Your situation sounds confusing, but if I'm parsing correctly you had Win 7 or 8 on Drive A but wanted Win 10 on Drive B?
If so then you image your Windows 7 onto the drive you want, upgrade Windows 7 from there off of a USB or directly through Windows 7 upgrade application.
I always unplug my other drives now when installing an OS because one time I had set it to install on a particular drive but when it rebooted the drive letters changed and it ended up formatting my whole main drive.
I built my system about a month after Windows 10 launched so I installed ye olde thyme M.2 drive, installed Win 7, ran the update to 10, then hooked up the 2 SSDs and the spiny disk.
Smooth as the backside of a baby's buttocks.
Might I also add that it was odd using a computer with the mobo sitting on the box it came in.
Two drives: Drive A and Drive B. Neither have any OS on them. Therefore I must two Windows 10 to install on one of them. I choose Drive A. HOWEVER! Somewhere in the installation process Windows put a part of itself on Drive B, and that part is essential enough Windows won't let me format Drive B.
Can't you just boot gparted off of a flash drive and reformat them, then reinstall with only one drive plugged in? Or is there some activation key bullshit?
On a different note, I looked up other processors officially supported by my desktop and I can get a significantly faster one for like $20 so I thought I might upgrade when I get around to installing a 64 bit os (was only using 2gb of ram before, so 32 bit was fine). The thing is, I'm still using the stock 250 watt psu it came with. Would going from a 45 watt cpu to a 65 or 89 watt cpu be overdoing it?
I'd keep my GTX770 for the foreseeable future. Didn't spec out a case/PSU, but everything else I'd possibly need is there.
I could knock the price down by skipping the mirrored HDDs, getting only one SSD, and getting the 32GB of RAM at 8-8-8-8 instead of 16-16. But I designed it along the same lines as I did my current PC, with an eye to upgradability.
I'm using the Z170-A in my current build, it's quite great. Two caveats to it: it takes a while from start to BIOS while it runs basic checks on the memory and processor, and the DDR4 slots don't give very good feedback for whether your RAM is seated correctly - I ran into trouble initially because I couldn't tell that one of my sticks wasn't seated fully. OTOH, the diagnostics make it easy to diagnose pre-BIOS issues.
Also, what are you doing with the old monster? Can you save money by cannibalizing hard drives from it?
Edit: you will need a new card if/when you decide to go for VR.
What modern game can't I run? The hot new game is the Division. They recommend a 970, but I'm pretty confident I can run it at max with what I have now.
What modern game can't I run? The hot new game is the Division. They recommend a 970, but I'm pretty confident I can run it at max with what I have now.
Have you tried it? Other graphics game I doubt you could run full settings is Star Wars Battlefront.
What modern game can't I run? The hot new game is the Division. They recommend a 970, but I'm pretty confident I can run it at max with what I have now.
Have you tried it? Other graphics game I doubt you could run full settings is Star Wars Battlefront.
They have about the same recommendation. I highly doubt I would have a problem.
But my original point stands. There are no games worth playing that require the latest and greatest to play maxed out. There haven't been for a looooong time.
Let's say there is some great must-play game that won't max out on a 680. That's fine because nobody smart is buying that shit now. Gonna wait for the $10 Steam sale, and by then you'll have the better video card with the money that has been saved. That new video card will play everything for at least 5 more years.
Scott you are full of shit. Your magical goal post requires YOUR definition of "worth playing", which hey some how only relates to games five years or older. Imagine that, no wonder your 680 works flawlessly during Civ5.
Scott you are full of shit. Your magical goal post requires YOUR definition of "worth playing", which hey some how only relates to games five years or older. Imagine that, no wonder your 680 works flawlessly during Civ5.
Are you trying to argue that Star Wars Battlefront is somehow worth playing and paying $40 for? What makes it any different from any other AAA generic action game besides a Star Wars theme? What makes it different or better enough to be worth $40? Is there such a hurry to play it now, it can't wait until it's $10? Is it worth installing EA Origin garbage?
Even if indeed it can't be run with a 680 at vsync max settings, it will still run well enough. Lowering the settings enough to keep it at 60fps is unlikely change the gameplay experience in any noticeable way.
Oh it will? You absolutely need max settings? Are you going to try to argue this game is so good that it's worth paying hundreds of dollars for a video card just to make its graphics a little bit shinier? Exactly how many games are there that will benefit in this way? Is making the graphics a bit shinier in a handful of games worth $400? Is that an intelligent expenditure of hard-earned moneys for someone who doesn't have incredible wealth?
When Civ VI comes out people will still be playing CS:GO, probably still playing Rocket League. Where will Star Wars: Battlefront be then? Forgotten trash with all the rest.
Even if indeed it can't be run with a 680 at vsync max settings, it will still run well enough. Lowering the settings enough to keep it at 60fps is unlikely change the gameplay experience in any noticeable way.
So now when we see the first statement, we should automagically translate to "I haven't found a game I want to play that can't be run at max settings".
Even if indeed it can't be run with a 680 at vsync max settings, it will still run well enough. Lowering the settings enough to keep it at 60fps is unlikely change the gameplay experience in any noticeable way.
So now when we see the first statement, we should automagically translate to "I haven't found a game I want to play that can't be run at max settings".
Yes, if you are a pedant you would be correct to argue that a rotten apple is still technically fruit, but that doesn't make it fit for human consumption.
Comments
If so then you image your Windows 7 onto the drive you want, upgrade Windows 7 from there off of a USB or directly through Windows 7 upgrade application.
Smooth as the backside of a baby's buttocks.
Might I also add that it was odd using a computer with the mobo sitting on the box it came in.
On a different note, I looked up other processors officially supported by my desktop and I can get a significantly faster one for like $20 so I thought I might upgrade when I get around to installing a 64 bit os (was only using 2gb of ram before, so 32 bit was fine). The thing is, I'm still using the stock 250 watt psu it came with. Would going from a 45 watt cpu to a 65 or 89 watt cpu be overdoing it?
If I go overboard a little, it looks like this.
https://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=22757689
$1,292.93
Intel Core i7-6700K 8M Skylake Quad-Core 4.0 GHz
ASUS Z170-A Intel Z170 motherboard
32GB RAM
2x 500GB SSD
2x 4TB HDD
I'd keep my GTX770 for the foreseeable future. Didn't spec out a case/PSU, but everything else I'd possibly need is there.
I could knock the price down by skipping the mirrored HDDs, getting only one SSD, and getting the 32GB of RAM at 8-8-8-8 instead of 16-16. But I designed it along the same lines as I did my current PC, with an eye to upgradability.
Also, what are you doing with the old monster? Can you save money by cannibalizing hard drives from it?
Edit: you will need a new card if/when you decide to go for VR.
If I want to go nuts, I could replace one of the SSDs with a PCIe M.2 drive for my main drive.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147467
The performance difference is ludicrous.
32GB SSD (from 2009)
240GB SSD
1TB HDD
2TB HDD
They're all ancient and not even worth salvaging for a new machine. Better to just leave them in the old monster.
I might make the monster my HTPC and give the old HTPC (which is pushing EOL) away to someone.
It's stupid fast.
He'll play today's games in three years and talk about how his GTX1180 is totally fine.
But my original point stands. There are no games worth playing that require the latest and greatest to play maxed out. There haven't been for a looooong time.
Let's say there is some great must-play game that won't max out on a 680. That's fine because nobody smart is buying that shit now. Gonna wait for the $10 Steam sale, and by then you'll have the better video card with the money that has been saved. That new video card will play everything for at least 5 more years.
Even if indeed it can't be run with a 680 at vsync max settings, it will still run well enough. Lowering the settings enough to keep it at 60fps is unlikely change the gameplay experience in any noticeable way.
Oh it will? You absolutely need max settings? Are you going to try to argue this game is so good that it's worth paying hundreds of dollars for a video card just to make its graphics a little bit shinier? Exactly how many games are there that will benefit in this way? Is making the graphics a bit shinier in a handful of games worth $400? Is that an intelligent expenditure of hard-earned moneys for someone who doesn't have incredible wealth?
When Civ VI comes out people will still be playing CS:GO, probably still playing Rocket League. Where will Star Wars: Battlefront be then? Forgotten trash with all the rest.