# First time building - High end, high budget. Need-moar-info.



## Luponius (Jan 20, 2011)

I'd mess the whole thread if I posted a monster-thread of what I've seen and found, my research and conclusions thus far when it comes to my build. I've got money, but I sure as hell ain't wasting it. I want to point out a few things first:

*Budget:* Around 2,200 Euros. Want to keep below that, ideally below 2000. 2.2k Euros is approximately 3000 US dollars.

*Hardware I have available:* None. Nada. Zilch. I'm a laptop user, and I need to build a solid high-end rig which is going to perform well, and feel very reliable.

*What I would like from TSF community:* Knowledge, Experience, Opinions and anything which may of help to building a successful rig.

*Couple of details bout me:* I'm attending a Computer Engineering course and while I ain't a guru when it comes to current market hardware, I don't consider myself a moron. Teach me and I'll do my best to learn, which is why I'm here in the first place.

*The File:* It's attached below, or you can follow this link to download it via mediafire: >>ClicK<<


----------



## gcavan (Aug 13, 2009)

First, take a look at this link for some example builds at various (USD) price points. Note the $2000 Intel is close to what you have chosen.
http://www.techsupportforum.com/for...evised-2010-and-updated-regularly-448272.html

Motherboard & Proc: I prefer AMD, but that is only personal. For gaming, the 6-core AMD's will gain you no real benefit over a (same speed) 4 core.

SLI/Crossfire: Not all games (and very few older ones) are optimized for SLI and Crossfire. Many, in fact will actually run slower on a dually setup.

Power supply: An 850 would be a good size for your system, though I am not a fan of Coolermaster PSU's. You should look at the Corsair Pro series (AX) and the Seasonic X- series


----------



## Luponius (Jan 20, 2011)

gcavan said:


> First, take a look at this link for some example builds at various (USD) price points. Note the $2000 Intel is close to what you have chosen.
> http://www.techsupportforum.com/for...evised-2010-and-updated-regularly-448272.html
> 
> Motherboard & Proc: I prefer AMD, but that is only personal. For gaming, the 6-core AMD's will gain you no real benefit over a (same speed) 4 core.


AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition Review vs Intel Core i7-950 - Introduction

Basically an AMD vs Intel comparison of the x6 cores and x4 cores (+2 virtual) for intel. AMD sure as hell shines in Photoshop, but I'll pass on it for the Intel i7's hyperthreading technology, which does seem to make the most out of each and every core it has (to my understanding at least)



gcavan said:


> Not all games (and very few older ones) are optimized for SLI and Crossfire. Many, in fact will actually run slower on a dually setup.


I was originally planning an HD 6870 x 2 build (like my mate does), but considering how annoying and stressful it is to bear myself through it all, especially being FORCED to take off crossfire and run on just one card (way inferior than running on a single GPU GTX 580) I decided against all that and picked the 580 up instead.

Not exactly a "good value for money purchase" but the single GPU monster between NVidia and ATI is very clearly NVidia. OCing will always be an option later on when I want that little extra push on gaming power.



gcavan said:


> Power supply: An 850 would be a good size for your system, though I am not a fan of Coolermaster PSU's. You should look at the Corsair Pro series (AX) and the Seasonic X- series


I so don't want to spend more money! (Is what you probably get all the time when it comes to PSU suggestions). I think I'll take you up on the suggestion instead and go for it. I was planning on getting a fairly more expensive one at first, but was instead suggested to get a PSU which matches my case for easier and cleaner installation. It doesn't matter too much if it's slightly painful to get it all together, I'll go for what's more reliable in the long run.

Also, I consider PSUs to be a fairly future-proofable component (along with cases). My options can be any of the following:
Gaming - Simark Supplies Computer Store Malta
Making a quick sweep through and checking stuff out I'd say this one could probably do, what do you think?

Corsair 850W HXEU (Modular)


----------



## shotgn (Aug 10, 2008)

That psu is the best investment you can make on your system. That is a great psu. You wont go wrong there


----------



## Luponius (Jan 20, 2011)

Got that PSU changed, thanks so far.

Would like some more thoughts on the following if possible:
*Storage*: RAID or not? SSD or HDD? Would it be smart to like try and find some low capacity (30 to 50Gig) SSDs (x2) and set them up as RAID 0 with a 1TB drive for main storage or stick to my current setup? Change anything etc.

*Memory*: Dominator or not? That's going to mean a +100 euro on my RAM. I will probably overclock later on in the long run, but is it really worth shelling out 100 extra euros for what is probably a minimal benefit?

*Motherboard*: Want it to provide me the very best support for my components without making it cost too much. A new build will mean a new motherboard - this is pretty much what I'm thinking at this point, so if my board can get me by just great, fully supporting everything I need, without having extra unnecessary junk, it'd most probably be optimal. It could also be that my chosen mobo is exactly that, or there are no better options - would like your opinion on that, though.

*Display*: 24" LED BenQ monitor (5ms response rate). Going for 218 euros, that's what I'm gunning for right now. Is it of good reputation? Anything I should be considering aside from this? Is this going to fit me fine for my gaming experience or are there significantly better (point out price differences if any) options available out there for me?


----------



## Luponius (Jan 20, 2011)

The display seems pretty much a go for, and the Asus Sabertooth x58 appears to be the best one out there for what I need right now and possibly in the near future.

Memory wise it feels like it's going to be quite a waste to shell out an extra 100 euros for what's probably going to be beyond minor improvement.

Storage wise I'm still clueless, would appreciate any extra information please.


----------



## MPR (Aug 28, 2010)

You can get a substantial increase in hard disk throughput with a RAID 0 configuration. However, this this doesn't mean that your entire system will double in performance; most of the tests I've read about showed somewhere around 10% overall performance increase (and that was highly application dependent). Of course, this comes at the cost of doubling the HDD cost and making the storage system as a whole a more susceptible to failure. Whether or not the extra hundred bucks is worth it is up to you.

SSDs, for the time being, have abysmal "bang for the buck" value. Sure, if you are a multi-millionaire and want the fastest thing out there grab a handful of half TB SSDs at grand a pop and throw them into a RAID array. However, if you, like I do, usually look to build an entire system for what one of these drives costs then you will probably want to wait a few years until they come down in price.


----------



## Luponius (Jan 20, 2011)

MPR said:


> You can get a substantial increase in hard disk throughput with a RAID 0 configuration. However, this this doesn't mean that your entire system will double in performance; most of the tests I've read about showed somewhere around 10% overall performance increase (and that was highly application dependent). Of course, this comes at the cost of doubling the HDD cost and making the storage system as a whole a more susceptible to failure. Whether or not the extra hundred bucks is worth it is up to you.
> 
> SSDs, for the time being, have abysmal "bang for the buck" value. Sure, if you are a multi-millionaire and want the fastest thing out there grab a handful of half TB SSDs at grand a pop and throw them into a RAID array. However, if you, like I do, usually look to build an entire system for what one of these drives costs then you will probably want to wait a few years until they come down in price.


Thanks for the reply. I received the reply on the quote and it did indeed go way above what I was planning for. I also understood bang for the buck value is just a big no no, I would have most definitely appreciated this if for just the sake of saying "I got SSDs!", but at this current price I'll pass on it. In a few months/next year or so I'll probably be snatchin' a couple of these, though!


----------



## MPR (Aug 28, 2010)

Personally, I think that this is a good drive at a reasonable price that won't break your budget if you decide to buy two for a small RAID array.

Newegg.com - Western Digital Caviar Black WD7502AAEX 750GB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive

I have the 640 GB version of this drive ($20 less) in my system now. Not only is this drive SATA 3.0 it also has a relatively large 64 MB cache. WD also seems to make pretty good drives. I've had a few Seagates fail but never a WD. The new black drives have a 5 year warranty, but I have a couple of older WD SE drives still chugging away with no bad sectors five years _past _their limited warranty.

I'm not familiar with European electronic suppliers but one should be easy to find.


----------



## Luponius (Jan 20, 2011)

MPR said:


> Personally, I think that this is a good drive at a reasonable price that won't break your budget if you decide to buy two for a small RAID array.
> 
> Newegg.com - Western Digital Caviar Black WD7502AAEX 750GB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
> 
> ...


Thanks for the reply. One thing I do want to make sure I satisfy is the fact that I'll be having 3 total disks, two of which will be going in a RAID setup, the other one I will simply keep it as a manual (non RAID) backup disk.

That means I'll be buying 3 drives as a total, and the main selection I have available are:
SATA Harddrives - Simark Supplies Computer Store Malta
The only one with a 64 MB buffer is: WD 1TB 1002FAEX SATA3 64Mb 7200 3.5 Getting 3 of these for a RAID + extra drive setup will cost me €240 which is way too expensive as I see it, and having 2 TB of data on a RAID setup is, once again, too much.

The alternative would be getting 3x WD 500GB SATA 32MB Black high perf which will come out at about €166 which is way more affordable and realistic, 1TB RAID 0 and 500Gig extra drive for backup. To be fair I don't really need anymore than 500 Gig on RAID 0, and 1TB Backup would work out fine.

It's probably the case that the 500Gig drives are not SATA3, although I can't confirm that since it's not written down. The 1TB one on the other hand clearly states it is SATA3, but in the end Storage is Storage, and while I'd very much so like to be able to have very fast boot times, in the end it will have minor impacts on game performance.


----------



## MPR (Aug 28, 2010)

That 1002FAEX is one of the faster non-SSD drives out there according to several benchmarks. It alone might outperform two lesser drives in a RAID 0 configuration. Also remember that RAID 0 increases the chance of data loss and if you put two cheaper drives in the array you are increasing this chance even more. This is not as big of a concern, however, if you only use the RAID array for applications that you can restore and back up your sensitive data elsewhere.

Of course, if you RAID 1 two high-performance drives you will still have a fast system and not have to worry too much about data loss or the purchase of a third drive.

A dedicated DVD RW might be something to consider as a cheaper backup option to a third HDD too.


----------



## shotgn (Aug 10, 2008)

I run a raid 0 on my personal system. I love the power and performance. But it comes at a price.

Make sure there is nothing you want to lose on your raid. I have the OS and a couple of games. Thats it.

Then I have a 1tb redundant hd for my important info,pics, and music


----------

