New System Wishlist, poke some holes for me please

[Earwax]

I've been trying to put together a sub $1200 video editing/graphic design rig for the last few weeks. So far, this is what I've come up with:

EVGA 141-BL-E757-TR LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX X58 SLI LE Mobo $220
SAPPHIRE VAPOR-X 100269VXL Radeon HD 4890 (I game when I don't edit) $190
Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz LGA 1366 $280
CORSAIR XMS3 12GB (6 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 $270
Total: ~$985 (taxes, shipping etc included)

I still need to purchase a PSU, after-market HSF, and an additional scratch drive 500GB-1TB. Remaining budget: $200

I'd appreciate any recommendations for the PSU and HSF. Also, if anyone has any horror stories about the hardware I've listed above, I'd love to hear them. I've built with ASUS boards the last two systems around and they've tended to die on me after about 3 years. I'm trying to put something together here that I can get 2-3 years of use as a workstation and then another 2-3 years as a HTPC.



I have a previous post soliciting hardware recommendations here.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

You can save 50$ by going with the Asrock Extreme.. for 170$ It has a reported BClock max of 222 by an Anandtech review so thats 4.4Ghz if your chip is capable. The PSU i wouldn't skimp on. Ripples going out of spec can damage your components. Check out JonnyGuru for his PSU reviews. He's also the PSU moderator here.

 

[Blain]

Core i5 is the way to go.

 

[gwarren007]

920 / 6gbCorsair $399
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...?ItemList=Combo.250777

evga / 6gb corsair $355
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...?ItemList=Combo.251040

XFX 4870 $145
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814150436

new TP650 $100
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16817371021

1tb Green $85(69AR)
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/...de=10009901&ps=homain1

Leaves around 120 for you budget.

 

[Earwax]

I looked at the mATX evga initially, but I already have a really solid ATX tower case that I invested in a few years ago I'd like to use, so I went with the full sized ATX board.

I've heard several people suggest i5, is that just because of the affordability?

I run a lot of programs that are optimized for multi-threading cpus, so I feel like the i7 would be a better processor. My goal with this setup is to reduce render times. I really want to put 12GB of RAM in this thing.

I looked at the Asrock extreme but I know nothing about that company. The reviews have been fairly impressive, but there also seem to have been a lot of people complaining about BIOS issues. I'll take another look at it. I really want a rock-steady motherboard because I've had issues with mobos in the past and it's the worst component to have go on the fritz.

I'm starting to think maybe I am doing a little bit of overkill with what I'm looking at, but I do want this thing to last as a solid workhorse for at least three years.

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: Earwax
I've heard several people suggest i5, is that just because of the affordability?

I run a lot of programs that are optimized for multi-threading cpus, so I feel like the i7 would be a better processor. My goal with this setup is to reduce render times. I really want to put 12GB of RAM in this thing.

The Core i5 processors offer a great value, considering performance & price.
Turbo mode makes them that much sweeter. :laugh:
They're 4 cores just like the i7's but without hyperthreading.

 

[gwarren007]

my edited build has everything you want - 12gb ram, full atx, quality power supply , 1tb scratch drive , etc.

What else would you like?

 

[Earwax]

Originally posted by: gwarren007
my edited build has everything you want - 12gb ram, full atx, quality power supply , 1tb scratch drive , etc.

What else would you like?

That seems just about perfect. I'd probably split the extra $120 on a slightly more heavy duty graphics card and an HSF solution. Considering the rest of the system I'd really like to stick an SSD in there, but those prices are way too prohibitive. $175 just for a 64GB kingston seems outrageous, but I suppose it is sort of new technology.

That'll certainly be something I'll want to upgrade in a year, as I've had friends rave about their SSD drives. I guess it's awesome and all that applications can open super fast, but I write a lot of super-large files with my average project so I don't see the benefit to having that kind of speed considering how small the storage space is. I'd rather double up on terabyte HDD drives.

Thanks everyone for your opinions, they are most welcome.

 

[gwarren007]

I picked the XFX if you wanted to go cheaper for now, and upgrade later after the rebates came in to get the 5870. You can transfer the warranty to the new buyer. Don't forget to register!!!

 

[BaboonGuy]

Originally posted by: Blain

Originally posted by: Earwax
I've heard several people suggest i5, is that just because of the affordability?

I run a lot of programs that are optimized for multi-threading cpus, so I feel like the i7 would be a better processor. My goal with this setup is to reduce render times. I really want to put 12GB of RAM in this thing.

The Core i5 processors offer a great value, considering performance & price.
Turbo mode makes them that much sweeter. :laugh:
They're 4 cores just like the i7's but without hyperthreading.

They are nice but OP's video editing and graphics design apps will most likely make use of HT. That and 1366 will be getting i9 with 6 cores so there is a little bit of future proofing there.

For heatsink get the Prolimatech Megahalems. Or if you want put in some work get a TRUE and lap it, pressure mod it, and lap your IHS on the CPU.

Pair with Indigo Xtreme TIM and one or two Sanyo Denki San Ace H101s (with a fan controller if you don't want noise). Two is better for push/pull but I've heard that one is actually enough and the second makes only a 2C difference (worth it for me...)

That's a pretty hardcore air cooling setup and you'd be able to take your CPU far. I highly recommend overclocking OP... make sure to get a D0 i7 920 (Micro center is a good way to get D0 guaranteed). You should be able to go to 4.2GHz with everything, maybe farther... your video editing and graphics design work will be very very fast.

 

[elconejito]

You can pick up a corsair 650 for about $100. And a WD 1TB for < $100. Those two are pretty much "must haves" for your rig. It also effectively kills your budget.

You have a few choices on what to cut to get it into your budget.

Personally, the first thing I'd cut back on is the the video card since that's for personal, not work, use. I don't game much tho, so that's a choice you have to make.

You could also cut RAM back to 6GB and add another 6GB later, but if you're working with really huge files (sounds like you are) that will absolutely kill performance on the "work" functions which is a big no-no.

You could just run the computer at stock speeds (or a very small OC) until you can scrape together some more cash for an aftermarket HSF. Depending on what you are coming from you might not notice.

You could drop to the i7 860 on P55 mobo. Anandtech review says performance is really close [ http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3641&p=5 ]. This would save you 50-100 bucks between the mobo price difference and RAM price difference (8GB vs 12GB) which would let you pick up that HSF.

 

[larslake]

I do hobby video and graphics. I've found that there's not much real life difference between Intel and AMD systems as far as the non-CGI pro studio is concerned. The really big difference is in the cost of the systems. I've elected to switch from Intel to AMD and then with the considerable money saved, invest it in a good IPS Monitor, Huge Storage, and Lots of Ram. Actually the price of the various cgi software will make the cost of a $2000 system look like chicken feed. As you progress in this field, you'll soon find out what a rendering farm is - dats when it starts to get expensive. But we all have to start somewhere, right? I'd say a good AMD AM3 socket, DDR 3 uATX board w/ a 64bit OS and at least 8 gig of ram. Hook up a Phenom II X2 550 Black Edition ( you can unlock the additional cores)or cpu of your choice and you've got a good start for less than or around $200(cost of MoBo and CPU is around $200 - 8gig of Gskill 1333 Ram is around $140). Antex Earthwatt 500, Dell 2209WA 22" UltraSharp, a bunch of Hard drives, an Nvidia GTX 260 works just fine and is a favorite of mine. Good Luck. PS just bought a MSI 785GM-E65 uATX ,open box, tested, for $69.00 total delivered from Newegg.

 

[gwarren007]

Everything he wants is available within his budget. Including the new truepower 650w power supply and a 1tb hard drive. Did you read the posts?

 

[elconejito]

Originally posted by: gwarren007
Everything he wants is available within his budget. Including the new truepower 650w power supply and a 1tb hard drive. Did you read the posts?

Ditto that. His budget is fine. Only if his budget were drastically lower would i recommend an AMD system right now. The high-end PhII are very competitive with the older Intel Quads, but they aren't even close with the i5/i7. If performance matters, right now, you're going with Intel.

i do agree that if for most tasks it doesn't make any difference. But for what the OP is trying to do at the budget he can afford this is the way to go.

 

[larslake]

Earwax is no different from the rest of us. We all want to engineer our equip. to multi-function within a home environment. The first priority in this case is the monitor. Most monitors are Twisted nematic displays and are not necessarily suited for design art creation or for hours of high detail work. A better choice here, for both art and gaming would be an In-plane switching(IPS) monitor. http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/s-ips-lcd-list.php - However if you enjoy the monitors you have by all means keep them. The next priority will be a a top of the line Video Card. Radeon cards are problematic at times because they can't keep up with Open GL rendering window that some CG software has. Nvidia gtx series use less power and perform better in most cases. These are all 3D gaming cards, but can work very well in a home studio. If your budget allows you a good Intel 4 core then by all means go for it. Soon we will be talking about INTEL 8 core and AMD 6 core. But keep this in mind, just because INTEL or AMD cpu/boards shows excellent benchmarks this year, next year may be a different story. So spend your money carefully. Good Luck

 

[Maverick2002]

You need to be more specific about what programs you use. That will influence the decisions between i5 and i7. Saying "most of OP's graphic design programs use HT" is a blanket statement. In most cases it's also total BS. I'm a designer by profession, and here's what I can tell you:

Adobe Suite is pretty much worthless for multiple cores. After Effects can do multi core rendering (not preview rendering - that's all RAM), but you will need to have a decent amount of RAM (2GB/core is optimal) for it to work well. I've tested this extensively.

The only multi-core, HT app I've ever used in the design field is 3ds Max, and only when rendering. Even there the boost from HT vs. not isn't huge.

In a lot of cases HT offers very little if any benefit - such is life. Our slower, 2x 4-core Xeon systems still render 3d scenes faster than our 4-core HT i920 (same amount of rendering buckets).

So ... be more specific.

 

[elconejito]

Originally posted by: Maverick2002
You need to be more specific about what programs you use. That will influence the decisions between i5 and i7. Saying "most of OP's graphic design programs use HT" is a blanket statement. In most cases it's also total BS. I'm a designer by profession, and here's what I can tell you:

Adobe Suite is pretty much worthless for multiple cores. After Effects can do multi core rendering (not preview rendering - that's all RAM), but you will need to have a decent amount of RAM (2GB/core is optimal) for it to work well. I've tested this extensively.

The only multi-core, HT app I've ever used in the design field is 3ds Max, and only when rendering. Even there the boost from HT vs. not isn't huge.

In a lot of cases HT offers very little if any benefit - such is life. Our slower, 2x 4-core Xeon systems still render 3d scenes faster than our 4-core HT i920 (same amount of rendering buckets).

So ... be more specific.

Where do you get that "Adobe Suite is pretty much worthless for multiple cores"? I am also a designer by profession. Print and web. Day job and freelance, I'm up to my elbows in it almost all day, every day. Both from the benchmarks available AND from my own personal experience with CS3 and CS4 (Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, Dreamweaver, InDesign) on a variety of systems (P4, C2D, C2Q) I'd have to respectfully disagree. That kind of blanket statement is much worse than "most of OP's graphic design programs use HT" blanket statement.

CS3 across the board definitely was more senstive to Ghz. Meaning a 3Ghz dual was better in most cases than a 2.4Ghz quad.

CS4 however, is the exact opposite. It makes great use of multiple cores.

And while I don't have hands-on experience with i5/i7 (don't have one available) all the reviews/benchmarks show that HT does make a (positive) difference in those applications where multithreading is supported. Video editing and encoding is definitely one of those areas. I don't know much about After Effects or 3DSMax since I don't use them, so I'll defer to you there, but I can't see how getting a HT enabled chip will hinder him. Or can it?

I'm not sure if you typo'd, but were you comparing two quad core xeons versus one i7 920? Two chips versus one? I would assume that the two xeons (unless there was a shocking disparity in Ghz) would be better than one i7. If you told me two xeons beat two i7s, then i'd be a little surprised.

 

[Maverick2002]

I will defer to you on CS4. I probably should have mentioned that. We use CS3 here and I've never seen it work better on quad vs. dual core. I don't know what the multi-core differences are for CS4 - I will need to research it more. I know Photoshop CS4 even makes a little use of GPU acceleration. AE CS4 also uses GPU acceleration but only with the special plugin that's only available with a Quadro CX.

As for my comparison of Xeons vs. i7 920, I wanted to illustrate that 2x slower Xeons (in Ghz, no HT, but 8 total physical cores) are still faster than a higher clocked i7 920 (HT, 8 logical cores).

3ds Max is one of the very few examples of design (not engineering) software that uses all cores to the max when rendering. I still want to try out Vray RT and see if that uses multiple cores as well.

 

[elconejito]

Originally posted by: Maverick2002
I will defer to you on CS4. I probably should have mentioned that. We use CS3 here and I've never seen it work better on quad vs. dual core. I don't know what the multi-core differences are for CS4 - I will need to research it more. I know Photoshop CS4 even makes a little use of GPU acceleration. AE CS4 also uses GPU acceleration but only with the special plugin that's only available with a Quadro CX.

As for my comparison of Xeons vs. i7 920, I wanted to illustrate that 2x slower Xeons (in Ghz, no HT, but 8 total physical cores) are still faster than a higher clocked i7 920 (HT, 8 logical cores).

3ds Max is one of the very few examples of design (not engineering) software that uses all cores to the max when rendering. I still want to try out Vray RT and see if that uses multiple cores as well.

Gotcha, that makes sense then Yeah CS3 you are better off with a fast dualie than a quad. A 3Ghz e8400 will beat a q8200 (same price) a Q9550 (more expensive) and go toe-to-toe with a q9650 (way more expensive) in CS3. [Of course, we aren't taking OC'ing into consideration here]

In CS4 though, the dual core loses out to all the Intel Quads, and several AMD quads as well. Adobe did a really good job making a lot of things (not everything, but a lot) multi-threaded. I expect it to be more pronounced in future versions.

The GPU acceleration in CS4 is (in my opinion) a bit overhyped. Not all programs support it, those that do support it do so to varying degrees, and what is supported can be done by any plain-old vanilla GPU that supports OpenGL. However, every week there is a thread asking if they should get ATI 4890/Nvidia GTX295 in Cross-Fire/SLI setup to "process images faster".

I kinda see where you're going with the Xeon vs i7. I think that shows a real core is better than a logical core.So 8c > 4c+4t. Makes sense to me.