KSP1 Computer Building/Buying Megathread

[VR_Dev]

Moved to giant computer mega-thread.

I recommend a desktop.

Yeah I was gonna ask here. It seemed strictly about building though.

In regards to my situation, gaming aside I really need a laptop. I'd just like one that would be able to play and record KSP and at least hold it's own for other games.

I know desktops are cheaper but I like being able to kerbal on the go. Are the Razer Blades really not built that well?

Edited March 4, 2015 by clown_baby

[Superfluous J]

I recommend a desktop.

I do as well...

...for anybody who will only ever play KSP in one location.

I play in 3 distinct locations, one of which has no internet access and one of which having a desktop either permanently set up or brought in daily (shudder) is impractical. There are a lot of us with similar oddities in our lives.

I started buying laptops in 2002 and gaming laptops in 2008, and each time realized I would never go back.

[VR_Dev]

I do as well...

...for anybody who will only ever play KSP in one location.

I play in 3 distinct locations, one of which has no internet access and one of which having a desktop either permanently set up or brought in daily (shudder) is impractical. There are a lot of us with similar oddities in our lives.

I started buying laptops in 2002 and gaming laptops in 2008, and each time realized I would never go back.

Yeah I'm pretty set on a laptop.

I'll look into the asus brand.

Also I just noticed what your signature pic is, and it's awesome

[Camacha]

I play in 3 distinct locations, one of which has no internet access and one of which having a desktop either permanently set up or brought in daily (shudder) is impractical. There are a lot of us with similar oddities in our lives.

A good rule of thumb is not to buy gaming laptops, unless you have very compelling reasons to ignore that rule of thumb. There are situation and application where there is little other choice, but if at all avoidable, avoid. You will get significantly less speed, for more money, in a package that often is neither very portable nor comfortable to use as a gaming station. Long story short, it is a whole lot of compromises in a box.

[Superfluous J]

A good rule of thumb is not to buy gaming laptops, unless you have very compelling reasons to ignore that rule of thumb. There are situation and application where there is little other choice, but if at all avoidable, avoid. You will get significantly less speed, for more money, in a package that often is neither very portable nor comfortable to use as a gaming station. Long story short, it is a whole lot of compromises in a box.

While I agree with some of this (the first part mostly) the problem is that most people stop at your comma and just assume that because they have no reason to buy a gaming laptop, there is no reason to buy a gaming laptop.

My laptop gets a pretty solid 20fps with KSP and 60fps with most other games (but those are actually released and optimized and whatnot) in a comfortable form factor (I don't use a separate keyboard and frequently the only 2 things plugged in are the power and mouse) with a large (17 inch plus) screen. Sure, it's heavier than a macbook air but the day I consider anything less than 10 pounds "heavy" is the day I move into the retirement home and complain about kids on my lawn.

Did I pay more than I would have for a desktop? Sure. Of course. Probably more than double.

Is upgrading anything other than memory or hard drives difficult to impossible? Yup, but in my experience by the time you need to upgrade most anything else, you need to upgrade the mobo as well and with that comes upgrades to most everything else.

Is the convenience of having my entire computing experience exactly the same in three different places worth these tradeoffs? Ab. So. Lutely.

[Camacha]

My laptop gets a pretty solid 20fps with KSP and 60fps with most other games (but those are actually released and optimized and whatnot) in a comfortable form factor (I don't use a separate keyboard and frequently the only 2 things plugged in are the power and mouse) with a large (17 inch plus) screen. Sure, it's heavier than a macbook air but the day I consider anything less than 10 pounds "heavy" is the day I move into the retirement home and complain about kids on my lawn.

I get a pretty solid 60 fps in KSP - when I am maxing out on mods. Otherwise it is somewhere beyond 100 fps, though of course it depends on ship size. I actually do regularly switch out parts, tinker or add hard drives. This is not some fictional thing that never actually happens.

The one thing this machine is not is portable, so if you need that you would be better off with a laptop. Do not get me wrong, I am not trying to turn this into a desktop versus laptop discussion. I do not want to say laptops or gaming laptops do not have their uses and value, but I think it is fair to establish that a lot of people buy a laptop because they feel it will be convenient and mobile, only to use it as a fixed station on the couch, rather than at a desk.

Then again, I am not known for my compromises, which might explain my preference for desktops

[VR_Dev]

Man you guys are bumin me out. All the reviews made it seem like laptops were legit.

I only used to play on my macbook. I had to turn the graphics down but it worked just fine

[Camacha]

Man you guys are bumin me out. All the reviews made it seem like laptops were legit.

It all depends on your wishes and requirements.

- A laptop will run games, a gaming laptop will run games better at the expense of cost and portability.

- A gaming desktop will run games better still, and/or at a lower price point. At equal price point, expect vastly superior performance.

- A gaming desktop is least portable, while a normal laptop is probably most portable. If you want to move around with your system more than once a month, desktops become less and less viable.

So, basically it boils down to a couple of simple questions.

- What programs and games do you want to run, at what resolution, settings and how many frames per second?

- Where do you want to do that?

- What is your budget?

Those three metrics will line out your options and limitations pretty quick. There are a couple of other things that might influence a decision, like things being upgradeable or durable, but those factors are often decided in a natural fashion based on the first three.

[cantab]

The other thing I would keep in mind is that product designations, for example for processors and graphics, are marketing. Similar names and numbers are used on desktops and laptops to make you think you're getting similar performance, and you just aren't. They're designed to hide the performance you give up. The fastest laptop "Core i5" is about the same speed as the slowest non-"low power" desktop "Core i3", no great surprise since they're both dual-core hyperthreaded chips. It's a not dissimilar story on the graphics cards. So check actual tests and benchmarks.

[VR_Dev]

Well thanks everyone, guess I'll but a PC then. Tons of research to do though now.

Any suggestion as to what a reasonable price is for a decent pc?

Edited March 5, 2015 by clown_baby

[briansun1]

Well thanks everyone, guess I'll but a PC then. Tons of research to do though now.

Any suggestion as to what a reasonable price is for a decent pc?

I'd say on a budget $500ish. This is a good place to start. This is also a good site for building

[Camacha]

Any suggestion as to what a reasonable price is for a decent pc?

That depends on the answers to those questions again Though I would replace where? with What other programs and things do you want to do?

[KandoKris]

Hi All

I though this would be a good place to seek advice for a desktop PC. A recent storm and open window as ment that I need to replace some pretty core components.

Anyway I’ve got it down to a battle of intel vs AMD and even thou there is a $400 difference between them I’m still finding it hard to choose. Also because I don’t do this often I would like confirmation that all the bits work together.

AMD $1000

ASUS Sabertooth 990FX Motherboard R2.0, AMD FX-8350 8 Core Black Edition Processor, Corsair Vengeance CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3, Sapphire Radeon R9 280X Vapor-X 3GB

Intel $1400

Intel Core i7 4790, EVGA GeForce GTX 970 FTW ACX 2.0 4GB, ASUS Sabertooth Z97 Mark S Motherboard, Corsair Vengeance CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3

With both to be run on a Strider Plus ST75F-P power supply.

Parts I think are salvageable from the old build;

Hard drives ( I have lots (5x 1tb 1x2tb & 1xSSD), DVDRW Drives (there hard to kill) and ram (Corsair Vengeance same as above)

System is to be a gaming rig with tomes of music /video storage as it also doubles as an archive centre for all my devices.

Other option is a complete new PC for $1500 or less But I really don’t like that option.

I need to make my choice soon it’s already been a week since I saw my kerbals and I want to be up and running when V1.0 is released

[Elthy]

Those are both not good:

The AMD FX are close to useless since they are outclassed by Intel in almost all scenarios. But the i7 is a realy bad choice and a wast of money, a i5 costs way less but is almost as fast (rule of thumb: if you dont know for sure you will need an i7 you dont need one).

Both run extremly expensive Mainboards, just buy the cheapest one you can get (with the right chipset, you wont need a Z97 for a non K CPU). The important part is the chipset and its quality is allways the same, the other stuff is only special features (you rarely need at all) or features for extreme overclockers.

You will be able to use the HDDs/SSD and the RAM without issues. Im not sure about the PSU, if you allready own it you should keep it but its totaly overpowered for those builds, 500W are more than enough.

[KandoKris]

Useless? but its 4.4ghz of power... never had an AMD build before always went intel

As for the i7 4.0Ghz (OC to 4.4) I just didn’t want to do a replacement and prefer to do an upgrade.

A replacement would involve a new ASUS P8Z77-M board and then I might risk salvaging the i5 3570k CPU which I would do but …not only is that risky but it seems the board is hard to find online as most no longer stock it plus like I said I want an upgrade not the same as before

As for the cheapest... its not a simple PC so I'm prepaired to throw some cash at it to make sure it can play the latest title's that take my fancy. ( futrure proof ) while also giving style. ( open perspex case )

Edited March 5, 2015 by KandoKris

[Elthy]

Im not sure if i understand you right: You have an i5 3570k and you are not sure if its still working since your mb is dead? You should go in a PC shop and ask them to try it, if its still working just buy a new Z77 mainboard.

As for the cheapest: There is no better performance from a more expensive mainboard...

[Camacha]

Useless? but its 4.4ghz of power... never had an AMD build before always went intel

You cannot compare one GHz to another, unless it is the same chip generation, on the same process, and even then there are some variables to take into account.

But if you have that kind of hardware lying around I would make use of it. Spending a whole lot of money will probably get you a slower computer. Not ideal, I would say.

As for the cheapest: There is no better performance from a more expensive mainboard...

That is not entirely true. More expensive board generally has more power phases, which means a more durable and stable operation. It is something that is hard to measure, but to take into account. This becomes especially relevant when overclocking.

[KandoKris]

thanks for the advise. So I'll steer clear of i7 and try to re-use more bits. I'll pull out the rice and hairdryer again before taking it to PC shop for testing. I have my fingers crossed but doubt it can be saved. Man its hard to find good Z77 1155 boards in Aus. But saying that I have now found a couple that should do and at least ship to Aus;

AS Rock Z77 PRO4-M LGA1155

DZ77GA-70K / DZ77GAL-70K

ASUS P8Z77-V

MSI Z77A-GD55

Anyone have opinions on them ? Also EVGA GeForce GTX 970 FTW ACX 2.0 4GB is it worth the $$

[Camacha]

I'll pull out the rice and hairdryer again before taking it to PC shop for testing.

Leave the hairdryer, that will do more harm than good, and be careful with the rice. The residue left by the rice could be more harmful than the gains, so preferably avoid contact.

I understand you have had some sort of mishap due to fluids? It might be a little late, but if that happens, ideally you would want to wash the substance away with distilled water. It feels odd, but is the best chance of preventing damage. After that just dry it in mild heat. No blowing, just put it somewhere slightly toasty and leave it alone for however long it needs and then a bit more. The better part of a week generally is about right, depending on how many nooks and crannies the object has. Force heating it might cause electrostatic dangers and could cause problems with expanding fluids or even steam in confined areas.

Fluids themselves are actually not as harmful as people think. If you did not short anything out right away, you are pretty much good. Corrosion, however, in another matter. Almost anything that is not just plain water will slowly eat at your hardware if not properly removed. Things will seem fine for a little while and then everything goes south - even more south than Australia already is That is why I prefer washing and drying if anything like that happens.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Camacha

[Drunken Hobo]

Finally ordered myself a new monitor to go with my new PC: http://www.amazon.co.uk/BenQ-VW2245Z-21-5-inch-Monitor/dp/B00EQ0PB5Y Will no longer have the joys of a 17" 4:3 CRT. Hopefully I've made a good choice. Next I'll need to do something about my 17-year-old speakers.

Will also have to rebuild by computer desk... yay.

[Superfluous J]

Finally ordered myself a new monitor to go with my new PC: http://www.amazon.co.uk/BenQ-VW2245Z-21-5-inch-Monitor/dp/B00EQ0PB5Y Will no longer have the joys of a 17" 4:3 CRT. Hopefully I've made a good choice. Next I'll need to do something about my 17-year-old speakers.

Will also have to rebuild by computer desk... yay.

Because of this post (and a ton of research), I just bought the 2255 from the same company, from the US Amazon site

[Drunken Hobo]

Because of this post (and a ton of research), I just bought the 2255 from the same company, from the US Amazon site

Was trying to figure out the difference between the two. Apparently your model has the power adapter built in, whilst I'll have a power brick. Your one will be more energy efficient too, and you can tilt the stand. Actual screen specifications seem identical.

Mine was slightly cheaper - £72, but has now gone up to £95.

[Superfluous J]

Was trying to figure out the difference between the two. Apparently your model has the power adapter built in, whilst I'll have a power brick. Your one will be more energy efficient too, and you can tilt the stand. Actual screen specifications seem identical.

Mine was slightly cheaper - £72, but has now gone up to £95.

For me, the only difference that mattered was that the one I bought had free shipping with Prime

[Azimech]

I bought a Pentium G3420 (it's a dual core) with an Asus Z77 last year. Really cheap system. This CPU beats most of the I3's and I5's and some I7's as well.

I was thinking about a CPU upgrade and so looked in this list: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Seems that CPU still is the one with the best value for money, with a price of $68. The next best one costs $90 (G3440).

So no CPU upgrade this year.

But I'm wondering if my GFX card is a bit old. It's an Asus GTX 260 (passmark score 1116). If I switch to my internal video of the G3420, KSP crawls. So maybe updated GFX card isn't such a bad thought after all. At least I'll be able to use the DX11 hack.

[Camacha]

Seems that CPU still is the one with the best value for money, with a price of $68. The next best one costs $90 (G3440).

Though value for money and single thread performance are both very interesting metrics, do note that they are not definitive. Value for money is mostly relative, because sometimes you simply need more performance no matter optimal costs, and single threaded speed is mostly interesting for applications that multithread badly (like KSP).

That being said, on a budget it is a very interesting chip, not in the least because it has a lot of overclocking headroom normally reserved for more expensive chips.