Finals Parts List - Cost $999.37

[ncasolo]

About half of the parts were purchased from Microcenter. The CPU and Motherboard were $280 combined at Microcenter. At newegg those two together would have been $365. There's not a single mail-in-rebate I have to deal with amongst these parts either. I signed up for that 2-day shipping program at Newegg so hopefully I get all the rest of this stuff Friday or Saturday. I've since cancelled that 2-day shipping program so it doesn't auto-renew me for $80.


Case: Cooler Master HAF 912
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119233&Tpk=Cooler%20Master%20HAF%20912

Power Supply: SeaSonic 620W
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151096

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

CPU: Intel i5 3570K
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116504

RAM: Crucial Ballistix Sport 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3-PC1600
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148544

CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103099

SSD: Samsung 830 Series 128GB SSD
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147163

Video Card: HIS IceQ Turbo 7950
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161415

Optical Drive: Samsung OEM Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827151244

If anyone sees a really stupid thing I've done please let me know. I can still return anything unopened.

 

[ncasolo]

Great build and great choice of Microcenter for the combo. Best prices if you can go to one of their stores.

One note: Ram 1600? - you may be able to get a faster set if you do some shopping.

You'll love the MOBO and CPU !

Good luck !

I asked a question on the memory section of this message board. I was either given a load of crap or a lot of really good information.

Apparently the Ivy Bridge chips won't really utilize any memory faster than DDR3-1600. Yes there is some better 1600 RAM out there, but RAM was a budget area even if you can get a bit more without spending much more. You'll notice the title of the thread said I spent $999.37. I really wanted to come in under $1000 so pretty much just about any additional money would have pushed me over on that. Ultimately I spent about $45 on the RAM.

The newegg shell shocker is an ivy bridge chip and Z77 motherboard... the RAM bundled with it? DDR3-1600. Add to that the fact that 4 or 5 of the recommendations I received for RAM were 1600 and I think I got it right. Given the price I probably would have gone 1866 or even higher, but my understanding is that it made no sense to do so.

 

[ncasolo]

our agreement has nothing to do with real world performance lol.personally i think AMD is doing a great job with their drivers.

Funny you should say that because the iRacing hardware forum (iRacing being why I'm building my PC) has a few people describing problems with 12.6 and 12.7 drivers that are going back to 12.4.

 

[nekulturny]

I asked a question on the memory section of this message board. I was either given a load of crap or a lot of really good information.

Apparently the Ivy Bridge chips won't really utilize any memory faster than DDR3-1600. Yes there is some better 1600 RAM out there, but RAM was a budget area even if you can get a bit more without spending much more. You'll notice the title of the thread said I spent $999.37. I really wanted to come in under $1000 so pretty much just about any additional money would have pushed me over on that. Ultimately I spent about $45 on the RAM.

The newegg shell shocker is an ivy bridge chip and Z77 motherboard... the RAM bundled with it? DDR3-1600. Add to that the fact that 4 or 5 of the recommendations I received for RAM were 1600 and I think I got it right. Given the price I probably would have gone 1866 or even higher, but my understanding is that it made no sense to do so.

You were given correct advice initially, per se. By default, I believe Ivy Bridge runs RAM at 1333mhz, just like Phenom IIs and Sandy Bridge. The speed on a RAM module you buy is the maximum number the manufacturer guarentees the RAM to run stable at. It may run higher or lower depending on how its clocked. Ivy Bridge does support up to 2800mhz RAM speed apparently. However, the question that comes into play is, do you really need to run RAM that fast? The answer is no.

This article is a bit outdated, using DDR2 RAM, but the finding are still consistent today with DDR3.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ram-speed-tests,1807-15.html

Funny you should say that because the iRacing hardware forum (iRacing being why I'm building my PC) has a few people describing problems with 12.6 and 12.7 drivers that are going back to 12.4.

Do you have the links? Honestly, this is something I have been looking into myself. People have been saying for years that AMD has "horrible drivers" yada yada. I've been a member of this forum for hell almost a year now. I must have asked a dozen times now to ask people who make the claim to offer evidence that Nvidia's driver support team is any worse than AMD's. I've always come up empty handed. Both of them are guilty of releasing cards that while architecturally may be sound, but the software side of things still being an on-going process. You see this with Windows too, (Windows Update). To a degree this is necessary, because new games come out all the time and something might be iffy with the video cards drivers on the new game that requires a patch. This happens with both Nvidia and AMD, but I've seen no evidence that any of them are any worse or better than the other. I chalk that up to the assumptions I mentioned earlier that people who assume that because AMD's CPU department is lacking, their graphics card must be as well. (A little fanboyism mixed in with old wive's tales)

 

[ncasolo]

You were given correct advice initially, per se. By default, I believe Ivy Bridge runs RAM at 1333mhz, just like Phenom IIs and Sandy Bridge. The speed on a RAM module you buy is the maximum number the manufacturer guarentees the RAM to run stable at. It may run higher or lower depending on how its clocked. Ivy Bridge does support up to 2800mhz RAM speed apparently. However, the question that comes into play is, do you really need to run RAM that fast? The answer is no.

This article is a bit outdated, using DDR2 RAM, but the finding are still consistent today with DDR3.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ram-speed-tests,1807-15.html



Do you have the links? Honestly, this is something I have been looking into myself. People have been saying for years that AMD has "horrible drivers" yada yada. I've been a member of this forum for hell almost a year now. I must have asked a dozen times now to ask people who make the claim to offer evidence that Nvidia's driver support team is any worse than AMD's. I've always come up empty handed. Both of them are guilty of releasing cards that while architecturally may be sound, but the software side of things still being an on-going process. You see this with Windows too, (Windows Update). To a degree this is necessary, because new games come out all the time and something might be iffy with the video cards drivers on the new game that requires a patch. This happens with both Nvidia and AMD, but I've seen no evidence that any of them are any worse or better than the other. I chalk that up to the assumptions I mentioned earlier that people who assume that because AMD's CPU department is lacking, their graphics card must be as well. (A little fanboyism mixed in with old wive's tales)

I could provide you links but without an iRacing membership you won't be able to read the threads. iRacing is apparently utilizing the DX9 engine right now and I'm guessing the newer drivers are more focused on DX11 performance (for obvious reasons). The NVidia cards perform poorly on iRacing and the suspicion is because their drivers don't work as well with DX9 as the AMD cards. Eventually iRacing will work out the bugs with the 12.6 and 12.7 drivers (as they believe the issue is with them not with the drivers). However, for the time being someone who just installed a 7970 was told he might want to try the 12.4 drivers instead of the 12.6 that came with the card.

When I was asking on that forum GTX 670 or AMD someone said he was loving his GTX670 and how he was getting 90-120 fps all the time on 3 screens. His resolution was x1200 and mine was x1080. My jaw nearly hit the floor because I'm getting 90-120 fps across 3 screens from a 1GB 5870. I don't have the graphics maxed out, but I have most things on at most tracks. Spa and Suzuka being the exception to that.

 

[nekulturny]

I see. I hate forums that don't let you see whats going on without membership.

I honestly don't know about the game or enough to know about the problems with DX9 vs 11 from card to card. But I will say about the guy loving his 90-120FPS, thats nice to hear. But one thing you should know is that most computer monitors run at 60hz. (there are some that run 120hz, but they generally cost well over $400). 60hz=60FPS, this means that no matter how many FPS your video card sends to the monitor, you'll never see more than 60 of em. So while the performance difference may be benchmarkable, it isn't really anything beyond being "on paper". Hell, did you know when you watch a movie on a big screen at a movie theater, you're only watching it at 24FPS? Now video games are a little bit difference since they're more interactive, so you do want more FPS, but 60 is still the magic number.

I only mention that because, you might be able to play your game just fine with something even cheaper than both the 670 or the 7950.

 

[hellfire24]

But one thing you should know is that most computer monitors run at 60hz. (there are some that run 120hz, but they generally cost well over $400). 60hz=60FPS, this means that no matter how many FPS your video card sends to the monitor, you'll never see more than 60 of em. So while the performance difference may be benchmarkable, it isn't really anything beyond being "on paper". Hell, did you know when you watch a movie on a big screen at a movie theater, you're only watching it at 24FPS? Now video games are a little bit difference since they're more interactive, so you do want more FPS, but 60 is still the magic number.

I only mention that because, you might be able to play your game just fine with something even cheaper than both the 670 or the 7950.

+1,@OP,read this carefully^

 

[ncasolo]

+1,@OP,read this carefully^

The problem is the drop in FPS is definitely noticeable when I go from 120 into the 70s and 80s. I don't have 120hz monitors and I've heard what you just said before. There has to be some sort of stuttering that goes with the hit to FPS and the FPS is just the measurable benchmark that identifies when the issue starts and stops. The actual issue may not be FPS related, but the FPS drops when the issues I'm having starts.

 

[nekulturny]

The problem is the drop in FPS is definitely noticeable when I go from 120 into the 70s and 80s. I don't have 120hz monitors and I've heard what you just said before. There has to be some sort of stuttering that goes with the hit to FPS and the FPS is just the measurable benchmark that identifies when the issue starts and stops. The actual issue may not be FPS related, but the FPS drops when the issues I'm having starts.

That would be correct, something else is going on with the game. You said the game makers seem to think its something on their end. Possibly something to do with CPU usage causing the stuttering. The FPS drop might be a side effect, but not a causal factor.

 

[ncasolo]

That would be correct, something else is going on with the game. You said the game makers seem to think its something on their end. Possibly something to do with CPU usage causing the stuttering. The FPS drop might be a side effect, but not a causal factor.

Which touches on another point. The CPU can be a serious limiting factor in iRacing and is the #1 reason why I upgraded. I have an AMD 955 BE @ 3.5ghz and I could put a new video card in my PC and see less than a 5% performance increase.

 

[nekulturny]

Well, have you considered getting a video card for starters and see if that improves things before pulling the trigger on the rest of the build?

 

[ncasolo]

Well, have you considered getting a video card for starters and see if that improves things before pulling the trigger on the rest of the build?

Not really and for a couple reasons. I can put the current PC to good use or I have a couple people interested in buying it. Plus even before I started having some performance issues I wasn't running things maxed out. The new machine will let me turn up the settings.

 

[nekulturny]

Up to you, but I'd at least stick the new card in the rig and see if that changes anything, takes 5 minutes to swap a vid card in and out, why not?

I used to play Runescape heavily til I finally got tired of the masses of botters (they outnumber legit players like 8 to 1. But they had issues with the game for several months before they fixed it, didn't matter what rig you were running, people would post their specs on the forums, all kinds of hardcore gaming rigs that could easily max BF3 at any resolution, and yet this little single core Java game with chinsy graphics would bring the system to its knees.

 

[mon4ro]

You Graphics Card, it seriously clashes with your motherboard color scheme, Blue PCB GPU and Black PCB board!!! going to look ugly in your awesome case, try going for a GPU with a Black PCB, i would spend a bit more to get it to look great.

Who the heck cares how the interior looks like? The build looks good, no need to change the GFX unless you want to.

 

[nekulturny]

Some people care about aesthetics...

 

[hellfire24]

^....and some people focus on performance!

 

[nekulturny]

^....and some people focus on performance!

Quality, performance (that meets your needs) and aesthetics are nice. The latter should never be sacrificed for the former two, but its always nice to find something that has all 3.

 

[hellfire24]

but its always nice to find something that has all 3.

But it's expensive in most cases :/

 

[nekulturny]

Depends on your tastes I guess. I think Sapphire and Zotac make nice video card color schemes. Love that Zotac bumblebee yellow, unfortunately, it does kinda clash with my Asus Sabertooth board, but my NZXT Phantom doesn't have a window on it, so it doesn't really matter. Zotac I think gets lost in obscurity because of the bigger companies that have been around longer like EVGA, Asus and MSI, but they actually make Nvidia cards very well.

 

[hellfire24]

for me,EVGA ftw and MSi twinfrozer cards are attractive.