Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Stealth on June 24, 2009, 11:49:53 pm

Title: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 24, 2009, 11:49:53 pm
haha naa just kidding about the 'better than yours' part.

ANYWAY, i decided to throw some of the money i've been throwing into cars and bikes, into a new gaming computer.  Three days ago I got motivated to build a new computer.  That motivation came in the form of a game - Crysis.  I'm sure you've heard of it :p

So i decided i want to get 60FPS on full resolution, and high quality.

That's going to be possible thanks to these two beautys that should be here later this week:

(http://images.tigerdirect.com/SkuImages/gallery/large/E145-0281-01.jpg)

Say hello to arguably one of the fastest graphics cards available these days, the EVGA GeForce GTX 285 Superclocked Video Card - with 2GB GDDR3.  Yes i know there's faster video memory out there, but Crysis relies heavily on video memory, more so than clock speed from what i've heard, so i figured 4GB of video memory should suffice.  I don't intend on overclocking anything.

Processor - i haven't decided yet, but i'm leaning heavily toward the i7

Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Dark RevenantX on June 25, 2009, 12:15:00 am
2GB on one card  :wtf:  Is that even neccessary?

Video memory is more like a limit to what your video card can do, rather than a speed slider.  If the game uses 0.5GB of video memory at those settings, your performance will be unchanged if you have 1GB, it'll stutter sometimes if you have 0.5GB, and it will suck if you have 0.25GB.  The memory speed, latencies, interface bandwidth, and such, are what make it faster.  Architecture plays a greater roll, still, as the true speed of the card, overall, is what it can actually do.  The cards that effectively process **** will be faster than cards that don't process new algorithms, functions, and are less well designed overall.  Similar architectures are tiered with core speeds.

So, yeah, get a GTX 285.  Hell, get two, if you're that loaded.  It's the best card you can buy.  The GTX 295 is not worth the price.

For the processor, get the best one you can reasonably afford.  If you're looking for a good price-performance ratio, the i7 720 is the best.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Mongoose on June 25, 2009, 02:15:18 am
That single card has four times the memory my system does. :eek2:

...I think I have hardware envy.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Spicious on June 25, 2009, 02:20:57 am
So unnecessary.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: ssmit132 on June 25, 2009, 03:05:09 am
At least you've got the money to splurge on your system, a luxury I don't have. :lol:
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: darkone on June 25, 2009, 08:06:05 am
One thing people forgot to say is that card is over $500.

I just build my new rig yesterday and found a great deal on the ATI 4890 w/1GB memory on the board and got it for under $200 :) So save your money, especially since there is no game out there that would even push the limits of that card why waste the money. In two years maybe and then 2GB boards will be common place and you'll get them for $100.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 25, 2009, 10:36:11 am
wow sometimes i wonder about you guys.  maybe it's a mixture of jealousy and ignorance, buuuuut, to respond to some of the comments.

1) saying 2GB isn't necessary is like saying having a fast car isn't necessary.  and sure, 99% of the time you don't need it, but then perhaps one day someone in a truck doesn't see you and you need that speed, then BAM - you have it.  same with the video card.  the more memory the video card has, the better, ESPECIALLY when you're playing games like Crysis, which, on highest resolutions and very high video settings and a few other tweaks will be at 1GB+.  I didn't just get that card because it had 2GB of memory, i got it because of its other 'accomplishments'.  geez, you all focus on the negative.  IT HAS 2GB MEMORY ZOMG.

2) "Unnecessary" is relative.  I intend this system to be able to play any game, on the highest setting, for several years.  my first 'gaming' computer did, with two 7800GTXs (top of the line card at the time).

3) I admit these cards were expensive, but don't know where you're getting you prices from - I got them both, shipped, for well under $800 :)
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: General Battuta on June 25, 2009, 10:37:11 am
Crysis isn't much fun, but it does make a good benchmarking tool, and I admire your commitment to future-proofing.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: TESLA on June 25, 2009, 10:45:09 am
wow sometimes i wonder about you guys.  maybe it's a mixture of jealousy and ignorance, buuuuut, to respond to some of the comments.

1) saying 2GB isn't necessary is like saying having a fast car isn't necessary.  and sure, 99% of the time you don't need it, but then perhaps one day someone in a truck doesn't see you and you need that speed, then BAM - you have it.  same with the video card.  the more memory the video card has, the better, ESPECIALLY when you're playing games like Crysis, which, on highest resolutions and very high video settings and a few other tweaks will be at 1GB+.  I didn't just get that card because it had 2GB of memory, i got it because of its other 'accomplishments'.  geez, you all focus on the negative.  IT HAS 2GB MEMORY ZOMG.

2) "Unnecessary" is relative.  I intend this system to be able to play any game, on the highest setting, for several years.  my first 'gaming' computer did, with two 7800GTXs (top of the line card at the time).

3) I admit these cards were expensive, but don't know where you're getting you prices from - I got them both, shipped, for well under $800 :)

Well if you have the cash why not splash out on an Alienware system or Dell XPS model. Will be expensive but you will be able to play all your games on the highest settings..
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 25, 2009, 10:46:28 am
Tesla: because i can get a much more powerful computer for less money i'd spend with XPS/alienware/misc "custom-pc builder", and i'd still have all the fun of putting it together myself ;)

you have to keep in mind that crysis is the first 'newer' game i've played in years.  i still play starcraft and warcraft III.  when i started playing Crysis, that's when i realized my all-powerful gaming computer wasn't all that anymore :(

just purchased my hard drive:
Patriot Warp Solid State Drive - 128GB, 2.5", SATA II
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 25, 2009, 11:12:42 am
Yeah, TESLA, Alienware/Dell/Any prefab PC is going to pale in cost and power compared to any custom-built PC.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: TESLA on June 25, 2009, 11:16:22 am
Yeah, TESLA, Alienware/Dell/Any prefab PC is going to pale in cost and power compared to any custom-built PC.


Oh i know that, just giving the lazy man way ;)
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Dark RevenantX on June 25, 2009, 11:26:06 am
It's just that... 2GB on a GTX 285 while the GTX 295 has 1.8GB...  What's the catch?
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 25, 2009, 11:41:15 am
GTX295 has dual cores, etc.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Ghostavo on June 25, 2009, 02:42:52 pm
First, what exactly do you mean by full resolution? 1920x1200? 2560x1600? What are you aiming at?
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Dark RevenantX on June 25, 2009, 02:55:40 pm
GTX295 has dual cores, etc.

GTX295 has 1.8GB overall...  Yet GTX 285 has 2GB on one (more powerful) core.  Seems like some kind of gimmicky selling point that the manufacturer is using.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 25, 2009, 02:59:17 pm
Yes, but GTX has 900MB per core, and each core is the equivalent of a GTX275.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 25, 2009, 03:02:38 pm
First, what exactly do you mean by full resolution? 1920x1200? 2560x1600? What are you aiming at?

2560x1600
but that may be a bit ambitious.  i don't think these two cards can run it at a res that high without dropping down to 30FPS
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 25, 2009, 03:23:26 pm
Just put a fan controller on it. It increases performance.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: azile0 on June 25, 2009, 05:08:53 pm
I have the Sparkle GeForce 9600. 2GB of memory, bish.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Dark RevenantX on June 25, 2009, 05:20:49 pm
Yes, but GTX has 900MB per core, and each core is the equivalent of a GTX275.

What argument were you trying to make?   :confused:
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 25, 2009, 06:00:48 pm
Just put a fan controller on it. It increases performance.
i'm not as gullible as 'office-space' type employees ;)
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 25, 2009, 08:07:28 pm
Yes, but GTX has 900MB per core, and each core is the equivalent of a GTX275.

What argument were you trying to make?   :confused:
I'm trying to explain why the 295 is better in terms of raw power (although I'd never buy one even with the money).

It has two functioning cores for decoding video/rendering/whatever, while the 285 only has one core for doing all of this plus slightly more memory. The 295, as you probably know, is two 275s in SLI.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Dark RevenantX on June 25, 2009, 08:19:50 pm
GTX 285 in tri-sli destroys the GTX 295 in quad-sli, so...
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 25, 2009, 08:30:36 pm
Really?
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Spicious on June 26, 2009, 01:43:05 am
just purchased my hard drive:
Patriot Warp Solid State Drive - 128GB, 2.5", SATA II
Bad (http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531&p=25).
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 26, 2009, 09:38:59 am
How do you know what he paid for it?
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 26, 2009, 03:18:49 pm
just purchased my hard drive:
Patriot Warp Solid State Drive - 128GB, 2.5", SATA II
Bad (http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531&p=25).

makes 0 sense.  two things that link you posted prove:
a) SSD beats every other hard drive type in the world hands down, no matter how many you RAID together
b) the hard drive i purchased isn't even in the comparison list on your site :/

the patriot warp isn't as quick as the X-25, sure, but i got it for free, and it's a lot faster than any SATA/SCSI/SAS, etc. out there, sooooo that works for me! ;)
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Ghostavo on June 26, 2009, 03:20:52 pm
There is a problem with SSD's that use JMicron's controller IIRC.

EDIT:
Here is more info on the subject. (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ssd-jmicron-jmf602,7057.html)
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Zantor on June 26, 2009, 03:55:40 pm
the GeForce GTX 285 is a good choice, made by EVGA, BFG, XFX, or someone really good. 2GB per card is a little excessive; heck IMO Crysis's graphics are excessive, but that's me. Why SLI, though? A GeForce GTX of any model can pack more punch alone than 2 or 3 8800s. I wouldn't recommend a resolution higher than 1920x1200 myself, but that's me.

Are you getting a quad-core or dual-core processor? If you're going to be all hardcore with an upgrade, get an Intel Core 2 Quad QX6800. To my knowledge this is the fastest and most expensive consumer processor available today. If AMD, get the best quad Phenom available to go in a board with an nVidia chipset.

For hard drives, SSD or magnetic-mechanical is your choice. If you get magnetic storage, get a Western Digital Raptor X or Caviar RE; the RE model is enterprise grade and so they are higher endurance and have a 5-year warranty unlike the SE. I would only get an SSD from Intel, WD, OCZ, or Corsair, but no one else; these companies are the top manufacturers in storage media (except for intel who does semiconductor electronics). These will offer you the best longevity, endurance, service, and performance than most other brands. I have a WD Caviar RE drive and I haven't run into anything more reliable. Use or don't use RAID at your discretion.

For RAM, you can go two ways, budget or hardcore expensive. Get Corsair ValueSelect if you don't want to break the bank; sometimes I find it's cheaper than Kingston and just as good. If you're going all hardcore like I think you are, get OCZ or Corsair RAM, NOTHING ELSE. OCZ is top in the market and yet very expensive, very reliable and VERY fast. Depending on the board you are getting, get the fastest possible with an in-between timing set. IIRC DDR3 doesn't go slower than CL5 and so if you get 6 to 9 you should be all right; the fastest speed DDR3 is available in now is 1600 MHz; that's 400 MHz x 4. If you bus speed is not 1600 MHz, do not get 1600/1666 MHz RAM. Rather, get a chip that runs at 1333 and RAM that runs at 1333 so you have a 1:1 ratio FSB to RAM. This will provide you with superb performance.

As for a motherboard, get one with the best nVidia chipset possible. I've been out of the loop on nVidia's chipsets; I believe the 700 series is the newest. At any rate, get the best chipset possible and a board that has all the features you want.

For audio, get a Sound Blaster X-Fi. I myself do not use integrated sound unless it's absolutely necessary (like in a laptop). I have used Creative sound cards for the last 10 years and they have not failed to disappoint me in their superior performance compared to other sound cards and integrated sound devices. Hardware buffers are louder, and though minutely faster any offloading you can do with sound will help your framerate.

I hope this info is of assistance and if I've stated most of what you know, oh well. In that case, I'm merely supporting or reinforcing your choices.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 26, 2009, 04:00:24 pm
The QX6800 was the top of the line CPU... in 2007.

The Caviar designations RE and SE are no more, there's Green (low-power), Blue (standard) and Black (performance). The VelociRaptor is the new Raptor.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Zantor on June 26, 2009, 05:00:08 pm
I'm a little behind the times. I'd have to do some research to find the latest and greatest of 09.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Spicious on June 26, 2009, 07:59:51 pm
makes 0 sense.  two things that link you posted prove:
a) SSD beats every other hard drive type in the world hands down, no matter how many you RAID together
b) the hard drive i purchased isn't even in the comparison list on your site :/

the patriot warp isn't as quick as the X-25, sure, but i got it for free, and it's a lot faster than any SATA/SCSI/SAS, etc. out there, sooooo that works for me! ;)
Only if you ignore random writes. This page (http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531&p=17) illustrates the problem a lot better. Incidentally, it's probably using a SATA connection.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 27, 2009, 12:57:05 am
Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 motherboard with an i7 920 processor, planning on OCing it to 3.6ghz, which seems to be do-able.

sorry, but i can't justify spending over $1000 on a processor.

As it is this whole thing is starting to wear on me.  i'm thinking about building 'reasonable' instead of 'insane'... as in, building a computer that will be top of the line, no doubt, but not the-most-expensive-of-everything.  i'm considering it. we'll see how i feel tomorrow morning :/
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Fury on June 27, 2009, 04:43:49 am
I've learned that going for high-mid range hardware is always more cost effective in the long run then going low-end, low-mid range or high-end range.

For example, when a CPU or video card that belongs to high-mid range (such as C2Q 9400 and Radeon 4890 right now) can no longer play games adequately, chances are that the high-end hardware of same generation can't either. Being reasonable with hardware choices saves lot of money in the long run. With the money you save on high-end hardware you can use to upgrade years later. Not to mention that hardware warranty is limited and dying CPU or video card will cost far less if you didn't buy that top of the line cash burner.

As for SSD's, they aren't cost effective or mature enough in my books. In a year or two they may have cost effective prices and their problems have been solved. If you get one for free or at significantly reduced price, then go for it. Otherwise get Western Digital Black instead.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 27, 2009, 09:07:39 am
Are you talking about the QX6800 as a 1000$ CPU? That's nearly 3 years old! Go with an i7 920 or 950, 270$ or 540$, depending on what you want to spend.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 27, 2009, 11:03:03 am
Are you talking about the QX6800 as a 1000$ CPU? That's nearly 3 years old! Go with an i7 920 or 950, 270$ or 540$, depending on what you want to spend.
i'm talking about the i7 965
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: JGZinv on June 27, 2009, 11:23:08 am
I have a GTX 275, it's more than enough.
Crysis is less than it's cracked up to be.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Ghostavo on June 27, 2009, 12:26:21 pm
I have a GTX 275, it's more than enough.
Crysis is less than it's cracked up to be.

He wants to play at 2560x1600. It's not more than enough, it's not even in the ball park of enough. It's so far from enough that you'd cry (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-sli,2298-6.html).
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: CP5670 on June 27, 2009, 12:42:56 pm
I doubt any current hardware can consistently get 60fps throughout the entire game even at 1920x1200. The overall game performance is worse than reviews would have you think, since the framerate falls sharply during heavy fights and the performance is also considerably lower in the last quarter of the game.

I have a single 280 (670mhz) and played most of the game at 1280x960 without AA with a custom high/very high configuration, but went down to 1024x768 for the last few levels, and even then the framerates fell into the low 30s during big fights.

I liked the game itself a lot despite the poor performance. Although it's not worth buying expensive hardware just for that one game.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: General Battuta on June 27, 2009, 12:48:21 pm
Yeah, to be honest, the only truly impressive thing about the game is the system requirements (and the resulting graphics.) There's gorgeous stuff in there, but it's hard to admire when the game itself can be so exasperating.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Zantor on June 27, 2009, 10:46:28 pm
Are you talking about the QX6800 as a 1000$ CPU? That's nearly 3 years old! Go with an i7 920 or 950, 270$ or 540$, depending on what you want to spend.

Like I said, I'm behind the times. I know about i7 but it didn't come to mind.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 27, 2009, 10:52:35 pm
I was refering to Stealth at that point.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 28, 2009, 12:13:38 am
I was refering to Stealth at that point.
and i don't know why :/
i wasn't referring to that proc...
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on June 28, 2009, 08:05:36 am
I thought you were by the "Not paying 1000$" comment.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on June 28, 2009, 11:18:04 pm
not at all.

what i meant was that if i kept on going the same direction i was headed, the only way i could get a processor to match the insane specs of the graphics cards, hard drives, etc. would be spending over $1000 on a processor.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Mefustae on June 29, 2009, 03:53:24 am
Yeah, well suck on my GeForce 6600GT. All 256mb's of it.

256 is higher than 2. I think we see who won here.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Mikes on June 29, 2009, 06:47:37 am
It's just that... 2GB on a GTX 285 while the GTX 295 has 1.8GB...  What's the catch?

The GTX295 can only use 900mb due to the nature of dual GPU / SLI solutions.

So it effectively has less than half the memmory for applications to use than the 2gb card and even a bit less than a 1gb card.

As far as gaming is concerned 900mb is still plenty as well so it doesn't matter all that much.
But it's something to keep in mind when talking about future games or ultra high resolutions.

Stock GTX 285 = 1gb effective memmory.
The modifed GTX 285 in aboves post = 2gb effective memmory.
GTX 295 = 900mb effective memmory.

Same with SLI ... if you put 2x 1gb cards into SLI it doesn't mean applications can suddenly use 2gb video ram... nope LOL ;) 1gb it is... because of how SLI works.
Same with ATI crossfire of course too.

Effective (usable) video memmory = total video memmory / number of cores.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 03, 2009, 10:24:33 am
OK since i've changed and am going for a more reasonable build, so i can still afford to put headers and cutouts on one of the cars later this month, here's the motherboard and RAM combo that i'm going to be getting.

If one of you gearheads could scope it out and just make sure it looks good:

RAM:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4282847&csid=_25
board:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4484418&CatId=4070

Thanks :)
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 03, 2009, 10:25:16 am
or should i get 1600mhz ram instead:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4282839&csid=_25
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Tyrian on July 03, 2009, 08:47:00 pm
Ok, I'm a late comer to the thread, but I just finished my own supercharged system, see here (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,62936.0.html) for specs. 

As for the hardware, I'd recommend the OCZ Gold in your second post.  I have it myself, and it screams.  Best of all, the specs say 1600 MHz, 8-8-8-24, stable at 1.65V, however, on my system it's stable at 1.5V.  Very cool stuff.

Processor-wise, go with the i7 920.  It has a slower QPI, but it's not noticeable.  It's also the most bang for your buck.  Plus, if you do decide to OC in the future, with a good cooler, you can hit 3.4GHz on air.

Another board you might want to take a look at is this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813188049) one from EVGA.  They've been doing some interesting stuff lately.  One thing about that current board you have is that it's stock memory speeds top out at 1333 MHz.  To take full advantage of the OCZ Gold that runs at 1600 MHz, you'd be forced to OC.

The GTX 285 2GB is an awesome card.  I have the stock one myself.  I've heard some mixed reports about the stability of the superclocked version though.  I'd recommend the stock one, as it's a little cheaper and can be manually set to the superclocked version's speeds.  Also, the GTX 285 has on-board PhysX support, which means you might want to take a look at a motherboard that supports PhysX.  Look on EVGA's website; they just released a cheaper version of my motherboard, the E760 Classified, that has PhysX support.  PhysX is gaining support amongst mainstream games.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on July 03, 2009, 09:03:56 pm
or should i get 1600mhz ram instead:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4282839&csid=_25

You won't notice the difference in speed between lower and higher clocks, but you'll notice the price.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: CP5670 on July 03, 2009, 10:00:36 pm
The higher speed memory is for overclocking the processor. It's only useful if you want to do that.

Quote
Also, the GTX 285 has on-board PhysX support, which means you might want to take a look at a motherboard that supports PhysX.  Look on EVGA's website; they just released a cheaper version of my motherboard, the E760 Classified, that has PhysX support.  PhysX is gaining support amongst mainstream games.

You don't need any specific motherboard for PhysX as long as you have an appropriate video card.

PhysX has been a no-show so far though. I still have yet to see a game that actually does something noticeable with it without having a huge framerate hit.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on July 03, 2009, 11:05:59 pm
And most newer (9XXX plus) nVidia cards already have PhysX, IIRC.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 07, 2009, 01:23:54 pm
sent the 285s back, didn't even open the box.

Means i'm now in the market for a video card.

Radeon 4890, or Geforce GTX275... what think.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Fury on July 07, 2009, 01:39:13 pm
Radeon 4890
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 07, 2009, 02:26:27 pm
Radeon 4890
Tri-fire'd 4890's would work. What do you have already? EVGA or Asus for X58 boards, an i7 920 ofc, 6-12GB DDR3 1600, maybe a solid state drive or two for OS? A few terabytes for storage. You can use a Corsair 850TX (or 850HX, if you want modular). Asus P6T6 WS or P6T7 WS motherboard would work well.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 07, 2009, 02:32:15 pm
here's what i have already...

- EVGA 141-BL-E757-TR and
- ASUS P6T Deluxe V2
(yes i know i have two boards, and i can use either one at this point)

- Corsair XMS3 Tri Channel 6GB PC10666 DDR3 Memory (1600mhz)
- WD VelociRaptor 300GB Hard Drive WD3000HLFS
- WD Caviar Black 1TB drive
- Kingwin Mach 1 Modular Power Supply - 800-Watt
- Intel Core i7 920 Processor BX80601920 - 2.66GHz
- Thermaltake VH8000BWS Armor+ MX ATX Mid-Tower Case
- Creative Labs Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer PCI Sound Card
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 07, 2009, 02:37:18 pm
How about three
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814103076
HD4890 1GB's (OC'd to 925MHz core)
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 07, 2009, 03:20:07 pm
naaa i don't want to do more than 2 video cards right now.  but i'd like to do 3 in the future.

for some reason i really like the 4890 XXX edition.  i think two of those would rape.

also i'm REALLY liking this board for some reason
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4633206&CatId=4070
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 07, 2009, 04:02:31 pm
naaa i don't want to do more than 2 video cards right now.  but i'd like to do 3 in the future.

for some reason i really like the 4890 XXX edition.  i think two of those would rape.

also i'm REALLY liking this board for some reason
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4633206&CatId=4070
That board is really nice.

Quote
World Frequency Records (Intel Core i7 CPU) :

    * Nº 1 : coolaler.com reached 6061.09 MHz with an Intel Core i7 Extreme 975 (45 nm) [Details]
            MB : EVGA X58 SLI Classified (Intel X58 rev 12) - RAM : G.Skill 6144 MB
    * Nº 2 : OPB@ocx&滄者極限 reached 5968.42 MHz with an Intel Xeon W3570 (45 nm) [Details]
            MB : EVGA X58 SLI Classified (Intel X58 rev 13) - RAM : Avantium 3072 MB
    * Nº 3 : Brian y. reached 5937.22 MHz with an �����º���µ���� (45 nm) [Details]
            MB : EVGA X58 SLI Classified (Intel X58 rev 12) - RAM : 6144 MB
    * Nº 4 : Pt1t [Matbe.com] reached 5901.25 MHz with an Intel Core i7 Extreme 975 ES (45 nm) [Details]
            MB : EVGA X58 SLI Classified (Intel X58 rev 12) - RAM : G.Skill 6144 MB
    * Nº 5 : Boblemagnifique 975XE Caskade First Test reached 5843.29 MHz with an Intel Core i7 Extreme 975 (45 nm) [Details]
            MB : EVGA X58 SLI Classified (Intel X58 rev 13) - RAM : STT 3072 MB
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 07, 2009, 04:24:39 pm
yeah seems like it's designed to overclock
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: CP5670 on July 07, 2009, 04:38:00 pm
Just like all boards are these days. :p

If you're trying to set a new world record OC, that might be the right board for you. For a typical OC on a system you will actually be using, almost any cheap board built on the same chipset is good enough. The cooling, processor and other factors will come into play long before the motherboard's limits do.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Tyrian on July 07, 2009, 05:47:43 pm
I actually have that board.  It's amazing.  I'm going to start OC'ing with it soon.  (I just finished breaking in the system.)  It's actually engineered to support cooling via liquid nitrogen.  We have some at work, so I'm going to talk to the guys there about what's involved in producing/storing/safely using the stuff.  :D  Plus that board supports 3-way x16 SLI.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 07, 2009, 06:34:46 pm
yeah seems like it's designed to overclock
Just like all boards are these days. :p

If you're trying to set a new world record OC, that might be the right board for you. For a typical OC on a system you will actually be using, almost any cheap board built on the same chipset is good enough. The cooling, processor and other factors will come into play long before the motherboard's limits do.
Actual abilities differ wildly. DFI's X58's aren't too shabby, if you can stand having only 3 DDR3 slots, the Foxconns are good, and if you need a lot of PCI Express x16 slots, Asus's P6T6/7's are the best bet (workstation w/ multiple graphics cards or perhaps RAID controllers). The EVGA one really is designed for world records. A fast and easy overclocking board are the Biostar TPower X58A's. I have a friend with the original TPower X58 and it was as simple as dialing up the bclk and leaving the rest on auto; very tight timings and low voltages (compared to the run-of-the-mill auto settings), while still rock solid stable.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: CP5670 on July 07, 2009, 08:43:59 pm
Quote
I actually have that board.  It's amazing.  I'm going to start OC'ing with it soon.  (I just finished breaking in the system.)  It's actually engineered to support cooling via liquid nitrogen.  We have some at work, so I'm going to talk to the guys there about what's involved in producing/storing/safely using the stuff. :D Plus that board supports 3-way x16 SLI.

You can't use LN2 on a normal system. It vaporizes quickly and you would need to refill it every few days. It's only used for momentary overclocks to set records with.

Quote
Actual abilities differ wildly. DFI's X58's aren't too shabby, if you can stand having only 3 DDR3 slots, the Foxconns are good, and if you need a lot of PCI Express x16 slots, Asus's P6T6/7's are the best bet (workstation w/ multiple graphics cards or perhaps RAID controllers). The EVGA one really is designed for world records. A fast and easy overclocking board are the Biostar TPower X58A's. I have a friend with the original TPower X58 and it was as simple as dialing up the bclk and leaving the rest on auto; very tight timings and low voltages (compared to the run-of-the-mill auto settings), while still rock solid stable.

I am looking at the MSI X58M myself. It's a cheap (by X58 standards), no-frills board that overclocks well, although it looks like it needs better chipset cooling. I want to see more opinions on it before I get it though.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 07, 2009, 10:58:38 pm
Quote
I actually have that board.  It's amazing.  I'm going to start OC'ing with it soon.  (I just finished breaking in the system.)  It's actually engineered to support cooling via liquid nitrogen.  We have some at work, so I'm going to talk to the guys there about what's involved in producing/storing/safely using the stuff. :D Plus that board supports 3-way x16 SLI.

You can't use LN2 on a normal system. It vaporizes quickly and you would need to refill it every few days. It's only used for momentary overclocks to set records with.

Quote
Actual abilities differ wildly. DFI's X58's aren't too shabby, if you can stand having only 3 DDR3 slots, the Foxconns are good, and if you need a lot of PCI Express x16 slots, Asus's P6T6/7's are the best bet (workstation w/ multiple graphics cards or perhaps RAID controllers). The EVGA one really is designed for world records. A fast and easy overclocking board are the Biostar TPower X58A's. I have a friend with the original TPower X58 and it was as simple as dialing up the bclk and leaving the rest on auto; very tight timings and low voltages (compared to the run-of-the-mill auto settings), while still rock solid stable.

I am looking at the MSI X58M myself. It's a cheap (by X58 standards), no-frills board that overclocks well, although it looks like it needs better chipset cooling. I want to see more opinions on it before I get it though.
Air condition + 60 gallon cooler of antifreeze + some special equipment = sub-0C temperatures 24/7 (if you can deal with the power bill and the inital cost)

Anyways; what I worry most about with MSI boards is the general lack of voltage-regulation cooling. Even my $60 Abit IP35-E has a decent vreg heatsink, yet many of these low-end boards are only 4-stage'ers and are running quad-cores that can overclock quite well. More-so now then ever, it's the motherboard determining whether or not a Core i7 is overclockable. A bad board is more liekly than a bad processor, and most boards are able to hit 200 bclk. An i7 920 @ 4.2GHz should be attainable on almost anything (I wouldn't count on a Zotac or a low-end MSI, though). The DFI T3HE6 and the Jr. are excellent motherboards depending on application.

To me, however, it's becoming hard to beat Phenom II's for the price. I just bought an open-box Asrock 780G motherboard (for an Athlon 64 Lima actually) for like $67 and there are Athlon II X2 Regor's for <$100. and some of them can unlock to quad-cores. But yeah too late for a Phenom II; not that price really matters (considering how you've already got a $300 board and a $350 board and are considering a $400+ board). Then again.... might be fun to buy something else to play around with? http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.209473
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Fury on July 08, 2009, 01:02:58 am
Uhhuh. X58 + Core i7 + DDR3 = EXPENSIVE

I guess you have the money to shell out though. Still, I would prefer P45, C2Q and DDR2 or AMD AM2+ and Phenom II route, much better bang for the buck. WD Caviar Black is better bang for the buck than VelociRaptor. Never heard of Kingwin power supplies, I hope you've read positive reviews on them. Are you sure you need a sound card? Onboard HD Audio will be sufficient for most people. If you really want a sound card, please stay away from Creative and their **** drivers and software. Auzentech Auzen X-Plosion 7.1 Cinema would be a real sound card with reliable drivers and software. Of course, a sound card is only as good as speakers plugged to it.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 08, 2009, 12:06:14 pm
wow can you say "opinionated"! :)

yeah i've used kingwin power supplies on every gaming rig i've ever built.  kingwin and thermaltake.  they have dedicated, and often several 12v rails.  this particular one has 4 12v rails, totaling 60a.  they're pretty good power supplies.  and modular is good too :)

Phenom II may be better bang for the buck, as is P45, DDR2, etc.  However, this PC i didn't want to be bang-for-the-buck, i wanted performance.  The DDR3 cost under $90 for 6GB (not bad), and the CPU was a little over $200 (not bad either).

The Creative card, you're right, is overkill - onboard audio is usually sufficient, but i have a 5.1 surround system in my room, and this card i already have from my previous build, so it's no cost to me now :)  Even 2 years ago it was only like $75
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Fury on July 08, 2009, 12:51:56 pm
You might want to read this post about multiple 12V rails:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=84&threadid=2167846&enterthread=y
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: CP5670 on July 08, 2009, 12:54:11 pm
Quote
Anyways; what I worry most about with MSI boards is the general lack of voltage-regulation cooling. Even my $60 Abit IP35-E has a decent vreg heatsink, yet many of these low-end boards are only 4-stage'ers and are running quad-cores that can overclock quite well. More-so now then ever, it's the motherboard determining whether or not a Core i7 is overclockable. A bad board is more liekly than a bad processor, and most boards are able to hit 200 bclk. An i7 920 @ 4.2GHz should be attainable on almost anything (I wouldn't count on a Zotac or a low-end MSI, though).

Well, that is my point. From what I'm seeing, 4.2 is around the typical limit for a 920 on air cooling anyway. I think that X58M board might need aftermarket heatsinks as you say though, which would negate its lower cost. Anandtech gave it a glowing review anyway, but there haven't been many user opinions on it yet.

I have a C2D, so in my case anything other than an i7 wouldn't be a worthwhile upgrade. Actually, I don't really need a new processor but my brother does, so I figured I might as well get an i7 now instead of a year later, and give him my current setup.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 08, 2009, 02:07:20 pm
You might want to read this post about multiple 12V rails:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=84&threadid=2167846&enterthread=y
nothing wrong with multiple 12v rails.  i don't change my opinion based on a post in a forum somewhere.  with the power supply i have, PCIe connectors are on two 12v rails (i.e. i'll power one 4890 (with two pci-e connectors) from the one rail, and the second 4890 from the other). 

hard drives, fans, mb power, etc. go on the other two rails.  4 total.

Should be more than adequate - i did a fair amount of research on it
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 08, 2009, 10:15:47 pm
You might want to read this post about multiple 12V rails:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=84&threadid=2167846&enterthread=y
nothing wrong with multiple 12v rails.  i don't change my opinion based on a post in a forum somewhere.  with the power supply i have, PCIe connectors are on two 12v rails (i.e. i'll power one 4890 (with two pci-e connectors) from the one rail, and the second 4890 from the other). 

hard drives, fans, mb power, etc. go on the other two rails.  4 total.

Should be more than adequate - i did a fair amount of research on it
Other than the Kingwin being ugly (by my standards), they're decent units. I'd say, without a doubt, to look at Corsair 850TX/HX's before you look at Kingwin's Mach 1s, but oh well. What's done is done. The 750TX is not as good as either 650TX or 850TX; the 750TX and 850TX are both Channel Well units of different generations and the 650TX a Seasonic S12-II in disguise. The 750TX is overall a very good unit, but voltage regulation leaves a bit to be desired. Nothing dangerous or anything, but it could do better. The 650TX is supposedly more stable than the 850TX, but the 850TX isn't far behind at all. Both have much better voltage regulation than the 750TX, and both have their price. The 650's lower wattage and the 850's higher price. I don't know about the 750HX though (I have only heard it's long-awaited). I just wish I could trade up my 750TX for an 850TX; that would be sweet, even if I don't need the extra 100W.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 09, 2009, 12:45:45 am
i have one of those corsair modular 1000W power supplies that i was going to use on a virtual server.  it's brand new - in the box. 

juuuust like this one:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3985032&CatId=2535

if you think it's better to use that, i can just return this kingwin for a full refund :/
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Mikes on July 09, 2009, 08:35:33 am
i have one of those corsair modular 1000W power supplies that i was going to use on a virtual server.  it's brand new - in the box. 

juuuust like this one:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3985032&CatId=2535

if you think it's better to use that, i can just return this kingwin for a full refund :/

The "loose screws" issue that keeps surfacing with the corsair units kept me away from them, especially since i have to move my tower to another town occasionally.
Good units otherwise though.

http://www.jonnyguru.com/ is one of the best review sites for Power Supplies that i know of. MUCH more thorough than the usual mainstream review cra*.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 09, 2009, 10:48:25 am
i have one of those corsair modular 1000W power supplies that i was going to use on a virtual server.  it's brand new - in the box. 

juuuust like this one:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3985032&CatId=2535

if you think it's better to use that, i can just return this kingwin for a full refund :/

The "loose screws" issue that keeps surfacing with the corsair units kept me away from them, especially since i have to move my tower to another town occasionally.
Good units otherwise though.

http://www.jonnyguru.com/ is one of the best review sites for Power Supplies that i know of. MUCH more thorough than the usual mainstream review cra*.
To the best if my knowledge, the "loose screws" issue isn't a point of worry. They're just something Oklahoma Wolf and a few others that constantly review CWT units point out as CWT's constant issue. Besides; it somehow manages to kill the PSU, send it back to Corsair. They'll replace it within the warranty period (5 years). The 1000HX should be a good bit better than your Kingwin. The 1kW Kingwin Mach 1 left a bit more to be desired on rail stability then the 1000HX.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 09, 2009, 12:17:57 pm
hmmmmk, in that case i think i'm set!

only thing i'm trying to decide on is watercooling components - i want everything to be able to fit inside the case, and i realize now that may mean i have to return the Armor+ :/
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: JCDNWarrior on July 09, 2009, 12:33:10 pm
Well, I just wanted to mention, don't be fooled by Crysis, even Warhead -- the games aren't very optimised, which is why they ask so much more than they should. There's a few really good optimisation mods out there that fix all these issues. Game worked great with my old 8800GT (Now called a GT250) at pretty much the highest settings. Game also ended up looking better due to better use of the shaders and better color correction, ToD, and so forth.

Just my 2 cents.

- JC
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 09, 2009, 10:53:11 pm
Well, I just wanted to mention, don't be fooled by Crysis, even Warhead -- the games aren't very optimised, which is why they ask so much more than they should. There's a few really good optimisation mods out there that fix all these issues. Game worked great with my old 8800GT (Now called a GT250) at pretty much the highest settings. Game also ended up looking better due to better use of the shaders and better color correction, ToD, and so forth.

Just my 2 cents.

- JC
I'll put it like this; this guy works hard and plays hard.

Now then; Petra's has what you need for water-cooling. I can see what I can toss together for you, Stealth. I would suggest returning the Armor+ (especially any thermaltake "LCS" chassis). Basic question is two 2x120mm rads or one 3x120mm rad? :p It's supposed to be easy to fit watercooling all internally on quite a few different systems. A few Lian-Li's stand out for that, as well higher-end Antecs and Cooler Masters. Silverstone too, of course. If you're handy with a dremel, you can make them accept all-internal water-cooling quite well. I think you may like the CM Cosmos 1000's or maybe the ATCS 840. There are still the older Stacker 800 series around and for sale, but I personally can't stand those. I was overall happy about the XClio Windtunnel for ~$100. As I said, if you're handy with a dremel, you can make it accept a nice radiator or two.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 09, 2009, 11:00:18 pm
i'd like to get one radiator to cool the CPU, and both graphics cards.  also, i'd really like to keep them all internal, so i can pick the case up and go.

i'm thinking maybe i should just stick to an EXTREMELY well air-cooled system though... one i can still overclock with.

only reason i don't want to do water-cooled on this case, is i will be moving it a lot (taking it to LANs, etc.), and it's going to be moved around, placed on its side, etc.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 09, 2009, 11:31:23 pm
i'd like to get one radiator to cool the CPU, and both graphics cards.  also, i'd really like to keep them all internal, so i can pick the case up and go.

i'm thinking maybe i should just stick to an EXTREMELY well air-cooled system though... one i can still overclock with.

only reason i don't want to do water-cooled on this case, is i will be moving it a lot (taking it to LANs, etc.), and it's going to be moved around, placed on its side, etc.
Other than the res (you CAN run a res-free system, but it'll be much more difficult to fill and ensure that there are no air pockets and no risk of anything running dry), everything else should be fine. Perhaps you're more interested in a mini-ITX or micro-ATX system? There are quite a few HTPC and LAN party chassis out there; Silverstone makes a few nice ones. If you have a rough cube that's not much wider than it is tall, there'd really only be one position to put it in. Other than that, there's some like the Antec Mini-P180 to consider, though that's not much smaller than a regular ATX chassis (added an inch or two to height by making it easier to work in). Micro-ATX may be your best fit, however. The DFI Jr T3HE6 would cover your X58 front and of course gives a pair of PCI-E x16 slots for you to have fun filling. Combine that with a cube mATX chassis and you're mobile and can use a full-sized (or sometimes even oversized) power supply. For those smaller systems, a Corsair 650TX should provide enough power in a small enough package. They're a good bit physically smaller than a 750TX. Other than that, you can see about an MSI or Asus mATX motherboard for that sort of LAN system... :p

As pointed out before, almost any (decent) X58 board can overclock and supports lots. That's the nice thing about the "high-end" boards... multiple graphics slots as well as a few added features. If you plan on going with a compact system, I'd say you should pay the extra for extra features. If you will want, need, or ever really use 1394 Firewire, buy a board with those connectors and perhaps a front-panel 1394 too. Make sure you've enough USB and enough eSATA. Use USB when in doubt! :p You'll run out of slots quickly with double-slot graphics cards.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 09, 2009, 11:46:44 pm
not necessarily compact system, because in my experience, the more compact, the harder it is to cool :/  i don't mind it being a monster case, as long as i can put everything in it... any size case will fit in my trunk - but sideways ;)
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 09, 2009, 11:48:59 pm
not necessarily compact system, because in my experience, the more compact, the harder it is to cool :/  i don't mind it being a monster case, as long as i can put everything in it... any size case will fit in my trunk - but sideways ;)

But do you want to be lugging around 60lbs of computer? And just get a better CPU cooler then. S1294 or something. Depending on space, a Scythe Mugen 2 or Zipang will be good. How many drives do you plan to run?
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 10, 2009, 10:13:46 am
one 5.25" optical, and 2x 3.5" internal drives

to be honest, i was just going to use the rest of the 5.25" bays whatever case i get has for fans :) or radiators.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 10, 2009, 12:53:28 pm
one 5.25" optical, and 2x 3.5" internal drives

to be honest, i was just going to use the rest of the 5.25" bays whatever case i get has for fans :) or radiators.
12CM fans are about as wide as 5.25" bays are... ;7 you could also stack radiators (radiator-fans-radiator) to save space.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 12, 2009, 11:50:46 pm
you could also stack radiators (radiator-fans-radiator) to save space.
dunno if i like that idea.  that way you'd be blowing hot air over an already hot radiator (after the air's passed through the first radiator it heats up) - limiting its cooling capacity tremendously.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: blackhole on July 12, 2009, 11:55:24 pm
I want to point out that reducing texture resolution will massively reduce memory consumption (assuming, of course, the graphics engine in question wasn't coded by the same boneheads who apparently worked on Prototype). So, even if you have low memory, a fast graphics card should be capable of most postprocessing effects and other such things even if the texture resolutions aren't maxed out.
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Bob-san on July 13, 2009, 12:03:08 am
you could also stack radiators (radiator-fans-radiator) to save space.
dunno if i like that idea.  that way you'd be blowing hot air over an already hot radiator (after the air's passed through the first radiator it heats up) - limiting its cooling capacity tremendously.
Actually not really. The air is moving so fast through that it only rises a few degrees overall. Actual loop temperatures tend to vary <3C when doing the same load. To me, that's just fine. You get 100% out of one and 80-90% out of the second while saving quite a bit of space. The second thing is go for lower-speed pumps. Much over 4-5gpm won't do you any good and tend to add too much heat. A few of these are like 9W pumps but when you want to increase flow by 20% you usually end up with an 18W pump. The added heat goes somewhere, and not just into the heat. The most efficient series is actually Pump --> Radiator --> component waterblock --> res
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 20, 2009, 12:57:46 pm
here's a pic of the finished product.  last week i put it all together:
(http://www.f1f3.com/hlphosted/newcomputer_before.JPG)

and today i cleaned it up some:
(http://www.f1f3.com/hlphosted/newcomputer_after.JPG)

(http://www.f1f3.com/hlphosted/newcomputer_after1.JPG)

(http://www.f1f3.com/hlphosted/newcomputer_after2.JPG)

(http://www.f1f3.com/hlphosted/newcomputer_after3.JPG)

(http://www.f1f3.com/hlphosted/newcomputer_after4.JPG)




Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: colecampbell666 on July 20, 2009, 01:11:49 pm
CAN YOU HEAR ME OVER ALL OF THE FANS?
Title: Re: Building a computer - yes, better than yours :)
Post by: Stealth on July 20, 2009, 01:44:05 pm
it's what i get for going air cooled via water cooled, but i wanted to get everything running first before moving to watercooling :)

however, the loudest fan is just over 20dba (and right now it has 8, but tomorrow i'm replacing the two monster fans with 6 fans (2 on top, 4 on the side, and they're all 18dba fans)... so it's a VERY quiet setup.  all fans are controlled by the fan controller with the exception of the processor fans, which are controlled by the motherboard.  it's a very, very quiet setup.

pretty cool having a computer that's running 12 fans, and at full speed it's just over 20dba :)