Aller au contenu

Photo

PC Building: Hardware Feedback (esp. Compatibility)


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
26 réponses à ce sujet

#1
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

I've more or less settled on the general set up for a custom PC I'm looking at building. This will be my first go of it. I'm looking for feedback. 

 

In terms of the CPU, I know that the i7 is superflous vs. the i5 unless you're doing video-editing, etc. Someone (not me) will be using it for that in part and will make up my cost difference for the i5, so I'm cool with that. But I heard that there may be motherboard issues with getting the i7 to work right. 

 

Otherwise, I'm interesting in what people have to say. I imagine the most common advice will be to go for the 970 because the marginal increase isn't worth the 980. 

 

CPU: Intel Core i7-4790K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor  

CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler  
Motherboard: Asus SABERTOOTH Z97 MARK2 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard  
Memory: Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-1600 Memory 
Storage: Crucial MX100 512GB 2.5" Solid State Drive  
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Superclocked ACX 2.0 Video Card 
Case: Phanteks Enthoo Pro ATX Full Tower Case 
Power Supply: SeaSonic G 550W 80+ Gold Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply  
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer  
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8.1 - 64-bit (OEM) (64-bit)  



#2
Fidite Nemini

Fidite Nemini
  • Members
  • 5 734 messages

You should go with the GTX 970 because the marginal performance increase with a GTX 980 isn't worth it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't see any issues here. System should run fine.



#3
Deathangel008

Deathangel008
  • Members
  • 4 444 messages

why this MB? imo its overprized, there are cheaper Z97 boards which aren´t worse.
take low-profile RAM, the heatspreaders are useless and incompatible to a lot of good custom CPU coolers.
i would take a bigger CPU cooler, at least something like the Thermalright HR-02 Macho or Scythe Mugen4. Haswell gets pretty hot compared to the old Sandy´s. i have a Noctua NH-D15 in my new system, very big and expensive, but also very quiet and cool, and of excellent quality.
and yup, i wouldn´t recommend the GTX980, too expensive. take a GTX970, personally i would recommend the MSI GTX970 Gaming 4G, very quiet card. the STRIX version by ASUS is also very quiet; the Gigabyte Gaming G1 has a very powerful cooler, but it is louder.
the other parts are fine.

edit: btw with the money you would save by buying the 970 instead of the 980 you could go for the i7 5820K with 6 cores.



#4
L. Han

L. Han
  • Members
  • 1 878 messages

You might want to look in to your power supply. It's solid, but extra room for future replacements/upgrades won't hurt you a single bit.

 

Also I'd like to just mention your SSD size. I don't know how much you save/clean up on your PC, but I am going to assume that it is not enough. If you are going to roll with a 512gb SSD, be sure to keep it clean. SSD's lose a lot of performance if you start filling it up.

 

Other than that, you got quite a beasty machine!



#5
bmwcrazy

bmwcrazy
  • Members
  • 3 622 messages
Other than Windows 8, everything looks good to me.

Good luck.

#6
Guest_TrillClinton_*

Guest_TrillClinton_*
  • Guests

Everything looks good, not a fan of the windows 8 though.



#7
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

why this MB? imo its overprized, there are cheaper Z97 boards which aren´t worse.
take low-profile RAM, the heatspreaders are useless and incompatible to a lot of good custom CPU coolers.
i would take a bigger CPU cooler, at least something like the Thermalright HR-02 Macho or Scythe Mugen4. Haswell gets pretty hot compared to the old Sandy´s. i have a Noctua NH-D15 in my new system, very big and expensive, but also very quiet and cool, and of excellent quality.
and yup, i wouldn´t recommend the GTX980, too expensive. take a GTX970, personally i would recommend the MSI GTX970 Gaming 4G, very quiet card. the STRIX version by ASUS is also very quiet; the Gigabyte Gaming G1 has a very powerful cooler, but it is louder.
the other parts are fine.

edit: btw with the money you would save by buying the 970 instead of the 980 you could go for the i7 5820K with 6 cores.

 

What time of motherboard would you recommend? 

 

You've given me a lot of food for thought. 

 

 

You might want to look in to your power supply. It's solid, but extra room for future replacements/upgrades won't hurt you a single bit.

 

Also I'd like to just mention your SSD size. I don't know how much you save/clean up on your PC, but I am going to assume that it is not enough. If you are going to roll with a 512gb SSD, be sure to keep it clean. SSD's lose a lot of performance if you start filling it up.

 

Other than that, you got quite a beasty machine!

 

Good point re: the SSD. It didn't occur to me. I was thinking about the volume of games I keep on my hard drive, w/o consider other stuff like movies etc. 

 

Other than Windows 8, everything looks good to me.

Good luck.

 

Can I even still get Win. 7? I think Win. 8 is a POS but I thought my options were limited. 



#8
ComradeShepard7

ComradeShepard7
  • Members
  • 1 261 messages

 

Can I even still get Win. 7? I think Win. 8 is a POS but I thought my options were limited. 

 

Newegg still sells it. I'm guessing others do as well. OEM appears to be the only choice as I haven't been able to spot any retail versions. Your windows 8 choice was OEM anyways so you would be stuck with your motherboard and no microsoft support anyhow.

 

As far as SSDs are concerned, I would just have a 75-150 GB partition on it for your OS with the sizing being determined by how much you intend to install there. I am in the process of building a new tower right now and I'll just use the rest of it for things where I'd like to have faster reads (the newer games I am playing at the time). Everything else is going to go into various partitions on a 4 TB HD.



#9
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages
What about the following design? 
 

 

I might just add in a slave HD. 



#10
Deathangel008

Deathangel008
  • Members
  • 4 444 messages

once again: why this MB? does it have any special features apart from its "military look"?
other parts look good except you still have win8 in your configuration.



#11
A Crusty Knight Of Colour

A Crusty Knight Of Colour
  • Members
  • 7 457 messages

Are you planning on overclocking the CPU? If not, I don't see why you'd need the HR-02. Also, if you plan on running SLI sometime in the future, I'd recommend an upgrade to a 650w power supply. A 550w might technically have the juice, but it also needs enough power connectors.

 

Would take a look at the GA-Z97X-Gaming 7 MB myself. It's a little more expensive, but it looks snazzy.



#12
TurianRebel212

TurianRebel212
  • Members
  • 1 830 messages

Sweet rig. But... You should buy to 970s and SLI them. Outperforms a 780ti in SLI. 



#13
Deathangel008

Deathangel008
  • Members
  • 4 444 messages

Sweet rig. But... You should buy to 970s and SLI them. Outperforms a 780ti in SLI. 

why?



#14
naughty99

naughty99
  • Members
  • 5 801 messages

If you will be spending this much on your new system, I'd wait a little longer for the 8GB VRAM versions of the 980 or 970. 



#15
Deathangel008

Deathangel008
  • Members
  • 4 444 messages

If you will be spending this much on your new system, I'd wait a little longer for the 8GB VRAM versions of the 980 or 970. 

because of a few non-optimized games?



#16
Fidite Nemini

Fidite Nemini
  • Members
  • 5 734 messages

If you will be spending this much on your new system, I'd wait a little longer for the 8GB VRAM versions of the 980 or 970. 

 

8GB VRAM won't help with anything and certainly not against memory leak if foolproving was the idea behind it. It will onyl mean you can play slightly longer before the game crashes compared to the standard 4GB VRAM.

 

4GB VRAM is more than sufficient for everything short of possibly 4K where the devs went ham with texture sizes, in which case TMU count will be the bottleneck long before VRAM starts noticably limiting the performance.



#17
Guest_TrillClinton_*

Guest_TrillClinton_*
  • Guests

8GB VRAM won't help with anything and certainly not against memory leak if foolproving was the idea behind it. It will onyl mean you can play slightly longer before the game crashes compared to the standard 4GB VRAM.
 
4GB VRAM is more than sufficient for everything short of possibly 4K where the devs went ham with texture sizes, in which case TMU count will be the bottleneck long before VRAM starts noticably limiting the performance.


Well a memory leak is a software issue.

#18
Fidite Nemini

Fidite Nemini
  • Members
  • 5 734 messages

Well a memory leak is a software issue.

 

Exactly, hence more VRAM won't solve it, only delay it.

 

VRAM is a fancy number for marketing, nothing more. Current VRAMs for GPUs is more than comfortably sufficient for every resolution a particular GPU is powerful enough. And 4K is an overused and bad argument because no current GPU actually is powerful enough for it.



#19
Guest_TrillClinton_*

Guest_TrillClinton_*
  • Guests

Exactly, hence more VRAM won't solve it, only delay it.
 
VRAM is a fancy number for marketing, nothing more. Current VRAMs for GPUs is more than comfortably sufficient for every resolution a particular GPU is powerful enough. And 4K is an overused and bad argument because no current GPU actually is powerful enough for it.


I agree. Mostly VRAM contains rendering data for the frames but most engines optimized to handle this type of thing

#20
naughty99

naughty99
  • Members
  • 5 801 messages
 

VRAM is a fancy number for marketing, nothing more. 

 

That certainly used to be the case, at one time there was not much benefit in having 3GB VRAM vs 1GB, for example. However, there are a few games now utilizing more than this for 1080p, especially when you use DSR or SSAA to render the game at higher resolution than your display. 

 

because of a few non-optimized games?

 


8GB VRAM won't help with anything and certainly not against memory leak if foolproving was the idea behind it. It will onyl mean you can play slightly longer before the game crashes compared to the standard 4GB VRAM.

 

4GB VRAM is more than sufficient for everything short of possibly 4K where the devs went ham with texture sizes, in which case TMU count will be the bottleneck long before VRAM starts noticably limiting the performance.

 

Yep, for most games it will make no difference at all. In the past there were only a few games that ever utilized larger amounts of VRAM: id Tech games (Wolfenstein New Order, RAGE, upcoming DOOM4) games with ultra high res texture mods (Skyrim, GTA IV). Now we have seen two new recent titles that use higher amounts of VRAM, Shadow of Mordor and Lords of the Fallen.

 

Maybe this will be limited to these few games and future id Tech titles or the occasional bad port, but I would not be surprised if more and more games recommend higher VRAM to prevent hitching. For example, Witcher 3 will likely incorporate a similar in-game DSR setting like Shadow of Mordor, considering Witcher 2 was one of the first games to include super sampling.

 

As a result, in my case I would not buy a relatively expensive 4GB 970 or 980 SLI setup at this point when the 8GB versions will be available soon, particularly since I don't upgrade very often, I'd want this to last several years. 

 

To be clear, going from, say 2GB VRAM to 8GB VRAM is not going to increase your frame rate. It just prevents hitching and stuttering for certain games that either handle streaming of texture data differently (id Tech engine), or use very high resolution textures, or poorly optimized textures, texture mods, etc. When space runs out in VRAM, the old texture data needs to be switched out and new textures loaded up from your drive and/or system RAM into the VRAM. "Hitching" occurs when a slight pause results from your texture data getting switched in/out of VRAM, loading up from the drive, etc.
 
If you don't have quite enough VRAM, you could have well over 60fps avg frame rate, but still experience hitching or stuttering in these games when your GPU has to pause to wait for new data to be loaded.


#21
Guest_TrillClinton_*

Guest_TrillClinton_*
  • Guests

 

 
 

That certainly used to be the case, at one time there was no benefit in having 3GB VRAM vs 1GB, for example. However, there are a few games now utilizing more than that for 1080p. 

 

 

 

Yep, most games it will make no difference at all. In the past there were only a few games that utilized larger amounts of VRAM: id Tech games (Wolfenstein New Order, RAGE, upcoming DOOM4) games with ultra high res texture mods (Skyrim, GTA IV). Now we have seen two new recent titles that use higher amounts of VRAM, Shadow of Mordor and Lords of the Fallen.

 

Maybe this will be limited to these few games and future id Tech titles or the occasional bad port, but I would not be surprised if more and more games recommend higher VRAM to prevent hitching. For example, Witcher 3 will likely incorporate a similar in-game DSR setting like Shadow of Mordor, considering Witcher 2 was one of the first games to include super sampling.

 

As a result, in my case I would not buy a relatively expensive 4GB 970m or 980m SLI setup at this point when the 8GB versions will be available soon, particularly since I don't upgrade very often, I'd want this to last several years. 

 

To be clear, going from, say 2GB VRAM to 8GB VRAM is not going to increase your frame rate. It just prevents hitching and stuttering for certain games that either handle streaming of texture data differently (id Tech engine), or use very high resolution textures, or poorly optimized textures, texture mods, etc. When space runs out in VRAM, the old texture data needs to be switched out and new textures loaded up from your drive and/or system RAM into the VRAM. "Hitching" occurs when a slight pause results from your texture data getting switched in/out of VRAM, loading up from the drive, etc.
 
If you don't have enough VRAM, you could have well over 60fps avg frame rate, but still experience hitching or stuttering in these games when your GPU has to pause to wait for new data to be loaded.

 

 

 

Well and again what happens when these engines are working on graphics is that, there is a continuous loop that runs while the data of this game is drawn on the screen. Between each frame that is drawn, the game needs to handle process the logical game data and the visual data. This process is usually double buffered meaning that as one frame is being drawn on the screen, another frame is being worked on. Makes the swapchain much easier to handle when using double buffering.

 

VRAM just simply means more draw data that can be processed in one interval. Reasons why some games slow down, is that the card cannot handle most of the processing. There is not enough data at once in the near RAM so the GPU has to wait for more data to arrive



#22
Deathangel008

Deathangel008
  • Members
  • 4 444 messages

However, there are a few games now utilizing more than this for 1080p, especially when you use DSR or SSAA to render the game at higher resolution than your display.

 yeah, and these games of course will run well with SSAA/DS on a single 980 :rolleyes:
 

As a result, in my case I would not buy a relatively expensive 4GB 970 or 980 SLI setup at this point when the 8GB versions will be available soon, particularly since I don't upgrade very often, I'd want this to last several years.

good for you, but i cant remember the OP talking about SLI. and imo "real enthusiasts" would still go with 2 or more Titan Black for SLI. but wait, i assume 6GB VRAM isnt enough anymore too...?



#23
bmwcrazy

bmwcrazy
  • Members
  • 3 622 messages
I assume the 8GB version will cost a lot more than the normal one. Plus you have to wait a lot longer.

If you don't plan on going 4K or using multiple displays for gaming, just get the 4GB GTX 970.

#24
naughty99

naughty99
  • Members
  • 5 801 messages

yeah, and these games of course will run well with SSAA/DS on a single 980 :rolleyes:

 
Single 980 might deliver high average fps, but these particular games and future titles in the next few years that utilize more than 4GB VRAM will have less hitching/stuttering with the 8GB version, particularly with SSAA/DSR, where you are rendering above native resolution.
 
For example, in Shadow of Mordor usage is reportedly up to 5.9GB VRAM on Titan Blacks at 1080p with DSR enabled, ultra settings.

And here is Lords of the Fallen at 1080p without DSR:

u284HLU.png

http://s27.postimg.o...phqsh/LOTF3.jpg

X0dD5B8.jpg

#25
Deathangel008

Deathangel008
  • Members
  • 4 444 messages

Single 980 might deliver high average fps, but these particular games and future titles that utilize more than 4GB VRAM will experience less hitching/stuttering with the 8GB version, particularly with SSAA/DSR, where you are rendering the game above native resolution.

4 or 8 GB VRAM doesnt make any difference when the GPU is too slow to reach acceptable fps, which often will happen when you use SSAA and/or DSR on current games. 

For example, in Shadow of Mordor usage is reportedly up to 5.9GB VRAM on Titan Blacks at 1080p with DSR enabled, ultra settings.

and? the more VRAM the card has, the more the game uses. for example Crysis3 used ~1,4GB VRAM on my 660ti with 3GB, but was also running quite well on my 560ti with 1GB on the same settings without reaching any VRAM limitations.
btw, "at 1080p with DSR enabled". what was the actual resolution?