Mid-High End Computer (aka I suck at forums, move please)

[GeneralNukeEm]

I read the stickied guide (wonderful resource, thanks) but wanted something in between the mid range and high end options that also utilized a z68 chipset mobo. Some reading of newegg and toms hardware/anandtech later produced the following:

CPU: Intel i5-2500K 3.3 Quad Core
Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 LGA 1155 Intel Z68 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX
RAM: CORSAIR Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9B
Graphics: GIGABYTE GV-N570D5-13I-B GeForce GTX 570
SS Intel 510 120gb
HD Samsung 1TB 7200 RPM
PSU: COOLER MASTER Silent Pro 600W
Case: COOLER MASTER Storm Sniper
CD/DV ASUS Black 24X DVD+R

Monitors: ASUS VW246H Glossy Black 24" x2 (not sure about this, it was rated pretty well on newegg and is cheaper than the HP ones in the guide, is there something specific about the one linked in the guide that's better?)
Speakers: Logitech Z523 40 Watts RMS 2.1 Speaker System
Keyboard, mouse, headset, etc are covered

Probably will want to purchase this within this within 2 weeks. Any glaring problems (like if things won't fit together or something) or suggestions? Primary uses will probably be games, internet, word processing, stata, and video/photo editing in that order.

[scythus]

Wrong forum?

[GeneralNukeEm]

I fucking swear I had the computer section opened. :hugecripes:

[Dwergi]

More or less the exact PC I bought a couple of months ago, down to the brand of RAM. Motherboard is different, but couldn't comment on it, since I bought the P67 back when it was reported to be faulty (but haven't had any problems yet, and warranty is valid for 2 years).

It's run everything on max settings so far - no complaints yet.

[Mangala Solaris]

Moved.

[Ryas Nia]

Monitors: ASUS VW246H Glossy Black 24" x2 (not sure about this, it was rated pretty well on newegg and is cheaper than the HP ones in the guide, is there something specific about the one linked in the guide that's better?)

The difference is in the quality TN panels are only 6bit with 8bit emulation for color. This means photos and movies are less color accurate. IPS which is the panel tech in the HP I suggest has true 8bit color, it also tends to be brighter, more uniform and has better contrast. They are professional monitors that are used for video editors and photo editors as well as people doing modeling and CAD work, but guess what.... They work just fine as regular use monitors as well with the added benefit of lasting for years and providing a better overall user experience.

I have a Dell 2404 that has been going strong for years now and its fantastic for gaming, photo editing and everything else I do. At work, im on my 3rd TN LCD because my boss insists on buying the cheapest shit he can find, often they are too dark or light, the colors are far from accurate and they just dont last as long (the ASUS is likely to be better than the crap we get at work).

[Aea]

I will basically not buy another TN panel in my life, the IPS premium is so tiny now (a few years ago it was a couple hundred dollars difference).

[GeneralNukeEm]

Thanks for the move Mangala.

I suppose I will just roll with that HP monitor from the guide then. Price difference doesn't seem that bad. Although is there one that's slightly bigger (around 23 inch) that you'd recommend?

I did some more reading and found something about how motherboard manufacturers have approved lists of RAM for each motherboard. According to the gigabyte website the RAM I picked out isn't specifically listed as working with the motherboard in question, but I've never heard of this before and in the past I've never had trouble with just plugging in what would otherwise be the proper type of RAM into a motherboard. Is this a big deal and I've gotten lucky in the past, or should any reputable motherboard generally work with any reputable RAM?

[Ryas Nia]

Thanks for the move Mangala.

I suppose I will just roll with that HP monitor from the guide then. Price difference doesn't seem that bad. Although is there one that's slightly bigger (around 23 inch) that you'd recommend?

I did some more reading and found something about how motherboard manufacturers have approved lists of RAM for each motherboard. According to the gigabyte website the RAM I picked out isn't specifically listed as working with the motherboard in question, but I've never heard of this before and in the past I've never had trouble with just plugging in what would otherwise be the proper type of RAM into a motherboard. Is this a big deal and I've gotten lucky in the past, or should any reputable motherboard generally work with any reputable RAM?

its generally not an issue and I have seen motherbaords validated to use specific ram not work with it before so RAM is still a crap shoot but its a crap shoot in your favor 95% of all memory will work so long as its the right type... ie at least DDR3 1333mhz for your system.

[GeneralNukeEm]

I'm not a gambling man but I'll take those odds. Any other comments on the build, or am I good to pull the trigger? And thanks for all the advice.

[Ryas Nia]

other comments, yeah, looks like i need to update my high-end i did not realize that the Z68's were shipping I thought they were just sending out review samples now :P guess i have been working too hard and not keeping up with the hardware.

I will say Im not that big a fan of Coolermaster PSU's they are ok, but not that good. I think you would be better off with a Corsair/Antec, the RAM should be fine with that motherboard I dont see any glaring issues.

[Verizana]

that build looks very good apart from that SSD. 20k IOPS and 210mb/s write? 1,2mill hours usage.

compare it to the OCZ vertex 3: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-706-_-Product

Better write speed, better read speed, much better IOPS, 2 mill hours usage and it's cheaper

[GeneralNukeEm]

I heard that intel SSD's were generally more reliable? Was the only reason I went with that instead of the Vertex 3 which I did see was getting tons of good reviews.

[XenosisReaper]

that build looks very good apart from that SSD. 20k IOPS and 210mb/s write? 1,2mill hours usage.

compare it to the OCZ vertex 3: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-706-_-Product

Better write speed, better read speed, much better IOPS, 2 mill hours usage and it's cheaper

I'm a little bit confused, 1.2 mill hours is roughly 100 years, is that really an issue?

As for the PSU/Cooling, I have to recommend Corsair, my current PC is pretty much all corsair apart from the GPU/CPU and it runs wonderfully.

[Bombcrater]

I heard that intel SSD's were generally more reliable? Was the only reason I went with that instead of the Vertex 3 which I did see was getting tons of good reviews.

The failure rate for OCZ drives is about five times that for Intel ones.

[GeneralNukeEm]

Is that a difference between something like .00001% vs .00005% (whatever) or more like 1% vs 5% (I will get intel thanks)

[Verizana]

I heard that intel SSD's were generally more reliable? Was the only reason I went with that instead of the Vertex 3 which I did see was getting tons of good reviews.

The failure rate for OCZ drives is about five times that for Intel ones.

What? I'm sorry but thats just wrong, you are just as likely to get a broken ssd from intel and ocz.

Intel:

Max read:
450 MB/s (SATA 6Gb/s)
265 MB/s (SATA 3Gb/s)

Max write
210 MB/s (SATA 6Gb/s)
200 MB/s (SATA 3Gb/s)

Random 4 KB Reads: Up to 20,000 IOPS
Random 4 KB Writes: Up to 8,000 IOPS

Crucials c300:

Max Read:
355MB/sec (SATA 6Gb/s)
265MB/sec (SATA 3Gb/s

Max Write:
140MB/sec (SATA 6Gb/s)
140MB/sec (SATA 3Gb/s)

Random 4k Read: 50,000 IOPS
Random 4k Write: 30,000 IOPS

Vertex 3:

Max Read:
up to 550 MB/s (SATA 6Gbps)
up to 280 MB/s (SATA 3Gbps)

Max Write:
up to 500 MB/s (SATA 6Gbps)
up to 260 MB/s (SATA 3Gbps)

4KB Random Read: 20,000 IOPS
4KB Random Write: 60,000 IOPS

The vertex 3 beats the intel drive using a sata2 connector on the motherboard while the intel is connected do a sata3 port. The vertex 3's IOPS write speed is 7,5 times the speed of the Intel and double of the c300 (last gen SSD). The max write speeds of the C300 are just terrible tbh.

The reason Ballistic Void keeps complaining about his C300 is because he feels the same performance when writing down tasks as he used to, maybe slightly better performance than his old pc. That is because the write speeds and IOPS (Internal Operations Per Second) of the C300 numbers are low.

I'm sorry but the Intel and Crucial drives just can't compete.

The Vertex 3 is slightly more expensive than the Crucial C300 and slightly cheaper than the Intel.

And yet you still insist on hating it.

[GeneralNukeEm]

Found a couple of articles in similar to this, claiming that intel's failure rate over 1 year was .59% while OCZ is 2.93%. Of course that was written 6 months ago when none of the current new drives were even out yet...

[Bombcrater]

What? I'm sorry but thats just wrong, you are just as likely to get a broken ssd from intel and ocz.

No, it's not wrong. I've seen the figures from a distributor that carries both brands of drive. If anything five times may be an understatement because the disti doesn't see OCZ drives that are RMA'd directly back to OCZ, and from what I hear that happens quite a lot.

SSD failures are almost always due to firmware issues or flash quality. Intel has the most reliable firmware around, they own the fabs that make the flash they use, and they have the resources to do way, way more testing than a small company like OCZ.

[Verizana]

and yet i haven't got a single ocz vertex 3 ssd back. By the way your argument for buying a second rate SSD because its less likely to be broken at arrival is just wierd, in my opinion its totally worth it, if its broken just send it back.

Its like saying you would rather have an i3 for your pc instead of an i7 because it runs cooler even tho the i7 is cheaper

Edit: i feel like I'm getting trolled.. OCZ also owns the fabs for making their ssd's m8