Building a PC

Started Apr 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
rhit Regular Member • Posts: 246
Re: A "better" PC

Tareq Abdulla wrote:

rhit wrote:

Tareq Abdulla wrote:

rhit wrote:

Sounds like you're basically attempting to "future proof" your machine at time of purchase.  Every two years, CPUs and GPUs theoretically double in number of transistors per die.  They also run cooler, allowing them to run faster before hitting thresholds.

That's all fine and good, but if you buy a Ferrari to commute to your market down the street, you're wasting a perfectly good machine.

Personally, I think you're looking at peoples' answers with the machine you intend to build already in mind.  And that's fine.  Who are we to tell you what to build?

But, in your pursuit of future proofing, do consider this before you drop your money on hardware.  I built my machine three years ago.  It has an i7-950 (OC'd to 4Ghz), 12Gb RAM (OC'd), a GTX 680 SC (OC'd as well), an Intel 510 SSD (main drive), and two WD Caviar Black disk drives for data and backup.  Everything that can be overclocked is.

I'm not a huge gamer, but when I do run games, the machine runs everything on "ultra" at 60 FPS.  And PS CS5, LR4, Pinnacle Studio 15 all run without a hitch.  I don't like to wait on a computer ever, and, three years after the build, I still never have to wait for this one to get the job done.

Whatever you buy, keep in mind that it will be obsolete in 6 months.  Also keep in mind that the pace of software development optimized for multi-cores and super GPUs is far behind the pace of CPU and GPU development.

I think Chris Noble makes a good point in PSUs.  A good PSU is super important.  I'd also add that a good case makes a huge difference in effective cable management and airflow.  I have the Corsair Graphite 600T.  It keeps things cool, has two giant 200mm fans to suck air in and blow it out, built-in grommets for cable management, clasped side doors (no screws for access), modular hard drive racks, mesh screens to keep dust out, and it doesn't have any stupid lights to make it looks like something out of "Fast and Furious."  Three years on, temps in my machine have remained the same as Day 1, there's never any dust in the machine, and all cables are tucked away behind the panel that holds the motherboard.

Good to hear that, thanks.

Well, i didn't decide yet, and i try to discuss all possibilities, but mostly people recommend the cheaper options always over something more expensive, and later on they recommend something expensive when they know what will be the purposes, I only decided on which CPU and RAM, the other things are all not a problem to choose whatever, believe me, i heard some advice me even to go for i3 and i5 and forget i7, so i think either i accept all people recommendations, or take when i need from them and i go with some i need for myself, or better not to ask because everyone will put his opinion and experience as a right suggestion regardless of budget or reason to use.

Fair enough.  

I would not recommend an i3 or i5.  i7 is the way to go.  The real question is just is if you need those two extra cores.  Personally, I don't think your need those two extra cores.  If you are, however, dead set on a CPU with more than 4 cores, I think you should check out AMD's line up as well.  No harm in taking a look.

Here's a link  that has a comparison of all current chips applying 6 filters to a 69mb TIF file.  Should give you some ideas as to performance.,3169.html

Well, in that link you posted i see that i7-3930K is the fastest, and it is the one i was thinking to get, i know it is not that much improvement over i7-3770K, but thinking about just processing 69MB TIFF givin those results, then what about 100-500MB TIFF files? Well, i will go with the fastest then, 5-10seconds different can be a lot if i process hundreds of photos converting to TIFF, i deal with 60MP RAW files and most of the time i convert them to TIFF instead of JPEG, not sure why i have to save money here if it will not save time even for seconds which will turns to minutes or hours if i process loads of photos, and i upload them one by one or send them by email at the same time.

Keep in mind that the test is the application of six CS6 filters to a TIFF file.  The test doesn't specify if it's six at once or in sequence; I think it's most likely in sequence.  In real world use, the difference won't be nearly as noticeable.

If you have the money for the top-of-the-line chip, go for it.  The performance per dollar drops significantly, however, once you go into the higher level 6 core chips as compared to the 3770.  It's all about diminishing returns.  You can spend more money, but with each additional dollar you put in, your return on that cost is reduced.  The only applications that would really really really max out the chip would be very complex mathematical calculations, modeling and simulations, or intensive 3D rendering involving many vectors, particles, etc.

I'm not sure what would be more beneficial to your photo editing - the 6 core chip or running SATA III SSDs in RAID0.  Hopefully someone else can comment.

 rhit's gear list:rhit's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow