1. #1

    Building around the GPU

    Hi there,
    A few month ago, I have upgraded my GPU to an Nvidia Geforce GTX560Ti. I was fairly content with the result, but now I have finally enough money to do a complete upgrade. The MoBo and CPU are a few years old, so any upgrade there would have either gone to waste, once I did a bigger upgrade, so I decided to wait to do it in its entirety.

    I am thinking about 2 main settings:

    I will either go for the
    MoBo: ASRock Z77 Pro3
    CPU: Intel i5 3570k

    configuration from Marest's Sample Builds, or I will go for

    MoBo: Asrock 970 Extreme4
    CPU: AMD FX 8350

    As far as I can tell, the second build is faster and cheaper, but uses slightly more power (which I am fine with). However, I am not sure, how those will go with the GPU I currently own. I don't plan on changing the GPU, too, since I think it will still be powerful enough for me.

    I mostly play WoW (albeit on good at the most), some other current titles (mostly point-and-click adventures), but usually nothing too demanding. However, I often have my games open in window mode and run a video + icq and similar stuff next to it, which often leads to a slideshow in the video. I hope to keep the new build for a while, I've had my current PC for over 4 years now, which is kind of where I want to end up with with the new build, too.

    My current CPU is an AMD Athlon X2 5200+, by the way.

    If anyone can tell me something about the different plans I have, and how the GPU might factor into it, I would really appreciate it.

    Silrar

  2. #2
    Go for the amd and you will not only have an underperforming video card, but also a pretty bad cpu for mmo's

  3. #3
    Go with either the setup you suggested or my setup.

    Yours:

    MoBo: ASRock Z77 Pro3
    CPU: Intel i5 3570k


    Mine:

    Mb: Gigabite G1.Sniper 3
    CPU: Intel 3570k


    Afterwards if you got a nice cooler u can overclock it to 4.5Ghz with no issues. That'll be a nice boost in performance coming from your amd chip.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Silrar View Post
    As far as I can tell, the second build is faster and cheaper, but uses slightly more power (which I am fine with). However, I am not sure, how those will go with the GPU I currently own. I don't plan on changing the GPU, too, since I think it will still be powerful enough for me.
    The 8350 is only faster than the 3570K in 8-thread programs. Games are 2-3 threads so the 3570K is a better choice. If budget is a concern, then you should go for the FX-4300 or the i3-3220 instead. 8 cores is kind of a waste. By the way, since your old system uses DDR2 RAM, you'll need to buy new DDR3 RAM when you upgrade your CPU/Mobo.

    Quote Originally Posted by c0rnel View Post
    Mb: Gigabite G1.Sniper 3
    CPU: Intel 3570k
    Compared to the Pro3, the Gigabyte Sniper is also some $65 more expensive.

  5. #5
    Personally I wouldn't go with an AsRock board. In the 10+ years I've built computers, I've had a problem with every. single. one. Don't go the cheap route, get something that will last. I've never had a problem with Asus or Gigybyte so I would go with one of those.

    Don't go AMD. Plain and simple.

    Again - Don't go the cheap route, put some money into the build so it lasts longer.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Ogretron View Post
    Again - Don't go the cheap route, put some money into the build so it lasts longer.
    'Futureproofing' is not viable. The advice should go: "put some money into the build so it doesn't die on you".

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by yurano View Post
    'Futureproofing' is not viable. The advice should go: "put some money into the build so it doesn't die on you".
    Hmm.. You're pretty much wrong there. Seeing it from a point of HT being supported and all cores -> http://benchmarkextreme.com/Articles...YSIS/2560A.jpg

    Getting better cards or more requires a better cpu.

    For a full analysis -> http://benchmarkextreme.com/Articles...alysis/P1.html

  8. #8
    Herald of the Titans shroudster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    netherlands
    Posts
    2,890
    guy plays wow , going the amd route is just gimping yourself in order to save some money.
    even more so if you want it to last 4 years or more.

  9. #9
    Ok, Intel it is.

    But I think the Gigabyte board is a bit overpowered (and pricey) for what I want to do. Maybe I'll go for the ASUS P8Z77-V LX instead, if you think Asrock is that bad.

  10. #10
    Herald of the Titans shroudster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    netherlands
    Posts
    2,890
    MSI and intel both offer a large scala of budget motherboards.
    get a Z77 if you want to overclock now/future else a B75 board works just fine. (if B75 you could get the non K chip for cpu , but imo overclocking gives allot of extra reliable performance at a minor price increase.)

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Faithh View Post
    Hmm.. You're pretty much wrong there. Seeing it from a point of HT being supported and all cores -> http://benchmarkextreme.com/Articles...YSIS/2560A.jpg

    Getting better cards or more requires a better cpu.

    For a full analysis -> http://benchmarkextreme.com/Articles...alysis/P1.html
    I don't see your point. Regardless of the clock rate, the average FPS barely changed. The graph shows a range of 2.6 to 4.2 Ghz a 60% difference in clock speed between high and low. This would lead to the conclusion that CPU performance is not important in Crysis 2560x1600 @ Very High.

    The article does not discuss or test the effectiveness of HT or additional cores.

    Moreover, the bottleneck only occurs at the CPU for lower resolutions in SLI. Not only is SLI almost never recommended, this test was performed with a 'middle of the pack' CPU and a high end GPU.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silrar View Post
    But I think the Gigabyte board is a bit overpowered (and pricey) for what I want to do. Maybe I'll go for the ASUS P8Z77-V LX instead, if you think Asrock is that bad.
    If you're going P8Z77-V, I'd go with the LK version for $10 more. It has higher quality parts.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by yurano View Post
    I don't see your point. Regardless of the clock rate, the average FPS barely changed. The graph shows a range of 2.6 to 4.2 Ghz a 60% difference in clock speed between high and low. This would lead to the conclusion that CPU performance is not important in Crysis 2560x1600 @ Very High.

    The article does not discuss or test the effectiveness of HT or additional cores.

    Moreover, the bottleneck only occurs at the CPU for lower resolutions in SLI. Not only is SLI almost never recommended, this test was performed with a 'middle of the pack' CPU and a high end GPU.
    My point was -> having better cards/more cards will require more cpu power (futureproof).

    The FX8350 is a really poor cpu compared to IB/SB. Loads of games are still cpu limited and the FX is just simply going to bottleneck a gpu in the future very earlier than an ivy bridge.

    The FX8350 performs @ 5GHz 1.27 in cinebench 11.5 single threaded while an i3 even does 1.4. Scores from here http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showt...t=6626&page=19

    Due to that some games are core limited, any SB @ 5GHz will do 2.0 single thread performance in cinebench -> http://i.imgur.com/dalIN.jpg

    Just in short words: I rather prefer a cpu with lesser cores giving me the same or better performance than having twice more cores. Any IB/SB is just simply a better choice than FX.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Ogretron View Post
    Personally I wouldn't go with an AsRock board. In the 10+ years I've built computers,
    Quote Originally Posted by Silrar View Post
    if you think Asrock is that bad.
    ASRock is not bad, that's outdated information. ASRock used to be cheap-ass offbrand of Asus years ago, but they started doing good boards around 2009 and has been totally viable choice since then.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by vesseblah View Post
    ASRock is not bad, that's outdated information. ASRock used to be cheap-ass offbrand of Asus years ago, but they started doing good boards around 2009 and has been totally viable choice since then.
    Asrock might not be bad but still Asus > Gigabyte > MSI > ASRock

    Asrock wouldn't be anything if Asus wasn't there.

    And seriously their RMA service & customer support isn't that great so it's still a risk.

    http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.as...Z68%20Extreme4

    Ivy bridge support added 3 months later?

    Outdated information.. Basically you mean they have decent hardware now? It's not only the hardware you know.. You rather have a stable bios instead of having loops of bugs.

    Who cares about the hardware, they all are almost the same..

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Faithh View Post
    Asrock might not be bad but still Asus > Gigabyte > MSI > ASRock

    Outdated information.. Basically you mean they have decent hardware now? It's not only the hardware you know.. You rather have a stable bios instead of having loops of bugs.
    Yeah, that's exactly the type of outdate information I mentioned. Just google for Asus P8P67 memory problems, double boots and repeat RMAs. Those problems plagued whole P8P67 line all the way to "deluxe" model.

    Personally I had to RMA (to local store) my P8P67Pro for three times. First because of Intel's SATA bug, second time the VRMs blew up without overclocking anything and third time the board that came from Asus was just DOA. I had to update UEFI on the first board four times to end double booting, luckily my plain vanilla G.Skill 1333MHz RAM detected properly already after third patch and I no longer had to enter the timings manually.

    None of that with ASRock Z77 Extreme4. Still have the same processor and had the same RAM before upping it to Corsair's 4x4 kit, but zero problems, zero UEFI reflashings, and it works.

    Quote Originally Posted by Faithh View Post
    And seriously their RMA service & customer support isn't that great so it's still a risk.
    Move into civilized country then if that's a problem. Here in EU the store is responsible for minimum of first 24 months for the crap they're selling as consumer electronics, after that any longer warranty is manufacturer's problem unless store volunteers to cover that too. No need to ever see or talk to Korean/Taiwanese/Chinese reps or send anything to the other side of the globe.
    Last edited by vesseblah; 2012-12-06 at 12:22 PM.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by vesseblah View Post
    Yeah, that's exactly the type of outdate information I mentioned. Just google for Asus P8P67 memory problems, double boots and repeat RMAs. Those problems plagued whole P8P67 line all the way to "deluxe" model.

    Personally I had to RMA (to local store) my P8P67Pro for three times. First because of Intel's SATA bug, second time the VRMs blew up without overclocking anything and third time the board that came from Asus was just DOA. I had to update UEFI on the first board four times to end double booting, luckily my plain vanilla G.Skill 1333MHz RAM detected properly already after third patch and I no longer had to enter the timings manually.

    None of that with ASRock Z77 Extreme4. Still have the same processor and had the same RAM before upping it to Corsair's 4x4 kit, but zero problems, zero UEFI reflashings, and it works.



    Move into civilized country then if that's a problem. Here in EU the store is responsible for minimum of first 24 months for the crap they're selling as consumer electronics, after that any longer warranty is manufacturer's problem unless store volunteers to cover that too. No need to ever see or talk to Korean/Taiwanese/Chinese reps or send anything to the other side of the globe.
    Do you mean that the sata ports were slowly dying on the Asus boards with p67? Double booting is very common for Asus boards but they fix it later with bios updated and it doesn't matter that much. It's kinda obvious this motherboard does a lot of checkings.

    But you possibly bought the first revision which mostly means in the begin of a new generation the motherboard can have a lot of problems. The z77 or z68 or the new p67 revisions don't have such issues.

    As an extreme overclocker, I'm not a fan of the heatsink design they've used on Asrock something mosfet stuff? Which just causes a lot of instability and errors during prime95 because the vrm is failing & overheating..

    Still we have to admit, everyone has his own opinions about a brand and which one is the best..

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Faithh View Post
    Double booting is very common for Asus boards but

    Still we have to admit, everyone has his own opinions about a brand and which one is the best..
    Point is, Asus' quality took a huge nosedive with P67 line, and ASRock boards had fewer problems on both SB and IB overall in last two years. That P8P67Pro is the last Asus board I'm gonna buy in a long time, it was that bad. SATA bug was not their fault, but the exploded VRMs and DOA board was, along with idiot summer trainees coding the UEFI. Totally open to Gigabyte, MSI and ASRock options when I'm next time shopping something.
    Last edited by vesseblah; 2012-12-06 at 04:32 PM.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by yurano View Post
    'Futureproofing' is not viable. The advice should go: "put some money into the build so it doesn't die on you".
    Sorry, that's what I meant. I would rather spend an extra $50 on something that works than cut corners and buy something that will break down in a few months.

    Quote Originally Posted by vesseblah View Post
    ASRock is not bad, that's outdated information. ASRock used to be cheap-ass offbrand of Asus years ago, but they started doing good boards around 2009 and has been totally viable choice since then.
    I still see problems with their new boards, so it's not outdated information when it still applies to their current product.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Ogretron View Post
    I still see problems with their new boards, so it's not outdated information when it still applies to their current product.
    You can see problems in all manufacturers if you look into right direction as I pointed out above. Real question is what problems you can live with and what are acceptable when it comes with hefty price premium.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

Posting Permissions

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