Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
This Forum is Read Only

i need help building a computer Follow

#1 Apr 08 2012 at 10:08 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
17 posts
Hello im looking forward to building my first desktop computer but i need some help about choosing parts and such. I have a general idea what i need but i dont know what i will need in graphics and processors. leaning to build it for ffxiv.
budget:1000-1500
#2 Apr 08 2012 at 11:42 PM Rating: Decent
**
542 posts
These two sites are fairly useful to get an idea of what parts good for their price, and both offer complete system builds, which you could use as a guideline or just follow it completely if you didn't want to do any research (although I'd still recommend doing some research before you buy).

http://www.tomshardware.com/

http://www.hardware-revolution.com/

If you want to directly compare products like CPU or GPU, read reviews for whichever product came out later, and it will likely compare the two you're deciding between. Aside from that, this is a pretty useful tool for direct comparisons. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/2

This forum helped me out a ton, the people here tend to be very knowledgeable and there are sub forums for every individual component if you need to find out more about any in particular. http://www.overclock.net/

If you have any questions about anything specific, feel free to ask. For now I recommend checking out the sites I listed, especially the "best parts for your money" sections and build ideas on the first two links to at the very least get an idea of what a build within your price range could look like.

EDIT: Btw, if you already know most of this and just need a CPU/GPU recommendation, I will say that my i5 760 and GTX 460 ran the game just fine when I played. With that said, a current generation i3 and any mid level GPU in today's market would be fine as well, so it just depends on how much you want to spend. If you do plan on making full use of that $1-1.5k budget, you could grab something like a 7970 and i5 2500k, which should run the game with ease.

Edited, Apr 9th 2012 2:02am by Susanoh
#3 Apr 09 2012 at 12:02 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
17 posts
yeah i been researching alot so far i found this
Graphic Card:Radeon HD 6950 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.1 x16 HDCP
Processor: Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz (3.7GHz Turbo Boost)
RAM: 4gigs
Motherboard: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157271
i have no clue what i should choose about cooling,power supply or the case
#4 Apr 09 2012 at 1:52 AM Rating: Decent
**
542 posts
Looking good, though you may want to look into getting 8gb of ram, mainly because it's fallen so much in price lately and can be found for under $40.

For PSU, I usually look for brands I know to be reliable like Corsair and Antec, and check the reviews on sites like newegg/amazon to make sure it's a durable product. AMD recommends at least a 500w PSU to accompany a 6950.

The case is largely personal preference, there's quite a few nice ones out there with a variety of different sizes and designs. My main gaming computer has this one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119197 and another computer in my house used for web and light gaming has this one. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147060 Both were just fine to work with and I have no complaints, the HAF 922 is a little big if that's a concern of yours, but it has excellent cooling. There's tons of other cases out there that I'm sure would work just fine, these are just the ones I've worked with.

Can't speak for cooling, I'm not into overclocking so I've stuck with the stock coolers on my CPUs. I can say that if you're not going to overclock and want to save some cash, the stock cooler will likely do its job just fine.
#5 Apr 09 2012 at 4:33 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
17 posts
Thank you a bunch. This will definitely be a couple week project. My plan was that i would buy a part or 2 every week since i am in college and don't have a well suitable job where i can buy it all at once. Plus this is my first time building a rig so i don't think i will be overclocking The bigger question is how about software? should i just buy window 7 and anti software/internet ?

Edited, Apr 9th 2012 6:44am by Vern716
#6 Apr 09 2012 at 6:31 AM Rating: Decent
*
116 posts
I personally have had great success with Windows 7 x64 Home Premium and Norton 360.

Regarding cooling if you're not over-clocking, I'd suggest keeping with the stock cooler and sticking as many fans into the case as it will support. Aftermarket case fans can be pretty inexpensive (~$10 each) and will keep all your components significantly cooler. Also when selecting your case, be aware if it does in fact, include any fans with it. I learned that lesson when mine arrived and it did not.
____________________________
FFXIV :: Valdai Devarda \ Lindblum Sargatanas "The Thread Closer"
.............................................................................................................
#7 Apr 09 2012 at 6:37 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,083 posts
If you're a college student talk to your college IT / CompSci departments about the Microsoft Dreamspark program. Most colleges are enrolled and it provides free Microsoft software (including Windows 7) to students. If they aren't enrolled, bug them about it, I think its only $500 a year.

Otherwise check out journeyed.com/select

____________________________
Wada: "There may be some areas of testing that were lacking or too rigid."
#8 Apr 09 2012 at 11:33 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
569 posts
Cooler Master HAF 932 Advanced Tower Case
Intel Core™ i7-2600K Processor, 3.40GHz w/ 8MB Cache
Asus P8Z68 Deluxe / Gen3 w/ DDR3 1600, 7.1 Audio, Dual Gigabit Lan, 1394, PCI-E, Quad CrossFireX / SLI
Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3 1600MHz CL7 Dual Channel Kit (2 x 4GB), Racing Red
Corsair Force Series 3 Solid State Drive SATA III, 240GB
Western Digital 1.5TB Caviar Black 7200rpm SATA III w/ 64MB Cache
eVGA GeForce GTX 550 Ti SuperClocked 1GB GDDR5 PCI-E w/ Dual DVI, HDMI
Corsair Enthusiast Series TX650 V2 Power Supply

Sub Total:$1,589.92

EDIT: This is what i use at least, and it performs phenomenally.

Edited, Apr 9th 2012 1:35pm by TwiddleDee
____________________________
99th paper cut, and the grain of salt.
#9 Apr 09 2012 at 3:50 PM Rating: Decent
**
542 posts
Vern716 wrote:
Thank you a bunch. This will definitely be a couple week project. My plan was that i would buy a part or 2 every week since i am in college and don't have a well suitable job where i can buy it all at once. Plus this is my first time building a rig so i don't think i will be overclocking The bigger question is how about software? should i just buy window 7 and anti software/internet ?


Just a tip, in some cases you may be better saving your money until you're ready to buy in case of any price drops, which for some components happen constantly. If you see an incredible deal on something that's likely not to drop again that's another story, but you might want to consider waiting on it if it's full price.

TwiddleDee wrote:
Cooler Master HAF 932 Advanced Tower Case
Intel Core™ i7-2600K Processor, 3.40GHz w/ 8MB Cache
Asus P8Z68 Deluxe / Gen3 w/ DDR3 1600, 7.1 Audio, Dual Gigabit Lan, 1394, PCI-E, Quad CrossFireX / SLI
Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3 1600MHz CL7 Dual Channel Kit (2 x 4GB), Racing Red
Corsair Force Series 3 Solid State Drive SATA III, 240GB
Western Digital 1.5TB Caviar Black 7200rpm SATA III w/ 64MB Cache
eVGA GeForce GTX 550 Ti SuperClocked 1GB GDDR5 PCI-E w/ Dual DVI, HDMI
Corsair Enthusiast Series TX650 V2 Power Supply

Sub Total:$1,589.92

EDIT: This is what i use at least, and it performs phenomenally.


Why put a 550 Ti in a $1600 computer built for gaming? Taking some money from the other components and putting it into GPU would show an enormous boost in performance.
#10 Apr 09 2012 at 4:30 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
569 posts
Susanoh wrote:
Why put a 550 Ti in a $1600 computer built for gaming? Taking some money from the other components and putting it into GPU would show an enormous boost in performance.


What would you recommend i change the 550 Ti with? As for why i chose it because it's good quality for good price.
____________________________
99th paper cut, and the grain of salt.
#11 Apr 09 2012 at 4:47 PM Rating: Decent
**
542 posts
TwiddleDee wrote:
Susanoh wrote:
Why put a 550 Ti in a $1600 computer built for gaming? Taking some money from the other components and putting it into GPU would show an enormous boost in performance.


What would you recommend i change the 550 Ti with? As for why i chose it because it's good quality for good price.


For a typical gaming build I'd probably recommend taking some money from the other components and putting it into the graphics. For example, I'd recommend i5 over i7 because they're extremely close when it comes to gaming, and putting that extra money into the GPU. The case is definitely nice, but I'd go with a cheaper one to put more money into performance parts (in this case, GPU again) unless the other parts were already top notch. Same with the $200+ SSD. Priorities vary from person to person so I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but I will say I personally recommend a strong GPU to someone building for gaming with performance in mind.
#12 Apr 09 2012 at 7:08 PM Rating: Default
****
4,144 posts
Vern716 wrote:
Hello im looking forward to building my first desktop computer but i need some help about choosing parts and such. I have a general idea what i need but i dont know what i will need in graphics and processors. leaning to build it for ffxiv.
budget:1000-1500


FFXIV Version 2.0 is still nearly a year away. Unless you absolutely have to have a computer now, the best advice you'll find here is to wait until it comes out and make your selections based on the updated graphics engine.

Your budget is enough that you could put something together that will run XIV well regardless of the changes made in 2.0, but waiting is still the better option. A computer you pay $1500 today for will cost you probably half that come 2.0 if not less.

*EDIT*

The suggestions to slack in the CPU department for a greater GPU aren't good suggestions. CPU will bottleneck the performance of your graphics unless you are overclocking, especially with the power the current high tier GPUs have. For example, I currently use a GTX 480 which is nearly 2 years old now. I run my CPU at what most would consider a high overclock (almost 20%) and my CPU still bottlenecks my graphics.

CPU >= GPU > PSU > RAM > the rest

Edited, Apr 9th 2012 9:24pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#13 Apr 09 2012 at 9:57 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
17 posts
This is what i have in my cart
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119197 (Mid Tower)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148767 (Hard drive)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150521 (Graphics will prob up grade in a couple months)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139028 (PSU)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231311 (RAM)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157271 (motherboard)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115072 (Processor)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115072 (OS)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820171567 (SSD Card idk why i need this )
Total: $1,013.91
I was told the motherboard was not good on another form. Am i Missing anything ?
Im not overclocking things i just want to play ffxiv on high/med settings (casual gaming)
and i was told to wait for a ivy bridge what is that?


Edited, Apr 10th 2012 12:18am by Vern716
#14 Apr 10 2012 at 12:24 AM Rating: Decent
**
542 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
The suggestions to slack in the CPU department for a greater GPU aren't good suggestions. CPU will bottleneck the performance of your graphics unless you are overclocking, especially with the power the current high tier GPUs have. For example, I currently use a GTX 480 which is nearly 2 years old now. I run my CPU at what most would consider a high overclock (almost 20%) and my CPU still bottlenecks my graphics.

CPU >= GPU > PSU > RAM > the rest


If you're referring to my post, we're talking about "downgrading" from an i7 2600k to an i5. These two CPUs are nearly identical when it comes to gaming performance. Every review I've seen has shown a very small increase from i5 to i7, and I've even seen instances where the i5 pulled ahead in some tests. That's not to say that the i5 is better, but when the "inferior" product can at times pull ahead in tests it only goes to show how razor thin the differences between them are.

The price difference between the two is $100 new on amazon and newegg. The graphics card discussed is the 550 ti, which if you add about $100 to that, you'd have roughly enough for a GTX 560 ti, which is quite a bit better than the 550 ti, as shown in this comparison. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/541?vs=547

As for the CPU holding the GPU back, I really don't think that's going to happen here. In any GPU review that uses an i5 or weaker in the test system, the GPU performs exactly as you'd expect. Example: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/03/05/amd-radeon-hd-7850-2gb/2 If an i5 isn't holding back a 590, it's definitely not holding back the low end GPUs we were discussing.
#15 Apr 10 2012 at 12:40 AM Rating: Decent
**
542 posts
Vern716 wrote:
This is what i have in my cart
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119197 (Mid Tower)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148767 (Hard drive)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150521 (Graphics will prob up grade in a couple months)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139028 (PSU)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231311 (RAM)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157271 (motherboard)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115072 (Processor)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115072 (OS)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820171567 (SSD Card idk why i need this )
Total: $1,013.91
I was told the motherboard was not good on another form. Am i Missing anything ?
Im not overclocking things i just want to play ffxiv on high/med settings (casual gaming)
and i was told to wait for a ivy bridge what is that?


At a glance, this all looks pretty solid to me. Did you have this build recommended to you on another forum? I only ask because of your SSD comment. Smiley: grin With an SSD you can put the OS and a few programs or games on it, and they'll run quicker and more smoothly than they would on a HDD. Entirely personal preference whether it's worth it for you to buy or not.

Ivy bridge is the next generation of Intel CPUs. If you don't end up buying your computer by the time Ivy comes out, it'd probably be a good idea to look into it, but I personally wouldn't hold off on building and being able to play games I wanted to for a new CPU unless it was like a week away.
#16 Apr 10 2012 at 1:47 AM Rating: Decent
**
335 posts
Susanoh wrote:


At a glance, this all looks pretty solid to me. Did you have this build recommended to you on another forum? I only ask because of your SSD comment. Smiley: grin With an SSD you can put the OS and a few programs or games on it, and they'll run quicker and more smoothly than they would on a HDD. Entirely personal preference whether it's worth it for you to buy or not.

Ivy bridge is the next generation of Intel CPUs. If you don't end up buying your computer by the time Ivy comes out, it'd probably be a good idea to look into it, but I personally wouldn't hold off on building and being able to play games I wanted to for a new CPU unless it was like a week away.


I wouldnt even wait till Ivy bridge. If you do get any performance increase it will only be marginal. Ivy is mostly for reducing power according to new sources.

Quote:
"Before you get too excited, though, bear in mind that Ivy Bridge is not a performance update to Sandy Bridge. Where Sandy Bridge was the tock — new architecture — following Westmere, Ivy Bridge is the tick (die shrink) of Intel’s tick-tock release strategy. That doesn’t mean that IB isn’t faster than SB — some leaked benchmarks show a 2-8% gain — but primarily, Ivy Bridge will consume less power. According to Intel, the Core i7-3770k will have a TDP of just 77 watts, down from 95W on the current top-end i7-2700K."

____________________________


#17 Apr 10 2012 at 8:35 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
17 posts
Thanks guys. I wanna buy i High end graphic card down the road and was wondering if i could just put it in with this Rig or would i need to buy other things to make it work? what about cooling factor?

Edited, Apr 10th 2012 10:37am by Vern716
#18 Apr 10 2012 at 10:19 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,148 posts
the card would be fine in the current system, make sure you have that i5-2500k running at a minimum of 4Ghz which it should do with ease and on the factory cooler
____________________________
Mishana: DRG | THF | RDM | NIN
#19 Apr 10 2012 at 10:31 AM Rating: Default
**
335 posts
Levish wrote:
the card would be fine in the current system, make sure you have that i5-2500k running at a minimum of 4Ghz which it should do with ease and on the factory cooler


While you most likely can run the i5-2500k on the stock cooler at 4.0GHz I do not recommend it. The stock cooler is pretty bad and it will make your CPU extremely hot. Normally any after market cooler will do.
____________________________


#20 Apr 10 2012 at 5:05 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,144 posts
Susanoh wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
The suggestions to slack in the CPU department for a greater GPU aren't good suggestions. CPU will bottleneck the performance of your graphics unless you are overclocking, especially with the power the current high tier GPUs have. For example, I currently use a GTX 480 which is nearly 2 years old now. I run my CPU at what most would consider a high overclock (almost 20%) and my CPU still bottlenecks my graphics.

CPU >= GPU > PSU > RAM > the rest


As for the CPU holding the GPU back, I really don't think that's going to happen here. In any GPU review that uses an i5 or weaker in the test system, the GPU performs exactly as you'd expect. Example: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/03/05/amd-radeon-hd-7850-2gb/2 If an i5 isn't holding back a 590, it's definitely not holding back the low end GPUs we were discussing.


Unless you are overclocking your CPU, chances are high that if you have a current gen GPU it is being bottlenecked by the CPU. As an example, i7 CPUs(I believe it was a 920 or 930 used in the testing at that time) needed an overclock to 4.1GHz to keep from bottlenecking a GTX 480. Basically any overclock up to 4.1 showed notable results while anything above barely made a difference. That info is from quite a while ago when the 480s were released.

The link you posted is just base clocks. I'm not sure why you would conclude that overclocking the CPU wouldn't lead to better results. Find a benchmark that compares a CPU running at base clocks and then overclocked with the same GPU. The results will yield at least one of two conclusions, in some cases both:

1) The CPU bottlenecked the GPU and the results were better with a CPU overclock to reflect this, or

2) The game was CPU intensive to begin with(Starcraft II and to a lesser extent, XIV) and the results were even better in comparison.


The whole point of suggesting the sandy bridge processors, assuming you meant the unlocked version, is to overclock them for better performance. An unlocked 2500 is capable of clocks well over the threshold for most current gen GPUs so I never suggested they not get this CPU. I was pointing out that for someone who isn't an enthusiast or willing to overclock and stabilize their system, they will see better performance from a better CPU because they generally have higher base clock speeds.

tl;dr
Levish wrote:
make sure you have that i5-2500k running at a minimum of 4Ghz


Edited, Apr 10th 2012 7:07pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#21 Apr 11 2012 at 12:30 AM Rating: Good
**
542 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Susanoh wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
The suggestions to slack in the CPU department for a greater GPU aren't good suggestions. CPU will bottleneck the performance of your graphics unless you are overclocking, especially with the power the current high tier GPUs have. For example, I currently use a GTX 480 which is nearly 2 years old now. I run my CPU at what most would consider a high overclock (almost 20%) and my CPU still bottlenecks my graphics.

CPU >= GPU > PSU > RAM > the rest


As for the CPU holding the GPU back, I really don't think that's going to happen here. In any GPU review that uses an i5 or weaker in the test system, the GPU performs exactly as you'd expect. Example: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/03/05/amd-radeon-hd-7850-2gb/2 If an i5 isn't holding back a 590, it's definitely not holding back the low end GPUs we were discussing.


Unless you are overclocking your CPU, chances are high that if you have a current gen GPU it is being bottlenecked by the CPU. As an example, i7 CPUs(I believe it was a 920 or 930 used in the testing at that time) needed an overclock to 4.1GHz to keep from bottlenecking a GTX 480. Basically any overclock up to 4.1 showed notable results while anything above barely made a difference. That info is from quite a while ago when the 480s were released.

The link you posted is just base clocks. I'm not sure why you would conclude that overclocking the CPU wouldn't lead to better results. Find a benchmark that compares a CPU running at base clocks and then overclocked with the same GPU. The results will yield at least one of two conclusions, in some cases both:

1) The CPU bottlenecked the GPU and the results were better with a CPU overclock to reflect this, or

2) The game was CPU intensive to begin with(Starcraft II and to a lesser extent, XIV) and the results were even better in comparison.


The whole point of suggesting the sandy bridge processors, assuming you meant the unlocked version, is to overclock them for better performance. An unlocked 2500 is capable of clocks well over the threshold for most current gen GPUs so I never suggested they not get this CPU. I was pointing out that for someone who isn't an enthusiast or willing to overclock and stabilize their system, they will see better performance from a better CPU because they generally have higher base clock speeds.

tl;dr
Levish wrote:
make sure you have that i5-2500k running at a minimum of 4Ghz


I thought you were referring to my post because I believe I was the only one who mentioned anything about taking money from the CPU and putting it into the GPU, so I explained why I felt going from i7 to i5 and putting an extra $100 into the graphics was a good move. My link was to show that i5 paired with a higher quality GPU will show very good results, while if we instead switched the CPU to an i7 the results would seem comparatively smaller. It wasn't about the difference between an overclocked CPU compared to a stock one.

It seems we might be talking about different things here. My post was about a specific build. If you were just speaking in general and not referencing my post about the specific build I was referring to, I don't really have anything to argue.

#22 Apr 11 2012 at 2:08 AM Rating: Default
****
4,144 posts
Susanoh wrote:
I thought you were referring to my post because I believe I was the only one who mentioned anything about taking money from the CPU and putting it into the GPU, so I explained why I felt going from i7 to i5 and putting an extra $100 into the graphics was a good move. My link was to show that i5 paired with a higher quality GPU will show very good results, while if we instead switched the CPU to an i7 the results would seem comparatively smaller. It wasn't about the difference between an overclocked CPU compared to a stock one.


There have been scores of 'help me build an XIV rig' threads and I usually see people saying to favor GPU over CPU. Your link does show that the i5 with a higher quality GPU will show good results and I won't dispute that, but the results are on games that are more GPU intensive games and there isn't any comparison between the same CPUs running at different clock speeds that would allow you to draw any conclusion about GPU bottlenecking.



Take a look at this.

It's a benchmark of SC2 which is a CPU intensive game. Similar to XIV it doesn't use Physx and those calculations are CPU bound. The GPU used is the same one I have and there are comparisons between the same processors at base clocks and overclocked. The 2500 isn't represented here, but the closest processor to it posts nearly 25% increase to average FPS. Other similar benchmark comparisons will show the same results and the gap would probably be even larger if the 2500 were tested. Keep in mind that the result from the bench is still bottlenecking the GPU.

Nothing wrong with the build, but the suggestion to downgrade the CPU and the reasoning behind it was why I responded. About the only way the CPU wouldn't hold the GPU back is at incredibly high resolutions that tax the GPU to it's limits. Most people run at standard resolutions.

____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#23 Apr 11 2012 at 3:53 AM Rating: Decent
**
542 posts
My reasoning is that there is an incredibly small difference between the i5 and i7, while there is a rather large difference between the 550 ti and options that cost roughly $100 more. Anandtech tested Starcraft II on medium settings at 1024x768, and there was a whopping 2.3 fps difference between the two, where the i5 actually ended up coming out ahead. http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/20

Meanwhile, there are plenty reviews showing a much larger difference between the 550 ti and 560 ti. http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_550_Ti_Direct_Cu/7.html In just about every game on the review, the 560 ti has a clear advantage, and the CPU used is a last generation i7.
#24 Apr 11 2012 at 5:18 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
17 posts
I love all your comments guys. I been looking at motherboards on new egg and it seems to me that they all have something wrong with them from the reviews that i have read so i am having a hard time deciding which one i should choose since they all seem to be bad.
#25 Apr 11 2012 at 7:11 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,148 posts
I'm with Susanoh a i5 vs i7 will show 5-10% which is on the very high side for games sensitive to CPU power, but most / all MMO's are

a 550ti vs a 560ti would show a much larger FPS gain overall

I would like to see a updated FFXIV bench from SE for 2.0
____________________________
Mishana: DRG | THF | RDM | NIN
#26 Apr 11 2012 at 11:19 AM Rating: Default
****
4,144 posts
Every time I see a benchmark of an unlocked SB processor running at stock I want to kick a kitten in the face. You might as well suggest they save even more money and downgrade from the 2500k to the locked version. Spend another 20 bucks on a GPU that you won't run to it's potential...
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#27 Apr 11 2012 at 12:34 PM Rating: Excellent
**
542 posts
Vern716 wrote:
I love all your comments guys. I been looking at motherboards on new egg and it seems to me that they all have something wrong with them from the reviews that i have read so i am having a hard time deciding which one i should choose since they all seem to be bad.


I've never come across a motherboard that didn't have at least a few bad reviews and problems given enough total reviews. If it works flawlessly for most people, there's a good chance it'll be the same for you. Just try to find one that works a great majority of the time and doesn't have any reviews about something ridiculous like catching fire (yes, I've seen it >_>).

Quote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Every time I see a benchmark of an unlocked SB processor running at stock I want to kick a kitten in the face. You might as well suggest they save even more money and downgrade from the 2500k to the locked version. Spend another 20 bucks on a GPU that you won't run to it's potential...



I don't really think that would be the same thing, considering one is a $100 difference between two similar performing unlocked CPUs, and the other is a $20 difference between an unlocked and a locked one. For people who will not be overclocking, it probably wouldn't be a bad deal, but for people who are the i5/i7 comparison is still valid.

Edit: By the way, I really don't think I'm the only one who thinks this way. These quotes are from Hardware Revolution and Tom's Hardware.

Quote:
While at first, the i7-2600 only appears as a slightly faster upgrade to the i5-2500, there’s more to it. It comes with Hyper-Threading, enabling it to perform significantly faster in heavily threaded workloads, such as video conversions and 3D rendering.

If all you do is gaming though, you’re better off saving your money by going with an i5-2500 or i5-2500K and putting the money that you saved on say, a better video card.


Quote:
CPUs priced over $230 offer rapidly diminishing returns when it comes to game performance. As such, we have a hard time recommending anything more expensive than the Core i5-2550K, especially since this multiplier-unlocked processor can be overclocked to great effect if more performance is desired. Even at stock clocks, it meets or beats the $1000 Core i7-990X Extreme Edition when it comes to gaming.


Aside from that, on the computer forum I frequent the i5 2500K is commonly considered an extremely strong price/performance CPU that is commonly paired with some of the highest end video cards (and rightfully so, it's one of the strongest performers out there and can be overclocked) while the 550 ti is not considered a top performer for an enthusiast gaming machine. I don't think I'm saying anything that any tech site such as the ones above or any computer building forum wouldn't say.

Edited, Apr 11th 2012 4:15pm by Susanoh
#28 Apr 11 2012 at 1:31 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
17 posts
#29 Apr 11 2012 at 1:50 PM Rating: Good
**
542 posts


You certainly can overclock it if you choose to do so. Smiley: nod

Both the i7 and the i5 "K" version (which you bought) are unlocked and can be overclocked.
#30 Apr 11 2012 at 2:18 PM Rating: Good
**
335 posts


I have that case and I must say I am quite pleased with it. It has much more space than my last one and it allows me to manage the cables so it doesnt look like a monstrous mess (and helps airflow). And I would agree with the majority of people on the i5-2500k for the processor. You really dont need an i7-2600k for gaming.
____________________________


#31 Apr 11 2012 at 2:34 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
17 posts
whoo i actually made the right decision lol i might end up buying the GTX 560 TI 2GB what kind of PSU would i need atm i have a 700W

Edited, Apr 11th 2012 4:35pm by Vern716
#32 Apr 11 2012 at 3:43 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,148 posts
700w psu would be sufficient for a system with 2x GTX 560 ti (SLI) if it is a quality model.
____________________________
Mishana: DRG | THF | RDM | NIN
#33 Apr 12 2012 at 3:39 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
17 posts
o i see. If i wanted to could i change my processor if my motherboard supported it?
#34 Apr 12 2012 at 11:34 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,144 posts
Susanoh wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Every time I see a benchmark of an unlocked SB processor running at stock I want to kick a kitten in the face. You might as well suggest they save even more money and downgrade from the 2500k to the locked version. Spend another 20 bucks on a GPU that you won't run to it's potential...



I don't really think that would be the same thing, considering one is a $100 difference between two similar performing unlocked CPUs, and the other is a $20 difference between an unlocked and a locked one. For people who will not be overclocking, it probably wouldn't be a bad deal, but for people who are the i5/i7 comparison is still valid.


It isn't the same thing, but the comparison is between the locked and unlocked versions of the 2500. The point was that if you aren't overclocking then you aren't reaching your potential so why bother with a processor that doesn't allow you to reach said potential. I just think it's pointless for people to run benchmarks(or make decisions or form opinions from them) on unlocked processors that aren't overclocked.

XIV definitely isn't a game that uses the processor efficiently and the majority of games don't take advantage of HT, I agree. The i7 does however have more headroom to OC and that will be a factor in gaming, especially for XIV. The 2550 is nearly the same price as the 2500k. I'm not saying the 2500k is a wrong choice, but budget allowing; there is a better choice.

@OP

You can change your processor to any other processor with the same 'socket type'. If you wanted something else later you could remove the 2500k and plug in any other processor that is LGA 1155.

Edited, Apr 13th 2012 1:41am by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#35 Apr 13 2012 at 2:08 AM Rating: Good
**
542 posts
More headroom to overclock? Last I saw people generally hit similar numbers with either (maybe 4.3-4.4 ghz average, closer to 5 with good cooling), with the best of the best closing in on or just barely making 6 ghz. I've never seen anything about the i7 getting much better results than an i5, and both tend to max out at a similar frequency.

I even checked hwbot and their averages tend to come within 100 mhz of each other (though they're obviously higher than the average user, it was the best reference I could think of).

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i5_2500k/

http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i7_2600k/

Edit: Overclocking potential aside, my overall thoughts are that the i7 is a very slight boost over an i5 that for gaming purposes is only worth it if every other component is top notch (this especially, it's the reason I brought it up) and you're a hardware enthusiast who doesn't mind spending the extra $100 for a minor upgrade. Or for people who regularly take advantage of hyperthreading. It looks like you may see it differently so all I can say is that I can agree to disagree.

Edited, Apr 13th 2012 4:26am by Susanoh
#36 Apr 13 2012 at 3:05 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
74 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
[quote=Susanoh][quote=FilthMcNasty]
@OP

You can change your processor to any other processor with the same 'socket type'. If you wanted something else later you could remove the 2500k and plug in any other processor that is LGA 1155.

Edited, Apr 13th 2012 1:41am by FilthMcNasty


True but you most likely going to need to flash your motherboard to get the IB processors working properly on it.
Not a big issue but might cause a lot of problems if one doesn't know it. :)
____________________________
You're never gonna feel You're never gonna heal
You're never gonna know what's fake or real
'Til you know who you are
You're lying to your face And running in a race
You're never gonna win 'til you find your place
And you know who you are
#37 Apr 13 2012 at 5:56 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
17 posts
well i been doing some research and i will probably get into some overclocking. This is my first rig so im not trying to buy the best of the best yet because if i mess something up while building thats money wasted. This is what i bought so far
1. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115072
2. http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6634207
Before i buy these today what do you think?
3. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139021
4. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131790
#38 Apr 13 2012 at 6:30 AM Rating: Good
***
1,083 posts
Vern716 wrote:
well i been doing some research and i will probably get into some overclocking. This is my first rig so im not trying to buy the best of the best yet because if i mess something up while building thats money wasted. This is what i bought so far
1. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115072
2. http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6634207
Before i buy these today what do you think?
3. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139021
4. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131790


I have that case and I love it. I also have a Silverstone Raven II and I like the Phantom way better. And of course that CPU I have as well with a Corsair H80 liquid cooler. I have a Corsair 850w pro PS - that one looks similar. And of course usually you can't go wrong with ASUS MBs. I'd say you're on the solid right track.
____________________________
Wada: "There may be some areas of testing that were lacking or too rigid."
#39 Apr 13 2012 at 1:24 PM Rating: Good
**
335 posts
Vern716 wrote:
well i been doing some research and i will probably get into some overclocking. This is my first rig so im not trying to buy the best of the best yet because if i mess something up while building thats money wasted. This is what i bought so far
1. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115072
2. http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6634207
Before i buy these today what do you think?
3. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139021
4. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131790


Both of those choices look good. I have a similar Asus motherboard and I have been very pleased. The only thing I would say is do not do their auto overclock.
____________________________


#40 Apr 13 2012 at 6:30 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,144 posts
Susanoh wrote:
I even checked hwbot and their averages tend to come within 100 mhz of each other.


2500k vs 2600k based on your links...

Healthy lead in Aquamark which is a bit dated, but was once standard. Wait, let me check my eyes here... the 2500k paired with 4 6990s was beaten in 3DMark performance by a 2600k pushing a pair of 3870s? confusedjackiechan.jpg

Also beaten by nearly 20% in 3DMark running the same GPUs in crossfire. 5% increase in DX11 performance with Heaven.

Susanoh wrote:
Overclocking potential aside, my overall thoughts are that the i7 is a very slight boost over an i5 that for gaming purposes is only worth it if every other component is top notch.


Again, there is no other point to using an unlocked CPU so I'm not certain why we would disregard overclocking. Out of the box, the i5 and i7 match up very well together in terms of gaming performance, but that changes when you use them as intended. There aren't any other components(monitor possibly but that's negligible at worst) that really factor into the equation. Your RAM is stable or it isn't. You have enough power or you don't.

It's only a minor upgrade if you don't plan on using it for what it is meant to be used for. Think of it in terms of performance for the dollar; you might save that 100 up front but if you aren't allowing your GPU to perform as well as it could, you're basically tossing that money right back out the window.

*EDIT*
HT will increase performance in games, but since nearly none of them are optimized to take advantage of it, it only comes out to a few FPS. It can however scale up to a fair gain in performance depending on the situation. 83 to 90 FPS not so much, but it's definitely noticeable when your frame rates are not that high to begin with say from 55 to 60.

Edited, Apr 13th 2012 8:44pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#41 Apr 13 2012 at 11:06 PM Rating: Good
**
542 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Again, there is no other point to using an unlocked CPU so I'm not certain why we would disregard overclocking. Out of the box, the i5 and i7 match up very well together in terms of gaming performance, but that changes when you use them as intended. There aren't any other components(monitor possibly but that's negligible at worst) that really factor into the equation. Your RAM is stable or it isn't. You have enough power or you don't.


I don't know why you're saying I'm disregarding overclocking. I never said that once. The entire first part of my last post was about how the i5 is also a good overclocker. People can overclock their i5s to 4-5 ghz with the best overclockers hitting near 6 ghz, just like they do with i7s.

My comparison is, and always was, about the value of an i5 vs. the value of an i7, either of which can be overclocked with good results.

By the way, I do realize that an i7 can give a slight FPS boost over an i5, and for anyone willing to spend the extra hundred bucks for that slight boost, more power to them. I'm not going to say you shouldn't. But when the topic comes up of distributing your budget differently in order to maximize performance, I will suggest it every single time. In the techpowerup review I posted earlier, these are a few of the FPS differences between a 550 ti and a 560 ti at 1920 x 1200.

Battlefield 3: 36 vs 59
Call of Duty 4: 77 vs 125
World of Warcraft 43 vs 69

These differences are substantial, and an example of a very large gain for the money spent. To compare them to the i7 and i5, which have come within a few % of each other in every test I've ever seen, the differences are enormous. This is why in this situation, I find this to be the better option. I am not saying that nobody should every consider buying i7s, and I am not saying GPU always trumps CPU so stick a 680 in your pentium 4 machine and go to town. I am only advocating using your money wisely, and getting the most out of the money you are willing to spend.

Edited, Apr 14th 2012 1:45am by Susanoh
#42 Apr 14 2012 at 2:43 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,144 posts
Susanoh wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Again, there is no other point to using an unlocked CPU so I'm not certain why we would disregard overclocking. Out of the box, the i5 and i7 match up very well together in terms of gaming performance, but that changes when you use them as intended. There aren't any other components(monitor possibly but that's negligible at worst) that really factor into the equation. Your RAM is stable or it isn't. You have enough power or you don't.


I don't know why you're saying I'm disregarding overclocking. I never said that once.


Actually you did. Pretty much your exact words. I even quoted you.

Susanoh wrote:
Overclocking potential aside, my overall thoughts are that the i7 is a very slight boost over an i5 that for gaming purposes is only worth it if every other component is top notch.

From what I gather you're saying that(as I agreed with and bolded above) the two perform nearly identically with the slight edge going to the i7. You also don't feel that the slight edge is worth $100. If I'm misunderstanding you somehow then you'll have to clarify, but it seems pretty straightforward.

Susanoh wrote:
My comparison is, and always was, about the value of an i5 vs. the value of an i7, either of which can be overclocked with good results.

By the way, I do realize that an i7 can give a slight FPS boost over an i5, and for anyone willing to spend the extra hundred bucks for that slight boost, more power to them. I'm not going to say you shouldn't. But when the topic comes up of distributing your budget differently in order to maximize performance, I will suggest it every single time.

I was with you up until the part about "slight boost". The price difference is static and shouldn't factor in anyway since you are suggesting it be spent elsewhere. Lets just set that aside for now and deal with performance because that's my issue with what you are saying.

The gap in how much the i7 outperforms the i5 increases the more you overclock. What does that mean? It means that the value of the i7 increases in comparison to the i5. So then, if it's expected that people will overclock to get the most value out of their dollar to begin with, why would you base a suggestion on a value assigned to an under-performing setup? That's what I don't understand.

We established that overclocking increases gaming performance. We also established that GPUs are bottlenecked by stock-clocked processors. Increasing CPU performance on it's own will increase gaming performance, but also comes with the added benefit of increasing GPU output. That's even more value added to benefits brought by boosting the CPU.

As far as the comparison of those two GPUs goes, the nomenclature dictates the winner. You don't really even have to look at the benchmarks. Wouldn't buy anything less than x70 to be honest, but x60 is entry level. Anything lower than that isn't going to do well at all. Compare the benchmarks of a 470 vs a 560 clock for clock. Compare the benchmarks of a 480 vs a 570 clock for clock. I see a pattern forming...

Edited, Apr 14th 2012 4:47am by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#43 Apr 14 2012 at 4:03 AM Rating: Excellent
**
542 posts
Quote:
Actually you did. Pretty much your exact words. I even quoted you.

From what I gather you're saying that(as I agreed with and bolded above) the two perform nearly identically with the slight edge going to the i7. You also don't feel that the slight edge is worth $100. If I'm misunderstanding you somehow then you'll have to clarify, but it seems pretty straightforward.


That quote where I began with "overclocking potential aside," was me moving on from the discussion on how well an i5 and i7 overclock (the beginning of my post) to my overall thoughts on the discussion. Not me trying to say that overclocking makes no difference. The second part I mostly agree with, although whether it's worth the extra $100 or not depends on the person. For the average buyer looking for the best performance/price ratio, I'd recommend i5 without hesitation. For the hardware enthusiast willing to throw down in order to push every last frame they can, it may easily be worth it to get the i7.

Quote:
I was with you up until the part about "slight boost". The price difference is static and shouldn't factor in anyway since you are suggesting it be spent elsewhere. Lets just set that aside for now and deal with performance because that's my issue with what you are saying.

The gap in how much the i7 outperforms the i5 increases the more you overclock. What does that mean? It means that the value of the i7 increases in comparison to the i5. So then, if it's expected that people will overclock to get the most value out of their dollar to begin with, why would you base a suggestion on a value assigned to an under-performing setup? That's what I don't understand.

We established that overclocking increases gaming performance. We also established that GPUs are bottlenecked by stock-clocked processors. Increasing CPU performance on it's own will increase gaming performance, but also comes with the added benefit of increasing GPU output. That's even more value added to benefits brought by boosting the CPU.

As far as the comparison of those two GPUs goes, the nomenclature dictates the winner. You don't really even have to look at the benchmarks. Wouldn't buy anything less than x70 to be honest, but x60 is entry level. Anything lower than that isn't going to do well at all. Compare the benchmarks of a 470 vs a 560 clock for clock. Compare the benchmarks of a 480 vs a 570 clock for clock. I see a pattern forming...


I couldn't find much on overclocked i5 vs. overclocked i7, while there's plenty of reviews using stock clocks, which is the main reason I posted them. I was under the impression that overclocking either produced similar results. I just did a little searching and did find this. http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_corei7_2600k_and_corei5_2500k/10.htm Eh, they still look close enough to me. They managed to get their i5 stable a little higher so others may get a slightly different result, but whether it'd be enough to justify the price difference is up to the buyer. I've said my piece on whether I feel it's worth it, whether it's worth it to you or anyone else is up to them.

As for the GPU, I basically agree. The 550 TI performs far weaker than the 560 TI based on the benchmarks I've seen, which is why I felt it a better idea to upgrade to a 560 TI even if it meant cutting costs somewhere else, such as the CPU. In this case, moving down from the i7 to an i5 in order to move up from a 550 TI to a 560 TI while keeping the same budget (basically i5 2500k/560 TI combo, rather than i7/550 TI combo) seems like a strong performance boost.

Edited, Apr 14th 2012 6:11am by Susanoh
#44 Apr 14 2012 at 5:08 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,144 posts
Susanoh wrote:
For the average buyer looking for the best performance/price ratio, I'd recommend i5 without hesitation. For the hardware enthusiast willing to throw down in order to push every last frame they can, it may easily be worth it to get the i7.


Both of the 2xxx-k processors are not meant for 'average' users. They're meant for people who are going to overclock. To quote the link you provided...

OverclockersClub wrote:
Overclocking is only one aspect of these processors, but is really the reason for a K-Spec version.


Susanoh wrote:
I couldn't find much on overclocked i5 vs. overclocked i7


You posted both of the relevant links earlier and they all have the GPU and CPU clock speeds listed. In the newer link from OCC look at the difference between the i5 and the i7. Factor in that the i5 is running a higher OC and the i7 would have performed even better had they matched speeds. (not sure why they didn't downclock the 2500 to the 2600 for the sake of comparison) Now also consider the GPU they tested with...Even bigger gap. The GPU can be OC'd to get more than these results show.

Gotta consider everything.



____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#45 Apr 14 2012 at 12:42 PM Rating: Excellent
**
542 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Susanoh wrote:
For the average buyer looking for the best performance/price ratio, I'd recommend i5 without hesitation. For the hardware enthusiast willing to throw down in order to push every last frame they can, it may easily be worth it to get the i7.


Both of the 2xxx-k processors are not meant for 'average' users. They're meant for people who are going to overclock. To quote the link you provided...

OverclockersClub wrote:
Overclocking is only one aspect of these processors, but is really the reason for a K-Spec version.


Susanoh wrote:
I couldn't find much on overclocked i5 vs. overclocked i7


You posted both of the relevant links earlier and they all have the GPU and CPU clock speeds listed. In the newer link from OCC look at the difference between the i5 and the i7. Factor in that the i5 is running a higher OC and the i7 would have performed even better had they matched speeds. (not sure why they didn't downclock the 2500 to the 2600 for the sake of comparison) Now also consider the GPU they tested with...Even bigger gap. The GPU can be OC'd to get more than these results show.

Gotta consider everything.


Ok, maybe "average user" wasn't the right term. I'm talking about people who want a great performance/price ratio, and in the case of the 2500k would still be overclocking. For those who never planned to overclock, a 2400 would be fine.

As for the review I believe they implied that they overclocked each CPU to whatever they were able to and have it remain stable, and IIRC they got within 100 mhz of each other (if they're not within 100 mhz, it's close). I feel like we're going in circles on this so I will just say that the results are there, one can likely imagine what an i7 would look like with a 100 mhz boost, or what a different or OC'd GPU might change. I've given my opinion enough times, it's entirely up to the individual whether it would make it "worth it" or not.
#46 Apr 15 2012 at 8:09 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
****
4,148 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
The gap in how much the i7 outperforms the i5 increases the more you overclock. What does that mean? It means that the value of the i7 increases in comparison to the i5. So then, if it's expected that people will overclock to get the most value out of their dollar to begin with, why would you base a suggestion on a value assigned to an under-performing setup? That's what I don't understand.


In FF14 potential of the i5-2500k vs a i7-2600k or a i7-2700k would be approximately 10% difference ( taking 30FPS as a random number this means you get 30FPS baseline with the 2500k vs 33FPS with the 2600k and the GTX 550) mostly due to:

HT - which at most is worth 5% on a quad core from my testing in FF14
Larger cache - 5% approximately based on IPC improvements

the GTX 550 has approximately a 50%-65% disadvantage to the GTX 560, putting this into FPS the 2500k would get the base 30FPS + 50% adjustment for gpu power (conservatively) for 45 FPS while the 2600k would give you 33 FPS.

FF14 is cpu bound but you aren't comparing processor A a dual core at 1.5Ghz to processor B a quad core at 4.0Ghz you are comparing one at 3.7 (stock clocks, no HT, lower cache) to one at 3.8 (stock clocks, with HT, slightly larger cache) or both at approximately 4.5 Ghz (the highend of the overclock within safe voltages spectrum).
____________________________
Mishana: DRG | THF | RDM | NIN
#47 Apr 15 2012 at 8:13 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
17 posts
whats a good MB that is 200-250$? intel
#48 Apr 15 2012 at 10:05 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,144 posts
Levish wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
The gap in how much the i7 outperforms the i5 increases the more you overclock. What does that mean? It means that the value of the i7 increases in comparison to the i5. So then, if it's expected that people will overclock to get the most value out of their dollar to begin with, why would you base a suggestion on a value assigned to an under-performing setup? That's what I don't understand.


In FF14 potential of the i5-2500k vs a i7-2600k or a i7-2700k would be approximately 10% difference ( taking 30FPS as a random number this means you get 30FPS baseline with the 2500k vs 33FPS with the 2600k and the GTX 550)


As I said before, the x60 is the entry point for any sort of decent performance from XIV. I don't suggest x60 and I wouldn't suggest lower than x80 if the person wanted solid performance.

Levish wrote:
you are comparing one at 3.7 (stock clocks, no HT, lower cache) to one at 3.8 (stock clocks, with HT, slightly larger cache) or both at approximately 4.5 Ghz (the highend of the overclock within safe voltages spectrum).


The difference in performance of these processors running at stock is not the same as the difference in performance of these processors OC'd. They are a lot closer to performing the same when they are not overclocked. They aren't worlds apart when they are overclocked, but in terms of performance for the dollar, the $100 premium looks a lot better than it does when you aren't making good use of the processor.

Also, the OP is considering dropping $250 on a mobo. I just find it ironic that we're arguing over $100 where there is a clear increase in performance, especially considering that it would be money much better spent on the CPU than on the mobo. We're talking about a system being used solely for the purpose of playing a game that is far from being optimized to take advantage of components regardless of what the budget is. You're wasting money either way...

Edited, Apr 16th 2012 12:14am by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#49 Apr 15 2012 at 10:10 PM Rating: Good
**
335 posts
Vern716 wrote:
whats a good MB that is 200-250$? intel


For which socket type? It really depends what you want out of your mobo really. I have been pleased with the asus motherboards. I currently have a Asus p8z68 motherboard which has been fantastic. But you might not need to have SSD caching and two ethernet ports and the other bells and whistles. It would be easier for you to post one you like and see what others think about it.
____________________________


#50 Apr 15 2012 at 10:31 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,144 posts
Vern716 wrote:
whats a good MB that is 200-250$? intel


This in that price range although I think it's cheaper directly from EVGA's website.

Great parts and warranty, stellar RMA service should you have any problems and their community forums are a great place to get help or even ask general questions. If your upper limit is $250 then this is about the best you can get. If you want to put up a little more then the Z77 just came out, but to be honest a basic P67 board is probably more than enough for your needs and it's only about $150.

Like Shadowspell said it really depends on what you want from a mobo, but if it's just for general web surfing, word processing and XIV then the money would be better spent elsewhere. You really don't need to spend that much on a motherboard.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#51 Apr 15 2012 at 11:03 PM Rating: Excellent
**
542 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
As I said before, the x60 is the entry point for any sort of decent performance from XIV. I don't suggest x60 and I wouldn't suggest lower than x80 if the person wanted solid performance.


Just to note, this entire discussion stemmed from me recommending a stronger GPU to a user who was using a 550 TI, which is why I and now Levish were using that card as the base for the discussion. If you'd like to use other video cards as a reference to make a different point, by all means, but the 550 TI is kind of important to the build which was being discussed.

Edit: More specifically, the question of whether upgrading a 550 TI to a 560 TI would be worth downgrading a i7 2600k to an i5 2500k if it meant keeping the same budget. The idea was to point out which components in the build could be substituted for a gain in performance, one of those components possibly being the CPU. Changing the video card to something better is opening a new discussion on a different build.

Edited, Apr 16th 2012 1:23am by Susanoh
« Previous 1 2
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 17 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (17)