KSP1 Computer Building/Buying Megathread

[DaBlacGuy]

Saving $850 for future build

[url]http://pcpartpicker.com/p/NBnVNG[/url]

I might wait for Zen and the R9 480 to come out before making any purchases to avoid any buyers remorse.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Here's my computer specs:
CPU: Two Intel core 2 CPUs 6700 @ 2.66Ghz
Memory: 8 gigs
OS: Windows 7, 64-bit
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO 512
Hard drives: Hitachi HDT725025VLA SCSI Disk device, and;
WDC WD25 00KS-00MJB0 SCSI Disk device
Keyboard: Great old mechanical keyboard, I can't find it by googling the model number
Mouse: Logitech optical mouse, has a small problem with the power cord
Joystick: Logitech extreme 3D pro
Monitor: LCD 1280 X 1024.

[Pipcard]

Which is better for KSP, a GTX 960 or an R9 380?

(joelhowell [URL="http://pcpartpicker.com/guide/xfmPxr/i5-4460-gtx-960-gaming-pc"]here[/URL] claims that an R9 380 is better in general)

[cantab]

On Windows it makes pretty much no difference. On Linux probably the nVidia card, just because nVidia make decent Linux drivers in general and AMD don't.

[Camacha]

[quote name='Elthy']It may start, but you wont have fun on that. Its not a normal Intel CPU, but a very low power model. Why fanless? There are options that only use one almost unhearable fan, but completly passive requires very big (and expensive) coolers or weak hardware...[/QUOTE]

Even silent PC enthusiasts tell us fanless is [I]not[/I] a good idea. You are always going to need some kind of airflow with those power numbers. Even if you could away with passively cooling a CPU and GPU, you are still dealing with parts that were designed to be cooled by a bit of air flowing past them. No airflow at all is a terrible idea and asking for a lot of trouble.

Of course, you could look at low powered systems, but that will pretty much mean performance is equally low.

[Alphasus]

[url]http://pcpartpicker.com/p/xKBtZL[/url]
Is this a good computer for playing 1080p games like Project C.A.R.S. and War Thunder? Of course, it would also need to run ksp rather well. It would need to run Project C.A.R.S. and war thunder at high, preferably ultra, as well.

[Spearka]

[quote name='Elthy']Wow, you missed a whole RAM generation, we are at DDR4 since Skylake. I definetly recommed an upgrade, i assume a complete rebuild is needed after such a long time.[/QUOTE]

yeah... problem is that I'm not exactly stable in terms of finance and any investment above £100 I feel is way too risky to do even if it's building a PC from the ground up. Wanna know how outdated my rig is, I'll give the rest of the Specs.

P5QPL-AM ASUS motherboard
Intel Pentium Dual-Core CPU E5300 2.6GHz
4GB RAM
NVidia GT630 Graphics Card.
Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit
500 GB Hard Drive

the thing is so old you can hear it spouting racist comments if you put your ear close enough Edited November 19, 2015 by Spearka

[Elthy]

That is to old to upgrade anything, you would need a new mainboard, CPU, RAM, which would be at least 200€ to be worth it.

[cantab]

Well it depends what you want to do. You can probably pick up a Core 2 Quad for £20-30, CeX have them, and that will be a decent upgrade for programs that can use four cores (ie not KSP). I found [url=http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=817]one review from 2012 pitting a fast C2Q against an Ivy Bridge i7 and an AMD FX[/url] all with a fast graphics card and the C2Q did well in games then. It's hard to find tests on newer games but I reckon anything your GT 630 can handle a C2Q will be fine with too.

Don't forget that the Pentium's cooler won't handle the hotter-running C2Q, so if you don't get a cooler with your processor upgrade you'll need to buy one separately.

Your big problem is the same as I had with my old PC though: only two DDR2 slots. 4 GB DDR2 sticks exist but they're usually stupidly overpriced so unless you get lucky you'll be stuck at 4 GB total and nowadays that gets to be a struggle. Edited November 19, 2015 by cantab

[Camacha]

I would advise against sinking money in such an old system. Save it and buy something more recent, even if another old beater. Spending money on old systems is counter productive. You invest in expensive, out-of-date standards that cannot be used in other systems. I know it is no fun, but you are much better off holding your breath a little longer and shelling out a little more for something more decent.

[Slam_Jones]

Good morning, fellow Kerbonauts!

I'm looking into getting an SSD for my PC. Currently I'm not too concerned with size... I mainly want to fit Windows 10 onto there and see how much smoother and quicker it loads before investing further money.

Now the SSD that I've had my eye on is the [URL="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147372"]Samsung EVO 850 (250GB)[/URL], which would currently set me back about $90. I've heard from other places that the Samsung are among the best SSDs. Is this still true? I have an offer from Newegg for a different SSD, an [URL="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167307&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=IGNEFL112015&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL112015-_-EMC-112015-Index-_-InternalSSDs-_-20167307-S1A1C"]Intel 535 Series (120GB)[/URL] for $40 after promo code and whatnot.

So I guess my question is, for lower-volume SSDs (250GB and below) is there any particular manufacturer I should look into? Or should I just spring for the cheapest (assuming it's from a company I've at least head of)? Edited November 20, 2015 by Slam_Jones
Added links to product info

[Red Iron Crown]

Samsung, Crucial and Intel are the good names in SSDs afaict. I would not buy another brand.

[Camacha]

[quote name='Red Iron Crown']Samsung, Crucial and Intel are the good names in SSDs afaict. I would not buy another brand.[/QUOTE]

I would. Crucial has an excellent name and builds the SSD's with the best features. Their MX series has power protection and MLC memory, both the more desirable options. I think some drives even act like SLC the first half of their capacity.

[Red Iron Crown]

I'm thinking you read my post a little too quickly, Camacha. ;)

[Camacha]

[quote name='Red Iron Crown']I'm thinking you read my post a little too quickly, Camacha. ;)[/QUOTE]

Is that what it said before? Looks like a glitch in the matrix :D

[Slam_Jones]

[quote name='Camacha']I would. Crucial has an excellent name and builds the SSD's with the best features. Their MX series has power protection and MLC memory, both the more desirable options. I think some drives even act like SLC the first half of their capacity.[/QUOTE]

Good to know. I wouldn't want my OS to suddenly disappear due to power issues... speaking of, how common are such issues? Does the memory get wiped during power surges, or things like that? My current residence has... lets say less-than-professional wiring (though far from dangerous).

The MX series would set me back a bit more, so would it be worth the extra cash? I'd likely only be putting the OS and maybe a game or two on it: nothing that can't be recovered.

[Camacha]

[quote name='Slam_Jones']Good to know. I wouldn't want my OS to suddenly disappear due to power issues... speaking of, how common are such issues? Does the memory get wiped during power surges, or things like that?[/quote]
SSDs currently still have a couple of flaws, a major one being that they do not fare well when power is suddenly cut. A way of dealing with that is using power caps. Though current implementations do not prevent any and all damage, it does offer a fair degree of protection, whereas others have none. And yes, I have seen a number of people deal with the consequences of these so called POR-issues. Damaged or illegible file systems are most common, though vague and annoying problems can also be caused by this. Not a lot of fun.

[quote]The MX series would set me back a bit more, so would it be worth the extra cash? I'd likely only be putting the OS and maybe a game or two on it: nothing that can't be recovered.[/QUOTE]
I consider some form of power protection mandatory for SSDs. It is something they all should have, though sadly most people just look at ideal numbers only achieved under non-real life circumstances.

[scribbleheli]

With the 1.1 and all the goodies that come with it coming. Would anyone recommend upgrading my setup?
I have been quite happy with it for some time. But as it was built in 2008. With odd upgrade here and there, I thought it might be time.

Core i7 920 @ 2.8ghz currently (3.5Ghz ish when playing Ksp)
Coarsiar H100i Cooler
Asus Rampage II extreme Motherboard.
Gskull 8Gb ram
Adata 60 & Muskin? 480Gb SSD
GTX 760 OC 4gb Windforce Gpu

I was thinking a core I7 6700k, and Asus Ranger mobo would be a good 7 year replacement.
And If anyone has a bead on a second gtx 760 Windforce. Im all ears.

[Elthy]

Dont buy the i7, its overpriced, if you are overclocking anyway you wont get a benefit (hyperthreading is almost allways useless). The i5 6600k would be a more reasonable choice. The mainboard is also totaly overpriced, something for half the money will also work good.

Also i would advice against another 760, dont use SLI/Crossfire if it isnt because you already have the best single GPU installed, it has to many drawbacks compared to a single, powerfull card.

[scribbleheli]

I found the mobo for about 150$
And buying a new gpu would be vastly more expensive vs sli an other 760.

[Elthy]

Yeah, a new GPU would be more expensive, but dont forget all the disadvantages that come with SLI:
Not perfect scaling -> you wont get a 100% improvement in FPS.
Unstable frametimes -> those increased FPS wont feel as good as the number would show, due to unstable frametimes and microlag.
Lacking compability -> SLI doesnt work with every game out of the box, some never work at all
Needs more space and a better cooling solution, sometimes the cards block themself from fresh air.

Also you would invest more money in an outdated GPU architecture, thats a problem especialy for Nvidia since they tend to reduce the support for older GPUs once a new generation is released.

Edit: And 150$ is still very expensive for a mainboard, is there anything special you need from it?

[scribbleheli]

The games I play are cpu intensive over gpu. I think, ksp obviously, dcs, arma 3.
So one gtx 760 is fine. Then two (especially if I get a second for 150$) should be beyond what I need for highest settings.
A family friend who is a computer guru said 150$ should be my mobo budget. He recommended a Asus z170-a. Which was 150$ ish from new egg.
I keep an eye on the open box stuff and saw the ranger.
I like the asus Rog boards I think. My rampage 2 was what..450$ when I bought it. So I thought it was a good deal. I don't have a lot of pc building experience out side of trying to put together the cheapest pos I can mange for work. So I don't know what I "need" but the more options the better.
I was doing a compare of several boards and it was checking off the most boxes. Usb 3.1 a and c. Usb 3. Crap ton of fan headers and a dedicated water pump header. M.2 dad are in my future along with Oculus rift.
I like my ROG sound card in my rampage. Needs to be full ATX.
What board would you recommend then?

Im putting together a black Friday list. What ever is the best vaule ill likely get.

Oh, my conputer case is all open, so fresh air is plenty.
The h100i is like 2*240mm fans or something, its litterly supported by a scaffolding of the nylon packing tape lol.
Function over form!

Several reviews have shown that the 6700k isn't that much faster then a 4970k in total, but in single core test it blows it away. Which sounds like it would be perfect for a game like KSP.

So thata my reasoning behind this.. but i'm open to suggestions Edited November 24, 2015 by scribbleheli

[Elthy]

Again:
An i7 is completly unnecessary when you plan to overclock anyway, go with the i5, it wil yield the same results but its way cheaper.

Cheaper Z170 boards start at about 100$. Write down the stuff you need (e.g. how many USB ports) and look whihc one is the cheapest that fullfills those things.

[Shania_L]

Hey guys, I have a generic question about how to choose components for my next machine.

I am looking to upgrade (probably total rebuild tbh its 6yr old) my current system as the power supply has started (maybe 8+ months ago) to grind its bearings into dust.

Currently I have;
AMD Phenom II 550 BlackEd 3.1GHz (Dual Core)
Radeon HD 7870 1Ghz 2GB GDDR5 (I thought this bit was salvagable as its not as old, but Fallout lists it as minimum req)
8 GB RAM

I have built a few PCs before but these days I have not really kept up with developments and am at a bit of a loss as to which specifications of certain components I should be spending my money on.

I am not particularly chasing bleeding edge performance, but I try to get as much as I can for what I spend which is why I tend to go for AMD.

My current thinking was leaning towards the AMD FX-6350 3.9GHz Hex core, which has the same clock speed as the 8370 but for 2/3 the price ... would I really miss the extra 2 cores?

Another one, is Graphics cards, Radeon R7 and R9, is that a simple upgrade or are they aimed at different tasks? £150 is about the cutoff between the top of R7 and the bottom of R9 territory.

Any advice on which specifications of different components to rate against each other would be muchly appreciated :)

[Elthy]

You can keep the GPU, my brother seems to play Fallout 4 fine on that card, but im not sure on which settings.

For the CPU: Since an Upgrade to an AMD FX CPU would require a new mainboard anyway you could also go with Intel. They offer way more single thread performance, which is important for KSP. if i understood that correctly, you currently use DDR3 Ram, which you could use on a new mainboard, too. You have a few options, from most expensive to budget:

1. Complete upgrade to Skylake, would also require new RAM. Futureproof and very performant, but even the basic i5 processors are quite expensive. Not recommeded.

2. A Haswell quadcore Processor. This would allow you to keep your RAM, so you would only need a CPU/mainboard. While a bit older than Skylake Haswell is still very good and only slower by a few %, also cheaper than Skylake by quite a bit (at least in Germany). It doesnt come with the newest stuff like DDR4, but that shouldnt matter that much when you are looking for gaming performance. You could go with a cheaper i5 and a B85 mainboard or with the i5 4690k and a Z97 mainboard to overclock. Anyway, you wont have to upgrade again for a long time.

3. An AMD FX 6300 or 6350. While ok for most games its not very good in KSP, since AMD processors have poor single thread performance. If you can afford an i5 i would choose that, but maybe thats not possible.

4. The Intel Pentium G3258. Its only a dualcore, but can be overclocked, which results in extreme single thread performance for its price. Not that good in other games, but perfect for current KSP (no idea how that will change with Unity 5).