New PC

[saleen385]

1: Gaming(War Thunder) surfing, light 3D modeling, general stuff
2: $1500
3: USA
4: Newegg
5: Intel, ASUS, NVidia
6: optical drives7:no OC
8: highest possible (32" monitor)
9: soon
10: no

This is what I picked,
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811139010
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132412
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487088
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438034
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117369
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233536
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822236625
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2W02CZ2241

I noticed that there is a newer version MB not sure if its worth it.

What do you guys think?

Thanks

 

[UsandThem]

1. Case is personal preference. I prefer quieter cases like the Fractual Design R5.
2. Asus make good boards. The new revision adds USB 3.1
3. Good video card
4. 850w is way over-kill for your system. You could run it easily with 500w. If you want to future proof it, you could get a good 550w or 650w EVGA G2. I have the 650w.
5. If you are not overclocking, you could get the non-k version to save a few $'s
6. Ram is fine.
7. Fine for traditional drive. I only use SSD's.
8. It's what I use except I have 500GB version.

 

[saleen385]

I was thinking the PSU in case I want to go to dual graphics cards
Are the SSD faster than std. HD?
I'll check out the case

thanks

 

[UsandThem]

I see. Even though the power supply is gold rated, it won't perform as efficiently as it could because with your specs, you will most of the time be pulling 90w-210w on your system. It might use a little more energy, but nothing major in extra electricity costs.

Yes, SSD's are faster than mechanical drives and use less energy. A lot of people use a SSD drive for their OS, but then use a mechanical drive for everything else because they cost less and are larger. I use SSD's for everything, but I don't 'back-up' large movies and such, so I have no need for 2+ TB hard drives.

 

[saleen385]

my plan is to use the SSD for the OS

thanks

 

[nsafreak]

Not understanding why you're going with the older Devil's Canyon when Skylake is already out. Here's what I would recommend for your budget instead:

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor ($399.99 @ NCIX US)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($24.88 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty Z170 Gaming K4 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($118.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($74.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($85.00 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($48.88 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 970 4GB Twin Frozr V Video Card ($329.99 @ B&H)
Case: Fractal Design Define R5 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case ($89.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA G2 650W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($79.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $1252.69
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-01-26 19:41 EST-0500

CPU: Skylake as opposed to Devil's Canyon, really doesn't make sense to buy DC now unless you have a board that supports it already
Motherboard: I far prefer ASRock better bang for your buck and equal, if not better, build quality
Case: Personal preference, I prefer Fractal Designs cases
PSU: You can up the wattage but I personally recommend that if you're going to go SLI you do it on the initial build. If you do it "down the road" then in all likelihood a single card solution will be available that will be faster than your SLi setup & use less power
GPU: Went with essentially the same one
HDD: Zero point in getting a WD Black when you already have an SSD

 

[dud]

Not understanding why you're going with the older Devil's Canyon when Skylake is already out.

I created my own build thread about two weeks ago (with a DC chip) and another user also questioned using DC vice Skylake. I did some research and literally changed my build design to Skylake. The cost of the build rose a little under $100.

After pricing the parts I did some price/performance comparisons of the two generations of CPUs and found that most (and I mean 90%+) of the reviews I read favored DC over Skylake for two reasons:

1) Skylake tends to be more expensive to build

2) the overall performance realized by Skylake over Haswell is miniscule (and un-noticeable).


Most reviews favored going DC because the extra cost was not offset by an appropriate performance improvement. I am wavering but am leaning back towards DC. I can get an I5-4690K for $230 while an I5-6600K currently runs $257. A good Asrock MB and some memory for DC is less expensive than an LGA 1151 and some DDR4, even though the difference is narrowing over time.

I'm sure that the newer chips are "better" but the performance difference from Haswell is very disappointing.

 

[saleen385]

I created my own build thread about two weeks ago (with a DC chip) and another user also questioned using DC vice Skylake. I did some research and literally changed my build design to Skylake. The cost of the build rose a little under $100.

After pricing the parts I did some price/performance comparisons of the two generations of CPUs and found that most (and I mean 90%+) of the reviews I read favored DC over Skylake for two reasons:

1) Skylake tends to be more expensive to build

2) the overall performance realized by Skylake over Haswell is miniscule (and un-noticeable).


Most reviews favored going DC because the extra cost was not offset by an appropriate performance improvement. I am wavering but am leaning back towards DC. I can get an I5-4690K for $230 while an I5-6600K currently runs $257. A good Asrock MB and some memory for DC is less expensive than an LGA 1151 and some DDR4, even though the difference is narrowing over time.

I'm sure that the newer chips are "better" but the performance difference from Haswell is very disappointing.

After reading that I also did a little more research and found the same thing plus they seem to run hot with the best way to cool them is with water cooling. I really don't feel like messing with that as I don't think they have the water cooling perfected yet.

Thanks

 

[UsandThem]

After reading that I also did a little more research and found the same thing plus they seem to run hot with the best way to cool them is with water cooling. I really don't feel like messing with that as I don't think they have the water cooling perfected yet.

Thanks

Skylake generally runs cooler than DC. The CPU in my signature idles at 24c and only gets up to 45c most of the time on the Noctua cooler. If I run a lot of stress-testing on it, it will hit the low 50's. The performance is very close in most cases, and I would select the DC if I got a good deal on it.

However, the only reason I didn't try to change your mind on what you picked out is since the 6600k and 6700k are in short supply, and they are selling over what Intel suggests for their price.

For example, Intel said the 6700k should be priced at $349. Right now, if you want one, you are paying $50-$70 more than that.

 

[dud]

After reading that I also did a little more research and found the same thing plus they seem to run hot with the best way to cool them is with water cooling. I really don't feel like messing with that as I don't think they have the water cooling perfected yet.

Thanks

I am all about the latest tech but Skylake (and by default, Intel) has been a HUGE disappointment. Intel is beginning to remind me of Microsoft ... Pumping out another crappy (sometimes good) OS every few years to keep earnings up. Skylake, IMHO is a disappointment because the increase in performance does not match the increase in price over Haswell. IMHO bad form on Intel's side.

I so badly wish that AMD hadn't dropped the ball and given Intel a run for their money. It would have all come out better for us if their were more competition. Skylake is what you get without it.

 

[lehtv]

Skylake, IMHO is a disappointment because the increase in performance does not match the increase in price over Haswell.

Maybe not with the unlocked enthusiast processors, but with cheaper ones, it's pretty much on par:

i7-6700 $330 (3.7-4.0 GHz turbo)
i7-4790 $310 (3.8-4.0 GHz turbo)

i5-6500 $205 (3.3-3.6 GHz turbo)
i5-4590 $200 (3.5-3.7 GHz turbo)

i5-6400 $190 (3.1-3.3 GHz turbo)
i5-4460 $190 (3.2-3.4 GHz turbo)

In each case, Skylake's performance per GHz is a few percent better, and power consumption is a little lower. So really you pay the same price for the same speed but get improved power consumption and compatibility with new motherboards and DDR4. I agree that it's underwhelming compared to the improvements we used to get each generation, but "a HUGE disappointment" is an exaggeration. Even the K models are worth buying to me because they overclock a bit better than Haswell, and DDR3 is nearing EOL so I'd rather not pay for new DDR3.