a seasonic upgraded rebrand platinum 650 for the same price as seasonic branded 550 http://www.ldlc.ch/fiche/PB00181077.html yeah something's not right with those seasonic base prices there
Due to all the demanding graphics the new upcomming mmorpg's I've decided to invest some cash in a new PC.
Someone I know made this PC comp, I don't know much about PC's, but would like to know the people who know best : the one's playing games.
Please take a few mn's and look at this PC components, the price, what maybe you would add/take out/improve and reasons why, would be fully appreciated!
Get rid of the SSD, the i5 6600k, and the cooler your getting. Replace it with a cheaper CPU, hard drive, and the stock cooler is fine for it as ocing a cpu is gonna do nothing for your, and buy a 980ti instead of the 970. Let me put it this way, a amd 8350 and a 980ti, would get double fps then your i5 6600k and a 970. As far as the ssd goes, it isnt gonna get any improvement for you, other then transferring files and loading into windows.
Yeah its pretty good, however I would personally hold off on buying a graphics card as the new nvidia cards are coming out in april.
No they arent. In fact if they actually talk about them it will be first time we ever hear about them. For now NVidia didnt say 1 word about consumer new cards. Except they will be on new 16 nm node.
They have been spotted in shipping manifests as of this week.
If you dont know much about computers drop "i5-6600k" for "6600". You can drop CPU cooler then.
Drop "Z" board and get "H" board
Drop NVidia GTX970 and get AMD R9 390.
Drop 16GB RAM and get 8 GB (2x4) and get faster RAM (2666 or 2800 MHz)
Def dont drop the Nvidia to a 390, unless you have cheap electricity, and a huge air conditioner. I just had both recently, that i bought at best buy. They get the same fps in most games, minus the 970 getting better fps in Dying light. The difference though is the AMD 390 uses 150-200 more watts, and runs between 70-90 c, where the 970 runs between 30-and 50c. Not to mention the 970 at least where I am is 10 dollars cheaper, which is the USA, since Amazon sells it for 309, and best buy matches it.
I am gonna tell you though, if you are buying a pc you don't want to upgrade in the next year, the 970 just isn't gonna do it. You can't run even dying light on ultra 1080 res, with out dropping to 30-45 fps in some places. The only graphics card out now, that is gonna be able to keep up with the future for the next 4 years, is a 980 ti.
Yeah its pretty good, however I would personally hold off on buying a graphics card as the new nvidia cards are coming out in april.
As for waiting 8 months to buy it, don't waste your time. The next gen isn't gonna be that much faster. Just like the 6600k 14nm cpu is literally like 5 percent faster then a 24nm 3570k. Besides there is gonna be one more upgrade after that, and there will be no more new graphics cards made ever again, since you can't get smaller than 7nm, so just wait for that last one.
If you dont know much about computers drop "i5-6600k" for "6600". You can drop CPU cooler then.
Drop "Z" board and get "H" board
Drop NVidia GTX970 and get AMD R9 390.
Drop 16GB RAM and get 8 GB (2x4) and get faster RAM (2666 or 2800 MHz)
Def dont drop the Nvidia to a 390, unless you have cheap electricity, and a huge air conditioner. I just had both recently, that i bought at best buy. They get the same fps in most games, minus the 970 getting better fps in Dying light. The difference though is the AMD 390 uses 150-200 more watts, and runs between 70-90 c, where the 970 runs between 30-and 50c. Not to mention the 970 at least where I am is 10 dollars cheaper, which is the USA, since Amazon sells it for 309, and best buy matches it.
I am gonna tell you though, if you are buying a pc you don't want to upgrade in the next year, the 970 just isn't gonna do it. You can't run even dying light on ultra 1080 res, with out dropping to 30-45 fps in some places. The only graphics card out now, that is gonna be able to keep up with the future for the next 4 years, is a 980 ti.
Yeah its pretty good, however I would personally hold off on buying a graphics card as the new nvidia cards are coming out in april.
As for waiting 8 months to buy it, don't waste your time. The next gen isn't gonna be that much faster. Just like the 6600k 14nm cpu is literally like 5 percent faster then a 24nm 3570k. Besides there is gonna be one more upgrade after that, and there will be no more new graphics cards made ever again, since you can't get smaller than 7nm, so just wait for that last one.
Thats actually the point, if you dont want to upgrade your GTX970 next year get R9 390 instead. Same with 980/ti and R9 Fury.
970 shortcomings (bad dx12 performance like whole maxwell lineup and im pretty sure pascal too and 3,5GB of VRam) are starting to really show. It was a good card when it was released, but today its yesterday tech.
My GTX970 runs at 80 degrees. And then begins to throttle to <1GHz. So i would recommend you to not missinform people with your PR. Most of todays cards run between 60-80 degrees becase they are set to run that way. 390 is a bit less power efficient (it uses little more power but its faster). If those couple of $$/year is really deciding factor to get slower, not future proof card....well that ones on you.
And if he really wants to OC he will get either i5-6400 or 6500, anyone buying 6600k (or any "k" for that matter).....well, lets call them idiots.
As far as the power supply goes the one in the link is Bronze rated which for anyone unaware is part of an industry standard aimed at imprioving energy efficiency for servers - Bronze was the 2007/2008 target for all servers, then Silver, Gold and Platinum by 2011. The benefits of which (less heat, less noise, lower running cost etc.) have been trickling down to us.
The Seasonic and Enermax ones linked above are Gold standard. Other factors (build quality etc. aside) a higher gold standard will be better and by now should be "about the same price" as bronze. The Enermax (slightly cheaper) and Seasnic slightly more both have a lower wattage rating though. There are BeQuiet - German reputable brand - that are Gold rated and provide between 600W and 700W but these are more expensive. There is also a 650W LDLC - repurable French brand - Gold basically the same price (and a Platinum 650W at the same price as the Seasonic).
Depending what your plans are you may want a higher wattage of course. However a PSU that can supply more (should be) able to provide less without "breaking a sweat" - so they should be quieter. And the standards above the basic 80+ are designed to make that a reality. Hence the PSU in the machine I am typing this on - couple of years old now - is silent (Gold standard 650W Corsair - CS650M I think).
Other thoughts: as Quizzical mentioned larger SSD? If you are happy Samsung is good choice if not the key is to have an SSD and if cost is a factor any reputable brand. Don't bother adding an older hard drive just to bump up storage - if in doubt you can always add more later. Two extra points however:
1. Do you plan to transfer / clone your current hard drive. If so you will need a SATA-usb connector. You can either buy these or Samsung do do an SSD with one (not sure the offering is on the site though).
2. Have you considered M.2 (SATA 3.2) support on the motherboard? Especially if you are looking at performance.
M.2 was only adopted August 2013 so there is variability in what is out there at the moment. The site linked basically offers the "equivalent" SSDs - so same performance - at a higher cost. On other sites though - not sure what you have access to - there are M.2 products e.g. Samsung SM951 storage that offer significant performance gains (terrabyte read / writes) at "about the same price" or - if OEM versions are available maybe 60% of the equivalent SSD cost. There is a lot of variation though in read / write and iops though.
And in the future the M.2 standard will probably fall in cost quicker since it is standard for mobile (replacing mSATA). So may also be worth considering for downstream.
The key - however - is a motherboard that supports M.2; pretty sure the one you linked - Z170 Pro Gaming - doesn't as it supports the older mSATA but (Edit) I have seen ASUS Z170 Pro motherboards that do (Edit: one on the listed site doesn't seem to so stock must be a factor). Essentially manufacturers (seem to be) replacing mSATA support with M.2 (SATA/PCIe) support. Not a "cost" issue either just a feature issue that is dependent on the age of the motherboard design and were manufacturers are in introducing the feature.
WARNING: M2 SATA storage has to be plugged into an M.2 SATA storage slot not an M.2 PCIe slot - which accepts PCIe storage). So if you go this way make sure it is M.2 (SATA) or M.2 (SATA/ PCIe) which supports both.
Get rid of the SSD, the i5 6600k, and the cooler your getting. Replace it with a cheaper CPU, hard drive, and the stock cooler is fine for it as ocing a cpu is gonna do nothing for your, and buy a 980ti instead of the 970. Let me put it this way, a amd 8350 and a 980ti, would get double fps then your i5 6600k and a 970. As far as the ssd goes, it isnt gonna get any improvement for you, other then transferring files and loading into windows.
I would strongly recommend against this.
In my opinion, SSD is the biggest thing to hit PC's in the last 10 years. I will use a computer with integrated Intel Graphics (and they suck, make no mistake about that), I can always turn down graphics options to get stuff to run. But a computer without an SSD - no way. I'm done with computers that take forever to boot, games that take forever to load, zones that take forever to switch, having the computer hitch for a few seconds every time I right click, etc.
Besides, when your gaming at 1080, what's the difference between a 970 and a 980Ti?
True, SSDs don't help FPS. But I they do help just about everything else. I won't build or buy a computer without at least a 120GB SSD, and haven't for the past few years. And the price of a 120G SSD today - that isn't getting you from a 970 to a 980Ti...
2. Have you considered M.2 (SATA 3.2) support on the motherboard? Especially if you are looking at performance.
M.2 was only adopted August 2013 so there is variability in what is out there at the moment. The site linked basically offers the "equivalent" SSDs - so same performance - at a higher cost. On other sites though - not sure what you have access to - there are M.2 products e.g. Samsung SM951 storage that offer significant performance gains (terrabyte read / writes) at "about the same price" or - if OEM versions are available maybe 60% of the equivalent SSD cost. There is a lot of variation though in read / write and iops though.
And in the future the M.2 standard will probably fall in cost quicker since it is standard for mobile (replacing mSATA). So may also be worth considering for downstream.
I think M.2 is a dead standard, as I believe NVME on PCIe will overtake it. I could be wrong - you can put NVME on a M.2 interface, but the M.2 interface limits you to such a small card, it limits the capacity of the drive. With PCIe, the sky is the limit - it could be as big as your video card, which could house a lot of NAND - after all, Samsung has 16T in a 2.5" case now, think about how much it could get on a 10" PCB.
Right now M.2 seems to really only take off on the cheap netbooks, as it provides a standard interface for that form factor. But so is PCIe (that's what Apple uses on all their laptops and mobiles)...
I wouldn't advise against an M.2 card if it were cheaper than a similar SATA3.0 drive, but I also wouldn't pay anything extra for M.2 or go out of my way to use it just because it's there.
2. Have you considered M.2 (SATA 3.2) support on the motherboard? Especially if you are looking at performance.
M.2 was only adopted August 2013 so there is variability in what is out there at the moment. The site linked basically offers the "equivalent" SSDs - so same performance - at a higher cost. On other sites though - not sure what you have access to - there are M.2 products e.g. Samsung SM951 storage that offer significant performance gains (terrabyte read / writes) at "about the same price" or - if OEM versions are available maybe 60% of the equivalent SSD cost. There is a lot of variation though in read / write and iops though.
And in the future the M.2 standard will probably fall in cost quicker since it is standard for mobile (replacing mSATA). So may also be worth considering for downstream.
I think M.2 is a dead standard, as I believe NVME on PCIe will overtake it. I could be wrong - you can put NVME on a M.2 interface, but the M.2 interface limits you to such a small card, it limits the capacity of the drive. With PCIe, the sky is the limit - it could be as big as your video card, which could house a lot of NAND - after all, Samsung has 16T in a 2.5" case now, think about how much it could get on a 10" PCB.
Right now M.2 seems to really only take off on the cheap netbooks, as it provides a standard interface for that form factor. But so is PCIe (that's what Apple uses on all their laptops and mobiles)...
I wouldn't advise against an M.2 card if it were cheaper than a similar SATA3.0 drive, but I also wouldn't pay anything extra for M.2 or go out of my way to use it just because it's there.
Agree about PCIe but my suggestion of M.2 SATA was instread of an SSD. And the value of selecting a motherboard that would allow either so as not to rule out incorporating a faster & cheaper storage solution than SSD.
M.2 (SATA) is absolutely not a dead standard. It is what has been adopted for the mobile market to "ease" the limitations of mSATA. And clearly PCIe is not an option for tablets. And mobile will / presumably is creating economies of scale and that will drive price reductions and capacity increases. (Which may explain why enterprise server versions of M.2 SATA are available). And compared to SSDs you have no case, simpler manufacturing, less cables, need less volume etc.
So agree with everything you say about PCIe - but there is NAS and/or Cloud Storage for bulk storage.
Going forward I think we are looking at replacing SSDs with "better and cheaper" M.2 SATA solutions or the "even better but more expensive" PCIe solutions.
Mobile/tablets use an SOC, so they don't typically use either SATA or PCIe - they will use whatever interface their particular SOC supports. And while they do use flash RAM - they do not use them packaged as SSDs (no controller chip)
Mobile/tablets use an SOC, so they don't typically use either SATA or PCIe - they will use whatever interface their particular SOC supports. And while they do use flash RAM - they do not use them packaged as SSDs (no controller chip)
I know. However tablets like the MS Surface do.
This is relatively new. M.2 SATA was only adopted in August 2013 - for mobile. Add in the the usual delay for design, setting up / adjusting fabrication plants, filtering down to retailers and the fist of these only really appear last summer. And as usual new = expensive; say twice the price of SSDs. Today - as usual - the price has fallen. And this standard is intrincially cheaper to manufacture and takes up less space. And - unlike SSDs there are OEM options which indicates large scale production. And in terms of speed they offer a lot more potential.
The standard has also been adopted by motherboard manufacturers - but not yet all; remember still pretty new and things don't change overnight.
Now I am not in any way arguing for a particular standard. Simply flagging up that if they are in the market for a new motherboard they may want to get one that supports M.2 SATA (rather than mSATA). They can still use an SSD; they can still use an old harddrive and with the right choice PCIe will also be an option. And they can go and read artciles about M.2 SATA for themselves. They are out there.
What it means for the future of tablets is that they will be able to come with "significant" amounts of more affordable storage. What it means for PC builders is another storage option to consider.
Comments
http://www.ldlc.ch/fiche/PB00181077.html yeah something's not right with those seasonic base prices there
and a seasonic gold for 102 CHF http://www.ldlc.ch/fiche/PB00151008.html
I am gonna tell you though, if you are buying a pc you don't want to upgrade in the next year, the 970 just isn't gonna do it. You can't run even dying light on ultra 1080 res, with out dropping to 30-45 fps in some places. The only graphics card out now, that is gonna be able to keep up with the future for the next 4 years, is a 980 ti.
As for waiting 8 months to buy it, don't waste your time. The next gen isn't gonna be that much faster. Just like the 6600k 14nm cpu is literally like 5 percent faster then a 24nm 3570k. Besides there is gonna be one more upgrade after that, and there will be no more new graphics cards made ever again, since you can't get smaller than 7nm, so just wait for that last one.
970 shortcomings (bad dx12 performance like whole maxwell lineup and im pretty sure pascal too and 3,5GB of VRam) are starting to really show. It was a good card when it was released, but today its yesterday tech.
My GTX970 runs at 80 degrees. And then begins to throttle to <1GHz. So i would recommend you to not missinform people with your PR. Most of todays cards run between 60-80 degrees becase they are set to run that way. 390 is a bit less power efficient (it uses little more power but its faster). If those couple of $$/year is really deciding factor to get slower, not future proof card....well that ones on you.
And if he really wants to OC he will get either i5-6400 or 6500, anyone buying 6600k (or any "k" for that matter).....well, lets call them idiots.
http://www.techpowerup.com/218376/asrock-unveils-sky-oc-technology.html
The Seasonic and Enermax ones linked above are Gold standard. Other factors (build quality etc. aside) a higher gold standard will be better and by now should be "about the same price" as bronze. The Enermax (slightly cheaper) and Seasnic slightly more both have a lower wattage rating though. There are BeQuiet - German reputable brand - that are Gold rated and provide between 600W and 700W but these are more expensive. There is also a 650W LDLC - repurable French brand - Gold basically the same price (and a Platinum 650W at the same price as the Seasonic).
Depending what your plans are you may want a higher wattage of course. However a PSU that can supply more (should be) able to provide less without "breaking a sweat" - so they should be quieter. And the standards above the basic 80+ are designed to make that a reality. Hence the PSU in the machine I am typing this on - couple of years old now - is silent (Gold standard 650W Corsair - CS650M I think).
And I used the http://www.realhardtechx.com/index_archivos/PSUReviewDatabase.html link as well since not every psu is available in every store / site / country. It is useful.
1. Do you plan to transfer / clone your current hard drive. If so you will need a SATA-usb connector. You can either buy these or Samsung do do an SSD with one (not sure the offering is on the site though).
2. Have you considered M.2 (SATA 3.2) support on the motherboard? Especially if you are looking at performance.
M.2 was only adopted August 2013 so there is variability in what is out there at the moment. The site linked basically offers the "equivalent" SSDs - so same performance - at a higher cost. On other sites though - not sure what you have access to - there are M.2 products e.g. Samsung SM951 storage that offer significant performance gains (terrabyte read / writes) at "about the same price" or - if OEM versions are available maybe 60% of the equivalent SSD cost. There is a lot of variation though in read / write and iops though.
And in the future the M.2 standard will probably fall in cost quicker since it is standard for mobile (replacing mSATA). So may also be worth considering for downstream.
The key - however - is a motherboard that supports M.2; pretty sure the one you linked - Z170 Pro Gaming - doesn't as it supports the older mSATA but (Edit) I have seen ASUS Z170 Pro motherboards that do (Edit: one on the listed site doesn't seem to so stock must be a factor). Essentially manufacturers (seem to be) replacing mSATA support with M.2 (SATA/PCIe) support. Not a "cost" issue either just a feature issue that is dependent on the age of the motherboard design and were manufacturers are in introducing the feature.
WARNING: M2 SATA storage has to be plugged into an M.2 SATA storage slot not an M.2 PCIe slot - which accepts PCIe storage). So if you go this way make sure it is M.2 (SATA) or M.2 (SATA/ PCIe) which supports both.
In my opinion, SSD is the biggest thing to hit PC's in the last 10 years. I will use a computer with integrated Intel Graphics (and they suck, make no mistake about that), I can always turn down graphics options to get stuff to run. But a computer without an SSD - no way. I'm done with computers that take forever to boot, games that take forever to load, zones that take forever to switch, having the computer hitch for a few seconds every time I right click, etc.
Besides, when your gaming at 1080, what's the difference between a 970 and a 980Ti?
True, SSDs don't help FPS. But I they do help just about everything else. I won't build or buy a computer without at least a 120GB SSD, and haven't for the past few years. And the price of a 120G SSD today - that isn't getting you from a 970 to a 980Ti...
I think M.2 is a dead standard, as I believe NVME on PCIe will overtake it. I could be wrong - you can put NVME on a M.2 interface, but the M.2 interface limits you to such a small card, it limits the capacity of the drive. With PCIe, the sky is the limit - it could be as big as your video card, which could house a lot of NAND - after all, Samsung has 16T in a 2.5" case now, think about how much it could get on a 10" PCB.
Right now M.2 seems to really only take off on the cheap netbooks, as it provides a standard interface for that form factor. But so is PCIe (that's what Apple uses on all their laptops and mobiles)...
I wouldn't advise against an M.2 card if it were cheaper than a similar SATA3.0 drive, but I also wouldn't pay anything extra for M.2 or go out of my way to use it just because it's there.
M.2 (SATA) is absolutely not a dead standard. It is what has been adopted for the mobile market to "ease" the limitations of mSATA. And clearly PCIe is not an option for tablets. And mobile will / presumably is creating economies of scale and that will drive price reductions and capacity increases. (Which may explain why enterprise server versions of M.2 SATA are available). And compared to SSDs you have no case, simpler manufacturing, less cables, need less volume etc.
So agree with everything you say about PCIe - but there is NAS and/or Cloud Storage for bulk storage.
Going forward I think we are looking at replacing SSDs with "better and cheaper" M.2 SATA solutions or the "even better but more expensive" PCIe solutions.
This is relatively new. M.2 SATA was only adopted in August 2013 - for mobile. Add in the the usual delay for design, setting up / adjusting fabrication plants, filtering down to retailers and the fist of these only really appear last summer. And as usual new = expensive; say twice the price of SSDs. Today - as usual - the price has fallen. And this standard is intrincially cheaper to manufacture and takes up less space. And - unlike SSDs there are OEM options which indicates large scale production. And in terms of speed they offer a lot more potential.
The standard has also been adopted by motherboard manufacturers - but not yet all; remember still pretty new and things don't change overnight.
Now I am not in any way arguing for a particular standard. Simply flagging up that if they are in the market for a new motherboard they may want to get one that supports M.2 SATA (rather than mSATA). They can still use an SSD; they can still use an old harddrive and with the right choice PCIe will also be an option. And they can go and read artciles about M.2 SATA for themselves. They are out there.
What it means for the future of tablets is that they will be able to come with "significant" amounts of more affordable storage. What it means for PC builders is another storage option to consider.