Spec Check

jambus

jambus

jambus

Associate
Joined
15 Jan 2008
Posts
420
Location
Petersfield, UK
A quick preface to say that this account isn't mine and so any assumed expertise attached to a post count is truly irrelevant. I'm a hardened amature.

The following system was to a friend's specifications and the post his idea that everything be verified by a more objective, and qualified body.


----------------

Case: Antec 900 case

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-P55-USB3

CPU: Intel Core i5 760 Socket 1156

Memory: Corsair XMS3 8Gb PC312800 Cas 9 timing 1600Mhz dual channel kit

Graphics Card: ATI Radeon 6950 GDDR5

Hard Drive: Samsung Spinpoint F3 1Tb

DVD: Recommendations?

Power Supply: Corsair CX600 Watt Builder Series

Screen: Recommendation welcome for a 22" ideal for an MMO in particular (contrast ratio important?).

---------

System is being built primarily for gaming (eagerly anticipating playing Diablo III on impressive settings) -- the budget is also pretty flexible, but looking around a £700-1k mark; so there's hopefully a reasonable margin for advice and adjustment.

More information can readily be given if needed.

Thanks in advance =]!
 
Last edited:
If its mainly for gaming I would suggest dropping the RAM to 4GB of this stuff.

With this extra money you can afford a sandy bridge i5 2500K and a P67 board like this. Compared to the i5 750, the 2500K is faster chip (here is a comparison) that can easily overclock to 4.6GHz.

Also, I would suggest going for this PSU instead.

The 6950 graphics card is a nice bit of kit - it also can unlock to a 6970 with a flash (have a look here).
 
cmndr_andi said:
If its mainly for gaming I would suggest dropping the RAM to 4GB of this stuff.

With this extra money you can afford a sandy bridge i5 2500K and a P67 board like this. Compared to the i5 750, the 2500K is faster chip (here is a comparison) that can easily overclock to 4.6GHz.

Also, I would suggest going for this PSU instead.

The 6950 graphics card is a nice bit of kit - it also can unlock to a 6970 with a flash (have a look here).
Click to expand...

Thanks for the speedy reply, I have a couple questions.

I'm simply parroting my friend's observations, but here we go:

-Surely 4G of ram is verging on bottlenecking the system, particularly in MMOs when lots of things are happening? (25 man raids in WoW for example).

-That said, is the faster chip cpu really worth it considering it wouldn't be wise to run it at max overclock anyway, and it would make the most negligible difference to gaming?

Still looking for a monitor recommendation from anyone as well. Someone is trying to shove 120hz 3d screens down my throat, another friend says to forget it unless you're playing fps games, and prioritise other stats.

Thanks again.
 
Most modern games are only 32bit (including WoW I believe) - so don't really benefit from more than 4GB of system RAM. Have a look at the first set of graphs here.

However, if you can afford it then there is nothing wrong with going for 8GB of RAM, and you will be ready for when games are coded to make use of more memory. If you go for 8GB - I would go with this GeIL kit - great value.

Well from what I hear WoW is a pretty CPU heavy game - and the 2500K is pretty powerful CPU - have a look at this page (scroll down to the WoW benchmark) and see how it does (since the 2500K and 2600K are actually performing equally in that test - it is likely that these CPUs are actually being graphics card limited, so the performance gap vs an i5 750 is likely even bigger).

As for max overclock - with this chip (stock @3.3GHz) the max overclock seems to be 4.9GHz with high-end air cooling. People are getting 4.6GHz stable rather easily and OCUK are even selling pre-overclocked bundles which run at 4.6GHz.

As for monitors, If you are mainly gaming - then I would suggest going with a nice, responsive, good value monitor like this.

However, if you have the budget - I would have a look at an IPS panel monitor like this. The superior colour accuracy, viewing angles and general image quality are worth it imho. Here is an in-depth review.
 
cmndr_andi said:
Most modern games are only 32bit (including WoW I believe) - so don't really benefit from more than 4GB of system RAM. Have a look at the first set of graphs here.

However, if you can afford it then there is nothing wrong with going for 8GB of RAM, and you will be ready for when games are coded to make use of more memory. If you go for 8GB - I would go with this GeIL kit - great value.

Well from what I hear WoW is a pretty CPU heavy game - and the 2500K is pretty powerful CPU - have a look at this page (scroll down to the WoW benchmark) and see how it does (since the 2500K and 2600K are actually performing equally in that test - it is likely that these CPUs are actually being graphics card limited, so the performance gap vs an i5 750 is likely even bigger).

As for max overclock - with this chip (stock @3.3GHz) the max overclock seems to be 4.9GHz with high-end air cooling. People are getting 4.6GHz stable rather easily and OCUK are even selling pre-overclocked bundles which run at 4.6GHz.

As for monitors, If you are mainly gaming - then I would suggest going with a nice, responsive, good value monitor like this.

However, if you have the budget - I would have a look at an IPS panel monitor like this. The superior colour accuracy, viewing angles and general image quality are worth it imho. Here is an in-depth review.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the continued advice, you're been brilliant and I'll be switching the processor and power supply to your suggestions.

Thinking about it, I'd actually like to spend a bit more on the RAM than I previously anticipated, as my old system had 512 (iirc) and gave me problems sleeping at night as a result. 8g as you said caters for the future a lil better.

That said, I might be looking for something a bit faster.

Screen-wise I'll probably be taking one of those two you recommended as well.

A final remark: how much more would I have to spend above the 6950 to see a noticeable difference?

Thanks again :>
 
Happy to help :)

As for the RAM - If you do go for 8GB, I really wouldn't spend much more to get a faster kit. Games just don't make use of the extra bandwidth and significantly faster RAM starts getting really expensive. In terms of extra cost vs extra performance - high speed RAM is a pretty bad investment in a gaming PC. The same money would be much better spent upgrading the graphics card.

As for which GPU to go for to see a noticeable difference over the 6950, this review (navigate to other games using the drop-down menu) give you a good idea. IMHO the best investment would be one 6950 (try and unlock it like I mention above) and then if you need more power add a second 6950. As you can see it the review 6950CF blows the GTX 580 out of the water - and it costs the same in total. If you unlock both to a 6970 - then you are laughing.

To get a P67 board that runs proper x8x8 CrossfireX, then you need to spend a bit more. However, this very nice board which offers this feature is currently subject to a 20% cashback offer - so it won't cost much more than a standard P67 board.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to go with the RAM you recommended, and double it to 8g, purely on the grounds of future-proofing. High speed RAM a no-go for now then.

Thanks for the suggestion on the graphics card, I'll try and bios my way to victory. Sounds good; excited to make this thing over the next few days.

Just need to find a cpu cooler, I'm told -- unless the inbuilt trend has changed for the better.
 
May I ask which kit you are going for, 2x4GB or two of the 2x2GB?

As for CPU coolers, this is a nice one. If you want a Rolls Royce one - then this + this fan is the way to go. Also running a Thermalright HR-02 passively is an expensive, but rather awesome option.
 
"2x4GB" is the working plan.

Well that choice being made I think I'm just in need of batting away a few demons about the screen, namely a particular friend who insists 120hz is the way to go for smoother gameplay.

Thing is, it always seems to be packaged with a lower colours and contrast ratio. Furthermore, none of us have heard of, or can make sense of what an IPS monitor like the one you recommended actually had to offer in favour of the others.*

I might well make a post in the monitor section, since I seem to be using up an awful lot of your time!



*Edit: in terms of specs.
 
jambus said:
"2x4GB" is the working plan.
Click to expand...

Excellent


jambus said:
Well that choice being made I think I'm just in need of batting away a few demons about the screen, namely a particular friend who insists 120hz is the way to go for smoother gameplay.

Thing is, it always seems to be packaged with a lower colours and contrast ratio. Furthermore, none of us have heard of, or can make sense of what an IPS monitor like the one you recommended actually had to offer in favour of the others.*

I might well make a post in the monitor section, since I seem to be using up an awful lot of your time!



*Edit: in terms of specs.
Click to expand...

The thing to remember is that the manufacturer's quoted specs (the ones on the product pages) are the very last thing you want to use for comparing monitors.

Not to put it too blunly - they are made up. contrast ratio, response time, brightness - all measured in obscure and non-standard ways, so most manufactures cook the tests (and thus the numbers) to make theirs appear better than the competition. I would suggest having a read of this.

The specs that really matter are:

- LCD Panel Type (the main ones are TN film, VA and IPS)
- Panel size
- Panel resolution
- static contrast ratio
- true response time (in a standardised test)
- refresh rate
- input lag
- black level
- colour accuracy
- true viewing angles
- connections

Most of these specs are not quoted by the manufacturers - and you usually have to look for in-depth, independent reviews to find them.

This article has some good information on panel types. If you want to see the true difference between an IPS panel and a TN panel - go to a highstreet electronics store and compare the display quality of the apple iMacs to one the standard PC displays. iMacs use IPS panels (similar to the one in the dell I linked to), while the standard PC monitors will almost certainly be running standard TN panels. When you do this comparision you will hopefully understand why people pay the money for IPS panel monitors.
 
Thanks for all your help, looking around I think I can safely say that I was reasonably lucky to secure your attention, over perhaps certain others.

Maybe I'll post the end result. =]

I think in regards to the monitor, I read some stickies, have been reading around and your two suggestions seem unsurprisingly solid. My decision will probably be based around the end budget. Has a habit of creeping up, as I'm sure you know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom