Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, JustAnEngineer
geekl33tgamer wrote:Unless I shoot for an i7 (or AMD FX something or other - apparently the FX-95 something is really good/fast at video encode. It gets bad reviews from a quick google tho?), do I stand to gain a lot more in CPU performance over what I have, or have things just moved into being a bit more efficient, and cooler running with less power needs?
southrncomfortjm wrote:Did you check out the System Guide?
Seems like you have the funds to get a nice high-end Devil's Canyon i7 4790K with Z97 mobo and a GTX 770/780 or R9 290 or 290X for those three monitors and still have tons left over.
Losergamer04 wrote:southrncomfortjm wrote:Did you check out the System Guide?
Seems like you have the funds to get a nice high-end Devil's Canyon i7 4790K with Z97 mobo and a GTX 770/780 or R9 290 or 290X for those three monitors and still have tons left over.
I think 2 cards should be budgeted. I agree with everyone else, The intel i7 4790K and a good motherboard is the way to go.
With that kind of money, I think a good set of naming headphones and a sound card should be included.
Will you be reusing the power spply?
geekl33tgamer wrote:Thanks everyone so far - those TR system guides are mightily useful
I've decided I wont get an AMD processor, and have been looking at those Devils Canyon processors someone mentioned. My e-tail outlet has an i7 4790k for £269.99, but I also found a 6-core Intel processor for almost double the money - A 4930k processor. Are those worth the extra money at all, because the motherboards it needs are crazy expensive?
deruberhanyok wrote:I don't think the performance benefit is worth the added cost, considering you have to get a motherboard with a different socket and there may not be one that ticks all the boxes for you.
On the other hand, if you're planning to never upgrade the "core" of the system (CPU/motherboard/RAM) and use it for 5-6 years, the extra cores might come in handy down the road.
geekl33tgamer wrote:It looks to have good room, loads of fan mounts, USB 3 front/top mount and audio connectors. It also looks mean yet stylish. I was looking at dual graphics because of all those screens, but will one really high-end single card really deliver smooth enough frame rates?
I'll also need a new PSU to answer someone else's question - my current one is 500w, but as old as the CPU it's also feeding (2008).
the wrote:As for the rest of the recommendations, I'll second the idea of a Core i7 4790k. Right now it is the best CPU you can get on the consumer side.
There are rumors of a new generation of video cards form both nVidia and AMD arriving later this year. The high end cards from this coming wave should make triple 1080p gaming from a single card a no compromise scenario.
geekl33tgamer wrote:Kingston HyperX 16GB (4x4GB) PC3-19200C11 2800MHz Quad channel Kit - Black/Red - £135.99
geekl33tgamer wrote:- There's a Dell 24" UltraSharp 1920 x 1200 IPS screen for £200 a piece, down from £280
- An AOC 24" 1080p G-sync monitor popped up at £340 each
frumper15 wrote:Any reason you can't/don't want to go with 2x8GB for memory? Price seems to be fairly close between the options in the States, and you may someday wish to upgrade to 32GB. I've always had better luck with performance and stability with as few sticks as required to fill the memory channel
Prestige Worldwide wrote:I would recommend a Deathadder 2013 instead of the Taipan, but this is probably more personal preference than anything else. It's the go-to Razer mouse and I wouldn't ever consider using anything else.
frumper15 wrote:Any reason you can't/don't want to go with 2x8GB for memory? Price seems to be fairly close between the options in the States, and you may someday wish to upgrade to 32GB. I've always had better luck with performance and stability with as few sticks as required to fill the memory channels.
frumper15 wrote:I have a Dell U2412M at home and have been very pleased with it. Gsync does look really cool, though and if it works with SLI and Multiple screens (that's going be a longshot I would think) it could make sense to go that direction.
geekl33tgamer wrote:I strongly advise against SLI/Crossfire insanity.MSI Geforce GTX 780 Gaming Edition OC 6144MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card - x2 - £878.98
I've added dual graphics after reading articles about performance scaling in SLI at high resolutions. For the most part in newer games, a 2nd card will get the average frames rates that this resolution up from around the low 40's to well over my target of 60 with all the eye candy turned up. This site's on inside the frame articles were pretty decent where SLI is concerned, and also NVidia seem to have fixed that frame stuttering issue to the point where the average eye won't notice it?
Cyril wrote:£276 Radeon R9-290 4GBWe wouldn't advise building a multi-GPU setup unless you absolutely must. Multi-GPU configs open up a whole can of worms, with occasionally iffy driver support for new games and potential microstuttering issues. There's a heat, power, and noise cost involved, too. We've found that it's almost always preferable to buy a faster single-GPU solution, if one is available, than to double up on GPUs.
geekl33tgamer wrote:I agree that having two screens is helpful for productivity. For gaming and productivity, I really like a big screen. At work, I frequently run side-by-side windows on a 1920x1200 display. At home, I run my games at 2560x1600 on a Dell UltraSharp 3007WFP with a web browser, etc. beside it at 1200x1600 on an UltraSharp 2001FP (in portrait mode). I believe that the current sweet spot for monitors is at 2560x1440.I also wanted to ask about screens too - I really would like 3 x 1 displays. Yeah, gaming is going to be sweet on them, but multi-screens also help for my programming and design work (The PC has to serve a functional use too). My e-tail outlet has 2 other screens that caught my eye that have attractive prices:
- There's a Dell 24" UltraSharp 1920 x 1200 IPS screen for £200 a piece, down from £280
- An AOC 24" 1080p G-sync monitor popped up at £340 each
My other choice at a much healthier £200 each 16:10 screen from Dell, and does anyone think that perhaps that's a better choice than the 1080p TN screens from the Asus screens I was looking at (they come bundled with a stand and healthy discount if you buy 3). Again, willing to take advice on here about this, as I really don't know!