Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Nefarious G

Building a new rig. Much input needed.

Recommended Posts

Hey guys, although I'm new to the forum I'm not new at all to building computers. Unfortunately as of late I haven't been able to keep up with technology as much (back to school and work). Anyway I'm putting together a new rig and any input on my setup would be appreciated.

 

Motherboard: DFI Lanparty UT NF590 SLI-M2R (Price limit $150ish)

 

Processor: AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ (Price limit $180ish)

 

Video Card: eVGA e-Geforce 8800GTS (Price limit $300)

 

Ram: 2x OCZ Technology OCZ2G8001G (Price limit $120)

 

Hard Drives: Seagate 15,000rpm 73.4Gb + additional large (250gb+) hd for storage

 

Sound Card: Need reccomendations.

 

What do you guys think, I need your input! Are there any downfalls with going AMD over pentium? I had one back in the day but it overheated like a ***. I heard they fixed those problems now so I'm willing to give them another chance. Also, I'm worried about the lack of ram on the 8800GTS. The GTS only has 320mb of ram. However, the GTX has 728 (or close to that) anyway, I would really like a card with 512mb of ram because of crysis/bioshock, but the price difference is outrageous. $270 vs. $500. Is it really worth the extra 250+ for the GTX?

 

*I am interested in minor OCing, as in 200-800mhz or so. Please keep this in mind as it will be an air cooled case and I would like quality but not insanely expensive components. I came to DIY-Street because a friend of mine built a rig with some help from you guys and it absolutely raped everything else. I hope to replicate his build experiance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clock for clock, Intel is the performance king right now. A quad core can be had for under $300, and awesome dual cores' can be had for pretty damn cheap.

 

Not that AM2 isn't great (it's the only rig I run now, regardless of my sig) but C2D is just better. Plain and simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest element

Simply put, you will not get an extra 800MHz out of the amd chip.

 

For mild overclocking a CD2 is much much easier and cheap as now. Get a new stepping chip and a p53 or 680i mobo and enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey guys, although I'm new to the forum I'm not new at all to building computers. Unfortunately as of late I haven't been able to keep up with technology as much (back to school and work). Anyway I'm putting together a new rig and any input on my setup would be appreciated.

 

Motherboard: DFI Lanparty UT NF590 SLI-M2R (Price limit $150ish)

 

Processor: AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ (Price limit $180ish)

 

Video Card: eVGA e-Geforce 8800GTS (Price limit $300)

 

Ram: 2x OCZ Technology OCZ2G8001G (Price limit $120)

 

Hard Drives: Seagate 15,000rpm 73.4Gb + additional large (250gb+) hd for storage

 

Sound Card: Need reccomendations.

 

What do you guys think, I need your input! Are there any downfalls with going AMD over pentium? I had one back in the day but it overheated like a ***. I heard they fixed those problems now so I'm willing to give them another chance. Also, I'm worried about the lack of ram on the 8800GTS. The GTS only has 320mb of ram. However, the GTX has 728 (or close to that) anyway, I would really like a card with 512mb of ram because of crysis/bioshock, but the price difference is outrageous. $270 vs. $500. Is it really worth the extra 250+ for the GTX?

 

*I am interested in minor OCing, as in 200-800mhz or so. Please keep this in mind as it will be an air cooled case and I would like quality but not insanely expensive components. I came to DIY-Street because a friend of mine built a rig with some help from you guys and it absolutely raped everything else. I hope to replicate his build experiance...

 

 

First off, there are two versions of the 8800GTS 320mb and 640MB, which one to get depends on usage, but the 640MB one would be more long term investment i would think.

 

Second, C2D is the only way to go when building new M8 simple as, they OC much better with very little effort with the right MoBo, im no expert @ OC'ing but even I hit 3.6 with ease, Not that there is anything wrong with AM2, but it just cant compete with the C2D at most things, not just games!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome, I think I will change this to an intel build. Thanks for the tips so far. With my price range (300ish for cpu/mobo) what would be a solid, reliable board for minor OCing? Currently I'm looking at the e6600, although it appears to be slower then the AMD I was looking at which had 2x @ 3.0ghz, many people have said on the forums that the e6600 is actually much much faster. Especially OC'd. Can someone clarify this for me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there's absolutely nothing wrong with the AMD platform. Even if you do a lot of video encoding and other very cpu-intensive tasks, there's simply no reason to treat AMD AM2 cpu's as if they had leprosy. If you are all about cpu speed because your e-penis is too small, then you should get an Intel cpu.

 

However, if you are a heavy gamer, then your gpu is the most important choice.

 

I play on this:

 

Gigabyte GA-965P-S3

Intel E6600 Core2Duo

2GB OCZ DDR2-800

Foxconn 8800GTS 320MB

2x80GB RAID-0

Corsair 620w psu

DangerDen watercooling

Viewsonic 19" widescreen LCD (1440x900)

 

my girlfriend (momma, admin here) plays on this:

 

DFI Infinity Ultra-II M2 (socket AM2)

AMD64 4800+ dual core AM2

2GB OCZ DDR2-800

ATI X1900XT 512MB Crossfire Edition (single card)

2x80GB RAID-0

Hiper 580w psu

Viewsonic 19" widescreen LCD (1440x900)

 

Both rigs play games just about equally well (a lot depends on the resolution you are running, so if you have a 24" monitor you want the Core2 Intel + 8800GTX + 2GB, but if you have less than that, any AMD dual core + 8800GTS 640MB + 2GB will be fine)

 

I have an NF590 LanParty for sale for $135, but if you stick to AMD and don't plan on getting SLI, then you don't even need that. You can pick up the same board as in momma's rig for nice and cheap as well as a good dual-core AMD AM2 (the 4800+ is the lowest I'd go, it's 2400Mhz per core)

 

There's no doubt that Intel is the strongest cpu, but what most of these guys didn't tell you (except techondan) is that there's really just no need for the mega-fastest cpu with 4+ cores. Games barely utilize dual-core cpu's. If games and general use are what you need/want, stick to something like the AMD setup and save some money (use that saved money to pop an 8800GTX or 2900XT in your rig).

 

If you do lots of cpu-intensive things like render in 3D, use CAD, professional video editing, then you would want a quad or dual Intel. But if you just like to rip DVD's and MP3's, play games, etc, then you just don't need it.

 

You got to keep in mind that the mentality at this forum for almost 4 years has been "OMFG I GOT TO CLOCK MY CHIP TO 124312MHZ OR I'M GOING TO GET BEAT UP BY NERDS WHO CAN CLOCK THIS HIGH!!!! OMG OMG!!!"

 

that mentality will still be here quite a bit, I'm trying to tone it down and let people know that reality and THEIR reality are always two different things.

 

 

BEST BANG FOR YOUR BUCK

 

 

that's the mentality I want to get people into around here. No sense wasting $2000 on a super rig when it will be worth $1000 in 6 months, and it won't play games much better than a $1000 rig that you should have bought the first time.

 

 

ps forget those expensive 15k rpm drives

 

get a couple of nice Seagate 7200.10 250GB drives with 16MB cache and put them in RAID-0, and then get a 500GB drive for about $10-$20 more and use it as storage/backup. 10k and 15k RPM drives are a waste of money for us normal users. If you are professional vid editor or professional musician, etc, then those drives are good (or if you are going to make a killer server).

 

But I do all that vid editing junk and I mix music (plug my guitar in and lay tracks etc), all kinds of stuff, and I only use a couple of cheapo 80GB drives in RAID-0 and it's plenty fast enough.

 

 

If you want cheap Intel setup, get an E6600 like I have, a decent 965 or 975 motherboard that does at least 2 drives in RAID (my Gigabyte GA-965P-S3 clocks all my Intel chips up past 3.4Ghz, does RAID on two SATA II ports, and cost about $99, and the E6600 is pretty cheap right now too, but even the E6400 is a killer deal as it and the E6600 have clocked up to 3Ghz on all of my Intel boards without a single voltage increase).

 

If you stick to AMD, you won't even need to overclock that 6000+ honestly. I don't even have momma's 4800+ overclocked and we play Rainbow Six: Vegas, STALKER, NeverWinter Nights 2, all kinds of good games and hers rocks out.

 

 

urrently I'm looking at the e6600, although it appears to be slower then the AMD I was looking at which had 2x @ 3.0ghz, many people have said on the forums that the e6600 is actually much much faster. Especially OC'd. Can someone clarify this for me?

 

gone are the days of matching mhz to mhz between the AMD and Intel chips. Those days are definitely long gone. A stock E6600 will normally beat a 3Ghz AMD64 at cpu-intensive tasks, but that's about it. I can get 70fps in F.E.A.R. with an X1900XT on all of these cpu's:

 

Sempron 3200+

Sempron 3400+

AMD64 4000+

AMD64 4400+ dual core

AMD64 4800+ dual core

Intel E6300

Intel E6400

Intel E6600

 

today's games rely much more on the gpu than anything else. Again, if you are going to be doing a 24" monitor @ 1920x1200 resolution, then you want a decently beefy cpu, but any dual-core AMD64 will be just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Angry - I had just finished reading your OCing guide (which was amazing, thank you) and thats actually why I proposed the switch to an Intel dual core. My primary use for the machine is gaming / photoshop CS2 / music... basic stuff. I would like this rig to last me though the current wave of games being released running things max'd and not stuttering or turning into a slideshow at 3fps like on my rig now

 

POS 3.4ghz P4 w/ HT - 6800GT - 1gb of ram :'( - 23fps on World In Conflict beta @ Medium settings. Worthless.

 

Anyway I would like to be able to sustain a good 50-70FPS on any of the new killer apps comming out such as BioShock / Crysis (the leaf sim) and World in Conflict, etc. The reason for changing the system to intel was so that I could OC to 3ghz like in your thread, and hopefully squeeze every last drop out of the system as I am a poor college student. However, would I be correct in saying that I would be more beneficial to me to buy the 6000+ AMD / Lanparty board and use the extra cash to go with a 640mb GTS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, it depends really

 

if you are after all the new games that are going to be monsters, you probably want to look into the 8800GTX though it is unreasonably expensive. If you went with an AMD, you could save a bit by buying a cheaper dual-core A64 and spend the saved money on the GTX.

 

Or you could go my route and get the E6600 (dunno how much they are now, I paid $360 for mine when they first arrived) and get the 8800GTS or even the ATI 2900XT (which is getting maturing drivers, so it is getting better and better).

 

Since you are mainly a gamer and don't care about SPEED SPEED SPEED to try and make your e-penis the largest, the AMD platform is still a great platform...but either platform is going to be great for gaming and everyday needs (as long as you get a good vid card for gaming).

 

Sustaining any type of framerate on a game that isn't out and is a hybrid DX9/DX10 game is impossible to predict. I judge my card's performance on how it plays Rainbow Six: Vegas because the Unreal3 engine that Vegas is built on is the game engine that is going to tax any video the most (probably more than Crysis, though fanboys will howl in pain at hearing this, I do believe the Unreal3 engine to be superior because Epic has about a 10 year head start on Crytek, and more importantly, Epic made the Unreal3 engine purely DirectX 9, so it will run like a champ, while Crytek is trying to make a hybrid DX10 game which is going to be a nightmare I'm sure).

 

 

ANYWAY lol

 

it's really up to you what you want to do. Either way you go is going to be great honestly. I feel you could save a few bucks by going the AMD route (and if you played your games on it next to a similar system running Intel chip you are thinking about, you'd barely see a difference, if any at all).

 

My goal in these situations is to get the parts I NEED, which in gaming is the video card. So if I got to spend $400-ish on the best vid card, it means I can go a little lighter on cpu, and I don't need the DDR2-35234Mhz RAM, just some DDR2-800 is perfect. Find a good psu that will power everything that isn't going to cost an arm and a leg, etc.

 

BEST BANG FOR THE BUCK.

 

ps, you still didn't say what size monitor you are going to be playing on (I still play on 19" wide @ 1440x900 and my 320MB 8800GTS is MORE than enough for full eye candy)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest element

Angry Is totally right If that AMD Cpu is the difference between the 8800GTX and a nice big monitor, go AMD.

 

If your not fussed on a massive monitor just go GTS and a X2 6000+ or X2 4800+ 65wt. And go for a nice quiet rig. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry guys forgot the monitor, currently using a 19" @ 1280 x 1024. Nothin crazy.

 

honestly you don't need anything more than the 8800GTS 320MB but you might find an ATI 2900XT for a decent price...but a 320MB GTS will stomp anything and everything @ 1280x1024.

 

What you now have to ask yourself is if you plan on going to a bigger monitor anytime soon. If no, then go with a Core2 E6600 + 2GB DDR2-800 + 8800GTS 320MB

 

If you feel like you'll (within 6 months?) go to a better/bigger monitor (1600x1200 non-widescreen / 1680x1050 widescreen or higher resolution) then get the AMD + 8800GTS 640MB (or possibly the GTX for like a thousand dollars more haha...actually I'd probably go with the new ATI 2900XT instead of a GTX)

 

as said earlier, you just got to figure out what is going to be the best bang for your buck, but with what I just posted about resolutions, that should be enough to help you decide which direction to go in (and again, my 8800GTS 320MB will do 1600x1200 easy at max settings for all games except RS Vegas, STALKER, and NWN2, so you got to figure Bioshock and Crysis and Unreal Tournament 2007 and all those new games might need a 2900XT or 8800GTX to play @ 1600x1200, but if you are like me, I love gaming but don't see the need to play at more than 1440x900 widescreen...coulda easily got myself a 24" LCD for 1920x1200 but... I got an Xbox360 for 1080i/1080p gaming lol)

 

*ahem*

 

hope that helps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks alot angry, looks like I definitely will be going with the 320mb GTS. I only play games at 1280x1024 because awhile back I was able to pick up an LCD with a 3.1ms response time for dirt cheap. Thanks a ton to everyone that responded. I'm very glad to see this build evolve from the origional parts I picked out. Lastly, is a 10k rpm raptor worth the extra dough or is a 7,200rpm seagate just as game / general use friendly? I am willing to shell out a little extra to get a real quick HDD. I love quick load times.

 

Current build (Revised):

 

Motherboard: Evga Nvidia 680i

 

Processor: E6750 Dual Core

 

Video Card: eVGA e-Geforce 8800GTS 320mb (Price limit $300) (1280x1024 100% of the time)

 

Ram: 2x 1gb DDR-800

 

Hard Drives: Awaiting final recommendation for main drive + additional large (300gb+) hd for storage

 

Sound Card: Sound Blaster Audigy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...