Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

need your help and opinions about my new pc build


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 conure

conure

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 12:39 PM

hello,
i did my research and came up with a build that looks very good (on paper,i dont have a lot of knowledge about the pc world).
i need help to decide which motherboard is best for my build and also if all the parts will work well and your overall opinions and advice how can i make this pc better or if there are parts that are too expensive for this build and for my needs.
this pc is mainly for heavy gaming and i dont think i will upgrade it , after the next 4-5 years i will buy a new one.
my build:

1. CPU - Intel Skylake Core i7 6700K Socket 1151 8MB 4.0Ghz
2. Motherboard - ?
3. RAM - G.Skill Ripjaws-V 2x8GB DDR4 3000Mhz CL15 Kit
4. Graphics Card - MSI GTX980 Ti GAMING 6GB GDDR5 DVI HDMI 3xDP PCI-E
5. Hard Disk - Western Digital Black 2TB 64MB Sata3 7200rpm Black WD2003FZEX
6. ssd - Samsung 850 Pro Series MZ-7KE256BW 256GB SSD SATA III
7.Power Supply - Antec HCP 850W 80Plus Gold High Current Pro
8. case Fans - do i need to replace \ add fans?
9. Monitor - ROG Swift PG278Q 1MS 144Hz G-SYNC WQHD asus
10. CPU heatsink - Noctua NH-D15S
11. CASE - NZXT Phantom 410 Mid-Tower Chimera Special edition Case

thank you in advance



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,398 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:06:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 01:37 PM

hello,
i did my research and came up with a build that looks very good (on paper,i dont have a lot of knowledge about the pc world).
i need help to decide which motherboard is best for my build and also if all the parts will work well and your overall opinions and advice how can i make this pc better or if there are parts that are too expensive for this build and for my needs.
this pc is mainly for heavy gaming and i dont think i will upgrade it , after the next 4-5 years i will buy a new one.
my build:

1. CPU - Intel Skylake Core i7 6700K Socket 1151 8MB 4.0Ghz
2. Motherboard - ?
3. RAM - G.Skill Ripjaws-V 2x8GB DDR4 3000Mhz CL15 Kit
4. Graphics Card - MSI GTX980 Ti GAMING 6GB GDDR5 DVI HDMI 3xDP PCI-E
5. Hard Disk - Western Digital Black 2TB 64MB Sata3 7200rpm Black WD2003FZEX
6. ssd - Samsung 850 Pro Series MZ-7KE256BW 256GB SSD SATA III
7.Power Supply - Antec HCP 850W 80Plus Gold High Current Pro
8. case Fans - do i need to replace \ add fans?
9. Monitor - ROG Swift PG278Q 1MS 144Hz G-SYNC WQHD asus
10. CPU heatsink - Noctua NH-D15S
11. CASE - NZXT Phantom 410 Mid-Tower Chimera Special edition Case

thank you in advance

 

If not upgrading in 5 years, I highly recommend i7-5820K and LGA2011-3 motherboard.

 

New graphic cards are around corner so GTX980 Ti is basically very expensive piece of very old tech that also lacks critical Directx 12 feature. Not future proof card. Also you will not manage 5 years with that so you will upgrade your graphic card anyway. So either wait better ones or buy something cheap now (like R9 380 4GB) and upgrade later.

 

256GB SSD is also too small for future games.

 

At least those things need improvement.



#3 conure

conure
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 02:00 PM

thank you for the reply,
i wanted to wait for the pascal card but it can be released next month or in 6 months,no one can really know when it will be available for purchase....
about the directx 12 - will buying the titan x be a better option? is this card support directx 12 technology?
i have 2tb + 256gb ssd so i think its more than enough,don't you think? (windows+all programs on the ssd and games etc on the hard drive).
about the motherboard - if i'm not going to add another graphic card in the future am i still need to buy an expensive motherboard?
what are the differences between this cpu - Intel Skylake Core i7 6700K Socket 1151 8MB 4.0Ghz and the one that you suggested? the price is more or less the same



#4 Ram4x4

Ram4x4

  • Members
  • 228 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pennsylvania
  • Local time:11:43 AM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 02:41 PM

If you won't be upgrading the system there is no real need to go with a more expensive Skylake, stick with a socket 1150 set up.  Skylake just came out and represents the new architecture.  It will very much be upgradable along the way.  One key feature that separates Skylake from previous architecture changes is they released the high end performance chipset (Z170) right off the bat.  Historically, new architectures (CPU's) were released with a lower end chipset and enthusiasts would wait until the high end chipsets came out later before getting onboard.

 

With Skylake, you now have the option to get a mobo and the top end chipset from the get go.  Later, when faster Skylake CPU's come out, it will be just a matter of swapping the CPU instead the entire mobo and CPU.  As it sits right now, Skylake is indeed very much about upgradability going forward.

 

If you just want the most performance now and will simply wring out the system and replace it later, save some expense and get an i7 4790K system with the best video card you can afford.  It will be viable for quite a few years.  You can run two video cards in these systems in SLI as the socket 1150 i7's and the new Skylake i7's both still have 16 PCIE lanes for GPUs.  All you need is a motherboard that has two PCIE slots for video cards.  It doesn't have to be an expensive mobo, just make sure it has the slots you want/need. 

 

As for the difference between a 6700K i7 and the 5820K, the 4-core i7's (both the 4790K and the 6700K) run at 4GHz clock speed natively.  The 5820K 6-core CPU runs at 3.3GHz clock speed natively.  Higher core counts typically mean lower clock speeds due to more heat with more cores.  So, I disagree with Drillingmachine on the 5820K.  These are not the fastest CPUs for gaming.  Oh, you can still game quite well with them, but if your goal is the most gaming performance, it's not the choice.  It'll be more expensive than a socket 1150 4-core I7 set up too.

 

What the 6+ core CPUs bring to the table is ability to run CAD, video editing, photoshop, virtual machines, etc better.  Any software that will run on multiple cores will benefit from the higher core counts of those CPUs.  Games only use 1 or maybe 2 cores as it is now, so going up to 6 or 8 cores doesn't gain any performance.  6+ core CPUs run at slower clock speeds than the 4-core i7's (the more cores you have, the slower the clock rate because of heat), so their frame rates with the same video card will be less.

 

Some say that future games will probably be able to use more cores, and I have no doubt that might be the case at some point in time, but I've spoken with programmers who are very good at game programming and they all agree that making a game work with more than 2 cores is incredibly difficult.  As threading is increased the return on performance doesn't always make the effort worth it.  They told me all about the details behind it, but I'm not a skilled programmer so a lot of it went over my head, but I get the gist of the diminishing returns on performance.

 

Another big stumbling block with increasing game threading is the GPUs.  If games were to be created that will use 4, or 6 or even 8 cores, then we will need massively more powerful GPUs than we have now, or need to run 3 or 4 video cards in SLI or Crossfire to take advantage of the increased processing power.  Running tri or quad SLI brings its own set of issues with PCIE lane availability that hasn't even been addressed in the hardware yet. much less the cost of 3 or 4 video cards alone.

 

Bottom line, I will put money on it we won't be seeing any games using 4 or more cores within the system life time of any rig you build today.  If anything, we'll see 4 core CPUs just become more powerful per core and gaming performance increases will occur on that basis, just as it is now.

 

On the other hand, if you are willing to accept a slight decrease in gaming performance (not even considering that a 5820K can be overclocked too) then the 2011v3 socket will most likely be viable for some time to come.  I'm sure that socket will get replaced somewhere down the line, but this configuration represents a much broader spectrum in terms of CPUs (2011v3 is "server" or "workstation" class) the work to upgrade or change it is more in depth and has more serious affects than on a mainstream "home PC" configuration.  One advantage might be that once a replacement for 2011v3 does come out, all those currently super expensive Xeon processors will come down in price and since the 6 and 8 core i7's use the same socket, plugging in a Xeon later is easy.  If, for some reason you aspire to run three or four video cards in SLI, then you will need the increased PCIE lanes the 2011v3 setup provides.


Edited by Ram4x4, 06 March 2016 - 02:51 PM.


#5 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,398 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:06:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 02:44 PM

thank you for the reply,
i wanted to wait for the pascal card but it can be released next month or in 6 months,no one can really know when it will be available for purchase....
about the directx 12 - will buying the titan x be a better option? is this card support directx 12 technology?
i have 2tb + 256gb ssd so i think its more than enough,don't you think? (windows+all programs on the ssd and games etc on the hard drive).
about the motherboard - if i'm not going to add another graphic card in the future am i still need to buy an expensive motherboard?
what are the differences between this cpu - Intel Skylake Core i7 6700K Socket 1151 8MB 4.0Ghz and the one that you suggested? the price is more or less the same

 

And Nvidia can put Pascal architechture first to mid range cards. Anyway 28nm manufacturing tech is over 4 years old now.

 

All Nvidia cards are bad for DX12, Titan X is same architechture that 980Ti has.

 

Putting games on SSD may decrease loading times a lot. And single game like GTA V can take 60 gigs...

 

LGA2011-3 motherboards are more expensive in any case.

 

i7-5820K has 6 cores, 6700K has only 4. Because DX12 games should use many CPU cores, I see no reason to go with quad core CPU if machine should last 5 years.



#6 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,398 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:06:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 03:01 PM

If you won't be upgrading the system there is no real need to go with a more expensive Skylake, stick with a socket 1150 set up.  Skylake just came out and represents the new architecture.  It will very much be upgradable along the way.  One key feature that separates Skylake from previous architecture changes is they released the high end performance chipset (Z170) right off the bat.  Historically, new architectures (CPU's) were released with a lower end chipset and enthusiasts would wait until the high end chipsets came out later before getting onboard.

 

With Skylake, you now have the option to get a mobo and the top end chipset from the get go.  Later, when faster Skylake CPU's come out, it will be just a matter of swapping the CPU instead the entire mobo and CPU.  As it sits right now, Skylake is indeed very much about upgradability going forward.

 

If you just want the most performance now and will simply wring out the system and replace it later, save some expense and get an i7 4790K system with the best video card you can afford.  It will be viable for quite a few years.  You can run two video cards in these systems in SLI as the socket 1150 i7's and the new Skylake i7's both still have 16 PCIE lanes for GPUs.  All you need is a motherboard that has two PCIE slots for video cards.  It doesn't have to be an expensive mobo, just make sure it has the slots you want/need. 

 

As for the difference between a 6700K i7 and the 5820K, the 4-core i7's (both the 4790K and the 6700K) run at 4GHz clock speed natively.  The 5820K 6-core CPU runs at 3.3GHz clock speed natively.  Higher core counts typically mean lower clock speeds due to more heat with more cores.  So, I disagree with Drillingmachine on the 5820K.  These are not the fastest CPUs for gaming.  Oh, you can still game quite well with them, but if your goal is the most gaming performance, it's not the choice.  It'll be more expensive than a socket 1150 4-core I7 set up too.

 

What the 6+ core CPUs bring to the table is ability to run CAD, video editing, photoshop, virtual machines, etc better.  Any software that will run on multiple cores will benefit from the higher core counts of those CPUs.  Games only use 1 or maybe 2 cores as it is now, so going up to 6 or 8 cores doesn't gain any performance.  6+ core CPUs run at slower clock speeds than the 4-core i7's (the more cores you have, the slower the clock rate because of heat), so their frame rates with the same video card will be less.

 

Skylake is new architechture but has tooth paste (not exactly but you get the point) under heat spreader and because of that will run very hot. Also it's only quad core part. Also there won't be any decent processor upgrades for LGA1151 socket from 6700K. Ever. How do I know that? LGA1151 will get max quad core parts because six cores for LGA1151 would make LGA2011-3 pointless. So upgrade wise 6700K is dead end.

 

5820K is much faster for gaming if game uses at least four cores and with DX12 we might finally see that. i7-5820K is much more future proof and gains from new architechture are minimal anyway. In 5 years DirectX 12 software should become more popular. Some games, like Star Citizen (will possibly never get ready but anyway), already want hexa core CPU for maximum settings.

 

 

Some say that future games will probably be able to use more cores, and I have no doubt that might be the case at some point in time, but I've spoken with programmers who are very good at game programming and they all agree that making a game work with more than 2 cores is incredibly difficult.  As threading is increased the return on performance doesn't always make the effort worth it.  They told me all about the details behind it, but I'm not a skilled programmer so a lot of it went over my head, but I get the gist of the diminishing returns on performance.

 

Another big stumbling block with increasing game threading is the GPUs.  If games were to be created that will use 4, or 6 or even 8 cores, then we will need massively more powerful GPUs than we have now, or need to run 3 or 4 video cards in SLI or Crossfire to take advantage of the increased processing power.  Running tri or quad SLI brings its own set of issues with PCIE lane availability that hasn't even been addressed in the hardware yet. much less the cost of 3 or 4 video cards alone.

 

Bottom line, I will put money on it we won't be seeing any games using 4 or more cores within the system life time of any rig you build today.  If anything, we'll see 4 core CPUs just become more powerful per core and gaming performance increases will occur on that basis, just as it is now.

 

On the other hand, if you are willing to accept a slight decrease in gaming performance (not even considering that a 5820K can be overclocked too) then the 2011v3 socket will most likely be viable for some time to come.  I'm sure that socket will get replaced somewhere down the line, but this configuration represents a much broader spectrum in terms of CPUs (2011v3 is "server" or "workstation" class) the work to upgrade or change it is more in depth and has more serious affects than on a mainstream "home PC" configuration.  One advantage might be that once a replacement for 2011v3 does come out, all those currently super expensive Xeon processors will come down in price and since the 6 and 8 core i7's use the same socket, plugging in a Xeon later is easy.  If, for some reason you aspire to run three or four video cards in SLI, then you will need the increased PCIE lanes the 2011v3 setup provides.

 

Those programmers are probably talking about DirectX 11 that heavily depends on single core performance. That picture tells a lot: http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2806.cpucompare.png

 

So threading does not help because DX11 is not made for threading, DX12 is.

 

Why more video cards need more CPU power? Better graphic options usually need only more GPU, not CPU power.

 

Main reason I recommend i7-5820K is because 6700K is overpriced. Previously there was huge price difference between low end and top end platform CPU's. Now top end CPU costs essentially same as low end platform CPU so I'd certainly take high end platform choice with high budget.



#7 conure

conure
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 03:39 PM

WOW!
this forum is great , its my first day here and already i learned a lot....
thank you so much for all the help and the fact that you both spend a lot of time to give such an informative answers.
i wanted to go 980ti sli but from what i know there are a lot of problems with sli and i dont have the knowledge to solve the problems all the time and change the setting for each game separately.
now i'm really confused about what should i do, im going to spend around 4000$ for this new pc and i thought its going to be a beast for at least 3-4 years but after i read all the comments i starting to question if it worth it to buy a new pc now...
i know that the best choice is to upgrade your pc every 2 years - but because i'm aware of the fact that i dont have a clue about all that im forced to stay with the pc until i buy a new one.
side note - i'm seriously thinking to change my profession (pastry chef) and start to learn a pc technician course and after that mcitp course in the future i could be more confident in my ability to upgrade my pc on my own...



#8 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,398 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:06:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 04:02 PM

WOW!
this forum is great , its my first day here and already i learned a lot....
thank you so much for all the help and the fact that you both spend a lot of time to give such an informative answers.
i wanted to go 980ti sli but from what i know there are a lot of problems with sli and i dont have the knowledge to solve the problems all the time and change the setting for each game separately.
now i'm really confused about what should i do, im going to spend around 4000$ for this new pc and i thought its going to be a beast for at least 3-4 years but after i read all the comments i starting to question if it worth it to buy a new pc now...
i know that the best choice is to upgrade your pc every 2 years - but because i'm aware of the fact that i dont have a clue about all that im forced to stay with the pc until i buy a new one.
side note - i'm seriously thinking to change my profession (pastry chef) and start to learn a pc technician course and after that mcitp course in the future i could be more confident in my ability to upgrade my pc on my own...

 

Switching graphic card is very easy task. So you can spend money now, just buy cheap graphic card and switch it later.



#9 conure

conure
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 04:38 PM

i think that i will buy the 980ti (to enjoy my new monitor and pc in the heavy games) and in 2 years i will switch to a different card and sell the 980 ti if i can...
so should i stay with my build and in 2 years just buy a new graphic card without change any of the other parts? will my pc still be strong for another 4 years or so?
if i will do that i think your suggestions about the cpu and motherboard will be more suitable for me if the next graphic card will have directx 12 abilities but in the other hand according to ram4x4 i will lose performers in the present until i get the next card...



#10 Bill_Bright

Bill_Bright

  • Members
  • 63 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nebraska, USA
  • Local time:10:43 AM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 04:43 PM

I don't see an OS listed. New computers require new licenses.
 
FWIW, I just build a new system using a Skylake and I went with the Gigabyte Z170-HD3 with DDR4 support and I am very happy with it.
 
It is a nice PSU but it is bigger than you need. You could easily due with a 750 or even 650W (though I would probably go with a 750W Gold.
 

i know that the best choice is to upgrade your pc every 2 years

 

Nah! There is no rule or standard for that. One thing nice about a PC (over a notebook) is it can evolve over many years.

 

Your case cooling should be fine without having to add additional fans. I would not worry about it initially. You can always add a fan or two later.


kIbxonF.gif Bill (AFE7Ret)
Freedom is NOT Free!
fl3leAE.gifWindows and Devices for IT, 2007 - 2018
Heat is the bane of all electronics!
───────────────────────


#11 Ram4x4

Ram4x4

  • Members
  • 228 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pennsylvania
  • Local time:11:43 AM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 06:17 PM

 

 

 

Skylake is new architechture but has tooth paste (not exactly but you get the point) under heat spreader and because of that will run very hot. Also it's only quad core part. Also there won't be any decent processor upgrades for LGA1151 socket from 6700K. Ever. How do I know that? LGA1151 will get max quad core parts because six cores for LGA1151 would make LGA2011-3 pointless. So upgrade wise 6700K is dead end.

 

5820K is much faster for gaming if game uses at least four cores and with DX12 we might finally see that. i7-5820K is much more future proof and gains from new architechture are minimal anyway. In 5 years DirectX 12 software should become more popular. Some games, like Star Citizen (will possibly never get ready but anyway), already want hexa core CPU for maximum settings.

 

 

 

 

Those programmers are probably talking about DirectX 11 that heavily depends on single core performance. That picture tells a lot: http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2806.cpucompare.png

 

So threading does not help because DX11 is not made for threading, DX12 is.

 

Why more video cards need more CPU power? Better graphic options usually need only more GPU, not CPU power.

 

Main reason I recommend i7-5820K is because 6700K is overpriced. Previously there was huge price difference between low end and top end platform CPU's. Now top end CPU costs essentially same as low end platform CPU so I'd certainly take high end platform choice with high budget.

 

 

 

 

The paste under the heat spreader is irrelevant.  If it proves to be an issue, it will get changed in manufacturing.  What evidence do you have to support what is there now is that bad?  Every posted test I've read so far shows the Skylake CPU's running cooler than the 4790K.  Here's just one example:  https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Haswell-vs-Skylake-S-i7-4790K-vs-i7-6700K-641/

 

I know the 6700K is a 4-core part, I said as much in my previous post.  The socket 1150 and 1151 parts represent the "home" PC category of CPUs and chipsets.  2011v3 is a "server" and "workstation" class CPU and chipset.  A wholly different category aimed at the business/professional environment, again I said as much in my previous post.

 

But there are no games now that are using 4 cores, only 2 at most (I believe there is at least one that will use 3 cores).  Putting a 6 or 8 core CPU in your system will not run any current, or near future games any faster.  In fact, they will be slower because the 4-core line of CPUs run at higher clock rates.  2-cores at 4.0GHz will beat 2-cores at 3.3 GHz, or 3.0GHz, so no, the 5820K would not be "much faster" with a game that could use 4 cores, because the 4790K and 6700K CPUs have 4 cores and they run them at a higher clock rate.

 

Sure, you could overclock your 5820K to 4 GHz (if it will run stable there) and equal the 4-core 4790K or 6700K, but you can probably overclock the 4-core CPUs even faster, so in the end the 4-core CPUs are the kings of gaming performance.  This is really undisputed in the PC world and has been for some time.

 

DirectX is just an API for accelerating graphics performance, it has nothing to do with the base game code.  The program code is where the number of threads used is defined.  Game programmers are already telling us that going over 2 threads is extremely difficult, and even in the cases where they are able to get a game to run stable with more than 2-threads, the performance increase is negligible...i.e. not currently worth the effort.  Think about it...parallel computing is definitely not new at all.  Plenty of other programs have been doing it for a very long time, so why do you think games are still struggling at getting over using 2 cores?  Because the programming involved is very, very difficult and the performance gains are minimal.

 

Even if we assumed right now that a game came out that could use 8 cores, how much performance increase do you think you'd see?  I'll bet money it won't be nearly as much as you think.  To realize any significant gains with a game that can run on 8 cores, you'd also have to have a proportional increase in GPU processing power and we don't have that right now.  At best you'd be looking to add 3 or 4 video cards to your system, but doing that runs into limits on the available PCIE lanes to run them.  You can't run 3 or 4 video cards on any current 4-core CPUs and chipsets.  Gaming performance has always had a relationship between CPU and GPU power.  It takes both to see real improvements in games.  Without it, you bottleneck the system at either the CPU or the GPU, otherwise all you'd have to do is slap a Titan X on an older, cheap Core2Duo system and be screaming, right?...wrong.  It takes both CPU and GPU for game performance.

 

Games have to process the code and graphics and the sound and the positional data of other players or objects and then output it all to the screen and speakers at the same time.  There are massive timing issues involved.  All other parallel processing software doesn't have this issue, so they can easily be multi-threaded.

 

You don't have to believe me.  Go look up Amdahls's Law on parallel computing and see for yourself.  Go visit programming forums and see why game programmers aren't expending massive effort to make games use 4, 6, or 8 cores. 

 

The bottom line remains, if your goal is absolute top-end gaming performance then a 4-core i7 4790K or 6700K is the top choice right now, period.  The 5820K, or any of the CPUs above it will still game decently well (and most likely acceptably), they just won't out perform the 4-cores in games.  Period.

 

As I also said before, the advantage of having more CPU cores has more to do with using programs that make good use of all the cores, like CAD, photoshop, virtual machines, etc.  If you do any of that, or want some good performance with that type of program and can accept a slight decrease in gaming performance, then yes, a 2011v3 based system makes sense, but...if your goal is completely and totally all out game performance, then one of the 4-core i7's is king.

 

We can compound the gaming issue a little further by stating you should match your GPU make/model to your favorite games because some games run better on NVidia cards and some will perform better on similar AMD cards.  There is no one card that will crush everything in every game.

 

And to compound yet further, performance is going to change depending on the resolution you want to run them at.

 

The OP specifically stated his goal was maximum gaming performance and he said he had no intentions of upgrading the system, he will use it until it is no longer viable and then buy a new system.  In that case his best bang for the buck is to build a socket 1150 based system with an i7 4790K if he is going to build it right now.



#12 Ram4x4

Ram4x4

  • Members
  • 228 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pennsylvania
  • Local time:11:43 AM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 06:47 PM

WOW!
this forum is great , its my first day here and already i learned a lot....
thank you so much for all the help and the fact that you both spend a lot of time to give such an informative answers.
i wanted to go 980ti sli but from what i know there are a lot of problems with sli and i dont have the knowledge to solve the problems all the time and change the setting for each game separately.
now i'm really confused about what should i do, im going to spend around 4000$ for this new pc and i thought its going to be a beast for at least 3-4 years but after i read all the comments i starting to question if it worth it to buy a new pc now...
i know that the best choice is to upgrade your pc every 2 years - but because i'm aware of the fact that i dont have a clue about all that im forced to stay with the pc until i buy a new one.
side note - i'm seriously thinking to change my profession (pastry chef) and start to learn a pc technician course and after that mcitp course in the future i could be more confident in my ability to upgrade my pc on my own...

 

 

SLI does present some issues, but I don't think it is as bad as you think.  Still, SLI was a good answer some years ago when single card performance was lacking, that's no longer the case.  A good top-of-the line 4-core i7 (either the socket 1150 4790K or the new Skylake 6700K) paired with a good video card is more than plenty for gaming.  The upcoming DX12 does make an argument for waiting to see what it will provide, but then you have to question whether any of your current games will ever make use of it.  You could end up second guessing yourself and never build a PC.  There will always be newer, faster stuff coming out.  Whatever you put together might be beastly now, but it will start sliding down the slope as time goes on, that's just the nature of it all.

 

I'd say right now your main choice is to decide if you want to wait on the new DX12 cards or not.  If not, then a solid socket 1150 i7 4790K system paired with the best GPU you can afford or want to get is going to give you the best bang for the buck (keeping in mind your stated goal was all out gaming performance).  If money is less of an issue and you might be open to the idea of doing some upgrades later, then the new Skylake 6700K would be a better choice.  The 6600K i5 and the 6700K i7 are the very first Skylake CPUs, so there will be newer, faster CPUs for that socket in the future.  Another year or two down the road, you might just get whatever the top CPU is then and swap it for the 6700K you buy today and boost the system performance quite a bit, which could add several years to its life.  You will already have the top-of-the-line chipset for Skylake since they released that chipset first, as I mentioned in my previous post, so a future upgrade would be as simple as a CPU swap.  Swapping out the graphics card is very easy also, so a newer one later too would be quite easy as well.  In terms of future upgradability, this new Skylake has definitely changed the landscape.  It's going to be cheaper and easier to upgrade them.

 

Just keep in mind that "all out gaming performance" translates into paying a lot of extra $$$ for a slight performance increase, or losing out on performance with other software.  Is getting an extra 7 or 8, or maybe 15 FPS in a game worth several hundred dollars?  Do you have to always have full up ultra settings in your games, or are you willing to save some $$$ if you have to turn down some of those settings a little?  It's always a trade off.

 

Think of it in terms of car racing.  Teams can build a car that will do a competitive lap within tenths of a second of all the other team's cars for a million dollars, but they'll spend multiple millions more in R&D and testing to squeeze out a tenth of a second faster on their lap times...A million dollars for say, a 60 second lap time car, but 4, 5, 6 or more million to get one that'll do it in 59.9 seconds....is it worth it?  It is in this case, but is it worth several hundred in your PC case?



#13 conure

conure
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 07:24 PM

Ram4x4 - i'm seriously considering to propose you....you are AWESOME!

after i read your last comment i think that i may spend some extra money to have the option to upgrade in the future if i will learn more about the pc world , i prefer to give myself at least the option to do that even if i need to spend a bit more right now , do you think its a good idea?
i will buy this CPU - Intel Skylake Core i7 6700K Socket 1151 8MB 4.0Ghz , the price difference between this and the i7 4790K isn't very big.

and for the motherboard - if i take in consideration that i may upgrade in the future , which motherboard can be very strong and good for my build? im planing to use the new monitor that i mention and plug my sony smart tv to my pc so im not sure if i need tons of ports.
if you can kindly recommend me which motherboard to buy that will be upgradable and good but also not the most expensive one.

 

do you think it will be worth the money to buy titan x than to buy the 980ti?

and about the new monitor - are you familiar with it and think its a good one (its the most expensive pc monitor i ever had).

are all the component going to work well together?

do you recommend me to ask from the shop i will buy my pc to overclock any of the parts?

where i live the summers are very hot and i had some overheating problems in the past - do you think i should put more fans in the case? or put a water cooling instead of fans? (tbh- im a bit scared to buy the water cooling because if there will be something wrong in the future it may destroyed my pc).

 

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR HELP SO FAR , IT MEANS ALOT TO ME!

 

bill bright - im going to use win10. 



#14 conure

conure
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:43 PM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 07:35 PM

i just saw your last comment ,
my current pc is 4.5 years old and in the last 1.5 years i played in medium graphics , i'm willing to spend more money to compensate myself for the horrors i had to deal with in the past :)
i know that graphics isn't all and im not a guy that show off and scream from the window that i have the greatest and latest stuff but for my personal feeling i think that when i finally buy a new pc i like it to be as strong as i can afford to myself at that time...



#15 Captain_Chicken

Captain_Chicken

  • BC Advisor
  • 1,363 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:11:43 AM

Posted 06 March 2016 - 09:54 PM

Titan X is a professional card and will have the same fps if not less then a 980ti.

Computer Collection:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users