Building New Rig [Opinions]

hyelife

Apprentice
May 5, 2005
303
0
0
#1
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115036
$289.99

EVGA 132-CK-NF78-A1 Motherboard (SLI)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813188024
$259.99

CORSAIR XMS2 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145176
$124.00

BFG Tech GeForce 8800GT 512MB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814143117
$214.99 x2

RAIDMAX SMILODON ATX-612WBP Case
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811156062
$94.99

Rosewill RP600V2-S-SL 600W SLI Ready-ATX12V V2.01 Power Supply
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817182032
$69.99

ARCTIC COOLING Freezer 7 Pro 92mm CPU Cooler - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16835186134
$26.99

Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Compound
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835100007
$5.99

What you guys think of this setup?
 
G

GuitarrassDeAmor

Guest
#2
Go with the Q6700.
EVGA 8800GT instead.
Go with a Thermaltake Power Supply.
Hard Drive?
Optical Drive?
 
G

GuitarrassDeAmor

Guest
#4
It can be done. Depends on what cards you are running also...it would be fine, but if you want to have the extra oomf, go with a 700 or 800.
 
Dec 23, 2005
4,996
0
0
30
#5
[QUOTE="GuitarasDeAmor, post: 0]It can be done. Depends on what cards you are running also...it would be fine, but if you want to have the extra oomf, go with a 700 or 800.[/quote]

That's what I was thinking. I just built a rig similar to this (except a Q6600) and I'm using a 700w PSU. I think 600w will be putting a strain on your PSU, and you have to realize most of the time your PSU doesn't deliver 100%. You're much better off with a 700+

edit:
Just read the specs sheet on your video card

425W PCI Express-compliant system power supply with a combined 12V current rating of 28A or more*

*Minimum system power requirement based on a standard PC configured with an Intel Core2 Extreme X6800 processor
Considering you're running 2 cards, a high end processor and mobo you'll definitely want at east 700. The little things count too, don't forget you're cooling system and whatever accessories you're running on top of your system.
 

hyelife

Apprentice
May 5, 2005
303
0
0
#7
OK I will upgrade the power supply to 700watts but the CPU I wont be downgrading to a Q6600. The E8500 has even beat the Q9550 in many tests. I could OC the E8500 to about 4.2GHZ with no issues but the Q6600 becomes unstable after 3.8GHZ.
On the graphic card side I heard the BFG runs quicker then EVGA (correct me if im wrong)
 
G

GuitarrassDeAmor

Guest
#8
BFG won't run faster unless it has higher clock speeds...which it PROBABLY doesn't.

I would go with the Q6600. Keep in mind, that is 4 cores instead of two...so if you compared it (I don't know the EXACT way they measure out..) it would be 8.2ghz dual vs a 14.4 Quad.
Go with a quad,
 

360DiedOnMe

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2007
1,596
0
0
33
#9
[QUOTE="hyelife, post: 0]OK I will upgrade the power supply to 700watts but the CPU I wont be downgrading to a Q6600. The E8500 has even beat the Q9550 in many tests. I could OC the E8500 to about 4.2GHZ with no issues but the Q6600 becomes unstable after 3.8GHZ.
On the graphic card side I heard the BFG runs quicker then EVGA (correct me if im wrong)
[/quote]
you don't want to downgrade to a q6600? No offense dude, but that's the dumbest ****ing thing i've heard on this forum yet.
 

furby

Elite Guru
Sep 23, 2006
5,233
0
0
29
insomniacs.eamped.com
#10
[QUOTE="hyelife, post: 0]OK I will upgrade the power supply to 700watts but the CPU I wont be downgrading to a Q6600. The E8500 has even beat the Q9550 in many tests. I could OC the E8500 to about 4.2GHZ with no issues but the Q6600 becomes unstable after 3.8GHZ.
On the graphic card side I heard the BFG runs quicker then EVGA (correct me if im wrong)
[/quote]
Have you forgotten the q6600 is quad core?
 
Dec 23, 2005
4,996
0
0
30
#15
[QUOTE="hyelife, post: 0]It looks exactly the same!! You like it?

I will check to see some comparisons of the Q6600 vs the E8500 (and no I don't consider ghz the speed of the cpu just pointing out that it overclocks higher).[/quote]

Yes, it does overclock higher. However, you have to remember you're clocking 4 cores on the Q6600 not 2.

Quad core programming hasn't completely evolved yet, but high end games and most media programs take advantage of the multi core setup. Quad core is also great for multi tasking such as reading/writing dvds while surfing and listening to music.

I think in the coming months though developers will begin to optimize for quad core. Not that Duo Core will be out the door, but because of the Q6600 quad cores are much more common now.

Not to mention you could save $40 by buying a Q6600 instead of the CPU you have chosen now.
 

hyelife

Apprentice
May 5, 2005
303
0
0
#16
I understand what you guys are saying and I already know that Quad is good for High Resolution games (under 1600 Dual core beats Quad) and other programs that take advantage of it, but I just think for quad core it should be atleast 30% faster then dual core which is not the case. I will look into the new quads that have been released (Q9650). Also what about the Q6700?
 

hyelife

Apprentice
May 5, 2005
303
0
0
#18
Look all im saying is the E8500 beats the Q6600 in most applications because most applications are still not taking advantage of the Quad processing unit and who know when they will. Your trying to make me understand that, Quad is like having 2 extra processors but in tests the dual runs quicker in most cases *TODAY*. But I admit you guys are right Quad is the future.

Anyways i've decided to go with the Q6700 most likely because it has a 10x multiplier instead of the 6600's 9X multiplier which gives me some extra room for OCing. If I could I would go with the QX6800 which has an unlocked multiplier with a hefty price.

Here is what I will most likely do.
I will increase the FSB to 400 with 10x multiplier to squeeze about 1250 extra ghz out the processor (if it runs stable). You guys thing this will be stable? I will also try to see if I can get 3x 9800gts running Tri SLI.

Also please don't make posts unless you got something productive to say. If I'm wrong try to explain or if you can't then just ignore the thread. I've used to build systems but after the P4's and Athlon 64's I've been outdated due to me going into the medical field (which I will be leaving soon). I was just in here trying to get some advice not to be insulted by some kids!
 

tuaamin13

Elite Member
Jul 11, 2007
1,647
0
0
32
#19
I haven't seen a whole bunch of data on the Q6700, but I believe percentage-wise, the OC you'll probably get on the Q6600 is greater than the percentage you'll get on the Q6700.

This database is a bit old, but you'll see what I mean.
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1138241

However, the data sample for the Q6700 isn't as large as the Q6600, because at the time the chip was $250 more, not $50 more.

You may be able to hit 4.0, but you might need a beefier cooler.
 
B

BLUEDOG314

Guest
#20
the e8500 oced will probably be better in most games for now except for i think supreme commander takes advantage of multicore. dont knock a 4ghz+ dual core, i mean if thats all you need then you should be fine. i do a lot of encoding and editing so i went with the q6600, got a G0, and run 3ghz stable 24/7 with no voltage increase. get what suits your needs.
 
Dec 23, 2005
4,996
0
0
30
#21
Tri SLI? That is quite beast. Perhaps a little overkill, but thats just me. What is it you are going to be doing with this monster of a rig?

Also, with this tri SLI you are going to need to boost the PSU again. 700W is not nearly enough for tri SLI, an overclocked Quad-Core and whatever cooling is going to be used on in that monster. I think you're looking at 1000+ now.

I really don't think you'll need tri SLI, especially not now. Perhaps in 2 years, but by then you're card will be much cheaper. I'd consider a GX2 if I were you.

I understand your view on the dual vs quad core topic and I do agree there are many more programs that are optimized for dual core but haven't been yet for 4. However, games are being optimized for 4 cores now that they are much more main stream. As are basic work and media programs. Not to mention quad-cores are BEAST at multi-tasking.

I really think you'll be happier in the end with a quad-core, but it is your choice in the end. It seems you've done plenty of research and understand all of it. You're well informed enough to tell everyone in this thread to stuff it if you so choose.
 
G

GuitarrassDeAmor

Guest
#22
You could do Tri-Sli with an 850W Power Supply if you needed too.

Dude, have you used SLI!?!? You def. need to play the latest BEJEWELED!!!
Jking, but TRI-SLI is cool, and needed for games such as Crysis. A Gx2, no. GTX, yes.
 

hyelife

Apprentice
May 5, 2005
303
0
0
#23
Actually the pc won't be used for gaming by me (my siblings will be gaming). Im going into 3D Graphic design and use programs such as 3D max/Maya and will be connecting 3 22" monitors. I will be doing allot of Rendering and so TriSLI will be a great help. I'm not sure if these programs are optimized for Quad core or not.
 
G

GuitarrassDeAmor

Guest
#24
Yes, the more cores the better as far as I know. Especially if you are running 3 monitors all at the optimum resolution, the quad will help greatly. Photoshop only uses 2 cores, so not sure about other stuff.
 
Dec 23, 2005
4,996
0
0
30
#25
[QUOTE="hyelife, post: 0]Actually the pc won't be used for gaming by me (my siblings will be gaming). Im going into 3D Graphic design and use programs such as 3D max/Maya and will be connecting 3 22" monitors. I will be doing allot of Rendering and so TriSLI will be a great help. I'm not sure if these programs are optimized for Quad core or not.[/quote]

I'd stick with quad, especially since you're using multiple monitors and multiple programs.

Tri-SLI is great, I'm not saying that its a bad thing. But it seems like you're boosting only the GPU, bottlenecking the rest of the system. I'd consider a better CPU and more mem as well. You can't run Crysis on highest settings with a strong GPU alone ya know.;)

edit: also consider a 790i mobo to take advantage of DDR3 memory.:)