It sounds like it comes with 2 slots, one x16 and one x4. Does that matter? How much does that matter?
In my experience the only use cases for 2 x16 slots is if you are running 2 graphics cards in SLI or Crossfire. Or if your case design does not allow you to have a card in one of the slots because maybe a hard drive is in the way.
Related to that, what does this mean? It sounds like it comes with 2 slots, one x16 and one x4. Does that matter? How much does that matter?
That means that is has two slots that will hold PCIe 2.0 x16 cards, but the second one only supports up to a x4 data transfer rate. Ultimately that means that PCI x16 cards will fit but run significantly slower in that slot. It really only matters if you want to use two video cards at the same time, since those are pretty much the only cards that require a slot of that size.
I decided I need the ability to play games, even if I'm not going to, because I will be making games and need to test real time rendering related stuff in real time.
That's fair enough. You might want a GTX 660 instead, though; performance is very similar overall (with significant shifts one way or the other depending on the game), but Nvidia's cards currently have the edge in efficiency and noise levels.
Overall, your system looks good, though the CPU choice might warrant further discussion.
Because performance was the same and price was the same, I choose the AMD solely because it was AMD. Apparently AMDs paired with AMDs give some benefits, but ignoring that, I wanted a card that was not compatible with a lot of Nvidia features, as there will be a computer with 2x GTX 570s on the same desk, and knowing where each brand falls short at a glance, and constantly being reminded, will benefit my work. I will be working on our lighting, renderer and PhysX integration among other things.
But I can't stand noise, and I wasn't aware AMD cards are extra loud.
SSDs have been considered, but I couldn't justify the price since it's a Windows computer.
Is the choice of CPU really that bad? I'll be multitasking a lot, and wanna be able to causally leave VMs open and look at porn while waiting for progress bars, and the additional cores and cache will probably help with that.
Because performance was the same and price was the same, I choose the AMD solely because it was AMD. Apparently AMDs paired with AMDs give some benefits, but ignoring that, I wanted a card that was not compatible with a lot of Nvidia features, as there will be a computer with 2x GTX 570s on the same desk, and knowing where each brand falls short at a glance, and constantly being reminded, will benefit my work. I will be working on our lighting, renderer and PhysX integration among other things.
But I can't stand noise, and I wasn't aware AMD cards are extra loud.
No one is saying extra loud; Nvidia's cards are just a little quiter at the moment. There's some noise testing here.
SSDs have been considered, but I couldn't justify the price since it's a Windows computer.
Why does that matter?
Is the choice of CPU really that bad? I'll be multitasking a lot, and wanna be able to causally leave VMs open and look at porn while waiting for progress bars, and the additional cores and cache will probably help with that.
No one is saying it's "bad". However, if noise is a concern, you should keep in mind that the 8-core AMD will definitely eat a lot more power than an i5, which means more heat and hence likely more noise.
Having more cores is nice, but AMD's cores are a lot worse than Intel's are.
Right, difference in noise isn't that bad. I looked at 660s, and 670s. A 660 is noticeably slower, the 660 Ti is faster, but not by much. It does however, cost $50 more. As for the SSD: because I have a finite amount of money.
I'm noticing a lot of hate for AMD, but just going by the benchmarks, this seems to be the best price/performance I can get, as someone who wants to multitask.
It's very possible I'm being dumb, and AMD products actually come with soul eating demons, and if so, I'd very much appreciate a clear warning. Otherwise, while I would like to thank you on all your input, I think I'll have to ignore it and go with the AMD. Of course, if someone was to tell me to switch out the motherboard, I'd just trust you, as there are no benchmarks or numbers to compare for that. I'm concerned mostly with number of USB ports (Little), secure boot bullshit (More so) and boot-time (A lot).
Right, difference in noise isn't that bad. I looked at 660s, and 670s. A 660 is noticeably slower, the 660 Ti is faster, but not by much. It does however, cost $50 more. As for the SSD: because I have a finite amount of money.
On some benchmarks the plain 660 is noticeably slower than the HD 7870, on some it's the other way around. In an overall sense they're basically equal - this is backed up by Tom's Hardware's averaged index.
I'm noticing a lot of hate for AMD, but just going by the benchmarks, this seems to be the best price/performance I can get, as someone who wants to multitask.
You're not wrong about price/performance - the FX-8350 does indeed win in that regard. However, that performance edge is relatively application-specific, and merely running a VM or two while looking at porn isn't really enough to pull out the full power of a CPU like that.
Well darn. Newegg sales, so I'm going with a GTX670, not Ti, and a 3TB harddrive and better (but apparently super noisy) PSU. Hopefully there is nothing the motherboard can do wrong that would get in the way of the better GPU. CPU is the same.
I just got a 660 ti amp from zotac and I do not recommend it to anyone that is building a PC. It did give me a very good frame rate increase from my HD 6850 toxic, but also is very much louder and it is very unstable, it's freezing up on battlefield 3 periodically.
It could be, but the noise issue is normal, I should have read more reviews. The over clocked 'amp!' Premise might cause the instability, also it works fine on other games.
Well, that particular make and model might be noisy, but I don't think that's normal for the 660 Ti in general. As for the instability, try lowering the clock speeds as a test.
That is a good idea, I'll try it when I get home. I should also open my case to see if temperature is an issue. I already lowered my CPU clocks and it didn't seem to fix it.
I guess it has a slightly worse memory interface, but I don't think that would affect game playing any. Plus I don't see it warranting that much money.
This reminds me, I told my friend I'd help her build a new computer to play games on, but I'm not really up on new hardware. Anyone have ideas about what's the most "bang for your buck" in terms of what should go in a gaming PC these days?
This reminds me, I told my friend I'd help her build a new computer to play games on, but I'm not really up on new hardware. Anyone have ideas about what's the most "bang for your buck" in terms of what should go in a gaming PC these days?
New computer is all built, but now I'm having monitor problems. The monitor is a samsung syncmaster, I think 172x? It was actually Scott's old monitor. It's all hooked up to the computer and power source, but no image whatsoever appears.
The green power light comes on, but blinks at 0.5 second intervals. I looked into it and it seems it is stuck in power save mode. I spent a good part of last night googling this problem, but nothing worked. Restarting the PC or monitor, plugging in the mouse and moving it around, trying all buttons, no good. Nothing can get this monitor to respond. I saw it working before, at Emily's place after the computer was newly built. Since then it has not been used till now. I have no idea what could have happened to it to break it. Or am I doing something wrong? Any idea?
Comments
AMD FX-8350 Vishera 4.0GHz (4.2GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8350FRHKBOX
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284
$200
CORSAIR Enthusiast Series TX650 V2 650W ATX12V v2.31/ EPS12V v2.92 80 PLUS BRONZE Certified Active PFC High Performance Power Supply
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139020
$90
SAPPHIRE 100354XTL Radeon HD 7870 XT w/Boost 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 CrossFireX Support Video Card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202024
$250
ASRock 970 EXTREME3 AM3+ AMD 970 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157280
$100***
Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148840
$80
4x G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1866 (PC3 14900) Desktop Memory Model F3-14900CL10S-8GBXL
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231527
$200 (4x50)
Total; $920
I'm not sure if it's a good choice for other kinds of GPU-heavy computation.
Overall, your system looks good, though the CPU choice might warrant further discussion.
You should also consider an SSD.
But I can't stand noise, and I wasn't aware AMD cards are extra loud.
SSDs have been considered, but I couldn't justify the price since it's a Windows computer.
Is the choice of CPU really that bad? I'll be multitasking a lot, and wanna be able to causally leave VMs open and look at porn while waiting for progress bars, and the additional cores and cache will probably help with that.
Having more cores is nice, but AMD's cores are a lot worse than Intel's are.
I'm noticing a lot of hate for AMD, but just going by the benchmarks, this seems to be the best price/performance I can get, as someone who wants to multitask.
It's very possible I'm being dumb, and AMD products actually come with soul eating demons, and if so, I'd very much appreciate a clear warning. Otherwise, while I would like to thank you on all your input, I think I'll have to ignore it and go with the AMD. Of course, if someone was to tell me to switch out the motherboard, I'd just trust you, as there are no benchmarks or numbers to compare for that. I'm concerned mostly with number of USB ports (Little), secure boot bullshit (More so) and boot-time (A lot).
I apologize if I'm coming off as rude.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130587
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130787
http://www.pcper.com/hwlb
monitor is a samsung syncmaster, I think 172x? It was actually Scott's
old monitor. It's all hooked up to the computer and power source, but
no image whatsoever appears.
The green power light comes on, but blinks at 0.5 second intervals. I
looked into it and it seems it is stuck in power save mode. I spent a
good part of last night googling this problem, but nothing worked.
Restarting the PC or monitor, plugging in the mouse and moving it
around, trying all buttons, no good. Nothing can get this monitor to
respond. I saw it working before, at Emily's place after the computer
was newly built. Since then it has not been used till now. I have no
idea what could have happened to it to break it. Or am I doing
something wrong? Any idea?