# Does this build match my intended use? Any suggestions to improve it?



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

Budget: I already exceeded my initial budget 
Currently trying to make it a little cheaper.

Brands: Open for suggestions. I lean towards quality over good price.

Multitasking and calculations: I am going to use this PC for software development (mainly using Eclipse and Visual Studio), running a virtual machine (not more than one at a time) and have a million tabs open in a couple of browsers.

Gaming: In the future I will add a good GPU for playing games like Battlefield 4 and GTA 5 on medium graphics so this PC should handle that.

Storage: I don't archive a lot of data so the 250GB SSD should be more than enough.

Operating System: Dual boot for windows 8.1 and linux.

Overclocking, SLI/Crossfire, Accessories, Recycled Components, Monitor, Stores: Nope.

Location: I am buying the PC in Israel (for ease and speed of parts replacement) so everything is more expensive here. The build I included at the bottom is 300$ more expensive here!

Noise and dust issues: It has to be quiet and have as many dust filters as it takes to maximally reduce the dust build-up inside the case. I consider to change the case to Nanoxia Deep silence 1 if that will considerably lower dust build-up and noise.

There's a good chance that another stick of 8GB RAM of exactly the same model will be added in a couple of months.

The goal is to buy a PC that will run smoothly for at least 3-4 years. 
Please explain if you think its wiser to lower the specs and upgrade the PC when parts will become cheaper. For example to buy 120GB SSD instead 250GB, use it for at least six months or until I'm near 75% capacity and then buy another one when the same volume SSD becomes much cheaper. What do you think?

What I came up with so far:

Intel Core i5-4690, Antec P100 - System Build - PCPartPicker

CPU: Intel Core i5 4690 3.5Ghz 6MB L3 Cache s1150 - Tray
CPU COOLING: Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo
MOBO: Asus H87-PRO
RAM: Kingston 8GB DDR3 1600MHz CL10 - 1.5v - PC3-12800 - HyperX Fury Series - 8192MB - HX316C10F/8
SSD: Samsung 840 EVO Series MZ-7TE250BW 250GB SSD SATA III
PSU: SeaSonic S12G-550 550W Gold Active PFC 12cm Fan PSU
CASE: Antec P100

Would love to hear what you think about it. Are all parts compatible with each other?

Suggestions to make it a little cheaper while still meeting my needs and any tips on how to achieve what I mentioned above will be greatly appreciated.


----------



## emosun (Oct 4, 2006)

Well a hard drive would definitely make it cheaper and if you arent gamming or doing anything intensive then the ssd wont offer much of a overall speed increase.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

For your intended purposes, retain the SSD, possibly using a smaller 120GB for boot drive, and a larger Hard Drive for storage.
You don't need the Hyper Cooler for the CPU, the stock cooler will work fine, replace the 550W Seasonic with a higher rated unit, minimum of 650W, if you are going to upgrade in the future graphics cards have high dependencies.
Also two sticks of Ram will run more efficiently due to running in dual channel mode.


----------



## Masterchiefxx17 (Feb 27, 2010)

Change the RAM from a single 8GB stick to a 2 x 4GB pair at 1600 Mhz speeds. Also stick with G.Skill or Corsair for better quality.

You will want a GPU if you plan on doing any gaming. A GTX 750 TI should do you well!

You can lose the CPU cooler as the CPU itself will come with one.

You'll want a bigger hard drive for games and programs. You may fill up the SSD quickly.

The rest looks okay to me.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

If you are considering upgrading the case to the Nanoxia DS1, then consider the Corsair 550D, which is slightly cheaper and highly rated in reviews.


----------



## Tyree (May 10, 2009)

As noted above, using a standard Hdd, OEM heatsik/fan and a more economical case would offer the good savings without sacrificing any performance. 
450W is plenty for a 750ti.


----------



## Rich-M (May 2, 2007)

Everything looks fine to me except would change ram to Crucial or GSkill for better quality ram.


----------



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

I found very few 1x8 GB RAM sticks here in the local market. Most are CL 10 and above.
Now it's really hard for me to imagine right now I'll want to go above 16 gigs of RAM in the next year or two but I will most likely upgrade to 16 in a few of months. 
So which option is preferable for that:
A. buying 1x8 GB of slighly slower RAM today and getting the exact same stick later making it 2x8 GB.

B. buying 2x4 GB kit of slightly faster RAM today and getting another kit like that later making it 4x4 GB.
or 
C. buy the cheapest solution of the above because its insignificant and barely noticeable.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

2 x 4Gb sticks, that way you can run it in Dual Channel mode.


----------



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

Question is will it be stable and work fast when it will 4x4 GB ?
Cause 2x8 is more on the safe side according to what I read.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

You'll find a lot more compatible Ram that is 4Gb than you will at 8Gb.
http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1150/H87M-E/H87_Series_Memory_QVL_list_Report.pdf


----------



## gcavan (Aug 13, 2009)

The results of this article would lead one to pick your option C. 

I've more or less duplicated its results in My System (at left) by installing all memory on the same channel. No difference in WEI, office or internet; game play indistinguishable, maybe a second or two difference when loading a new map; I don't do any A/V work with the PC, other than watching TV/movies and that doesn't change.

PS: If you will definitely u/g memory to 16GB, I'ld go with option A


----------



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

Thanks a lot for your input guys!


> The results of  this article would lead one to pick your option C.


Great article. Here's another one with many tests that shows the difference between CL 9 & 10 is also very insignificant:

AnandTech | Memory Scaling on Haswell CPU, IGP and dGPU: DDR3-1333 to DDR3-3000 Tested with G.Skill




> You'll find a lot more compatible Ram that is 4Gb than you will at 8Gb.


That is true. Some claim it's still safe to put RAM that isn't mentioned in the QVL as long as it matches the parameters and its a leading brand like g.skill, corsair, crucial...
The reason for this is that the QVL is simply what's been tested but we can't expect Asus to test every model of RAM that comes out. Especially months and years after the board came out.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

allisone said:


> Some claim it's still safe to put RAM that isn't mentioned in the QVL as long as it matches the parameters and its a leading brand like g.skill, corsair, crucial...
> The reason for this is that the QVL is simply what's been tested but we can't expect Asus to test every model of RAM that comes out. Especially months and years after the board came out.


True, but if you look at the list on the Asus website, you will see it is the latest list of many.
They have obviously done a lot of testing and updating to keep it current.


----------



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

So you only go with models which are listed? If you're talking from a bad experience of yours and others (model from a leading brand, parameters matched) or you have a good source that explains that to include then I would love check it out.

Looking at the 1600Mhz section of the QVL there I saw that many great models of leading brands aren't included. Take this one for example. It's not listed.

Searching for this issue I found so many people recommend ignoring QVL in SUCH cases. Not talking about less known brands and models.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

No, not talking from a bad experience of mine, just relate it to many users of this site that have Ram issues because of not using recommended Ram.


----------



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

I see its a gamble then. At least the mobo is listed on the RAMs QVL.


----------



## Rich-M (May 2, 2007)

Well I agree with everything Panther said except I do go only with recommended tested rams from motherboard mfgr site only as I have had way too many issues in the past when I didn't. I think more advanced motherboards of today are getting much fussier on compatible ram than they used to be.


----------



## Tyree (May 10, 2009)

A 2x4GB 1600MHz matched pair should be all you require. If you need 16GB, go with a 2x8GB 1600MHz matched pair. Go with G.Skill or Corsair. Good quality Mobo's rarely have issues with good quality RAM.


----------



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

> Go with G.Skill or Corsair


What about Crucial ? I found a good bargain on one of their models.


----------



## Rich-M (May 2, 2007)

allisone said:


> What about Crucial ? I found a good bargain on one of their models.


Better yet IMHO!


----------



## Tyree (May 10, 2009)

allisone said:


> What about Crucial ? I found a good bargain on one of their models.


Crucial is OK. Just stay away from the Ballistix series.


----------



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

Tyree said:


> Crucial is OK. Just stay away from the Ballistix series.


A little searching found complaints about Ballistix models from two years ago and before that.

Are you sure this problem still exists and they didn't fix it in the new ones? If so, please explain how do you know

I wanted to buy these:
Crucial Ballistix Sport 8GB (1 x 8GB) DDR3-1600

Thanks for letting me know.


----------



## Masterchiefxx17 (Feb 27, 2010)

Masterchiefxx17 said:


> Change the RAM from a single 8GB stick to a* 2 x 4GB pair* at 1600 Mhz speeds.


----------



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

But then when I Upgrade to 16 (when funds are more available and it will be much more needed in the future than now. RAM disk and stuff like that) I will have to either add 1x8 or 2x4 which are much less preferable memory configurations according to what I read in a couple of places.
What's your take on this?


----------



## Rich-M (May 2, 2007)

There have been issues now and then but honestly I have been using only Crucial ram for years as I resell it and have had no issues with Ballistix.


----------



## Masterchiefxx17 (Feb 27, 2010)

allisone said:


> But then when I Upgrade to 16 (when funds are more available and it will be much more needed in the future than now. RAM disk and stuff like that) I will have to either add 1x8 or 2x4 which are much less preferable memory configurations according to what I read in a couple of places.
> What's your take on this?


16GB is not needed. 8GB is more then enough to use for your PC.


----------



## gcavan (Aug 13, 2009)

From Post#1


> Multitasking and calculations: I am going to use this PC for software development (mainly using Eclipse and Visual Studio), running a virtual machine (not more than one at a time) and have a million tabs open in a couple of browsers.


16GB may not be absolutely required, but it wouldn't hurt, and I expect will show a definite improvement over 8.


----------



## Tyree (May 10, 2009)

For your intended use, 16GB may be warranted but go with a matched pair of 2x8GB. We recommend G.Skill & Corsair for quality/reliability but it is your money/your choice.


----------



## allisone (Jun 13, 2014)

Thanks a lot for your help! I really appreciate it.

One thing I see conflicting views on is the importance of quality of mobo derived from the chipset the mobo has.
A recommendation I got from so very knowledgeable and experienced folks is "we recommend Z-series mother boards over others because of the higher technical quality of components, more reliability and are therefore better for long-term builds" and I do want a good long term build.

Now that I managed to cut down the price on some parts I have a little budget left to put a better board and go with quality over price IF it makes noticeable difference like longer life, reliability, performance...

Also, some say ASRock is lower quality than Asus, Gigabyte and MSI and if possible to stick with the last 3 unless going budget.

What's your take on this?

Which option would you pick if you were me:
1. If ASRock is practically almost the same quality as Asus then ditch the overpriced Asus H87 pro and get: ASRock H97M-Pro4 or ASRock Z87-Extreme4 or a Z97 chipset ASRock better yet.

2. IF what they say is right and Z-Series are considerably higher quality and more reliable + Asus and Gigabyte are considerably higher quality than ASRock then increase the budget a little and go with a more expensive Z97 Gigabyte board like:
GA-Z97-D3H
GA-Z97-HD3
GA-Z97X-Gaming 3
GA-Z97X-Gaming 5
GA-Z97X-SLI
GA-Z97X-UD3H

Their specs are all compared here.
Can anyone please explain their differences beyond this spec comparison in terms of build quality,reliability..?


----------



## Masterchiefxx17 (Feb 27, 2010)

Stick with Asus and Gigabyte branded motherboards for top quality.

The GA-Z97-D3H is a solid and great performing motherboard. I would stick with that.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

allisone said:


> One thing I see conflicting views on is the importance of quality of mobo derived from the chipset the mobo has.
> A recommendation I got from so very knowledgeable and experienced folks is "we recommend Z-series mother boards over others because of the higher technical quality of components, more reliability and are therefore better for long-term builds" and I do want a good long term build.
> 
> Also, some say ASRock is lower quality than Asus, Gigabyte and MSI and if possible to stick with the last 3 unless going budget.
> ...


In my experience Asrock are now as good a quality as the other top boards.
MSI in my opinion make some boards for the low end of the market that lack in quality, but they are up there for quality at the high end.


----------



## Panther063 (Jul 13, 2009)

If you want quality and longevity, stick with Asus Tuf series.


----------



## Rich-M (May 2, 2007)

I have to agree that since ASRock has made their own boards the quality is great. I have had consistently good luck with Gigabyte and the better Msi boards as well.
Asus for me is hit or miss.


----------



## Tyree (May 10, 2009)

Masterchiefxx17 said:


> Stick with Asus and Gigabyte motherboards for top quality.


Every reliable PC builder, that I know personally, uses Asus & Gigabyte Mobo's.
MSI - ASRock are "OK".


----------

