KSP1 Computer Building/Buying Megathread

[K3achas]

How's this PC?

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/GBcP7P

(note: I plan on installing linux)

with i7 4790k:http://pcpartpicker.com/p/qmR6K8

with i7 5960X(too expensive):http://pcpartpicker.com/p/LqmKNG

Edited October 18, 2014 by K3achas

[Elthy]

The CPU is extreme ........, slower than the Intel i5s but uses 4 times as much energy and costs even more...

[K3achas]

The CPU is extreme ........, slower than the Intel i5s but uses 4 times as much energy and costs even more...

I esential went straight for the best CPU I could find and built it from there. BTW AMD says you can overclock up to 5GHz with the included cooler.

[Elthy]

Its by far not the best CPU. Ghz and cores are not evreything!

AMD uses "modules" which the count as two cores, but not every unit is duplicated. Also Intel CPUs have way, way more power per mhz...

The most powerfull CPU for singlecore loads (like the KSP physic calculations) is the i7 4790k (about 300€), for multicore loads the i7 5960X (about 1000€!). But both CPUs are way to expensive, especialy when you can buy an i5 4690k for 200€ and you get nearly the same performance as the 4790k (and more than that AMD thing). Those -k CPUs are also good to overclock.

BTW: You should state what you want to do with the PC, then we can help you better.

[K3achas]

Its by far not the best CPU. Ghz and cores are not evreything!

AMD uses "modules" which the count as two cores, but not every unit is duplicated. Also Intel CPUs have way, way more power per mhz...

The most powerfull CPU for singlecore loads (like the KSP physic calculations) is the i7 4790k (about 300€), for multicore loads the i7 5960X (about 1000€!). But both CPUs are way to expensive, especialy when you can buy an i5 4690k for 200€ and you get nearly the same performance as the 4790k (and more than that AMD thing). Those -k CPUs are also good to overclock.

BTW: You should state what you want to do with the PC, then we can help you better.

Mostly just KSP, other games, and coding. Do you know if there's a better processer for doing that?

[swiftgates24]

Mostly just KSP, other games, and coding. Do you know if there's a better processer for doing that?

Haswell E (5820k, 5930k, 5690X) and Haswell+ Xeons are for rendering. i7/i5 are for games and other things, and i3/Pentium/Celeron are for simple computing. An i7 4790k or even an i5 4690k should do you fine.

[cantab]

Yeah, Intel have AMD licked at the high end at the moment. If you're going to overclock the i5 4690k will do practically as well as anything, if you really want to stick to stock speeds the i7 4790k has a noticeable edge.

[Skyler4856]

Is it possible to have two cat5 wires running off the same modem simultaneously?

[Red Iron Crown]

Is it possible to have two cat5 wires running off the same modem simultaneously?

Not usually. You would need a hub or switch to support multiple connections. What are you trying to do exactly?

[Skyler4856]

Not usually. You would need a hub or switch to support multiple connections. What are you trying to do exactly?

Run an apple airport, whilst using an Ethernet connection for my Xbox

[cantab]

Is what you have actually just a modem, or is it a router? (Hint: If you have wifi in your home you almost certainly have a router somewhere.)

If what you have is a modem (only) then you'll need a router as well to connect more than one PC to the internet at the same time.

Usually home routers have four ethernet ports for your local network. If you have a router and it only has one ethernet port, you'll need an ethernet switch to connect more devices.

[Red Iron Crown]

The airport has two ethernet jacks. Connect the WAN one to your modem and connect the LAN one to your Xbox.

[Skyler4856]

Well call me a hog-monkey's uncle, it works!

[Red Iron Crown]

Glad it works. The airport is a bit limited in ethernet jacks compared to most home routers (as cantab mentions they usually have one WAN port and four LAN ports), if you ever need more ports you'll have to put a switch between the airport and the Xbox.

[Randox]

Thought I would seek some advice on finishing up the upgrades to my computer. Looking to get a new CPU, mobo, and case. I am hoping to keep the total costs for this to $250-$300, and will try to use sales where I can if possible.

See a couple posts down for updated CPU and mobo picks from intel

Right now I have:

CPU: AMD Phenom II 1065t 6 core ~2.9GHz

GPU: AMD HD 7950

Motherboard: Some random piece of junk I'm not convinced is 100% compatible with my CPU (it adamantly refuses to use the CPU's turbo function)

PSU: 650W

RAM: 12GB (3 x 4 GB)

HDD: x2

Case: Mid Size ATX

Computer is originally an h8-1011, and still has all the original components except PSU and GPU, and I have added a seccond HDD: http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?cc=us&lc=en&docname=c02874899#N92

The gpu and psu are already upgrades over what the computer came with, bought with the intention of finishing up the upgrades this year. For the CPU, I have decided to go with AMD but I want to double check my picks and solicit any better ideas:

Pick 1: FX-4300 4 core @3.8 GHz - $130 - http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4904563&CatId=7339

Pick 2: FX-8310 8 core @3.4 GHz - $140 - http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=9494388&CatId=7339

Now, when I look at the benchmarks, the 8310 is ~8,000 vs the 4300's ~4,700, but I'm assuming that over half the performance with half the processors would be a good indicator of per core performance. I'm not seeing any games on the horizon where more than 4 processors is going to trump better per core performance, so I am thinking that the 4300 would be the best buy for my purposes. I rarely do any video edited or 3D modelling, so games really are the paramount concern here, not maximum multitasking ability.

Next up is a new case. Needs good ventilation. Was thinking this one, either for the $55 on Tiger Direct or whatever my local computer shop is selling them for right now (they're the ones who showed it to me): http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2817829&Sku=YYD2-VL800P1W2N

Not looking for anything super ostentatious here, and certainly not more expensive. If anyone else has some ideas, feel free. Especially something a bit cheaper that isn't going to turn my computer into a furnace, because I don't think watercooling or more fans is going to fit in the immediate budget.

And then there is the mobo, which is the really hard part for me. Given the price of the cpu and case is ~$200, I'd like to keep the mobo under $100 if I can.

Right now, I am looking at this one: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1963472&CatId=7244

It looks like it will be able to accommodate the USB3 ports on the front of the case I am looking at, and will be able to accommodate my optical and hard drives with room to spare for possible additional hard and solid state drives. I am wondering if there are any critical features I am going to be missing by avoiding anything more expensive? My future plans for the computer don't seem to involve anything this mobo can't handle until it comes time for a new CPU (probably). The next GPU upgrade might be a second 7950 instead of a single better card, and I would like to get an SSD and I'll probably look at getting some 1600 MHz DDR3 RAM at that time to replace the sticks I have now, definitely not anticipating the need for 32GB of it.

To the final build would be:

CPU: FX-4300 3.8 GHz

GPU: HD 7950

Mobo: MSI 970A-G46 AMD 9 Series

RAM: 3x 1333 MHz DDR3

And the hope will be that it can see me through at least a couple years of quality gaming without being required to touch any of those components, and will be reasonably balanced performance wise without either the CPU or GPU robbing one or the other of significant potential like my current CPU does.

Edited October 19, 2014 by Randox

[Elthy]

The FX 4300 is way to weak (for a 7950) and buying it when 2 times the performance cost only 10$ more is... not realy a good idea.

AMD claims its CPUs are quad- to octacores, but the 4300 is just a dualcore with some things doubled per core, same for the 8310.

In my opinion it would be also a good idea to consider a cheap i5, it would be way better than every AMD CPU...

[jfx]

If you are going to switch the mainboard, save some more and buy an i5. Even the 8310 would be a sidegrade for KSP and other games.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/700?vs=147

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/837?vs=147

Even an i3 curbstomps the FX series in KSP, as seen in DMagics benchmark compilation.

http://imgur.com/a/UoRjf#2

http://imgur.com/a/Qq6Ic#4

Edited October 19, 2014 by jfx

[Randox]

Wow, kind of dismaying to see how poorly those FX cards stack up against the CPU I have now. I didn't realize that AMD was doing the 2 logical processors per core shenanigans, or that the per core performance of the FX series was so abysmal. I will hand it to AMD though, they overall benchmark very well.

I will have to check, because an i5 is going to blow the budget out of the water no matter what, but looking around I made some new picks:

i5-4960k: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=9085223&csid=_61

Would this be closer to the neighborhood of something that might keep up with the HD 7950? I would prefer that it not need excessive overclocking just to keep up, though I'm pretty sure I'm not going more expensive either way. Maybe I missed an opportunity to get a lot more power for a marginal price increase, or missed something much cheaper that is almost as good.

And then I need a mobo, so: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=8992482&CatId=8586

Thoughts?

I don't suppose that intel motherboards without an onboard GPU are a thing that exists? That is...not something I really want to be paying for.

Edited October 19, 2014 by Randox

[Drunken Hobo]

Ended up ordering that Medion PC: http://www.medion.com/gb/shop/multimedia-pcs-medion-akoya-pc-p5261-e-310019239.html

Added up the cost of the individual parts on Amazon, using the absolute cheapest parts I could find and it came to £500.

The original price of that PC was £489.

Currently £40 off, bringing it to £449.

Found a £20 voucher code, now £429.

Delivery cost brings it up to £435.95 (boo).

4.1% Top CashBack offer makes it £418.08.

Not bad for a PC with a 1 GB GTX 750, i5 processor, 8 GB of RAM & a 1 TB hard-drive. I'm not sure it'd be possible to more PC for your money. It's almost too good to be true. I'm just waiting for the nasty surprise as it comes "ready to assemble" or something.

[cantab]

Errr? I thought Intel put the integrated graphics on the CPU now?

[jfx]

Wow, kind of dismaying to see how poorly those FX cards stack up against the CPU I have now. I didn't realize that AMD was doing the 2 logical processors per core shenanigans, or that the per core performance of the FX series was so abysmal. I will hand it to AMD though, they overall benchmark very well.

I will have to check, because an i5 is going to blow the budget out of the water no matter what, but looking around I made some new picks:

i5-4960k: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=9085223&csid=_61

Would this be closer to the neighborhood of something that might keep up with the HD 7950? I would prefer that it not need excessive overclocking just to keep up, though I'm pretty sure I'm not going more expensive either way. Maybe I missed an opportunity to get a lot more power for a marginal price increase, or missed something much cheaper that is almost as good.

And then I need a mobo, so: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=8992482&CatId=8586

Thoughts?

I don't suppose that intel motherboards without an onboard GPU are a thing that exists? That is...not something I really want to be paying for.

Onboard gpus are no longer a thing. Both AMD and Intel put them on the same piece of silicon as the cpu now. You'll always get one unless you buy a FX (they are too fat on their own to make it economic to produce with an integrated gpu) or a xeon.

If your budget is tight another opportunity is to go for a Pentium G3258 "Aniversary edition" (55€ here) - you can overclock it easily (otherwise you need a ix-xxxk cpu to overclock) to 4ghz and beyond and when you have more funds later replace it with a i5-4xxx or their one of their broadwell sucessors. As for mainboards: Any ATX board with Z97 chipset from the brand of your choice should do. (Asrock Z97 Pro3 etc.) But it would be a downgrade for anything making use of more than two to three threads.

Edited October 19, 2014 by jfx

[Camacha]

Onboard gpus are no longer a thing. Both AMD and Intel put them on the same piece of silicon as the cpu now. You'll always get one unless you buy a FX (they are too fat on their own to make it economic to produce with an integrated gpu) or a xeon.

Note that some IGP's are on the same die, while others are later assembled into a package within one CPU.

[Duke23]

I have an FX-4350 and for the most part it holds its own... To be honest though I really wish I had held out and built my system around a decent i5 instead. Hindsight is hell.

So, I'm pretty sure my SSD is biting it. I'm past the blind panic stage and into the mourning period even though it's technically still working... It started with a bunch of bluescreens within anywhere from 5-30 minutes after booting. I was about to start ripping out hardware but I decided to fix the event log (it had an issue I discovered the other day but didn't figure out exactly how to fix it until earlier) and when I was able to check it, it spammed that Drive C was corrupt and unreadable. So I ran chkdsk which went to town and scrolled stuff by so fast I couldn't read most of it. Orphaned files, corrupted files, index errors, etc... SMART data says there were CRC errors and POR recoveries (not even sure what that is at the moment). I ran some SMART tests, it passed the short test but crashed pretty much everything at the end of the extended test. Rebooted and chkdsk ran again and fixed significantly fewer things. The system is up now and still not quite right but SFC says everything is fine. The event log is pretty quiet now and the system appears to be stable but a couple of my programs aren't working right. I'm... kind of scared to do anything right now. I have a backup of the SSD from a couple days ago so it's not like I'm going to lose everything even if it completely crashes, but I really don't want it to go out like this

[cantab]

An alternative hypothesis is that something else is causing the bluescreen and corrupting the hard drive in the process. Seemingly random errors make me suspect a ram fault - have you run a test such as Memtest86+?

[Duke23]

I was going to do that before I saw the errors in the event log but was holding off to see if anything happens again. Probably should though now that you mention it. Would errors caused by bad RAM show up in the SMART data like that though? It shows wear leveling at 4 as well and I'm not sure what is normal for that. Also neither of my regular hard drives had any problems at all when I checked them the other day, and one of them has most of my non critical programs installed. I did not check the SSD at the same time because I didn't want to bring down the whole system right then.