|
Ceros_X posted:Thanks for redoing this thread! Might have been me, I linked this article a couple times in the last thread. Final paragraph: quote:We didn't experience any issues with system stability or crashes, either with the full Killer suite or the company's plain driver—instability being one bit of conventional wisdom that some folks cite as a reason to avoid Killer hardware. If you're wary of an otherwise-ideal motherboard or laptop just because it happens to have Killer-powered networking on board, you can probably relax. Not only can you disable the Bandwidth Control feature of Killer's software, but you can also forgo the company's software suite entirely and just install a plain driver package. If all you want is a basic GigE controller with no frills, the Killer NIC can play that role, too. As the article explains early on, Killer NICs used to be specialized solutions produced inhouse by Bigfoot with their own PowerPC microprocessors on the PCI card. These required the special software stack to work. Now that Qualcomm has acquired Bigfoot and there's less of a compelling reason to offload the network stack to a dedicated microprocessor, the NIC is just an Atheros chip with a normal driver and the extra software stack is optional. dexefiend posted:http://www.techspot.com/photos/article/1155-affordable-dual-xeon-pc/ No, it'll just use a lot more power. If you're OK with that then it's a fine system. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 00:29 on May 3, 2016 |
#
¿
May 3, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 03:02 |
|
|
Aeryk posted:So I know the answer is to buy something that isn't super old, but I've been curious. I have a machine with a core2 duo E6750 in it paired up with a 960. Some games I can play fine, albeit at lower settings. A few seem fluid, but are going in slow motion. Is the chip just to old to deal with it? I could play fallout 4 fairly well, but dark souls isn't happening for sure. Yeah, a dual core under 3GHz is pretty low end at this point. If you're wanting to get more mileage out of that system instead of invest in a new one, you should probably check and see if your motherboard supports a Core 2 Quad. At this point you can find all but the highest-end models on eBay for pretty cheap, and a Q9400 for example would basically be two of your current processor as a drop-in replacement for $25-30. Make sure you have something better than the stock C2D cooler if you do this, since most of the Quads are 95W instead of 65W and it won't be sufficient. You won't be able to get top-end performance without at least a quad core from the last few generations, but the 960 is a fairly modest graphics card anyway so pairing it with a Core 2 Quad won't waste all that much potential if you'd rather wait.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
TalonDemonKing posted:Like I said, it's just some stuff I'm doing at this internship. I've always been weak in the 'Picking PC Parts from a catalog and not loving it up'; so the teacher is having me do this kind of stuff. Yeah the confusion is because many people think of what you decided as a "streaming box" or maybe "video server" and not just an HTPC, which frequently just needs to meet requirement 4 from your list. Most of the work in playing a video is decoding it and a lot of modern GPUs (even integrated ones) can handle that for the CPU with common codecs. Not only that, but even a slowish CPU like a desktop Core 2 Duo will be capable enough to decode a 1080p stream without any help from the GPU at all if it doesn't have to do anything else at the same time. Because relatively recent NUC models have a new enough integrated GPU to decode most streams without much effort on the part of the CPU, use very little power due to their 15W U series mobile processors, and as a result of using so little power and a mobile platform are small and quiet, they make excellent HTPCs if all you're doing is playing video. They don't have great internal storage (the big ones let you mount a 2.5" HDD and an M.2 SSD and that's it) and they do only have two low-voltage cores to throw at CPU loads, so they don't fit your requirements. Sounds like you should probably build a mini-ITX box with a real desktop chip inside, with what kind depending on just how much CPU load you have like previous posts said. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:41 on May 6, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
Rusty posted:This may sound dumb, but I haven't built or used a PC in ten years. Do I need to update my motherboard and SSD drivers for brand new parts and Windows 10? I bought an MSI Intel Skylake H170 LGA and a Samsung 850 EVO 500GB. Also, I haven't bought a video card yet, so should I use a 9800 GTX + for now or the on board video? I don't think I am going to playing new games until I buy a video card, but I may play some less demanding ones. SSDs don't need driver installation. You may want to install the drivers included with the motherboard or check the website for new ones, but for many components 10 will be able to find usable drivers on its own. If you aren't playing anything that needs a newer GPU, a 9800 GTX is fine - Nvidia actually provides drivers back to the 8000 series for 10.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Whale Cancer posted:Probably a dumb question but here goes. I also have a Hyper 212 on a P8Z68-V LX which is almost identical in layout and I'm assuming you mean the CPU fan's in the way. If that's the case you should be able to gently slide the fan up on the cooler a little bit, so that the memory stick will fit in under it. Once you have the memory in you can slide the fan back down and you'll be good.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Music Theory posted:The case was mostly chosen for aesthetics and because PCPartPicker didn't complain about it being incompatible with anything. The CPU in my old computer is an AMD Phenom II, so I'm assuming cannibalizing that isn't the best idea. I do happen to have a 1TB Seagate Barracuda hard drive, though. I'll let someone else critique part choice but: -There's nothing you can upgrade a Phenom II to except maybe a better Phenom II, so a new system is the way to go. I think some Phenom systems can upgrade to Bulldozer but that's kind of a wash, don't bother. - If your old computer's license is 7/8 retail, you can probably install it on your new computer and then upgrade to 10. If it's OEM then you will likely need a new license. - The 1070 is going to cost a lot more than the 960 you picked so they aren't really in the same tier, but if you want to spend that much then it's not a bad idea to wait for the 1070 (or whatever Polaris brings if it comes out fast enough) instead of buying a 970 or 390 or whatever.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
tadashi posted:I'd like to build a smaller profile/lower power consuming "desktop" computer for everyday office use (word, excel, email, etc). I was looking at Brix and NUC builds but I also need to be able to extend the users' desktops to 2 monitors (extended desktop, not mirrored). Brix and NUC generally use mini-display port and mini-HDMI out. I assume I can use them together for dual monitors? I don't think these computers use use display port 1.2 so daisy-chaining display port monitors doesn't seem possible. I have a Broadwell NUC doing dual 1080p monitor using both ports, it works great. It can also do 4K although the HDMI port is limited to 30Hz. From the spec sheet the Broadwell and Skylake models both have HDMI 1.4a and DisplayPort 1.2.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
tadashi posted:Thanks, I must have overlooked that. Huge thanks, though. Hearing someone else is using it and that it works is the best endorsement. Have you had any issues with the bare bones components (obviously, hard drive and memory will be different)? No, it's worked pretty much perfectly. I've been using it as a work desktop running Windows 10 for several months now - MS Office, text editing, lots of telnet/SSH sessions. I have the i3 model (NUC5i3RYH) with a 128GB Micron SATA M.2 SSD and 2x8GB of DDR3.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
melon cat posted:I'm helping a buddy build a low-end rig for video-editing. Vitals: Are you choosing Haswell over Skylake for any particular reason? I think most people would advise using Skylake since it's newer unless you have a reason not to.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Massasoit posted:So I'm thinking of building a new computer and I wanted a reality check on if it's really worth it. Is there a reason you're running at stock speed with a K chip? I would expect overclocking to make a noticeable difference. Even overclocked, that chip isn't bad today but if you upgrade to a 1080 it won't be able to reach its full potential compared to if you had it with a Skylake K-series chip. It will definitely still be an improvement over the 970 but I would probably spend $300-400 to upgrade the platform before spending $600+ on a graphics card.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Gunder posted:I'm not really comfortable doing any overclocking, which is why I picked the non-k version of the 6600. Another reason for my upgrade would be to get away from my old, faulty motherboard, which has the stepping issue that the first sandybridge motherboards had, which prevents me from using more than one hard drive and one optical drive. If I really don't want to go down the overclocking route, isn't a non-k 6600 going to save me the cost of having to buy a separate cooler, as it looks like the K version doesn't include one? (my current cpu cooler has developed a clicking noise, so i'd rather not use that if I can avoid it). I'm going to add to the sentiment that overclocking is a no-brainer. i5-*K chips are all capable of significant gains through overclocking versus the non-K equivalent and you cannot damage your chip or anything else if all you're going to change is the multiplier. Getting high overclocks requires high voltage and that carries some risk but you can get most of the way up without doing that. Taking my 2500K as an example, the stock speed on this thing is 3.3GHz and I can run it at 4.4 at least without touching voltage at all. That's a one-third increase in processor speed for a total investment of around maybe 10% of the cost of the system if you consider the premium for a Z-series motherboard (which you are already paying), the cost of a HSF and the premium for the K chip. It's more of a difference for many applications than upgrading to an i7 for generally less cost. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 00:48 on May 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 14, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
Serephina posted:Hello everyone! Yeah, I think you're right to avoid the embedded chips - for Intel those tend to be Celeron or Pentium models that are actually jumped-up Atoms and wouldn't really be capable of any serious gaming. It looks like the standard HD 530 integrated from Skylake would probably be able to run Civ 5 at low-medium settings from what I'm seeing, but for truly smooth play at high settings you'll probably need either a discrete card or one of the Iris Pro chips with eDRAM. If low-medium is fine for a start though, you can always get a system with space for a GPU and if they don't like it they can add one later. snuff posted:To people recommending 6600k's and overclocking I just want to point out that no gains are guaranteed. My 6600k does 4.0 GHz, barely because it sometimes fails during boot. So I'm running stock speeds now. Well, that's still almost a 25% improvement over stock but I can understand the disappointment considering it seems far from typical. Have you messed with voltage at all? Also, Intel offers insurance policies of a sort that allow you to get a replacement if you fry your chip, so if you think it's worth it you could buy one and then play fast and loose with the voltage to try and get where you want. If you do kill your chip, it sounds like the replacement would probably be better. One more thing is that I'd try a different PSU if you have one around to see if it makes a difference. Unstable or weak voltage could be unnoticeable elsewhere but cause problems to manifest during OCing. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 14:57 on May 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 14, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
Ninkobei posted:A gentle reminder to new computer builders to be sure to tighten their cpu cooler slowly, alternating one turn with each screw. A friend of mine decided he could put only two screws in at once and tighten them before putting the other two on. It bent/warped the edges of his skylake chip which seems to have caused some sort of motherboard short circuit, as well as permanently damaging the chip. This reminds me of working with Coppermine Pentium 3s and Athlon XPs, which had the bare processor die touching the heatsink instead of a heatspreader in between - I think mobile chips are still like this, since it gives you a thinner package overall. This combines with socket design that has you bending a big steel lever across the HSF to hold it on, almost certainly putting more pressure on one side or corner of the chip than the others. A bit too much force in the wrong place and you could actually crack the chip, killing it thoroughly and permanently. Even with irritating pushpin stock coolers and fragile LGA sockets, we've come a long way. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:57 on May 16, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 16, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Would it invalidate the 70 or so pounds I spent on the OS because if it is I am going to cry. Not if you bought the OS for the key. If you just bought it for the media then yes, you can download an image for free so that's kind of a waste.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
The Gate posted:PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant If you're confident a 120GB SSD is enough then it's plenty for the OS (especially Windows 10, it only uses like 10GB) but if you plan to put anything else on it then you may end up happier with a 250GB. Also, is there a reason you're going for that particular CPU cooler? The sideways heatpipe design of it seems to be intended for low-profile use. I'm sure it will work fine, but you have a big enough case to fit a tower and towers tend to be cheaper, as well as working with your existing airflow channels instead of being perpendicular to them.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
Butt Ghost posted:I'm planning on upgrading my PC. It's used primarily for gaming. My budget is $500. I live in USA. I know next to nothing about where to go from here. I just want better graphics. You're in a somewhat difficult place because AMD platforms are not great at the moment and your graphics card isn't that bad, so to make a substantial improvement you'll have to buy a good enough graphics card that the processor will bottleneck your performance some. Additionally there are going to be some new graphics cards in your price range in the next few months that are a lot better than what's currently available, but they aren't out now. I would probably try and pick up something like a 970 or 290 used and save the rest of your cash to build a new system if you have to get something now. If you get a more expensive card then you'll lose more potential performance to the processor not being able to keep up, and a total rebuild will cost more than $500 to be better than what you have.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
The Gate posted:No particular reason, I just grabbed one off the big list of coolers linked in the parts section of the thread. If there's a thread-recommended specific one I can grab whatever really. The Cryorig H7 and Cooler Master's Hyper 212 series are both well received. There are lots of other companies putting out very similar-looking models that probably perform well too, but those two are reasonably priced and known to have good performance. Their stock fans are also quiet enough that you probably won't hear them over the other components in the case.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
There's also a Resource Monitor (which has a link to it in the Task Manager, at least in Windows 10) already built in that will give you more detail. For memory make sure that you aren't comparing a value that includes cached memory with one that's just memory actually in use. For CPU I have no idea, since it seems like Microsoft consistently uses average-across-all-cores load values instead of 100% meaning "100% of a core" like it sometimes does in Unix-based OSes.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:Need some advice and/or help picking out parts. It looks like you can upgrade to any >=95W first-generation Phenom II, (check "Support and Downloads" -> "CPU Support List") which means that as long as the cooler and PSU are adequate you could get a 3- or 4-core proc off of eBay and swap it in. New video cards should be compatible as well. However, you won't be able to get it anywhere near as good as a new machine would be so I probably wouldn't want to spend too much on a video card. Whether an upgrade is cost-effective really depends on what you anticipate doing with it, since right now it sounds like what it most needs is a reinstall and some debugging of the BIOS/hardware issues. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 19:20 on May 19, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
I don't suggest swapping the motherboard, that's basically a new build. CPU is entirely different because right now you have a slow old dual-core and you're proposing doubling the RAM and improving the GPU attached to it. Depending on what you plan on doing with those there's a good chance that either you don't need them or you really would want a new CPU too because the current one would hold you back. Moreover, I know from experience that you can get a better CPU for less than $20 - you asked what's most cost effective which is why I brought that up. So what are you planning on doing with it that you think more RAM and a new GPU are in order but a new proc isn't? Also I would really figure out those boot issues before you spend a dime. OSes don't usually take hours to start up even if you've really hosed them up badly, so it sounds like something might be on its last legs.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
If you're adding five hard drives I would be really hesitant to buy a prebuilt desktop, because a lot of them won't have space for five drives total let alone on top of whatever they come with. The link you gave is to a list of like 1,250 desktops though - did you mean something else? The one at the top of the list looks alright but you could build it cheaper yourself. In general if you're going to get a system that's midrange or better you will probably save money to build it yourself, especially if you're adding a video card or getting something high end because manufacturers love to make up their margin on gamers. Low-end systems are usually cheaper prebuilt because the manufacturers get a lot of savings from buying parts in bulk and they know consumers in that segment are very price sensitive. If you have to buy one prebuilt then I would say make sure you get an Intel quad-core and a good enough power supply to run all the extra stuff you plan to pile in, but I can't really recommend doing that from a price perspective unless you want a $300 shitbox. Edit: Here are the Sims 4 system requirements: http://help.ea.com/en/article/the-sims-4-system-requirements/ You might be OK to run it on that system as is but based on my experience with Sims 3, if you get a better processor you won't regret it. Recommended specs list a quad-core, too. You'd probably be fine if you got an SSD and moved up to 8GB of memory like you said, then added a 750Ti (or another GPU that isn't more than like $150 or so) and a compatible quad core. You could also buy everything but the processor and if it's not good enough with the dual-core then at that point you could decide to upgrade or to build new, reusing the SSD and 750Ti you just bought. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 19:55 on May 19, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:I meant in general a ~$300 prebuilt system. If those are too lovely or won't work for what I need them to work for then I won't bother. OK, I get it now. You can do (1) but before you try any upgrades I'd make sure that all the issues you have are sorted out by a reinstall and you don't have failing hardware that would compromise the project, especially the MB. I don't think that you can get all 4 components (GPU, proc, memory, and SSD) for $150 but you could maybe drop one of them and make it work. GPUs below something like a 750Ti or R7 265 are probably not worth bothering with compared to what you have, so you'd need to drop like $100 just on that. (2) is going to cost at least probably $300-350 to get a desktop that is worth upgrading (you want at least an i3 to get HT and turbo, ideally an i5 so you have a quad-core) and that's before you put a GPU and presumably an SSD in it. Don't pay extra to get a GPU and an SSD added to a prebuilt machine in this price range because you'll almost definitely be getting screwed on the price - put them in yourself. Total cost will probably approach or exceed $500 but it will definitely be a good deal better than what you have, especially if you can get an i5. You can skip the SSD if you want to save the money (although they are really nice) but don't skip the GPU because integrated isn't any better than what you have. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 20:29 on May 19, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
AMD makes processors still but they went heavy into multithreading with their last couple generations - their current processors are effectively 8-core for integer math, which is most of what games do. Unfortunately games usually can't load more than 4 threads very much so they don't benefit, and Intel has made their cores so much faster that even on games that do Intel is thoroughly ahead. I'm not aware of any applications where AMD does have a significant edge in CPU performance, so the only real place where there's a good case to buy AMD is "I want to play games but don't have enough budget to buy any discrete graphics whatsoever" and that's a pretty small slice. Especially when you consider that as soon as you do get enough budget to add a discrete GPU to that system, you would have been better off buying an Intel system in the first place. They are due to come out with a new series with a whole new architecture ("Zen") this year (maybe early next year? not sure), and many are hoping they will be able to return to the glory days of Athlon 64 and trading blows with Intel. Unfortunately they have a large gap to make up and a much smaller R&D budget, so it will be difficult to do that. They have been struggling to keep up since Core 2 launched in 2006, and not really competitive since Sandy Bridge in 2011 or maybe even the first i7s (Nehalem/Bloomfield) in late 2008. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:02 on May 19, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
^^ Yeah, that. The Samsung 840 is an old model that's out of production and overpriced as a result - 850 Evo is better in every way. With that kind of budget you can stretch for a new i5 which will be a quad-core and enough to actually keep up for a few years. That CM power supply you had is more expensive than it needs to be for what it is. Case is strongly subjective, but the Define R5 is really good. 16GB of memory is not really necessary but it's not that expensive either, so your call. If you wanted to go a bit higher, the next step would be to get a Z170 motherboard, overclockable 6600K processor, and heatsink for it - this would be an extra $100 or less and would likely have the processor running at least 25-30% faster. If you wanted to go a bit lower, you'd either lose the SSD or get an i3 instead. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:19 on May 19, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:Is that one faster because of the i5 processor, I take it? That i5 will run rings around an $80 AMD quad-core, and even around the best processor AMD sells in most if not all things.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Yeah, even the lowest end first generation i7 (920) is going to be better overall than the best processor that your old AMD system supports and if it's more recent, it may well be as good as anything you could build for $500.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
The original 212 was fine for overclocking the i7 920 back in 2009 and that was a 130W processor. The physics of heat transfer don't change so the updated model will surely be fine for the 2500K, which is a 95W chip at stock. I have a 212+ on my 2500K and it stays pretty frosty at 4.4GHz.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
The 6700K is probably going to have a small lead in single-threaded performance depending on the clocks you're running at, and a lot of the Z170 motherboards have some brand new features like slots for PCIe M.2 SSDs or Thunderbolt 3 or whatever that are less common in X99. The power consumption is not realistically going to be that different except maybe under load though.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
Injuryprone posted:Here's my 4 year old super budget PC specs I took from an old Techreport build guide. It's in need of an upgrade if I want to play Overwatch without having to turn my GPU fan speed up to 100% every time I play. I use Windows 7 now, but would use the free upgrade to 10 once I have all the new parts. My monitor is probably from 2007 so I would need to upgrade that too I guess. My budget is $400 not including a new monitor. I would not recommend buying a full new system given your budget and what you have already. Buy an i5 or i7 from Sandy or Ivy Bridge (2500, 2600, 3550, 3570, 3770) used as an upgrade and something like a 970 or 290X and you'll get a better system than the Techreport suggested one. You might be able to get away with the graphics card upgrade alone, I don't know how CPU intensive Overwatch is. That would allow you to save some money for full replacement in a couple years, but unless you have a lot of money to blow the platform you're on is still pretty good value. If you do go for a new CPU, you will probably want an aftermarket cooler of some sort - the Cryorig H7 and Cooler Master Hyper 212 series are popular recommendations. You can't overclock with that motherboard so don't pay extra for a K chip, but the quads do dissipate more heat so you don't want to limit them with an i3 cooler. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 04:00 on May 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
Injuryprone posted:Is Windows 10 a huge performance boost? Boot times are faster and it performs a lot better in HD space- and RAM-limited systems compared to 7 but I don't think there's any noticeable difference in game performance in general.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
ItBurns posted:Has there been any compelling reason revealed to wait for Kaby Lake (outside of waiting forever for the next-next-next-gen)? I recently discovered that my 4770k is mysteriously missing Vt-d which I needed for a project so I was thinking of a side-grade to a 6700k until I remembered that Intel was going to have something later this year. I will probably wait until black friday anyways because It's neither a redesign nor a shrink so I don't think anyone is expecting notable CPU performance increases. From what I've read the main benefits known at this time are native USB 3.1, improved video decoding and improved IGP performance.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2016 21:16
|
|
but the feature list for Kaby Lake honestly looks a little thin from a performance standpoint.
|
StoneyAssassin posted:I'm fine with spending $300+ or so. I'm interested if the 1070 would leave too much performance on the table to be a worthwhile upgrade but I like what you say about a firesale. Are you overclocking? You didn't mention and the 2500K usually has a lot of potential.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Lavender Philtrum posted:You really sold me on the monitor, I ordered it today. My question though is what does overclocking a monitor actually mean? Does the image quality suffer for the higher Hz? It's somewhat similar in concept to overclocking a processor. Performance levels are set at a point that all units of a given model will be able to reach so that the model has consistent and flawless operation for all end users, but due to manufacturing variances not all units actually have the same potential and there are higher settings than stock that will work on some and not others. If you're lucky you might be able to turn it up higher and have things work perfectly, and if not you still have the guarantee that stock settings work. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Jun 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
That's odd since the etching in one of the pictures mentions microATX. You might be OK with just the one hole anyway if it's the one at the bottom, you shouldn't be putting a huge amount of pressure on that part of the board since all of the parts that take force to install tend to be up top.
Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Jun 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Use needlenose pliers to grab and unscrew the standoffs and then screw them back into the correct holes with your fingers.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
Yes, it is splittable for that exact reason. Only one side of the 8 pin connector should be the right shape to fit.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
ufarn posted:Is it even worth exploring some overclocking of an i5-760, or is it not worth the hassle? I want my computer to remain (fairly) silent, it's just that it's by far the biggest bottlneck in my five-year-old computer at this point. It doesn't have the optimization improvements that come with newer systems but it's still a quad core that may have the potential to reach a fairly high clock speed, so if you have good cooling and a motherboard that allows it then it's not a bad idea to try. Here's a guide on the very similar 750: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-750-overclock,2438.html They were able to get up to the 3.6GHz stock speed of the i7-870 without any voltage increases, which is a ~30% improvement over stock (if we ignore the effect of Turbo Boost) so well worth a bit of effort. As long as your cooling is sufficient then you don't face any risk of damage from this. If you go too high and it's not getting through POST, your motherboard may (probably will) have a feature that automatically uses last known good settings but if that's not the case and you can't get it to boot then a CMOS reset will get you back on course. More likely, you won't notice any stability issues with a too-high OC until you get into Windows and it will work well enough for you to go back into BIOS and set things right. Going farther requires caution, but with voltage increases they got it to 4.2 stable. You probably don't want to stay at the highest speed that you can get stable by tweaking voltage though - as they say in the article, power use gets out of control at really high voltages and you will burn the chip out over the long term. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Jun 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:If I buy a 60 Hz monitor, does that mean my FPS are capped at 60? Does it matter, since it's not visible to the human eye and VSync prevents tearing? I don't have a >60Hz screen but from what I understand it is visible to the human eye, or at least some humans' eyes. You just might not realize until you use something better and then try to go back.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
The i7-920 tends to have good OC potential so try that if you haven't and you feel like it. You have to do BCLK overclocking which takes a bit more work than K chips, but I remember being able to get mine to 3.6GHz with a Hyper 212 on it and not having to do anything scary or intricate. Might have worked at stock voltage even, I know I was able to undervolt it quite a lot at stock speeds so there was definitely some headroom.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 03:02 |
|
|
Agreed, although if you're spending that much my recommendation would go the other direction - get a 6600K and a good HSF so you can overclock it if you want to build a really topnotch system.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 21:02
|
|