New Build advice needed.

[Modestus]

Looking more seriously at what to get, list below of possible build from Scan.co.uk.

Plan would be to use M.2 Solid State Drive for operating system and put games onto second Solid State Drive, mind you I am so out of touch I have no idea any more.

I could up the graphic card but I am getting killed by the exchange rate from Euros to Sterling.

Case

NZXT H440 [Matte Black]

£89.99 inc VAT

Motherboard

Asus 3XS X99-A/USB3.1, Intel X99, S 2011-3, DDR4, SATA Express, SATA III 6Gb/s, PCIe 3.0 (x16), 3-Way SLi/CrossFire, ATX
£164.39 inc VAT

CPU

Intel Core i7 5820K Unlocked, Haswell-E, 6 Core, 3.3GHz, 3.6GHz Turbo, 28 PCI-E Lanes, 15MB Cache, Retail [Extreme Overclock - CPU overclocked upto 4.4GHz]
£323.00 inc VAT

CPU Cooler

Dark Rock Pro 3 - Performance Air Cooler
£61.99 inc VAT

DDR4 Memory

16GB (4x4GB) Corsair DDR4 Vengeance LPX, 2666MHz, CAS 16-18-18-35, 1.2V
£90.14 inc VAT

Graphics Card

4GB Asus GTX 980 STRIX DirectCU II OC, 1178MHz GPU, 2048 Cores, 7010MHz GDDR5 [Single card]
£430.80 inc VAT

PSU

650W Corsair RMx, Modular, Silent, 80PLUS Gold - Any Single Graphics Card
£74.99 inc VAT

Storage 1
M.2 Solid State Drive
128GB Samsung SM951, PCIe Gen3 x4, NVME, up to 2000MB/s Read, 650MB/s Write, 300K IOPS
£64.94 inc VAT

Storage 2

500GB Samsung 850 EVO, Read 540MB/s, Write 520MB/s, 97K IOPS
£123.42 inc VAT

Storage3
Hard Disk Drives
Not Selected

Optical Drive

Samsung SE-208GB/RSBDE, External USB DVD Writer
£17.87 inc VAT

Sound Cards
Not Selected

Network - Wireless Adapters
Not Selected

Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64-bit
£82.92 inc VAT


Cheers Modestus.

[Goofy]

What exactly do you need advice on?

[Modestus]

What exactly do you need advice on?

Looking at the above is there anything that someone would consider to be a better option, anything that stands out as being a bad choice on my part.

[Goofy]

Looking at the above is there anything that someone would consider to be a better option, anything that stands out as being a bad choice on my part.

For all I can tell, no. M.2 SSDs I don't know too much about, though. And personally I would probably get a GTX 970 instead of GTX 980 (or wait until the new cards are released which would be pretty soon), but that's all up to you.

And oh, I would personally not spend £60 on a CPU cooler but whatever floats your boat.

[Modestus]

For all I can tell, no. M.2 SSDs I don't know too much about, though. And personally I would probably get a GTX 970 instead of GTX 980 (or wait until the new cards are released which would be pretty soon), but that's all up to you.

And oh, I would personally not spend £60 on a CPU cooler but whatever floats your boat.

Hmm why the GTX 970 and not the GTX 980, I assume its because the benefit is not worth the extra money, it would certainly save me money to change to a 970.

I think I would need the cooler because the CPU would be overclocked and the stock cooler may not be good enough, perhaps better to be safe then sorry.


Will do a bit more research on the M.2 SSDs

Anyhow cheers for that.

[Goofy]

Hmm why the GTX 970 and not the GTX 980, I assume its because the benefit is not worth the extra money, it would certainly save me money to change to a 970.

Yeah, the GTX 970 is great value. 90 % of the performance of a 980 for way less money. But you should wait until the new GPUs are released in any case - even if none of them will interest you, the prices of the 900 series GPUs should come down at that point.

The other suggestion I would make is that you should probably get a 750-watt PSU with two PCI-E power outputs just in case you ever decide to go SLI. You can look at EVGA PSUs for example, from what I know they offer better products at the same prices in the lower price ranges. I personally have a Corsair RM750 in my PC and it's good but I would probably have got more bang for my buck by buying EVGA, SeaSonic or some other brand. In any case, make sure to get one with as long a warranty as possible.

I think I would need the cooler because the CPU would be overclocked and the stock cooler may not be good enough, perhaps better to be safe then sorry.

That is true, though I'm fairly sure you could get similar performance out of a cheaper air cooler. Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO is a real classic by now and it could suit all your needs as well while being much, much cheaper. But again, whatever floats your boat - it's your PC, not mine, so I'm totally fine with you getting whatever you want to.

[Modestus]

Yeah, the GTX 970 is great value. 90 % of the performance of a 980 for way less money. But you should wait until the new GPUs are released in any case - even if none of them will interest you, the prices of the 900 series GPUs should come down at that point.

The other suggestion I would make is that you should probably get a 750-watt PSU with two PCI-E power outputs just in case you ever decide to go SLI. You can look at EVGA PSUs for example, from what I know they offer better products at the same prices in the lower price ranges. I personally have a Corsair RM750 in my PC and it's good but I would probably have got more bang for my buck by buying EVGA, SeaSonic or some other brand. In any case, make sure to get one with as long a warranty as possible.

That is true, though I'm fairly sure you could get similar performance out of a cheaper air cooler. Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO is a real classic by now and it could suit all your needs as well while being much, much cheaper. But again, whatever floats your boat - it's your PC, not mine, so I'm totally fine with you getting whatever you want to.

Thanks again, the ability to add a second card is a cheap way to upgrade the system further down the road so I will look again at the PSU.

I will take your advice and wait for the new GPUs to be released and do some more research.

[wudang_clown]

Unless you are going to become a professional pc player, you can easily save a lot of quid.

Basically, each component could be downgraded with no loss in performance. Perhaps with the exception of motherboard. This is clearly a box which makes an impression, sort of like a sports car, but I don't think you really need these components, meaning: most likely you will never actually use that power.

Instead of i7 you could easily pick a quad core i5. You don't need 6 cores, and the fact the CPU is unlocked will make no difference to you. Unless you will want to play two simultaneous campaigns of Gary Gisby's War in the West for some weird reason.

16GB of memory? You won't need that as well. I have 8GB and I play Witcher 3 and latest Wolfenstein on ultra settings with only occasional drop in performance coming from my HDD, but I don't really mind it. If you ever need more that 8GB, you can always upgrade to 12GB, instead of going straight to 16GB. I don't even use 8GB when I'm working, which involves running lots of processes simultaneously on a few virtual machines.

GPU - I'm quite sure you could save some money on this one, but I'm not up to date anymore with GPUs, so I'll only say: think it over, because it's quite possible you can buy something slightly less powerful and a bit cheaper, and that won't make any difference to you, but it will make to you wallet.

Another thing is that it is still possible to buy Windows 8.1 at a cheaper price than 10 and then upgrade it for free to Windows 10. This option expires sometime in June, iirc. You'd have to read about it a bit more, though, because I'm not sure what's the exact procedure when it comes to any future system recoveries. I'm quite sure though that once you upgrade, you become Windows 10 user, but you'll probably have to create an additional system recovery media. Still, this is a completely legit way of saving some money and you should definitely explore it.

Next, consider buying a cheaper case, for example by Fractal Design. They make outstanding cases. I have one, and I'm very satisfied. I know that's a personal preference, but I don't think a case with a side window is a good choice, so think about that as well, because you will be stuck with that case for a number of years probably.

Also, think if you really really need an external optical drive. I bought my new box without any optical drive and bought Windows 8.1 (before 10 came out) digital version (had to download it and install it from a USB stick). My personal experience is that it's better to invest in a bigger USB stick. I simply don't use DVDs or CDs anymore, therefore I don't need a drive.

To wrap it up, you have a lot of options to save a lot of money and still build a powerful rig. In my opinion it is much more important to invest in a) a proper and even professional display/monitor to prevent your sight from degrading faster than it should and b) an actually and truly ergonomic chair, than to actually waste money building something you will most likely never ever use at 100% of its power.

[Modestus]

Unless you are going to become a professional pc player, you can easily save a lot of quid.

Basically, each component could be downgraded with no loss in performance. Perhaps with the exception of motherboard. This is clearly a box which makes an impression, sort of like a sports car, but I don't think you really need these components, meaning: most likely you will never actually use that power.

Instead of i7 you could easily pick a quad core i5. You don't need 6 cores, and the fact the CPU is unlocked will make no difference to you. Unless you will want to play two simultaneous campaigns of Gary Gisby's War in the West for some weird reason.

16GB of memory? You won't need that as well. I have 8GB and I play Witcher 3 and latest Wolfenstein on ultra settings with only occasional drop in performance coming from my HDD, but I don't really mind it. If you ever need more that 8GB, you can always upgrade to 12GB, instead of going straight to 16GB. I don't even use 8GB when I'm working, which involves running lots of processes simultaneously on a few virtual machines.

GPU - I'm quite sure you could save some money on this one, but I'm not up to date anymore with GPUs, so I'll only say: think it over, because it's quite possible you can buy something slightly less powerful and a bit cheaper, and that won't make any difference to you, but it will make to you wallet.

Another thing is that it is still possible to buy Windows 8.1 at a cheaper price than 10 and then upgrade it for free to Windows 10. This option expires sometime in June, iirc. You'd have to read about it a bit more, though, because I'm not sure what's the exact procedure when it comes to any future system recoveries. I'm quite sure though that once you upgrade, you become Windows 10 user, but you'll probably have to create an additional system recovery media. Still, this is a completely legit way of saving some money and you should definitely explore it.

Next, consider buying a cheaper case, for example by Fractal Design. They make outstanding cases. I have one, and I'm very satisfied. I know that's a personal preference, but I don't think a case with a side window is a good choice, so think about that as well, because you will be stuck with that case for a number of years probably.

Also, think if you really really need an external optical drive. I bought my new box without any optical drive and bought Windows 8.1 (before 10 came out) digital version (had to download it and install it from a USB stick). My personal experience is that it's better to invest in a bigger USB stick. I simply don't use DVDs or CDs anymore, therefore I don't need a drive.

To wrap it up, you have a lot of options to save a lot of money and still build a powerful rig. In my opinion it is much more important to invest in a) a proper and even professional display/monitor to prevent your sight from degrading faster than it should and b) an actually and truly ergonomic chair, than to actually waste money building something you will most likely never ever use at 100% of its power.

A lot to think over I will however treat myself to a case with plenty of room but not with a side window.

[SPARTAN VI]

I have to disagree with Wudang Clown.

Total War games in particular do scale with core count and are very hardware intensive. You cannot simply drop from an i7 to and i5 and expect no performance loss in Total War. Even more drastic would be a drop from a GTX 980 to 970. Check out the Attila benchmark discussion to see how nearly identical builds measure up when we change the processor, GPU, or even RAM speed.

[wudang_clown]

I have to disagree with Wudang Clown.

Total War games in particular do scale with core count and are very hardware intensive. You cannot simply drop from an i7 to and i5 and expect no performance loss in Total War. Even more drastic would be a drop from a GTX 980 to 970. Check out the Attila benchmark discussion to see how nearly identical builds measure up when we change the processor, GPU, or even RAM speed.

I haven't said there won't be a performance loss. I said that you won't use that power 100%, and that is still true.

That chart you presented shows a difference only on paper and is hardly relevant, because there is 7-8 fps drop from 8 core CPU to 4 core CPU (nothing is said about differences between i5 and i7, though), but your eyes simply won't be able to tell the difference.

It is also irrelevant, because gameplay in Total War games is not based on reaction time. It's the same difference as between live sports footage and a Hollywood movie. The former is shot at 60fps, so you see a fluid movement and very sharp image because it has to be fluid and sharp, because actors (players or athletes) move fast. The latter is shot at 24fps, and yet it is completely fine, because frame rate doesn't need to be higher in a movie. We perceive reality with our own eyes at 30fps. You don't complain when you watch a movie at 24fps, you don't even think about frame rate, but you would complain if you watched sports at 24fps, because athletes would be blurred while moving fast and you couldn't tell what exactly is going on.

Objectively speaking, you don't need those extra 8fps, so you don't need to even consider buying one of the most expensive CPUs on the market to have 8fps more while playing Attila, that would be silly, in my opinion.

[SPARTAN VI]

I haven't said there won't be a performance loss. I said that you won't use that power 100%, and that is still true.

But you did say there wouldn't be performance loss.

Basically, each component could be downgraded with no loss in performance....

...Instead of i7 you could easily pick a quad core i5. You don't need 6 cores, and the fact the CPU is unlocked will make no difference to you.

That chart you presented shows a difference only on paper and is hardly relevant, because there is 7-8 fps drop from 8 core CPU to 4 core CPU (nothing is said about differences between i5 and i7, though), but your eyes simply won't be able to tell the difference.

If I remember correctly, the chart I linked was taken running a benchmark at Extreme settings with a Haswell-E unlocked i7, unlocked i5, and i3. The i7 and i5 were downclocked to get as close to a apples-to-apples comparison as possible with each other, so this actually isn't indicative of their stock (higher) clock speeds. I'll try to dig up the source video later to see if they capture that.

I'd have to agree that the cost:performance ratio of an i7 would not match the i5. On the other hand, a 15% boost by adding hyperthreading and 2 cores is significant, so I'd disagree from the standpoint that there's "no loss in performance." You also made a point that "unlocked" CPU will make no difference. In our own Attila TW benchmark thread, and in my personal experience, I've seen a clear linear trend when overclocking.

Here are the results that I posted in that thread:

All in all, I reduced my turbo speeds from 4.4GHz to 3.8GHz, which is about 13% less. My average framerate suffered by 13-16%, which is pretty consistent for performance scaling.

maximum quality:
3570K @ 3.8GHz avg 35.7
3570K @ 4.4GHz avg 40.6 = 14% higher

quality:
3570K @ 3.8GHz avg 42.6
3570K @ 4.4GHz avg 49.4 = 16% higher

performance:
3570K @ 3.8GHz avg 58.1
3570K @ 4.4GHz avg 66.0 = 13% higher

So the data does indeed back my argument, and this is only core clock (i.e. everything else equal). If you take into the account of the performance drop from core count, losing hyperthreading, and dropping to a GTX 970, it all adds up to clear performance and image quality losses.

It is also irrelevant, because gameplay in Total War games is not based on reaction time. It's the same difference as between live sports footage and a Hollywood movie. The former is shot at 60fps, so you see a fluid movement and very sharp image because it has to be fluid and sharp, because actors (players or athletes) move fast. The latter is shot at 24fps, and yet it is completely fine, because frame rate doesn't need to be higher in a movie. We perceive reality with our own eyes at 30fps. You don't complain when you watch a movie at 24fps, you don't even think about frame rate, but you would complain if you watched sports at 24fps, because athletes would be blurred while moving fast and you couldn't tell what exactly is going on.

Objectively speaking, you don't need those extra 8fps, so you don't need to even consider buying one of the most expensive CPUs on the market to have 8fps more while playing Attila, that would be silly, in my opinion.

That's actually quite subjective and a far cry from irrelevant, IMO. I would argue that performance in any game is more about just reaction times, but immersion. That difference in 8fps can be the difference between having v-sync on or off, which is the difference between tearing or a solid 30-60fps/hz. Personally, I cannot play video games with v-sync off because tearing is incredibly distracting and immersion breaking. On the other hand, if you're already above 60fps, that additional 8fps means you could possible afford to increase one or two settings. IMO, better image quality and smooth framerates translate to better immersion.

[alQamar]

@Spartan if you could make tests with 4,4 GHz and Hyperthreading on and off this would be more helpful. Sure the current i7 don't just have more virtual threads (Hyperthreading) but also larger cache and more stock clock. It is
yet unclear if Warhammer, due to the engine optimizations will make more benefit of an i7 compared to an i5.


http://ark.intel.com/de/products/881...up-to-3_90-GHz
http://ark.intel.com/de/products/88195/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz

It is also irrelevant, because gameplay in Total War games is not based on reaction time**. It's the same difference as between live sports footage and a Hollywood movie. The former is shot at 60fps, so you see a fluid movement and very sharp image because it has to be fluid and sharp, because actors (players or athletes) move fast. The latter is shot at 24fps, and yet it is completely fine, because frame rate doesn't need to be higher in a movie. We perceive reality with our own eyes at 30fps. You don't complain when you watch a movie at 24fps, you don't even think about frame rate, but you would complain if you watched sports at 24fps, because athletes would be blurred while moving fast and you couldn't tell what exactly is going on.

Objectively speaking, you don't need those extra 8fps, so you don't need to even consider buying one of the most expensive CPUs on the market to have 8fps more while playing Attila, that would be silly, in my opinion.

I had very controverse discussions about framerates in the past while I basically agree with your opinon TW does not need more than 30 fps to run objectively fluid some insist they could even feel the difference between 60 fps and let's say 100 fps (which would be the case if they have a monitor that has a comparable high vertical refresh rate like typically 120 Hz or 144 Hz for those).

Otherwise a framerate above 60 fps will be capped by the hardware and will also cause tiering because the monitor won't be able to show the amount of frames.

**True it is not based on reaction time a lot, if not played in multiplayer.

[alQamar]

@Modestus

Please have a look into the Attila benchmark thread (Warhammer thread will be opened as soon the game is out and I have some data).
You will notice that the X99 / i7 6-core combo - at least for Attila is not unbeatable and rocking along the way. Considering the price I would rather abstain from that and more go to an i7 6700k and OC this one to about 4.6 GHz easy (or higher with water cooling) I can fairly recommend Corsair Hydro H110 series for those things. Also no very expensive Z110 board is needed for that.

As for the NVMe SSD. Certainly the Samsung drive is a great thing, but unless you plan to host Hyper-V or similar stuff for labs on this machine, it is fairly overdriven for just an OS installation.
Same for the EVO 850 for games. Please note that there is an EVO 2 850 with an improved technology

German site but figures should be self explaining: http://www.computerbase.de/2016-04/s...nd-noch-besser

Choosing the 850 EVO 2 for OS and games would be more than sufficient. I own the 500 GB EVO 1 myself and it needs only 1.30 mins to install Windows 10 in a VM. That's where this drive can rock, not for games and OS Data

PSU is ok also wattage. However you don't have to take a more powerful one, with that card you will unlikely need an SLI. Check benchmark thread again to see the differences it does for Attila. Imho it is not worth the price.

Please know that choosing a 980 might be a bit late now, rather wait for the next Nvidia GPUs comming in summer (or fall). They are supposed have much more power due to major technology improvements. If you stick with the 980 wait for sales, they (970, 980, 980TI) are in production anymore and prices are already dropping. Consider to get a 980TI instead if you don't want to wait.

[z3n]

Keep in mind this is 3~ year old info/parts by now however Corsair Hydro 110I is what I use, gave me a stable 4.4 ghz or so on my 3770k. Also note that you won't be able to always OC to what people 'claim/say' on sites/reviews unfortunately, despite your cooling.

Also Samsung 840 pro works fine for Skyrim and such but WD 1TB Black drives are much faster in terms of turn times for M2TW. So don't always expect SSD's to be 'amazingly fast', in fact I quite like my WD drives now, they're great. With the OS on a SSD boot up is faster. Skip the 'superclocked' and so on cards, I had to downclock one of my titans which continuously crashed my drivers during games when it was clocked higher (which was very annoying) however the other worked fine at it's higher clockspeed.

[alQamar]

Also note that you won't be able to always OC to what people 'claim/say' on sites/reviews unfortunately, despite your cooling.

this is true, the individual luck of quality of the CPU is also important.
Nevertheless the computer of my gf is running a 3570K with ease 4.4 GHz aircooled, so I wonder why you had no luck to push it resonably higher to be honest. My 2600K runs 4.5 aircooled and stable 5.2 watercooled with the mentioned Corsair. However when I am not into business of benchmark competitions I run the 2600K at 4.6 GHz, which seems to be an optimal balance between temps and noise.

That said the Corsair is not completely stock but from the start more an optimized "alQamar's edition" (other thermal grease, other coolers and the pump limited to 7 volts for the sake and aim of noise cancelling).

[z3n]

I wasn't really interested in going higher seeing as I was running on 4.4ghz at 1.275v. To go past I'd have to break 1.3v, something I didn't really want to do.
Essentially you are limited if you don't want to buy your CPU again the next year by the voltage 'limit' suggested by people who know much more than me about overclocking for your CPU. Some people are luckier than others from what I read (if true), being able to get their OC running fine at much lower voltages like 1.1.

[DAVIDE]

About cabinet, always go with a tower or a full tower one. Yo have a lot of space and cleareance between components and components and cables. and of course a better air circulation inside

About PSU, 650W is ok.. but just to be sure id have gone with a PSU starting from 750W or above. You never know if in a future you will add another device or multiple fans or another card or whatever

RAM... id have gone with a 1866 cas 9 for a better speed, stability and overclocking maneuvering

Mobo is ok

Cpu is ok

Cooling is ok

my recent purchases:

Platinum quality, editors choice


Case super tower:



Cooling:







Inviato dal mio GT-I9300 utilizzando Tapatalk