Edited......
Printable View
Edited......
I really, really, really don't see the market for the 3960X. Read the review of it on HardOCP. 2600K is such a complete beast.
i7-2600K is still the best bang for your buck. Even with a crossfire/SLI setup, it's still the best option.
Eh, Sandy-E was kind of a bust. Unless you absolutely need hexa-core, then just get a 2600k. That's pretty much a unanimous decision between all review houses. If you are really itching to spend there is also the 2700k that is hitting 5.0Ghz on air at around 1.4V. Pretty crazy!
My fellow Sharks have spoken, I shall heed thy wise words!;)
I'll look at that i7 2700K Timman'd mentioned, might settle for a 2600K + high-end S1155 mobo + G. Skill RipjawX PC3 17000 DDR3 2133 (have it already).
FWIW, the 2700k is just a binned 2600k.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeysg
i have the "low end" dual core i3 2100, and i dont see me needing anything faster for a long time... all my games run silky smooth
well it is not about the cpu ALONE
here is what you GET :
1- 64 G Ram total 8x8G , and cheap 32G ram 8x4G ... this is AWESOME. you can dedicate 16G/32G for RAM disk and use it allways , keep the PC in sleep mode never shut it down , and enjoy 16/32 G ram disk !!!
I would go for 64G ram and make a 32G ram disk and use it ALL TIME !!! make a GHOST Image of it in case i shutdown the pc.
install all programs and games on it !!!
2- you will get true SLI/Cross fire ... this will work wth 6990 and 590 cards in SLI mode perfectly (well if u are that rich) using 16x X2
3- PCIe 3.0
4- 6 cores !!!
5- dont get the X get the K cpu why pay 1K$ if you can get near performance for 1/2 price ???
6- the new Asus mobos have faster USB3 ...New ASUS USB 3.0 Boost technology supports UASP (USB Attached SCSI Protocol)
7- Asus aded their own SSD caching for mechanical harddisk on that mobo and guess WHAT ,its not only SSD caching !!! it works with RAM DRIVES !!! tis means ... just make 2 RAm disks .. one 16G for caching another say 16 G for software and games and keep the rest for system :) wonderland !!! u will have mechanical harddisks super speeds with better than SSD caching !!! and noo need to pay for an extra SSD drive for HD caching !!! who needs it anyways :P when u can cach at light speed :P
8-if you are rich enough to get 2 dual GPU high end cards and SLI them u will ee the difference coz they need 16X PCI e each !
so big YES if you can pay for it GET it and be sure u fill those 64G of rams
8G modules are cheaper now :)
oh and be sure to get the ASUS ....
and make FILL THOSE 64G/48G/32G RAM !!!!
Uh, dude, you think too highly of me, what you've suggested sounds a tad......pricey.:eek: However, I'll comtemplate getting the hexa core Intel CPU. I'm in no rush anywayz as the latest from AMD/ATi hasn't been announced yet. I'd rather get everything in one fell swoop, painful....yes, but it'd better than buying piecemeal.Quote:
Originally Posted by horizons
lolz ok get 32G of ram then cheap using 8 dims !!! only 180$ for 32G how aboutthat , u can still do 16G ramdisk and keep 16G for system !!! Plus in the future when 8G dimms become cheap you can make it 64G easilyQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeysg
I was actually looking at your first post ..
u were looking at ~1.5-1.6k mobo + cpu and was acceptabe to u :)
I figured out , he can get the K CPU and use the rest for RAM :)
u save 400$ if you move to the K, and for 400$ you can get 4x4 + 4x8 =48G ram :)
or just cheap 180$ VERY CHEAP 32 G RAM !!!
if you work with large RAM disks you will never look back !!!
if you have 16g or 32g o ramski, or more, no need for ramdisk...OMG
fire up a sig, want to see what you presently have in your main rig....LOL
To the OP, the 2600k is the sweet one for INTEL right now, for what it is worth...since the Zambezi 8 core fiasco is now exposed(no, I do not want to wait for winblows8 to get supposed better performance), I am considering switching to Intel next time around, it is going to be a long, long time before AMD surpasses their 1055/1100 six core series, I am a staunch long time AMD supporter, but may not be able to wait the 1.5/2 years for the next one....just a MB and CPU, all the rest will migrate over...
Laterzzzzz.............
Removed.....
Why not do i7 2600k/2700k and then possibly upgrade to Ivy when it comes out? Ivy will end up making the pricey i7 3930k obsolete in only a few months time, so why spend that much money right now?Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeysg
Removed.........
Horizons, dude you sound like a car salesman with all those exclamations. ;)
1. Even at 64 bit no application can eat more than 4Gbs, 2Gbs being the limit for 32 bit applications (correct me if I’m wrong). So no matter what, no application will use more than 4GBs of ram. CS5 (being one of few 64bit applications out there) will be able to address 4Gbs per instance. On the other hand your average game will not unless specifically written (or instructed by a third party mod: Skyrim 4Gbs switch for example) to do so. 12Gbs is probably more than enough for most applications these days. Hell, I’m still running 6Gbs in triple channel and I have yet run into any issues. So unless you are planning on running a game and at the same time compress\edit video and run Photoshop that extra ram will just sit there, eating grass and picking its nose.
2. Ram disks are fine if you have an UPS. If you lose power for whatever reason you lose any info that was written into the RAM drive. Get a catching SSD and you’re fine (for example OCZ Synapse was designed to act as catching SSD). No accidental loss of data. I can see the advantages of using RAM drives but for you average user they are more of a liability.
3. Filling all the ram slots is not necessarily a good idea. Some motherboards can become unstable when all the slots are full. From personal experience you may end up having to increase the timing on the ram just to make it more stable (performance hit). So packing your system full of RAM is not always recommended.
4. As for a CPU, if you are a gamer, there are really not that many games that support more than 4 cores (or even 2). So unless you are planning on doing video compression\editing 4 cores are more than enough. Look at the new AMD CPU. This thing has 8 cores, but check out the benchmarks. They suck. You have to have an application that supports multithreading. If you don’t, the extra cores will do nothing.
5. Finally, it sounds like he doesn’t want to spend a ton of cash on this set up.
This is not a criticism of you knowledge, just a different point of view so don’t freak out.
Back to the original poster,
As suggested above, the 2600k is probably the best bang for your buck at this point.
6-12Gbs of quality triple channel RAM, an SSD for a boot drive (or a catching SSD for your HD boot drive) and you’re set.
For mobos I personally prefer EVGA (Asus being a very close second) over any other manufacturers. But as far as I recall EVGA may not have anything for the 2600k cpu's (could be wrong here).
The 6 cores are the proverbial tit on a bull. It may look “appealing” but at this point in time serves no purpose. Sure you could go “future proof”, but by the time you will start seeing apps that can truly take advantage of the extra cores your CPU will be obsolete. Hence money wasted.
Anyway, this is just my opinion, so like any other take it with a grain of salt and come up with your own conclusions.