Help with my build?

[dylanchisman]

Hi, i'm looking to buy myself a nice new desktop. I'm just wondering if all of these components are compatible with each other (I've already checked but it's possible i've made mistakes), and I'm also wondering if the price for the build is okay. Without further ado:

Case
COOLERMASTER HAF 922 MID TOWER GAMING CASE

Processor (CPU)
Intel® Core™i7-2600k Quad Core (3.40GHz, 8MB Cache) + HD Graphics

Motherboard
ASUS® SABERTOOTH P67 (NEW REV 3.0): USB 3.0, SATA 6.0GB/s, THERMAL ARMOR!

Memory (RAM)
8GB KINGSTON HYPER-X T1 DUAL-DDR3 2133MHz, X.M.P (2 x 4GB KIT)

Graphics Card
3GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 580 - 2 DVI, HDMI, DP - 3D Vision Ready
*Free Item
*FREE Batman Arkham City with any Nvidia® GeForce GTX560 or above!

Memory - 1st Hard Disk
600GB VELOCIRAPTOR WD6000HLHX, SATA 6-Gb/s, 32MB CACHE (10,000rpm)

1st DVD/BLU-RAY Drive
24x DUAL LAYER DVD WRITER ±R/±RW/RAM

Memory Card Reader
INTERNAL 52 IN 1 CARD READER (XD, MS, CF, SD, etc) + 1 x USB 2.0 PORT

Power Supply
CORSAIR 650W ENTHUSIAST SERIES™ TX650 V2-80 PLUS® BRONZE (£72)

Processor Cooling
COOLIT ECO II C240 A.L.C (£99)

Sound Card
ONBOARD 6 CHANNEL (5.1) HIGH DEF AUDIO (AS STANDARD)

Network Facilities
ONBOARD GIGABIT LAN & WIRELESS 802.11N 300Mbps PCI CARD (£16)

USB Options
6 x USB 2.0 PORTS @ BACK PANEL (MIN 2 FRONT PORTS) AS STANDARD

Monitor
IIYAMA E2273HDS 22" LED WIDESCREEN, HDMI/DVI-D HD1920x1080 (£139

DVI-D & HDMI Monitor Cables
1 x 2 METRE GOLD PLATED V1.4 HDMI CABLE (£8)

Keyboard & Mouse
LOGITECH® K200 USB MEDIA KEYBOARD (£10)

Mouse
LOGITECH® OPTICAL USB MOUSE (£5)

Speakers
LOGITECH S120 2.0 BLACK SPEAKER SYSTEM (£9)

Surge Protection
6 Socket Compact 2M UFO Surge Protector (£9)

Warranty
3 Year Standard Warranty (1 Month Collect & Return, 1 Year Parts, 3 Year Labour)

The total cost for the build, and delivery from pcspecialist costs £1,749 including monitor, mouse and keyboard. Personally I think that sounds a tad expensive, so I'm just wondering what kind of prices I could get from doing the build myself and where the cheapest place to buy components from is (I live in UK). Obviously this build includes that nice monitor, mouse and keyboard too (total of £155), but i'm not too fussed about those cos I can buy those separately.

Also on a side note, the SSD, are they worth the price? I mean i've heard loads of things about them, and obviously it improves startup and makes windows run faster or whatever, but you can get like... a 600gb 10k rpm hdd for £50 cheaper than a 160gb SSD. Obviously SSD's is a relatively new technology, but is the extra £50 and loss of 440gb space worth it? I was thinking I could just put a small (80gb) SSD in for the OS and whatnot and then a 750GB HDD (7,200rpm) for music, games, movies, etc. as this would be £6 cheaper.

Any help on this matter would be appreciated. Thanks

 

[SuF]

Moved to tech support.

 

[kill dank]

reasonably priced, but not the best bang for your buck. When you have a 3gb 580 in there you shouldn't expect it to be.

 

[Nemesis4895]

The 2133 Mhz RAM is not compatible with that motherboard. If you have experience with overclocking RAM, go 1866 Mhz RAM. If not, go with 1600 Mhz RAM. You really won't notice any kind of a performance difference between the two anyways.

3 GB graphics card is extreme overkill. Unless you rendering HD video across 4 seperate monitors, you won't need 3 GB. I'd go with GTX 560 TI in SLI. Performance wise, the two 560's paired together will make a 580 look like a snail.

IMO, the 2600k is a waste of money. The 2500k is only slightly behind the 2600k in benchmarks.

 

[kill dank]

Nemesis, RAM will clock down to whatever the motherboard supports. It really isn't a problem, though he could probably get some slower RAM for cheaper that would be just as good.

The GPU isn't extreme overkill. It's expensive, but considering the rate at which new, more graphic intense games come out, it wouldn't necessarily hurt. BF3 can use 1.5GB and I'm sure newer games will use more. Two 560 ti's would outperform the 580, but at a lower price than the 3GB 580, two 6950's would wreck the 560 setup.

It depends what he plans on doing as to whether or not the 2600k will benefit over the 2500k. Idk what I would do without HT.

And dylan, how much does the gpu you listed cost? do you have the 500ish dollar version or the clocked up 700ish dollar version? Either way you can definitely get a better deal. I could pick out a nice gpu setup if you give me a budget.

 

[Nemesis4895]

Nemesis, RAM will clock down to whatever the motherboard supports. It really isn't a problem, though he could probably get some slower RAM for cheaper that would be just as good.

The GPU isn't extreme overkill. It's expensive, but considering the rate at which new, more graphic intense games come out, it wouldn't necessarily hurt. BF3 can use 1.5GB and I'm sure newer games will use more. Two 560 ti's would outperform the 580, but at a lower price than the 3GB 580, two 6950's would wreck the 560 setup.

It depends what he plans on doing as to whether or not the 2600k will benefit over the 2500k. Idk what I would do without HT.

And dylan, how much does the gpu you listed cost? do you have the 500ish dollar version or the clocked up 700ish dollar version? Either way you can definitely get a better deal. I could pick out a nice gpu setup if you give me a budget.

BF3 CAN use 1.5GB of graphics memory, not many people have a 2560 x 1600 resolution monitor though.

With as many bugs that ATI drivers have, I'd never settle for an ATI card.

I really could care less about HT. I'd rather save $100 and lose 3 FPS or wait a few extra seconds on encoding.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=287

 

[Ivy Bridge]

Nemesis, RAM will clock down to whatever the motherboard supports. It really isn't a problem, though he could probably get some slower RAM for cheaper that would be just as good.

The GPU isn't extreme overkill. It's expensive, but considering the rate at which new, more graphic intense games come out, it wouldn't necessarily hurt. BF3 can use 1.5GB and I'm sure newer games will use more. Two 560 ti's would outperform the 580, but at a lower price than the 3GB 580, two 6950's would wreck the 560 setup.

It depends what he plans on doing as to whether or not the 2600k will benefit over the 2500k. Idk what I would do without HT.

And dylan, how much does the gpu you listed cost? do you have the 500ish dollar version or the clocked up 700ish dollar version? Either way you can definitely get a better deal. I could pick out a nice gpu setup if you give me a budget.

Yeah dude, HT really doesn't make that big of a difference. If someone has the extra $100 then by all means, go for it. In gaming, the 2600k and 2500k are nearly identical. Pretty much the only place HT benefits is encoding and stuff, to which I have to say: is a 5-10 second faster render worth $100 to you? And will the average user even encode enough video for the long term benefits to be worth it? No doubt the 2600k is the better processor, but a 1-3% performance boost is not justifiable for a $100 premium IMO.

BF3 CAN use 1.5GB of graphics memory, not many people have a 2560 x 1600 resolution monitor though.

With as many bugs that ATI drivers have, I'd never settle for an ATI card.

I really could care less about HT. I'd rather save $100 and lose 3 FPS or wait a few extra seconds on encoding.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=287

You don't need to have a 1600p display to take advantage of more than 1.5GB VRAM. I play at 1080p and I've seen my BF3 usage spike up to 1511MB VRAM used out of 1536MB with relatively low AA/AF settings. If I increased the settings, it would easily top out my VRAM. Also, Shogun 2 has been known to hit above 2GB VRAM usage. There's a plethora of games out with high end texture packs and other mods that will very easily make use of more than 1.5GB. Plus, as games come out, VRAM usage is likely to go up. The 3GB 580 is by no means required for 1080p gaming, but it's not like it would hurt either.

 

[Nemesis4895]

Yeah dude, HT really doesn't make that big of a difference. If someone has the extra $100 then by all means, go for it. In gaming, the 2600k and 2500k are nearly identical. Pretty much the only place HT benefits is encoding and stuff, to which I have to say: is a 5-10 second faster render worth $100 to you? And will the average user even encode enough video for the long term benefits to be worth it? No doubt the 2600k is the better processor, but a 1-3% performance boost is not justifiable for a $100 premium IMO.




You don't need to have a 1600p display to take advantage of more than 1.5GB VRAM. I play at 1080p and I've seen my BF3 usage spike up to 1511MB VRAM used out of 1536MB with relatively low AA/AF settings. If I increased the settings, it would easily top out my VRAM. Also, Shogun 2 has been known to hit above 2GB VRAM usage. There's a plethora of games out with high end texture packs and other mods that will very easily make use of more than 1.5GB. Plus, as games come out, VRAM usage is likely to go up. The 3GB 580 is by no means required for 1080p gaming, but it's not like it would hurt either.

Well I haven't played BF3 yet lol, didn't think it actually used that much. Never played Shogun either.