Potential new machine

Discussion in 'Hardware Discussion & Support' started by dj_stick, Jul 3, 2017.

  1. dj_stick

    dj_stick Apple Fanboy?

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    17,569
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Long time between posts, even longer between builds.

    Haven't built a PC in at least 10 years - bought my current Mac Pro back in '08, added Ram/HDD/GPU over time however, can still handle most things and games at playable rates.

    However, I've recently decided for a number of reasons, I no longer need OS X, and am looking for a new machine, I'll probably keep my nV GTX 960 for a while as it's a decent enough card for now (possibly bottlenecked by my machine) and my dream spec list (while being relatively affordable) at the moment is as follows:

    Intel i7 7700K
    Corsair H110i Cooler
    Gigabye GA-Z270X-Gaming 7
    2x 16GB Corsair DDR4 3000mhz
    Carbide SeriesĀ® Quiet 600Q Inverse ATX (I like the quiet factor, and I'm used to this particular layout as the Mac Pro was RHS access too - works with how my desk is set up)
    Corsair RM650x modular PSU (will this be enough power?)

    If I decide to move to SSD, rather than keeping my current HDD set, I'm thinking of the following to start with
    Intel 512gb 600p Series M.2 (for OS)
    Intel 1tb 600p Series M.2 (for games)

    My audio and photo libraries will probably stay on their current HDDs for the forseeable future

    Any thoughts/critiques?
     
  2. Trusteft

    Trusteft HH's Asteroids' Dominator

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2004
    Messages:
    19,664
    Likes Received:
    1,485
    Trophy Points:
    153
    If money is an issue, you can easily go for 16GB of RAM. No game needs even that and most programs don't either.

    650 should be more than enough, though I don't know the efficiency of that PSU. If you don't plan on adding more hardware, the 650 should be ok.

    On my gaming system (a laptop) I have 2 M.2 devices too. I have the OS and games on one, and everything else on the second. If you do not plan on using the second drive for something that requires intense transfers/recordings, you would be better with a single larger drive.

    Keeping audio/photos etc on mechanical drives (as long as you have backups) is a great idea. No reason to waste money on SSDs for that. Also don't forget that SSDs without power for years, tend to lose data. Always store your data on mechanical drives, if you have to use drives.


    If you don't want that Mac any more, I would do you a favor and take it from you, free of charge :p Because I am nice like that. :p

    You are heading to the opposite direction I am (slowly moving away from Windows), but I wish you good luck.
     
  3. dj_stick

    dj_stick Apple Fanboy?

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    17,569
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Hah well I'm keeping my options open (considering the hackintosh route - did that back in '07 to run Logic) but all the software I use now is cross platform.

    I'm thinking of the two separate drives in case I need to totally wipe/reinstall the Windows drive - a large portion of my games are in Steam, and will auto-reinstall if needed. Could always use the smaller drive for OS X ;)

    Thanks for the tip on 16Gb - currently running 24gb, didn't want to downgrade too much (but if it's future proof?)

    This is the PSU, nice and modular, and hopefully enough if I upgrade the GPU down the track.

    Now I know it's wishful thinking to expect this build to last almost a decade like my current one (I'm surprised it's still going tbh) but I'd like to "Futureproof" myself as much as possible
     
  4. Trusteft

    Trusteft HH's Asteroids' Dominator

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2004
    Messages:
    19,664
    Likes Received:
    1,485
    Trophy Points:
    153
    You know very well there is no such thing as future proofing. I future proofed my first Atari ST back in 1989 by upgrading it to 1MB of RAM. In the mid to late 90s I would future proof my PC every 3 months, then buy completely new components/pc every 6. Future proofing FTW! Of course it is not that bad/good now days, but still...
    You don't need to get a second SSD for backup of the first. You can save an image (or whatever) on a mechanical drive. A much cheaper drive. Besides if the M2 doesn't fail the first week, it will probably not fail for a long long time. And if it fails after that, it will probably be something else that causes it, like a PSU failure or something, which will probably destroy your second installed drive as well. By waiting till/if it fails, you can probably buy a 1TB of M2 for peanuts when that time comes.
    I am not telling you what to do, just giving you my opinion.
    I don't use Logic (heh) so I have zero experience with it. Including memory requirements. But don't forget the hardware requirements of Windows based PCs are usually higher than MacOS or Linux ones. Which I have a feeling it is partly why you want to get 32GB of RAM. If you plan on using the machine for a decade, sure go for it. Not sure if it is plausible, but if the hardware lasts for a decade of everyday use, good for you.

    Regarding PSU, I use a Corsair one (RM750 modular Gold) on one of my main editing machines and it is a good one. In general I have good experience with Corsair. I have more hardware on it than you plan on installing, and it was installed 2 years ago, but it is ok so far. Their memory have failed me, but shit happens.

    16GB, it all depends on your software and of course if you are going to use virtual machines on the PC. If Logic doesn't use much, then why not save the money? If it is not a big deal, just get 32GB, but more than likely it will be a waste of RAM.

    If you can afford it, I would recommend on getting a UPS.
     
  5. Judas

    Judas Obvious Closet Brony Pony

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    37,625
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    138
    why a 7700k... why not a ryzen 1600 or 1700 for that matter... as of the last few bios updates.. basically the last month.... the ryzen platform has now matched the 7700k in many if not most gaming senarios (some wins some losses all within mere low single digit percentages)... the 1600 has a clock base advantage somewhat due to it's binning... but the 1700 has the core count benefit... which greatly surpasses the 7700k in basically EVERYTHING by a significant amount.

    Frankly without even looking at the cost differences.... ryzen's the better option.. more powerful.... far more "future proof"....

    With price taken into account.... you save a bundle.
     
  6. Tipstaff

    Tipstaff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Messages:
    8,819
    Likes Received:
    656
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Judas, if you are suggesting a Ryzen I would suggest a motherboard too. Gigabyte seems like they have their act together, so that's an obvious choice, but do you have a specific board in mind?
     
  7. Judas

    Judas Obvious Closet Brony Pony

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    37,625
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    138
    I was going to recommend the gigabyte board as well... but it's hard to really make any specific selection without potentially alienating several other good boards in the process (depending on the wants/needs). There appears to be word out that the 2nd revisions of many boards have already started hitting distributors which improve on several fronts, specially in the bios department if i understood correctly.
     
  8. Calliers

    Calliers HH's Man In Black Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    31,919
    Likes Received:
    2,068
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Yeah I recommend going Ryzen too, Intel has been dragging their feet for far too long.
     
  9. dj_stick

    dj_stick Apple Fanboy?

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    17,569
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    88
    AMD don't yet support Thunderbolt do they?

    Thanks for the suggestion though, I'll look into AMD's offering
     
    Calliers likes this.
  10. Judas

    Judas Obvious Closet Brony Pony

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    37,625
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Most of the intel motherboards... actually i'm trying to think of the last board i saw that had thunderbolt directly available (actually called this on board).... which is basically none of them..... either way, both amd and intel have USB 3.1/USB C versions which is i believe basically the same thing...

    Not having had to deal with thunderbolt directly though, i don't know if the protocals work identically or not to usb C (3.1)... but far as i can see they should plug in straight away.
     
  11. tastyweat

    tastyweat Lurking

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2003
    Messages:
    4,924
    Likes Received:
    116
    Trophy Points:
    73
    RAM depends on what you're doing... if you're still planning on making music - then that 32GB might come in useful.
     
  12. Tipstaff

    Tipstaff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Messages:
    8,819
    Likes Received:
    656
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Gigabyte was the first from what I recall that had it on their X99 boards, and there was a Z170 from Asus that had it.. the Premium I think. Come to think of it I've never sold a board with Thunderbolt as it's been useless for the PC. Storage and external graphics is all it's really used for, and with a PC all that can be put into a box, via SATA and so forth, so there was no need for it. Anything related to Thunderbolt that I've dealt with has either been laptop or Macbook related. It's literally been people wanting an external graphics adapter so that they can game on their laptop, or do graphics intensive work.
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2017
  13. dj_stick

    dj_stick Apple Fanboy?

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    17,569
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Iirc while using the same connector, Thunderbolt 3 and USB 3.1 aren't quite the same (you can get a USB 3 over TB3, but not the other way around, like with TB1/2 and MiniDisplayport)

    Thanks for the feedback everyone, due to potential compatibility issues if I do want to use OS X, Intel is still the way to go for now for me, but might just go with 16gb of ram to star with (can always add more later)

    Now to save some money...
     
  14. Judas

    Judas Obvious Closet Brony Pony

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    37,625
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ryzen is supported on OS X though... o_O

    Apple has been leaking at the seams with bits of information that they will be using AMD ryzen products and threadripper.... there are SEVERAL ryzen users with OS X running flawlessly on their machines (and with pretty sweet performance apparently too!)

    Yosemite and El Capitan...

    Oh by the way, there are several fairly reasonably low cost PCI-Ex Thunderbolt Cards that you can throw into a system, and considering how ryzen has 4x additional pci-ex lanes over intel.... no real loss there. Then again if you were to consider Threadripper due out within the next month and a bit... you'd have a full 64 pic-ex lanes vs intels maximum 44 pic-ex lanes (40 typical on x299 and sub 24 if you go with a lower end cpu in a x299 system).
     
  15. dj_stick

    dj_stick Apple Fanboy?

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    17,569
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    88
    hmmm, pricing up an 1700x with a decent mobo vs a 7700K with similar spec board (and same everything else) comes in at about $40 more... not much in the scheme of things... twice the number of cores too...

    Currently on a dual quad CPU (no HT) so this will be familiar territory for me I hope.

    But then I guess anything current would be a big upgrade
     
    Calliers likes this.
  16. dj_stick

    dj_stick Apple Fanboy?

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    17,569
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Well I've started the process. Scored a good deal on an Intel 512Gb 600p SSD, and just ordered a Fractal Design Meshify C case along with a Corsair 650W PSU.

    I've decided to pass on a second SSD for games for now, save for a 1-2 TB one down the track (that Crucial MX300 2tb looks nice and affordable) and just use one of my 1Tb HDDs for games storage. Any brand new must play asap games I can install on the SSD and then move the files over later (Steam's good for this, as are some of the other launcher platforms.)

    Still haven't 100% decided which way to go, but I'm edging towards a Ryzen 1700/X370 combo, as I've decided to keep my old Mac Pro and roll it back to a fresh OS X 10.6.8 install, so I've got no compatibility issues with any of my music software, powercore card, audio interface(s) etc, and have it as a dedicated music box, and a backup system if the new comp goes down.
    Won't even need a KVM switch as the monitor has multiple inputs, and my Apple keyboard is on an extension cable, all I have to do is just unplug it from one extension, and plug it into the next (I already have a spare.) Will probably plug the mouse into the keyboard and cable tie part of the cable to the keyboard so it's less messy on the desk.
     
  17. Trusteft

    Trusteft HH's Asteroids' Dominator

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2004
    Messages:
    19,664
    Likes Received:
    1,485
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Speaking of SSD for games.
    I thought I would need at least 1TB when I ordered my gaming system (a laptop). I found that this is not the case. I use my C drive (two internal drives, both 512GB, both M.2, the C is PCIE and the D is SATA) for Windows and games installations and I have to say, 512GB is more than enough for games. Right now I have 23 games installed from Steam alone, and another 60 from GOG, plus few more from discs. Just under 240GB taken from games. Including WoT.
    As I see it, unless one wants to install a crazy amount of games* which he is not going to play any time soon, half a TB of drive is more than enough for games alone.


    * Just to be clear, I believe I have way too many installed as it is.

    Of course one needs to remember than with SSDs it is good to have plenty of space available to increase the longevity of the drive.
    So my point is...not sure, I guess, you might not need a 1 or 2 TB drive for games alone. Of course you know better than anyone else how many games you want installed at any one point. :p
     
  18. Judas

    Judas Obvious Closet Brony Pony

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    37,625
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    138
    4 games and 200gb is consumed on my ssd. So it depends heavily on the type or rather size of games obviously.

    I personally find that a 500gb SSD usually fits quite well for both windows OS, programs and games... User files residing on another drive of whatever size that may be needed for whatever you may be storing, obviously those with 10's of thousands of pictures would need a reasonably large disk.... those with 100's of movies of decent quality will need a fairly massive disk... and those that really don't do much of either wouldn't need much of anything at all.

    In my general builds, the vast majority of people general don't end up needing anything more than 100gb of total drive space, so while a 120gb SSD usually will do, a 250gb usually is more than plenty to ensure that longevity and to avoid any potential space contraint issues are not going to be a concern at all. I good chunk of people getting me to build them a new machine quite often will get hung up on the drive space usually pointing to a standard drive in the 2TB size that costs the equivalent of the 250gb SSD and go "Why would i buy a drive that's 8 times smaller for the same price?" to which i explain the major advantages and the fact that they aren't likely to use up such space (depending on the customer).
     
  19. dj_stick

    dj_stick Apple Fanboy?

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    17,569
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Currently have between 500-700gb of storage taken up just by games atm.
    Internet speed here is notoriously sh*t, enough for TV streaming, but a decent size game is a buy today and play in 24hrs proposition, so I don't like deleting things I might want to play again on a whim (for example I couldn't justify keeping Doom installed at 50gb, even though it's a good bit of fun to randomly boot up, kill some demons for an hour or so then move on).

    So for my usage, 1tb would be about minimum, 2tb would be just about right.

    Photo library is taking up ~2tb or so on a separate drive, will stay that way, but may use a portion of the system SSD for current projects, then archive when finished.
    Music library is currently on a separate drive, along with all my music production work/sample libraries and as that drive is staying with the Mac I'll move my music over to the system SSD, but that won't be a lot of space.
     
  20. Judas

    Judas Obvious Closet Brony Pony

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    37,625
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    138

Share This Page

visited