Posts by wiredotter14

goldenpanther said:Great, thanks. And it’s actually cheaper too, $67. About power—do I need a new PSU? Does this GTX 1050 run just off the motherboard, or does it need those 6 or 8-pin connectors?

Look, that cheaper one is the 2 GB version. The 4GB model is $405 (still cheaper)

It needs a 6-pin connector, which looks like your current PSU has. But all in all, it won't pull much more than what you're using now—maybe 80W instead of your current 65W. You don't need a new power supply.

goldenpanther said:just got an email from Future saying they finally got those 460 cards in stock. wondering if an EVGA GTX 1050 Ti 4GB would fit this setup?

Intel Core i3-4130
LC-CC-95 cooler
ASUS B450 Motherboard with Corsair RAM and Radeon GPU
2x4 GB RAM Kingston Hyper X 1600 Mhz
Radeon R7 250 1GB DDR5
500 GB HDD + 120 GB SSD
Chieftec GPS 450 AA

It’d fit fine,

but there's cheaper stuff over at Downtown

Intel has always operated on thinner margins. An ASUS RX 580 can't be priced the same as a GTX 1060; it has to be cheaper, otherwise, they won't move any significant volume at all.

crimsonstag84 said:Quad-channel, and I honestly doubt you'll need more than 32GB for gaming and everything else.

8 RAM slots? lol 😵

makes sense

Anyway, that motherboard rating on Amazon isn't great
three stars is basically a garbage average; people are running into all sorts of issues
http://www.amazon.com/Product/Produc...82E16813130841

What's the deal with the 4x4GB RAM setup? Did it end up being cheaper or what?

Lmao, pure chaos here.
Look, it’s not about whose specs are better. We were just debating i7 versus i5 and a bunch of other stuff. Basically, you’re stating what you’d pick, and I’m just saying what I’d pick for myself.

It’s not like he *has* to swap out the i5, but bumping up to an i7 gives him that extra 10-25% headroom—just enough to stop that RTX3080 from being held back.
Again... that Cooler Master case isn't some cheap junk from $50; it's actually a pretty solid build with great airflow. If someone wants a flashy case, that's just a matter of aesthetics, not necessity.
Btw, the PSU I mentioned comes with a 5-year warranty, and when I brought up the Wattage, I just meant 500W will cover him in any scenario. The efficiency difference on 80+ power supplies won't really pay itself back unless you're running a massive mining rig or something.

analogtiger19 said:@wiredotter14

One part costs 70% more than the other, so don't try to sell me those political talking points about how it's just "10% of the total price." The rest of the build doesn't magically contribute to that "25% performance boost" you're claiming—which, by the way, is a total stretch that only happens in rare scenarios, maybe at 1440p if you ever actually switch resolutions. You practicing for the upcoming elections or something? 😬

Besides, anyone looking to maintain a steady 60fps setup five years down the road is going to struggle with whatever hardware they buy today. In that scenario, having a top-tier case and a solid power supply makes upgrading your CPU, motherboard, and RAM combo way cheaper later on—since you'll probably swap the GPU much sooner anyway.

Honestly, let's just agree to disagree. We clearly have different ideas of what "value" means, and that's that. It’s actually better for the end user this way; they get to weigh two completely opposing viewpoints. Win-win. 👍 😁

You didn't listen to a single thing we said.
Tech moves fast, APIs change, and hyperthreading is killer.
Even now, an i5 isn't on the level of a Core i7, and those 8 threads aren't being fully utilized yet.

The point is, an i5 is already bottlenecking cards like the GTX 1070, and in 3, 4, or 5 years, that gap is only going to get wider.
So, grab the Core i7 now. When you upgrade in a few years, you won't have to swap the motherboard and CPU, which is an investment of roughly $1000.

He could grab a higher-quality PSU if it fits his budget, but there's really no need. In a few years, a 4K gaming rig will pull about as much power as this current 1080p setup does now.

And he doesn't even need a better case for a future upgrade; he could cram a GTX 1080 in here right now and have zero issues.

analogtiger19 said:Looking at these links, the only logical takeaway is that an i7 delivers higher FPS in most scenarios (sometimes significantly, sometimes not—but does anyone actually care about the difference between 80 and 90 FPS? Though, honestly, based on your link, there’s practically no difference here). That was never the debate. And yeah, even an i3-2100 won't completely bottleneck a GTX 980Ti (in AC Syndicate, the core load hits 96-98%, so if we want to be pedantic, you could call that a bottleneck)...

Let me sum this up, because I feel like I'm failing to get my point across. 😬
Does an i7 give you more FPS than an i5? Yes. Do I think a 70% price hike is justified for a measly 25% boost in specific situations? No. 🙂

Look, first off, you're investing in the whole rig. We aren't talking about a 70% increase in total PC cost; it's more like 10%. If paying 10% more gets you 20-25% more breathing room, that's a win.

Second, nobody is claiming an i5 can't run today's games—especially paired with a GTX 1060—but you seem to misunderstand what "future-proofing" actually means.
The goal isn't jumping from 80 to 90 FPS. It's making sure that when a demanding title hits, you're sitting at 60 FPS instead of 45 when you have a beefy GPU.
Plus, you're totally ignoring how APIs evolve. An i7 will only widen the gap over an i5, especially in CPU-heavy titles.

Basically, you slap an i7 on a standard motherboard and you're set for whatever comes next. Otherwise, in a few years when you want to drop in a GTX 1170 or an RX 590, you'll regret buying the i5. You'll be stuck trying to sell it for an i7, which are harder to find used because people hold onto them longer. Or worse, you'll end up replacing the entire platform. Like The New Guy said, that extra 20% headroom the i7 provides puts it in a completely different hardware class.

Alexander Moore67 said:Just one quick question: if you were buying this for yourself for $3.25, would you have gone with a $127 case
?

Absolutely. And besides, he mentioned the build would be around 8k, not 10k.
That Zalman case is solid and breathes well. Honestly, I wouldn't buy anything more expensive (if I were even considering it) without checking it out in person first.

Newer games running on DirectX 12 / Vulkan support much better multi-threading than DX11 ever did. We’re already seeing overclocked i5 chips performing nearly identical to non-overclocked i7s in recent titles, especially when you look at the price gap. Moving forward, the i7 is just going to be about maximizing that utilization.
And for those poorly threaded games? An overclocked Pentium or an i3 might actually outpace an i5. You really have to look at where things are heading to see how bottlenecks will eventually shrink.

BTW Kimberly Gomez34. The guy said he’d go with a build featuring a GTX 1060, which is totally fine for 1080p. I brought up higher resolutions because of the increased CPU load if he decides to upgrade to a beefier GPU in a year or two—making everything more taxing on the processor. He isn't going to buy a 1440p monitor and stick with a GTX 1060 forever. There's also the option of picking a 144Hz monitor instead of a higher resolution one, which, like you said, would put more strain on the CPU by chasing higher FPS.

The components are fine, but honestly, if you're dropping more than $3000 on a PC build, there's no point in settling for an i5. Going with an i7 ensures you can handle higher resolutions, better FPS on a high-refresh monitor, VR, and all that other stuff.
That power supply you mentioned is solid, though Fortron is pretty reliable too.

Basically, an i5 + GTX 1070 setup is just a budget 1440p build. What I put together—the i7 + GTX 1060—is much better for the Future. (The 1070 is a great card right now, but it's overpriced because there's zero competition for it.)

If the goal is just pushing max settings at 1080p, you could do that for way less money—maybe around $800.

I run my printers on unbranded third-party inks and haven't hit a single snag, even though we’re churning out about 10k pages a month

Fair point, honestly, I couldn't care less about that debate anyway

analogtiger19, an i7 isn't strictly mandatory, but for most games, it sits right in that sweet spot similar to an overclocked i5—except most people won't bother overclocking.

As it stands, it’s a solid foundation for future upgrades since it can handle just about anything from upcoming processor generations, especially since newer titles are leaning harder into multi-core performance.

Besides, there's plenty of wiggle room in this second PC build budget up to $3333 to grab a pricier case, but personally, I think the Zalman Z3 + is perfectly fine.
I might eventually pack this thing with cooling if I want dead silence, though the case already has decent airflow (and honestly, that i7 doesn't run that hot anyway).

I opted for the i7 because the user mentioned a $1,000 budget, which provides a great platform for the Future. You could go with the B150 + i5 route, but that's a weaker CPU combo and doesn't sit in the same price bracket. Since the user is currently playing at 1080p, it makes way more sense to invest in a processor that won't become obsolete for at least the next 5 or 6 years (which isn't really true for an i5) rather than overspending on an overkill GPU that'll be easier to swap out later.

Better power supply... I'd say this Fortron is pretty reliable. It's Modular, so less cable clutter, and it comes with a 5-year warranty, which some of those flashy brands don't even offer. There's no need for a beefier PSU for this PC build, and finding something with a 5-year warranty without spending a massive extra chunk of change isn't easy (at least not that I know of).

@Kimberly Gomez34

the more you know... hahaha. Honestly, I'm still wondering how you guys keep copying this stuff.
P.S. Right now, it doesn't make much sense to go for those Xeon chips; the platform is getting old. Skylake isn't overpriced anymore, and the older generations aren't exactly a steal either.

hollowmarlin27 said:Not even in my wildest dreams.

Nothing concrete here.

You've lost it. 🙂

hollowmarlin27 said:Clearly, you aren't reading the forums.

Whenever someone runs into issues with an MF device, Wi-Fi connectivity, or whatever, the standard advice is always the same: download the latest drivers.

And how do you know the package doesn't include the latest firmware designed to work with those specific drivers? Like in the case mentioned above.

Did they actually give you any real advice? Anything constructive? Based on your logic, everyone should just buy an HP and keep a fat wallet ready for those overpriced original inks.

Look:

This PC build can handle 1440p gaming without breaking a sweat, and it'll crush 1080p at much higher refresh rates than just 60fps.



It’d be more futureproof for 1080p titles, too. If you decide to grab a better monitor down the road, you won't be stuck.



This is a similar PC build, but it only has 8GB of memory and a weaker graphics card.

Honestly, for most 1080p gaming, you probably wouldn't even notice the difference.
BTW, you could pick up an AMD RX 480 somewhere else, but the prices are basically the same, and they don't carry models with decent coolers at Future. Of course, you could always hunt for an RX 480 elsewhere or just buy the whole setup from a different shop.

If I were in your shoes, I'd go with the second option. You don't really need a GTX 1070 for 1080p, and this setup provides a solid foundation for an upgrade later on. Plus, you save over $500

And what resolution are you running?

1440p? 1080p at 144Hz?

If you're stuck on 1080p at 60Hz, then this PC build only makes sense if you're planning to grab a new monitor to actually match the hardware (or maybe a multi-monitor setup).

Also, are you planning on overclocking the processor?

What's a new driver gonna do for you?

Besides, this kind of thing can happen with any printer out there.
It’s completely unclear what you're even suggesting (if you're actually suggesting anything).

hollowmarlin27 said:1. With Canon, you get starter cartridges. There’s an XL version too.

2. Epson XP isn't a bad choice. Someone actually called me today saying: "I have an Epson XP225, I just installed new Firmware and now it won't work with third-party cartridges." We're looking at it tomorrow.

There's another solution for him—a much smarter one—but it falls under that whole No. 1 on lobbying nonsense, so it's better to just keep my mouth shut. Unless you want to get banned.

Sorry, this is all I can offer. That's just how life works.

1) For Epson, just buy the cheap third-party ones right away.

2) You'll know immediately if the replacements work. They either do or they don't. If they work, great—you've got cheap printing. If they don't, return the printer. At worst, you only lose $17 on the replacement ink.

You didn't give any actual suggestions, and I have no idea why people think bananas are healthy just because they're high in potassium; don't overdo it.

Rembrante, we already figured out after your second post that HP makes printers where finding replacement ink is a nightmare (and they supposedly have high-quality print heads). I’m not sure what you’re trying to get at here; people come to this forum for actual printer advice, not long-winded essays on the printing industry.

on topic:

That Canon deal isn't exactly great regarding ink availability either. Generally speaking, some models just make it way easier to find ink than others.

This all-in-one has excellent ink availability, and if you're planning on printing a lot like you said, you won't have to worry about running through its lifespan too quickly.
(those numbers Rembrante keeps throwing around—20k to 30k pages on an HP—don't mean a thing to someone looking at a printer under $100)

http://moj-toner.com/printeri-shop/prodaja/epson-xp-225

ink is cheap and easy to find
http://www.nabava.net/search.php?tp=0&q=xp-225
They're even cheaper abroad (around $1 per unit), but if you aren't buying in bulk, about $0.40 per cartridge is the best price you'll find in the US.

Anyway, for the $100-$$500 range, I'd suggest Brother, but for anything under $333, Epson has some practical devices.