Excited about my new build, thought I'd let you guys tear it down!

[cbaclawski]

I've been planning on building a new gaming PC for VR for a while now, and was going to wait until I could get a headset and the newer video cards became available. With the announcement that Forza was coming to PC, I couldn't wait any longer and pulled the trigger:

13-130-900 MSI Z170A SLI Plus LGA 1151 Intel Z170 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 ATX Intel Motherboard
$129.99

14-202-089 SAPPHIRE TRI-X Radeon R9 290X DirectX 11.2 100361-3SR 4GB 512-Bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 CrossFireX Support Video Card
$319.99

17-438-030 EVGA 110-B2-0850-V1 80 PLUS Bronze 850 W Semi-Modular NVIDIA SLI Ready and Crossfire Support Continuous Power Supply
94.99

19-117-559 Intel Core i7-6700K 8M Skylake Quad-Core 4.0 GHz LGA 1151 91W BX80662I76700K Desktop Processor Intel® HD Graphics 530
$379.99

20-147-399 SAMSUNG 850 EVO M.2 500GB SATA III 3-D Vertical Internal SSD Single Unit Version MZ-N5E500BW
$157.99


35-103-099 Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO - CPU Cooler with 120 mm PWM Fan
$29.99

I considered going with the i7-58x0 cpu, but in the end I decided to stick with the 6700k..

The 290x GPU is a stopgap until the next generation cards come along. I know I probably paid too much for it, but seemed to make the most sense of what was on newegg. I couldn't bring myself to pay 980ti prices when it seems like it will be outclassed by the soon to come next generation. If not I can just add another 290x...

As I was typing this I realized I forgot ram.. so just ordered this:

G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3000 (PC4 24000) Intel Z170 Desktop Memory Model F4-3000C15D-16GVR

So What did I screw up?

 

[Ketchup]

The 212 evo comes out a little short with my 4790k. Your chip doesn't put out as much heat, so you shouldn't have to worry about throttling unless you start overclocking and/or running prime a lot.

 

[PontiacGTX]

You could get a r9 390 instead with 8GB and performs around the r9 290x at stock clocks,the pcs+,royalace/queen and tri-x / Nitro have the best cooling

 

[cbaclawski]

The 212 evo comes out a little short with my 4790k. Your chip doesn't put out as much heat, so you shouldn't have to worry about throttling unless you start overclocking and/or running prime a lot.

Thanks, I probably won't overclock much, if at all. I really got the 6700k for the higher stock clocks, and the z170 just in case I ever want to play around...

You could get a r9 390 instead with 8GB and performs around the r9 290x at stock clocks,the pcs+,royalace/queen and tri-x / Nitro have the best cooling

I checked a couple benches and looked like the 290x came out a little ahead, and I didn't figure I'd ever need the extra memory, especially considering it's a stopgap and will likely replace it relatively soon...

All parts are already on their way, so too late to change anyway(unless I really made a mistake...)

 

[lehtv]

I don't understand the power supply choice. I would not buy a Bronze unit with such a high capacity in this day and age. A decent Gold rated 550-650W unit is plenty for a single GPU setup and costs less, and a bigger 750-850W unit would also benefit from Gold efficiency because if you're going to power hardware that actually needs such a powerful unit, then the higher efficiency could make a real difference in your electricity bills. E.g. EVGA SuperNova 750 GQ $80

I also don't understand why the 290X 4GB over newer 390 8GB, as the Crossfire option makes more sense with the 8GB VRAM. But it doesn't really matter as a stop gap card.

212 EVO is alright, and at the $25 AR price it's definitely worth buying. But it's not optimal for 6700K overclocking. I doubt it will throttle at all even if you overclock (should aim for sub 80C temps, throttling comes way above that), but you would get better overclocking results with a more powerful cooler like HR-02 Macho.

Good CPU, RAM, SSD and board.

Didn't see a case mentioned.

 

[cbaclawski]

I don't understand the power supply choice. I would not buy a Bronze unit with such a high capacity in this day and age. A decent Gold rated 550-650W unit is plenty for a single GPU setup and costs less, and a bigger 750-850W unit would also benefit from Gold efficiency because if you're going to power hardware that actually needs such a powerful unit, then the higher efficiency could make a real difference in your electricity bills. E.g. EVGA SuperNova 750 GQ $80

I also don't understand why the 290X 4GB over newer 390 8GB, as the Crossfire option makes more sense with the 8GB VRAM. But it doesn't really matter as a stop gap card.

212 EVO is alright, and at the $25 AR price it's definitely worth buying. But it's not optimal for 6700K overclocking. I doubt it will throttle at all even if you overclock (should aim for sub 80C temps, throttling comes way above that), but you would get better overclocking results with a more powerful cooler like HR-02 Macho.

Good CPU, RAM, SSD and board.

Didn't see a case mentioned.

Admittedly I didn't put a whole lot of thought in to the power supply, I really just wanted something decent from a reputable manufacturer, and went with the extra wattage "just in case" I ever decided to add a second card, and didn't want to have to worry about it. I'm not really concerned about actual power use. At most, I'll probably use it 10hrs a week...

In hindsight, the 8gb 390 might have been a better choice, especially if I ever did want to add a second card. Seems like there was a reason I went with the 290x at the time, but now I can't remember what it was... Oh well, if all goes to plan, I'll be swapping it out for a new generation card soon, and it won't matter...

here's the case:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811352031

nothing special, don't care much how it looks, and it was on sale...

 

[lehtv]

Good case :thumbsup: Can't really go wrong with Fractal Design.

 

[tential]

Good build great price on a 390x.

 

[lehtv]

Good build great price on a 390x.

290X

 

[guskline]

I would not buy a 290x now. Buy a 390. Almost the same price and 8G VRAM even as a "hold over".

 

[SlowSpyder]

I'd also get a 390 over a 290X, even if you are only planning on using it for a short time, sometimes plans change and you may be happy to have more and faster vram on the 390. The difference in performance between the two isn't noticeable, but if a vram limit pops up it'll be very noticeable in the 390's favor.

 

[lehtv]

I'd also get a 390 over a 290X, even if you are only planning on using it for a short time, sometimes plans change and you may be happy to have more and faster vram on the 390. The difference in performance between the two isn't noticeable, but if a vram limit pops up it'll be very noticeable in the 390's favor.

I'd say it's very unlikely to run out of 4GB of VRAM unless you have two GPUs. One R9 290X isn't really fast enough to use over 4GB at 60 fps average graphics settings.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I'd say it's very unlikely to run out of 4GB of VRAM unless you have two GPUs. One R9 290X isn't really fast enough to use over 4GB at 60 fps average graphics settings.

If the 390 was substantially slower than the 290x, I'd agree with you. But the 390 (especially the factory overclocked ones, the Nitro comes in at 1040/1500 from the factory) will be 95% as fast in games, and if/when a game does want more than 4GB of vram it'll keep on trucking where the 290x will stutter. We already see some of this happening with the 3.5GB+.5Gb GTX970. If someone had to give up a lot with the 390, I'd agree with you, but since we're talking about two very close GPU's that cost the same and use the same amount of power, have the same features, etc., I see no benefit to the 290x.

 

[lehtv]

@SlowSpyder

I'm sorry but I don't follow. I simply made a claim about whether 4GB VRAM is enough or not. I implied nothing about which card is the better purchase. Agreeing with my claim about 290X's VRAM being enough only on some irrelevant condition regarding the performance of R9 390 is just silly.

Please point out in which game the 3.5GB VRAM of GTX 970 runs out (and causes noticeable effect on playability) when running 60 fps average framerate.

 

[SlowSpyder]

@SlowSpyder

I'm sorry but I don't follow. I simply made a claim about whether 4GB VRAM is enough or not. I implied nothing about which card is the better purchase. Agreeing with my claim about 290X's VRAM being enough only on some irrelevant condition regarding the performance of R9 390 is just silly.

Please point out in which game the 3.5GB VRAM of GTX 970 runs out (and causes noticeable effect on playability) when running 60 fps average framerate.

Dude, I'm not looking to argue with you. To me it sounded like you were saying he should go with the 290x over the 390, if that wasn't what you were getting at then nevermind my comment.

I was simply stating I don't see a benefit to picking the 290x in a thread about a new build that the OP asked us to critique. Both those cards are so close in performance that I don't think the minor bump in SP's the 290x has makes any practical difference, but the vram can make a big impact for a game that could need more than 4GB. These GPU's may not be powerful enough to really use 8GB, but a game may want 4.5GB at some settings, the R9 390 can do that, the 290x cannot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3vd3PtRvTI

More.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=gtx+970+vram+stutter

 

[cbaclawski]

Yeah, I agree, 290x 4gb vs. 390 8gb probably wasn't ideal. Especially if I ever add a second card, and the performance of the 2 might be hamstrung by the 4gb.

I think I started looking for a cheap used 290x, but ended up not wanting to deal with ebay/paypal, and just got the new card...

That said, It's pretty unlikely that I'll add a second card, barring an incredible deal on a second 290x. I've had an SLI setup before (dual gtx 560's) and while the performance boost was nice, there were some headaches as well...

For the time being though, it does seem like the 290x will very slightly outperform the 390, and will probably eventually just move to another system when I replace it in this one... (it will be a huge upgrade to the other system's radeon 6670 2gb ddr3)

Thanks for all the comments!

 

[lehtv]

Dude, I'm not looking to argue with you. To me it sounded like you were saying he should go with the 290x over the 390, if that wasn't what you were getting at then nevermind my comment.

:thumbsup:

I was simply stating I don't see a benefit to picking the 290x in a thread about a new build that the OP asked us to critique. Both those cards are so close in performance that I don't think the minor bump in SP's the 290x has makes any practical difference, but the vram can make a big impact for a game that could need more than 4GB. These GPU's may not be powerful enough to really use 8GB, but a game may want 4.5GB at some settings, the R9 390 can do that, the 290x cannot.

I agree that the R9 390 would've been the better choice (as I stated in my first post in this thread, in case you didn't read it), but for different reasons: it's newer so it will resell at a better price when upgraded to next-gen, and the 8GB VRAM will come in handy if he decides to go Crossfire instead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3vd3PtRvTI

Well below 60 fps average. If one enjoys playing at < 50 fps to begin with, this might be a real issue. Might be, because this doesn't prove anything about R9 290X 4GB, only about GTX 970 3.5GB. But personally I like to keep things as close to 60 fps as possible. Of course, I don't know what the OP likes

 

[SlowSpyder]

Well below 60 fps average. If one enjoys playing at < 50 fps to begin with, this might be a real issue. Might be, because this doesn't prove anything about R9 290X 4GB, only about GTX 970 3.5GB. But personally I like to keep things as close to 60 fps as possible. Of course, I don't know what the OP likes

Obviously 60FPS+ is ideal. But, would you rather have 45FPS with zero vram limits, or 45FPS with vram induced stuttering? Of course some settings could be lowered that would increase FPS and lower vram requirements as well, but you lose eye candy, so I guess it depends on the gamer and the game.

There are some videos in that list that show the GTX970's vram to limit out and games stutter when it happens. Of course AMD and Nvidia's memory management is different, and the R9 290 has a bit more full speed memory than the GTX970. Again, just my opinion, two GPU's that are essentially indistinguishable in performance, that offer the same features and abilities, I'd take the one with twice the vram given that they're at the same price point, and for more reasons than just performance as you stated.

 

[lehtv]

@SlowSpyder If I had to choose, I would have 45 fps with zero VRAM limits rather than with stuttering. I'm not an imbecile. But I would not have to choose given that there's the third option of running 60 fps with zero VRAM limits. Image quality wise the difference between 45 fps and 60 fps settings is in most cases almost indistinguishable, while the difference in smoothness is pretty big unless you're running GSync/FreeSync.

 

[cbaclawski]

:thumbsup:
. But personally I like to keep things as close to 60 fps as possible. Of course, I don't know what the OP likes

I can usually live with anything 45+, but obviously more is better...

 

[LPCTech]

That build sounds good to me. I detect no flaws.

 

[Vortex6700]

@SlowSpyder

Please point out in which game the 3.5GB VRAM of GTX 970 runs out (and causes noticeable effect on playability) when running 60 fps average framerate.

Arma 3. Easily.