Trilemma

[webstar]

I should pick up my rig tomorrow, but there's still time to change something, and therefore I'm in a trilemma... I know, only a day left, and I'm still fighting with myself about the best possible choice.

So, choice 1 would be:
Intel i7 2600 + CM Hyper 212+
MSI P67A-C45
Exceleram Rippler 2x2GB 1600MHz CL7
Palit GTX 570
Silverstone Strider Plus 750W
CM 690 II

Choice 2:
Intel i5 2500 + CM Hyper 212+
ASUS P8P67
Exceleram Rippler 2x2GB 1600MHz CL7
Palit GTX 570
Silverstone Strider Plus 750W
CM 690 II

Choice 3:
Intel i7 2600 + CM Hyper 212+
ASUS P8P67
Exceleram Rippler 2x2GB 1600MHz CL7
Palit GTX 570
Silverstone Strider Plus 750W
Xigmatek Asgard

Basically, I'm at the very end of my budget, and I have to compromise.

Solution 3 is probably the worst of them, 'cause I know that a quality case is a must. And I just can't choose between the two that are left, and here's why:
It is inevitable that ASUS P8P67 is a better mobo, but I might not even use the second pci-e for gpu or even esata (both of which C45 doesn't have)

Although this rig will be used mostly for games, I feel like I could benefit from 2600 in terms of photoshop and vegas usage (which I do less, but still...).

I'm in need of some serious help.

 

[mnewsham]

number one, take out the 2600 and change it to 2500k, change the ram to CL9 1333Mhz if you want to go cheaper. and your PSU is too big, maybe 550Watts would be better.

 

[webstar]

The reason why I'm going with non K is 'cause I wouldn't even OC further than 4GHz in the first place. Besides, there's been a shortage of K cpus here and so far I've been told they expect them in shop in mid-february, maybe even later.

 

[mnewsham]

The reason why I'm going with non K is 'cause I wouldn't even OC further than 4GHz in the first place. Besides, there's been a shortage of K cpus here and so far I've been told they expect them in shop in mid-february, maybe even later.

For such a small price premium on the 2500k over the 2500 i would go for it even if i weren't over clocking any time soon honestly. But it's up to you.

 

[Davidh373]

I would swap the RAM for a GSkill 4GB stick. That should save you some cash.

These two are the exact same DIMM, one just has a rather unnecessary heatspreader.

Value
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-423-_-Product

Ripjaw
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-310-_-Product

 

[webstar]

For such a small price premium on the 2500k over the 2500 i would go for it even if i weren't over clocking any time soon honestly. But it's up to you.

I know, and I wanted to get a 2500K/2600K... but like I said, I would need to wait for atleast another month (and they told me to expect them in 20 days, approximately 10 days ago... now it's postponed). First batch of K cpus that arrived was sold in the matter of hours, same day.

I would swap the RAM for a GSkill 4GB stick. That should save you some cash.

G.Skill isn't available here. I know, it's a shame...

 

[mfenn]

Never heard of Exceleram, so I can't comment on the quality. Make sure that it is 1.5V though (don't want to burn out your memory controller!). Many shops put 1.65V RAM into Sandy Bridge rigs to save a buck. You also don't need DDR3 1600, so you can save some money by going down to 1333.

As mnewsham said, your PSU is a bit oversized. Even a 650W would leave you with a large safety margin.

Of your choices there, I would say that Option 2 is the best.

 

[webstar]

Well, PSU is kind of an overkill, but there weren't any other PSUs in 650W-750W range. I planned to get a Chieftec 650W/700W (PSH unit, like Corsair) but they were out of stock also. As for Exceleram, it's owned by Mushkin and made in Germany so I guess that quality is decent atleast. I'm still leaning towards the first option 'cause it also could be more "future proof" than the classic quad with no hyperthreading, considering that by the end of the year we'll have six and eight core cpus by intel.

 

[mfenn]

Well, PSU is kind of an overkill, but there weren't any other PSUs in 650W-750W range. I planned to get a Chieftec 650W/700W (PSH unit, like Corsair) but they were out of stock also. As for Exceleram, it's owned by Mushkin and made in Germany so I guess that quality is decent atleast. I'm still leaning towards the first option 'cause it also could be more "future proof" than the classic quad with no hyperthreading, considering that by the end of the year we'll have six and eight core cpus by intel.

You were doing so well until you mentioned the dreaded "future proof"! In this case "future proof" is a code word for "I spent 33% more money for 10% more performance". Remember, Hyperthreading does not increase the physical number of cores on the chip and thus can only increase performance by so much (that is, not very much). It's really only useful when you're juggling 10+ threads. If you only have 4 threads, HT will in fact decrease performance.

 

[webstar]

You were doing so well until you mentioned the dreaded "future proof"! In this case "future proof" is a code word for "I spent 33% more money for 10% more performance". Remember, Hyperthreading does not increase the physical number of cores on the chip and thus can only increase performance by so much (that is, not very much). It's really only useful when you're juggling 10+ threads. If you only have 4 threads, HT will in fact decrease performance.

Well, I didn't mean "future proof" in that sense, 'cause there are no "future proof" components, as we all know. I only meant it as in it would probably last me longer before I need another upgrade, which I fairly believe is true considering that I use photoshop and vegas often, where does extra threads could come in handy, don't you think? And although 2500 is miles away from my Q6600 (2.68GHz, can't go further...), it still is a quad -> quad transition. Don't get me wrong, it would still be a huge performance jump in every aspect, atleast that's how I see it. Also, I didn't say that 2600 is my final choice, but it is kind of tempting.

 

[mnewsham]

Well, I didn't mean "future proof" in that sense, 'cause there are no "future proof" components, as we all know. I only meant it as in it would probably last me longer before I need another upgrade, which I fairly believe is true considering that I use photoshop and vegas often, where does extra threads could come in handy, don't you think? And although 2500 is miles away from my Q6600 (2.68GHz, can't go further...), it still is a quad -> quad transition. Don't get me wrong, it would still be a huge performance jump in every aspect, atleast that's how I see it. Also, I didn't say that 2600 is my final choice, but it is kind of tempting.

For the majority of people it is the i7-980x of the 1155 socket, too much money for what you get. the i7-950 can perform very good up against the i7-980x just with less cores. well the 2500k performs right up with the 2600k it just costs $75-$100 less.

 

[webstar]

For the majority of people it is the i7-980x of the 1155 socket, too much money for what you get. the i7-950 can perform very good up against the i7-980x just with less cores. well the 2500k performs right up with the 2600k it just costs $75-$100 less.

Yeah, I know what you mean. But considering that I can't get a K cpu right now, and waiting is, well, not an option, I get to choose between these two. But tell me, if you were upgrading your pc every, let's say, 4 years, wouldn't you want to get pretty much the best you can, without regreting it later?

On the other hand, how do you think MSI P67A-C45 compares to ASUS P8P67?

 

[fffblackmage]

Well, I didn't mean "future proof" in that sense, 'cause there are no "future proof" components, as we all know. I only meant it as in it would probably last me longer before I need another upgrade, which I fairly believe is true considering that I use photoshop and vegas often, where does extra threads could come in handy, don't you think? And although 2500 is miles away from my Q6600 (2.68GHz, can't go further...), it still is a quad -> quad transition. Don't get me wrong, it would still be a huge performance jump in every aspect, atleast that's how I see it. Also, I didn't say that 2600 is my final choice, but it is kind of tempting.

Well, that's a good example where even that kind "future-proof" fails. If, at that time, you bought the Q6700 instead, you'd still be looking at a significant upgrade to the i5-2500K today.

 

[Davidh373]

wouldn't you want to get pretty much the best you can, without regreting it later?

lol, it WOULD BE perfect if you could just "not regret" something later... but every PC component purchase I've regretted have been the one's I've paid a premium for. Some of these include but are not limited to the 4890 (When it was $250, it released just before the 4xx NVidia series), 9800GTX (when it was $450), 3 way SLI X58 Motherboard ($230). Looking back on things I don't really mind paying $100-$300 a year to upgrade my station every year or so, but overpaying to begin with is always regretted. It's a lot better to spend $200 on a part to begin with and $200 later, rather than $400 for something slightly better an see it's ass get kicked in 6 months and not be able to logically part with it because you spent so much.

 

[Zap]

The reason why I'm going with non K is 'cause I wouldn't even OC further than 4GHz in the first place.

Haven't you heard? Non-K chips will not overclock.

But tell me, if you were upgrading your pc every, let's say, 4 years, wouldn't you want to get pretty much the best you can, without regreting it later?

I hardly wait 4 months between upgrades, sometimes... However, I will entertain your question. Let's say someone gives me a wad of money and tells me to buy myself a nice computer, because they won't give me any more money for 4 years. Let's say I am given $4000. With this, I can get an Intel hex core with 24GB RAM, two high end graphics cards, nice big SSD and the rest of the system.

I would not do that.

Instead, I would spend HALF of that amount on a nice rig, maybe a quad core with 8GB RAM and a single high end graphics card, and a smaller SSD with a spindle secondary HDD.

I would then save the extra $2000 and use it for upgrades in a couple years.

The thing is that four years is an eternity with computers and even if you buy the absolute highest end stuff, it will feel slow and tired after 4 years.

 

[Davidh373]

I hardly wait 4 months between upgrades, sometimes... However, I will entertain your question. Let's say someone gives me a wad of money and tells me to buy myself a nice computer, because they won't give me any more money for 4 years. Let's say I am given $4000. With this, I can get an Intel hex core with 24GB RAM, two high end graphics cards, nice big SSD and the rest of the system.

I would not do that.

Instead, I would spend HALF of that amount on a nice rig, maybe a quad core with 8GB RAM and a single high end graphics card, and a smaller SSD with a spindle secondary HDD.

I would then save the extra $2000 and use it for upgrades in a couple years.

The thing is that four years is an eternity with computers and even if you buy the absolute highest end stuff, it will feel slow and tired after 4 years.

Bingo, Bango, Boingo!

 

[webstar]

Haven't you heard? Non-K chips will not overclock.



I hardly wait 4 months between upgrades, sometimes... However, I will entertain your question. Let's say someone gives me a wad of money and tells me to buy myself a nice computer, because they won't give me any more money for 4 years. Let's say I am given $4000. With this, I can get an Intel hex core with 24GB RAM, two high end graphics cards, nice big SSD and the rest of the system.

I would not do that.

Instead, I would spend HALF of that amount on a nice rig, maybe a quad core with 8GB RAM and a single high end graphics card, and a smaller SSD with a spindle secondary HDD.

I would then save the extra $2000 and use it for upgrades in a couple years.

The thing is that four years is an eternity with computers and even if you buy the absolute highest end stuff, it will feel slow and tired after 4 years.

Non K chips do overclock, but their oc ability is limited, as in only +4 in multiplier. Which makes 3.8 or 3.9GHz with 2500 and 2600 respectively.
Well, I'd be the first to choose saving half of that money, 'cause I know there's no point in wasting $4000 on a pc. Besides, my budget is not even close to the half you chose to save, so there's also no point in saving half of it for future upgrades.

see it's ass get kicked in 6 months and not be able to logically part with it because you spent so much

If you look at it that way, then there's no point in upgrading at all. There's always something better around the corner.

 

[dpodblood]

Out of the 3 I would pick number 2. I would also go with the K processor, even if you don't plan on overclocking right now. What is it that's preventing you from going with the K? The price difference is only ~$15.

 

[betasub]

If you look at it that way, then there's no point in upgrading at all. There's always something better around the corner.

No, you spend a reasonable amount now to get (at least) the performance you need to meet your current requirements. It is "over-spending" or "over-speccing" for the nebulous idea of "future-proof" that Zap is warning against.

 

[webstar]

Out of the 3 I would pick number 2. I would also go with the K processor, even if you don't plan on overclocking right now. What is it that's preventing you from going with the K? The price difference is only ~$15.

What's stopping me is that they're out of stock where I'm from, and won't be available for atleast another month. Like I said before, pretty much every single K cpu that arrived was sold on the very same day.

No, you spend a reasonable amount now to get (at least) the performance you need to meet your current requirements. It is "over-spending" or "over-speccing" for the nebulous idea of "future-proof" that Zap is warning against.

I'm not sure it's overspending 'cause that pc is going to be used extensively in the next few years, and it's not going to be used for gaming purposes only but also for image editing, video editing or even programming and that pretty much made me choose a HT cpu.

As for the "future proof" thing, I already agreed that there are no "future-proof" components, so there's no point of mentioning it again.

 

[dpodblood]

Personally I would just wait the month until the parts become available, unless my current rig died in a pile.

 

[Ausm]

The reason why I'm going with non K is 'cause I wouldn't even OC further than 4GHz in the first place. Besides, there's been a shortage of K cpus here and so far I've been told they expect them in shop in mid-february, maybe even later.

Go with the K series anyone can practically OC it to 4.4 even with the crappy retail CPU fan.

 

[VirtualLarry]

lol, it WOULD BE perfect if you could just "not regret" something later... but every PC component purchase I've regretted have been the one's I've paid a premium for. Some of these include but are not limited to the 4890 (When it was $250, it released just before the 4xx NVidia series), 9800GTX (when it was $450), 3 way SLI X58 Motherboard ($230). Looking back on things I don't really mind paying $100-$300 a year to upgrade my station every year or so, but overpaying to begin with is always regretted. It's a lot better to spend $200 on a part to begin with and $200 later, rather than $400 for something slightly better an see it's ass get kicked in 6 months and not be able to logically part with it because you spent so much.

That is so true. I bought two DFI X48 mobos, because the first review of Crossfire on the P45 comparing it to the X48 showed like a 10-15% performance loss from the x8/x8 of the P45, they cost me $260 each.

Later reviews debunked the first, and showed that it was more like a 3-5% difference.

I would have much rather spent $130 on a EP45-UD3P, which is also an overclocking monster.

I'm happy with my GA-P35-DS3R v1.0 boards though, they've lasted me a long time (and will hopefully continue to last, knock on wood). I recently upgraded them with Q9300s that I paid $100 ea + tax for at Microcenter. Those are the reasonably-priced components that I don't regret. But spending top dollar for the "best" or "high-end" components? Nah, definately a waste of money.

 

[Davidh373]

I'm not sure it's overspending 'cause that pc is going to be used extensively in the next few years, and it's not going to be used for gaming purposes only but also for image editing, video editing or even programming and that pretty much made me choose a HT cpu.

Oh, I missed that. If you feel that you do enough video editing (what you would get a boost in with the i7 > i5) then shoot, that $100 might be put to good use. The thing is though, it may not be "longer" before you upgrade with the i7. Usually, there is a 20%-30% increase in performance when the next generation of chips come out, be it graphics or processors. Also, intel's plan is to have 6-8 core processors out hyperthreaded by the beginning of next year with socket 2011, so you may see double the performance there.

 

[mfenn]

And although 2500 is miles away from my Q6600 (2.68GHz, can't go further...), it still is a quad -> quad transition.

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but the i7 2600 is still a quad-core. The jump from 4 cores/4 threads to 4 cores/8 threads is nowhere near the jump from 2 cores/2 threads to 4 cores/4 threads.

I hardly wait 4 months between upgrades, sometimes... However, I will entertain your question. Let's say someone gives me a wad of money and tells me to buy myself a nice computer, because they won't give me any more money for 4 years. Let's say I am given $4000. With this, I can get an Intel hex core with 24GB RAM, two high end graphics cards, nice big SSD and the rest of the system.

I would not do that.

Instead, I would spend HALF of that amount on a nice rig, maybe a quad core with 8GB RAM and a single high end graphics card, and a smaller SSD with a spindle secondary HDD.

I would then save the extra $2000 and use it for upgrades in a couple years.

The thing is that four years is an eternity with computers and even if you buy the absolute highest end stuff, it will feel slow and tired after 4 years.

:thumbsup::thumbsup: This. OP, $4K was just an example figure. Pretty much the same thing applies at $2K.

I believe that the major takeaway from this discussion is this: when the time comes that a Sandy Bridge processor is considered slow, the 10% difference between the 2500 and 2600 will not matter.