Deciding on a new system.

Ozir

Ozir

Ozir

Associate
Joined
12 Jul 2012
Posts
22
Hi,

At around the end of this month to the beginning of the next, I am looking to purchase a new PC for gaming.

My primary intent and ambition with this system is to be able to play Guild Wars 2 and Tera on max settings without any slowdown; However, I am also looking to use this system to be able to play any new games on max as and when they're released in the similar fashion of 60+ fps without any slowdown.

Now my reason behind making this thread; I spend a lot of time on computers but I would consider myself a novice in the knowledge of the parts that go together to build the best one for me.

At this time I have narrowed my decision down to two pre-builds on overclockers.co.uk:

"Ultima 9200i Arctic" Intel Core i7 3770K 3.40GHz @ 4.30GHz DDR3 Quad Core System:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-262-OE&groupid=43&catid=2040&subcat=

"Ultima 9550i Tyrannosaur MKIII" Intel Core i7 3770K 3.50GHz @ 4.50GHz DDR3 Quad Core Ivybridge Nvidia GTX 680 System:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-244-OE&groupid=43&catid=2040&subcat=

I am mainly looking for clarification from someone who knows more than I do about what the difference in these two are. I am looking to SLI with a second 680 on whichever build I decide on.

From what I can see, the Tyrannosaur has the higher cpu clock speed of the two, at 4.50GHz and the better power supply at 850. The Arctic is at a slightly lower cpu clock speed, but has SSDs in the default price. Would anyone be able to confirm that this is the only difference between the two systems and that the SSDs are why the default price of the Arctic is higher?
From what I can see, the CPU, graphics cards and RAM are the same?

Would both of these PCs be sufficient to play Guild Wars 2 and Tera as I want?

Many thanks for any help.
 
The Ultima 9200i Arctic has a Motherboard: Gigabyte Z77X-UD3H

The Ultima 9550i Tyrannosaur MKIII has a Motherboard: Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H Intel Z77

Both Machines are beasts but you do not need a 3770k cpu for gaming you only need a 3570k.

The diffrence is the 3770k has hyperthreading which is not needed in gaming but is helpfull when video converting etc.


This may be more suitable Titan 8600i Polar"


http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-261-OE&groupid=43&catid=2040&subcat=


Get them to make some small changes like a better ssd such as the crucial m4
 
Thanks for the response mickyflinn.

I have been doing some more research into cpu's after what you mentioned in your post.

Let's say that for example I wanted an i7 to make use of the hyperthreading for things other than gaming- would there be any disadvantage over the i5 when I am gaming? Is it possible that the i7 can perform worse than the i5 (assuming identical clock speeds etc.)?
 
An i7 won't be any worse than an i5 for gaming, it just won't be any better either. As mickyflinn said, if you're mainly gaming get the i5.
 
So, an i5 3570k is effectively an i7 3770k without the hyperthreading? Is the diffeence really as literal as that?

I am still considering the i7 system due to the higher clock speed on the machine I was looking at (which I assume will be some advantage), but probably mainly because of a "just because I can" attitude.

I was also looking at this:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-256-OE&groupid=43&catid=2040&subcat=
Which when SLI'd with a second 670 comes to around the same total as the 680 systems. I am aware that the 670 and 680 are very close in terms of performance, but assuming that price is not a factor in this decision, would a 4.8GHz 2x670 or a 4.5GHz 2x680 system perform better for gaming?

Any input is welcome.
 
Ozir said:
So, an i5 3570k is effectively an i7 3770k without the hyperthreading? Is the diffeence really as literal as that?

3770k has 2mb more cache

I was also looking at this:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-256-OE&groupid=43&catid=2040&subcat=
Which when SLI'd with a second 670 comes to around the same total as the 680 systems. I am aware that the 670 and 680 are very close in terms of performance, but assuming that price is not a factor in this decision, would a 4.8GHz 2x670 or a 4.5GHz 2x680 system perform better for gaming?
Click to expand...

The clock speed for the processors above will have little diffrence in performance,as games highly dependent on the gpu.

2x680 will beat down 2x670
 
Thats a lot of money to spend on a gaming machine do it for a £1000 easy Build your self or evan use the overclocked bundles + case + psu + SSD + GPU Easy under a grand
 
Thanks for all the help.

I had since all but decided on the:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-244-OE&groupid=43&catid=2040&subcat=

But since, I was browsing the forums and noticed someone recommend this system to someone else:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-249-OE&groupid=43&catid=2040&subcat=

With the second system I've linked, I can replace the default card with a 690 and come up with a system ~£200 cheaper than the 680 SLI one.

The money isn't remotely the defining factor between deciding between these systems for me, and my research has lead me to believe that a single 690 is slightly inferior performance wise to having two 680s.

Aside from the graphical inferiority, is there anything else I am missing that would be a major performance difference between these two systems? And if possible, would anyone with better knowledge of graphics cards be able to recommend either system? With the 690 being the newer card have performance and compaitibility issues been ironed out by now?

Many thanks.

Edit: Would the 750W psu on the second system be at all an issue with a 690, do I need something more to be safe?
 
Last edited:
The Tyrannosaur has the ZX 850W gold PSU whereas the Laser has the ZS 750w. However the Laser system has the Asus Xonar DG 5.1 where the Tyrannosaur has the standard onboard sound.

Other than that the only difference is the standard case and GFX card choice.

Unless you really want x2 GTX 680's a single GTX 690 will give you identical overall performance, more space inside your case and will be quieter.
 
Will the 750W psu be sufficient for the specs inside the Laser system with a 690?

I was leaning towards the 690 as not to run into problems with games not supporting SLI, but I'm also now aware that the 690 runs in SLI in itself.
With that in mind I'm really not sure what to go for. I guess the Tyrannosaur with 2x 680s will perform better, if only very marginally?
 
The ZS 750w will be more than enough for the GTX 690 and will manage x2 GTX 680's fine too.

Although the ZX 850 would be better suited to running dual GTX 680's, due to it's higher efficiency.
 
Many thanks for your help NathWraith.

I feel as if I've gotten more and more persnickety as this thread has gone on, but I was wondering about something else:

Say I have to disable SLI for a certain game, am I correct in thinking that the 680 sli will be reduced to the power of a single 680, and the 690 would be limited to only one of its dual-gpu?

If this is the case, does either set up perform better/worse under these circumstances?

I understand that the majority of games that would require SLI do support it, but I'm probably more curious than anything.
 
Ozir said:
Many thanks for your help NathWraith.

I feel as if I've gotten more and more persnickety as this thread has gone on, but I was wondering about something else:

Say I have to disable SLI for a certain game, am I correct in thinking that the 680 sli will be reduced to the power of a single 680, and the 690 would be limited to only one of its dual-gpu?

If this is the case, does either set up perform better/worse under these circumstances?

I understand that the majority of games that would require SLI do support it, but I'm probably more curious than anything.
Click to expand...

You would be correct.

A single GTX 680 is superior to running 1 690 GPU (internal SLI disabled).

Two GTX 680's are superior to running both 690 GPU's (internal SLI enabled).

A 690 GPU will be cheaper, use less space, consume less power and be quieter. Also has the ability to quad SLI in the same space as two GTX 680's.

Basically depends on how much money you have to spend and how important noise/power/space is to you in a build :)
 
I guess noise and power is just personal preference, but how important should space be to me in a build?

Are you just referring to the fact that with only a single 690 there is room to add a second in the future, or are there other underlying factors?

Are both default cases with the Tyrannosaur and the Laser systems sufficient for two card set ups? And if not would you be able to suggest a more suitable case selection available in either build?

Also in regards to the noise, how significant is it between the 2x 680 and 690 set ups? My PC tower is effectively beside my monitor on my desk, would either be a nuisance?

Thanks again.
 
Last edited:
Ozir said:
I guess noise and power is just personal preference, but how important should space be to me in a build?

Are you just referring to the fact that with only a single 690 there is room to add a second in the future, or are there other underlying factors?

Are both default cases with the Tyrannosaur and the Laser systems sufficient for two card set ups? And if not would you be able to suggest a more suitable case selection available in either build?

Also in regards to the noise, how significant is it between the 2x 680 and 690 set ups? My PC tower is effectively beside my monitor on my desk, would either be a nuisance?

Thanks again.
Click to expand...

I would recommend a single GTX 690 as the quieter overall choice.

System space is only an issue if you want to expand the systems spec in the future, e.g. adding an additional GFX card, sound card, firewire, wifi etc

By having x2 GFX cards as standard you obviously are decreasing your options.

Both cases are high airflow chassis. Corsair 500r for the Laser and NZXT Phantom full tower for the Tyrannosaur. According to Bit-tech the NZXT Phantom is 5C cooler than the Corsair 500R under CPU stress test, so the difference is slight.

Obviously this can all change depending whether you stick to stock fans or not.

A Silverstone TJ11 would provide the best aircooling but it is considerably more expensive than the other two cases.
 
Great NathWraith, thanks again.

I am just trying to make up the price difference in the two systems for my own understanding:

The Tyrannosaur with the 680 SLI comes to £2198.95
The Laser with 2x 680s would come to £2018.93

The case on the Tyrannosaur is £8.37 more.
The PSU is £57.01 more expensive.
And when adding SLI on the Tyrannosaur, I have to pay an additional £24.99 on the same 680 listed in the Laser build, is this a charge that comes with SLI?

If so, that still only bumps the price of the Laser to £2109.30, so where is the other ~£89 coming from?


Also, what is the difference in cards from different manufacturers? I've noticed that there is sometimes a big price difference in the same card from a different manufacturer; are these price differences due to better performance? And is it something worth looking in to?
 
Ozir, system prices aren't as simple as adding up prices of the individual components off the website.

You can have any GFX card you want in a system but the cards offered on the drop down menu are offered as they are usually the ones we hold the most stock of. These change every few weeks though.
 
Okay cool, thanks.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-182-EA

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-030-KF

Are the two cards that I think I would be considering. Am I correct in thinking that the KFA2 here is the same one included in the Tyrannosaur build, and as such I could swap for the EVGA SLI at an identical price? Sorry for my ignorance.

If so could anyone adivse either way? Google searches show the mostly people complimenting EVGA when it comes to graphics card manufacturers, but would the performance of the two be identical or is there something I'm missing?

Many thanks again.
 
You would be correct yes, that is the same KFA2 card we use in the Tyrannosaur. It is also faster than the EVGA due to the higher boost core clock.

You can however change to the EVGA cards if you so wish. You will get a 3 year warranty on EVGA compared to the 2 year warranty on the KFA2.

KFA2 cards are very good however, the LTD version we use in the Tyrannosaur is quieter than the stock cooler EVGA use.
 
Just wanted to say thanks again to everyone in this thread for the help.

I placed my order today, I decided to go for the 680 SLI Tyrannosaur, which is due to arrive on Friday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom