# Performance/Gaming Computer Build, budget ~$1400 give or take



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

*Performance/Gaming Computer Build, estimated cost ~$2,100*






I currently have an MSI gaming laptop, a GT780DX. It is a very good computer, and I can play Skyrim on Ultra. It is an amazing PC, and for laptops it hardly gets any better than this. However, I have decided that since I have two laptops and I never take this laptop anywhere because it is a little too big to carry around, I will build a serious work/gaming PC instead and actually save money (or break even) and have more performance.

Moreover, I am realizing that to have a real PC it really expands my storage capabilities. I recently bought a 3TB USB 3.0 external for $250 and it was a good deal. But I already used up all but 300mb in only 1 month (although a lot was backing up my current hard drives).

So I realized that having a desktop, I can add in new 2TB 3.5" hard drives for less than $100 each. That Significantly decreases cost of storage and expansion.

I have done a bunch of research on parts. I have been dancing around doing this for over a year, and now it is time to move forward.

Since I just bought two 24" 1080p monitors, I won't be needing monitors. I also have a trackball (I don't like mice, just trackball) and also I just bought a nice illuminated keyboard. So now all I need is the tower. *EDIT:* I returned the Logitech illuminated keyboard and instead got the challenger ultimate keyboard.

After monitors and peripherals, I want to spend a max of about $800 - $1000 on the actual PC. So far it seems to be working out, but I could use some input as to me selections. I have two main builds, an AMD build and an Intel build. Both fit the budget, and the AMD of course is a little bit less expensive. (*UPDATE: HOLIDAY BUILD!!*)

================================================


Nice trance song I just found, for your enjoyment:


----------



## wolfeking (Nov 5, 2012)

Go intel.  But drop the 2600k for a 2500k, unless you are getting it for the same price. The 2600k does not help in games, but it does help with other programs that are heavily threaded. 

Get a good cooler with a little bit of money, like a hyper 212+ or maybe a lower end noctua. 

With the money saved, go to a HD7950. Much better card, but not really necessary unless you are worried about having to lower the res or settings, which I am not 100% about. 

Motherboard, you really want an ATX, but that one is pretty good.  Look and see if you can find a SLI premium I think it is (the ATX of that exact board).


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

wolfeking said:


> Go intel.  But drop the 2600k for a 2500k, unless you are getting it for the same price. The 2600k does not help in games, but it does help with other programs that are heavily threaded.
> 
> Get a good cooler with a little bit of money, like a hyper 212+ or maybe a lower end noctua.
> 
> ...



This PC will be used primarily for work. I am an EXTREME multitasker, so unless 2500K is significantly less in price, I would prefer to have the better multithreaded performance of 2600K.

But why do you suggest to get the Intel build instead of the AMD build? The AMD processor here is faster than the 2600K based on this link: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html



> *PassMark - CPU Mark Benchmarks:*
> AMD FX-8320 - 9,195
> Intel i7-2700K - 9,000


----------



## Ankur (Nov 5, 2012)

gsdgsag said:


> AMD build will get hotter, but the processor is faster.
> Intel build has a slower processor (still fast though), but it will stay cooler.
> 
> So what do you think? Is there anything I need to know?
> ...


Nope the Intel is not slower, you probably saw it on CPUbenchmark.net, they are completely wrong.
Check here
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/698?vs=287
and get a 3570K if you are going for the new 7000 AMD cards.
Don't worry about temps, get a decent cooler and you will be fine. About the case look for one which is has good cable management features, airflow, I'll suggest corsair cases.


----------



## wolfeking (Nov 5, 2012)

That site is not even a good benchmark, let alone a end all. It is a video benchmark. Meaning basically more cores is better. The intel slaps the AMD upside the head in clock for clock performance, meaning each MHz does more work. 

The 2500k is $100 less and does about the same job, just without hyperthreading. You can clock a 2500k higher on the same heatsinks though, as HT on average adds about 4-5*C to the temps under load. Not world ending, but it can make a difference. 

And what kind of work? A good single thread performance will 80+% of the time be better than more threads.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

wolfeking said:


> That site is not even a good benchmark, let alone a end all. It is a video benchmark. Meaning basically more cores is better. The intel slaps the AMD upside the head in clock for clock performance, meaning each MHz does more work.
> 
> The 2500k is $100 less and does about the same job, just without hyperthreading. You can clock a 2500k higher on the same heatsinks though, as HT on average adds about 4-5*C to the temps under load. Not world ending, but it can make a difference.
> 
> And what kind of work? A good single thread performance will 80+% of the time be better than more threads.



Sorry, I gave the wrong link. I updated the link and posted the benchmarks.

I do graphics work and extreme multitasking with tons of things open.
*EDIT:* 2500k is only i5. I want i7
Do you have any other suggestions for less expensive i7 processors?

In fact, I might even do 2700K if I go the intel route. 2700K is only about $20 more than 2600K.
I won't be getting 2500K because it is only i5


----------



## wolfeking (Nov 5, 2012)

You also have to look at the fact that the intel is clocked slower. Run the 2700k at 4.0GHz and it will smash the AMD with no trouble.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

wolfeking said:


> You also have to look at the fact that the intel is clocked slower. Run the 2700k at 4.0GHz and it will smash the AMD with no trouble.



Ok this is good to know.



wolfeking said:


> Meaning basically more cores is better. The intel slaps the AMD upside the head in clock for clock performance, meaning each MHz does more work.



hmm ok do you have any suggestions for a better benchmark site?


----------



## wolfeking (Nov 5, 2012)

anandtech.com   is the best. 

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=287 is the bench to look at.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

wolfeking said:


> anandtech.com   is the best.
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=287 is the bench to look at.



Excellent, thank you! I will use this from now on!

wow, you're right, the 2600K is a lot better! With all except for Photoshop

Which of these two motherboards is better?

EVGA Z68 SLI 130-SB-E685-KR - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813188097&Tpk=EVGA Z68 SLI 130-SB-E685-KR
GIGABYTE GA-P67A-UD3-B3 - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128476


----------



## byteninja2 (Nov 5, 2012)

The eVGA, but neither baords are to great in quality, and they are both old. Go with a Gigabyte UD3H Z77, unless you are buying used and you are limited to those 2.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

byteninja2 said:


> The eVGA, but neither boards are to great in quality, and they are both old. Go with a Gigabyte UD3H Z77, unless you are buying used and you are limited to those 2.



Will that work for a Sandy-Bridge processor?

I am not limited to any specific one, I just need the motherboard to be compatible with the following:
* Sandy Bridge i7
* USB 3.0
* high-end graphics like HD7870 or GTX 580

I prefer the cost to be around $130, $150 at most. If I can get $100 board, then even better.


----------



## salvage-this (Nov 5, 2012)

Yeah it will still work.  If you want the extra features like PCI express gen 3 you will need to have an ivy bridge processor.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

salvage-this said:


> Yeah it will still work.  If you want the extra features like PCI express gen 3 you will need to have an ivy bridge processor.



I don't think I need the special gen 3. I'm ok with using last year's tech if it saves me hundreds of dollars on the build.
Actually what is Gen 3 PCIe? Do I need that?

Does that support Ivy Bridge too? If so then it would be good for future upgradeability..


----------



## salvage-this (Nov 5, 2012)

It is not really necessary but personally I do not like to replace motherboards often.  So I would go with the Gigabyte Z77X UD3H or 5H with a 3770K.  Sandy bridge will OC further but ivy will still hit 4.5/4.6 reasonably easy.  As long as you are not looking to get 4.8+ out of the chip I would get the newer tech.  Just my opinion.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

salvage-this said:


> It is not really necessary but personally I do not like to replace motherboards often.  So I would go with the Gigabyte Z77X UD3H or 5H with a 3770K.  Sandy bridge will OC further but ivy will still hit 4.5/4.6 reasonably easy.  As long as you are not looking to get 4.8+ out of the chip I would get the newer tech.  Just my opinion.



ok. What size of tower do I need for GIGABYTE GA-Z77X-UD3H and a minimum 600W PSU?
I want at least 5 hard drives (for future) and one CD drive.


----------



## salvage-this (Nov 5, 2012)

ATX mid tower is probably the best fit.  Toss up a few cases that you like the design of and we can help you find one that is a well built case.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

salvage-this said:


> ATX mid tower is probably the best fit.  Toss up a few cases that you like the design of and we can help you find one that is a well built case.



I have a PowerEdge 400SC case (empty) laying around. Could I use that?

I'm about to give you a list of a couple I like, but what is a "Smart HDD Modular System"

It says 6 or 9 bays "Smart HDD Modular System" http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811103030

If it fits 9 HDD then I might be interested in this one.
*EDIT:* I think I understand now. I think that 4 of the bays can be either 5.25" bays or 3.5" HDD bays. So it can have up to 9 HDD in it. Let me know if I am wrong.

Will this work?

DIYPC DIY-5823BK Black SECC ATX Mid Tower Computer Case with 1 x 80mm Fan: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811353006

I like that it has 6 HDD bays (I assume this means 5 HDD and 1 DVD drive? Please correct me if I'm wrong). PLUS it's only $15!! I also like how basic it is, so it doesn't look expensive. I care more about performance. I don't want to show it off. If someone comes in my room, I want them to think "normal PC"  - or better yet, nothing at all. If this will work for my needs I actually think I want this one.

Are there any downsides to this one? Perhaps I need a high-speed fan?

Oh, I think I get it. Basically any ATX motherboard can fit in a case which says it is compatible with ATX?


----------



## salvage-this (Nov 5, 2012)

As long as the case is ATX and not m-ATX or Mini/Micro ATX.  If it has compatibility with all  of them that is fine but you need ATX compatibility for sure.  

Just looking over the cases you have posted so far.  You mentioned 9 drives?  Are you looking to have that much storage?  How do you want your system setup?  Do you have a budget for your case planned out?


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

salvage-this said:


> As long as the case is ATX and not m-ATX or Mini/Micro ATX.  If it has compatibility with all  of them that is fine but you need ATX compatibility for sure.
> 
> Just looking over the cases you have posted so far.  You mentioned 9 drives?  Are you looking to have that much storage?  How do you want your system setup?  Do you have a budget for your case planned out?



Yes, I do want that much storage. One of the key reasons is so I can go add $80 2TB hard drives whenever I run out of storage. With 9 bays I could have 18TB. Trust me, I would use it, because technically that's only 9TB if you back everything up at least once. And by next year, 2TB SATA2 drives will be only $50. The following year they will be $30.

Yes, I have the budget for the case planned out. If you look at the original post, $50 case which is average is included in the budget.


----------



## salvage-this (Nov 5, 2012)

gsdgsag said:


> Yes, I do want that much storage. One of the key reasons is so I can go add $80 2TB hard drives whenever I run out of storage. With 9 bays I could have 18TB. Trust me, I would use it, because technically that's only 9TB if you back everything up at least once.
> 
> Yes. If you look at original post, $50 case which is average is included in the budget.



Gotcha.  Alright well I'll look around to see if there is anything good for a decent price but that will be tough to find that kind of storage for that price.

Take a look:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119233  6 drive bays stock that you can convert later with an 5.25 to 3.5 adapter

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Description=3.5 to 5.25 bay adapter&Submit=ENE


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 5, 2012)

salvage-this said:


> Gotcha.  Alright well I'll look around to see if there is anything good for a decent price but that will be tough to find that kind of storage for that price.



I already know you can get a 3.5" 2TB bare HDD for $80. I did the research before posting. Average is $100 though.
But if you go on craigslist you can sometimes get one for even cheaper.



salvage-this said:


> Gotcha.  Alright well I'll look around to see if there is anything good for a decent price but that will be tough to find that kind of storage for that price.
> 
> Take a look:
> 
> ...



after reading reviews about the cheap cases, I will be getting a case at least $50.

The first link you gave me is too fancy. The idea is to be high-performance, but not look like it.
I think I'm going to go with my original idea: Antec Gaming Series One Black Steel ATX Mid Tower http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129181&name=Computer-Cases

Also your second link is useful; good to know that I can just get an adapter for the 5.25" bays.

I don't understand, there are like 20 kinds and brands of HD7870. ATI, XFX, PowerColor, IceQX, Sapphire, Gigabyte, and lots of versions of HD7870 like Black, Double D, Core, etc. What do I choose?

Moreover, some of them support two monitor plus HDMI, whereas others only support one monitor plus HDMI.


----------



## salvage-this (Nov 6, 2012)

gsdgsag said:


> after reading reviews about the cheap cases, I will be getting a case at least $50.
> 
> The first link you gave me is too fancy. The idea is to be high-performance, but not look like it.
> I think I'm going to go with my original idea: Antec Gaming Series One Black Steel ATX Mid Tower http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129181&name=Computer-Cases
> ...



that is pretty good for the price.  There are certainly better cases but if you want a good case that is not a gaming case for 50 to 100 there are not a huge amount of choices.  

just another option.  Way better build quality and cooling while not being too flashy.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129179



gsdgsag said:


> I don't understand, there are like 20 kinds and brands of HD7870. ATI, XFX, PowerColor, IceQX, Sapphire, Gigabyte, and lots of versions of HD7870 like Black, Double D, Core, etc. What do I choose?
> 
> Moreover, some of them support two monitor plus HDMI, whereas others only support one monitor plus HDMI.



Every card will have a reference design. So all of the cards that look exactly the same are probably the reference cards with stock coolers from different manufacturers.  Cards that have better coolers are most likely redesigned cards.  

All of the current gaming GPUs can support 2 monitors.  Some can support more than that.  Generally you have 2 DVI and another port or two for extra support if you use more than 2 monitors.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 7, 2012)

salvage-this said:


> that is pretty good for the price.  There are certainly better cases but if you want a good case that is not a gaming case for 50 to 100 there are not a huge amount of choices.
> 
> just another option.  Way better build quality and cooling while not being too flashy.
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129179
> ...



No I see tons of them with only one DVI port.


----------



## FuryRosewood (Nov 11, 2012)

I'm getting confused by the quoting, I would second the case that salvage recommended...and unless your backing up the internet, I don't see a point in 9 2TB harddisks... not unless your planning on running a dedicated RAID card or something... which will cost about 200 bucks on its own on the low end.


----------



## salvage-this (Nov 11, 2012)

I don't see the point in it either.  If that is what he wants I won't tell him no.  Good news though, if he is not running RAID he can just get a decent storage card and run the rest off of the motherboard.  If he is looking for RAID he is looking at $600+ for a single RAID card that can handle 9 drives.  Or he could use 2 RAID cards and set up 2 different RAID arrays.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 11, 2012)

FuryRosewood said:


> I'm getting confused by the quoting, I would second the case that salvage recommended...and unless your backing up the internet, I don't see a point in 9 2TB harddisks... not unless your planning on running a dedicated RAID card or something... which will cost about 200 bucks on its own on the low end.



I HATE RAID AND WILL NEVER USE IT.
I could delve into the reasons, but let me just for example tell you about my college computer science professor who had a PhD: First day in class he describes to us how his huge RAID setup crashed and he irreparably lost ALL DATA all ALL THE DRIVES. With 100% ZERO CHANCE of ever recovering any data. Just because of one single tiny glitch.

I'm sure 90% of the people on the internet who are pro-RAID have probably never even been to college. No offense.


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 11, 2012)

FuryRosewood said:


> I'm getting confused by the quoting, I would second the case that salvage recommended...and unless your backing up the internet, I don't see a point in 9 2TB harddisks... not unless your planning on running a dedicated RAID card or something... which will cost about 200 bucks on its own on the low end.



for your information, (9TB would not be enough for me, but for sake of argument), 9TB for me would mean 4.5TB of data with one full backup of everything.
Now, currently with all my hard drives and externals, I have OVER 4TB OF SPACE USED UP, WITH NOT A SINGLE BACKED UP FILE, AND AM ACHING FOR MORE SPACE, not to mention taking a BIG RISK by not having ANYTHING backed up. This means even with  9TB OF HARD DRIVES, I would only have 500GB left for storage!!!!! That's because for security I would like to have at least ONE FULL BACKUP of EVERYTHING.

IDEALLY I NEED A 20TB SYSTEM TO LAST ME THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. That's up to 10TB of space with one full backup of everything and zero duplicate files.

This is because between video files, graphics files, duplicates and revisions of graphics files, applications, web server backups between 20 to 100 clients at any one time, audio files, and other data, it takes up a MASSIVE AMOUNT OF SPACE!!!

My primary largest storage needs, in this order:
* Applications/OS
* Graphics/Web Files/Backups
* Video Files
* Audio Files
* Text Files

Not to mention that more than 1 FULL TB of data just for my movies and television shows. And for that alone I could easily eat up 2 or 3 TB of data in the space of a couple years. And that's only with SMALL (low-resolution) video files, most between only 200MB and 700MB. If I wanted to get/rip blu-ray copies of my movies, it could easily eat up 20 to 100 TIMES that amount. Needless to say, 25 to 50GB movie files, which could easily take up about 25TB of space, will never happen - at least not in the near future.

--

In conclusion, 10 x 2TB Hard Drives would be extremely practical for me, and I would gobble up every byte! (Pun intended!!! XD)

If I can get deals on hard drives, I could get as low as an average of $80 each 2TB hard drive. The probable thing I would do, is:
1. Buy 2 x 2TB HDD @ average $80 each if I search on craigslist and get lucky.
2. Insert my 3TB HDD from my external.
3. Now that I have 5TB, I could buy another couple 2TB HDD over the next few months.
4. Once I run out of space, which I might be able to stretch to another year, the price on HDD will have dropped and I could probably get 3TB or 4TB HDD for the same price as a 2TB this year.

--

Moreover the INTERNET has more than 1 QUADRILLION GIGABYTES OF DATA, and is growing exponentially every day. For perspective, that is 1 TRILLION TERABYTES - which would be equivalent to 500 BILLION 2TB HARD DRIVES. 
For further perspective (just doing this math now): 1 2TB Hard Drive is about  3 7/8” in length. 3.875 x 500 Billion = 1,937,500,000,000" = 30,579,230 miles

* This means if you lined up 2TB HARD DRIVES side by side it would reach from Earth to the moon AND BACK exactly 64 TIMES!!!
* If you placed the 2TB Hard Drives side-by-side they would WRAP AROUND THE EARTH 1,228 TIMES!!!
* It's about 37 million miles to Mars, so this means that the hard drives side-by-side would just about reach MARS!!!

* The cost to buy enough 2TB Hard Drives to fit THE ENTIRE INTERNET (@ $100 each), would cost $50 TRILLION DOLLARS!!!!
* There is only an estimated 6 to 8 trillion dollars IN THE ENTIRE WORLD!!! This means that to get enough money to buy enough hard drives to get the entire internet NOT INCLUDING THE OTHER HARDWARE NEEDED TO RUN THEM, it would take ALL THE MONEY OF EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THE ENTIRE WORLD FOR SEVEN FULL YEARS to pay for it!!!
* So to say "you could fit the entire internet", IS THE MOST COMPLETELY PREPOSTEROUS THING ANYONE COULD EVER SAY!!!!


----------



## salvage-this (Nov 11, 2012)

gsdgsag said:


> I'm sure 90% of the people on the internet who are pro-RAID have probably never even been to college. No offense.



Yeah I am sure that all of those System Administrators that maintain rooms full of servers all running various levels of RAID have no college experience.... lol

I can tell you for sure that RAID by itself is not a bad thing.  Hardware and software crashes are part of computing.  It sucks when it happens but it does.  It sounds like he was using RAID 0 anyway if there was no chance of a recovery.  In that case if you are smart enough to set up a RAID system, you should know what you are getting into.  

Anyway it makes it easier for us to make your goal of 18\20 TB of system storage not running RAID.  Get a decent motherboard that has a lot of SATA ports and then get an expansion card for whatever else you can't fit onto the onboard SATA ports.


----------



## gigabiteme (Nov 25, 2012)

sounds like you are going to have a lot of wires/ antec one mite not be the case for you
try the antec 1100- or antec 300-2(sometimes called 302)- they will keep things running cooler too.regards


----------



## gigabiteme (Nov 25, 2012)

sounds like you are going to have a lot of wires/ antec one mite not be the case for you
try the antec 1100- or antec 300-2(sometimes called 302)- they will keep things running cooler too.regards
added- or maybe a server case


----------



## gsdgsag (Nov 25, 2012)

gigabiteme said:


> sounds like you are going to have a lot of wires/ antec one mite not be the case for you
> try the antec 1100- or antec 300-2(sometimes called 302)- they will keep things running cooler too.regards
> added- or maybe a server case



I already bought everything. Updating main post now.

updated


----------



## gsdgsag (Dec 6, 2012)

Hey guys, here are the pics. Sorry, I found another more active forum so Ive been posting there. But here are the pics for you guys.


----------



## m3incorp (Dec 12, 2012)

Very nice build.   What's the name of that other forum that you found to be more active if you don't mind saying?  Thanks.


----------



## empty213 (Dec 14, 2012)

lol, I laugh at people rushing to accept information from benchmark websites.. anyways, FX-8 core processors, has free water cooled stock fan!


----------



## StrangleHold (Dec 17, 2012)

empty213 said:


> anyways, FX-8 core processors, has free water cooled stock fan!


 
That's only the WOX models.


----------



## Darren (Dec 18, 2012)

For such an amazing rig why only a 50 dollar case (even though I have it  ). Also no CPU Cooler? Looks awesome though. I love the look of the 7000 series Sapphire cards. I've got a 7850 myself.


----------



## spirit (Dec 18, 2012)

I think you're next upgrade should be a better case. The Challenger doesn't have great cable management. Even a small upgrade such as a Define R3/4 or a Carbide 300R would make your rig look massively better.


----------



## Darren (Dec 18, 2012)

spirit said:


> I think you're next upgrade should be a better case. The Challenger doesn't have great cable management. Even a small upgrade such as a Define R3/4 or a Carbide 300R would make your rig look massively better.



Cable management is alright. It's not great. Works alright for my rig but with a huge rig like that with Crossfire and lots of drives... not so much.

Edit:

See, not too bad.


----------

