New system

[Bando]

I'm trying to configure a new system, as mine is slowly giving up.

I know I can search the forum (in fact I did) but there's so much info to go around, I'm struggling to "see the trees through the forest".

 

Therefor I'm seeking for help with you guys. I hope some smart advice will bring the perfect rig for me.

 

I am playing this sim and some Metro as prime games.

My monitor is a UHD 40'' curved Samsung.

 

I'm trying to decide on the following:

GPU:

4096MB MSI Radeon R9 FURY X Hybrid PCIe 3.0 x16 (Retail) for € 669,00

or

6144MB Gigabyte GeForce GTX 980 Ti Windforce 3x Gaming Aktiv PCIe 3.0 x16 (Retail) for  € 663,01

 

Do I need to purchase cooling aids for any of those GPU's?

 

MOBO 1151:

MSI Z170A GAMING Pro Intel Z170 So.1151 Dual Channel DDR4 ATX Retail for € 143,96*

Or

Anything you can suggest that’s better

 

CPU

Intel Core i5 6600K 4x 3.50GHz So.1151 WOF for € 251,80

Or

Intel Core i7 6700K 4x 4.00GHz So.1151 WOF for € 373,86

 

I’ll need a Power supply around 600Watts I believe.

Casing, 3rd party CPU cooler,HDD, SSD and memory modules are no problem to buy anywhere. (although any good suggestion is appreciated).

 

Thanks in advance.

 

[SharpeXB]

For running UHD you will need absolutely the strongest GPU you can get. That would be the 980ti. I hear AMD cards don't perform as well with DX9 games which this one is. Also the Fury X has that outboard fan which may be difficult to find space for if you also want a CPU cooler or another GPU and 4K will require 2 cards.

Depending on your level of patience you might consider holding out for the next generation which will be here mid year. I'm running 2x Titan X cards and BoS at 4K Ultra works them very hard. It looks unspeakably gorgeous but those cards are both working very hard. I added after market ACX coolers to them. Since they can hit 80C. The stock cooler or the default fan control will not do. They'll hit 90C that way.

CPU yes the obvious choice would be Skylake. You need the best single core performance you can get.

Edited January 20, 2016 by SharpeXB

[dburne]

GPU - I would go Nvidia, a 980 Ti would do you very well. I personally am a big fan of EVGA cards having run them for years, but I am sure that Gigabyte will be very good as well.

 

CPU - That I5 will do fine, the only real gain in the I7 would be hyperthreading ability , which for gaming does not translate to any performance increase, and a slightly larger L2 cache which won't mean much either. You can overclock that I5 nicely as well, get a good cooler something like a Corsair H100i closed loop cooler.  Keep in mind when looking for a case if you do go with something like the H100, would need to accomodate mounting the radiator.

 

Definitely go SSD's , for both the OS and for your games. I have two of them, one for my OS and program files, and another I have my games installed on. Both are Samsung Evo Pro's. Also have a couple large platter drives I used for storing documents, videos, etc...

[Dakpilot]

If it were my money I would go for the GTX980ti any of the known brands are good, have had good experience with EVGA in the past, My Galax GTX970 exoc works very hard with 4K but cooling is good, and have been very impressed

 

Potential advantages for i7 but at a cost, for an extra 120 Euro is it worth it? only you can say  over the life of the PC it is not huge investment

 

 

I have only had good experience with H100i and also with using two SSD as above

 

get the 6700K and overclock it! you know you want to 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[KoN_]

Go for the GTX 980Ti or buy the

GTX 980 and overclock it upto Ti standards.

i5 CPU. with a good cooler and paste. and again over clock to 4.2ghz.. stable

Best boards are Gigabyte or Asus .

80+ bronze PSU.

 

either way that's a good setup .

[Dakpilot]

Go for the GTX 980Ti or buy the

GTX 980 and overclock it upto Ti standards.

 

 

Although the 980 can be overclocked to same clock speed as a 980ti there is a lot of difference

 

2GB more ram

 

96 vs 64 render output processors

 

768 more shader units

 

176 vs 128 texture mapping units

 

and uses 165W rather than 250W of the older 980 (which is still a good card, performing only about 25/30% less)

 

At 4K res that extra 2GB Vram of the ti could be crucial, I have gone above my cards 4GB when using high texture settings and had to drop them

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Bando]

Thanks for the input.

Still not decided if I should wait or go ahead.

Current system does do the job, but in lower specs then I'd wish.

 

Ah, decisions, decisions.........

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Go for the GTX 980Ti or buy the

GTX 980 and overclock it upto Ti standards.

 

 

-snip-

 

 

For the record, there are greater differences between the 980 and 980Ti than clock speeds and boost clock speeds.

Although the 980 can be overclocked to same clock speed as a 980ti there is a lot of difference

 

2GB more ram

 

96 vs 64 render output processors

 

768 more shader units

 

176 vs 128 texture mapping units

 

and uses 165W rather than 250W of the older 980 (which is still a good card, performing only about 25/30% less)

 

At 4K res that extra 2GB Vram of the ti could be crucial, I have gone above my cards 4GB when using high texture settings and had to drop them

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

Precisely.

[Ala13_Kike]

in my oppinion, unless  if  will do SLI or CFX, i5 it's a cheaper option, and the difference with one I7 it's none on reality. With these GPU, you will take a good FPS in all games, with I7 or I5.

I5 has better and easy OC and core speed with air cooler, and for games you don't need one I7 to play, not now and not in a lot of year. Always you will have the possibiliti to change the CPU in one future and purchase a cheaper I7 in the next generation.

Use the difference in graphic card, or save it.

 

It's my oppinion, not the true

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

 

in my oppinion, unless  if  will do SLI or CFX, i5 it's a cheaper option, and the difference with one I7 it's none on reality. With these GPU, you will take a good FPS in all games, with I7 or I5.

I5 has better and easy OC and core speed with air cooler, and for games you don't need one I7 to play, not now and not in a lot of year. Always you will have the possibiliti to change the CPU in one future and purchase a cheaper I7 in the next generation.

Use the difference in graphic card, or save it.

 

It's my oppinion, not the true

 

 

 

An i7 is actually going to show some quantifiable benefit in a sim title like IL-2 where GPU load is usually lower than the CPU load... With that being said, multi-thread optimization does still need to be looked at.

 

Your assessment about i5's being "better" and "easier" to overclock isn't really true... 

[Ala13_Kike]

Yes, but my I5 with 4,5ghz per core, I think that has'nt any problem of perfomance playing at this SIM. (in this sim and all flight sim that I have). I can play using DSR at 1600p very smooth, without problems in ultra preset. (my screen resolution is 1200p on reality)

 

Why to pay +120€ for one I7? If you don't use Fraps or similar, Do you think that with the same graphic card you'll see the difference of use I5 or I7?

Better to pay in graphic card, in my oppinion.

 

If you will play only at Il2 BoS or DCS or similar, ok, but normally people that like play with PC, play at other games. 

 

About OC, and talking about games, not other software, in my case to increase at 4,5ghz per core, only I need to change the multiplier (45), increase the vcore to 1,2, and I can use air cooler without problems.

For one I7, is it the same? to arrange the same core speed?

 

I know that one I7 it's a powerfull CPU with lower core speed, but not in games, but I think, and it's my oppinion, that I prefer to pay the difference of cost in other hardware, better GPU or better screen, or similar.

 

Remember, it's only my oppinion. Not a bad option if you have money but for me is not necessary this CPU to play. 

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

 

(A.) Yes, but my I5 with 4,5ghz per core, I think that has'nt any problem of perfomance playing at this SIM. (in this sim and all flight sim that I have). I can play using DSR at 1600p very smooth, without problems in ultra preset. (my screen resolution is 1200p on reality)

 

(B.) Why to pay +120€ for one I7? If you don't use Fraps or similar, Do you think that with the same graphic card you'll see the difference of use I5 or I7?

Better to pay in graphic card, in my oppinion.

 

(C.) If you will play only at Il2 BoS or DCS or similar, ok, but normally people that like play with PC, play at other games. 

 

(D.) About OC, and talking about games, not other software, in my case to increase at 4,5ghz per core, only I need to change the multiplier (45), increase the vcore to 1,2, and I can use air cooler without problems.

For one I7, is it the same? to arrange the same core speed?

 

(E.) I know that one I7 it's a powerfull CPU with lower core speed, but not in games, but I think, and it's my oppinion, that I prefer to pay the difference of cost in other hardware, better GPU or better screen, or similar.

 

Remember, it's only my oppinion. Not a bad option if you have money but for me is not necessary this CPU to play. 

 

 

(A.) Yeah, I run a Sandy Bridge i5 at 4.7Ghz so I'm perfectly aware...

 

(B.) This is a flight sim forum and he is asking what to do for a new system build - given that this is a flight sim forum I'm going to suggest the i7 because it is a CPU intensive program and will likely be optimized for multi-threading somewhere in the future.

 

(C.) See statement B.

 

(D.) Yeah, it's the exact same process to overclock an i7...    Something like a Skylake build is going to run a lot cooler than something like a Sandy Bridge chip and as such a user would see an increase in thermal overhead for overclocking as it is.

 

(E.) I don't know where you're getting the information for your claim but that isn't true... Side-by-side, i7's generally have a higher base clock than a comparable i5 and almost always have a higher boost clock than a comparable i5. Aside from clock speeds, single core performance between an i5 and an i7 is comparable in most cases... The primary difference between the Core i product sets is the introduction of hyperthreading on i7 processors - the CPU can split threads on each physical core for an average total of 4 physical cores and 4 virtual (threads) cores each running at the same clock speed. If you're running a Core i7 ####X of some sort you can even get 6 physical/6 virtual for a total of 12 CPUs...

 

I don't think your opinion is necessarily bad or even that you are entirely wrong but I do think that a lot of your information is wrong, misleading and maybe a little presumptive... I see the direction of PC gaming moving towards optimizing software to take advantage of absurd amounts of high-powered hardware, peripherals, etc. that are coming out in the near future and if you can make the capital investment (it's normally $100.00 different - not to sound like a spoiled American but that isn't much for "future proofing") in purchasing an i7, I would in nearly every case.

Edited January 22, 2016 by Space_Ghost

[Bando]

Thanks QuiQue and Space_Ghost for your insides.

 

The money is not such an issue at my age, so it'll probably be the best and fastest CPU (I've never overclocked anything and I'm a bit hesitant to do it).  So, that'll be an I7 then probably.

What I'm still contemplating is waiting for the (very) much improved video cards that are on the way, or go for it now.

I want to pursue 4K as my UHD monitor shows some amazing graphics at that resolution, but I need to fly alone then, no other aircraft, for it will turn into a slide show.

Money reserved for it (anywhere from 1500 to 2500 Euro's will do) is enough for only one upgrade every 2-3 years, so if I buy now, I hope I won't be sorry for the better part of 2-3 years.

 

Not made up my mind yet.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Thanks QuiQue and Space_Ghost for your insides.

 

The money is not such an issue at my age, so it'll probably be the best and fastest CPU (I've never overclocked anything and I'm a bit hesitant to do it).  So, that'll be an I7 then probably.

What I'm still contemplating is waiting for the (very) much improved video cards that are on the way, or go for it now.

I want to pursue 4K as my UHD monitor shows some amazing graphics at that resolution, but I need to fly alone then, no other aircraft, for it will turn into a slide show.

Money reserved for it (anywhere from 1500 to 2500 Euro's will do) is enough for only one upgrade every 2-3 years, so if I buy now, I hope I won't be sorry for the better part of 2-3 years.

 

Not made up my mind yet.

 

I'm planning on building around a 6700K with my next system - I anticipate that I should be able to stick to my 4-5 year upgrade cycle.

 

The 980Ti is surely tempting and is what I've picked... Did NVidia announce a new series?! 

[SharpeXB]

I always feel it's a good investment to put the strongest CPU I can afford into a new machine.

GPUs are easy to upgrade but CPUs are not.

If you want a stronger graphics card later on its easy to sell the old one on eBay and simply click in a new one. Upgrading the CPU means basically rebuilding the machine, i.e. new motherboard.

[SYN_Vorlander]

Just buy it. It's only money. You can't take it to the grave.

[DD_Arthur]

Just buy it. It's only money. You can't take it to the grave.

 

Lol, indisputable logic!  .  However, this game is shortly to receive another BIG upgrade in the form of the Moscow map.  From what the dev's have said, we know that this will be on another level of detail from the BoS map.  If your system hasn't gone into meltdown yet, wouldn't it be better to await this new map and then consider the options, especially if we're going to have another generation of graphix cards released later this year? 

[Bando]

My wife's PC died.

So I'm tempted to look for a new rig for myself and push this one through to my better half.

 

Still there's a lot of uncertainties concerning what to buy.

Socket 1150 or 1151?

What is a good mobo.

 

I'll go for the fastest i7 CPU, with at least a 980Ti GPU.

I think the mobo is a very important piece as it's the base. This morning I was running through the internet to look for one.

I'm quite overwhelmed as to what to buy for a mobo.

So I figured; go for the CPU first. The fastest CPU were on socket 1150 and 1151. What to buy?

 

After the mobo and the CPU are decided on, the rest should be fairly straightforward.

 

I'd like to hear the options I have with the pro/con reasons.

[Ala13_Kike]

Only I can recommend you that I have, but for socket 1151 (if you will take one I7-K), that it's Asus Maximus Ranger VIII. (in my case for socket 1150)

Not a bad mobo, with a good number of Sata and PCIx slots, USB and possibilities of expansion, for me, plus that I need, and good overclock possibilities, with a very good stability and perfomance. And Asus it's a good brand

[Bando]

Thanks, I'll look it up.

[Bando]

Been searching for quite some time now.

Came up with this:

CPU: Intel i7 6700k So 1151 

Mobo: Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 7

PSU: 620 Watt Antec HC Modular 80+ bronze

RAM: 2x 8 GB G.Skill ripjaws ddr4-3000 dual kit

Video: Inno3d Geforce GTX980Ti chill X3

SSD: 250GB samsung 850 Evo Sata 6Gb

HDD: 2TB Seagate

A big tower comes along, some cooler and paste, a br player, but that's about it.

 

I'd be pleased if someone could comment on this.

[Dakpilot]

Can highly recommend Corsair H100i cooler and the software that runs with it

 

And maybe it is only me, but two 128 GB SSD's cost the same as one 256, I have had SSD failure before so there is less irritation factor if one fails, also I believe it is more convenient to have OS only on one HDD and games/programs on another

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Bando]

Thanks dakpilot.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Been searching for quite some time now.

Came up with this:

CPU: Intel i7 6700k So 1151 

Mobo: Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 7

PSU: 620 Watt Antec HC Modular 80+ bronze

RAM: 2x 8 GB G.Skill ripjaws ddr4-3000 dual kit

Video: Inno3d Geforce GTX980Ti chill X3

SSD: 250GB samsung 850 Evo Sata 6Gb

HDD: 2TB Seagate

A big tower comes along, some cooler and paste, a br player, but that's about it.

 

I'd be pleased if someone could comment on this.

 

I like it.

[coconut]

Can highly recommend Corsair H100i cooler and the software that runs with it

 

And maybe it is only me, but two 128 GB SSD's cost the same as one 256, I have had SSD failure before so there is less irritation factor if one fails, also I believe it is more convenient to have OS only on one HDD and games/programs on another

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

Wouldn't it be better to simply backup the SSD to the HD? It's always a pain to plan your partition layout, you always end up with one filling up earlier than you thought, and some other being under-utilized. Same problem with physical disks.

[Dakpilot]

I would recommend backing up to the large HDD always, but we dont always do it  my point is that two separate 128 gb SSD's cost the same as one 256, by keeping your OS on one and games programs on another you have halved your work when/if you have an SSD failure

 

If you need to do an OS re-install/format, your games and programs are untouched

 

Whether it is actually noticeably beneficial, maximum performance is said to occur when SSD is not at total capacity so keeping just the OS and a few associated programs will keep things regarding windows/drivers at peak performance 

 

a 128gb ssd is not a significant expense to add another if you get short of 'performance' storage space, perhaps I am more concerned having suffered SSD failure with no warnings like traditional HHD's, and the irritation factor in re-installing everything on one large drive was enough 

 

With SSD's barely producing any heat, no vibration and using very little power, having multiple SSD drives is much less of a consideration than with traditional larger platter drives

 

Ideal solution would just be to RAID five decent size SSD's but then cost does become a huge factor 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Bando]

Thanks for the input.

I'm going for one 128 GB SSD and another 256 GB SSD, coupled with a HDD of 2 TB.

This should suffice.

I'm planning the OS on the small SDD and the sim on the 256Gb SSD.

This way I'll have the best of both worlds.

 

I'll use the internal HDD as a personal cloud and backup drive.

 

System itself is good enough and fits together in your opinions?

[Dakpilot]

 

System itself is good enough and fits together in your opinions?

 

Cant really fault any of your choices 

 

X99 platform can have benefits but really only if going multi GPU,

 

i7 6700k will always be a slightly faster single thread CPU with more instructions per clock, and DX12 multi 6+ core benefits are still potentially a very long way away (especially in the flight sim world)

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Bando]

Thanks!

[LoneStar_47]

Howdy Bando!

 

You may want to reconsider the smaller 128 GB SSD for your OS. I currently use a 256 SSD for my OS drive. After formatting you will have around 235 GB available for installing your OS, etc. Currently my 256 SSD has 128GB of OS and other installed files leaving 114GB free. The problem is that other applications install files to the C: drive even if you install the application to other drives.  Some applications will only install to the C: drive. I previously had a 128GB for my OS and realized that I was quickly approaching capacity. I recall reading somewhere on the internet that it is not recommended to use most of the drive space. Maybe someone with more expertise can elaborate. Bottom line, the decision is yours. Hope it works out well for you.

[Bando]

Thanks Lonestar. 

I am using a 128Gb SSd at the moment for my OS. It's my C drive and I try to be as consistent as possible for each and every application to write as little as possible to C:\.

 

It's been in this rig for about 2 and a half years and I've upgraded from W7 to W10 in the meantime.

C:\ is being occupied for 50% now, with some 55Gb free space left.

I therefore think that 128Gb for the OS will be enough, but one has to be consistent in the installments of software, and give the swapfile a place on the regular HDD.