Thanks for the tip.
I disagree that it was inappropriate - there is a difference between being real, and being inappropriate, though our modern culture seems all to eager to conflate the two in order to protect people's feelings (even at the expense of truth), and and I find it extremely discouraging that you would think so.
He was rhetorically out of his depth. It was clearly explained to him. And it was hilarious to me. If the truth is condescending - if the truth is insulting - then in my view it must be , for I'd rather the truth than any facsimile. And if that is inappropriate for this site, then I am inappropriate for this site. There are better options out there now. I've saved my pages. Toodles.
Meh, I really like my GX500 for the most part.
I own that exact PSU and it's been running for years now.
Understood. However, perhaps something is wrong on my end? I can't see the post which this one is responding to; I'd like to know which post specifically brought on the warning.
That is weirdly similar to my experience. The brand I've had the worst luck with is Antec, and they make great PSUs generally, right? It's really weird.
What is the difference between running apparently fine and fine? Well, not a whole lot, if you ask me.
And I dispute the fact that you should just discount all of those reviews as being just days after the product was purchased. For starters, they might do that, but if it fails on them there's a big chance they will go back and write a negative review. That hasn't happened here, but you definitely see it on PSUs that really are unstable by nature (Looking at you, Diablotek). Then too, if you go and sort the reviews by "ownership," you will see plenty of reviews that came in positive years after the PSU was purchased.
I have something of a crusade for Raidmax because I see a lot of their products that have just massive amounts of good reviews, and I myself have had nothing but good experiences with them. I know they're not well made, but I just can't bring myself to say they are absolutely terrible and should never be purchased. That just doesn't seem to be true for so many of their units.
There are two ways to go here that make sense - get the RAM with the best CAS rating which fits the top acceptable mhz of the mobo/CPU, or else (if that doesn't appeal to the user) go for the cheapest possible combo which satisfies the amount you're targeting.
If the OP specifies they want the build to look good, then that's also a consideration. I usually don't bother with looks unless it's specified that they care.
Yeah that's why I agree with the assessment in this case. The build's probably asking too much from the PSU. Nobody really believes it can do 530W, lol - not even me.
I really should report this post, but then there's the danger that it could be deleted and lost to posterity.
You know, for this build I would agree, but honestly... 1,295 people were paid by Raidmax to write good reviews for this PSU on Newegg alone? I kinda doubt it man.
It could... but it's unlikely that everything would die. More likely some components will fry along with the mobo, while others will not. Sometimes none, sometimes all, and sometimes something in between. It depends on what fails and how badly it fails I suppose.
If I am "above" you, metaphorically speaking, then I would appear beneath you while you experienced vertigo... ah never mind. Can't be funny if you have to explain it.
lol, are you trolling? Do you understand why people get fast RAM at all? Do you understand the difference between an enthusiast build and a professional rig? Do you understand that there's absolutely no legitimate reason we have to believe the OP would care what color his RAM is? Why are you even bringing AMD in to this?
The more I talk with you, the less I understand you. I'm not going to bring this inane argument into another forum just to satisfy your myopic rhetorical strategy, but I can tell you right now that I will gladly tell anyone who chose RAM over their bus rating for performance reasons, yet who should not be overclocking, the exact same thing I have said here - you done messed up.
Yeah this would be AWESOME. There are some people here who have very specific, specialized knowledge. It would also be a way to alert people to great builds/build guides that are languishing because they slipped past the "just posted" showing. There are some really great builds on this site that don't have the upvotes they deserve.
I am wary of buying PSUs, HDDs, SSDs, and Case Fans used. I will do it if the price is right and I have enough information to make me feel comfortable about the purchase. Software, depending on the way you buy it, can also be very dicey.
Things which I generally consider to be absolutely safe for purchase used are motherboards, CPUs, and RAM. I'll also usually be fine with purchasing GPUs, but there are danger signs you have to look for when buying a used GPU - was the person a bitcoin miner, was the card stable? Was the card properly cleaned and maintained over the course of its life, etc.
I would go this way:
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
I have to disagree. Those are nice parts, but not suited to emulating Wii through Dolphin.
I suppose if you experience vertigo at the bottom of a mountain it might look like the top is beneath you. But that would be an illusion.
Oh yes. You're going to want something like the G3258 or a fast i3, and then you will want to couple that with an AMD graphics card.
Oh yes, because I'm banging such a big AMD drum.
You could have got RAM that performed the same for cheaper; that's been the point you've tried so hard to ignore this whole time. It was a bad choice regardless of how you came by it; that you independently made such a bizarre error is beyond my understanding.
You are repeating yourself, and I didn't find it convincing the first time. I am aware of the different workloads possible. We have nothing more to say to each other on this subject.
Whoa, yourself. You're using exactly the same RAM as me, except you dropped it into a rig not designed ot use it. It seems very out of place. Anyway I don't care if you use my builds as a base, so long as you use them in a way that makes sense (carrying over the RAM in this case doesn't make sense).
You need to read the three points of the Puget Systems review again:
1. This refers only to dual CPU systems and so is moot in this thread; no one has suggested such a build.
2. Most, but not all. And in this case, many of the actions you perform, if single-threaded, are dealt with quite efficiently from a cost perspective with the FX-8370E.
3. Diminishing returns come at 6/8 cores, not 4. This is why they recommend Xeons and i7s, not i5s.
Your second link shows an excellent result for the FX-8350, which is simply a slightly different version of the processor I recommended, and everything above it (really anything above about the Intel Core i5-4430) shows very diminishing returns. Not sure why you think this chart supports your hypothesis. The i7 is faster, but boy is it more expensive for a < 10s gain.
The third bench is the only one that shows any real reason to consider going Intel (and curiously it leaves out i3s from the test, but it's quite obvious the bench used is highly single threaded, given the improvements overclocking shows here, so an i3 would be a better choice than an i7 for this bench in terms of price/perf.). Whether or not going all the way up to an i7, or sacrificing everything else to step down to an i3 just to make these few jobs faster is worth it to the OP is anyone's guess, but my guess is that no, it's not worth it.
The 750Ti is not a good card for Adobe. I would not normally link to a forum post to prove this, but if you follow this thread: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2251507 You can see a number of links and the discussion (surprisingly accurate this time around) showing why. AMD's cards have double precision, they are better-suited to OpenCL calculation, and they generally cost less than Nvidia. Ergo, they are the better choice for photoshop.
I am not telling you not to post your build. I am only pointing out its flaws.
And that is why people should not listen to you yet.
You can enable XMP all you like, the system is not going to use it at that speed without needing to OC its part on the CPU die. Since that IS OCing, and this is a professional workstation, it makes little sense to do so. Far better to go with 1600mhz low-CAS RAM for an intel build, or else stick with AMD and enjoy native support for 1866 (or 2133 even if you switch to the FX-9000 series or A8/A10).
OK, there you go. Thanks for the info. Might as well go with the 270X, or even the 270 for that matter.
270X is good, but doesn't it use more power?
Razer is not the quality brand everyone thinks it is. My wife's Razer mouse is starting to go on the fritz as well. Buyer beware.
To be frank that is extremely light work.
You gave a four core with hyperthreading, which is eight threads, same as the FX-8370E you denigrated, except even more expensive. If what you say is really true, then a fast i3 would be best. It offers all the single core speed you could ever want, and it does have four threads. Frankly, I'm not sure you know what you're talking about when it comes to the FX-8370E - this sucker turbos a full 1ghz up to 4.3 - which is PLENTY fast for almost all photoshop work. Intel is faster, yes, but it's basically overkill. For that matter, an FX-4350 would have been a great choice as well except that it's not as energy efficient.
The 750 Ti is not a good card for photoshop. Experience has taught me to recommend AMD graphics when it comes to Adobe products; they generally have a better working relationship with AMD than Nvidia.
You chose the RAM because you based your build off mine. You put no thought into it. You're suggesting they spend extra money for absolutely ZERO increase in performance, due to the limitation of the CPU you suggested.
Not everything, but not nothing.
RAM speeds are controlled by the mobo only when the FSB is on the mobo. For all modern chips the FSB is effectively on the CPU. Check the Intel ARK site for the CPU, you can see that it specifies only up to 1600mhz, and if you go to the newegg site for that motherboard or the company site, you can see that any speeds above 1600mhz are specified as speeds it is rated to handle as an overclock of the FSB equivalent.
I am not satisfied. Your photoshop use pales in comparison to professional use of the program. Try to keep that in mind. As I said in my description, this is about the upper end of what I can imagine spending, for extremely high-load work. Anything less, he can go way down from there.
One of the first custom PCs I ever did for a customer was my sister in law's PC, which she uses for graphic design in photoshop. She's like you, so I built her an A8-3000 series build, using the AMD integrated graphics to do what she needs. Years later it's still chugging.
If anything more than 2 or 4 is a waste, why not go with an i3? And why use Nvidia when you could be using a GPU capable of doing better on the OpenCL stuff, like an R7 360 or 260X?
For that matter, why are you including 1866mhz memory when the CPU cannot support anything over 1600mhz without overclocking?
OK, let's hear your thoughts on why.
The 210 should be acceptable.
Here's a build with a particularly powerful GPU for your needs. It's also quite expensive, so if you need to step it down in terms of price you can cut a lot off by going down a few levels with the GPU - also with the SSD and, if needed, with the CPU. Really for photoshop this is about as high end as I can imagine anyone reasonably going for photography PS work.
Make sure you take the upgrade to Windows 10 so that you're not RAM limited by Windows 7 Home's 16gb limit.
I think you posted the wrong build? That build does not have integrated graphics.
We do not. Apparently, and I do find this funny, they've just released E3 Xeons on Skylake for mobile, but not for desktop or server.
All of my lulz.
Yeah, already pointed out to me twice before. Alas. At least the news that they will include FPGAs is still really, really cool!
I think I hear the sound of a pleb...
if they are moving their whole network to Windows 10, it could be a pretty big deal to their IT staff to have everything on a single gold image, running off the same licensing, etc.
I think you're gonna be SOL on the Windows 10 support, unfortunately: https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/comments/3b0gxr/geforce_7series_on_windows_10/
I wouldn't waste the cash.
when it stops, don't keep on screwing.
when it stops, don't keep on screwing.
Excellent life advice, my friend.
I think they do well in either configuration because in pull they create a steady draw and they typically have more blades, closer together, which is going to do more to create and sustain suction than a faster fan with fewer blades.
I really like the ones with high CFM but low pressure to just blast the case with air going in every direction - good for a front fan wafting air over the GPU and motherboard components, unless there are a lot of HDDs in the way.
First do some research and determine whether Nvidia even released win10 drivers for the 7000 series. I can't upgrade my laptop because AMD did not release drivers for the old GPU in that; could be the same issue for you here.
I would agree with the notion that push is better than pull when you're interfacing with a tight-knit rad like that. If you look at all the companies that make computer cooling solutions, they always show their single fan options in a push configuration over the rad, not the other way around - even though they could do it that way.
I'm not 100% on this but I think the reason may be because the rad retards the intake for the fan, so it's basically starved and can't get a good flow going, which in turn prevents it from creating the suction that would allow it to draw air over the rad. If you put the fan in front of the rad on the other hand, sure it will have difficulty pushing air into the rad, but at least you are not restricting its breathing room - it can create flow and as a result air will be forced through the rad. Of course the best option is to have a positive pressure system where the front fan feeds into the rad and a fan on the back creates a negative pressure area for that air to move to. I have a push-pull on my Cooler Master 120V that keeps my overclocked 130W CPU down in the mid 30s at stock and in the high 50s at absolute maximum load - when it was just push it could get up into the 60s.
OK, so you lost the SSD and the fans, and you included the full Windows 10 instead of just doing the smart thing and getting 7, then upgrading to 10.
And on top of that, you still can't overclock, you still aren't going to be outperforming the FX-8350 in multithreaded apps, and you're still paying more than my build when all's said and done.
Oh, and refer back to your original benchmarks - multithreaded performance of the FX-8350 is much better than the synthetic estimation CPU-World does. It's not even a real benchmark, synthetic or otherwise.
Cost, as always. There may be some weird issues, but to be perfectly honest I've done it without thinking on the vast majority of PCs I have used and upgraded over the years, and I've never noticed a problem. I would say the chances of it being an issues are lower than the chances that your specific brand will not be supported on a given board.
Yes. Don't listen to others. The biggest problem is that you will lose dual-channel, if your platform supported that, and the performance difference between single and dual channel is like 1-3% - I.E. negligible.