Pet peeves when it comes to people building PCs

[MEC-777]

I don't understand when people ask for help coming up with a build, but give no relevant information such as; budget, main system usage, location/currency etc. And then people reply without asking those questions with random build suggestions.

[minibois]

well, but... nope i won't continue any further

 

a pet peeve of mine is people who completely change op's build (without explanation), often op already has done some searching and wants some parts because of certain reasons. 

It's annoying too when people just give one liners as responses, such as "Xeons are for servers" or "go with i5"

Like, you're not helping! You're only making OP more confused! 

[simson0606]

It's annoying too when people just give one liners as responses, such as "Xeons are for servers" or "go with i5"

Like, you're not helping! You're only making OP more confused! 

YES! THIS!

[TheMcSame]

 "Xeons are for servers"

^^^^^

 

The biggest pet peeve of mine though... Powerful and expensive builds with a cheapo $2 no brand PSU.

[MEC-777]

^^^^^

 

The biggest pet peeve of mine though... Powerful and expensive builds with a cheapo $2 no brand PSU.

 

And then when you try to recommend they change it right away, their response is "well it's been working fine so far" 

 

*facedesk*

[Speakerator]

We all have them, those things that drive you crazy when other people do them. I have two things that people who are building PCs do, that drive me insane. 

 

1. People who build a $500-$600 PC and spend $100+ on a case. At that price range you should try to squeeze every bit of performance you can out of your PC, if you spend that much of your budget on a case that is just stupid. You loose so much performance for the outside of you PC to look good. I wouldn't recommend spending that much on case unless you are spending $1000+.

 

2. People who have VERY strict budgets. The people who say, for example, give me a $800 build and you give them something that costs $820, and they say, "That's to expensive I can't go over $800." That's ridicules you can spend $20 more to get something better. And don't say you don't have the money for it, you can get $20. The same thing goes for components, people will say, "I need a GPU that costs $330." You give the a 970 for $350, and they say they can't go that high, yes you can.  

 

Those are my two biggest pet peeves. What are some of your guys? 

 

Edit: Just thought of another one. People who don't put their GPU in the top slot.

 

Edit 2: Guys who get a locked CPU and, (A) (this one is the least bad) Put them in a Z series board, ( B) But expensive cooling on them like H100is and NH-D15s, © Put them in a really expensive motherboard. I saw this guy the other day who had a i5 4590 on a sabertooth Z97 with a Dark Rock 3.

 

You'll definitely hate me - I have a 2500 non key on a Z68 board cooled by a DR3^^ In my defense, Sandy Bridge runs quite hot and I wanted it to be quiet. But not getting the k version was just dumb. But I was young and stupid 

 

Back on topic:

i.) Little 14 year ols brats* bragging about their machine with all the bells and whistles having cost a fortune, payed by their dad...

ii.) ....used for web browsing and League of Legends...

iii:) ...which they are too stopid to properly maintain and hence ask dumb questions on the internet

 

*substitute with stereotype of your convenience

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

You'll definitely hate me - I have a 2500 non key on a Z68 board cooled by a DR3^^ In my defense, Sandy Bridge runs quite hot and I wanted it to be quiet. But not getting the k version was just dumb. But I was young and stupid 

You're not the only one with that kind of setup. I'm running a 2500 non-K on Z77 with a DR3P here. I don't give a quack what people think about that.

When I bought the CPU in 2011 I had no intention of overclocking or even keeping it more than a year or two.

The motherboard was a "form over function" choice and a lucky choice at that. I soon found out that it completely ignores Intel's multiplier lock on the non-K CPUs, allowing it to auto-overclock the CPU after all (around 2 years now on 3.8 @ 1.344V, never had a single hiccup).

That's also where the DR3P comes in, it allows me to keep the temps under 55°C during gaming.

[toms94z71]

People always pushing ssds in 800$ or less builds. Yes load times are faster but for lower end builds you are better saving that money and getting a better gpu or cpu. Plus a with a 120gb or less ssd you will spend a lot of time jist shuffling files around since it will fill up so fast.

[DigitalHermit]

people who trade off performance for appearance...

 

like that one customer who traded an excellent heatsink fan for a crappy LED one...

 

Edit:

oh... and dealing with the local parts retailers...

can't even rely on them to find the exact part that I'm looking for...

[ANewFace]

People always pushing ssds in 800$ or less builds. Yes load times are faster but for lower end builds you are better saving that money and getting a better gpu or cpu. Plus a with a 120gb or less ssd you will spend a lot of time jist shuffling files around since it will fill up so fast.

People who get 60gb SSDs just for the OS drives me crazy.

[MEC-777]

People always pushing ssds in 800$ or less builds. Yes load times are faster but for lower end builds you are better saving that money and getting a better gpu or cpu. Plus a with a 120gb or less ssd you will spend a lot of time jist shuffling files around since it will fill up so fast.

 

This is debatable, IMO. If someone has steady income, they can easily grab a 120 or 256GB SSD for the time being and run it until they can scrape up another $50-80 for a 1-2TB HDD. You will be limited by how many games you can have loaded at once, but it's worth it to not have to transfer your OS over from the HDD and you won't have a bunch of redundant OS files left over after the transfer. 

 

I did this with my first build back in September 2013. Used a 120GB SSD in my ~$700 initial build for a couple months before adding a 1TB barracuda later on. I didn't have a very large games library at that point anyways, so it wasn't like I needed the space. 

 

So I think this is more of a per situation thing, but with the dropping prices of SSD's, I still push to try and fit at least a 120GB in any build over $600. 

 

I also believe the majority of regular PC users ought to use SSDs as well. Most basic users I've encountered had no more than 60-100GB of data on their old PC hard drive and so it doesn't make sense (to me) to use a $10-15 cheaper and slower HDD with mountains of capacity they'll never use, vs spending $10-15 more for a super-fast user experience they'll actually notice and enjoy and still have enough capacity. Regular users like having less than 15 second boot up times and hate waiting for programs to load as well, not just us enthusiasts.

[Speakerator]

 

The motherboard was a "form over function" choice and a lucky choice at that. I soon found out that it completely ignores Intel's multiplier lock on the non-K CPUs, allowing it to auto-overclock the CPU after all (around 2 years now on 3.8 @ 1.344V, never had a single hiccup).
That's also where the DR3P comes in, it allows me to keep the temps under 55°C during gaming.

 

 

 

Nice. Does it still serve you well or do you have update plans? I'm quite comfortable, even though current games push it to a solid 90% - but I think it does not bottleneck the 970. Postponed  any update plans until 2016, when Skylake has established itself - maybe even further if it's still going strong. What's that board of yours? My Asus does also offer some kind of "overclock any CPU" magic, but I never bothered trying.

 

This is debatable, IMO. If someone has steady income, they can easily grab a 120 or 256GB SSD for the time being and run it until they can scrape up another $50-80 for a 1-2TB HDD. You will be limited by how many games you can have loaded at once, but it's worth it to not have to transfer your OS over from the HDD and you won't have a bunch of redundant OS files left over after the transfer. 

 

[....]

 

I also believe the majority of regular PC users ought to use SSDs as well. Most basic users I've encountered had no more than 60-100GB of data on their old PC hard drive and so it doesn't make sense (to me) to use a $10-15 cheaper and slower HDD with mountains of capacity they'll never use, vs spending $10-15 more for a super-fast user experience they'll actually notice and enjoy and still have enough capacity. Regular users like having less than 15 second boot up times and hate waiting for programs to load as well, not just us enthusiasts.

 

People who get 60gb SSDs just for the OS drives me crazy.

 

I do only use a 120Gig one for OS and other stuff and it is full to the brim - though there is not a single game, photo or personal file on it. My library is on a WD Green (5400 RPM), so it should be respectively slow, but loading times never really bothered me. And with games currently beeing like what, 50/ 60 GB? That's an additional 25 - 30 bucks just for the space^^

[toms94z71]

This is debatable, IMO. If someone has steady income, they can easily grab a 120 or 256GB SSD for the time being and run it until they can scrape up another $50-80 for a 1-2TB HDD. You will be limited by how many games you can have loaded at once, but it's worth it to not have to transfer your OS over from the HDD and you won't have a bunch of redundant OS files left over after the transfer. 

 

I did this with my first build back in September 2013. Used a 120GB SSD in my ~$700 initial build for a couple months before adding a 1TB barracuda later on. I didn't have a very large games library at that point anyways, so it wasn't like I needed the space. 

 

So I think this is more of a per situation thing, but with the dropping prices of SSD's, I still push to try and fit at least a 120GB in any build over $600. 

 

I also believe the majority of regular PC users ought to use SSDs as well. Most basic users I've encountered had no more than 60-100GB of data on their old PC hard drive and so it doesn't make sense (to me) to use a $10-15 cheaper and slower HDD with mountains of capacity they'll never use, vs spending $10-15 more for a super-fast user experience they'll actually notice and enjoy and still have enough capacity. Regular users like having less than 15 second boot up times and hate waiting for programs to load as well, not just us enthusiasts.

Yeah I can see your point in it being case by case, if 700$ is all some one would have to spend for the next 6 months or more I wouldn't recommend a ssd unless all they do is web surfing and playing solitaire. If you have a dslr with a decent megapixel count and store all your photos in  NEF then 120gb disappears fast. I took 1.5 gb of pics at a bday party a few weeks ago for a 7 year old and my dslr is only a 12 megapixal one. 

[carguy86]

a friend aproaches and asks if you could build them a pc, then a week later when you show up with a parts list that fits their budget they just shove a prebuilt pos in your face saying that the 1000 usd price tag = EKSTREME GAMING MACHINE!!.

[JakLawrence]

Pet peeve #1...people who make absolutely no effort with cable management.

[patrick.glock]

People who build $1,000+ Gaming machines and don't play minecraft on them. Huge waste of cash in my opinion.
If they were just going to play GRID, ARMA, or the latest games with brand new engines, they only need a $400 machine.

 

[Mightyinvader]

People who Buy parts purely for look, despite the lack of performance...

[Guest]

I hate when so many people on this forum say, "get duel GTX 970's." DUEL IS LIKE LUKE SKYWALKER AND DARTH VADER FIGHTING. ARE ALL OF YOU PEOPLE THAT STUPID? THE CORRECT WORD IS DUAL AS IN TWO ITEMS. Sorry. I really had to get that out.

[Guest Kloaked]

So I told a friend who was building his first PC that it wasn't a good idea to get a liquid cooler AIO for his first build, and I recommended him a nice air cooler since he had it in his budget for one.

 

Two weeks later he messages me on Facebook and says he tried installing an H100i and his computer keeps shutting off when he turns it on.

 

So I went over there after school the next day and fixed everything, even his cable management. He gave me $60 though, ha.

 

It's just annoying when people don't listen to your advice and end up proving you right.

[ThomasD]

We all have them, those things that drive you crazy when other people do them. I have two things that people who are building PCs do, that drive me insane. 

 

1. People who build a $500-$600 PC and spend $100+ on a case. At that price range you should try to squeeze every bit of performance you can out of your PC, if you spend that much of your budget on a case that is just stupid. You loose so much performance for the outside of you PC to look good. I wouldn't recommend spending that much on case unless you are spending $1000+.

 

A quality case can last, not just a few builds, but decades. A durable, functional, and flexible case is an investment that will continue to pay off long after you have migrated away from the rest of that middling build.

 

The next wise investment is a high quality power supply.  Again, something that with proper care can last for several builds. 

 

Pretty much everything else in a build is disposable.

 

Cheaping out on either of those first two items means spending more money sooner rather than later.

[Guest]

I have a pentium g3220 and a titan x. 

I'm dying of laughter ... anyways I guess you took spending the most on the GPU for (gaming?) build to the extreme.

[Ellis_D]

1. When people have $1300 worth of video cards hooked up to a single, $130 1080p TN panel

When people spend no more than $50 on their case in a high-end build.  A good, well built case is a great investment that should last at least 10 years so long as the ATX standards don't change.

Non-Modular PSUs

"Nvidia is just better than AMD" bullshit fanboyism

Over-spending on storage.  The prices are constantly falling so you're wasting money by buying more than you need today when you can wait until tomorrow and get a better deal.

Speaking of which, buying SSDs on tight-budget builds.  Put that money towards a better GPU.  You can afford to wait on storage performance and drop in a cheap SSD months down the road when you've saved up for it.

[Freeeeezy]

People not putting an SSD in an $800+ build. At that price range, or even lower down to the $500 price range you should be able to afford at least an SSD for just the OS.

[ANewFace]

People not putting an SSD in an $800+ build. At that price range, or even lower down to the $500 price range you should be able to afford at least an SSD for just the OS.

I disagree somewhat. I wouldn't recommend an SSD on a build lower then $800

[ANewFace]

 

1. When people have $1300 worth of video cards hooked up to a single, $130 1080p TN panel
2. When people spend no more than $50 on their case in a high-end build.  A good, well built case is a great investment that should last at least 10 years so long as the ATX standards don't change.
3. Non-Modular PSUs
4. "Nvidia is just better than AMD" bullshit fanboyism
5. Over-spending on storage.  The prices are constantly falling so you're wasting money by buying more than you need today when you can wait until tomorrow and get a better deal.
6. Speaking of which, buying SSDs on tight-budget builds.  Put that money towards a better GPU.  You can afford to wait on storage performance and drop in a cheap SSD months down the road when you've saved up for it.

 

I agree with 3-6