Sugestions before I purchase this rig?
<div class="IPBDescription">Seems to be the season...</div>Yes I know, there's a flood of topics like this already, but feel free to hijack this one and post your own rig for comments.
I'm planning on buying the following setup for the purpose of modeling and playing the upcoming Valve games. I want this rig to last a while so I've tried to keep the components easy to upgrade down the line (quad core, RAM, SLI...)
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6600
Mobo: Gigabyte GA-P35-DS4
RAM: Corsair PC6400 2048MB XMS2 Twinx CL5 (2x1024MB)
Graphics: MSI GeForce NX8800GTS-T2D640E-HD-OC
Case: Antec P180
PSU: Aikuo 560W V2.0 14cm
Total ~1000€
Here are some questions.
1. Do I really need a sound card? I've been doing just find with my 2.1 speakers and nForce2 on my current mobo.
2. RAM is pretty cheap, how much will it help in 3d modeling if I add another gig or two?
3. Any opinions on the Samsung SyncMaster 205BW monitor? I've got a 21 inch Trinitron CRT that's been working beautifully for the past 8 years but I'd like some dual screen action.
4. Any other comments about general compatibility/quality?
I'm planning on buying the following setup for the purpose of modeling and playing the upcoming Valve games. I want this rig to last a while so I've tried to keep the components easy to upgrade down the line (quad core, RAM, SLI...)
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6600
Mobo: Gigabyte GA-P35-DS4
RAM: Corsair PC6400 2048MB XMS2 Twinx CL5 (2x1024MB)
Graphics: MSI GeForce NX8800GTS-T2D640E-HD-OC
Case: Antec P180
PSU: Aikuo 560W V2.0 14cm
Total ~1000€
Here are some questions.
1. Do I really need a sound card? I've been doing just find with my 2.1 speakers and nForce2 on my current mobo.
2. RAM is pretty cheap, how much will it help in 3d modeling if I add another gig or two?
3. Any opinions on the Samsung SyncMaster 205BW monitor? I've got a 21 inch Trinitron CRT that's been working beautifully for the past 8 years but I'd like some dual screen action.
4. Any other comments about general compatibility/quality?
Comments
I think you should seriously consider getting a raptor drive for the system, it makes more of a difference to system responsiveness than the second cpu does in my experience.
I have a SyncMaster 940BF monitor and it works out well for gaming, I'm not sure how it compares with the model you are looking at.
Intel just cut prices on the quad core systems, and AMD are due to release their quad core products which look like they will trounce the current intel offering, so expect a price war on cpus in the coming months. Not sure if you are prepared to wait or not.
I'm not convinced you will need more than 2GB of ram right now, not for gaming anyway.
The P180 is an awesome case, but make sure you get the latest revision which has some very nice improvements including external fan switches and conduits for feeding cables under the motherboard support.
Also with regards to the case, I wasn't aware of the revisions unless you mean the P182? I do notice a P180b on Antec's website, but I can't find it on my retailer's site...
1. I don't actually know if you need a sound card. I've heard so much freaking praise about them that I caved and bought one, mostly because I'm also buying a nice set of headphones, but if you're just using a set of 2.1 speakers it might not be worth it. Especially if the speakers aren't super high quality.
2. The only way RAM's going to help your 3d modelling is if you have a large number of objects or really complex objects. Once you get with that many polys the RAM is often a limiting factor, but the ability to render them also is. I'd hold off on more RAM for now; you might find your video card/CPU bogs down before you manage to fill the memory with geometry.
3. I'm writing this on a SyncMaster 225BW. Next to it is a SyncMaster 930B. I've got no experience with the model you're asking about but SyncMasters have never steered me wrong. I get a bit of backlight seepage on this one but I don't really mind and it's not super awful.
4. Don't forget DVD drives and hard drives and stuff <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="biggrin-fix.gif" />
I've decided to go for the 320MB version of the graphics card rather than the 640MB after seeing <a href="http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=778&model2=707&chart=318" target="_blank">these benchmarks</a>.
Since that switch saves me 100 bucks I can upgrade to the E6750 processor which actually seems <a href="http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=873&model2=877&chart=436" target="_blank">more helpful</a> and not much more expensive.
Finally I'm hesitating about which brand of RAM I should buy. Apparently people are frequently finding their Corsair DDR2 chips busted, and I was recommended to take the G.Skill equivalent (which is a bit more expensive). Not sure what to make of that...
Get the 640MB GTS. Its more future proof.
Go with the original CPU, buy a tuniq tower. Overclock CPU to 3.2+ GHZ.
G Skill ram owns. I love paying 180 bucks for 800DDR2 and being able to go 900MHZ without changing volts or timings. Just make sure you get the high end G skill.
3d-rendering with a quad core will be nigh on twice as fast with a good renderer, modelling won't care that much I believe.
Do you know whether Rhinoceros/Flamingo is multi-threaded? It also seems that most software/games won't be taking advantage of four cores for a while.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-http://en.wiki.mcneel.com/default.aspx/McNeel/FlamingoPerformanceTuning.html+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(http://en.wiki.mcneel.com/default.aspx/McNeel/FlamingoPerformanceTuning.html)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->A dual-processor or dual-core computer (when correctly enabled in Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP or Vista) will speed up rendering, probably by 85%, compared to a single processor. Quad-core processors will approach 4 times the performance of single processors of the same speed. Currently, Flamingo does not improve performance with more than 4 processors.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That was for flamingo 1.1 to 2.0.
<!--QuoteBegin-Flamingo sys reqs.+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Flamingo sys reqs.)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin--> • Pentium, Celeron, or higher processor.
(Dual processors are supported.)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's only 30€, probably less once the new prices take full effect; that's a measely 3% of your estimated price for the machine. Who knows, at some point you might want to render something and have a 2 cores left for modeling or browsing the web while you do. Flamingo might get quad core support when it starts to take hold and there are definetly some games that can make use of quad cores on the way, such as Alan Wake and an upgrade to the HL2 engine, possibly coinciding with episode two. Photoshop also gets some marginal gains by going to a quad core if you're using that.
The FSB on the Q6600 is 1066 MHz, which is dual channel 533 MHz. if you're not overclocking you can save some cash by getting a lower speed grade of memory since you WILL be running it at 533, not 800 MHz. You'd save about €100 getting a lower speed grade RAM and you can even find it rated for better latencies(e.g. 2x1 GB pc5300 CL3 for <100€). The only thing you could possibly hope to gain from higher speed memory is overclocking with RAM in synchronous mode and upgradabillity to newer processors, but they'll likely use 1333 MHz FSB, and that's pc5300, or they'll ditch DDR2 and go for DDR3 by the time you want one. Even if you are overclocking I doubt you'll be able to push a 2.4 GHz processor much above 3GHz without increasing the voltage and getting some better cooling to deal with the heat. Whichever speedgrade you go for, lower latency RAM will only give you an extra couple of percent on average, only go for it if it doesn't cost significantly more than the normal stuff.
Unless you're going to a 64-bit OS it's probably not worth getting more than 2GB as 1 to 1.5 GB or so of virtual address space will be reserved to the OS and to memory mapped I/O for grafics cards and stuff and you won't be able to make any meaningful use of more than 2.5-3 GBs.
After a bit more research I've realized that since I'm going to be running XP for a while longer, it's not worth getting any more RAM, as XP only supports 2 gigs.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm pretty sure XP supports 4 gigs, but I say that only 'cause thats what my old CS teacher said(he did a lot of work in advanced music composition programs, which used up tons of RAM). I could be wrong, but I thought I'd say either way.
I'm pretty sure XP supports 4 gigs, but I say that only 'cause thats what my old CS teacher said(he did a lot of work in advanced music composition programs, which used up tons of RAM). I could be wrong, but I thought I'd say either way.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
32-bits => 2^32 bits of addressable RAM. Some virtual addresses will be reserved to the OS, some will be mapped to I/O for graphics cards etc. Applications can address something like 2.5-3 GB depending on BIOS, OS and what's installed.
You should get a q6600 considering the price, it is a awesome deal. So what apps arent multi core supported. XP is and will divide up the work the best it can. Games coming out this year will have multi core support. Some games already do such as Supreme Commander.
Overclocking ram can help. I noticed about a 10fps difference(sometimes more or less depending on the game) when I put a divider on my ram to push it past my FSB speed.
A Q6600 should be able to go 3ghz with a tuniq tower cooler. If you get a G0 stepping Q6600... say hello to 3GHZ plus. Alot of people are getting some great clocks with them with minor increases in volts. Increasing your Vcore normally wont kill the CPU. Excessive increases will.
Instead of 'pushing it past your FSB' which implies running it asynchronously at a higher clock than data can be pushed over the FSB(Why would that help? Did you keep absolute latencies roughly the same(e.g. CL4 at 800 MHz is closer to CL3 at 533 or 667 MHz and equivalently for other latencies)?) couldn't you reduce the CPU multiplier and bump the host frequency to run the FSB faster as well?
<!--quoteo(post=1640866:date=Jul 27 2007, 02:41 PM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Jul 27 2007, 02:41 PM) [snapback]1640866[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Quanaut might have been thinking of Windows XP 64bit edition, which actually goes way beyond 4 gigs.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
XP without a qualifier usually means 32-bit.
Instead of 'pushing it past your FSB' which implies running it asynchronously at a higher clock than data can be pushed over the FSB(Why would that help? Did you keep absolute latencies roughly the same(e.g. CL4 at 800 MHz is closer to CL3 at 533 or 667 MHz and equivalently for other latencies)?) couldn't you reduce the CPU multiplier and bump the host frequency to run the FSB faster as well?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For me to match my ram speed I would need 450MHZ on the FSB. At 450x7 on the multiplier that would put me at 3.1Ghz. Giving me an extra 100MHZ. I would need to increase Vcore since I cant get 3.1GHZ stable at stock volts. My temps are already higher then I would like since I use the stock cooler. My temps where fine in the winter but in the summer they are higher.
For me to get 450MHZ on the FSB, I would need to increase the northbridge volts. My northbridge is passively cooled and gets pretty hot when running at 450MHZ. It also wasnt to stable unless I increased the FSB voltage.
So I run my FSB at 333mhz with a 9 multiplier. My ram runs at 900MHZ 4-4-4-12 at stock volts. I got about a 10 fps boost from 800MHZ to 900MHZ in CS:S when I ran the benchmark. In some games I gained no noticeable difference.
Once I get a new cooler, Ill sync the ram and FSB.
For me to match my ram speed I would need 450MHZ on the FSB. At 450x7 on the multiplier that would put me at 3.1Ghz. Giving me an extra 100MHZ. I would need to increase Vcore since I cant get 3.1GHZ stable at stock volts. My temps are already higher then I would like since I use the stock cooler. My temps where fine in the winter but in the summer they are higher.
For me to get 450MHZ on the FSB, I would need to increase the northbridge volts. My northbridge is passively cooled and gets pretty hot when running at 450MHZ. It also wasnt to stable unless I increased the FSB voltage.
So I run my FSB at 333mhz with a 9 multiplier. My ram runs at 900MHZ 4-4-4-12 at stock volts. I got about a 10 fps boost from 800MHZ to 900MHZ in CS:S when I ran the benchmark. In some games I gained no noticeable difference.
Once I get a new cooler, Ill sync the ram and FSB.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ah, that makes more sense. Well, one reason for the speed increase might be that 4-4-4-12 at 800 MHz is higher latency than 4-4-4-12 at 900 MHz; but that shouldn't net you any significant increase unless cache misses are the major limiting factor of performance.
INTEL Core 2 Quad Q6600
Gigabyte GA-P35C-DS3R
G.Skill PC6400 2048MB DDR2 PK (2x1024MB)
MSI GeForce NX8800GTS-T2D640E-HD-OC
Antec P180B
Fortron 500W ATX FSP500 BlueStorm II
I thought about the quad core for a long time and finally decided to go for it. The games I want to play are mostly based on Source, and as soon as the Orange Box comes out, those four cores should get a workout. Of course, 3d modeling will benefit a lot in the meantime, so that's nice. I'll cave and get the 640MB of RAM on the graphics card as well.
I'm not really planning on overclocking, at least not right away. I like having that option down the line, but I don't know much about the process so I'll have to read more about it in the future.
<a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231065" target="_blank">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16820231065</a>
Same brand but its the high end stuff and not that much more expensive.
What speed can I hope to achieve on the processor by overclocking it with this equipment (including th HZ RAM). My case should stay quite cool, as it will have at least four 12cm fans. Do I need a better CPU cooler than the box one?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's a crap shoot. Most reviews seem to indicate around 3GHz without going outside Intels recommended range. (1.100V to 1.372V.)
Power usage for CMOS is proportional to frequency and proportional to voltage squared. Maximum frequency it will operate at is roughly proportional to voltage if temperature remains the same. Once you start needing to bump up the voltage you are on the power proportional to frequency cubed road to competition with char coal.
Be sure to run memtest86(or equivalent) and a few demanding stress tests like 3dmark2006 on a continuous loop for a few hours to see that it really is reasonably stable. The amount of errors is something like an exponential curve; it's sensible to back off a percent or two from the maximum stable overclock to be on the safe side.
What speed can I hope to achieve on the processor by overclocking it with this equipment (including th HZ RAM). My case should stay quite cool, as it will have at least four 12cm fans. Do I need a better CPU cooler than the box one?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For a Quad? hell yes. They run pretty hot or so I have heard.
For a Quad? hell yes. They run pretty hot or so I have heard.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What the? Intel isn't stupid. The boxed cooler that comes with the processor is good enough with a decent margin(to account for crappy chassis).
The only reason you'd get a better cooler is if you're unhappy with the noise or intend to overclock; otherwise stock is just fine.
[...]
I think you should seriously consider getting a raptor drive for the system, it makes more of a difference to system responsiveness than the second cpu does in my experience.
[...]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Anyone who purchases the Raptor needs to be aware of the excessive noise one produces. I'm referring to the RaptorX, which I purchased two of, and promptly returned. The standard Raptor is <i>supposed</i> to be quieter.
What the? Intel isn't stupid. The boxed cooler that comes with the processor is good enough with a decent margin(to account for crappy chassis).
The only reason you'd get a better cooler is if you're unhappy with the noise or intend to overclock; otherwise stock is just fine.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What speed can I hope to achieve on the processor by overclocking it with this equipment (including th HZ RAM). My case should stay quite cool, as it will have at least four 12cm fans. Do I need a better CPU cooler than the box one?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->