No compromise build (sorta)

[bgstcola]

1. Mostly light tasks MS-Office/programming/web/email (90%). But it should also excel at Photoshop/Lightroom/Audio editing (9%) and gaming (1%). My primary goal is to build very responsive, reliable and quiet pc.

2. $4000. Cheaper is better but it is not important.

3. Denmark

4. Not important since I don't care much about the exact price.

5. Don't wanna support nvidia. I chose the Intel 750 over Samsung 950 pro simply because I trust Intel more. I know the Samsung is way faster/cheaper/bigger.

6. Antec case and Antec CP-850 psu.

7. No OC

8. 1440p

9. ASAP when I'm not in doubt about parts.

10. Nope

I posted this build on the PCPartPicker forum but I'm not sure about the advice I got. They told me to go with x99 instead. I looked into that and it seemed like a 5820k would only be faster when doing stuff like heavy audio/video editing. It would actually be slower for lighter tasks. I'm basing this on:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/skylake-intel-core-i7-6700k-core-i5-6600k,review-33276-5.html

They also told me it would be overkill which is kinda true but I have more money than time and spend several hours in front of my computer every day, so very small improvements are worth a lot of money to me. To me there is no such thing as "fast enough" before we hit that limit where the difference is so small that you cannot tell, unless you measure it.

Thanks

[PCPartPicker part list](http://pcpartpicker.com/p/9WGKjX) / [Price breakdown by merchant](http://pcpartpicker.com/p/9WGKjX/by_merchant/)

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor ($329.99 @ Micro Center)
CPU Cooler: Scythe Kotetsu 79.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($34.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170X-UD5 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($165.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2666 Memory ($109.88 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Intel 750 Series 400GB PCI-E Solid State Drive ($389.99 @ B&H)
Storage: Samsung 850 PRO 2TB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($894.97 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury 4GB Tri-X Video Card ($529.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Monitor: Asus MG278Q 144Hz 27.0" Monitor ($519.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $2975.79
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-12 10:31 EST-0500PCPartPicker](http://pcpartpicker.com) 2015-11-12 10:31 EST-0500 |

 

[Ken g6]

Don't wanna support nvidia.

Nvidia cards are likely to be quieter, and have better acceleration support in various Photoshop filters.

I chose the Intel 750 over Samsung 950 pro simply because I trust Intel more. I know the Samsung is way faster/cheaper/bigger.

Don't (just) trust - backup! You should get a spinning disk for backup.
BTW, Intel does make a faster drive, but you can't afford it!

That monitor is not IPS, so it's not so good for Photoshop. Good choices include the MG279Q and this 4K Acer.

Oh, also, do get more RAM. This and this are good 32GB (2x16GB) sets.

 

[Ichigo]

Nvidia won't be quieter if you're running 144hz lol. That bug has been around for years.

Definitely IPS monitor.

Also a $3k build with quad-core instead of 5820k is lol

 

[bgstcola]

Oh the monitor was a mistake. I meant the MG279Q.

Ichigo, why should I go with the 5820k if it is more expensive (motherboard) and slower for most of my tasks? Is there something wrong with Toms Hardware review? I can't find any other reviews why they test the 5820k against a 6700k in everyday tasks.

Thanks for the ram suggestions. I think I will buy the Corsair kit (Gskill is hard to find in Denmark)

 

[LTC8K6]

Oh the monitor was a mistake. I meant the MG279Q.

Ichigo, why should I go with the 5820k if it is more expensive (motherboard) and slower for most of my tasks? Is there something wrong with Toms Hardware review? I can't find any other reviews why they test the 5820k against a 6700k in everyday tasks.

Well, you don't even seem to come close to needing a 6700K.

You aren't going to overclock, so you don't need an expensive overclocking "Z" board and an unlocked hot running "K" chip.

I'd get the much cooler running 6700 non-k chip and a cheaper board.

 

[bgstcola]

Thanks

The cheaper boards seems to have lesser quality components. The Gigabyte board I picked has Intel everything and not that expensive. I looked into the non k 6700. It's only a bit cheaper and running 0.6Ghz slower. The price per Ghz is almost the same.

 

[cyclohexane]

Wow, the SSDs are a hugely overpriced and a waste of money. Especially for your intended use scenarios.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

[PCPartPicker part list](http://pcpartpicker.com/p/9WGKjX) / [Price breakdown by merchant](http://pcpartpicker.com/p/9WGKjX/by_merchant/)

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor ($329.99 @ Micro Center)
CPU Cooler: Scythe Kotetsu 79.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($34.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170X-UD5 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($165.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2666 Memory ($109.88 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Intel 750 Series 400GB PCI-E Solid State Drive ($389.99 @ B&H)
Storage: Samsung 850 PRO 2TB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($894.97 @ Amazon)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury 4GB Tri-X Video Card ($529.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Monitor: Asus MG278Q 144Hz 27.0" Monitor ($519.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $2975.79
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-12 10:31 EST-0500PCPartPicker](http://pcpartpicker.com) 2015-11-12 10:31 EST-0500 |

Whoa there. That's way, way overkill for what you're describing. For 90% MS-Office/programming/web/email, there is very little benefit to such an... extravagant build...

I can appreciate wanting the latest and greatest, but spending almost US$3000 (which works out to ~21000,- in our local currency) on it seems a little over the top, when a simple i3/i5 build with a decent graphics card can do all you ask of it.

Also, since you're Danish, and specified Denmark as your build location, why use American retailers? That's going to cost a pretty penny in shipping. If they even ship here at all.

 

[bgstcola]

I will buy from Denmark. I just used pcpartpicker to create a list.

I already have a 2600K with ssd so it doesn't make sense to buy a i3/i5. I want something faster. I don't like to wait. Even if it is only a second.

The thing is, there are some components in my current build I need to upgrade because they piss me off (too small SSD, video card, WD greens for data). Since I don't have too much time these days I want to upgrade everything when I'm already at it. I spend way too much time on these upgrades (OCD);-)

The SSDs maybe too much. But at the same time I figure that an all ssd system will be amazing. I guess I could change the 850pro 2gb to a crucial mx200 1gb and a hdd for stuff where it really doesn't matter. hmm

But do you guys agree that the 5820k will be slower for most of my usage patterns? (yes they are both plenty fast but again, I rather wait 2 seconds than 3 seconds when I open MS-Word - because I do it all the time).

 

[LTC8K6]

You are never going to see any difference between the 3.4/4.0 65 watt 6700, and the 4.0/4.2 91 watt 6700K when opening Word, imo.

In fact, you won't be able to tell the difference from the 2600K.

You describe mostly light workloads which will probably show no discernible speed difference with any of the modern mid to high end CPUs.

You will have to run benchmarks to tell any difference, imo.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

You are never going to see any difference between the 3.4/4.0 65 watt 6700, and the 4.0/4.2 91 watt 6700K when opening Word, imo.

In fact, you won't be able to tell the difference from the 2600K.

You describe mostly light workloads which will probably show no discernible speed difference with any of the modern mid to high end CPUs.

You will have to run benchmarks to tell any difference, imo.

^^This.

What you need is a good SSD. Be aware higher capacity SSDs perform better then their lower capacity brethren, even among the same family. You should take a look at Crucial's BX100 1TB. It has 90% of the performance of high-end SSDs at a very reasonable price.

If you really want a fast SSD (that's compatible with your mainboard), I can recommend the Kingston HyperX Predator. Its a PCIe drive, so you'll need an unused PCIe slot on your mainboard, but this thing is fast.

Add 16GB RAM, so you wont have to close anything also helps. RAM is cheap, and one can never have too much.

For gaming, what to recommend really depends on which titles you play. The 980 is a good fit for 1440p, no real reason to go higher unless you have a 4K monitor. Coincidently have you considered one? They're great for office type work, where you need screen real estate.

 

[MrTeal]

If I could make a suggestion.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor ($329.99 @ Micro Center)
CPU Cooler: Scythe SCNJ-4000 84.6 CFM CPU Cooler
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170X-UD5 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($165.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($269.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 1TB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($343.98 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($83.89 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($83.89 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury 4GB Tri-X Video Card ($529.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro OEM (64-bit) ($129.89 @ OutletPC)
Monitor: Asus MG278Q 144Hz 27.0" Monitor ($517.58 @ Newegg)
External Storage: Samsung D3 Station 3TB External Hard Drive ($96.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $2552.17
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-13 09:53 EST-0500

It's still really more than you need, but if you want a top of the line system you can't really beat the 6700k without an overclock.

As other have mentioned a single big SSD if generally faster, and it's easier to manage a single big drive for OS/Programs/Games/Data. The only thing you need punt to spinning disk is things like movies, backups, etc.

Add in a copy of something like Acronis True Image, and buy a fireproof safe. Backup incrementally nightly to one of the HDDs, and do a full backup weekly. Monthly grab the USB3 drive out of the safe, backup the system, and toss it back in the safe. Like Ken_G6 said, nothing is more reliable than a good backup.

 

[bgstcola]

Thanks for the suggestions.

Regardig 6700 vs 6700k. Wouldn't the time to open Word be proportional to the clock speed? The 6700k has 18% higher base frequency so I would guess that Word would open 18% faster (I'm guessing it's cpu bottlenecked when installed on an Intel 750)?

4k would make sense but would compromise gaming. I've waited ages for a good gaming IPS monitor. Besides my eyes sucks so I would only appreciate a 4k monitor it it was really large.

I'm planning to use the 400gb Intel 750 PCIE SSD for OS/Programs and the 850 pro for games and data.

I have two old WD greens 2gb I will use for backup (along with Crashplan). Maybe I need to buy another HDD for movies hmm.

I think I will follow your advise and get 32gb. I tend to have a lot of programs/tabs going on at the same time.

 

[LTC8K6]

An SSD is what would make Word open faster, I think.

Word opens in about 1.5 seconds on the Win10 i5-3330 I am using right now, as near as I can time it.

 

[IEC]

An SSD is what would make Word open faster, I think.

Word opens in about 1.5 seconds on the Win10 i5-3330 I am using right now, as near as I can time it.

Yes, but the extra clockspeed from a 6700K will always help, even in desktop apps. There are plenty of huge Word and Powerpoint files thrown around my office, for example.

A 6700K + SSD makes short work of that. Will he notice a difference vs the 6700? Only when it's an annoyingly large file that takes time to load. But at the small price difference and with 4.2GHz turbo I'd always pick the 6700K.

As for the SSDs...

Intel SSDs are a terrible value for the average user. For a consumer, it would always be a better idea to get something like a Samsung 850 EVO (or multiples for the price of the Intel!) and invest in nightly/weekly backups.

Hell, you should do at least weekly backups anyways.

 

[LTC8K6]

I already have a 2600K with ssd

If hasn't already overclocked that, he has a lot of performance left unused.

If he has, then it opens large Word files pretty darn fast, I'll bet.

It's hard to believe he's going to notice a difference opening Word files going from the 2600K/ssd to a 6700K/ssd. Stock or not.

Maybe he will, though.

 

[DreadBelch]

If I could make a suggestion.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K 4.0GHz Quad-Core Processor ($329.99 @ Micro Center)
CPU Cooler: Scythe SCNJ-4000 84.6 CFM CPU Cooler
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170X-UD5 ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($165.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4-3200 Memory ($269.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 1TB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($343.98 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($83.89 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($83.89 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury 4GB Tri-X Video Card ($529.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Pro OEM (64-bit) ($129.89 @ OutletPC)
Monitor: Asus MG278Q 144Hz 27.0" Monitor ($517.58 @ Newegg)
External Storage: Samsung D3 Station 3TB External Hard Drive ($96.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $2552.17
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-11-13 09:53 EST-0500

It's still really more than you need, but if you want a top of the line system you can't really beat the 6700k without an overclock.

As other have mentioned a single big SSD if generally faster, and it's easier to manage a single big drive for OS/Programs/Games/Data. The only thing you need punt to spinning disk is things like movies, backups, etc.

Add in a copy of something like Acronis True Image, and buy a fireproof safe. Backup incrementally nightly to one of the HDDs, and do a full backup weekly. Monthly grab the USB3 drive out of the safe, backup the system, and toss it back in the safe. Like Ken_G6 said, nothing is more reliable than a good backup.

I've trusted Seagate for years and was also considering the "7200.14" 3TB Barracuda you linked until I came across this article that references a Backblaze.com study:

The failure rate on many Seagate drives is simply abominable, from 9.5% on certain 1.5TB drives to 23.5% on the old 7200.11 series, to a whopping 43.1% on the Seagate 7200.14 drive family of 3TB products. Age alone does not account for it — the 7200.11 drives are nearly 5 years old with a 23.5% failure rate, while the 7200.14 drives are half that age with a 43% failure rate. Many of Seagate’s problems, however, appear to be in the 1.5TB to 3TB range. At 4TB, Seagate is much better, with a failure rate of just 2.5% in 2014.

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...clear-winners-and-losers-but-is-the-data-good

At least some of the testing done on the hard drives in that study is extremely rigorous and doesn't represent typical usage, but it's still something to be aware of. Would love for some of the more technical-minded/knowledgeable folks here to chime in on that study and tell us what they think about it.

 

[MrTeal]

I've trusted Seagate for years and was also considering the "7200.14" 3TB Barracuda you linked until I came across this article that references a Backblaze.com study:



At least some of the testing done on the hard drives in that study is extremely rigorous and doesn't represent typical usage, but it's still something to be aware of. Would love for some of the more technical-minded/knowledgeable folks here to chime in on that study and tell us what they think about it.

Going with a different drive won't really affect the cost, especially since the OP doesn't really seem to care about cost. That's an interesting post, along with the Tweaktown one linked from last year.
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6...bility-myth-the-real-story-covered/index.html
While both seem to question Backblaze's methodology, avoiding the 7200.14 might be worthwhile in any case.

 

[bgstcola]

The reason I will pay over price for extra reliable components is not that I don't do backups. It's because I don't want to risk computer trouble during busy periods. I get completely stressed out when there is something wrong with my computer.

 

[Essence_of_War]

Nvidia cards are likely to be quieter, and have better acceleration support in various Photoshop filters.

Uhhh...are you sure?

I thought photoshop makes use of OpenCL acceleration.

 

[Ken g6]

No, I'm not entirely sure, but I'm not sure all third-party PS filters use OpenCL instead of CUDA either.

I'm pretty sure PS doesn't use either natively, which leaves cooler and "quieter" in support of Nvidia.

 

[cyclohexane]

The reason I will pay over price for extra reliable components is not that I don't do backups. It's because I don't want to risk computer trouble during busy periods. I get completely stressed out when there is something wrong with my computer.

This completely bat shit crazy. You get completely stressed out with computer problems. But you don't do backups, what?!?

That's like saying you get completely scared of knocking up your girlfriend, but you don't use condoms.

 

[Bearmann]

This completely bat shit crazy. You get completely stressed out with computer problems. But you don't do backups, what?!?

That's like saying you get completely scared of knocking up your girlfriend, but you don't use condoms.

You misread it. He does do backups.