Thank you for this, and everything about this site. It's simply without equal and is invaluable to the builder community!
There is a "sweet spot" in PSUs vs calculated system demand, where the PSU supplys enough ready power but never quite exceeds its rating on any one output, and so it lasts, generally, the entire lifecycle of the system it's mounted in.
Rule of thumb for us old guys (50+) is between 25% and up to 40% above expected system requirements.This is just cheap insurance we've learned, since trouble-shooting a system down to where you can be sure the PSU is faulty is not a bit of fun, even if you are pretty good with decent multimeter.
A hosed up PSU can cause ANY part of your system to act crazy, and even never twice the same way the same day - so you get to try to chase down bogeys involving multiple software, firmware and hardware at the same time - Now that sounds fun doesn't it?
Basically, buy a damned good PSU, and get one between 25% and 40% more than you think your system might require. The added benefit to this "inefficiency" is that your PSU capacitors and such will last LONGER, because they are never stressed to their max.
Efficiency is over-rated when your efficient choice PSU is flaking out and you aren't comfy enough with a multi-tester to figure out the PSU is at fault and not your cpu or motherboard or vid card or.. you name it. Extra capacity means less load on the capacitors et al, and that means longer life at rated output - Like I said, it is cheap insurance. I'd rather spring for a PSU that eats bon-bons most of its day and has capacity to rise to any challenge, than an "Efficient" one likely to stroke out the moment I add one more thing to its load.
Nice build, good looking too. How do you like that Viewsonic monitor?
Having more PSU than you actually need is no sin; typically whatever the estimated power needs are, you want to add 25% to 40% to that, depending on how long you think this build will serve you - the longer, the higher and also if a machine is on 24/7 then you want more head room, so closer to that 40% than the 25%.
General rule of thumb that's never failed me is 1st, buy a quality PSU like EVGA, Seasonic - you got that part covered. Next find a good estimate or three and take the highest, then add in your 25 to 40 percent of that. It's cheap insurance.
(Stay away from Newegg's estimator - it's full of crap as a Christmas turkey, way way over estimates to get you to buy a big PSU. Here's a good one: http://www.extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp )
PSUs are the only component which all others in your system depend on, and believe me you don't EVER want to have to try troubleshooting a system with a screwy PSU, unless you got another you can drop right in, or know your way around with a decent multimeter.
49c under load..? With AIR?
LOL, ain't that the truth!
Thanks! I hope to one day build this system - if the bloody IRS ever gives me my money back, lol.
Actually, the H240-X places below the Glacier 240L at both stock and overclocked conditions here:
And the Kraken X61 in turn beats the Glacier 240L at both stock and overclocked here:
Hell, most of my friends do too lol.
Thanks man! Lol, love that movie. Yeah, I live where there are gators, wild hogs, and black bear - and rednecks; if it weren't for internet IT shopping, I'd shoot myself.
Thanks! Appreciate the info :)
I bought them off a guy with a store who was retiring.
Some rationale and what have you for the components in this build:
CPU - Consistently OC'd more stable, and higher Ghz than the other two entries in the Has-E bunch, the 5960 and 5930; costs $190 less than the 5930 for the same 6 cores, same cache, but just 28 lanes instead of 40 - big whoop on that.
MoBo - Great reviews, and a Toms pick.
Cooler - Good history with NZXT, and this x61 is a great price for performance.
GPU - Cheaper than two 290x's with two watercoolers, out performs two crossfired 290x's.
PSU - Works out cheaper than buying the 1000W model, so why not?
Case - Awesomeness
SSD - Great price for performance, solid reviews with no gotchas.
I am with you, old school, and here I'll date myself: Radio Shack and Heathkit raised me! Well, thank god for internet and Amazon; at least with age, I've learned a bit more patience..
Sad to say I've heard so much bad about them in sooooo many places, that I took them off my PPP vendors list. Just not worth finding out for myself. As for Newegg and Amazon, I've had nothing but good experiences with them for nearly a decade. So much so in fact, if my tax refund EVER gets here, I might just do second day delivery on everything for my new system. This waiting now that I've got my system specs down is rough! Lol.
Thanks! I'll definitely check it out at that price!
That's a great drive, great price!
I'd go with Hitachi, who still make their own 3.5 drives despite being acquired by WD. You can get a 2Tb Ultrastar for less than $70 USD, albeit it is a 3Gb/s 7200rpm. Sata II is good enough for mechanical hard drives - they are no where near that fast anyway. Definitely do an SDD for boot / main games though.
All things being equal, though they seldom are, multiple partitions on the same physical disk don't slow disk access down and as was stated previously they can marginally improve performance by limiting the amount of data that must be sorted, searched etc to a subset of the total capacity of the HD, instead of the whole drive.
Multiple partitions are useful in situations such as RAID or backing up for the same reason, as well as data organization. Multiple partitions also help keep the amount of fragmenting manageable, though modern HDs with modern algorithms tend to NOT get significantly fragmented until they are nearly full.
1283 watts on 1300w psu does not leave any wiggle room.
I apparently cant' update my Firefox beyond 12, so I am accessing the site via mobile site.
Someone just sent me a message, as I can see the notifier, but when I open it, the blue field hides it so SORRY I CAN'T READ IT.
Here's what I'm seeing in firefox,
the text is from near the top of this page we are on here, everything above "Site performance: We massively improved the performance of part selection pages. You should notice a difference immediately. We made not just the backend server processing but also the page load and rendering times significantly." is blocked out by the bluish section where CPU, Cooler etc picto-icons are:
Here's what I'm seeing in firefox, the text is near the top of this page we are on here, everything above "Site performance: We massively improved the performance of part selection pages. You should notice a difference immediately. We made not just the backend server processing but also the page load and rendering times significantly." is blocked out by the bluish section where CPU, Cooler etc picto-icons are:
The gunmetal blue area housing "CPU" "Cooler" etc pictos is overlapping the top of this page and every other - I think it's not scaling to the screen resolution.
Cancel that: I changed res and it is still overlapping, cutting off the page tops.
I looked it over quite hard, and I'd rather have it than 2 separate cards - one card to install, one slot, really NICE liquid cooler already on board.
But I got thinking: for $100 less, I get the same or even a bit more in performance, and the redundancy of having two cards in case one of them dies, LOL!
Amen. I've got quite a few sitting around the shop, so hopefully don't have to buy more ;)
Thanks for the great comments. I'm definitely open to your OS suggestion. I'll check out the SSDs and keyboard options too. Thanks!
Hi there folks, brand new here. First, love this site and appreciate all the work that goes into it very much, as well as reading other member's comments and checking out their builds.
I welcome all comments and suggestions on this 9590 build, and thanks in advance - I posted this just for them: A blindspot is by definition, something you can't see on your own, so thanks for the help!
Here's some of the thoughts that went into this build design:
General: I tried to limit as much as possible, the number of suppliers, and especially to those I've had good experiences with.
CPU: I waited for a good price break on the 9590, and getting it at that price with a h2o cooler was just right to try this beast out.
MB: Good experiences with Gigabyte MBs, and this one has all the sata et cetera for the price, decent enough reviews.
Mem: 16GB of 1866 / 9 cas seems fine for my application: some vid editing, programming, and moderate gaming.
Drives: Definitely wanted SSD as the main boot drive and goto install drive for most apps. The two 2TB drives get raid mirror; I've got tons of stuff I don't want to lose, but don't access often but still want on the same machine.
Video: I liked the card, the price and the reviews. Like I said, I'm a moderate gamer so this should fit the bill and I can always add another.
Case / PSU / OS: Case looks great for the $$$; I used three different PSU calculators for this build (+ 15% or so more load) and all came in under 875, so I went with a 1000W one with pretty superb reviews just to have wiggle room. I chose this Win 7 because I hate 8, and this quals for a free 10 upgrade when and if.
Anyway, that's my reasoning. Looking forward to hearing from you all!