The recommendation of the Corsair cx 430W made me cringe. Corsair's refusal to give them out for review, coupled with the number of DOA units I've heard of recently just makes it looks like a horrible POS PSU...
I'd much rather go with a cheaper case (one of the smaller CM elite cases for example, or a Xigmatek Asgard) and get a better PSU for the price difference (say, a Seasonic 430W)
1. GTX580; this card costs 40% more than GTX570 and offers cca. 16% more performance (at 1920); if the game is not playable with GTX570 it's not with GTX580. for AAA games, that have such high demand, a GTX570SLI would prove better (SLI drivers support most popular games).
2.Premium is also about noise; a Corsair AX or Seasonic Gold PSUs provide much better noise quality at idle or everyday work.
3.X58 platform; I would appreciate a test comparing this motherboard versus AsusP8P67Pro with 2xGTX580(SLI). I think it would give an indication of the situation in November when the new 28nm Nvidia Kepler and AMD Southern Islands hit the shops. Nobody wants a premium rig that it's not upgradable in 6 moths time.
Originally Posted by Synalar 1. GTX580; this card costs 40% more than GTX570 and offers cca. 16% more performance (at 1920); if the game is not playable with GTX570 it's not with GTX580. for AAA games, that have such high demand, a GTX570SLI would prove better (SLI drivers support most popular games).
there is a rather large difference between gtx 570 and gtx 580. you may find for premium players that has high resolution (:D) games are only playable on gtx 580. such generalization is foolish.
gtx 580 is the fastest single GPU card at the moment, there is absolutely every reason to use it in premium player. most people spending that amount of money (£300+) on graphics department doesn't want to be bothered by drivers.
Originally Posted by Singularity The recommendation of the Corsair cx 430W made me cringe. Corsair's refusal to give them out for review, coupled with the number of DOA units I've heard of recently just makes it looks like a horrible POS PSU...
I'd much rather go with a cheaper case (one of the smaller CM elite cases for example, or a Xigmatek Asgard) and get a better PSU for the price difference (say, a Seasonic 430W)
We'd actually intended to change that, but we hit the Publish button too quickly. It's changed to the Antec Earthwatts 380W:
Quote:
Originally Posted by The article Finally, we've updated the PSU from the Corsair SU-430CX 430W to a PSU we have reviewed: the Antec Earthwatts 380W. We said in Custom PC that it 'proved able to output a stable voltage from all of its rails [and] its also reasonably efficient'. As this isn't a monster PC, a 380W power supply is fine.
got to admit I like having 3 screens to much to have just one graphics card (and want 3d) so 2 nvidia cards are a must.
however since moving to 2 570's I cant seem to get them to run 3 monitors at present without them rebooting the computer... so its not plug an play perfect yet.
with the issues over SI I'm suprised that you didn't hold off a month but I guess some readers might explode lol.
Originally Posted by sp4nky "When it comes to PSUs, our sister mag Custom PC..."
I hadn't realised that Custom PC was feminine. Is it on newsagents shelves next to Hello! and such?
EDIT: By the way, nice to see the PC guide back after its Christmas break
You can find it in the Womens Monthlies section...
/gets coat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Singularity The recommendation of the Corsair cx 430W made me cringe. Corsair's refusal to give them out for review, coupled with the number of DOA units I've heard of recently just makes it looks like a horrible POS PSU...
I'd much rather go with a cheaper case (one of the smaller CM elite cases for example, or a Xigmatek Asgard) and get a better PSU for the price difference (say, a Seasonic 430W)
Yup, the CX430 has a bad rep, which is a shame as the Builder CX400 (it's predecesor) was a great unit in it's class.
premium player is an interesting one this week, didnt see an i7 recommendation coming at all! Although if i was buying a new rig now i'd just wait until march
I'd have expected 8GB RAM "Gaming Workhorse" rig, and find the jump between the mid-range GTX560 and the Top-End GTX580 rather high.
Also, while the SB Chips are undeniably great once the current problem has been solved, it would have been nice to at least mention chips-and-boards that come without errors. :D
Originally Posted by Claave We'd actually intended to change that, but we hit the Publish button too quickly. It's changed to the Antec Earthwatts 380W:
Hurray! A much better option in my opinion! :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Repo Yup, the CX430 has a bad rep, which is a shame as the Builder CX400 (it's predecesor) was a great unit in it's class.
Very true, the old CX400 was light years ahead of this low-end stuff.
Originally Posted by Hustler Yikes!!!....clean sweep for Intel on the CPU front.
AMD....Bulldozer cant come soon enough.
Why on earth don't they recommend the Athlon II X3 for the gaming build????
Also - a Phenom II X4 + mobo is quite a bit cheaper than the Intel equivalents, allowing for a bigger GPU - why is this not considered?
1) Drop the Antec 300 in favour of the confusingly named but superior Antec 100. The latter has far better asthetics and cable management facilities (well it actually has cable management....)
2) Where are you getting your memory prices from? DDR3 PC12800 (1600MT/s) is easily available for sub £35 (and in some cases sub £30).
3) Drop the G6950 for the i3 540. It is only a few £ more but offers HT and a higher stock clock frequency to counter (thus more performance clock for clock).
4) Put back in the HD6850 1GB or replace it with the GTX460 1GB. Realistically looking forward 768MB of memory isn't enough for future games at 1680x1050. Heck, current games can easily blow past that limit at 1680x1050 with some AA & AF (something either the HD6850 or GTX460 are perfectly capable of).
With the price of memory so low, theres no reason for anything except the budget build to have less than 8GB of RAM. 6GB is ok, but lets face it, if your paying for x58, then $145 (/w 15% promo code) US$ (Its the same price for me in canuckastan) for 12GB 1600mhz (3x 4GB) is easy money to spend for such a large epeen expansion.
With apoligies to you UK folks who seem to pay a premium on everything and then VAT on top of that, just to add insult to injury.
"Whats tipped our recommendation in favor of an LGA1366 build, though, is the well publicised problems Intel is having with its P67 and H67 chipsets. As a result, youre better off opting for an X58-based board right now."
If you believe this is the case, why recommend Sandy bridge components for the other builds? I fail to see why this is only an issue with the premium player rig.
Following your previous conventions, surely a 2600K based build would be more sensible? According to your own benchmarks the 9xx range is eclipsed, hexcore notwithstanding.
Additionally, the cited advantages regarding triple channel memory and additional PCI-E lanes are arguably negligible, especially in terms of real world performance.
Originally Posted by digitaldunc From the premium player recommendation:
"Whats tipped our recommendation in favor of an LGA1366 build, though, is the well publicised problems Intel is having with its P67 and H67 chipsets. As a result, youre better off opting for an X58-based board right now."
If you believe this is the case, why recommend Sandy bridge components for the other builds? I fail to see why this is only an issue with the premium player rig.
Following your previous conventions, surely a 2600K based build would be more sensible? According to your own benchmarks the 9xx range is eclipsed, hexcore notwithstanding.
Additionally, the cited advantages regarding triple channel memory and additional PCI-E lanes are arguably negligible, especially in terms of real world performance.
Have to agree...
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_kille4 Hmmm... still waiting for LGA 1356 to come out to replace x58
Originally Posted by rasmusdf Why on earth don't they recommend the Athlon II X3 for the gaming build????
Also - a Phenom II X4 + mobo is quite a bit cheaper than the Intel equivalents, allowing for a bigger GPU - why is this not considered?
Perhaps bit-tech is just an Intel shill.
Since you're new I'll forgive you ;) for not knowing the Affordable All-Rounder had an AMD CPU for every single buyers guide (in memory) until very recently. The G6950 is just better than the Athlon II X3 when overclocked, and the Gigabyte H55 board is excellent and cheaper than ever. http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/06/24/intel-pentium-g6950-cpu-review/1
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi Since you're new I'll forgive you ;) for not knowing the Affordable All-Rounder had an AMD CPU for every single buyers guide (in memory) until very recently. The G6950 is just better than the Athlon II X3 when overclocked, and the Gigabyte H55 board is excellent and cheaper than ever. http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/06/24/intel-pentium-g6950-cpu-review/1
Ok, I accept you are not shilling for Intel (sorry) ;-) Still, for gaming is a 3.2 GHz 3-core not a better bet? I can accept it is debatable.
On the mid-level build: The Core i5 is an awesome CPU, no doubt about it. Still, Core i5 + motherboard is £300. For around £170 toy can get an AMD Phenom II X4 + motherboard, that leaves an extra £130 for a stronger GPU. I think it would be interesting to explore if this was a stronger bet for a gaming PC.
Comments 1 to 25 of 33
ReplyI hadn't realised that Custom PC was feminine. Is it on newsagents shelves next to Hello! and such?
EDIT: By the way, nice to see the PC guide back after its Christmas break ;)
I'd much rather go with a cheaper case (one of the smaller CM elite cases for example, or a Xigmatek Asgard) and get a better PSU for the price difference (say, a Seasonic 430W)
1. GTX580; this card costs 40% more than GTX570 and offers cca. 16% more performance (at 1920); if the game is not playable with GTX570 it's not with GTX580. for AAA games, that have such high demand, a GTX570SLI would prove better (SLI drivers support most popular games).
2.Premium is also about noise; a Corsair AX or Seasonic Gold PSUs provide much better noise quality at idle or everyday work.
3.X58 platform; I would appreciate a test comparing this motherboard versus AsusP8P67Pro with 2xGTX580(SLI). I think it would give an indication of the situation in November when the new 28nm Nvidia Kepler and AMD Southern Islands hit the shops. Nobody wants a premium rig that it's not upgradable in 6 moths time.
there is a rather large difference between gtx 570 and gtx 580. you may find for premium players that has high resolution (:D) games are only playable on gtx 580. such generalization is foolish.
gtx 580 is the fastest single GPU card at the moment, there is absolutely every reason to use it in premium player. most people spending that amount of money (£300+) on graphics department doesn't want to be bothered by drivers.
We'd actually intended to change that, but we hit the Publish button too quickly. It's changed to the Antec Earthwatts 380W:
however since moving to 2 570's I cant seem to get them to run 3 monitors at present without them rebooting the computer... so its not plug an play perfect yet.
with the issues over SI I'm suprised that you didn't hold off a month but I guess some readers might explode lol.
/gets coat.
Also, while the SB Chips are undeniably great once the current problem has been solved, it would have been nice to at least mention chips-and-boards that come without errors. :D
AMD....Bulldozer cant come soon enough.
Counting chickens before they've hatched me thinks.
Hurray! A much better option in my opinion! :)
Very true, the old CX400 was light years ahead of this low-end stuff.
Why on earth don't they recommend the Athlon II X3 for the gaming build????
Also - a Phenom II X4 + mobo is quite a bit cheaper than the Intel equivalents, allowing for a bigger GPU - why is this not considered?
Perhaps bit-tech is just an Intel shill.
1) Drop the Antec 300 in favour of the confusingly named but superior Antec 100. The latter has far better asthetics and cable management facilities (well it actually has cable management....)
2) Where are you getting your memory prices from? DDR3 PC12800 (1600MT/s) is easily available for sub £35 (and in some cases sub £30).
3) Drop the G6950 for the i3 540. It is only a few £ more but offers HT and a higher stock clock frequency to counter (thus more performance clock for clock).
4) Put back in the HD6850 1GB or replace it with the GTX460 1GB. Realistically looking forward 768MB of memory isn't enough for future games at 1680x1050. Heck, current games can easily blow past that limit at 1680x1050 with some AA & AF (something either the HD6850 or GTX460 are perfectly capable of).
With apoligies to you UK folks who seem to pay a premium on everything and then VAT on top of that, just to add insult to injury.
Otherwise I've yet to see a system use more than ~3.8GB while gaming - and usually they hover around 2.7GB.
"Whats tipped our recommendation in favor of an LGA1366 build, though, is the well publicised problems Intel is having with its P67 and H67 chipsets. As a result, youre better off opting for an X58-based board right now."
If you believe this is the case, why recommend Sandy bridge components for the other builds? I fail to see why this is only an issue with the premium player rig.
Following your previous conventions, surely a 2600K based build would be more sensible? According to your own benchmarks the 9xx range is eclipsed, hexcore notwithstanding.
Additionally, the cited advantages regarding triple channel memory and additional PCI-E lanes are arguably negligible, especially in terms of real world performance.
Since you're new I'll forgive you ;) for not knowing the Affordable All-Rounder had an AMD CPU for every single buyers guide (in memory) until very recently. The G6950 is just better than the Athlon II X3 when overclocked, and the Gigabyte H55 board is excellent and cheaper than ever. http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/06/24/intel-pentium-g6950-cpu-review/1
Ok, I accept you are not shilling for Intel (sorry) ;-) Still, for gaming is a 3.2 GHz 3-core not a better bet? I can accept it is debatable.
On the mid-level build: The Core i5 is an awesome CPU, no doubt about it. Still, Core i5 + motherboard is £300. For around £170 toy can get an AMD Phenom II X4 + motherboard, that leaves an extra £130 for a stronger GPU. I think it would be interesting to explore if this was a stronger bet for a gaming PC.
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums