Building extreme gaming system

[Chronozon]

I'll soon be building a new computer, and I'd appreciate some opinions on what I've decided on. I won't be overclocking and money is (almost) not an issue. Here goes:

Case: Lian Li PC-V1100
Power Supply: Antec NeoPower 480W
Processor: AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 Boxed
Motherboard: MSI K8N Neo4 Platinum
Memory: Corsair 2GB TWINX2048-3200
Hard Drive: Western Digital 74GB Raptor 10000RPM SATA
Hard Drive: Seagate 400GB Barracuda 7200.8 SATA
DVD Burner: NEC ND-3520
Video Card: Connect 3D Radeon X850 XT PCI-Express
Sound Card: Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
Monitor: Dell Ultrasharp 2001FP

So, opinions and suggestions are welcome. Also, let me know if you spot any problems with this system, components not working well together or whatever.

Thanks.

 

[Infohawk]

I thought extreme gamers went for crt monitors, isn't that an lcd?

How much will this cost you?

 

[Chosonman]

Yea go for a 22"+ CRT or you'll never experience the true power of your system.

 

[flamingelephant]

extreme = sli with 2 6800's

 

[Chosonman]

Originally posted by: flamingelephant
extreme = sli with 2 6800's

Yea, Extreme waste of money.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: flamingelephant
extreme = sli with 2 6800's

 

[Insomniak]

6800 Ultras in SLI is no more a waste of money than buying any top end processor. Buying the biggest, fastest always leads to way out of proportion cost for performance. But on the other hand, you get to be top of the heap for at least a few months...

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Insomniak
6800 Ultras in SLI is no more a waste of money than buying any top end processor. Buying the biggest, fastest always leads to way out of proportion cost for performance. But on the other hand, you get to be top of the heap for at least a few months...

Where do you draw the line? How do you get the biggest bang for your buck? (honest question)

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Insomniak
Where do you draw the line? How do you get the biggest bang for your buck? (honest question)

"Extreme" = He doesn't care how much it costs, he wants the very best of eveything.

 

[ribbon13]

How long would this stay on top of the heap?

Lian Li PC-V2100B
PCP&C Turbo-Cool 850 ETX (SSI)
Tyan Thunder K8WE
2 AMD Opteron 250
8 Corsair CMX512RE-3200LL
3Ware 9500-12
12 Western Digital WD740GD
Lite-on SOHW-1633S
2 Asus EN6800Ultra/2DT/256M

3 Meanwell SE-600-24
2 Swiftech MCW50-T with 6800 kits (series to equal 24v for the meanwell)
2 Dominator Pro 437w
2 Black Ice Xtreme III Triple 120mm Radiator

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Blain

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Insomniak
Where do you draw the line? How do you get the biggest bang for your buck? (honest question)

"Extreme" = He doesn't care how much it costs, he wants the very best of eveything.

Right, but I was responding to Insomniak's more general statement: "Buying the biggest, fastest always leads to way out of proportion cost for performance. "

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Insomniak
6800 Ultras in SLI is no more a waste of money than buying any top end processor. Buying the biggest, fastest always leads to way out of proportion cost for performance. But on the other hand, you get to be top of the heap for at least a few months...

Where do you draw the line? How do you get the biggest bang for your buck? (honest question)

Generally, you buy a notch or two below top-of-the-line if you need that kind of performance (unless you have money to burn), OR you decide on an acceptable level of performance and then buy the cheapest parts that will give you that. You can also compare performance/dollar for various parts and pick the one that seems to be the best value.

Look at, for instance, Athlon64 CPUs (prices from newegg, all retail):

S754 Sempron 3100+ (32-bit only, performs like the A64 2800+) -- $121
S754 2800+ -- $123
S754 3000+ -- $146
90nm S939 3000+ -- $162
S754 3200+ -- $191
S754 3400+ -- $223
90nm S939 3200+ -- $239
S939 3500+ -- $272
90nm S939 3500+ -- $349
S754 3700+ -- $468
S939 3800+ -- $630 (!)
S939 4000+ -- $719 (!)
S939 FX-53 (unlocked 4000+) -- $755 (!!)
S939 FX-55 (unlocked "4200+") -- $1009 (!!!)

If you assume the PR is accurate (and don't take things like overclocking capabilities into account), going from, say, the S754 2800+ to a S754 3400+ is a theoretical 21% performance increase for an 84% cost increase. I would say the 2800+ is a better "value", or it has more "bang for the buck" -- but the 3400+ might still be worth it if you need the extra performance.

On the other hand, if you were comparing the 90nm S939 3200+ with, say, the S939 4000+, then you're looking at a theoretical best-case 25% performance increase for three times the money. This is a *terrible* deal, especially when many of the cheaper processors can be overclocked to get close to 4000+ speeds. In terms of overall performance (at least for gaming), you would be way better off buying the 3200+ and spending the other $400 on a really fast video card than sinking it all into the processor.

The OP's system makes no sense, because you could downgrade the CPU to something like a 90nm 3500+, swap the MB and video card for an AN8-SLI and two 6800GTs, and have a faster gaming system for less money overall.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Insomniak
6800 Ultras in SLI is no more a waste of money than buying any top end processor. Buying the biggest, fastest always leads to way out of proportion cost for performance. But on the other hand, you get to be top of the heap for at least a few months...

Where do you draw the line? How do you get the biggest bang for your buck? (honest question)

Generally, you buy a notch or two below top-of-the-line if you need that kind of performance (unless you have money to burn), OR you decide on an acceptable level of performance and then buy the cheapest parts that will give you that. You can also compare performance/dollar for various parts and pick the one that seems to be the best value.

Look at, for instance, Athlon64 CPUs (prices from newegg, all retail):

S754 Sempron 3100+ (32-bit only, performs like the A64 2800+) -- $121
S754 2800+ -- $123
S754 3000+ -- $146
90nm S939 3000+ -- $162
S754 3200+ -- $191
S754 3400+ -- $223
90nm S939 3200+ -- $239
S939 3500+ -- $272
90nm S939 3500+ -- $349
S754 3700+ -- $468
S939 3800+ -- $630 (!)
S939 4000+ -- $719 (!)
S939 FX-53 (unlocked 4000+) -- $755 (!!)
S939 FX-55 (unlocked "4200+") -- $1009 (!!!)

If you assume the PR is accurate (and don't take things like overclocking capabilities into account), going from, say, the S754 2800+ to a S754 3400+ is a theoretical 21% performance increase for an 84% cost increase. I would say the 2800+ is a better "value", or it has more "bang for the buck" -- but the 3400+ might still be worth it if you need the extra performance.

On the other hand, if you were comparing the 90nm S939 3200+ with, say, the S939 4000+, then you're looking at a theoretical best-case 25% performance increase for three times the money. This is a *terrible* deal, especially when many of the cheaper processors can be overclocked to get close to 4000+ speeds. In terms of overall performance (at least for gaming), you would be way better off buying the 3200+ and spending the other $400 on a really fast video card than sinking it all into the processor.

The OP's system makes no sense, because you could downgrade the CPU to something like a 90nm 3500+, swap the MB and video card for an AN8-SLI and two 6800GTs, and have a faster gaming system for less money overall.

Great post.

Someone should make a java applet or a math equation that can take inputs on price and performance and say which has best value. I don't know enough about math to make the equation though.

As a someone who doesn't know too much about hardware (me that is), where did you get the data on performance percentage difference? When I see two processors, all I see are the Ghz which I know is not a proper indication of relative performance.

 

[darkeyed]

You might want to research the power supply issues with this machine. I know the Antec NeoPower 480W has a dual rail setup. I know some people have had problems with dual rails and some motherboards and video card combinations. I am not sure about the 850XT power ussage.

I am not saying it is a problem I am just saying you might want to be sure and dont cut your PSU right on the edge. I would rather have a bit more power then not enough. Are you planning on overclocking the system?

I went with a OZC modular PSU for that reason. I like the modular features but it is a single rail system.

Otherwise your system will scream.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Someone should make a java applet or a math equation that can take inputs on price and performance and say which has best value. I don't know enough about math to make the equation though.

Just calculate (price / performance (however you want to measure it)), and the one with the lowest value is the best. Or calculate (performance / price), and the one with the highest value is the best. Performance numbers for games and real-world benchmarks with various processors are readily available on the web.

If you got through about second grade math (with like fractions and stuff), you can manage this.

As a someone who doesn't know too much about hardware (me that is), where did you get the data on performance percentage difference?

I just divided the performance ratings (which is a rough approximation, but probably close enough for this). So I assumed a "3200+" processor would be (3200/2800) = 14% faster than a "2800+" processor.

When I see two processors, all I see are the Ghz which I know is not a proper indication of relative performance.

For processors in the same family, with everything else equal, you can just compare the clock speeds (for instance, a 2.2Ghz S939 A64 should be about 22% faster than a 1.8Ghz S939 A64 in terms of raw CPU speed). But you can't directly compare clock speeds between, say, S754 and S939 A64s (since S939 has dual-channel memory and a different cache layout), or between Pentium and AMD CPUs. You can (roughly) compare between actual P4 clock speeds and AMD performance ratings (so a "3200+" Athlon64 *should* be roughly equal in performance to a Pentium 4 at 3.2Ghz), but at the "same" speed, AMD chips are generally faster in games, and Pentium chips are generally faster in encoding/number-crunching apps.

 

[ribbon13]

There is nothing wrong with single rail at all. Its better if its a decent psu to begin with and has enough amps for your needs.

Multiple Rails --> + Diode --> 1a load resistor --> 500mf capacitor --> no rail worries.

 

[imported_SoulCatcher]

If money truely is no object, and you want extreem performance Look at this

http://www.chumbo.com/Info.aspx?id=244958

and this

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=13-131-517&depa=1

You can get the asus mobo for around 200$ if you shop around

 

[ribbon13]

If money is no object then look at my little specs above.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: SoulCatcher
If money truely is no object, and you want extreem performance Look at this

http://www.chumbo.com/Info.aspx?id=244958

I wonder what the windowblinds theme looks like.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: Chosonman

Originally posted by: flamingelephant
extreme = sli with 2 6800's

Yea, Extreme waste of money.

I'd keep the X850 too

 

[Markfw]

Instead of all those sata drives, go with 15k scsi and a u320x2 LSI controller, it will blow those sata out of the water.

 

[PhoenixOrion]

For extreme gaming, the combination of cpu/gpu pretty much determines what performance level you are going to get. The choice of fx55 with x850xt should get you best fps for most d3d games.

But with a setup like this that you should pair it up with a noteworthy gamer's choice of 22" crt nec/mitsu 2070 and 5.1 sound from klipsch promed ultra.