I need your opinion(s) on a new computer I plan on getting.

It's been a while since I last upgraded my PC...about 3 years or so and it's looking a bit long in the tooth. The best game I can manage to run smoothly is Doom 3, FarCry and Half Life 2. Everything from Bioshock and onwards has absolutely killed me. So, i'm going to get myself a new tower rather than upgrade, basically because to upgrade would involve getting a new motherboard, powersupply and case anyway, so I thought I might as well shell out the extra $300 for a new operating system and get myself a fresh system. Here are the specs I have in mind:

Power supply: Silverstone ST1000 1000W

Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad Extreme QX9770 @ 3.2Ghz

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3

Video: Galaxy GeForce GTX280 PCI-E 2.0, 1GB

RAM: Corsair DDR2 Ram, 4GB

Hard drive: 1TB Samsung Hard Disc Drive SATA2 32MB


Basically, I want a system for gaming, broadband and word processing for University. I want a kick arse machine that will run Crysis smoothly (wishful thinking) and hopefully have a system that I shouldn't have to update for another 18 months or so. How do the above specs look for that type of system?
Joel wrote:It's been a while since I last upgraded my PC...about 3 years or so and it's looking a bit long in the tooth. The best game I can manage to run smoothly is Doom 3, FarCry and Half Life 2. Everything from Bioshock and onwards has absolutely killed me. So, i'm going to get myself a new tower rather than upgrade, basically because to upgrade would involve getting a new motherboard, powersupply and case anyway, so I thought I might as well shell out the extra $300 for a new operating system and get myself a fresh system. Here are the specs I have in mind:

Power supply: Silverstone ST1000 1000W

Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad Extreme QX9770 @ 3.2Ghz

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3

Video: Galaxy GeForce GTX280 PCI-E 2.0, 1GB

RAM: Corsair DDR2 Ram, 4GB

Hard drive: 1TB Samsung Hard Disc Drive SATA2 32MB


Basically, I want a system for gaming, broadband and word processing for University. I want a kick arse machine that will run Crysis smoothly (wishful thinking) and hopefully have a system that I shouldn't have to update for another 18 months or so. How do the above specs look for that type of system?
Expensive.

Will it play Crysis smoothly? Definitely.

Some issues:

1. The Motherboard is designed to enhance ATI based video cards. You have chosen a Nvidia.

2. The Motherboard does not match up well with the Extreme Processor you chose. This would be like a Ferrari with 14 inch wheels. You're spending big money on a processor and combining it with a motherboard and memory chipset that will not match up with it.

3. DDR2 memory with the Processor you chose. Not a good mix.

Suggestions:

1. Pick a less expensive CPU (like an Intel Core 2 Duo 8500) and exchange the video card for an ATI 4870X2 2GB DDR5 card. If you add another card in the future this setup will smoke. This would save you about $1185 American (so I'm assuming a lot for whatever these go for in Australia). In real world performance with what you've selected this setup would actually perform as well if not better than what you've picked.

2. Keep the CPU and Video Card you chose and change the motherboard for an EVGA 790i Ultra SLI and switch the memory for 4GB of DDR3 memory. This would cost you about $250 more American (again sorry). This setup would flat out destroy. Crysis wouldn't know what hit it. Rather future proof too.

3. Change the motherboard, video card, and ram. Get an Asus P5E3 Premium Wi-Fi motherboard (around $380 American), the aforementioned ATI 4870X2 (about $550 American) and 4GB of DDR3 memory (about $170 American). This would be likely around $230 more (american) for the MB, $130 more for the video card, and $35 more for the Ram. So for right around $400 more you could have a system that is even better than option 2 (and $150 more than option 2 again in American money).

If I were choosing and money wasnt an issue then option 3 would be my choice. In fact I'm having a Falcon Northwest built for me to replace my 3 year old system with those exact parts but with 2 of the ATI cards in a crossfire configuration (for 4 GPUs). If it's good enough for a Falcon NW Mach 5, then it should be good enough for anyone.

If you are on budget then option 1 would be a good solid choice that I don't think anyone would regret even trying to play Crysis.

I learned long ago that if I'm building my own machine to find out what exact parts Falcon NW used and use the same (saving usually a thousand or more than having them build it). Now though I just let Falcon build them for me. My 3 year old system isn't bad at all (it can play Crysis almost decently) but I needed another system for LAN parties. Have to have the engine to keep up with the other guys.

Hope my advice helps.
How much money will it cost? There's no reason not to cut corners.

--Go AMD! (um... I'm an AMD stockholder, soooo...)
--Quad may be excessive. The difference might not be worth the money:
http://www.bambam.info/images/porta.GIF
--1000W may be excessive?
--Can use re-use your current HD(s)? 1TB drives may be cheaper in the future.
--Get a cheap case that's functional and not pretty
so I thought I might as well shell out the extra $300 for a new operating system
Why not save $300 and use what you have now? Or something that's free? That's the whole point of not buying a retail computer.

My experience with building my computer was good, but the board I got in my barebones was too cheap. A $50 board won't cut it; that I regret. So the Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3 is good.

I recommend checking out the barebones systems at http://www.magicmicro.com/ Even if just to see what's possible.
Quad Cores are only relevant for programs that take advantage of multiple cores like Crysis. The number of programs that do this are extremely limited. It does however prepare you for the future.

The AMD Phenom is actually pretty damn good bang for the buck.
lotus_j wrote:
Joel wrote:It's been a while since I last upgraded my PC...about 3 years or so and it's looking a bit long in the tooth. The best game I can manage to run smoothly is Doom 3, FarCry and Half Life 2. Everything from Bioshock and onwards has absolutely killed me. So, i'm going to get myself a new tower rather than upgrade, basically because to upgrade would involve getting a new motherboard, powersupply and case anyway, so I thought I might as well shell out the extra $300 for a new operating system and get myself a fresh system. Here are the specs I have in mind:

Power supply: Silverstone ST1000 1000W

Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad Extreme QX9770 @ 3.2Ghz

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3

Video: Galaxy GeForce GTX280 PCI-E 2.0, 1GB

RAM: Corsair DDR2 Ram, 4GB

Hard drive: 1TB Samsung Hard Disc Drive SATA2 32MB


Basically, I want a system for gaming, broadband and word processing for University. I want a kick arse machine that will run Crysis smoothly (wishful thinking) and hopefully have a system that I shouldn't have to update for another 18 months or so. How do the above specs look for that type of system?
Expensive.

Will it play Crysis smoothly? Definitely.

Some issues:

1. The Motherboard is designed to enhance ATI based video cards. You have chosen a Nvidia.

2. The Motherboard does not match up well with the Extreme Processor you chose. This would be like a Ferrari with 14 inch wheels. You're spending big money on a processor and combining it with a motherboard and memory chipset that will not match up with it.

3. DDR2 memory with the Processor you chose. Not a good mix.

Suggestions:

1. Pick a less expensive CPU (like an Intel Core 2 Duo 8500) and exchange the video card for an ATI 4870X2 2GB DDR5 card. If you add another card in the future this setup will smoke. This would save you about $1185 American (so I'm assuming a lot for whatever these go for in Australia). In real world performance with what you've selected this setup would actually perform as well if not better than what you've picked.

2. Keep the CPU and Video Card you chose and change the motherboard for an EVGA 790i Ultra SLI and switch the memory for 4GB of DDR3 memory. This would cost you about $250 more American (again sorry). This setup would flat out destroy. Crysis wouldn't know what hit it. Rather future proof too.

3. Change the motherboard, video card, and ram. Get an Asus P5E3 Premium Wi-Fi motherboard (around $380 American), the aforementioned ATI 4870X2 (about $550 American) and 4GB of DDR3 memory (about $170 American). This would be likely around $230 more (american) for the MB, $130 more for the video card, and $35 more for the Ram. So for right around $400 more you could have a system that is even better than option 2 (and $150 more than option 2 again in American money).

If I were choosing and money wasnt an issue then option 3 would be my choice. In fact I'm having a Falcon Northwest built for me to replace my 3 year old system with those exact parts but with 2 of the ATI cards in a crossfire configuration (for 4 GPUs). If it's good enough for a Falcon NW Mach 5, then it should be good enough for anyone.

If you are on budget then option 1 would be a good solid choice that I don't think anyone would regret even trying to play Crysis.

I learned long ago that if I'm building my own machine to find out what exact parts Falcon NW used and use the same (saving usually a thousand or more than having them build it). Now though I just let Falcon build them for me. My 3 year old system isn't bad at all (it can play Crysis almost decently) but I needed another system for LAN parties. Have to have the engine to keep up with the other guys.

Hope my advice helps.
WOOOW, thanks so much for that. It made very good reading. I've been doing some more research and I think i've addressed the mother board issue and i've ended up downgrading the processor a little and adding some more RAM. How does this look instead:


Power supply: 825W H/duty power supply

Processor: Quadcore 9450 @ 2.6GHz

Motherboard: MSI P7NSLI Platinum

RAM: 8GB Kingston DUal Channel DDR2

Storage: 2 X Samsung 750G

Video: 2 X Asus 1G 260GTX PCI (each 512MB)
I personally don't see an issue with DDR 2 ram with that set-up. DDR 3 is ridiculously expensive, and you can probably save a bit getting some very good DDR 2 at higher clock speeds, and lower latencys.

And playing Crysis smoothly? Perhaps... but don't expect any AA or AF even with that setup. I would not use Crysis as a benchmark either as it is still a terribly optimised game. If you want, try Crysis Warhead instead, much more optimised version of the engine, and scaled better.

Also, it's better of going a little lower down on the food chain to get more bang for your buck, yet giving yourself the headroom to overclock. If you don't really want to risk it though, be prepared to pay big bucks to get the same performance out of stock.

Also, avoid the 1TB drives, you'd be better of getting 2X500gb and RAID-0 them for double the bandwidth. But of course there is a risk or data loss, so I would get a Raptor or Velociraptor for your OS installation drive(s), and RAID-0 your data drives... works very well for my setup.

Anyway, use what lotus said as a benchmark because its good detailed advice, but you'd want to get the most out of that setup if you are going to go into that much detail and spend that much money. If you just buy it and leave it without any urge to tweak it, you might as well buy a Dell XPS or something (yuck!).

Just for comparison's sake, my current setup is has an Intel Core2 Extreme Quad QX9650, 8GB DDR Ram @ 4-4-4-12 latency, GeForce 8800 GTS 512 (needs an upgrade soon as it is the only one holding me back for latest games), and it fairs pretty well with latest games although Crysis makes it buckle at the knees.

-Cub. =o)
my few euro cents

OK cpu sound fine but i dont know the buss frequincy of it and the memory

in short i rather see u use a asus mainbord that had a bus frequincy of 1666 FSB front side buss


its better to have a slower CPU with a higher FSB if u are taking use of the high end features

same with memory like whats been said better go for some DDR3 its usualy faster but even so do make sure the memory is rated for the speed.

Video

well i would not bother with a 1 gig nvidia card its not better then the 512 ones not even faster its basicly a slow card beefed up.

if u realy want kick ass vid results go for two XFX nvidia 9600 cards in SLI link that will also use that 1000 power suply u are aiming for since those cards to tend to hog a bit of power

Last note on power suply make sure its one of those "cable friendly" ones i mean the ones that have plugs on both ends so u only have cabbles in the pc that are needed.

Hard drives my vieuws
the bigger a hard disk the bigger the clusters hence the more date loss when filling it up we all know the fealing u have a 500 gb hard drive but its full when u have about 450 gigs on it

Seeing the amount of cash u are wanting to spend u could try this
Get a solid state drive of 30 gig or so and use that as your windows system drive it will be alot faster then any regular drive on the market at this time
then for data and stuff get two 500 gb drives that way u have less chance of loosing all date ewhen a drive failes.



last note on kick as computers

Do not save money on keeping your system kool dont get a boxed processor the kooler will barely keep the cpu kooled go got a over kill zalman cpu cooler also make sure the computer case has enuf cooling.

in any case thats my few euro cents
Live is too short to waste it make sure its with the one u love !
MAIL : [email protected]
Joel wrote:
WOOOW, thanks so much for that. It made very good reading. I've been doing some more research and I think i've addressed the mother board issue and i've ended up downgrading the processor a little and adding some more RAM. How does this look instead:


Power supply: 825W H/duty power supply

Processor: Quadcore 9450 @ 2.6GHz

Motherboard: MSI P7NSLI Platinum

RAM: 8GB Kingston DUal Channel DDR2

Storage: 2 X Samsung 750G

Video: 2 X Asus 1G 260GTX PCI (each 512MB)
You should go with the original power supply from your first post.

Go for the Quadcore 9550. It has some multimedia extensions the 9450 doesn't have. It is also faster and in the states costs $10 more. It's worth it. MAKE SURE:

GET A ZALMAN 92MM FAN FOR THE CPU. Don't mess around with the stock fan.

The MB you've chosen has known issues with the NVidia card you've chosen and the QuadCore processors. So I'd stay away from that motherboard. The motherboard is the one place you don't want to cut corners. Your system can only be as strong as the MB it is based on. With the money you've saved from switching CPUs you could easily upgrade to the Asus P5E3 Premium Wi-Fi MB and notice a serious increase in performance. The main differences are the chipsets. The Intel X48 chipset blows away the NVidia chipset. The other difference is the RAM it uses. One is DDR2 the other is DDR3. You want DDR3.

RAM: GET DDR3. If you're going Quad Core you have to get a motherboard that really smokes with it (has the right chipset). These motherboards generally have DDR3. If you go with the Asus P5E3 (and you should) then you'll be set for DDR3. DDR3 is only about 25% more expensive than DDR2. It's about 50% faster in tests.

Video Card: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU5GkRsucQY

You want an ATI based 4870X2 (the X2 models have 2 GPUs on the board). The biggest difference is how these cards use RAM. First the ATI uses DDR5 which is faster. Second the R700 based cards are much better at accessing and using memory. One of the biggest farces in the industry has been huge memory video cards, where the memory is too much for the pipeline and performance increases aren't worth it for the money spent. The R700 uses the same tech they invented for the Xbox 360 and allows for larger memory usage. The whole setup can actually take full advantage of DDR5. Potential for the R700 series is through the roof.

The above video is a standard 4870 vs a GTX280 over clocked. It's not even a 4870X2.

Hard Drive: I'd take Cubase's advice. Get a Velociraptor have the OS installed on it. Then get 2 500GB HDs and have them RAID 0 array. That would be really tight.

If you did all the above then you'd likely still be spending less money than your original setup in the first post. You'd also out perform that machine dramatically.

***UPDATE***

I've since searched Australian prices on things. It appears DDR3 is more expensive in Australia than it is in the states. Comparing PC8500 (the DDR2 Ram you'd use) to DDR3 in 4GB the price ranged from $230 to $290 for the PC8500 and $320 to $400 for the DDR3. The MB price difference (between the ASUS P5E3 Deluxe and Premium, Deluxe=DDR2, Premium=DDR3) was $170. So to get DDR3 the true cost difference would be about $260 Australian.

I'm not sure if that is worth it for you. I'd suggest that if you're thinking of the future the MB would be worth it, and you can add more DDR3 memory when their price drops (it will, it will become the standard in about 2 years). If you're looking to save the money make sure you choose the ASUS P5E3 that has the 1600MHZ FSB and not the 1333MHZ FSB (there appears to only be about a $30 Australian price difference).

I also only found ONE ATI 4870X2 in Australia made by a company called GAINWARD and I know nothing about them. I did notice a few familiar brands with a single 4870. It could be that you won't see more 4870X2 in Australia for a short while, but I'm sure they're coming. They kick ass.

The ASUS P5E3 is made for ATI btw. If you're serious about the slower Nvidia go with the EVGA 790i Ultra SLI.
lotus_j wrote:
I've since searched Australian prices on things. It appears DDR3 is more expensive in Australia than it is in the states. Comparing PC8500 (the DDR2 Ram you'd use) to DDR3 in 4GB the price ranged from $230 to $290 for the PC8500 and $320 to $400 for the DDR3. The MB price difference (between the ASUS P5E3 Deluxe and Premium, Deluxe=DDR2, Premium=DDR3) was $170. So to get DDR3 the true cost difference would be about $260 Australian.
You can say that again. The main reason why I encouraged Joel to stick with DDR2 is becuase (despite being cheaper in US and other countries) DDR3 is ridiculously expensive here... heck even DDR2 is expensive, and have only recently been coming down in price.

But then again, if you are serious about future proofing to the max, then DDR3 is worth it... but also remember that a good amount of cash on some very good DDR2 will probably work out better than the same amount of cash on some cheaper/nastier DDR3, given the price difference between the two in Aus. Also, I don't know if it is still the case with latest DDR3 sticks, but a lot of MBs can't cope with too many DDR3 sticks (3 or 4), limiting the ability to OC much? This was what troubled me when I built my system and encouraged me to get some good quality 4x 2GB DDR2 sticks ahead of DDR3.

And I agree about the motherboard. Spending more saves you more in the long run as it will give you more headroom to push the system... especially if you are going DDR3.

Question Joel: Vista or XP? If you want to utilise more than 3.5GB of ram you will need a 64-bit OS... however XP-64 is a bit dodgy.

-Cub. =o)
Definitely Windows Vista 64 bit, i've actually been told that would be the best way to go. Plus I want to have the latest operating system. Have they made a service pack for Vista yet?
Joel wrote:Definitely Windows Vista 64 bit, i've actually been told that would be the best way to go. Plus I want to have the latest operating system. Have they made a service pack for Vista yet?
Yes, we are up to Vista SP1, and XP SP3.

-Cub. =o)
Thanks for that. I just wish I was as conversant with computer hardware as you guys. I have some idea of what is good and what isn't, but how would I know which Motherboard works best with a processor? Just in general, how do I work out what is compatible with what? Is there a guide I can read to help me identify these things?
Joel wrote:Thanks for that. I just wish I was as conversant with computer hardware as you guys. I have some idea of what is good and what isn't, but how would I know which Motherboard works best with a processor? Just in general, how do I work out what is compatible with what? Is there a guide I can read to help me identify these things?
unfortunately there is no be-an-and-end-all guide to what you should buy. It simply comes from experience and patience. Computer hardware forums are a good source of information as you have many people who have gained real world experience through trial and error.

It's like the community we have here, where you have a bunch of folks, each proficient in the subject medium sharing stories, ideas and experiences to the point where the forum as a whole (and its members) are wiser with every sitting.

Aside from forums, hardware review sites are also a good source of useful information. Anandtech, TomsHardware and Guru3D are some of my favorite ones.

I can tell you who you should NEVER take advice from though; and that is the Vendors. 9 times out of 10 these folks are salespeople rather than professionals and usually only recommend what works for them rather than catering a solution for you.

Anyway, good luck with your new system... remember it is always better to ask questions and learn the ropes rather than buy the best of everything and wonder why it does not work how you want it to.

-Cub. =o)
Joel wrote:Thanks for that. I just wish I was as conversant with computer hardware as you guys. I have some idea of what is good and what isn't, but how would I know which Motherboard works best with a processor? Just in general, how do I work out what is compatible with what? Is there a guide I can read to help me identify these things?
Chipsets are CONSTANTLY changing and the chipsets are generally what makes one MB better than another in addition to the feature sets. AMD, Intel, and Nvidia all make chipsets. Sometimes certain chipsets are better than others. In my line of work I get to hear about them all and their tendencies.

Technology changes so often that it is incredibly difficult for the consumer to keep up with it all. Years ago I started telling people the best way to keep up with the best product was to look and see what the industry leaders are using. One company that always wins in the benchmark tests (and I mean ALWAYS) is Falcon NorthWest the original PC manufacturer for "gaming enthusiasts." Falcon always creates the fastest and best reliable machines on the planet. It doesn't matter your budget, their system will win a benchmark shootout with any machine in their budget. At one point years ago they had never lost a head to head matchup. I'm not sure if that is still current, but for over 10 years that was the case. They know product. They also use the same stuff you and I can go into a store and buy. They don't use any product made especially for them. There are no video cards with things removed like Dell and others (including AlienWare now) use for example.

So I tell people: Go price a system with a Falcon NW configurator on their web site:

http://www.falcon-nw.com

All the equipment they put in their machines is listed by brand and product ID. So you can see what they put in a machine. While you may find what MBs, etc. they use and thus what chipsets are kicking ass you can't find out which ones "don't." Just assume that if they aren't using something there is a reason. They have no "brand loyalty," they just use the best, period. So they don't always use "X," brand or anything.
Cubase wrote:

You can say that again. The main reason why I encouraged Joel to stick with DDR2 is becuase (despite being cheaper in US and other countries) DDR3 is ridiculously expensive here... heck even DDR2 is expensive, and have only recently been coming down in price.

But then again, if you are serious about future proofing to the max, then DDR3 is worth it... but also remember that a good amount of cash on some very good DDR2 will probably work out better than the same amount of cash on some cheaper/nastier DDR3, given the price difference between the two in Aus. Also, I don't know if it is still the case with latest DDR3 sticks, but a lot of MBs can't cope with too many DDR3 sticks (3 or 4), limiting the ability to OC much? This was what troubled me when I built my system and encouraged me to get some good quality 4x 2GB DDR2 sticks ahead of DDR3.

And I agree about the motherboard. Spending more saves you more in the long run as it will give you more headroom to push the system... especially if you are going DDR3.

Question Joel: Vista or XP? If you want to utilise more than 3.5GB of ram you will need a 64-bit OS... however XP-64 is a bit dodgy.

-Cub. =o)
Well the DDR3 at $320 is actually pretty good memory. DDR3 as a rule is more efficient than DDR2. The latency of "bad memory," is much better than DDR2. So the total cost difference is $260 Australian (MB and memory difference) of the gear I'd suggest using. The question really is for Joel. If that isn't a big deal then he should go for it.

A year ago you're probably right about the same amount of cash in DDR2 outperforming the same amount in DDR3. That isn't the case today. The difference is the MB costs. Still if you're investing serious cash the extra $260 for the MB and RAM is definitely worth it for performance and future proofing.