Planned new build, please comment...

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
Hi,

I am planning on putting together a new system in a couple of weeks or so, since it seems my current one's motherboard is acting up a lot and may not last...

So, here is my build.

My main purpose is GAMING, followed by web. I do not overclock...

Motherboard : Gigabyte :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16813128378

CPU : Phenom II X4 : 955 :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...4&Tpk=phenom%202%20955

RAM : G.Skill 4GB :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820231189

GPU : Radeon HD 4890 1GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814102830

HD : Samsung 500GB.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16822152112

Case : Raidmax...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16811156063

PSU : Corsair 650W :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16811156063


My questions :

- General opinion of this build? Do all the parts match together (as far as I see, yes, except some people had instances where the board wouldnt recognize the 955 but I hope the newer boards work fine)

- Is it worth to go for another 2GB of ram?

- Is the Power Supply sufficient for this build?


Thanks. Much appreciation to anyone who chooses to give me feedbacks...
 

Eureka

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
3,822
1
81
Looks pretty good so far. The power supply is good, I'm running a similar system on 500W. For gaming, I'd spend a little more on a Western Digital Black, maybe a SSD.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16822136320

Everything else is pretty good. If your main purpose is gaming (and not multitasking while gaming), 4gb of RAM is enough.

Are you sure you don't want to overclock, though? That 955 is bred for overclocking...
 

brblx

Diamond Member
Mar 23, 2009
5,499
2
0
looks good to me.

if you're running a 64bit os you could do 8gb of memory, but you don't really need it at this time. 6gb is more typical with the intel boards which have triple channel (2gb x3). 4gb sticks are a bit pricey and will probably get cheaper, so i'd wait.

power supply is more than enough.
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
Thank you for the responses!

I dont multitask when gaming, so yeah, it seems 4GB should be good enough.
As far as the HD, I would rather not use Western Digital. I've had terrible experiences with them, so I am sticking to other brands...

I am running XP at the moment, will only update to 7 or whatever if absolutely forced to. (IE, Game X only runs on Windows 7). I don't overclock because its just not my thing to do, I go by factory performance, whatever relatively small gains I can make for overclocking are just not enough for me to bother with the risks/possible instability etc. Thank you for the feedback again, it is really helpful.

 

jae

Golden Member
Jul 31, 2001
1,034
0
76
www.facebook.com
Yes pretty solid build. Not a fan of Raidmax, but cases are personal taste. What res. do you game at? Not interested in a SSD drive? I would reconsider sticking with XP, instead of going with Vista64 or Win7.
 

Lunyone

Senior member
Oct 8, 2007
482
0
71
Build looks pretty good. You might want to consider OC'ing the CPU, it is quite easy and doesn't hurt anything. You should be able to OC to 3.6-3.8 without any voltage changes. Just go into the BIOS and adjust the multiplier and be done with it!! It's that easy on the Black Edition CPU's!! I'd also consider getting Vista Home Premium 64 bit or download Windows 7 64 bit and then pay for it when it ships out. Either way you'll be able to take advantage of more RAM over 4 gb's. XP 64 bit will do that too, but it hasn't been reviewed too well and why get something quite dated when Vista/7 are much better options, IMHO.
 

Eureka

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
3,822
1
81
Originally posted by: Shargrath
Thank you for the responses!

I dont multitask when gaming, so yeah, it seems 4GB should be good enough.
As far as the HD, I would rather not use Western Digital. I've had terrible experiences with them, so I am sticking to other brands...

I am running XP at the moment, will only update to 7 or whatever if absolutely forced to. (IE, Game X only runs on Windows 7). I don't overclock because its just not my thing to do, I go by factory performance, whatever relatively small gains I can make for overclocking are just not enough for me to bother with the risks/possible instability etc. Thank you for the feedback again, it is really helpful.

With a chip like 955, you won't be affecting stability for a substantial gain. If you're worried about stability, we can walk you through it. The idea is to move with increments, and test every time to ensure stability. As soon as you hit instability, you back down and keep it there. That 955 should be able to overclock to at least 120% of its core speed easily, since the 955s are hand picked for performance. If you don't plan to OC at all, and sure about it, you might want to get a 920 for $60 cheaper, the only difference is .1ghz.

Western Digital Blacks are the fastest standard hard drives on the market, with a 5 year warranty to boot. It'll give you a bit of a boost in performance. Not sure what problems you've encountered, but a 5 year warranty is hard to beat (its also regarded as one of the best hard drive brands around here).

This is the time you should upgrade to Windows 7. XP 32-bit cannot see 4 gigabytes of ram. You need a 64-bit OS, either XP 64-bit (which I haven't heard the best reviews about), Vista 64 or Windows 7. I recommend getting the Windows 7 Release Candidate, its free until 7 launches. And when I used the beta, it was a very mature, fast system. The operating system is way better than Vista, and works just as well as XP. The interface was well done, all my applications worked, and all the drivers worked (with the beta you had to manually install drivers, but the RC should've fixed it).

And while it is a personal issue, I'd also recommend something not a Raidmax. If you can give us a budget we can pick you out a better case. (Silverstone Raven!!)
 

z1ggy

Lifer
May 17, 2008
10,009
65
91
Yeah why not OC? When you actually get the chip, its really only running at liek 75% performance or something. OC just means you are getting it to its real potenial..its not like you are making it go to 115% or something..more liek 85%
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
To respond to your concerns,

How much more performance is that overclock really going to give me? Its not going to turn into an I7 940 because of a little overclock and I dont want to push it to far. I want the system to last for 4 years and at stock cooling, I don't think I want to go farther than stock speed and risk my equipment for the little improvement that I will see.

As far as Western Digital is concerned, sorry, your rip me off once, I don't buy from you again. A brand new hard drive should not turn into a useless chunk of metal (and whatever other parts are in there) after a month of use. All my other WD drives that I used before the one that made me turn away from WD, have been problematic as well, always making terrible noise, screechy, slow and just terrible.

As for the case, the price fits into my budget (under $100), it looks nice and Ive read good reviews on it. I looked at the silverstone you mentioned and even if it was within my price range, I wouldn't get something that ugly (in my opinion). I dont know much about reputation, but I already have an Antec case now and Antec has a great reputation. The case? Less than stellar. The front panel is falling off because it was secured with cheap plastic and I've been cut by the sharp steel on the inside, so I still dont know why people recommended Antec to me when I bought the system I have now. I like everything I saw/read about the case I listed and the price fits my budget, so unless you guys have personal experiences on why this case is bad, then I will probably go for it.

As far as RAM, so there is no point in me getting 4GB of ram while running XP? I don't want to run the Windows 7 beta because I will get used to it and then when Windows 7 comes out, I wont be able to afford the $200-$300 (if not $400) that it will cost to buy. OS prices are one of the most outrageous things in computers imo, but thats what you get when one guy has a monopoly on the business. Yeah, I could buy Vista, but I've used that in school and I througholly hate it. Can't stand Vista lol.

As far as SSD's are concerned, I dont really understand what those are...

 

Denithor

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2004
6,298
23
81
Actually - you could get to i7 940 performance level by overclocking your 955.

But honestly if you're uncomfortable with overclocking - don't do it. An X4 955 is plenty fast enough at stock for 99% of purposes out there - and certainly for today's games.

Also, case is highly personal, what appeals to you I may find completely fugly and wouldn't own. And the same in reverse. So just get what you like and don't worry overly about opinions in that department.

Now, the one place I will make a recommendation is the harddrive. I have used a lot of harddrives over the last fifteen years or so. The best I've seen so far are the Seagate 7200.10 drives (no longer made I believe) and the Western Digital 640MB Caviar Black or Blue (either is fine). The Caviar drives are nearly silent (no annoying clicks or anything) and quite fast, for mechanical drives.

If you want a completely different computing experience grab an Intel X25-M SSD. Fast boot-up, shorter game loading times, faster minimum fps in games - these drives are amazing.
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
Originally posted by: Denithor
Actually - you could get to i7 940 performance level by overclocking your 955.

But honestly if you're uncomfortable with overclocking - don't do it. An X4 955 is plenty fast enough at stock for 99% of purposes out there - and certainly for today's games.

Also, case is highly personal, what appeals to you I may find completely fugly and wouldn't own. And the same in reverse. So just get what you like and don't worry overly about opinions in that department.

Now, the one place I will make a recommendation is the harddrive. I have used a lot of harddrives over the last fifteen years or so. The best I've seen so far are the Seagate 7200.10 drives (no longer made I believe) and the Western Digital 640MB Caviar Black or Blue (either is fine). The Caviar drives are nearly silent (no annoying clicks or anything) and quite fast, for mechanical drives.

If you want a completely different computing experience grab an Intel X25-M SSD. Fast boot-up, shorter game loading times, faster minimum fps in games - these drives are amazing.

Thanks for the recommendation. Do you know if any of today's seagate's are good? I heard some bad things about modern seagate's so iffy on that. Not using Western Digital again. Maybe they improved, maybe they didn't, but they ripped me off bad enough in the past not to want anything to do with them anymore.

As far as the SSD goes, that sounds great, but the problem is price. A SSD is just too expensive. I looked the the one you recommended and the cheapest one is $314 with just 80GB of storage. Maybe I will go for a SSD next gen or later...the price is just out of my range (My ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM with shipping is $1000).

Thanks...
 

Denithor

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2004
6,298
23
81
Seagate had a lot of problems with their 1.5TB drives. Haven't heard whether they got things worked out yet or not - probably safer to stick with other brands for the moment.

The Samsung F1 series is probably the second best set of drives on the market right now (following the WD Caviar series).

And yeah - SSD is super fast but also expensive as crap /GB. You basically get one for your OS + software/games and use a different drive for bulk storage.

Since you are building new, let me make a suggestion. Download Windows 7 RC 64-bit and give it a test run on your new hardware. You can use it for free for a full year from download date so if you don't like it - just wipe the drive and install XP instead.
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
On another forum, I was recommended to go for an X3: 720 and a 4850 because they said since I use a CRT monitor, I should save money because there wont be that much of a difference between the performance of this as opposed to the X3:720.

Any ideas? I am wary of that idea...
 

M0RPH

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,302
1
0
You can get a X3 720 with Asus mobo combo for about $180 AR. You are paying twice that for the X4 955 + mobo and of course it's not gonna be anywhere near twice as fast.

4850 vs 4890 depends on what resolution you're gaming at.
 

Alienwho

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2001
6,766
0
76
The X3 720 is an excellent chip if you care about value or tinkering. I have an X3 720 and easily unlocked the 4th core and OC'd it to 3.2Ghz. That combined with the 4870 gives me excellent game performance. If you are gaming at less than 1600x1200, the 4850 would probably be a better choice. If you can't decide on 4850 or 4890, just go in the middle and get a 4870.

I honestly have not tried gaming on my X3 720 at stock (3 cores @ 2.8Ghz), so I cannot comment on that. 4 cores @ 3.2Ghz is awesome though. I wanted the 955 as well but saved a boat load of money going for the X3 and came out extremely satisfied. Assuming it lasts a few years it will be my favorite chip I have ever owned.
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
Thanks for the input guys.

I think I am leaning towards getting a 4870 now and saving a little bit of money. I don't game on more than 1280X1024, so a 4890 would probably be too much card for my use. I still plan on sticking with the 955 though, mostly because its a lil more room for the future and the fact that I don't overclock or tinker.

Thanks. Any suggestions for good 4870 models?
 

Alienwho

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2001
6,766
0
76
If you are going for a more room in the future, why not just go with the i7 920? It's only like $30 more plus probably $30 more for a motherboard, then get a 4870 instead of a 4890 for $60 cheaper and call it a day. The reason I got the X3 is because if I was going to be spending over $120 more on a cpu I might as well throw in the extra few dollars for an i7. I basically turned my $120 X3 into a $245 955 with a bit of tinkering. I love the current lineup of Phenom II's, but even as an AMD stockholder if I was going to spend $250 on a cpu i'd throw in a few more for the i7. Just my opinion.

What I would really do if I were you if you really want to feel like an upgrade is dump the old CRT and get a new flat panel LCD. I just got a 1920x1080 Dell on sale yesterday for $150. You could probably get the X3/4870/LCD monitor for the same price as a 955/4890 and I can pretty much guarantee you'd be much more satisfied overall.
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
Originally posted by: Alienwho
If you are going for a more room in the future, why not just go with the i7 920? It's only like $30 more plus probably $30 more for a motherboard, then get a 4870 instead of a 4890 for $60 cheaper and call it a day. The reason I got the X3 is because if I was going to be spending over $120 more on a cpu I might as well throw in the extra few dollars for an i7. I basically turned my $120 X3 into a $245 955 with a bit of tinkering. I love the current lineup of Phenom II's, but even as an AMD stockholder if I was going to spend $250 on a cpu i'd throw in a few more for the i7. Just my opinion.

What I would really do if I were you if you really want to feel like an upgrade is dump the old CRT and get a new flat panel LCD. I just got a 1920x1080 Dell on sale yesterday for $150. You could probably get the X3/4870/LCD monitor for the same price as a 955/4890 and I can pretty much guarantee you'd be much more satisfied overall.

Hmm, I looked into the I7 920, but the performance difference that I saw in bechmarks (game wise) between it and the Phenom II was not large enough to make me want to make the switch. Also the motherboards are actually more than $30 more from what I can see, since those that are less, a lot of people seem to have troubles with.

As far as replacing my monitor, I'm really fine with my CRT. I prefer it and as long as it is working, I don't see a reason to throw more money on it. I am not a graphics hog, I dont even bother with high/advanced graphic setting even when I can. I just want a game to run well and I dont play the graphic hog kinds of games (far cry/crysis etc). The most graphic intensive stuff is RPG's like Oblivion or Fallout 3, but I am fine with the quality I get now.

Plus where will I put all my plushies living on top of my CRT? Lol!

 

M0RPH

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,302
1
0
Originally posted by: Shargrath
I still plan on sticking with the 955 though, mostly because its a lil more room for the future and the fact that I don't overclock or tinker.

Have to say I don't really agree with your reasoning here. If you get the 720 and save nearly $200, you put that money in the bank and you can do your next upgrade that much sooner. In another year that $200 will probably buy you a quad much faster than the 955 that you can drop right in.
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
I dont know, its just personal preference of mine to just put together a system and not tinker with it for around 4 years and then start over again. I dont like to throw more money into an older system, even if it's a year old...
 

deputc26

Senior member
Nov 7, 2008
548
1
76
Hey if he's uncomfortable with OCing just let him be. Also if you don't OC the i7 920 loses a LOT of it's value especially for games. Your build looks decent though I'd stick with the 4890 in case you get a new monitor.
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
Originally posted by: deputc26
Hey if he's uncomfortable with OCing just let him be. Also if you don't OC the i7 920 loses a LOT of it's value especially for games. Your build looks decent though I'd stick with the 4890 in case you get a new monitor.

Thanks for clearing that up about the i7!

 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Originally posted by: M0RPH
You can get a X3 720 with Asus mobo combo for about $180 AR. You are paying twice that for the X4 955 + mobo and of course it's not gonna be anywhere near twice as fast.

4850 vs 4890 depends on what resolution you're gaming at.

This.


I don't game on more than 1280X1024


Your looking at way too much video card, then.


You could probably get the X3/4870/LCD monitor for the same price as a 955/4890 and I can pretty much guarantee you'd be much more satisfied



:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
 

Shargrath

Member
May 25, 2009
162
5
81
Guys, I don't want a new monitor. Why would I spent extra money on a new monitor when I have one that works? I am happy with the resolution I am running at now and I dont use more than 800x600 for the desktop anyway, I only up it a little in games. Plus I dont like LCD monitors. If they still made CRT monitors, I would pick up a CRT.

I dont play games at high res, I am not a graphic hog, I dont even like Graphic Hog games. Even if my computer could run it, I would not even play Crysis/Far Cry 2 even if someone gave it to me... I am mostly interested in RPGs, like the upcoming Dragon Age, Neverwinter Nights 2 and anything the Oblivion/Morrowind team puts out...

 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Topic Title: Planned new build, please comment...

:D

For the most part you have received great advice.

I think in your OP you spec'ed a great system - it's just overkill for what you say your goals are and guys are just trying to save you $200 - $300.