Battlefield 3 Build - $2k

[fire r a g e]

Hey everyone. It has been a long time since I have posted on THG and a lot has changed since then (I have been keeping up with the updates). I have been researching a lot over the past few months, but I still don't think I can come up with a config on my own, so I need help from you all.

1) What will you be doing with this PC? Gaming? Photoshop? Web browsing? etc
Gaming (BF3, Skyrim, GW2), minor video editing, web browsing, watching youtube in 1080p quality.

2) What's your budget? Are tax and shipping included?
$2k, although if REALLY necessary, I can stretch it a bit ($100 to $200 more)
3) Which country do you live in? If the U.S, please tell us the state and city if possible.
U.S. Dallas, TX

4) If reusing any parts, what parts will you be reusing? Please be especially specific about the power supply. List make and model.
None.
5) Will you be overclocking?
Yes.
6) What is the max resolution of your monitor? What size is it?
2560x1440; 27"
7) When do you plan on building/buying the PC?
September 14 when my paycheck comes
8) What features do you need in a motherboard? RAID? Firewire? Crossfire or SLI support? USB 3.0? SATA 6Gb/s? eSATA? Onboard video (as a backup or main GPU)? UEFI? etc.
Maybe CF/SLI support, if I need it, USB 3.0, SATA 6GB/s, UEFI.
9) Do you already have a legit and reusable/transferable OS key/license? If yes, what OS? Is it 32bit or 64bit?
Yes, 64-bit W7 Home Premium.

Thanks!

 

[blazorthon]

You can also argue that a good 660 ti that can oc to 1300+ mhz core can perform as fast as a regular gtx 680. Problem is how do you know its a good gpu or not unrolled you overclock it. If you are not gonna use aa/af at all, might as well get a "good" pair of gtx 660 ti and overclock them to 1300+ mhz for even less money.

You'd be wrong to argue that because the 660 Ti can't match a 680 whereas the 7950 can match the 7970. The 660 Ti has crap overclocking headroom in performance because of its weak memory interface. It's weak memory and ROP interface almost cripples it when AA is used and even when it's not used, it's still a performance inhibitor. Two 7950s are far better than two 660 Ti cards. The 660 Ti is an extremely unbalanced card. It's GPU can be overclocked as much as you want, but it has hardly any GPU performance scaling at all in its minimum FPS, which is already poor enough. It's memory is what needs to be overclocked for a worthwhile performance gain and it simply doesn't have enough headroom to make enough of a difference to even match the 7870 in overclocking, let alone the 7950. Heck, even the average 7850 with a good non-reference cooler is somewhat better than a 660 Ti in overclocking.

 

[sherlockwing]

I get it now. However, what would be the advantage of either case over the other?

www.anandtech.com/show/4972/corsair-carbide-500r-a-corsair-in-every-home/6

Going down that page,,Thor V2 is better in very cooling category except SSD temp(not going to melt either way),

V2: 2 usb 2.0 front port, built in top exhaust fan, space for a dust filtered bottom 140mm(this is a drop & plug slot, you don't even need screws) and more interior room.

500R is a better value now(I bought V2 when it was onsale for 103.99), you don't have to sort through different screws(all in one bag for Thor) and is 14 pound lighter(I am have no muscle and always end up last in PE yet I had no problem carrying the Thor up a long winding stairwell).

 

[jacknhut]

You'd be wrong to argue that because the 660 Ti can't match a 680 whereas the 7950 can match the 7970. The 660 Ti has crap overclocking headroom in performance because of its weak memory interface. It's weak memory and ROP interface almost cripples it when AA is used and even when it's not used, it's still a performance inhibitor. Two 7950s are far better than two 660 Ti cards. The 660 Ti is an extremely unbalanced card. It's GPU can be overclocked as much as you want, but it has hardly any GPU performance scaling at all in its minimum FPS, which is already poor enough.

Actually it can match a reference gtx 680 if oc high enough. Reviews of a pair of gtx 660 to is actually very close in performance of gtx 670 and 680 in non as/af settings.

 

[DeusAres]

So here is what I came up with.
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($215.99 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 612 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($49.98 @ NCIX US)
Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Extreme3 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($132.86 @ Newegg)
Memory: Samsung 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($44.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1.5TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 240GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($189.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card (CrossFire) ($341.04 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card (CrossFire) ($341.04 @ NCIX US)
Case: Corsair 500R Black ATX Mid Tower Case ($94.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair 750W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($94.98 @ NCIX US)
Total: $1575.85
(Prices include shipping and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2012-09-08 22:31 EDT-0400)

What do you guys think? I tweaked azeem40's build a bit.

Looks good.

I would go with this cooler instead...

Noctua NH-D14
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835608018

I would also consider going with the Asrock z77 extreme4 motherboard. You get a bit more features for not much more than the extreme3 mobo.

ASRock Z77 Extreme4
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157293

Other than that, everything else looks good. Shouldn't have any problem maxing out BF3.

 

[blazorthon]

Actually it can match a reference gtx 680 if oc high enough. Reviews of a pair of gtx 660 to is actually very close in performance of gtx 670 and 680 in non as/af settings.

OP is playing at 1080p. OP will be using AA/AF. Also, I've never heard of any review where a 660 Ti could come anywhere close to a 680 in overclocking performance.There are some that used cherry picked 660 Ti's to get way above normal memory overclocks that could compete with a stock 680 in performance, but those were neither realistic nor able to compete with an overclocked 680 in performance like the 7950s can. A 192 bit GDDR5 bus is very bad for such a high-end GPU as the GK104, even for the version used in the 660 Ti and 670.

 

[azeem40]

The 500R has a completely tool-less design.

 

[sherlockwing]

The 500R has a completely tool-less design.

Thor V2 have tool-less Hard drive and optical drive cages as well, the anandtech review recommend bolting in the optical but I didn't have vibration problem with my optical before I bolted it in, just bolted because I could. Also, the anandtech review mentioned Thor V2 didn't have a 3.0 header, but it have been a fixed quite a while back, mine have a 3.0 header.

You wouldn't ever lose your thumbscrew with the 500R, but I am a messy man yet failed to lose any of the Thor V2 thumb screws when I took the cover off(5+ times).

 

[jacknhut]

OP is playing at 1080p. OP will be using AA/AF. Also, I've never heard of any review where a 660 Ti could come anywhere close to a 680 in overclocking performance.There are some that used cherry picked 660 Ti's to get way above normal memory overclocks that could compete with a stock 680 in performance, but those were neither realistic nor able to compete with an overclocked 680 in performance like the 7950s can. A 192 bit GDDR5 bus is very bad for such a high-end GPU as the GK104, even for the version used in the 660 Ti and 670.

Actually op DOES NOT use aa/af.

 

[blazorthon]

Actually op DOES NOT use aa/af.

Oop's, got messed up between another thread, my bad. Still, at that resolution, the 660 Ti still has a substantial disadvantage even without AA.

 

[azeem40]

Thor V2 have tool-less Hard drive and optical drive cages as well, the anandtech review recommend bolting in the optical but I didn't have vibration problem with my optical before I bolted it in, just bolted because I could. Also, the anandtech review mentioned Thor V2 didn't have a 3.0 header, but it have been a fixed quite a while back, mine have a 3.0 header.

You wouldn't ever lose your thumbscrew with the 500R, but I am a messy man yet failed to lose any of the Thor V2 thumb screws when I took the cover off(5+ times).

You can't lose the thumb screws unless you force them off, thus breaking them. You just loosen them and the side/front panel comes right off on the 500R.

 

[sherlockwing]

You can't lose the thumb screws unless you force them off, thus breaking them. You just loosen them and the side/front panel comes right off on the 500R.

I mean lose(lost) them as in place them(thumscrews) somewhere and forget where they were a few minutes later. Was actually paying compliment to 500R's stay-on thumb screw design.

500R's right side panel is have a an area bent outward to help cable management, really helpful if you can't be bothered with tying all your cables down, but if you tie them all down Thor V2 handles cable management just fine.

 

[azeem40]

Actually op DOES NOT use aa/af.

Actually, he said he won't be MAXING AA/AF.

 

[ojas]

So here is what I came up with.
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($215.99 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 612 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($49.98 @ NCIX US)
Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Extreme3 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($132.86 @ Newegg)
Memory: Samsung 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($44.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1.5TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 240GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($189.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card (CrossFire) ($341.04 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card (CrossFire) ($341.04 @ NCIX US)
Case: Corsair 500R Black ATX Mid Tower Case ($94.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair 750W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($94.98 @ NCIX US)
Total: $1575.85
(Prices include shipping and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2012-09-08 22:31 EDT-0400)

What do you guys think? I tweaked azeem40's build a bit.

Well i didn't go through all of the posts, but here's what i'd do:
Replace the i5 with an i7-3770K for $100 more since you do some video editing.

Use an AsRock Extreme4 or Extreme6 for $2 or $55 more respectively

Use two HIS IceQ Turbo H795QT3G2M Radeon HD 7950 3GB cards which were for about the same price as the ones you've listed, but it's discontinued on newegg. Two of those should give you an excellentprice/performance ratio at your resolution:

(http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7950-review-benchmark,3207-13.html)

Use a Samsung 830 equivalent of the SSD for around $30 more.

Use GSkill's Sniper Series 1.25v RAM for $3 more

Yes the 500R is a great case, though i've found Cooler Master's HAF 912 to be phenomenal value. Add a 200mm fan on the front and the top, shift the included front fan to the VGA intake area. Or, use two intake fans on the front, 200mm on top and a 140 on the side, your choice really.

Also check out the InWin Dragon Rider, though i own an HAF 912 Advanced so i can only really talk about that.

If you decide to keep the case, your total will come to about $1764 with the Extreme6. If you go with the 912, you'll end up saving $14 with the two 200mm fans included, or spend $10 more for the Dragon Rider.

Heck i guess you could even get the ZALMAN CNPS12X or Noctua's NH-D14 for another $50 or so, both of which are excellent coolers.

I use the EVO, it is very good but then again i don't overclock.

 

[blazorthon]

The Evo is plenty for minor and moderate overclocking and the 612 is even better, I can also recommend the HAF 912, a more expensive mobo doesn't seem like a good *investment* if OP isn't going for some more extreme overclocking, 1.25V RAM doesn't seem to have a significant advantage over 1.5V RAM except it uses slightly less power, and a Vertex 4 256GB is both as reliable as the Samsung 830 256 GB with current firmware and a lot faster, and also doesn't use SandForce like the Mushkin drives do while being the same price as the Mushkin Chronos Delux 240GB.

Excluding the i7 versus i5 for non-gaming purposes, none of these recommendations are likely to have a significant impact on gaming performance despite the significant impact in price, so I can't really recommend many of them. Well, that's my take on it.

 

[azeem40]

I agree with the above.

 

[fire r a g e]

If that is true, I will get the Vertex 4 instead.

So, parts:
500R case
2 7950s
Vertex 4 256GB

 

[Flare01]

Actually, he said he won't be MAXING AA/AF.

Unless my English is so bad that I'm incapable of understanding a simple sentence, I believe this statement below written by OP means that he won't be using AA/AF.

BF3
Skyrim
GW2
Metro 2033

I plan on playing with no AA or AF as I cannot tell the difference between it turned on or off.

 

[jacknhut]

Unless my English is so bad that I'm incapable of understanding a simple sentence, I believe this statement below written by OP means that he won't be using AA/AF.

I think your English is fine Flare. I also understand it the same way you do.

I just found a review on overclocked GTX 660Ti vs overclocked GTX 670 vs overclocked 7950 here:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/08/23/galaxy_gtx_660_ti_gc_oc_vs_670_hd_7950/2

Look like the 3 cards are pretty close (within 6 fps of each other) in BF3, and in Skyrim the 7950 takes the lead where in Batman the table turns and the 2 Nvidia cards win over.

I guess if you wanna go with 7950, go with that XFX Black Edition one.

 

[ojas]

Yeah well. They weren't really performance enhancing suggestions (except the cards and the i7).

The case and the coolers were suggested for better cooling and lower noise, though to be frank I haven't any clue about the 612. And i'm not quite sure i'd put an EVO in a 2k build, especially when i have a lot of money left over.

The HIS cards are good from a performance/cooling/noise/OC/price POV, however that's subject to their availability.

OCZ's drives don't inspire confidence in me, though i can't really speak for the Indillix based drives.
In SSDs i usually only feel safe suggesting Samsung's 830, an Intel or Curcial drive.

Agreed, 1.25V RAM have no particular advantage except power, and perhaps overclocking since they're doing 9-9-9-24 on 1.25v, so they should be able to hit lower latency numbers at higher voltages. Can't guarantee that of course.
But then they were only like $4 more, which i guess you'd recover from your power bill in some time (how much time, i can't say, i don't live in the US).

Now, the motherboard. Extreme4 was a suggestion because Tom's had a look at it and approved it, plus the ratings on newegg aren't bad. Plus it's only $2 more, so that makes sense.

Extreme6 again because i've actually read a review about it on Tom's, and i guess features are also a point to consider. But again, that's a personal choice, which is why i suggested both.

And it was still within budget, so. Anyway, these were just suggestions, and points of discussion. After all, $2k can buy you a lot, and you have a lot of options at this price point.

 

[sherlockwing]

The Evo is plenty for minor and moderate overclocking and the 612 is even better, I can also recommend the HAF 912, a more expensive mobo doesn't seem like a good *investment* if OP isn't going for some more extreme overclocking, 1.25V RAM doesn't seem to have a significant advantage over 1.5V RAM except it uses slightly less power, and a Vertex 4 256GB is both as reliable as the Samsung 830 256 GB with current firmware and a lot faster, and also doesn't use SandForce like the Mushkin drives do while being the same price as the Mushkin Chronos Delux 240GB.

Excluding the i7 versus i5 for non-gaming purposes, none of these recommendations are likely to have a significant impact on gaming performance despite the significant impact in price, so I can't really recommend many of them. Well, that's my take on it.

Samsung 830 560mb/s read 525 mb/s write Unless the data listed on Tom is blatantly wrong I fail to see how OCZ is a lot faster. Plus even if OCZ is say 100mb/s faster in write the difference in most loading would be barely over 1 sec, definitely not recognizable.

Samsung's SSD reliability reputation is far beyond that of OCZ's and 830 is a more proven product(released earlier) and winner for Tom's best SSD for the money award for multiple consecutive month at its price point. You might still want OCZ because it might be a little cheaper but Samsung 830 wouldn't set you back in speed much if at all and come with a longer reliability track record and stellar reputation.

 

[blazorthon]

Samsung 830 560mb/s read 525 mb/s write Unless the data listed on Tom is blatantly wrong I fail to see how OCZ is a lot faster. Plus even if OCZ is say 100mb/s faster in write the difference in most loading would be barely over 1 sec, definitely not recognizable.

Samsung's SSD reliability reputation is far beyond that of OCZ's and 830 is a more proven product(released earlier) and winner for Tom's best SSD for the money award for multiple consecutive month at its price point. You might still want OCZ because it might be a little cheaper but Samsung 830 wouldn't set you back in speed much if at all and come with a longer reliability track record and stellar reputation.

The Vertex 4 is a lot faster in random writes. I should have specified, my bad. Outside of random writes, the Vertex 4 isn't too much faster, although the Vertex 4 has lower access times and can thus be a little snappier.

OCZ's Vertex 4 uses a completely different controller from their previous SSDs. Unlike those previous models, it is extremely reliable (as is the Agility 4, but that is often overpriced). It uses a Marvell controller instead of OCZ's unreliable SandForce implementation.

Edit: Also, strait from that article you linked:
[citation][nom]Andrew Ku[/nom] But there's a little more to the story. When we first reviewed the Vertex 4, it was outperformed by the Vertex 3. However, improvements made to firmware version 1.5, which we discussed in OCZ Vertex 4 128 GB: Revisiting Write Performance With Firmware 1.5, essentially put the newer SSD on par with its predecessor. In the time between our original story and now, our 256 GB drive is almost 25% quicker.

This changes our opinion of the Vertex 4, since OCZ has a product able to more equally match the performance it offered previously in the Vertex 3. More than before the Vertex 4 seems to be a strong alternative to Samsung's 830 if you want a performance-oriented SSD that doesn't depend on compression technology to put its best foot forward. [/citation]

OCZ will continue with firmware improvements. The 830 won't be able to hold out agaisnt the Vertex 4 even in read performance for much longer.

 

[fire r a g e]

I might just get this:
CPU: Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($215.99 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 612 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($49.98 @ NCIX US)
Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Extreme3 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($132.86 @ Newegg)
Memory: Samsung 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($44.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1.5TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 240GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($189.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card (CrossFire) ($341.04 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card (CrossFire) ($341.04 @ NCIX US)
Case: Corsair 500R Black ATX Mid Tower Case ($94.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair 750W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($94.98 @ NCIX US)
Total: $1575.85
(Prices include shipping and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2012-09-08 22:31 EDT-0400)

 

[Quantum01]

I might just get this:
CPU: Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($215.99 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 612 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($49.98 @ NCIX US)
Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Extreme3 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($132.86 @ Newegg)
Memory: Samsung 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($44.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1.5TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 240GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($189.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card (CrossFire) ($341.04 @ NCIX US)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon HD 7950 3GB Video Card (CrossFire) ($341.04 @ NCIX US)
Case: Corsair 500R Black ATX Mid Tower Case ($94.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair 750W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($94.98 @ NCIX US)
Total: $1575.85
(Prices include shipping and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2012-09-08 22:31 EDT-0400)

Just wanna let you know, you got a 2000 dollars budget and you are trying to save pennies on the cheapest motherboard available on the market that support SLI/CF. I used to have that Z77 Extreme 3 and it's build quality is terrible. The board is flimsy, the PCB is very thin compared to Asus or Gigabyte and very easily warpable when you provide moderate amount of pressure on the CPU socket installing a large heatsink. That board is for a budget build who have to squeeze in every pennies they got, not for a good overclocking build. When overclocking, you don't just look at the overclocking capabilies, but its long term stabilities as well and that board while have the capabilities to overclock, but I seriously doubt it long term stability due to the cheap VRM design.

I also have a similar budget as you and I was able to get a much higher end system with the X79 chipset and i7 and dual Gigabyte HD 7970 that I can overclock to 1220 Mhz Core 7.2 Ghz memory without touching the voltage at all. With some additional voltage, the Gigabyte HD 7970 Windforce 3 go up to 1285 Mhz core stable.

To be honest I don't see any HD 7950 that can overclock that high ever and yes I have done lots of research. This review here of the Sapphire HD 7950 OC card showed that it can barely reach 1065 Mhz core overclock without voltage increase, which is much worse than any reference HD 7970 which maxed out the 1125 Mhz core overclock allowed by AMD overdrive. That particular Sapphire card is also shows a very high degree of PCB warping as well which shows that the board quality is not very good either.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1862/14/

Another review posted by jacknhut above showed another non reference HD 7950 by XFX which again max out at 1200 Mhz core overclocking and that is with lots of voltage increase. Without voltage, it can barely reach 1100 Mhz which is terrible as compared to the Gigabyte HD 7970. I don't know about you but these HD 7950 don't seem to have the same overclocking headroom as the Gigabyte HD 7970 as other people claimed.

Here is the thread of my build suggestion:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/361770-31-time-build-2000-budget-help

 

[blazorthon]

Just wanna let you know, you got a 2000 dollars budget and you are trying to save pennies on the cheapest motherboard available on the market that support SLI/CF. I used to have that Z77 Extreme 3 and it's build quality is terrible. The board is flimsy, the PCB is very thin compared to Asus or Gigabyte and very easily warpable when you provide moderate amount of pressure on the CPU socket installing a large heatsink. That board is for a budget build who have to squeeze in every pennies they got, not for a good overclocking build. When overclocking, you don't just look at the overclocking capabilies, but its long term stabilities as well and that board while have the capabilities to overclock, but I seriously doubt it long term stability due to the cheap VRM design.

I also have a similar budget as you and I was able to get a much higher end system with the X79 chipset and i7 and dual Gigabyte HD 7970 that I can overclock to 1220 Mhz Core 7.2 Ghz memory without touching the voltage at all. With some additional voltage, the Gigabyte HD 7970 Windforce 3 go up to 1285 Mhz core stable.

To be honest I don't see any HD 7950 that can overclock that high ever and yes I have done lots of research. This review here of the Sapphire HD 7950 OC card showed that it can barely reach 1065 Mhz core overclock without voltage increase, which is much worse than any reference HD 7970 which maxed out the 1125 Mhz core overclock allowed by AMD overdrive. That particular Sapphire card is also shows a very high degree of PCB warping as well which shows that the board quality is not very good either.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1862/14/

Another review posted by jacknhut above showed another non reference HD 7950 by XFX which again max out at 1200 Mhz core overclocking and that is with lots of voltage increase. Without voltage, it can barely reach 1100 Mhz which is terrible as compared to the Gigabyte HD 7970. I don't know about you but these HD 7950 don't seem to have the same overclocking headroom as the Gigabyte HD 7970 as other people claimed.

Here is the thread of my build suggestion:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/361770-31-time-build-2000-budget-help

You tell OP that he's not going for a good enough motherboard (understandable) given OP's budget, but then you go on to the other extreme in suggesting something that is even less reasonable with X79. Why should OP have to pay at least bout $200 more (increased CPU and motherboard expenses) for roughly the same performance? If you think that the Extreme 3 is too flimsy, then recommending a superior LGA 1155 socket motherboard is far more reasonable advice.

A 7950 has lower stock voltage than a 7970. That lets the 7970 go higher when you don't bring the 7950's voltage up to the 7970 stock voltage range. You need to account for that when doing research.

That XFX 7950 isn't even one of the good 7950 models.

 

[Quantum01]

You tell OP that he's not going for a good enough motherboard (understandable) given OP's budget, but then you go on to the other extreme in suggesting something that is even less reasonable with X79. Why should OP have to pay at least bout $200 more (increased CPU and motherboard expenses) for roughly the same performance? If you think that the Extreme 3 is too flimsy, then recommending a superior LGA 1155 socket motherboard is far more reasonable advice.

I'm sorry when did I suggest to him to get X79? If you read my post carefully, I said I got an X79 system with a similar budget, and that is not the same as suggesting him to get an X79. Maybe you should spend less time assuming what other people say first before attacking them?