Building High Budget PC, Pointers?

[Vinnylegs]

Hey guys I have been wanting to build myself a new PC for a long time and now I am finally ready to do it. I have a max budget of $2000, but hopefully will spend a little less than that while still being overkill.

These are the parts I have picked out:

Case: In Win Maelstrom Full Tower Case $140
PSU: Corsair 1000HX $280
CPU: Intel Core i7-870 $310
Motherboard: Asus P7P55D-E Pro $188
Video Card: ASUS GTX 480 $500
RAM: Corsair XMS3 2x4GB $153
HDD: Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB $100
DVD Drive: ASUS 18xDVD 48xCD $18

Total is $2048 tax and shipping included.

Now as I said I want it to be overkill, the reason is so it will stand the test of time, and because I hate low fps/lag and want to experience games at their best. I also want to be able to upgrade it to SLI and more RAM for future performance increase.

I was hoping I could get some pointers on the components to see If I'm in the right direction or way out in left field. Like am I wasting my cash with certain parts or not spending enough?

Thanks for any feedback!

[Nuclear Krusader]

If you want it to stand the test of time you better forget about SSDs: they're not reliable enough, and have lots of problems with firmware.

The X58 is not stable either. You'll do better with an 1156 CPU, dual channel RAM, and the P55 chipset.

[Vinnylegs]

Hmm I did not know that thanks for the tips. I was hoping to maybe get 5 years out of it with upgrading the GPU half way through.

So scrap the SSD, HDD combo and maybe just get a VelociRaptor? $290
Replace motherboard with P55 Asus Sabertooth $200
1156 CPU Intel Core i7-875K $360
Dual Channel RAM Corsair XMS3 2x4GB $153

So with this I saved $121, I don't see myself needing more than 600GB for the HDD.

[Nuclear Krusader]

The Western Digital Caviar Blacks are the best hard drives right now. The Raptors have also had their share of problems. You don't need to shell out lots of cash to make it last. Buy a couple of 1 GB Caviar Blacks and you're all set, storage-wise.

[Vinnylegs]

Updated my first post. Now from those changes I removed the GTX 470 and replaced it with a 480, but is the extra $140 worth the performance increase? I was told by a friend it was only 10% difference between the 470 and 480.

Edit: The new CPU also is without cooling, I am not sure what brand I should be looking for in that department..

Intel BXXTS100H CPU Cooler

[Nikon]

unless you really plan on overclocking, you dont need the 875k, its is exactly the same as the 870, and the 50 extra dollars gets you the unlocked multiplier, and you saw you lose the cooler.

[Vinnylegs]

I figured It would stand up to the challenge later down the road if I overclocked it. I am not sure if that cooler will be able to do the job though.

[Nuclear Krusader]

There's no need really, to overclock a CPU. You're only shortening its lifespan, and you want this machine to last, correct? Frame rates in games and 3D apps are video-card-dependant, not CPU. And may I suggest never to overclock the videocard, specially since quite a few VCs already come overclocked from the factory; again, overclocking shortens a component's life and can destabilise your system, whilst the gain is minimal.

Get the boxed CPU and use its stock HSF which is sufficient.

[Vinnylegs]

I always thought overclocking didn't affect the lifespan as long as it wasn't overdone.

First post updated.

So everything else seems to be good, the only other thing I'm unsure about is going with the 480 over the 470.

Alright thanks for the much appreciated help, good thing I came here

[glc]

Have you looked at ATI/AMD video cards?

[David M]

Once you have a nice gaming rig, the next step is to get more monitors. With Nvidia, you need two graphics cards to have three monitors. With AMD, you need only one graphics card.

[Vinnylegs]

I have looked at ATI, I just decided to go with Nvidea because that's what I've always had. I always thought Nvidea was more revolutionary too but I forgot about Eyefinity. My plan was to eventually get two more monitors but I never thought to research it at this point.

Hmmm I'm not sure what to do now haha... I know AMD is coming out with new cards, maybe I should wait for those which may include price drops for the 5's...

[quartet-man]

Nvidia isn't what it used to be and has lost a lot of ground as I understand it.

[Nikon]

amd's new 6xxx series cards are about as powerful as a 460gtx or a 5850, new architecture, but weaker in general. idk why they named them in the 68xx, but who knows.

[glc]

but weaker in general

That remains to be seen. We need to wait till the whole line is out to see exactly where they stand. They said the same thing last year when the 5xxx's first started showing up.

[Preston]

Originally Posted by Nuclear Krusader If you want it to stand the test of time you better forget about SSDs: they're not reliable enough, and have lots of problems with firmware.

I am using an Intel SSD (boot/OS drive) in my HTPC (Vista) and one in my desktop (XP). I have had no reliability or firmware issues. The performance is amazing!

If you are going for a high end rig, I would say an SSD is a must. All of my future builds will have an SSD.

PD

[Nuclear Krusader]

That's one (or two) against many that have been dropping like flies. Still, it's his money.

[Preston]

Originally Posted by Nuclear Krusader That's one (or two) against many that have been dropping like flies. Still, it's his money.

Are any brands in particular experiencing the failures, or are they spread pretty even across the board? (I've been away from the forums lately).

I figure that with flash memory you get what you pay for.

Anyway, didn't mean to steer the thread to an SSD discussion...

[Nuclear Krusader]

S'ok, it's not a particular brand AFAIK. It seems brands have decided to follow the trend from software makers and use customers as beta testers. They keep coming up with firmware version after firmware version; also, the technology is not entirely tested as true and true. Yes, I do think that in the near future magnetic drives will be phased out and replaced with SSD, but as long as there're magnetic drives available I'll choose them over SSD. The most important part of a computer is the data: parts can always be replaced, data no.

[Preston]

I can't speak for many different brands, but both my Intel SSDs came with up to date firmware right out of the box.

It seems like that a lot of the firmware upgrades had to do with TRIM command/support, but now I think that they are getting that figured out.

One other note to Vinnylegs, if you do go with an SSD, there are a few tweaks out there that can help things out. Win 7 takes care of most of them, but you might find a few more tweaks that can improve perfirmance. A Google search for SSD Tweaks will yield a bunch of info.

The Intel drives also come with a software application called the "Intel SSD Toolbox" that will help tweak and TRIM the drive (especially useful for Vista and XP systems).

[David M]

I'm finding it hard to justify spending hundreds of extra dollars to save a few seconds here and there on an SSD, whose capacities are still a joke.

I think a lot of people are going to be sorry when SSD's are 1/4 the price and four times the capacity in a few years. That's how technology works.

When a 1 terabyte SSD drive comes out for $200 I might consider it.

[Nikon]

the performance of ssd's is also all over the place. i was looking to get one for my new rig, but after much research, i decided to wait. price per gigabyte is rediculous, but thats the nature of a new storeage tech. performance is all over the place, so before you go and get one, think about how it will be used, and find one most appropriate for that application.

i think the only reason i might get an ssd is for my protools PC, because of the high disk write/read useage. protools records straight to a disk