KSP1 Computer Building/Buying Megathread

[IvanTehFennec]

That's where we can help. We can help find parts for a budget for the best performance. There are plenty of guides as to how to put a computer together, and honestly it's pretty simple. Things with Slot X go in slot X, and Slot Y go to Slot Y.

[Camacha]

You did read that the VP for the server branch called Bulldozer a failure for the server market?

Also: Bulldozer was postponed for almost two years. They were unable to release earlier, since 65nm and 45nm manufacturing did not enable them to reach power and frequency goals (and more than two modules woul have been way too fat with that technology).

You did read that I said Bulldozer was not done yet? The product was not ready to be released yet, they are ironing out the flaws, but it will be a while before everything is as it should. Of course, that is to be expected with the first totally new architecture in many years.

You go on about Bulldozer, you do know the latest series of FX chips are on Piledriver aka Vishera.

Piledriver fixes all the problems with Bulldozer.

It fixes the most urgent, but surely not all. Some are a bit more complicated to improve and can not ever be changed within a year, as product and design cycles are something like four years long (with several running concurrently). The rough performance of the product that will be released next year is already laid out, there is only so much a CPU manufacturer can do within a relatively short year.

I'm not quite at the building level yet. Can I please just get an opinion on which choice is the best price and performance wise. I'm twelve and have a bit of a challenge making money.

For me the choice would be between the 799 dollar and the 999 dollar model. The first one will play KSP nicely, as single threaded performance is important and not having a quad core is not a problem. The video card is no monster but provides a lot of bang for the buck and will do just fine for KSP and other games at medium to high settings. If you really want high end performance with high end games you should be looking at a quad core. The 999 dollar model has a proper i5 CPU and a very decent GPU. This will run pretty much any game nicely, but will be a bit overkill for a game like KSP.

A quick calculation lets me build the 799 dollar model for 614 euros, which is about spot on the same. Their pricing does not seem too bad (compared to European prices), providing there are not too many hidden costs. However, the more specific you can be in what you want to do with your computer, the better our advice about what suits your needs

Edited June 3, 2013 by Camacha

[sammoe]

For me the choice would be between the 799 dollar and the 999 dollar model. The first one will play KSP nicely, as single threaded performance is important and not having a quad core is not a problem. The video card is no monster but provides a lot of bang for the buck and will do just fine for KSP and other games at medium to high settings. If you really want high end performance with high end games you should be looking at a quad core. The 999 dollar model has a proper i5 CPU and a very decent GPU. This will run pretty much any game nicely, but will be a bit overkill for a game like KSP.

A quick calculation lets me build the 799 dollar model for 614 euros, which is about spot on the same. Their pricing does not seem too bad (compared to European prices), providing there are not too many hidden costs. However, the more specific you can be in what you want to do with your computer, the better our advice about what suits your needs

I think I'll go for the $999 model then when I've saved up. By then these new Haswell processors should be standard.

[Camacha]

I think I'll go for the $999 model then when I've saved up. By then these new Haswell processors should be standard.

When you save a little more you might upgrade it with a SSD or some other nice parts The basis is good and should last you a long time.

[sammoe]

When you save a little more you might upgrade it with a SSD or some other nice parts The basis is good and should last you a long time.

Yeah that was another thing that worried me. But I had forgotten about upgrades . Thanks!

[Leonov]

I dont know about that build, you pay that much and you arent even getting a 3570K. If you can get comfortable with assembling a computer, you can build a Good AMD machine. The A10-5800K is a Pretty good APU to build a Good Rig Around.

[IvanTehFennec]

Those Digital Storm builds are a complete RIP. I'd rather buy from EA than buy such an over-priced piece of crap.

EDIT: Here's their $1,400 option at $1,179. It also comes with enough pop-tarts to [redacted]

Edited June 4, 2013 by IvanTehFennec

[Camacha]

I dont know about that build, you pay that much and you arent even getting a 3570K.

The chip is actually almost exactly as fast as the 3570K. It just lacks the overclocking capabilites. It is a popular choice for budget conscious builds or with people that do not want to overclock.

The A10-5800K is a Pretty good APU to build a Good Rig Around.

As a combination of CPU and GPU the A5800K is a nice chip, when it comes to just the CPU bit the i5 is in a league of its own. Personally I would always recommend to (relatively) spend slightly more on a CPU than a GPU, as the latter is more easily replaced, even a couple of generations in the future.

Those Digital Storm builds are a complete RIP. I'd rather buy from EA than buy such an over-priced piece of crap.

EDIT: Here's their $1,400 option at $1,179. It also comes with enough pop-tarts to [redacted]

[image]

As mentioned before, I calculated the 799 dollar model and that was pretty much spot on what parts would cost (based on European pricing, I am not sure about prices overseas). Also, some nuance would be nice. They do not look like pieces of crap. Even if you think the prices are way too high, the hardware seems to be pretty decent. It would be nice to acknowledge that.

[IvanTehFennec]

As mentioned before, I calculated the 799 dollar model and that was pretty much spot on what parts would cost (based on European pricing, I am not sure about prices overseas). Also, some nuance would be nice. They do not look like pieces of crap. Even if you think the prices are way too high, the hardware seems to be pretty decent. It would be nice to acknowledge that.

That's the thing. It's overpriced. You can get their $1,400$ option for $1,000 if you play it smart on Newegg. It's a rip-off.

[joppiesaus]

Those Digital Storm builds are a complete RIP. I'd rather buy from EA than buy such an over-priced piece of crap.

EDIT: Here's their $1,400 option at $1,179. It also comes with enough pop-tarts to [redacted]

I have the same processor and I didn't know that you have 3.8 ghz turbo. Now I finally understand why it is sometimes 3.8 ghz.

[Camacha]

That's the thing. It's overpriced. You can get their $1,400$ option for $1,000 if you play it smart on Newegg. It's a rip-off.

That's the thing; I calculated the parts cost of the 799 dollar model and the parts were pretty much exactly the price they are asking (ie. 798 dollar and change). I can not call that over priced by any standard As also mentioned before, I calculated it with local (European) prices, which might make some difference. In general that difference does not turn out to be really big, though.

Also remember that assembly often costs money; locally it is something in the neighborhood of 50-65 euro (65-85 dollar). An assembled system also comes with system warranty, so finding and solving a problem becomes the job of the supplier instead of having to rely on yourself to find out what is wrong. For folks with some experience that is not an advantage; they will find out themselves, but for some people this is a notable gain. At the end there is still some price difference left, but it is a bit less that it appears to be

I can imagine the top model having some bigger margins, but calling the build(s) an over-priced piece of crap simply does not fly, especially since the top model was never seriously considered for sammoe.

[IvanTehFennec]

That's the thing; I calculated the parts cost of the 799 dollar model and the parts were pretty much exactly the price they are asking (ie. 798 dollar and change). I can not call that over priced by any standard As also mentioned before, I calculated it with local (European) prices, which might make some difference. In general that difference does not turn out to be really big, though.

Also remember that assembly often costs money; locally it is something in the neighborhood of 50-65 euro (65-85 dollar). An assembled system also comes with system warranty, so finding and solving a problem becomes the job of the supplier instead of having to rely on yourself to find out what is wrong. For folks with some experience that is not an advantage; they will find out themselves, but for some people this is a notable gain. At the end there is still some price difference left, but it is a bit less that it appears to be

I can imagine the top model having some bigger margins, but calling the build(s) an over-priced piece of crap simply does not fly, especially since the top model was never seriously considered for sammoe.

But he can GET the top model for the price of the next one down! :|

[dodrian]

I think it's about high time I upgraded my old (2007) PC. It's running Ubuntu, and I use it as a budget gaming machine.

Motherboard: GA-P35-DS3L

CPU: Intel Core2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz

RAM: 4GB 800 MHz DDR2

Graphics: G84 [GeForce 8600 GT] 256MB, 700MHz

HDD: 500GB 7200RPM

250GB 5400RPM

I'm thinking what I most need an upgrade of is the graphics card. Any suggestions as to what I should go for, considering the limitations of the rest of my system? Unfortunately I've not got much money I can spend on it.

Edit: I was looking at this GT 640, but it's at the top end of my budget and I'm worried it'll be too overpowered for the rest. Is it worth trying to upgrade this old system on such a small budget?

Edited June 5, 2013 by dodrian

[Plur303]

I think it's about high time I upgraded my old (2007) PC. It's running Ubuntu, and I use it as a budget gaming machine.

Motherboard: GA-P35-DS3L

CPU: Intel Core2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz

RAM: 4GB 800 MHz DDR2

Graphics: G84 [GeForce 8600 GT] 256MB, 700MHz

HDD: 500GB 7200RPM

250GB 5400RPM

I'm thinking what I most need an upgrade of is the graphics card. Any suggestions as to what I should go for, considering the limitations of the rest of my system? Unfortunately I've not got much money I can spend on it.

Edit: I was looking at this GT 640, but it's at the top end of my budget and I'm worried it'll be too overpowered for the rest. Is it worth trying to upgrade this old system on such a small budget?

With an older system like yours there is no reason to get a new graphics card. I would buy a used card that is 1 or 2 generations old for cheap. It will still be a huge upgrade for you and a fraction of the price of a new card.

[Leonov]

It would be a little smarter to wait a bit save some money and build a Rig based around the new A10 6800K APU. It will be the best bang for buck build.

Edited June 5, 2013 by Leonov

[lobsterbark]

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: AMD A10-5800K 3.8GHz Quad-Core Processor

Motherboard: ASRock FM2A55M-DGS Micro ATX FM2 Motherboard

Memory: Kingston Blu Red Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory

Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 500GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive

Case: Antec Three Hundred Two ATX Mid Tower Case

Power Supply: Corsair CX 430W 80 PLUS Bronze Certified ATX12V Power Supply

Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 (OEM) (64-bit)

Total: $480.36

I can run Skyrim at max and Far Cry 3 at medium-high. And just under 500 bucks.

Edited June 5, 2013 by lobsterbark

[Manifest]

I secretly dream of creating a super computer the size of some of the first computers to be created,

except, you know, it would have way more CPU power and such per square centimeter.

Funding, space, knowledge of what makes a computer run, and actual use for the damned thing is needed though.

But I can't help but wanting to have it, I guess its that little remaining 8 year old spirit that resides within me.

Edited June 5, 2013 by Manifest

[Fyrem]

My plan:

This month, buy a i7-4770 and a Motherboard. I already have a 'good enough' 580gtx video card - and thus will wait to buy a new one during the next generation of Video cards.

However, what I do need to figure out, with all the new motherboards for the Socket 1150 chip, WHICH ONE should I get?

Want I want : 2x PCI 3.0, USB 3.0 (more than one would be better), 6gb/s SATA, DDR3 1600 (min)

I don't need to worry about the MB's Graphics ability, since I never play to use it.

I don't need to worry about the MB's Sound ability, since I have a SoundBlaster card that I will transfer over to the new box.

I generally do not Overclock. I just don't feel comfortable doing it. (even thou I am a IT professional, I have seen enough PC's/CPU's fried due to overclocking that I see no reason to deal with it myself).

Anyone have any insights as to which Motherboard for socket 1150 is a good choice?

Is there anything else I should be concered about?

[jfx]

ASRock B85 Pro4 or similar. If you want to retain the ability to overclock for the future; ASRock Z85 Pro4 or similar.

[Leonov]

In regards to haswell, i dont think its worth leaving socket 2011 and the 3770K. The 4770K isnt looking like much of an improvement in the gaming department. Most of the people that have recieved Engineering samples have noted that it is getting Hot, Some have even reported cratering under the stresses of overclocking. To each their own, if you have to have intel stay with socket 1155 or socket 2011 3570K and 3770K respectivly.

Now if you want to change to AMD i can point out some stoof, Let me know.

[jfx]

The 3770k is on the mainstream 1155 socket. You confuse stuff - Ivy-e on 2011 which you refer to is not even released yet. Also Haswell is getting hot, but not so hot that it is a problem. (Read as: not hotter than a FX-8xxx without aftermarket cooler).

[Fyrem]

I wasn't looking at the K version.

from another forum I use, listing the Top Tier 1 CPUs, yes, AMD is also on the list but I am intentionally leaving them out

Core i7-3970X, -3960X, -3930K

Core i7-4770K, -4770, -4770S, -4770R

Core i7-3820, -3770K, -3770, -2700K, -2600K, -2600

I acknowlage that the 39xxX and K chips can be better, however those are overlocked. (see my comment that I don't like overclocking).

Thus, as I see it, my BEST cpu would be the -4770 (no letter).

I will give the ASRock line a closer look, I had not heard of them before.

[jfx]

For mainboard support the K does not make a difference.

Depending on you use case you can also take a loook at the Xeon E3-1240 V3; it is a bit cheaper than the 4770 and comes with a disabled igpu.

http://ark.intel.com/compare/75055,75122

It is also supported by most mainboard manufacturers.

http://www.asrock.com/support/cpu.asp?s=1150&u=615

[IvanTehFennec]

For mainboard support the K does not make a difference.

Depending on you use case you can also take a loook at the Xeon E3-1240 V3; it is a bit cheaper than the 4770 and comes with a disabled igpu.

http://ark.intel.com/compare/75055,75122

It is also supported by most mainboard manufacturers.

http://www.asrock.com/support/cpu.asp?s=1150&u=615

Xenons are for servers, not for Gaming. Trying to use them for gaming is like suggesting using a poptart to do open-heart surgery. It doesn't work like that.

EDIT: However, apparently poptarts make good GPUs.

[jfx]

As I said they are the same cpu, (same die, same stepping) as you can easily see with the provided link. e3 xeons and i7s are identical - and have been for a lang time - except for the mentioned points.

It would also help if you spelled the product you refer to right.

Edited June 5, 2013 by jfx