Wanted some feedback on Build and i7 vs AMD

[trickymickey]

Hi, I?m planning on building a new computer and wanted some input. This is the first time I?ve tried to build one by myself from scratch so I?ve been reading threads about picking parts and wanted to get some feedback from more experienced people.

I plan to use my computer for games, streaming video/music, along with websurfing, email wordprocessing etc.

I?m looking not to spend too much trying to keep it around 750-900 but if there?s a part that?s considerably better than one I?ve picked it?s not a hard and fast budget.

Live in the US planning to purchase in the US

The build I?ve put together is AMD, but this is the part I need the most help with, several of my friends told me intel is hands down the better CPU, but it seems like that performance comes at a hefty premium. Is it worth it to go to an intel i7 core or Core 2, or is it a fairly small performance difference? Open to nVidia, although I had picked out an ATI.

I already have a mouse, keyboard, 19? monitor (which I will probably upg to a 22 down the road, not quite yet though).

I?m not planning to overclock it to start out with, but I might down the road.

Planning to build it in July or August (depending on how expensive it is and how good of deals I can find)

This is what I think is probably a pretty good build for my price range, but I?m wide open for feedback and suggestions on improving it.

**Case** I?m probably most sure about this part. It seems to have gotten good reviews, reasonable price (100 on newegg) and I like how it looks.
Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16811129021

**CPU** Like I said I?ve been looking at AMD, but I?d be interested if anyone could tell me how much better I could expect from intel.
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 125W
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819103674
Also looking at either of these two lesser AMDs
AMD Phenom II X4 810 2.6GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache 4MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 95W
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819103650
AMD Phenom II X4 940 Deneb 3.0GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM2+ 125W
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819103471

**Graphics** Looking at ATI 4890/4870/4850. Is HIS a good brand, it seems to have gotten good reviews but I really have no idea here. These are the 3 I?ve looked at. From what I?ve read it?s a big step up from 4850 to 4870 or 4890.
HIS Hightech H489F1GP Radeon HD 4890 1GB 256-bit PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814161276

**PSU/MoBo**I found this combo on newegg and it looks like a pretty good deal
CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX 750W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 Power Supply
GIGABYTE GA-MA790X-UD4P AM3/AM2+/AM2 AMD 790X ATX AMD Motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...?ItemList=Combo.201928

**HDD**
Western Digital Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5"
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16822136319


**Memory** Really not sure here either, is DDR3 better than DDR2, the prices don?t seem that much different so if it?s a lot better I don?t want to get a mobo or cpu which doesn?t work with ddr3.
G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10666) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model F3-10666CL8D-4GBHK
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820231189
G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model F2-6400CL5D-4GBPQ
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820231122


**DVD**
SAMSUNG Black 22X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW 16X DVD+R DL 22X DVD-R 6X DVD-RW 12X DVD-RAM 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-R 32X CD-RW 48X CD-ROM 2MB Cache SATA 22X DVD±R DVD Burner with LightScribe
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16827151173



Please let me know if this build looks good, is completely awful, somewhere in between or any other tidbits. Appreciate the help in advance.

Thanks

 

[videogames101]

-The AMD 955 is an excellent chip. Intel and AMD trade blows at different price points, intel only really wins outright at $250+, otherwise it's a toss-up.

-HIS HD4890 is a beast card.

-Excellent PSU and mobo.

-Excellent HDD

-DDR3 is only required for i7 and AM3-only boards, and is overpriced atm. You want DDR2.

-Best dvd-drive you can buy right there.


This is way overkill for a 19" monitor, I'd advise you to step up to the 22" as quickly as possible to let this rig loose.

 

[SunSamurai]

18$ more for nearly double the performance in RAM? Your definition of overpriced is funny.
Getting DDR2 now = screwing yourself in a year if you decide to get more ram. Look at where DDR is now.

 

[trickymickey]

I'm planning to go 22" within a few months, but the 19" is free so it's fine for now. Either way it's a big step up from my 4 year old 15" laptop.

From what I looked at on newegg DDR3 didn't seem like a big jump in priice over ddr2. Is GSkill a decent brand? It seemed to come up with decent reviews, has anyone used it and had good experience. How important is latency, or is that secondary to speed?

Thanks for the help.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Phenom 720BE / Asus 790FX AM3 combo: $264

G.Skill 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600: $95
(on the Asus QVL list)

G.Skill is dependable - not an exceptional high-flyer. The slower timings are offset by faster speed and quantity.

 

[SunSamurai]

G.Skill is one of the best in consumer satisfaction. Usualy I list brands based on user reviews. Top G.Skill stuff has 100s of 5 star reviews and very little 1-3 star reviews, telling me people are generally happy and knowledgeable.

 

[SparksIT]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

G.Skill 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600: $95
(on the Asus QVL list)

Seems a bit pointless to get 3 sticks of Memory for only a dual channel CPU.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: SparksIT

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

G.Skill 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600: $95
(on the Asus QVL list)

Seems a bit pointless to get 3 sticks of Memory for only a dual channel CPU.

Whatever perceived 'disadvantage' you see is non-existent. "Dual channel" does not mean "twice as fast" - at best a 5% speed increase in memory-intensive tasks is typically seen.

For each 10% increase in the IMC/NB speed with the Phenom arch, memory latency and bandwidth increases 3-4% - quickly surpassing any increase from "dual channel".

Anand took the Phenom 720 BE memory controller/northbridge from 2GHz to 2.8GHz (or a 40% increase).

A 20% increase in the Phenom II 720BE IMC/NB is a 'slam dunk'.

 

[glugglug]

If you run multiple CPU intensive tasks at once, the i7 is a no-brainer. The difference is huge. I put my new system together a month & a half ago with a Core i7, Intel x25-M for system drive, and a separate 1TB drive for photos/videos/music & apps that don't need the speed.

I couldn't believe the difference from my old Core2. It really is quite difficult to get the CPU loaded. And the power usage is better as well, since the cores spend so much time sleeping.
Back when Intel introduced hyperthreading with the P4, you were lucky if an app could get 25-30% improvement. With the i7, I am actually seeing 80-100% improvement, even when all cores are running similar tasks. For example, recompressing a DVD (from ISO on drive, otherwise its limited by the 20x DVD burner), DVDShrink pegs 3 pseudo-cores, and the single instance goes through about 10.5MB/s with AEC enabled.
You would think that doing 2 DVDs at once, pegging 6 cores in task manager since each instance pegs 3, at least 2 physical cores have to be shared between SMT threads, so each instance should slow down a bit. It doesn't, at least not noticably. The thing really acts like it has 8 cores.

I can't stress enough how big a difference the SSD makes either. I know a good SSD will put you overbudget, but it is probably worth it. Even if it does mean sticking with the slower CPU.

 

[deputc26]

Originally posted by: glugglug
If you run multiple CPU intensive tasks at once, the i7 is a no-brainer. The difference is huge. I put my new system together a month & a half ago with a Core i7, Intel x25-M for system drive, and a separate 1TB drive for photos/videos/music & apps that don't need the speed.

I couldn't believe the difference from my old Core2. It really is quite difficult to get the CPU loaded. And the power usage is better as well, since the cores spend so much time sleeping.
Back when Intel introduced hyperthreading with the P4, you were lucky if an app could get 25-30% improvement. With the i7, I am actually seeing 80-100% improvement, even when all cores are running similar tasks. For example, recompressing a DVD (from ISO on drive, otherwise its limited by the 20x DVD burner), DVDShrink pegs 3 pseudo-cores, and the single instance goes through about 10.5MB/s with AEC enabled.
You would think that doing 2 DVDs at once, pegging 6 cores in task manager since each instance pegs 3, at least 2 physical cores have to be shared between SMT threads, so each instance should slow down a bit. It doesn't, at least not noticably. The thing really acts like it has 8 cores.

I can't stress enough how big a difference the SSD makes either. I know a good SSD will put you overbudget, but it is probably worth it. Even if it does mean sticking with the slower CPU.

Agreed, if you are encoding go i7, otherwise go PhII/Core2 and use the change to get an SSD. THe average user will see a much greater perf. jump from HDD->SSD than PhII/Core 2 -->i7.

 

[trickymickey]

Ok, so I'm kind of nubby, but how exactly does a ssd work? It's basically like a usb thumb drive except much bigger I think? Would it be hooked up just like a hdd, or does it plug into a pci slot or something on the mobo? I assume i'd just install my os and frequently used programs on it and then save all music/video/files on the hdd? How much would a ssd run me, I looked around on newegg and it looked like maybe 80-100 bucks for like 30-40gb, are those just shitty drives or is that would I should expect to pay? All the ssd on newegg have "sequential write" and "sequential read" speeds on there, is this a comparable speed to a hdd, or what does that mean?

 

[vagabond66]

Check newegg.com, they have an amazing deal on a combo for an antec nine hundred two midtower case with an antec earthwatts 750w psu

 

[deputc26]

Originally posted by: trickymickey
Ok, so I'm kind of nubby, but how exactly does a ssd work? It's basically like a usb thumb drive except much bigger I think? Would it be hooked up just like a hdd, or does it plug into a pci slot or something on the mobo? I assume i'd just install my os and frequently used programs on it and then save all music/video/files on the hdd? How much would a ssd run me, I looked around on newegg and it looked like maybe 80-100 bucks for like 30-40gb, are those just shitty drives or is that would I should expect to pay? All the ssd on newegg have "sequential write" and "sequential read" speeds on there, is this a comparable speed to a hdd, or what does that mean?

Excellent questions, yes SSDs use a bunch of flash memory chips all working together. The data flow is organized by a controller. Which controller the SSD has determines largely how good the drive is, the first controllers (made by JMicron) were terrible and caused stuttering issues that most users would find unacceptable. Many(most) of the drives you see on the market still have this controller, avoid it. There are three other types of controllers on the market, the best is:

Intel's (also the most expensive) which comes only in Intel SSDs and Kingston SSDNow SSDs.

The (arguably) second best controller is made by Indilinx and is called the Barefoot controller, it is excellent and beats Intel at somethings but is not as all-round solid. SSDs using this controller are OCZ Vertex, OCZ Agility, Supertalent Ultradrive ME, G.Skill Falcon, Patriot Torqx. I believe the Falcon is currently best value at $200 for 60gb but I would get the Vertex for OCZ's superior customer service and slightly better firmware.

Last is Samsung's controller which is used in (obviously) Samsung SSDs, OCZ Summit and others though I forget the full list it is not that long.

Any of the above SSD's are excellent, Since price is an issue I'd recommend an Indilinx based drive, they are (currently) most cost effective. Though if you don't mind stepping down to AMD's fastest and newest (and only 45nm) native dual core you get $60 off the proc plus Intel SSD here and with the Phenom II X4 810 here. Oh and $45 off with the X4 955 here and $40 off with the X4 940 here.

The storage system has long been the bottle neck in modern computers and SSDs (largely) eliminate this problem which is why they provide such a huge boost to total system performance.

Best of luck with your new build.

 

[ZanatosFox]

Wow, nice post deputc26, very informative. :thumbsup:

 

[trickymickey]

Any of the above SSD's are excellent, Since price is an issue I'd recommend an Indilinx based drive, they are (currently) most cost effective. Though if you don't mind stepping down to AMD's fastest and newest (and only 45nm) native dual core you get $60 off the proc plus Intel SSD here and with the Phenom II X4 810 here. Oh and $45 off with the X4 955 here and $40 off with the X4 940 here.

Little confused, what am I stepping down from? I was planning to get AMD 955 which I thought was amd's fastest and newest cpu, no? Thanks for the information about SSDs, 300 dollars is not in my budget for storage, but I'll look into some of the lesser brands/smaller capacities.

 

[deputc26]

Thank you Fox

You would be stepping down from the 955 (unless of course you used the combo that included it) and yes the price on SSDs is a little ridiculous. My point with the Athlon II X2 is that $361 is not much more than you'd pay for a 955 plus an HDD and your system would feel a lot faster, though I'll admit you'd be sacrificing the "futureproofness" by not going quad core. Honestly it would be a tough call for me whether to go X-25m/Athlon II or 955/hdd but for the uses you mentioned the SSD system will be faster (except for a very few games). Ultimately it's your decision, feel free to ask more questions.

 

[trickymickey]

Oh also, I assume you would want the ssd to have a sata II connection. Also what does "MLC" vs "SLC" architecture mean?

 

[deputc26]

Yep SATA II for sure.

MLC and SLC are the two different types of flash memory. MLC (multi level cell) holds two bits per cell and SLC (single level cell) holds only one bit per cell. In the future MLC will hold even more than two bits per cell.

MLC Advantages: Much cheaper per Gigabyte
SLC Advantages: 1. Longer life span (Most *MLC* drives list 1.5 million hours (longer than a 100 years) of use before the average drive fails, SLC lasts ten times as long)
2. Faster write speeds and greater I/o performance.

MLC is currently better for the consumer (you) and SLC is better for the enterprise market. Not all SSD's are created equal however and overall an Intel controlled MLC drive will be faster than a JMicron controlled SLC drive. I cannot overstate how important it is to have the right controller.

Here is a great article on SSDs from this website http://www.anandtech.com/stora...howdoc.aspx?i=3531&p=1

 

[jae]

go with AMD x3 or x4, Gigabyte AM3 board, G.Skill DDR3 ram, 1TB WD Black, [PCP&P, Corsair, or Antec] 500-600w PSU (can probably find a combo deal with a case). Since you wil be gaming on a 22" screen, you should be content with a 4850 card.

 

[trickymickey]

Interesting article on SSDs, I think I'm going to stick with a HDD for now and revisit SSDs down the road, maybe at the end of the year. Since I'm going to need a decent HDD for storage with the SSD, if I go ahead and get the HDD I can always add the SSD down the road and transfer my os/apps to it then. It just seems like unless you want to drop 300ish dollars on a high end drive the performance isn't insanely better than a high end HDD, but it probably will be soon.

 

[ZanatosFox]

Originally posted by: trickymickey
Interesting article on SSDs, I think I'm going to stick with a HDD for now and revisit SSDs down the road, maybe at the end of the year. Since I'm going to need a decent HDD for storage with the SSD, if I go ahead and get the HDD I can always add the SSD down the road and transfer my os/apps to it then. It just seems like unless you want to drop 300ish dollars on a high end drive the performance isn't insanely better than a high end HDD, but it probably will be soon.

That may be true, I don't have any experience w/ the cheaper drives. I did however recently purchase the Intel X25-M 80GB SSD, and wow, I could not believe the difference it made. It breathed a bit of life back into my aging (5+ years) A643500+ system. Made the difference between WoW being basically unplayable to pretty decent (well, pretty decent considering the system's overall shortcomings). There's a thread out there about it if you want more info.

Cheers! :beer: