• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Did I blow it with this configuration ?

L

lowepg

Member
I got some great advice here on upgrading my old photoshop pc. At the same time a newegg sale flier arrived and I took it upon myself to make some slight tweaks. Here's what I ordered:
1 x CPU INTEL|CORE I5 2500 3.3G 6M R $209.99
1 x PSU ANTEC|TP-650 650W RT $69.99
1 x HD 1T|SAMSUNG HD103SJ 32M 7K % - OEM $54.99
1 x CASE CM|SGC-2000-KKN1-GP RT $69.99
1 x WIN HOME PREMIUM 7 64-BIT OEM - OEM $89.99
2 x MEM 4Gx2|GSKILL F3-10666CL9D-8GBSR $139.98
1 x BD-COMBO LG | UH10LS20 OEM - OEM $69.99
1 x MB BIOSTAR TH67+ RT $104.99
1 x intel 510 SSd $284

So after it went to pick status- I realized I didn't order the -k chip. Duh,

So did i blow it? Should i simply pick up a SAPPHIRE 100287VGAL Radeon 5670 for $55 and bail on the idea of using onboard vid?
 
You got an H67 Motherboard so the "K" CPU wouldnt have done you any good anyway 😉

Not to mention the non "K" i5-2500 should be a very powerful CPU without Overclocking! the OC is just sort of a "free" performance increase.

I would if doing gaming or anything slightly GPU intensive drop 100 bucks on an HD 5770.
 
The only problem I see with that build is that a 650W PSU is about three times (seriously) what you need for that system. An Earthwatts 380 would be better matched. Additionally, the Intel 510 is not worth $285 IMHO. I'd rather have a Sandforce for $210.
 
Thanks.... I knew I was going a bit over on the ps. I plan to load the case with HDs and wanted to give myself some room to decide to play games on this someday and perhaps go with a real vid card.

Any serious downside to going too big on ps for now though?

Anything else I'm missing?

Stock CPU cooler ok?
 
lowepg said:
Thanks.... I knew I was going a bit over on the ps. I plan to load the case with HDs and wanted to give myself some room to decide to play games on this someday and perhaps go with a real vid card.

Any serious downside to going too big on ps for now though?

Anything else I'm missing?

Stock CPU cooler ok?
Click to expand...

Stock cooler is okay and since you wont be OC'ing it should be more then enough. SB runs cool 😉

The downside is bad efficiency on the PSU, if you are pulling 100w idle then at the wall you might be pulling 150w because it is such a low draw on the PSU.
 
Nah...it certainly won't be as bad as all that. Odds are, instead of running 85%+, it might run at 82% efficiency...

http://www.antec.com/pdf/manuals/TP-650_Manual_EN.pdf

IMO, other than the initial slightly higher cost, there's nothing wrong with buying a PSU that's a bit larger than you NEED... Of course, buying a 1200 watt unit for this would be terrible overkill...and THEN there might be some issues with efficiency...but even that's not going to be terrible on the electrical bill.
 
BoomerD said:
Nah...it certainly won't be as bad as all that. Odds are, instead of running 85%+, it might run at 82% efficiency...

http://www.antec.com/pdf/manuals/TP-650_Manual_EN.pdf

IMO, other than the initial slightly higher cost, there's nothing wrong with buying a PSU that's a bit larger than you NEED... Of course, buying a 1200 watt unit for this would be terrible overkill...and THEN there might be some issues with efficiency...but even that's not going to be terrible on the electrical bill.
Click to expand...

I'm working with a 550wat Antec that only supplies 384 watts on the 12v rail, which is LAME considering it's 550wat PSU. I'd definitely go for the 650 PSU if you ever plan on putting a decent video card in the machine. Being conservative, when overclocked my CPU and GPU alone are capable of sucking down over 300 watts so best to leave yourself some head room.
 
OP should try out the integrated graphics with his 2500/H67 combo before considering an add-in video card. Of course, the hefty power supply would allow him to run almost any single discrete card.

With 2500/H67 there are limited overclocking options, but a 3.3GHz quad plus Turbo should handle most work loads handily.
 
betasub said:
OP should try out the integrated graphics with his 2500/H67 combo before considering an add-in video card. Of course, the hefty power supply would allow him to run almost any single discrete card.

With 2500/H67 there are limited overclocking options, but a 3.3GHz quad plus Turbo should handle most work loads handily.
Click to expand...

What do you mean ALMOST any GPU?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/292?vs=305

The GTX 580 only pulls 490w at MAX load in Furmark with an OC'd x58 i7
 
BD231 said:
I'm working with a 550wat Antec that only supplies 384 watts on the 12v rail, which is LAME considering it's 550wat PSU. I'd definitely go for the 650 PSU if you ever plan on putting a decent video card in the machine. Being conservative, when overclocked my CPU and GPU alone are capable of sucking down over 300 watts so best to leave yourself some head room.
Click to expand...

see my signature
 
lowepg said:
So did i blow it?
Click to expand...

Yes. The correct procedure outlined in "Internet Etiquette Guide, version 7.12, page 33, paragraph 3" states that you should ask your questions BEFORE actually placing your order. :colbert:

As others have said, PSU is way overkill. Your system using integrated graphics will not draw over 100W. Most of the time you will be drawing under 50W. The only benefit of the higher wattage is if you absolutely intend to add a high performance (as in one that requires two PCIe power plugs) graphics card in the future. Otherwise, you have wasted money on the purchase, and will waste money on electricity because at under 10% output the efficiency will not be that great.

The non-K chip of course has half the integrated graphics as the K chip if you use the IGP (which you probably should). And if you don't use the IGP, the K chip is the overclockable one.

The H67 chipset is required (at this time) to use the IGP, so that's fine. If not using IGP, then you would have wanted the P67 chipset.

You could have saved big money on the RAM and SSD. Though there can be a huge price disparity, very unlikely that you would notice any performance difference as long as you avoid running benchmark programs.
 
Zap said:
You could have saved big money on the RAM and SSD. Though there can be a huge price disparity, very unlikely that you would notice any performance difference as long as you avoid running benchmark programs.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback !

I know I could have bought a cheaper SSD, but how could I have saved big money on the ram? I thought this was a pretty decent price for 16G?
 
BoomerD said:
Nah...it certainly won't be as bad as all that. Odds are, instead of running 85%+, it might run at 82% efficiency...
Click to expand...

Actually, it is as bad as all that. The OP's system will probably draw about 40W DC at idle (which is where it will be 99% of the time). There's a reason that Corsair only measures down to 20%, and that's because the efficiency really falls off a cliff below that. 50W is a mere 8% of 650W.

Now, as you say, the extra power consumed isn't going to be that much in absolute terms, but it's pretty significant once you figure the additional initial cost of the PSU.

lowepg said:
Thanks for the feedback !

I know I could have bought a cheaper SSD, but how could I have saved big money on the ram? I thought this was a pretty decent price for 16G?
Click to expand...

I think that what Zap was referring to is that most people don't touch 4GB of RAM, let alone 16GB.
 
mfenn said:
There's a reason that Corsair only measures down to 20%, and that's because the efficiency really falls off a cliff below that.
Click to expand...

Actually it isn't just Corsair, but Ecos Consulting (the company that "rates" PSU efficiency) that only measures down to 20%. Because that's how they are rated, then that's what manufacturers aim for.

And yes, efficiency tends to plummet at lower output. It isn't always at 20%, but it is always at or below 20%.

mfenn said:
I think that what Zap was referring to is that most people don't touch 4GB of RAM, let alone 16GB.
Click to expand...

This.
 
mfenn said:
I think that what Zap was referring to is that most people don't touch 4GB of RAM, let alone 16GB.
Click to expand...

Maybe folks that are just playing computer games, but I can tell you that working with very large projects on Photoshop (on Win7-64) will swallow up just about every bit of RAM you can throw at it.

Adobe Premiere (crunching HD video) will also laugh at 4 Gigs or RAM 🙂
 
Last edited:
lowepg said:
Maybe folks that are just playing computer games, but I can tell you that working with very large projects on Photoshop (on Win7-64) will swallow up just about every bit of RAM you can throw at it.

Adobe Premiere (crunching HD video) will also laugh at 4 Gigs or RAM 🙂
Click to expand...

Good thing that you put those requirements in the OP then. 😉
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top