Noob looking at doing a build

[trents]

Yes, I prefer USB 3 flash to optical as well because of the greater transfer speed, though I've owned some cheap, pretty slow USB 3 flash drives as well. And they don't get scratched like optical media does.

Optical is almost going the way of the floppy disk. Case manufacturers are commonly leaving out 5.25" external bays these days. On the few occasions when optical is needed I use an external USB DVD burner, though they are pretty slow at 8x. Some old systems in my customer base don't won't boot from USB so internal optical still comes in handy at times.

 

[Bill_Bright]

And they don't get scratched like optical media does.

No, but they can more easily get lost or misplaced, or even zapped by ESD pulling it out of a pocket. But not the point!

Optical is almost going the way of the floppy disk.

Also not the point! I say again, the OP has already stated he will be transferring music from CDs, and probably movies from DVDs and Blu-Rays. Therefore, he will be needing an optical drive anyway!

This thread is NOT about debating which installation media is better!

 

[EarthDog]

I understand that and that is why I have used thumb drives. But again, the OP has already expressed a desire to transfer his music from CDs to local disk. That means he will already need an optical drive.

FRT, I am not saying I have encountered OS installation problems installing from flash drives. What I am saying I have encountered many MANY times, USB port problems - even on new boards - where connected devices are not recognized or detected, and that's my complaint - not the flash drive, but USB in general. Ff the installation flash drive is properly recognized, it works great.

As far as install speeds, yeah, installing from DVD is almost always the slowest. But for me, that really does not matter. I am always doing something else during Windows installs anyway. That is, I click on "Next" then wonder off and work on something else. Then I come back and click "Next" again and wonder off again. I don't normally sit in front of the monitor waiting for the next user input prompt.

Another reason I like installing the OS from an optical disk is because I prefer the DVD installation media to flash drives. But that's me. Yeah, optical disks can break or get scratched, but generally they are easy to care for, thus are not subject to data corruption or unreadable disks like flash drives are.

Just because he is using one for something else, doesn't mean he should install windows from it . Everyone has their preferences and for you, that is optical media installation. Me, I prefer the conveneince, and most importantly, the speed USB installation provides.

I wasn't saying you were having issues from the drives. In fact, I mentioned the ports specifically. No issues here literally hundreds of installs this way. A user is just as likely to run across a bad media disc (I have run across a couple in my time as a reviewer over the years) as port that doesnt recognize your media, or bad media in general (ESD or damage on flash, scratched/broken optical - both can be misplaced). So there is that as well.

I don't wait for prompts either, but, time is money for me and if it can be installed faster, in most cases, people would prefer that.

Optical is absolutely going the way of the dodo... regardless if that a 'point' or not. It's time to move on.

This thread is NOT about debating which installation media is better!

Correct.. but I was simply responding to a post(s) talking about it. Though I didn't read he was installing windows to an external drive (not that you said that).

Anyway, cheers, you prefer the slow, outdated media, Bill, and that is OK.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Just because he is using one for something else, doesn't mean he should install windows from it.

Gee whiz. No where did I say any one "should" do anything?

 

[EarthDog]

Apologies if I misunderstood...?

I agree - except to install the OS. And for that, I prefer an optical drive

I thought you were saying because he already has one (optical) might as well install the OS from it...

 

[Bill_Bright]

I thought you were saying because he already has one (optical) might as well install the OS from it...

I was saying that is an option available for him.

 

[trents]

No, but they can more easily get lost or misplaced, or even zapped by ESD pulling it out of a pocket. But not the point!
Also not the point! I say again, the OP has already stated he will be transferring music from CDs, and probably movies from DVDs and Blu-Rays. Therefore, he will be needing an optical drive anyway!

This thread is NOT about debating which installation media is better!

True. But he may already have a suitable flash drive which he could use for installation and it would likely be faster.

OP raised the issue of install media himself back in post #32 so any help we can give him about that is not entirely off topic.

 

[Peebles24]

I have a optical drive i can hook up just dont have the windows os disc.

 

[EarthDog]

You can make at the MS website..same with putting it on a usb (the faster method).

 

[trents]

Yes, I already gave him the link for that.

 

[Peebles24]

Thank you

 

[Bill_Bright]

I have a optical drive i can hook up just dont have the windows os disc.

You can make at the MS website..same with putting it on a usb (the faster method).

Or you can buy the DVD and never have to worry about downloading [hopefully successfully] the installation file, formatting a stick, copying [hopefully successfully] the installation image to the stick, then installing from there. Nor do you need to worry about burning [hopefully successfully] an ISO image to a blank DVD. It even comes in a little, easy to identify package so you don't have to worry about labeling and the package even has the key code sticker you can keep with the disk, or attach to your computer - your choice.

But he may already have

Using little "what if" points to render a different position moot is just silly. Yes, he may have, but he may not. But it may be too small. What if it already has data on it? It may be USB 1.0.

What if he already has an optical drive? Oh wait! He already does. What if it is a reader only? Does not matter.

Yes, optical drives are going the way of the dodo. So what? He has a drive and will be using it anyway to transfer his tunes from CD to his computer.

OP raised the issue of install media himself back in post #32 so any help we can give him about that is not entirely off topic.

Yes, he raised the issue about his options. And they were provided to him and that is great. He did not ask "which option is better". And note I NEVER EVER said optical was better.

So I say again,

This thread is NOT about debating which installation media is better!

 

[EarthDog]

The OP already has plenty of information to make this decision prior to this post on his own. There is something to be said for just leaving things alone. Since this is not TPU (where this useless back and forth is allowed, I suggest following that mantra here.

 

[Peebles24]

System is coming together. A friend loaned me a evga gtx960 ssc till i get a gpu. I have assembled everything but the 3 front fans, hdd, and ssd. It looks really clean so far i think. The fans and drives should be here tomorrow.

- - - Auto-Merged Double Post - - -

I will add completed pics hopefully tomorrow

 

[EarthDog]

Looking good so far!

 

[Peebles24]

It is stable and cool, havent stress tested it, but under normal use it is between 20 and 30 celcius. Have it clocked at 4.6ghz and ram set at 3k. Need tk do some real testing but it is very stable right now, hasnt had a hiccup.
Have it hooked up to my 32" lg tv. Will get a nice monitor before long.

 

[Peebles24]

So i had pretty well decided on the msi rtx 2060 gaming z gpu, but i am seeing used amd vega 64 cards about 100 bucks cheaper. What do i do, i know very little about the different vega 64 cards. There is very little info out there for amd card comparing. Like the nvidia cards there are quite a few different vega 64. I do know the vega is power hungry but i have plenty of psu headroom for it.

Help please

 

[EarthDog]

Heat mitigation in the case, noise... etc. All part of that higher draw.

That said, it's a good choice in that price bracket...though I bet used 2060s can be found as well. There is rtx 2060 and v64 numbers in the 2060 review on the front page..

 

[Peebles24]

Heat mitigation in the case, noise... etc. All part of that higher draw.

That said, it's a good choice in that price bracket...though I bet used 2060s can be found as well. There is rtx 2060 and v64 numbers in the 2060 review on the front page..

But which is the better choice, if they were the same price. Performance wise which will be king. Which 64 is good or do they all perform about the same?

 

[trents]

But which is the better choice, if they were the same price. Performance wise which will be king. Which 64 is good or do they all perform about the same?

A question with not a clear cut answer perhaps. A better question is, "Which performs better for how I use it?" Different video cards will excel in various games and computation tasks but not in others when compared with each other. A good place to start would be to research the web and find head to head testing comparing the cards you are looking at across a broad range of use scenarios. Here is an example, though not using the rtx 2060: https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-RTX-2080-vs-AMD-RX-Vega-64/4026vs3933. Although I suspect the rtx 2060 is too new to have much data like that quite yet.