Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: mbailey on March 18, 2014, 05:16:58 AM
-
Looking to purchase a gaming computer...ive posted the specs below.. . Im looking to run this game...and my son to run a game called Arma(?) Just curious what the computer gurus here think.... Im thinking ill get Win7 instead of 8 though...
My knowledge is about nil when it comes to them...I could build you a store to sell them out of...a home to take them to, and a desk to put them on...but when it comes to the computer itself.....lets just say that id have a better chance looking intelligent having a conversation about partical physics with Sheldon, than a discussion about computers...
- NVIDIA GTX 770 2GB
- Intel Core i5 4570 CPU
- 8GB 1600MHz Memory
- 120GB Corsair Neutron GTX SSD
- 1TB 7200RPM HDD
- Upgraded CPU Air Cooling
- ASUS H81 Chipset Motherboard
- 600W Corsair CX Power Supply
- DVD-R/RW/CD-R/RW
- Microsoft Windows 8.1
-
Since AH runs fine on a 6 years old upper-mid range puter, this one should be able to run this game on 3 monitors.
Arma3 would be fine in full HD, maximum details.
Its a very good machine :aok
-
Very good indeed! I'd change the motherboard to at least a H87 for better performance or even Z87 if you plan to overclock in the future. There's also been argumentation whether a SSD would provide any measurable benefit in games versus a fast regular HDD, other than that Windows and the games will load faster.
-
Always buy the most puter you can afford Bailey. I try and buy one good enough to last me 4 or 5 years with upgrades at least.
I'll say this I am very impressed with Digital Storm an outfit out of CA. This is the most problem free 'puter Ive ever had and they have terrific support.
-
Thats who makes this one.... :aok
-
You have selected a PCIe 2.0 MB and a PCIe 3.0 GPU.
-
You have selected a PCIe 2.0 MB and a PCIe 3.0 GPU.
^ this
and also, that particular video card has a "MINIMAL REQUIREMENT" of at least a 600 watt PSU..... you might want to consider going up to a 750 or 850 watt PSU....
also, as Bizman suggested, I would try stepping up to the Z87 , or at least the H87........ me personally would want the Z87 chipset
also, you might want to see if they can install Windows 7 64 bit, instead of Windows 8.1...... if possible
Good Luck on your build
hope this helps
TC
-
mbailey, look up on youtube about how to build a computer yourself and you will see how easy it is. you basically need to know how to use a screwdriver. it is pretty simple. and you could probably get better components than if somebody else builds it for you.
I built my own when I knew as much as you do now. now I can take it apart and put it back together without my reading glasses :).
semp
-
I wouldn't use a 128gb SSD. I've been fighting my laptop OS installation on an 80GB SSD and I wouldn't ever recommend anything less than 256GB SSD because you'll be endlessly fiddling with the computer keeping it from filling up the boot drive.
Samsung 840 Evo SSDs are as inexpensive as they get, and they're almost as fast as the fastest SSDs out there. Get a 256 or 500GB Samsung 840 evo or a crucial M500 and you'll avoid hassles down the road.
Or skip the SSD and get a 2TB western digital black.
-
You have selected a PCIe 2.0 MB and a PCIe 3.0 GPU.
Absolutely meaningless. PCIe 2.0 is not a bottleneck, nor is even close being one.
and also, that particular video card has a "MINIMAL REQUIREMENT" of at least a 600 watt PSU..... you might want to consider going up to a 750 or 850 watt PSU....
Needless, its just throwing money out from the window.
-
Absolutely meaningless. PCIe 2.0 is not a bottleneck, nor is even close being one.Needless, its just throwing money out from the window.
I was just about to say the same. The PSU is so and so but will be enough as long as he chooses a quality PSU like XFX black or Seasonic gold/platinum series.
-
I wouldn't use a 128gb SSD. I've been fighting my laptop OS installation on an 80GB SSD and I wouldn't ever recommend anything less than 256GB SSD because you'll be endlessly fiddling with the computer keeping it from filling up the boot drive.
Samsung 840 Evo SSDs are as inexpensive as they get, and they're almost as fast as the fastest SSDs out there. Get a 256 or 500GB Samsung 840 evo or a crucial M500 and you'll avoid hassles down the road.
Or skip the SSD and get a 2TB western digital black.
I second this comment also. 128Gb is a joke it will get filled in an instant especially if you install a couple of games on it. 250 or 500Gb Evo is much recommended instead.
-
Oh, my mistake! I thought we are talking about a surround system with three monitors? If so it absolutely does make a difference. The H81 will never support SLI or Crossfire, either. So, multi-monitor will hit the wall at two displays. The 770 is capable of four displays, but not on the system described, at least not at anything like what it would do on a PCIe 3.0 MB.
So in the case of multi-monitors the comment about "nor is it even close to being one" is utterly wrong.
-
Oh, my mistake! I thought we are talking about a surround system with three monitors? If so it absolutely does make a difference. The H81 will never support SLI or Crossfire, either. So, multi-monitor will hit the wall at two displays. The 770 is capable of four displays, but not on the system described, at least not at anything like what it would do on a PCIe 3.0 MB.
So in the case of multi-monitors the comment about "nor is it even close to being one" is utterly wrong.
Cannot follow the reason-causatility relationship in your sentences. Maybe its my fault.
But 3 full hd monitors can be run easily even on a HD5970. Okay, not the crysis3, but still. And that was many years before this PCIe3.0 hype.
Anyways, if it isnt more expensive, it doesnt hurt to have the newer standard even if its practically useless.
SLI/CF has no real point in it as an upper-mid range card - 770/280x - is able to run anything in full-hd/max setting easily, or on 3 monitors with little compromisses. A real high end card will handle anything for like 4 years, let alone the dual-gpu monsters. Of course, anything is possible, but it only lenghtens your e-peebody just as much as it lightens your wallet.
-
So the weak points are the 120SSD and the PSU? So if i bump up to a 256 and lets say a 750PSU i should be good to go? Id like to be able in the future to upgrade the computer....and figured this one may be able to do that.
The games im looking to run are AH (of course) Arma series (son i have no clue what that is) , Napoleon Total War, and my son wants to upload games off Steam(?)
This is my first gaming computer.....the one I run now is ancient......and a Dell Dimension which is twice as bad...vid card (if u wantto call it that) is an x300? Does literally nothing.
I wont be running 3 monitors...just 1 a 23"
Is Windows 8 really that bad? or should i have them upload Win7 ?
Guys, i really appreciate all the feedback..... :salute
-
mbailey, look up on youtube about how to build a computer yourself and you will see how easy it is. you basically need to know how to use a screwdriver. it is pretty simple. and you could probably get better components than if somebody else builds it for you.
I built my own when I knew as much as you do now. now I can take it apart and put it back together without my reading glasses :).
semp
Hey there Semp...good to see ya sir :aok
Id love to build my own, but life right now is nuts....Between buying a new home 3 months ago, 13yrold twins, work (im an insurance adjuster, lets justsay winter hasnt been kind to houses in my area, and im busier that a 1 armed wallpaper hanger) That and ive been spending my evenings helping my closest friend / hunting partner / partner in crime ( best way to describe him is the kind of friend that if you called and told him that you needed to bury a body...he wouldnt ask what happened...he would just ask what shovel he should bring..., and if im gonna bring the beer :lol )He suffered a severe spinal injury 2 weeks ago and just got out of ICU.....Im assisting in therapy and rehab so he can walk again, that and convincing him that he will walk again / keeping his spirits up...... due to these reasons the time is just not there to do it...It would have been my preference to build one for sure and its a project im gonna tackle one of these days when life calms down a bit....Ill definatley hit u up for some advice when that time rolls around.....
Regarding being able to use a screwdriver......Heck im just happy to remember to put my pants on before i go out in the morning....that said for my own safety...hand tools are out of the question right now :lol
-
Oh, my mistake! I thought we are talking about a surround system with three monitors? If so it absolutely does make a difference. The H81 will never support SLI or Crossfire, either. So, multi-monitor will hit the wall at two displays. The 770 is capable of four displays, but not on the system described, at least not at anything like what it would do on a PCIe 3.0 MB.
So in the case of multi-monitors the comment about "nor is it even close to being one" is utterly wrong.
The 770 cannot exceed its max theoretical bandwith regardless of amount of monitors you connect to it. WTF are you babbling about? :D
The 770 is essentially a re-badged 680 so this comparison reveals the reality:
(http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/images/perfrel.gif)
-
The 770 cannot exceed its max theoretical bandwith regardless of amount of monitors you connect to it. WTF are you babbling about? :D
Play nice :furious :D
-
The video card performance is independent of how much bandwidth of the PCIe bus it can use, at any given moment.
Being able to burst the data to the video card much faster allows the CPU to regain access to the rest of the I/O bus, which can help with sound and networking.
The faster bus speed also allows the video card to access system memory faster which reduces the amount of time the CPU will be locked out of system memory.
A lot of data has to be moved to the video card memory, before the video card can start processing it. The faster this can be accomplished, the better the entire system will run.
-
The video card performance is independent of how much bandwidth of the PCIe bus it can use, at any given moment.
Being able to burst the data to the video card much faster allows the CPU to regain access to the rest of the I/O bus, which can help with sound and networking.
The faster bus speed also allows the video card to access system memory faster which reduces the amount of time the CPU will be locked out of system memory.
A lot of data has to be moved to the video card memory, before the video card can start processing it. The faster this can be accomplished, the better the entire system will run.
Yes and this is why the graphics performance drops only by 30% even when PCI-E 1.1 x4 is used, which is 10 times slower than PCI-E 3.0 x16!
The difference between a 770 running 2.0 vs 3.0 is on average 0.4fps.
-
It is not just frame rate. It is also how well the system responds, overall. Any improvement is a good one, and there will be an improvement.
It may not make itself visible in all applications, but for those heavy ones pushing all the resources of a computer, it can make a pretty good difference.
-
It is not just frame rate. It is also how well the system responds, overall. Any improvement is a good one, and there will be an improvement.
It may not make itself visible in all applications, but for those heavy ones pushing all the resources of a computer, it can make a pretty good difference.
Skuzzy, he stated that he would only play a couple of games with that puter. No GPU-rendering or anything like that.
I agree that the 3.0 wont hurt anything, but would it give the user any practical advantage while running games?
But if a PCI 3.0 board isnt that much more expensive than a 2.0, surely i would choose the 3.0 one.
-
Skuzzy, he stated that he would only play a couple of games with that puter. No GPU-rendering or anything like that.
I agree that the 3.0 wont hurt anything, but would it give the user any practical advantage while running games?
But if a PCI 3.0 board isnt that much more expensive than a 2.0, surely i would choose the 3.0 one.
This and the story about not being able to run multi screen using PCI-E 2.0 are just not true.
-
Games are one of the most resource intensive on computer hardware. They want to run sound, graphics, networking, and device inputs all in real-time. It is a brutal environment for a computer.
Whatever you see on the screen has to get loaded into the video card memory first. The speed of the bus to and from the video card will impact the rest of the computers ability to appear to do multiple things, at the same time, and do it smoothly.
How much? That is the question. It will depend on the game and how the game apportions all its resources. Whether or not the game is CPU bound, GPU bound, or well balanced will not matter so much. Certainly a CPU bound game might show a larger advantage over a GPU bound game.
-
Games are one of the most resource intensive on computer hardware. They want to run sound, graphics, networking, and device inputs all in real-time. It is a brutal environment for a computer.
Whatever you see on the screen has to get loaded into the video card memory first. The speed of the bus to and from the video card will impact the rest of the computers ability to appear to do multiple things, at the same time, and do it smoothly.
How much? That is the question. It will depend on the game and how the game apportions all its resources. Whether or not the game is CPU bound, GPU bound, or well balanced will not matter so much. Certainly a CPU bound game might show a larger advantage over a GPU bound game.
I don't disagree with you there Skuzzy. Naturally the faster the bus the better. But as I said it is incorrect to claim that one couldn't run a multimonitor setup on PCI-E 2.0 board.
-
I see no reason why 3 monitors cannot be driven by a PCIe 2.0 card. From the video card's perspective, those three monitors represent higher a resolution, and nothing more.
The amount of data involved is the same, whether the video card is running 320x240 resolution or 11,520x6480.