System Builder Marathon, March 2011: $2000 Performance PC

[kbrooks]

{by Duk3}-Sure is a good time to be building a new PC.
..

I was thinking it was kind of a bad time to be upgrading for some of us, atleast for the gamer/enthusiast. I'm ready to upgrade now, but I'm having a hard time deciding if I should wait for X68/LGA2011, Just go with p67/LGA1155 or even get X58/LGA1366 (I'll be upgrading from C2Qextreme/nForce790i)

So far p67 only offers 4 ram slots and Dual channel, not that multi-channel ram is a big deal that I've heard, and the PCIe bandwidth is lower(again I know this doesnt make much of a real world difference, it still would be nice to have support for 16x16x8x or whatever.

The big thing for me I guess is the 4 Ram slots and no 6 Core Cpu's for 1155, I run ProTools, Cubase, SoundForge, Reason ect. on my PC so for me the more threads and the more ram the better. I read where some p67 boards support 32gb of ram, but the most you could get that I know of would be 24gb (4x 8gb modules that cost about $820.00 each and who knows how well that would run or if the non-server Mobo's even support 8gb modules)

But I could live with 16gb being the ceiling for my ram but no Six Core CPU's for p67 is a bummer. I've heard a few people say that they will be making IvyBridge CPU's for LGA1155/P67 but not from any really reliable source. And I looked at a screen-cap a few days ago of the 2011 CPU Rollout for Intel all the way to IvyBridge, it showed no 6 Core Cpu's for 1155.

I guess after all the rambling what I'm saying is if I could find out for sure I'd be able to drop a SixCore Cpu (hopefully 22nm) in my p67 motherboard I would upgrade now. Why the hell did intel release the mid-range/low-end first!!!!!!!!

 

[brucek2]

If you need a new system today, then this is a fine way to go. If you've got some discretion as to when you build your next system, I'm not sure I agree that now is a good time. I'm waiting for X68 boards and 3rd gen SSDs, both of which I'd expect in the next few months.

 

[jecastej]

Almost everyone would cut on certain options to favor the ones they think offer the best value or performance here and there. But this is a fair $2000 system from a gaming perspective.

My 2600k/ASUSP8P67 PRO/8GB Corsair system is light on graphics compared to this system (1x Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB for HD1080) but with a better and lighter Lian-Li aluminum case (>18 lb. total) and lower power 550w Corsair. Also I skipped SSD options for now but included an entry Quadro 600 for 3D modeling (as both drivers can be used). I spent around 1600K. CPU performance and power consumption over Gaming were my priorities and I can say I am very happy with this machine. I had the option to go with a 9xx i7 but I am glad I went with the SB 2600K for less money.

With the monitor I preferred color precision and better angles for design so I opted for the 24' Dell Ultrasharp 1920 x 1200 as I already had a cheaper TN with the same screen size for a dual setup. This is working fine too.

 

[araas]

u need to allow canadians to enter too!!!!!!!!!

 

[slothy89]

[citation][nom]Kbrooks[/nom]I read where some p67 boards support 32gb of ram, but the most you could get that I know of would be 24gb (4x 8gb modules that cost about $820.00 each and who knows how well that would run or if the non-server Mobo's even support 8gb modules)But I could live with 16gb being the ceiling for my ram but no Six Core CPU's for p67 is a bummer.[/citation]4x8 = 24 ??!? it really is the end of the world...

4x8 = 32... 2x8 = 16 (x 2 = 32).. recheck your maths the 24gb ceiling is for 1366, 6x4Gb modules and the few boards that take 48gb..

if you really really need the extra threads/mem bandwidth, id say wait for LGA2011 it will either be triple or quad channel. And the CPUs will far surpass the 1366 chips

 

[preolt]

Nice system, I love the pure value the SB platform has. Dollar for dollar I am building all SB builds for my customers. AMD is gonna really need to step up their game with bulldozer because right now they are the ones getting "bulldozed" (I know that is an awful pun but I couldnt help it...).

I like most things about this build except may be the ati graphics cards. I guess I have just had far too many bad experiences with amd/ati video cards, and to be completely honest I would recommend getting the msi twin frozr gtx 560ti over any other graphics card on the market right now. They are an awesome value and silent to boot.

Only other comment I can make is not even about this build. I want to know what the heck is going on over at EVGA. I have used their mobos for years along with their video cards. But lately they seem to be dropping the ball all over. msi and gigabyte have blown them out of the water with oc versions of the 500 series. And eVGA hasnt even released a p67 mobo yet. Can some one at TH give me (and hundreds of others) a little insight on what is happening? I know they lost a whole team to saphire, but what the heck is going on over there. End rant.

 

[k2kropf]

Here's the EVGA P67 mobo I found (not sure if this is what you're asking about):http://www.evga.com/products/moreIn...rd Family&series=Intel P67 Series Family&sw=5 . But yeah, I'm with ya on being a little worried about EVGA. They generally make quality stuff and have decent warranties, but they could use a little "refreshing" in their product lines. No offense meant here, as I do like EVGA as a whole. Edit: it does look like perhaps that mobo is temporarily out of stock .

 

[k2kropf]

Sorry, here's the link again : [url=http://www.evga.com/products/m...rd Family&series=Intel P67 Series Family&sw=5 ][/url]

 

[k2kropf]

And again (sigh) : http://www.evga.com/products/moreInfo.asp?pn=130-SB-E675-KR&family=Motherboard%20Family&series=Intel%20P67%20Series%20Family&sw=5

 

[kbrooks]

4x8 = 24 ??!? it really is the end of the world...

Whoops I must of been using the same math the IRS uses to figure out how much money they are going to refund you.....

 

[COLGeek]

Very nice rig. I like the aesthetics. Clean lines, not overstated. Go ahead and ship to me, I'll take good care of it.....I promise I'll walk it and feed it and pick up after it.

 

[hmp_goose]

[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]A cold air port? Show me one that does? If you're talking about side fans, which don't port, this case has two front fans in a more-advantageous location.[/citation]
I admit I was speaking English real good when I posted, but you've since lost me: "Which don't port"? I put forth it's a big deal to have an intake in the side of the case, right by the video card.
[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]Yes, we should probably include a 2560x1600 display with each system, even the cheap one so that comparative tests can be standardized. Then again, system builders already have peripherals and, hopefully, an OS license from the system they're trying to replace.[/citation]
I think "standardizing" would miss the point: Bump up the budget for the little guy by ~$200, and the others by ~$500, and sit back with some popcorn as the participants try to "balance" the monitor size in addition to the usual CPU vs. GPU debate . . .

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]hmp_goose[/nom]I admit I was speaking English real good when I posted, but you've since lost me: "Which don't port"?[/citation]There's no port connecting the side fan to the GPU, and side fans tend to be located past the intake fan of this type of card. They blow at the wrong part of the card, so that the air must flow "backwards" towards the front of the case to reach the GPU fan.

The IDEAL solution would be a fan IN FRONT of the graphics card, a "tunnel of air" flowing from the front of the case, into the card fans, and out the back of the case. Oh, but that's what this system has.

If we instead consider improperly-designed graphics coolers like those of the GTX 590 and HD 6990, which blow out both ends, the side intake would be better than the front intake. But with those cards, the front fan might best be used for exhaust. Fortunately, the cards used in this system flow in the "right" direction, as do the case fans.

 

[hmp_goose]

I suggest there are HDDs in the way of that flow, and you could do better with a HAF 932, as the side draft Web - er, intake is large enough to feed a proper "cross flow"(?) card. I even suspect such intakes are good for the CPU cooler, if you mount them vertically . . .

IIRC, there used to be a "Cosmo" case, once, where if you used two of the provided four 120mm door fan mounts, you could get about the same effect as a HAF 932 . . .

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]hmp_goose[/nom]I suggest there are HDDs in the way of that flow, and you could do better with a HAF 932, as the side draft Web - er, intake is large enough to feed a proper "cross flow"(?) card. I even suspect such intakes are good for the CPU cooler, if you mount them vertically . . .IIRC, there used to be a "Cosmo" case, once, where if you used two of the provided four 120mm door fan mounts, you could get about the same effect as a HAF 932 . . .[/citation]So far as the drives being "in the way", I think the results speak for themselves. "Locking" the cards at 40% fan speed was enough to keep them cool under all test conditions (even FurMark).

 

[mraltoid19]

What a nice set up!

 

[steve_str]

The Antec Three Hundred is only 465mm deep, which means installed 3.5" hard drives are likely to overhang the motherboard, which means the 11" Radeon 6950s, which are 1.5" longer than the motherboard is wide, are going to bump into 3.5" hard drives installed in the top internal 3.5" bays. In other words, for such long video cards, the Antec Three Hundred is a poor choice because only only the bottom couple internal 3.5" bays are likely to be usable.

Regards,

steve_str

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]steve_str[/nom]The Antec Three Hundred is only 465mm deep, which means installed 3.5" hard drives are likely to overhang the motherboard, which means the 11" Radeon 6950s, which are 1.5" longer than the motherboard is wide, are going to bump into 3.5" hard drives installed in the top internal 3.5" bays. In other words, for such long video cards, the Antec Three Hundred is a poor choice because only only the bottom couple internal 3.5" bays are likely to be usable.Regards,steve_str[/citation]The 3.5" drive does not overhang the motherboard, as illustrated in the assembled PC photos. There's enough room for three 3.5" drives in this build, plus three 2.5" drives on 3.5" adapters, I think that's enough drives for most people.

Of course you're also welcome to add drive adapters to one of the external bays.

 

[mordark]

The I7-2600K does not support 1600 mhz RAM, you just spent unneeded money on speed instead of quality, going with the 1600 instead of the 1333 mhz RAM as listen on Intel's website... Why?

"Memory Specifications
Max Memory Size
(dependent on memory type)
32 GB
Memory Types
DDR3-1066/1333
# of Memory Channels
2
Max Memory Bandwidth
21 GB/s
ECC Memory Supported
No"
- http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52214

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]mordark[/nom]The I7-2600K does not support 1600 mhz RAM, you just spent unneeded money on speed[/citation]Thank you, for you I suggest buying the $500 PC, and saving even more money by using integrated graphics.

 

[silverblue]

It may not support the speed, but the timings might be beneficial at a lower frequency.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]silverblue[/nom]It may not support the speed, but the timings might be beneficial at a lower frequency.[/citation]Core i7-2600K supports DDR3-2133, I don't see why anyone who overclocks anything would even care what Intel says about compatibility.

 

[silverblue]

I don't doubt that it's more than capable of supporting it; I simply wished to highlight to mordark that even if something cannot support RAM above a set frequency, it doesn't mean it can't run said RAM at the best speed possible for that system with the added benefit of better timings. In any case, Phenom II wasn't supposed to support above 1333MHz as far as I recall, yet that hasn't stopped people using much faster memory modules.

In any case, the point is moot. He was wrong.

 

[mordark]

Thirdly is the motherboard you have to take into consideration. Timings as a benefit maybe? Even then I would go with OCZ Memory at lower frequency.
And to the OverClockers, heating up that CPU by making it run faster than it's designed to will only burn it out sooner. Hope you enjoy dishing out the cash to replace it before it ever outdates! Even if you keep it cool with Nitrogen, think twice if the chance of blowing up is worth the risk, Alienware users. >;3

DDR3 2133(O.C.)*/1866(O.C.)/1600/1333/ 1066 (* Due to CPU behavior, DDR3 2200/2000/1800 MHz memory module will run at DDR3 2133/1866/1600 MHz frequency as default

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131714

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]mordark[/nom]Thirdly is the motherboard you have to take into consideration. Timings as a benefit maybe? Even then I would go with OCZ Memory at lower frequency.And to the OverClockers, heating up that CPU by making it run faster than it's designed to will only burn it out sooner. Hope you enjoy dishing out the cash to replace it before it ever outdates! Even if you keep it cool with Nitrogen, think twice if the chance of blowing up is worth the risk, Alienware users. >;3DDR3 2133(O.C.)*/1866(O.C.)/1600/1333/ 1066 (* Due to CPU behavior, DDR3 2200/2000/1800 MHz memory module will run at DDR3 2133/1866/1600 MHz frequency as defaulthttp://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6813131714[/citation]Inaccurate information like that is par for the course, too. I just tested a wide array of high-end modules and they all default to DDR3-1333 CAS 9. That's because they're programmed with two defaults, DDR3-1333 CAS 9 and DDR3-1066 CAS 7.

Getting memory to run at a rated frequency higher than 1333 MHz requires intervention in BIOS. Sometimes one may use XMP to set everything with a couple keystrokes, other times one must do it all manually.