New build in the making, opinions welcome!

Hello there overclockers! It has been awhile since I've last popped my head in for a hello.

EDIT: Decided to go with just a Monitor+video card.
monitor 2x*or 3x if sli*:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009483
Video card:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130782
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121724

Still unsure if I can afford to dump $1000 on a video card...may go with SLI 670's for less >.>

Looks great to me, especially your case choice, so much better than the new Phantoms.

Why are you on the fence with the i5 3570k? It's a solid processor lol. If you wait untill the 7xx series come out, the 6xx's will be cheaper. The 7xxs are to be an incremental upgrade anyways.

If you're using Nvidia I'd go for the Asus 144hz monitor and enable the lightboost hack for no motion blur 120hz gaming (2d). You'd need a second 670 for that though...
As for cpu, 3570k is more than enough and will save you monies.
Your psu can probably handle a 670 sli setup too.

If you're not set on Nvidia getting a 7950 might be better, and you can also run bitcoin
with it, and get some money on your spare time or dedicate it to world community grid or folding at home.

Reasons to get Nvidia:
-Cuda enhanced applications
-You REALLY like physx and run games that use it extensively
-You want no motion blur gaming in sli with a lightboost enabled monitor.

Same can be said for the 3770k, it's a great chip if you're into folding or if you decide to run benchmarks, or do more multithreaded work (like encoding, rendering and such).

I'm on the fence for the ivy because I currently have a 2500k sandy bridge, which is actually minutely faster overall, as well as a lower heat output while overclocked. I love my 2500k, and would buy another*it has been overclocked at 4.5 ghz on a mere 1.295 volts, hardly ever peaking over 75C.

my current pc that will be replaced is in my sig.

As for the monitor, I don't see a need to get a high refresh rate monitor, I am completely content with 60 fps in games. Heak, I'm content with 43*average my 460 gets nowadays, on med-high settings...on 1680x1050T.T*

The 670 is my card of choice, and will not be purchased until the 700 series to save me ~ 50-100 off my final build cost. I want to steer clear of AMD when I go intel for processors, just a personal preference*I keep intel with nvidia, and AMD with AMD...*

I was considering going AMD with their vishera processor, but discovered that AM3+*to my knowledge* does not support pci-e 3.0, and while I fully understand that isn't really an issue, I'd like to have it, as a "for the hell of it" thing.

besides, the AMD build I made cost literally $10 cheaper than the build listed above, and while the 8 cores are nice, they won't ever really be utilized to their potential for what I plan to do on my PC.

The 670 is my card of choice, and will not be purchased until the 700 series to save me ~ 50-100 off my final build cost. I want to steer clear of AMD when I go intel for processors, just a personal preference*I keep intel with nvidia, and AMD with AMD...*

I was considering going AMD with their vishera processor, but discovered that AM3+*to my knowledge* does not support pci-e 3.0, and while I fully understand that isn't really an issue, I'd like to have it, as a "for the hell of it" thing.

besides, the AMD build I made cost literally $10 cheaper than the build listed above, and while the 8 cores are nice, they won't ever really be utilized to their potential for what I plan to do on my PC.

Click to expand...

It's utterly ironic and hilarious that AMD tests their graphics cards on Intel =P

I don't blame you about the Sandy/Ivy thing, they're incredibly close performance.

The 670 is the perfect choice imo as well, only 5% "worse" than the GTX 680, while the 680 is like $100 more. I too can't wait untill the new 7xx's come out so the 6xxs will go down ... XD

But alas, why would you replace you're whole PC? That looks pretty good to me honestly. You could add a much better GFX card (like a Titan, 780 or 670...) and be done with it.

Yeah, replacing your computer seems to be rather pointless...nothing you're replacing is a meaningful upgrade except the GPU. Just throw in a new GPU and be done with it.

Also...

I want to steer clear of AMD when I go intel for processors, just a personal preference*I keep intel with nvidia, and AMD with AMD...*

Click to expand...

...to put it bluntly, is rather stupid. And if you want to try the "friends are compatible" argument, you'd be completely wrong, because AMD tried to buy NVIDIA and only bought ATI when the deal fell through, and Intel and NVIDIA don't like each other anymore than AMD and NVIDIA do.

Partly due to damage to my mobo, partly due to wear and tear on the other components.

I think I might hold on to my ram*still unsure if they escaped the damage to my mobo, as I get a C0000005 error every now and again.

When I was installing my PSU in my phantom, I shocked my mobo accidently, causing one of my ram sockets to fail. I am unsure if the ram escaped unscathed, due to that c0000005 error, but i have it in a different slot, allowing me to utilize all 8 gigs.

And no, I was *very stupidly* not wearing an anti-static wristband. I did have my left hand on what i thought was grounded old steel case, but it was not enough.

my 460 also had some issue with vram, the memory heatsinks were not seated properly or something, causing some graphical artifacts something fierce @ 75C on the temp gauge, and based on what I read of the 400 series, they top out at 95C or something on average, effectively forcing me to downclock the card to keep it under 75C to avoid the unplayable artifacting.

So to "be safe" I'm replacing all of the components.

I may contact Kingwin to try to take up on my warranty for that instead of buying a new psu though, That thing is only showing 8.31 volts on the 12v rail*software* in bios and an actual voltage testing device, it shows 12.446, and 12.337 respectively.

I just want to "start over" to try and evade any further quirks.

Knufire said:

And if you want to try the "friends are compatible" argument, you'd be completely wrong, because AMD tried to buy NVIDIA and only bought ATI when the deal fell through, and Intel and NVIDIA don't like each other anymore than AMD and NVIDIA do.

Click to expand...

I remember the time when AMD bought ATI and for many years, their 64-bit drivers were poor so you could buy an AMD CPU and an AMD GPU that don't work together as nicely as you might expect. At the same time, Nvidia took that chance to fix the big bugs in their drivers and beat AMD to getting good 64-bit drivers ready.

Now, things are not so heavily biased towards Nvidia, but I still go with them for the VDPAU and CUDA support.

I have decided.

I will NOT buy a new pc.*may change if Haswell turns out to be friggen sweet*

I will probably go for a GTX 670 4GB or a Titan to replace my GPU, Will buy listed monitor above, and hope for the best.

If I still get that god forsaken C000005 error,*Which I probably will...* I will attempt to first replace my ram, then the mobo if it is still not fixed. I want that error quirk gone!

I just prefer Nvidia over AMD just because of the extra features that i actually DO use.

CUDA - Gimp/Photoshop.

PhysX - Planetside 2, Metro: Last light



Thanks guys.

Using PhysX and CUDA would be a much more legitimate reason to use NVIDIA.

If you are going triple monitor and gaming, get AMD cards (7970). The Nvidia cards can get choked up at that res with gobs of AA, even the 4GB models, as they are still on a 256bit bus whereas the AMD cards are 384bit and 3GB and a shed load cheaper than any 680 4GB offering from Nvidia, and maybe even the 670.

That said, since you use its features, and you a buying a 'mere' 1080p monitor, get a 670 2GB and call it a day. Anything more than that for 1080p is a waste of money, IMO.