer hardware. In this case, there is no justification for the the Core i7 4790 or Core i7 4790K that would justify the massive increase in price even with a higher budget. If there's an increase in price, I will try to justify it. If I can't justify it, then I won't recommend the more expensive part. Not every single price increasing part in the world is overly too much money.

This at least is interesting. I mean, I want to know the algorithm you use to determine what's worth it and what's not. Previously it seemed to be mostly "if it's within budget and it's at all better, go for it" (how's that for a little straw-manning?), but perhaps there's some way you have of telling whether or not something is "worth it" even within a budget? To me, the added longevity gained with faster turbo and unlocked multiplier would go a long way toward justifying an i7, if I thought that I wanted to spend all the way up to the 2k limit to maximize my performance within the budget envelope. It's certainly going to do more for performance than a nicer case, a more reliable hard drive, a more expensive version of windows, etc.

You've only been here less than a week. You've already made the mistake of assuming things that are not true. i.e the bang for the buck value of my PCs in my rig. Are you really sure that you're not making the same mistake again of assuming what people can and can't do? I highly recommend that you actually spend more time on this forum and actually see what's up rather than judge from one thread about a NON-BUDGET gaming PC using incomplete information.

Aaaaand the appeal to authority. This is ridiculous. So you purchased your i7 for substantially cheaper than it would have been did you not have a sweetheart deal lined up - of course you could (using the same deal) have purchased a Xeon or an i5, or an i3, and those would have cost even less, yes? And the PSUs - well you got them for free on a one-off deal; doesn't tell me anything about your purchasing proclivities. The NZXT Phantom, even as an $80 case, is not a budget choice. You still paid far, far out the ass compared to many cheaper cases that would offer configurations almost as good.

The server is running off a 120gb SSD for a 2gb OS that loads itself into RAM after first boot, and as an appliance should be on and running most of the time anyway, negating the startup bonus you get from the SSD as anything meaningful to invest it. At a maximum, it would have been better to get a cheap 32gb SSD and run the appliance off that.

Then with your HTPC you went and got all that at 50 a pop or under for each (except that you actually didn't; you paid more for at least some of that by your own admission) - that's a bizarre cost-saving decision and not a very good way to make the most of your budget. Anyhow, you ended up with a Prodigy, which is just about one of the largest ITX cases I have heard of, and rather negates the whole idea of an HTPC - it's more like a LAN rig.

I mean, I fail to see how your sig builds still do not represent a gross mis-characterization of budget building as I understand the process.

You started off by suggesting that keeping the user from getting to 24gb of RAM was a serious misstep. It would have absolutely zero influence on gaming performance, and will not for many, many years. None at all. Most games these days actually don't see much, if any, improvement past 4gb. 8gb is the standard suggestion because there are a few games which need this to perform well; most of those are not considered well-coded games. It is extremely difficult to imagine a future in which even 16gb would be required to game at the maximum settings, let alone 24gb.

At this point, you're not even actually addressing my arguments so much as a straw man that you would prefer to engage with; I'd report the behavior for rudeness/harassment, but you are a mod, so I can't imagine that would get very far.

 

[Pez]

I'm going to be hitting Fry's (and possibly MicroCenter) this coming week. I'm going to check out a few things (cases, keyboards, etc). Here's the full Fry's ad. See anything good there?

I'm also liking some of the cables for the modular PSU's I'm seeing. I've never had a modular PSU before, I'm looking forward to it.

I definitely don't want Win 10, since I'm a gamer, and that OS isn't very good for games yet. I'll pick up 8.1 somewhere.

I also need some recommendations on fan brands.

 

[computerguy151]

SO many people in here recommending i7's when clearly he won't need it. His uses won't go beyond an i5, and it seems he is set on not overclocking it. Anyone can splurge on different parts, but when does it become unnecessary?

 

[TheEschaton]

SO many people in here recommending i7's when clearly he won't need it. His uses won't go beyond an i5, and it seems he is set on not overclocking it. Anyone can splurge on different parts, but when does it become unnecessary?

I think we are suggesting Xeons and i7s because it seems like he keeps his computers long enough that the extra threading will become a real benefit to him around the end of this rig's lifespan.

inb4 "games don't use more than 4 threads blah blah blah." It's already not true; the trends are clear by now. This will continue to be more and more important.