Building a PC

A HD movie in proper format and everything is anywhere from 10-30GB. I dunno about the average user, but I have about 4,000 songs in my library, which is like 20GB. A game nowadays is 7GB-20GB. That space gets used up pretty fast. Not to mention a typical 10-15 minute gameplay in uncompressed 1080p is about 35GB lol.

With 1TB drives being so cheap, why not? I see no reason to pay like $30 for a ~300GB drive when you could put forth a tiny bit more cash and get a 1TB for $50.

I've actually got plans for a 4TB RAID0 setup in the future when I get the extra money (8TB total space, 4TB writable space) just for my gameplays.

 

How much is this beast going to set you back, also I've read a plfew people say 2600 is good enough for a solo botting computer what's your thought?

 

Dont forget large programs, like the Adobe series. Considering he's going to be wanting alot out of his computer I am presuming he'll have alot of space being taken by programs.

Also I'm selling 1TB HDD's for 25$ if your interested? PM me

 

Yeah, I'll have photoshop etc on it, so that's a lot of room being taken.

There is many things that can fill a TB.

 

why build a pc mate from scratch with difrent components im doing a it course and i would think it would run rather badly with all types of random manufacturer stuff you should just buy a mac but i really hate macs but you might like them

 

I had a mac. Until it got stolen at school yesterday, poor old macbook pro was only 2 weeks old. Hopefully police will find it.

 

Tip for you mate, contact apple. Heard a story that a dude got his mac robbed, he contacted apple, and apple could look at the activity on the Mac. Turns out the robber used the Mac to take pictures for facebook or something so they caught him! Sorry to hear that anyway dude, Apple will be able to track it!

 

Right, I've decided on some parts, tell me why others are better etc

CPU - Intel Core i7 6 Core Processor i7-980 (3.33GHz) 4.8GTs/12MB
Motherboard - Asus RAMPAGE III Extreme 3-way SLI & CrossfireX, SATA 6.0gb/S, USB 3.0
Ram - 24gb Kingston Hyper-X TRI DDR3 1600MHz, X.P.M (6x4GB)
Graphics Card 1 - Nvidia 9800 GT (Already purchased)
Graphics Card 2 - 3gb nvidia geforce gtf580
Hard Drive - 3TB WD Caviar green WD32EZRX Sata 6gb/s, 64MB cache
12x Blu-Ray re-writer drive, 16x DVD R/RW
Internal 52in1 memory card reader
Power Supply - 1200W quiet 80 plus quad rail PSU + 120mm Case fan
CPU cooling - Coolit Eco II C240 Advanced Liquid Cooler
Sound Card - Sound Blaster X-FI Titanium - Fatal1ty Champion Series
USB 2.0 Ports x6
1 x IEEE 1394a Firewire port
PCTV systems dual tuner tv card & windows media centre remote
Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit
Microsoft Office Pro 2010
6 socket compact 2m UFO surge protector and auto power off function
38" Sharp MONITOR (Already Purchased)
Monitor #2 (NEED SUGGESTIONS)
Monitor #3 (NEED SUGGESTIONS)

Could this run ANY game on the current market
How many bots could this run?

Thanks
I_D_B

 

Do either of your video cards support HDMI? If so maybe you should consider replacing a monitor position with your tele? I play WoW on my 48inch in HD and its top! Only a suggestion mate.

 

Silly to get an i7-980 since it costs twice as much as a 2600k, uses an older socket, and doesn't perform significantly better. Silly to get a 3-way sli mobo to use with 1 graphics card

edit: didn't see that you have two graphics cards, you need to have two of the same card to run sli.

 

I suggest for your secondary monitor you look into getting a touchscreen monitor. It will be beneficial for the upcoming Windows 8.

 

No offense but we've told you like 234234 times don't go for anything on the 1336 socket. This benchmark PROVES the 2600k is better: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/287?vs=142

The 980x won like 13 benchies out of 42 or something like that. Not very impressive numbers for the 980x, which also happens to cost 3x as much (price/performance-wise the 980x is a nightmare, not to mention less powerful)

Your motherboard is overkill, you will never use any of the features that make it cost as much as it does.

You can't SLI cards that aren't the same model (i.e. a 9800 GT has to be paired with another 9800 GT, same goes for all of NVIDIA's other models) with Crossfire they have to be in the same series i.e. 6970 can be CF'd with a 6990 (69xx series, 68xx series, etc)

Your power supply is overkill, you could run 4-way GTX 580s on that easily. You're best off to pick a power supply that is close to the amount of power you intend on drawing. PSUs have different efficiency ratings at different percents of power draw (i.e. you might be 87% efficient at 100% load, but only 80% efficient at 50% load). You're inadvertently raising your inefficiency by overestimating your power needs.

Sound cards are useless unless you have a REALLY good headset or sound system. Most "gaming" headsets have a built in amp so you don't need a sound card as well, and pretty much any speaker system you buy that isn't custom built will be fine without a sound card, so it's an extra expense that just further increases your cost/performance

If you're buying Windows rather than pirating it, don't bother with buying W7 Ultimate. You won't use any of the features that are different from Home Premium as an average user, so it's an unnecessary expense

You can't run 3 monitors on 1 NVIDIA card, you need to SLI in order to have more than 2. AMD has Eyefinity which allows you to run more than 2 monitors from one card.

If you plan on using a tri monitor setup for gaming, you're going to need more than a single GTX 580. You're probably going to be looking at 2x 3GB GTX 580s in order to have a decent experience with multimonitor gaming. 1.5GB VRAM doesn't cut it for anything over 1080p (BF3 beta pulls about 1500mb VRAM at 1080p :x)

24GB RAM is way overkill if you ask me. Anything over 16GB even for botting is really kind of useless, as you'll probably max out your processor before you hit anywhere near 24GB RAM usage. Also, having a ton of RAM modules can impact your overclocking ability... just something to consider (if you bought the 980x and didn't overclock it, suffice to say you're an idiot.. same goes for 2600k)

 

^like

 

I said 2 gfx cards, that's 3 monitors. The current one is my TV.

 

TVs as monitors aren't nearly as effective as an actual monitor imo. They just don't look as nice as monitors do picture quality-wise most of the time. You're better off taking all that money you would have wasted on a 980x/rampage III and putting it towards a 1600p display if size is a concern (Dell U3011 ideally); it will actually be useful/not negatively effect your cost/performance + you could manage it on a single 580 3GB.

Also I could be wrong but I'm almost positive you can't game with all 3 monitors unless you're in SLI (since you'd have 2x monitors on the 580 / 1x monitor on the 9800 GT). Even if you could, a single 580 3GB won't do well at 5760x1080 (you're going to want at least 2 for 'playable' FPS). And if not for gaming, why have 3 monitors? Unless you're extremely concerned about a tiny increase in productivity, having 3 monitors for anything but gaming is useless. 2 monitors (which can be done on a single card) might suck for gaming but it's not that far off productivity-wise from 3 monitors (I have my main display, 22" Acer 1080p display for gaming, and a 32" 720P LCD TV for extra screen real estate when I need it, which is rare btw).

I just want to say that if you're gonna ask for help the least you could do is listen. You've been talking about building this PC for like a month now, and you refuse to acknowledge any of the things we're telling you (especially about the 1336 socket). I don't know if it's intentional so I'm sorry if this comes off as offensive but don't ask for advice if you're not willing to listen or at least tell us what your reasoning is so we have a better understanding of the choices you're making.

 

Who said I was going to game on all 3 monitors, I am taking you're advice, but you are assuming too much. There would be 1 monitor running gaming/bots.

 

The reason I'm assuming things is because you're not giving any details. Also you're not really listening, I and many others have had to tell you not to go with the 1336 socket like at least 10 times total. You still keep pushing the issue without giving us any reason as to why you're doing it, which makes it difficult for us to give you any sort of insight if you're not willing to offer any insight of your own.

I already addressed the 3 monitor thing in my previous post. 3 monitors are pointless for anything other than gaming. Also one would assume that if you're buying a $500 graphics card that you would be gaming. That is an assumption I stand by. It honestly sounds like you just want to build a computer to say "Ha, my computer cost ____, what about you?" rather than even worrying about how it performs.

 

No, it's purely because out of the 6 specialists I've spoken to, yes specialists, they've all recommended it over the other one, 2 of them are retired, so they aren't just telling me it b/c it's worth more.

 

Lol, I'd like to hear the "specialists" reasoning behind this. These people are feeding you LIES. I have no obligation to lie to you. The benchmark I linked you to (did you even look at it? >_<) proves without any doubt that the 2600k beat the 980X in 29/42 benchmarks (+/- 1 or 2, I counted it very quickly). To further put it in perspective, that's 69% - 31% in favor of the 2600k.

Let's calculate cost/performance.

I couldn't find the 980X on Newegg, possibly because it's out of stock. Either way though, I distinctly remember it actually being more expensive than the 990X ($1050 vs $1000) so I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by going with the 990X here:

990X - $1000
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115079

2600K - $315
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115070&Tpk=2600k

Now let's take a look at benchmarks (I'll actually post the images here, since you obviously didn't bother to look at the link I posted for you) My source, if you feel like checking any of my info/educating yourself




2600K won by a significant margin. SYSmark is a benchmark designed to test relative performance in general use applications. This might not seem like much but it's a HUGE deciding factor. How fast you do general task inadvertently effects your efficiency even down to the more specific and targeted tasks.

Now let's take a look at game benchmarks:








Now I'm no "specialist" but those graphs tell us definitively that the 2600K outperforms the 990X in gaming. Hell, even the 2500k outperforms it in all but one test.

Now I'm going to show you some of the areas where the 990X is in fact better, and just to keep this free of bias. These are the areas where the 980X took the lead in benchmarks in the last list I linked you to as well. They're very specific and not something I'd really make a decision based on, but here it goes:





The only one out of those that sticks out to me as something that might concern you is Winrar possibly. Even at that... it beat the 2600K by one second. Is one second justification for a pricetag of almost $700 more?




Two more benchmarks demonstrating superiority in very common applications you might even see yourself ACTUALLY USING.

I'll spare you the images from the benchmarks but the 990X is clearly superior in terms of video encoding/transcoding. Not amazingly superior, but usually anywhere from 15-35% more efficient depending on the format/file size/etc. If this is a big issue for you, great - go for the 990X. Does an extra minute rendering a file (which is a gross overestimation, for all intensive purposes we're talking about a matter of SECONDS) justify the $700 higher pricetag?

Power consumption is another thing to consider, which is significantly better on the 2600K:



The 2600K and 990X both overclock great. You can very easily hit 5.0GHz on either chip without going too extreme on cooling methods. The 2600K is more power efficient at those clocks, cooler, amazingly stable, and faster clock for clock.




As you can see, the 990X clocked at 3.46GHz doesn't perform as well as the 2600K clocked at 3.4GHz. The top table clearly demonstrates better overclockability as well on the 2600K side. The same performance gap can be seen even under these overclocks in gaming scenarios, the 2600K still performs better as demonstrated in previous gaming benchmarks (I'll spare you the pictures, check link if you don't believe me)

You can crunch the numbers if you are so inclined but at this point I really feel like it is unnecessary to provide an exact price/performance on the 990X/980X. The proof is in the benchmarks. Even if they performed equally, which they don't, the 990X costs THREE TIMES AS MUCH. If you want, you can rely on your so called specialists who are very obviously misleading you into thinking that higher price equates to higher performance. You can choose to ignore all of the things I have just pointed out to you right here. The choice is really yours.. I do not control how carelessly you spend your money.

 

You've actually helped me save $600 roughly. Thanks a bunch.
Gonna complain to them specialists L