Page 1 of 2
1
2
LastLast
  1. #1

    New computer question

    It's been a while since I last updated my computer and I've fallen a little out of touch with all the recent improvements to the technology and want to get a little advice before I start compiling what I want to put in my new computer.

    What are yall's opinions on the new 8 core processors and what the best motherboards out there at this time.

  2. #2
    The fx-8150 isn't a real 8-core... it's a quad core with 4 extra integer cores... only has 4 floating point units that get shared with the 8 integer cores.
    It is also a very poorly performing cpu compared to the cheaper i5-2500k.
    If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One... now I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds.

  3. #3
    Basically quad core is the highest actual multicore out there then?

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by rebelpyr7 View Post
    Basically quad core is the highest actual multicore out there then?
    There are phenom II hex-cores... but they're even worse than the phenom II quad-cores for gaming, which already aren't very good.
    Just go for an i5-2500k if you want the best gaming cpu available... it's priced very well.
    If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One... now I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds.

  5. #5
    Fluffy Kitten Marest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,228
    Moved to "Computer Build Help".

    Today, there is no question about it: If you are a gamer you should get an i5 2500k. However, we got Ivy Bridge incoming in a few months time followed by the first revision of Bulldozer.

    Further, having more cores is not always better for gaming. It is much more important to have 2 (or 4) fast and efficient cores compared to having 4 (or 8) slow and less efficient cores. This might not hold true for multi-threaded application use however (say for example movie and 3D rendering).

    As for motherboard it boils down to feature-set, overclocking, reliability and support (manufacturer) and budget. And of course using the correct chipset and socket.
    Last edited by Marest; 2011-11-07 at 08:03 AM.

  6. #6
    What would you recommend on the motherboard. That is one aspect I never got to far in depth with and focused more on video cards and ram. With motherboards I typically just went for one that had good reviews and wasn't too pricey

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by rebelpyr7 View Post
    What would you recommend on the motherboard. That is one aspect I never got to far in depth with and focused more on video cards and ram. With motherboards I typically just went for one that had good reviews and wasn't too pricey
    If you get an i5-2500k you want to get something with a p67 or z68 chipset. Any would do fine unless you need a specific feature, like sli/crossfire support... but not likely. I'd recommend sticking to reliable brands though... msi/gigabyte/asus/asrock are all good.
    If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One... now I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds.

  8. #8
    Thanks for all the help guys. It really makes me feel rather dumb that I'm so behind on computer tech even though I'm in my twenties....

    I was going over my old computers and I've noticed I have always gone for AMD CPU's instead of Intel. I Know there used to be a big difference years ago, but is there much a difference now? If there is what would either CPU be better for?

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by rebelpyr7 View Post
    Thanks for all the help guys. It really makes me feel rather dumb that I'm so behind on computer tech even though I'm in my twenties....

    I was going over my old computers and I've noticed I have always gone for AMD CPU's instead of Intel. I Know there used to be a big difference years ago, but is there much a difference now? If there is what would either CPU be better for?
    Been seeing a lot of threads lately about computer builds, guess it's that time of year. I'll try to keep this basic as it's always best for you to do your own research and shopping around. Don't take that the wrong way as me being unhelpful but it's one of those "teach a man to fish" situations. The more you learn and the more diverse your resources the better off you will be.

    I approach computers two ways, DIY or a professional system. When I mean professional I do not mean Dell/Alienware or any manufacture specific brands like a Gateway. Building a rig yourself offers a lot of opprotunity to learn and will save you the most money. Going with a professionally built system offers you the greatest opprotunity for performance and the best garuntees of a worry free system if you choose the right company. Personally I only use digitalstormonline (DSO), I've built systems for myself and other people in the past but for me I rather spend a few extra dollars as DSO's work is exceptional.

    I could spend all day showing comparisons as to how DSO has more options, better options, better quality and everything else but just look through their forums and their customer and industry reviews. They were even a sponsor and this years Blizzcon so they are not an unknown supporter of the MMO community. They gave away one of their custom systems in a raffle.

    In general as far as the current technology is concerned, Intel > AMD and Nvidia > ATI. People will attempt to argue those points but the simple fact remains that AMD/ATI have been in second place in terms of performance for a couple of years and that is not going to change any time soon. Intel and Nvidia have consitently been getting their newest technology on the market first and it beats AMD/ATI in benchmarking and real game testing every time in honest comparisons. AMD/ATI are not bad, they are just not as good. They have been the favorite of the really budget minded people simply because AMD/ATI has to sell their stuff cheaper in order for it to be worth it.

    Both Intel and Nvidia are very close to releasing new tech with in the next 2-3 months. Intel has a new enthusiast level chip coming out for their current Sandy Bridge line, called Sandy-e. It will be the extreme version hex core CPU (plus 6 virtual cores) and new MOBOs to go with. And Nivida will be launching the GTX 6XX series cards. Expect 660, 670 and 680 models at the start with 690 (which should be avoid at all costs) and lower end 650 models coming shortly after.

    Unfortunetly the rapid change/improvements in the CPU world has meant each of the new chips intel has been putting up have been different socket types each time so if you want the new MOBOs that are coming out you have to use the extreme version chips. The current non-extreme chips like the 2600k Quad Core are great but the MOBOs for them we all lacking in total number of PCI lanes limiting SLI performance. The new boards for the Sandy-e chips will have 40 total PCI lanes so if you want something more then x2 SLI you will want the new MOBO/CPU combo. The current MOBOs can do more then x2 SLI but with limited PCI lanes, some as few as 24 lanes on certain x3 SLI boards, your performance abilities will be limited.

    The one upside to new releases like that is most of the time the older stuff goes on sale with most retailers. The chips not so much as the new chips are an addition, not a replacement, but the whole new series of graphics cards will be the previous generation will be sold off. The X70 level of Nvidia GPUs, as in 570 and the upcoming 670, is as high as you need to go for most single monitor use. Anything 25" or smaller will not need anything more then that and going SLI and going with higher RAM versions will provide better max setting performance (AA & AF are the real killers). Things like the 580 are just over kill for single monitor sets ups on anything smaller then 28" so make sure to shop smart when it comes to your GPU.

    Concerning my comment about avoiding the 690, which would also include the 590 and every other dual GPU cards, is not just a matter of choice. Do the research and read forum and blog posts about them, they SUCK. Tech reviews can be misleading, especially tomshardware, so be careful. The 590, is just 2 underpowered 580 chips crammed on to one card. The heat and power issues were so extreme that every version that has been released has required an emergency update to further reduce it's performance after they are released.

    With two underpowered GPUs on one card they still operate as if they are SLI. Which means if you play any game that does not support SLI, or support it correctly, you will end up running on a single underpowered chip. Also if you get a failure on a single chip you have not graphics card to use while yours gets fixed. With normal SLI you still have your other cards left. Even with very good cooling the dual GPU cards are known to run a 90c and higher under full load (that's almost 200f for comparison). The new

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    Been seeing a lot of threads lately about computer builds, guess it's that time of year. I'll try to keep this basic as it's always best for you to do your own research and shopping around. Don't take that the wrong way as me being unhelpful but it's one of those "teach a man to fish" situations. The more you learn and the more diverse your resources the better off you will be.

    I approach computers two ways, DIY or a professional system. When I mean professional I do not mean Dell/Alienware or any manufacture specific brands like a Gateway. Building a rig yourself offers a lot of opprotunity to learn and will save you the most money. Going with a professionally built system offers you the greatest opprotunity for performance and the best garuntees of a worry free system if you choose the right company. Personally I only use digitalstormonline (DSO), I've built systems for myself and other people in the past but for me I rather spend a few extra dollars as DSO's work is exceptional.
    I actually prefer to learn it to make my own decisions so I appreciate it. As to DIY opposed to professional ones, I haven't bought a pre-made computer since I was 10, built all of my own since then. I have normally stuck with ASUS Motherboards and AMD chips along with corsair ram and nvidia Video Cards. Never really had a problem but I could honestly say I don't think I have ever tried really hard to use the full capabilities of my computer. That's slowly changing since my new career will be revolving around computers so I'm working on educating myself more about them. Starting with building myself a new computer.

    So far from what I've seen I may actually switch to an Intel chip because from all my research its been showing my AMD has fallen a little behind the curve now that Intel has quad core CPU's that can compete now.

    ---------- Post added 2011-11-07 at 10:06 PM ----------

    Some thing I wonder about though, is there a website where I can put all the components of a computer together and check for compatibility and overall estimated specs or something? I was hoping http://www.ibuypower.com/ would of had it but it mostly just lets you modify their prebuilt computers.

  11. #11
    Generally speaking what are you considering 2 underpowered gpu's? Like 2 560's or 2 6850's would be a price point bestbuy compared to a single 580 or 6970 and even if 1 died you would still have a decent card left behind? Most sli and xfire supporting GPU's will still be playable in a single card setup clearly 2 is better than a single mid-high card but still.

  12. #12
    Fluffy Kitten Marest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    In general as far as the current technology is concerned, Intel > AMD and Nvidia > ATI. People will attempt to argue those points but the simple fact remains that AMD/ATI have been in second place in terms of performance for a couple of years and that is not going to change any time soon. Intel and Nvidia have consitently been getting their newest technology on the market first and it beats AMD/ATI in benchmarking and real game testing every time in honest comparisons. AMD/ATI are not bad, they are just not as good. They have been the favorite of the really budget minded people simply because AMD/ATI has to sell their stuff cheaper in order for it to be worth it.
    In today's market, AMD and nVidia are almost equal when it comes to performance over price. It is true that nVidia has the fastest single GPU card on the market today with the GTX 580, but for the cards below that price point there is not one company that performs so much better than the other as to draw that conclusion. I'm talking about comparing the GTX 570 to the Radeon 6970 and the GTX 560 Ti to the Radeon 6950. Considering that the Radeon cards offer better performance (but cost a bit more) and have 2GB vRAM as opposed to 1GB and 1.25GB I'd say the Radeon cards are in a slight lead in the mid-range. When it comes to the budget range, there really is no question. Radeon 6770, 6850 and 6870 are all performing extremely well considering the price, and only the GTX 460 is a viable option from nVidia.

    When it comes to CPUs you are a bit more correct, but Bulldozer chips aren't that far behind. It is still fairly safe to say that the i5 2500k is the strongest GPU for gaming, but for rendering and multi-threaded application use there is a middle-ground between the 2500k and the 2600k where Bulldozer actually performs better. Considering their claim that Windows 8 will work better with the architecture, AMD might just be the leading brand in that particular price point - but not by much. When it comes to APUs, AMD is hands down the leading contestant today with both Fusion and Llano APUs being superior to almost any nVidia + intel combination in the strict budget section.

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    Both Intel and Nvidia are very close to releasing new tech with in the next 2-3 months. Intel has a new enthusiast level chip coming out for their current Sandy Bridge line, called Sandy-e. It will be the extreme version hex core CPU (plus 6 virtual cores) and new MOBOs to go with. And Nivida will be launching the GTX 6XX series cards. Expect 660, 670 and 680 models at the start with 690 (which should be avoid at all costs) and lower end 650 models coming shortly after.
    This is just complete speculations from your end (unless you have inside information I guess), and still you are (despite that nVidia has released no indication of these GPUs real performance) already recommending users to stay away from the "GTX 690"? That is a bit weak. Also, the new Sandy Bridge-E CPUs are not directed towards gamers, but extreme enthusiasts (read: workstations). Even the cheaper SB-E chips, together with a proper x79 mainboard, will cost around $1000 easily.

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    Unfortunetly the rapid change/improvements in the CPU world has meant each of the new chips intel has been putting up have been different socket types each time so if you want the new MOBOs that are coming out you have to use the extreme version chips. The current non-extreme chips like the 2600k Quad Core are great but the MOBOs for them we all lacking in total number of PCI lanes limiting SLI performance. The new boards for the Sandy-e chips will have 40 total PCI lanes so if you want something more then x2 SLI you will want the new MOBO/CPU combo. The current MOBOs can do more then x2 SLI but with limited PCI lanes, some as few as 24 lanes on certain x3 SLI boards, your performance abilities will be limited.
    3-way SLI is perfectly viable with a Sandy Bridge setup. However, it doesn't scale nearly as well as Crossfire though, and the 3rd card will only give around 60-75% performance increase at best. Also, Ivy Bridge (which will be the next consumer-level CPUs from intel, rumored to be due in about 2-3 months time) will use the same socket as Sandy Bridge uses; LGA 1155, and support the chipsets currently on the market; H61, H67, P67 and Z68.

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    Anything 25" or smaller will not need anything more then that and going SLI and going with higher RAM versions will provide better max setting performance (AA & AF are the real killers).
    That depends entirely on the resolution and not the size of the monitor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    Concerning my comment about avoiding the 690, which would also include the 590 and every other dual GPU cards, is not just a matter of choice. Do the research and read forum and blog posts about them, they SUCK. Tech reviews can be misleading, especially tomshardware, so be careful. The 590, is just 2 underpowered 580 chips crammed on to one card. The heat and power issues were so extreme that every version that has been released has required an emergency update to further reduce it's performance after they are released.
    Again, you are discussing a card which might not even exist. There was no GTX 490. Even if it was to be released, you know nothing about it. It isn't even certain that it will be a dual GPU card to begin with.
    Last edited by Marest; 2011-11-08 at 10:56 AM.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by taekvideo View Post
    If you get an i5-2500k you want to get something with a p67 or z68 chipset. Any would do fine unless you need a specific feature, like sli/crossfire support... but not likely. I'd recommend sticking to reliable brands though... msi/gigabyte/asus/asrock are all good.
    I have the second the Z68 recommendation - a lot of them are around the same price as their P67 counterpart, but also give the option to utilize Intel's Smart Response Technology (using a solid state drive as a cache drive for HDDs). I'd also like to second the recommendations of MSI, ASUS and ASRock (even though ASRock and ASUS are one in the same). Gigabyte... well, I suppose there's that personal preference thing :P

    Quote Originally Posted by rebelpyr7 View Post
    Thanks for all the help guys. It really makes me feel rather dumb that I'm so behind on computer tech even though I'm in my twenties....

    I was going over my old computers and I've noticed I have always gone for AMD CPU's instead of Intel. I Know there used to be a big difference years ago, but is there much a difference now? If there is what would either CPU be better for?
    Nah, you just didn't keep up with it, no need to feel dumb. I used to love baseball, but haven't followed it for years, so I'm in the same boat :P AND I'm 27!

    Concerning AMD vs Intel: There was a time when AMD was King... ahh the glory days of the X2. Those times are over, AMD has fallen drastically behind in their CPU tech, and it shows in their latest CPU. I used to be an AMD fanboy, I loved rooting for the underdog and defending them and their ways.. but it's just not justifiable anymore, sadly. Intel is just that superior, it's sad, really. When someone says that Intel is leaps and bounds ahead and better than AMD, think of those leaps and bounds as the Mariana's Trench.

    I will say, however, that AMD's video card department is stellar. They bought ATI (so now all ATI video cards are AMD) and performance is only going up. They are neck and neck with Nvidia video cards (GTX 580 notwithstanding) and offer exceptional performance for the price, as well as superior power efficiency. The rumormill is buzzing right now with the potential for their new line of video cards to start being released at the end of this year (the 7800 series), and Nvidia might as well... however these are just rumors, nothing's been confirmed. It's going to be exciting though, that's for sure.
    Intel Core i7 950 @ 4GHz, 1.34v | ASUS Sabertooth X58 | MSI R6870 HAWK | 12GB G.SKILL Sniper @ 1600MHz 8-7-8-20-1T | Acer S211HLbd | Noctua NH-D14
    Corsair Graphite 600T SE | Corsair HX750 750W PSU


  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Marest View Post
    In today's market, AMD and nVidia are almost equal when it comes to performance over price. It is true that nVidia has the fastest single GPU card on the market today with the GTX 580, but for the cards below that price point there is not one company that performs so much better than the other as to draw that conclusion. I'm talking about comparing the GTX 570 to the Radeon 6970 and the GTX 560 Ti to the Radeon 6950. Considering that the Radeon cards offer better performance (but cost a bit more) and have 2GB vRAM as opposed to 1GB and 1.25GB I'd say the Radeon cards are in a slight lead in the mid-range. When it comes to the budget range, there really is no question. Radeon 6770, 6850 and 6870 are all performing extremely well considering the price, and only the GTX 460 is a viable option from nVidia.
    Nivida has had the top cards for this generation and every generation release over the last 3+ years and will continue to beat ATI in their future releases unless ATI gets their act together. I said ATI cards we not bad, but when comparing equal level cards Nvidia bears ATI every signle time. ATI is also forced to run those higher RAM numbers to compensate for the lower performance of it's GPU chips.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marest
    When it comes to CPUs you are a bit more correct, but Bulldozer chips aren't that far behind. It is still fairly safe to say that the i5 2500k is the strongest GPU for gaming, but for rendering and multi-threaded application use there is a middle-ground between the 2500k and the 2600k where Bulldozer actually performs better. Considering their claim that Windows 8 will work better with the architecture, AMD might just be the leading brand in that particular price point - but not by much. When it comes to APUs, AMD is hands down the leading contestant today with both Fusion and Llano APUs being superior to almost any nVidia + intel combination in the strict budget section.
    You are trying to argue on behalf of AMD/ATI in terms of budget when I already said they are the better choice when your budget is concerned. There is no need to try and say I am wrong when all you are doing is repeating what I said. If you need to cheap out on your system AMD/ATI is the way to go.


    Quote Originally Posted by Marest
    This is just complete speculations from your end (unless you have inside information I guess), and still you are (despite that nVidia has released no indication of these GPUs real performance) already recommending users to stay away from the "GTX 690"? That is a bit weak. Also, the new Sandy Bridge-E CPUs are not directed towards gamers, but extreme enthusiasts (read: workstations). Even the cheaper SB-E chips, together with a proper x79 mainboard, will cost around $1000 easily.
    It is not speculation, get on some tech forums, the 690 is already known to be a planned release. It may not launch right away, which I already said the top and and low land cards typically come second, but it will be released and just like every dual GPU card it will be a failure. Some people will like it but it's heat and performance issues will still make it a poor choice compared to x2 SLI for the other mid to upper end GPUs. As far as the Sandy-e chips, I already said they are extreme/enthusiast chips, so again please stop trying to say I'm wrong when all you are doing is repeating what I already said.


    Quote Originally Posted by Marest
    3-way SLI is perfectly viable with a Sandy Bridge setup. However, it doesn't scale nearly as well as Crossfire though, and the 3rd card will only give around 60-75% performance increase at best. Also, Ivy Bridge (which will be the next consumer-level CPUs from intel, rumored to be due in about 2-3 months time) will use the same socket as Sandy Bridge uses; LGA 1155, and support the chipsets currently on the market; H61, H67, P67 and Z68.
    Again you are misquoting me. I already said 3-way SLI can be done on Sandy brdige MOBOs but due to the lack of PCI lanes x3 SLI performance is very low. You're numbers are also complete fiction. Sandy Brdige boards can operate at a max 8x8x8 for x3 way SLI compared to x16x8 for x2 SLI. So to add that 3rd card your first card gets it's performance cut in half. The total load is more spread out but you give up half the performance of one card to get it. Numbers in testing are closer to +30% going from x2 to x3 on a Sandy Brdige MOBO.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marest
    That depends entirely on the resolution and not the size of the monitor.
    More wrong info on your part, I was using the monitor size to represent resolution. Most 24" and 25" monitors will max out at 1900x1200. If you want 2500x1600 you will need to look at things like 28" monitors. I was using the size of the monitor as a more general representation since there are always a range of different resolutions for each size so I used the size to represent them all. At 1920x1080 or 1900x1200 (24" or 25") x2 SLI 570's will run max settings on just about every game. The exception being some games needing more RAM to max AF and AF at that those resolutions for those cards.

    But at the same time even upgrading the cards to 580's at that same resolution it will still be your RAM that limits performance with max AA and AF on the same size monitor. For anything smaller then a 28' (2500x1600) or a triple monitor setup 580's become a waste as you do not need that much power for lower resolutions.


    Quote Originally Posted by Cantii View Post
    I will say, however, that AMD's video card department is stellar. They bought ATI (so now all ATI video cards are AMD) and performance is only going up. They are neck and neck with Nvidia video cards (GTX 580 notwithstanding) and offer exceptional performance for the price, as well as superior power efficiency. The rumormill is buzzing right now with the potential for their new line of video cards to start being released at the end of this year (the 7800 series), and Nvidia might as well... however these are just rumors, nothing's been confirmed. It's going to be exciting though, that's for sure.
    The new cards from both Nvidia and ATI will both be new 28nm chips but ATI ran into issues with their chips and they have been delayed. Like usual Nvidia has it's act together. The both use the same manufacturing plant/company (I forget the name) but ATI's design was flawed.
    Last edited by Organoth; 2011-11-09 at 12:59 AM.

  15. #15
    Fluffy Kitten Marest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    Nivida has had the top cards for this generation and every generation release over the last 3+ years and will continue to beat ATI in their future releases unless ATI gets their act together. I said ATI cards we not bad, but when comparing equal level cards Nvidia bears ATI every signle time. ATI is also forced to run those higher RAM numbers to compensate for the lower performance of it's GPU chips.
    This is not even true. Again, 6950 vs 560 Ti and 6970 vs 570. AMD beats the nVidia cards but do cost a bit more. They are almost equal in the grand scheme; in some games the AMD cards perform better and in some the nVidia cards.

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    You are trying to argue on behalf of AMD/ATI in terms of budget when I already said they are the better choice when your budget is concerned. There is no need to try and say I am wrong when all you are doing is repeating what I said. If you need to cheap out on your system AMD/ATI is the way to go.
    AMD bought up ATI a few years ago, so they are the same company. ATI is a sub-branch of AMD and focuses more on workstation GPUs today (afaik). Also, I never claimed you were wrong; I more or less said you were correct: "when it comes to CPUs you are a bit more correct". I merely pointed out that what you said wasn't completely accurate and elaborated as to where AMD outperforms intel.

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    It is not speculation, get on some tech forums, the 690 is already known to be a planned release. It may not launch right away, which I already said the top and and low land cards typically come second, but it will be released and just like every dual GPU card it will be a failure. Some people will like it but it's heat and performance issues will still make it a poor choice compared to x2 SLI for the other mid to upper end GPUs. As far as the Sandy-e chips, I already said they are extreme/enthusiast chips, so again please stop trying to say I'm wrong when all you are doing is repeating what I already said.
    Yes, it is: pure speculation and rumors. We might very well see a 690 being released; it is fairly likely, but you still know absolutely nothing about how it will perform. You have absolutely no facts to back up that future dual GPU cards will be failures. Just look at the ASUS ROG MARS II card. I would even go so far and say that the 590 is far from a "failure" as x2 SLI 580 takes up a lot more space, generates a huge amount of heat and also requires more power. It boils down to personal preference; do you want to sacrifice performance for a cooler and less-energy consuming GPU that will take up less space? And I never even pointed out that you were wrong about SB-E CPUs, read again. I just pointed out that they are not CPUs meant for gaming, and a setup of CPU + motherboard will cost around $1000 minimum which is far from what the average user will be willing to pay. Recommending a SB-E CPU to the average consumer is just silly. Again, I never said you were wrong, I just clarified.

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    Again you are misquoting me.
    I'm not misquoting anybody. I took what you wrote straight off with no edits.

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    I already said 3-way SLI can be done on Sandy brdige MOBOs but due to the lack of PCI lanes x3 SLI performance is very low. You're numbers are also complete fiction. Sandy Brdige boards can operate at a max 8x8x8 for x3 way SLI compared to x16x8 for x2 SLI. So to add that 3rd card your first card gets it's performance cut in half. The total load is more spread out but you give up half the performance of one card to get it. Numbers in testing are closer to +30% going from x2 to x3 on a Sandy Brdige MOBO.
    Again, never claimed you were wrong. The only card however that can potentially max out a 8x PCI-E lane is a GTX 590 or a Radeon 6990. Running GTX 580s in 3-way SLI will not be bottle-necked by the speed of the lanes, but rather the poor scaling of nVidia SLI. Just ask Synthaxx; he is running 3 580s in SLI with an i7 2600k.

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    More wrong info on your part, I was using the monitor size to represent resolution. Most 24" and 25" monitors will max out at 1900x1200. If you want 2500x1600 you will need to look at things like 28" monitors. I was using the size of the monitor as a more general representation since there are always a range of different resolutions for each size so I used the size to represent them all. At 1920x1080 or 1900x1200 (24" or 25") x2 SLI 570's will run max settings on just about every game. The exception being some games needing more RAM to max AF and AF at that those resolutions for those cards.
    Now you are just being silly. Monitor size has absolutely nothing to do with screen resolution and screen resolution is what has an impact on performance. There are plenty of 20-25" monitors that has anything from a 1024x768 to a 1920x1200 resolution. Heck, my dad has an old 32" (?) CRT monitor in his garage with a top resolution of 1280x1024. There are also 27" monitors with 1920x1080, 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 resolutions. Also, could be fun for you to know that 2x 6970 outperforms 2x 570 in most titles (Battlefield 3 included); crossfire just scales that much better (not to mention that the 6970s come with 2GB vRAM natively).

    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    The new cards from both Nvidia and ATI will both be new 28nm chips but ATI ran into issues with their chips and they have been delayed. Like usual Nvidia has it's act together. The both use the same manufacturing plant/company (I forget the name) but ATI's design was flawed.
    Again, you are mentioning rumors like they were facts. Nothing indicates that AMD is having their GPUs being delayed, the rumors rather tell that they will have their new cards on the market a lot sooner than nVidia. I'm talking about the actual new architectures and not the die-shrinks. Sure, things can go either way - but until they actually do there is nothing that says these rumors are facts.


    Also, take a glass of water and a deep breath; no one is out to get you. Just take it easy.
    Last edited by Marest; 2011-11-09 at 04:01 PM.

  16. #16
    AMD/ATI has not beat Intel/Nvidia in ANYTHING in the last several years and will not beat them in anything for years to come. No single CPU or GPU put out by ATI/AMD has beat anything put out by Intel or Nvidia when you actually compare the same level items. The models you are attempting to compare are not equal counterparts. You are refering to invalid benchmarks that look at over-tuned ATI cards and comparing them to Nvidia cards with stock tuning. I've read the same review but you are not providing accurate info.

    To the OP:
    If you want to cheap out, go AMD/ATI, if you want a real system, go Intel/Nvidia. And no matter what brand you choose avoid dual GPU cards at ALL costs. They run hotter then two normal cards in SLI, some dual GPU cards get up to 100c and they are weaker then two normal cards in SLI as the dual GPUs have to be severally under-tuned to keep the card from melting, literally.
    Last edited by Organoth; 2011-11-10 at 07:30 AM.

  17. #17
    Immortal Notarget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Dark Side of the Moon
    Posts
    7,348
    Marest and Oranoth I actually enjoyed reading a lengthy discussion with some good points (they're a little rare compared to "rate my build"). I don't read what Marset says as being out to get you or saying you're completely wrong at all Organoth

    Telling the OP not to follow advice from Marest is just silly, have you actually seen Marests signature? Also his first answer was this:

    Today, there is no question about it: If you are a gamer you should get an i5 2500k. However, we got Ivy Bridge incoming in a few months time followed by the first revision of Bulldozer.
    So yeah OP, there is no doubt for a budget 800-1200 you wanna go with the i5-2500k (assuming gaming rig and being able to OC).

    A good mid/upper range GPU $230-$350, any (big brand) GTX560ti/GTX570/6950/6970.

    $110-$180 MB z68 (my choice) or p67, SLI/CF or no, is the major question here.

    8GB RAM (major brand, G.SKILL/Corsair are popular choice here).

    Good quality PSU $70-$120 (Seasonic, Corsair and a few others).

    Small (64GB) Crucial m4 SSD with the Z68 MB for SSD caching or if you can afford it add a 128GB+ one and a storage drive.
    Last edited by Notarget; 2011-11-10 at 08:12 AM.

  18. #18
    Fluffy Kitten Marest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Organoth View Post
    AMD/ATI has not beat Intel/Nvidia in ANYTHING in the last several years and will not beat them in anything for years to come. No single CPU or GPU put out by ATI/AMD has beat anything put out by Intel or Nvidia when you actually compare the same level items. The models you are attempting to compare are not equal counterparts. You are refering to invalid benchmarks that look at over-tuned ATI cards and comparing them to Nvidia cards with stock tuning. I've read the same review but you are not providing accurate info.
    It's weird because A: AMD cards sell very good and B: many high-end (and informed) users on this forum are running AMD cards.

    560 Ti vs 6950: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/293?vs=330
    570 vs 6970: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/292?vs=306
    SLI 570 vs CF 6970: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/298?vs=307

    As I said, in some titles the nVidia cards will outperform the AMD cards, but in almost equal amount of titles the AMD cards will perform better. It boils down to preference. If you prefer nVidia, that's fine. But don't shun AMD because of it; they have perfectly viable GPUs on the market.


    As for OP, feel free to check out this thread for some sample builds: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...-Sample-Builds
    But as I mentioned, both Ivy Bridge and the first revision of Bulldozer as well as the new GPUs will be on the market in 2-5 months.

  19. #19
    Yea I started looking into those. I may end up waiting for them to come out and seeing how they are. Worse comes to worse the older ones may get a little cheaper if I don't like how they run. I've sort of branched into motherboards and ram now since I got the help on the CPU here and the advice on video cards mostly agreed with what I already knew. That and looking for a nice mid sized tower or full tower to use since my old case has seen its last computer.
    Last edited by rebelpyr7; 2011-11-11 at 02:18 AM.

  20. #20
    Fluffy Kitten Marest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,228
    Quote Originally Posted by rebelpyr7 View Post
    Yea I started looking into those. I may end up waiting for them to come out and seeing how they are. Worse comes to worse the older ones may get a little cheaper if I don
    't like how they run. I've sort of branched into motherboards and ram now since I got the help on the CPU here and the advice on video cards mostly agreed with what I already knew. That and looking for a nice mid sized tower or full tower to use since my old case has seen its last computer.
    Any P67 or Z68 board will do in theory. Check out the sample build to see what mainboard fits into what budget (and research the features of motherboard you find interesting): http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...-Sample-Builds

    My high end recommendation would be:
    MoBo: Gigabyte GA-Z68XP-UD3P$179.99 Review

    Mid-range:
    MoBo: ASUS P8Z68-V$129.99

    Budget:
    MoBo: MSI P67A-G43$109.99 Review

    For case, you can check out the case catalog here: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...4-Case-Catalog
    Last edited by Marest; 2011-11-10 at 08:02 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •