New PC Build

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, herman mcpootis said:

trust me, i already tried reported him several times but only the posts gets deleted

Ah well worth a shot  

 

I just do my best to warn people if he posts a spec in a thread. Shame he has me on ignore as I kind of enjoyed his mini rants 

[Herman Mcpootis]

1 minute ago, lee32uk said:

Ah well worth a shot  

 

I just do my best to warn people if he posts a spec in a thread. Shame he has me on ignore as I kind of enjoyed his mini rants 

his rants keep pissing me off. everytime someone raises a legit concern on his(retarded) builds or calls him out on his completely bullshit statements, he straightaway shoots them down and/or insults them for it. he once called my i5/rx 470 build 'horrendous' as a "misuse of a processor'. even called me a dunce for making a duplicate post. maybe we report him to the police for cyber harassment and see if it works.

[antondan]

2 hours ago, Buzzsaw said:

With aesthetics aside, the color of your computer case or the inside components has ZERO bearing on computer performance.

 

Here is my recommended computer build for less than $1,400.

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($339.99 @ Newegg)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 67.8 CFM Fluid Dynamic Bearing CPU Cooler  ($84.90 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 3 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard  ($140.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: Mushkin Blackline 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory  ($61.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Sandisk Ultra II 240GB 2.5" Solid State Drive  ($76.80 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($49.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($49.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($49.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon RX 480 8GB NITRO+ OC Video Card  ($339.77 @ Newegg)
Case: Corsair Carbide Series 300R Windowed ATX Mid Tower Case  ($97.98 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair CXM 750W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($89.89 @ Newegg)
Total: $1382.27
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-09-23 08:36 EDT-0400

I may have skimmed through the thread but I did not see any point where the OP asked for 3TB of storage. And even if he did ask so, splitting it into 3 drives is not a good idea unless you plan to do the infamous RAID 0.  Furthermore there have been many reports about high failure rates on the Seagate hard drives especially the higher capacity ones. 
In fact they even faced a lawsuit regarding the high failure rates of their 3TB models. 
Here are two links to back my sayings up. But a quick google will yield more results 
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-failure-rates-q2-2016/
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/222267-seagate-faces-lawsuit-over-3tb-hard-drive-failure-rates

In short I would not recommend the use of Seagate drives.  A single WD 1TB drive would have been adequate.

 

And that brings us to the GPU, at this budget an RX 480 is not acceptable, at least not for a gaming build. You should have picked the GTX 1070 instead, which benchmarks prove is much faster.  Yes, the GTX 1070 costs more, but instead of getting those 2 extra HDDs you could have spend more money on the more important GPU. 

Regarding the SSD, is the a reason you picked the Sandisk over the Samsung 850 EVO, because the EVO has quite the reputation. In  fact I believe it would be a better choice in any 1000$+ budget build.  

Finally the power supply, at that price point you should have picked a Gold+ rated one. There are equally reliable but more efficient fully modular PSUs out there at the same price.  Such as the EVGA SuperNova G2 650. 

Other than that, the Motherboard is not a bad choice you get all the basic features without blowing your money. 
I believe it would have been better if the RAM was from a company like Corsair but Mushkin can do and at 2400Mhz it should help gaming performance without being too expensive. 
I believe the cooler is too expensive, at that price (or even lower), there are great liquid coolers out there. But that's not really a fault in the build -since that be quiet! cooler is quite amazing-, just a notice.  

 

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, antondan said:

I may have skimmed through the thread but I did not see any point where the OP asked for 3TB of storage. And even if he did ask so, splitting it into 3 drives is not a good idea unless you plan to do the infamous RAID 0.  Furthermore there have been many reports about high failure rates on the Seagate hard drives especially the higher capacity ones. 
In fact they even faced a lawsuit regarding the high failure rates of their 3TB models. 
Here are two links to back my sayings up. But a quick google will yield more results 
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-failure-rates-q2-2016/
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/222267-seagate-faces-lawsuit-over-3tb-hard-drive-failure-rates

In short I would not recommend the use of Seagate drives.  A single WD 1TB drive would have been adequate.

I wouldn't take any notice of that Backblaze article. As for the lawsuit well that is also relying on the data from Backblaze.

 

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6028/dispelling-backblaze-s-hdd-reliability-myth-the-real-story-covered/index.html

[antondan]

33 minutes ago, lee32uk said:

I wouldn't take any notice of that Backblaze article. As for the lawsuit well that is also relying on the data from Backblaze.

 

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6028/dispelling-backblaze-s-hdd-reliability-myth-the-real-story-covered/index.html

Read the article, it brings up some valid arguments and I came to agree with most of those. However the last page is where they lost me at least for this particular scenario.
What I got from the article was that those seagate tests performed could have very well been more than unfair. From the drive source and the HDD racks used to test them, to the temperatures and workloads, all those could have made the failure rates be much higher than they actually are. However, while they do suggest in the last page not to let those results cloud our vision when choosing the appropriate HDD and even help the company through a potentially inequitable crisis, I would still not suggest such HDDs on a friend/3rd person just because of the responsibility such a person holds. What if those failure numbers are partially correct and the OP ends up having HDD problems and losing their data?
I know the opinion of many people will differ since those very actions are the ones that may greatly reduce Seagates income, but still. 

Thank you for the article you posted though. It helped me look on the whole matter from a different angle and I will keep it in mind next time I purchase an HDD or back my opinion with testings that may have been rigged/unfair.  

[Serpius]

4 hours ago, antondan said:

I may have skimmed through the thread but I did not see any point where the OP asked for 3TB of storage. And even if he did ask so, splitting it into 3 drives is not a good idea unless you plan to do the infamous RAID 0.  Furthermore there have been many reports about high failure rates on the Seagate hard drives especially the higher capacity ones. 
In fact they even faced a lawsuit regarding the high failure rates of their 3TB models. 
Here are two links to back my sayings up. But a quick google will yield more results 
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-failure-rates-q2-2016/
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/222267-seagate-faces-lawsuit-over-3tb-hard-drive-failure-rates

In short I would not recommend the use of Seagate drives.  A single WD 1TB drive would have been adequate.

 

And that brings us to the GPU, at this budget an RX 480 is not acceptable, at least not for a gaming build. You should have picked the GTX 1070 instead, which benchmarks prove is much faster.  Yes, the GTX 1070 costs more, but instead of getting those 2 extra HDDs you could have spend more money on the more important GPU. 

Regarding the SSD, is the a reason you picked the Sandisk over the Samsung 850 EVO, because the EVO has quite the reputation. In  fact I believe it would be a better choice in any 1000$+ budget build.  

Finally the power supply, at that price point you should have picked a Gold+ rated one. There are equally reliable but more efficient fully modular PSUs out there at the same price.  Such as the EVGA SuperNova G2 650. 

Other than that, the Motherboard is not a bad choice you get all the basic features without blowing your money. 
I believe it would have been better if the RAM was from a company like Corsair but Mushkin can do and at 2400Mhz it should help gaming performance without being too expensive. 
I believe the cooler is too expensive, at that price (or even lower), there are great liquid coolers out there. But that's not really a fault in the build -since that be quiet! cooler is quite amazing-, just a notice.  

 

Starting with the HDD, it's common to note that many HDD manufacturers will have HDDs that fail at a certain point in any form of testing. I don't care who the manufacturer is, whether it be Western Digital, Seagate, or Toshiba. I have been in the IT industry for well over 20+ years and have used many different brands of HDDs. I can be certain that I do not see a "real world" difference in reliability between the WD or the Seagate HDDs. 

Onto why I picked out 3 - 1 TB HDDs... it is not NOT for RAID purposes... it was for redundancy/backup purposes. I am a firm believer of not "putting all of your eggs in one basket". Meaning that it's a bad idea to put all of your data into a single 3 TB HDD. What if that single 3 TB dies on you? You potentially can lose up to 3 TB worth of data. Is it worth it? It's better to spread your data between the 3 separate 1 TB HDDs. So, if one of them fails... you do not lose the other 2 TB of data.

 

I picked out the Radeon 8 GB RX 480, which is perfectly suitable for gaming purposes. I'm not here to debate this 'ad naseum' over AMD vs Nvidia. That's done elsewhere in other forums and I will leave those discussions there. You're not required to like my choice of the graphics card, just like I am not required to like your choice of a Nvidia GTX 1070. Let's leave it at that.

 

There's absolutely no need to go to a gold rated power supply unit unless you are attempting to save pennies on your electric bill.

Seriously, all of this Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum ratings are overrated and often times, useless.

Getting a Bronze rated power supply unit is perfectly fine for low to upper end computer builds regardless of what others say. Over the years, I have yet to see a major reason to go with a Gold rated PSU unless the client specifically states it.

Having said that... I never liked EVGA power supply units... in my experience, those seem to crap out more often than other brands that I have used.

I always recommend the following brands (not necessarily in this order): Seasonic, Antec, XFX, and Corsair (in their X lines, not the crappy S lines).
 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Buzzsaw said:

Starting with the HDD, it's common to note that many HDD manufacturers will have HDDs that fail at a certain point in any form of testing. I don't care who the manufacturer is, whether it be Western Digital, Seagate, or Toshiba. I have been in the IT industry for well over 20+ years and have used many different brands of HDDs. I can be certain that I do not see a "real world" difference in reliability between the WD or the Seagate HDDs. 

Onto why I picked out 3 - 1 TB HDDs... it is not NOT for RAID purposes... it was for redundancy/backup purposes. I am a firm believer of not "putting all of your eggs in one basket". Meaning that it's a bad idea to put all of your data into a single 3 TB HDD. What if that single 3 TB dies on you? You potentially can lose up to 3 TB worth of data. Is it worth it? It's better to spread your data between the 3 separate 1 TB HDDs. So, if one of them fails... you do not lose the other 2 TB of data.

 

I picked out the Radeon 8 GB RX 480, which is perfectly suitable for gaming purposes. I'm not here to debate this 'ad naseum' over AMD vs Nvidia. That's done elsewhere in other forums and I will leave those discussions there. You're not required to like my choice of the graphics card, just like I am not required to like your choice of a Nvidia GTX 1070. Let's leave it at that.

 

There's absolutely no need to go to a gold rated power supply unit unless you are attempting to save pennies on your electric bill.

Seriously, all of this Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum ratings are overrated and often times, useless.

Getting a Bronze rated power supply unit is perfectly fine for low to upper end computer builds regardless of what others say. Over the years, I have yet to see a major reason to go with a Gold rated PSU unless the client specifically states it.

Having said that... I never liked EVGA power supply units... in my experience, those seem to crap out more often than other brands that I have used.

I always recommend the following brands (not necessarily in this order): Seasonic, Antec, XFX, and Corsair (in their X lines, not the crappy S lines).
 

YAWN.

[antondan]

1 hour ago, Buzzsaw said:

Starting with the HDD, it's common to note that many HDD manufacturers will have HDDs that fail at a certain point in any form of testing. I don't care who the manufacturer is, whether it be Western Digital, Seagate, or Toshiba. I have been in the IT industry for well over 20+ years and have used many different brands of HDDs. I can be certain that I do not see a "real world" difference in reliability between the WD or the Seagate HDDs. 

Onto why I picked out 3 - 1 TB HDDs... it is not NOT for RAID purposes... it was for redundancy/backup purposes. I am a firm believer of not "putting all of your eggs in one basket". Meaning that it's a bad idea to put all of your data into a single 3 TB HDD. What if that single 3 TB dies on you? You potentially can lose up to 3 TB worth of data. Is it worth it? It's better to spread your data between the 3 separate 1 TB HDDs. So, if one of them fails... you do not lose the other 2 TB of data.

 

I picked out the Radeon 8 GB RX 480, which is perfectly suitable for gaming purposes. I'm not here to debate this 'ad naseum' over AMD vs Nvidia. That's done elsewhere in other forums and I will leave those discussions there. You're not required to like my choice of the graphics card, just like I am not required to like your choice of a Nvidia GTX 1070. Let's leave it at that.

 

There's absolutely no need to go to a gold rated power supply unit unless you are attempting to save pennies on your electric bill.

Seriously, all of this Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum ratings are overrated and often times, useless.

Getting a Bronze rated power supply unit is perfectly fine for low to upper end computer builds regardless of what others say. Over the years, I have yet to see a major reason to go with a Gold rated PSU unless the client specifically states it.

Having said that... I never liked EVGA power supply units... in my experience, those seem to crap out more often than other brands that I have used.

I always recommend the following brands (not necessarily in this order): Seasonic, Antec, XFX, and Corsair (in their X lines, not the crappy S lines).
 

I use one 1TB HDD and if I want to backup something I do so in my external hard drive. There is no need to inflate the OPs build by 100$ for something he doesn't want. If he wanted more than a TB of storage he would say so. If he decides to do backups he can backup important files on a USB/External drive.

Here's how it is in my book:
Builds with a budget of less that 700$ : RX 460
With a budget of 700-800$: RX 470-GTX 1060
800-1000$: RX480
1000$-1800$: GTX 1070
1800$+: GTX 1080
(Note GPU options do change depending on the needs of the person and whether he can salvage older hardware and cases) 
It does not matter what company you support (I frankly don't care about the letters written on the card), what matters is the performance and value. 
In short, no the RX 480 is not a bad card. In fact it's a really really good one. But for a 1400$ gaming build? No thanks.  You basically decreased the OPs performance in games by 30% and where did you allocate the budget you gained from downgrading the GPU? On 2TB of storage he's simply not going to use.  I am required to not like your choice simple because it's incorrect, you decreased performance in order to spend on useless features. 

Regarding the PSUs.  If you didn't care about the rating you could have gotten a Bronze+ rated PSU with less money and get something else in return, perhaps better ram. 
I see no reason of spending on a 750Watt power supply, if you were to spend that much get a 650Watt Gold+ rated one, if you don't want it to be Gold+ get a cheaper 650W Bronze+. What you kept doing in your build is allocating the budget on the completely wrong components.  I wont argue with you about the EVGA part, even though I have many benchmarks, teardowns and reviews to back me up, simply because it's not the point.

Your entire build would have been much better if instead of 2 extra HDDs you put the GTX 1070 into a GAMING PC.  Got a less powerful PSU and allocated the extra money on better ram that will furthermore increase gaming performance (not noticeable right away but will probably be in a few years where components will struggle keeping up).  If you don't believe in higher RAM clock speed you could just have upgraded the SSD to a SAMSUNG 850 EVO that is faster (proven by multiple benchmarks).

What would you gain in result? Much better gaming performance on the gaming build and better RAM or a higher quality SSD. 
What would the OP miss from his build if you did so? Nothing. He wouldn't use 3TB of storage or he would have said so in the original post, 100Watts he wasn't going to use unless he planned to overclock the CPU AND SLI the 1070s at the same time. 

[Dash Lambda]

On 9/23/2016 at 4:02 PM, Buzzsaw said:

-snip-

I'm gonna limit myself to one single comment:

The CXM series is famously mediocre. I wouldn't stick one in a build with a reasonably high budget.

[Herman Mcpootis]

17 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

I'm gonna limit myself to one single comment:

The CXM series is famously mediocre. I wouldn't stick one in a build with a reasonably high budget.

considering this is the same dumbass that calls a supernova G2 a bad choice for a high end gaming pc, i don't think he'll really care all that much.

[Dash Lambda]

Just now, herman mcpootis said:

Considering this is the same dumbass that calls a Supernova G2 a bad choice for a high end gaming PC, I don't think he'll really care all that much.

Eh, still worth noting.

[gtx1060=value]

4 hours ago, herman mcpootis said:

considering this is the same dumbass that calls a supernova G2 a bad choice for a high end gaming pc, i don't think he'll really care all that much.

i just read through all his posts for the last week, Im dead - so fucking funny