Recommendations to budget

[Dlaw]

I notice you mention the need for wireless? There is an AC version of the EXT6, would save you an additional card, and provides both Wireless and Bluetooth.

Windows won't be any harder to set up than assembling the PC itself. It's actually quite painless.

 

[afpTeam]

Final quick question, if I may please...

For a typical builder accustomed to current device designs and current mechanical approaches, having all components on hand still in the boxes, how long should it take to put all this to runnable condition in a typical tower configuration? Given all leading edge devices that might take a little examination on install, is four hours build reasonable and perhaps again as much to get OS and basic driver installs working, (barring any DOA or bunged up issues, plug-n-pray hitting the majority on queue)? The only change I've made is basically adding a DVD drive and 1Tbyte HD, wireless mouse and keyboard.

In other words is 8 hours a reasonable guess from install to basic running condition? Without anything bizarre or special purpose device mounts, this has been my experience in the past on typical machines. I expect some rework on cable runs and harness configs, possibly some reference lookups for best practice mounting / grounding, etc.

Thanks again.

 

[Dlaw]

You should be able to get it together in much less than 8 hours. My build process goes like this:

Remove the motherboard and accessories from their packaging, and place the bare board on the box it came in. Install the CPU (with stock cooler, at first), and RAM. Plug in the OS drive, then run the required power cords from the PSU to the board (CPU power, ATX [24 pin] and SATA are all you should need at this point). Plug in a keyboard and mouse, run a single monitor from the onboard video, and optionally install a PC speaker (typically comes with the case). Plug the PSU into the wall, flip the switch and either press the power button on the board (if it has one), or use a flat head screw driver to jump across the PWR_SWC (or whatever it's labeled as) header pins to fire it up for the first time. If all goes well, in a few moments, you should be looking at UEFI options.

Set your date and time, and look for the options to set your memory to it's XMP profile (typically in the CPU/OC section, under RAM frequency). Reboot, and either hook up your DVD drive if that's the way you intend to install Windows, or plug in your USB stick, and install Windows. This way, if there's a problem (which would normally surface under a load), Windows won't install correctly, and you can troubleshoot much easier and RMA the defective part without having to tear the whole system apart.

After Windows is installed (I don't generally bother with drivers until after the build is finished), unplug and disassemble the system and install everything into the case. If your using an aftermarket cooler, it's easiest in most cases to install it first, before installing the board into the case. After the board is screwed down, install the GPU(s), and run your power cables as best as you can to keep them out of the path of airflow. Install your drives (make sure the OS drive ends up on the same SATA port) and double check all of your connections. After everything is installed (don't forget your front panel headers), plug in your peripherals and power, and fire it up. You should now be looking at a vanilla (untouched) install of Windows. Install your drivers and apps, and go to town!

Even for a first timer, using that process, you should be up and running in closer to 4 hours.

 

[afpTeam]

You should be able to get it together in much less than 8 hours. My build process goes like this: [...]

[...] Even for a first timer, using that process, you should be up and running in closer to 4 hours.

Holy smokes, (humble bows, deepest thanks), what a guide! I know some big name computer companies that would do well to spend some time here on the forums.

I would edit this thread as solved, but for the fact I want to come back in a couple weeks and detail how it goes.

Many more thanks Dlaw until then and to all those here helping the rest of us get back out in front of the pack.

 

[Tech Tweaker]

Final quick question, if I may please...

For a typical builder accustomed to current device designs and current mechanical approaches, having all components on hand still in the boxes, how long should it take to put all this to runnable condition in a typical tower configuration? Given all leading edge devices that might take a little examination on install, is four hours build reasonable and perhaps again as much to get OS and basic driver installs working, (barring any DOA or bunged up issues, plug-n-pray hitting the majority on queue)? The only change I've made is basically adding a DVD drive and 1Tbyte HD, wireless mouse and keyboard.

In other words is 8 hours a reasonable guess from install to basic running condition? Without anything bizarre or special purpose device mounts, this has been my experience in the past on typical machines. I expect some rework on cable runs and harness configs, possibly some reference lookups for best practice mounting / grounding, etc.

Thanks again.

Personally I expect a build to take anywhere from three to eight hours. Depending upon how many files need to be backed up, how many programs need to be reinstalled, how much attention is given to wire management, etc. Though, if there are a lot of files or programs to be reinstalled I might still be reinstalling several days later (if it's for my own PC), as I'll install things as I remember them.

If no special programs are needed to be installed and there aren't any files to be backed up and transferred to the new PC, I can usually have the PC up and running within two to three hours probably.

 

[Dlaw]

Personally I expect a build to take anywhere from three to eight hours. Depending upon how many files need to be backed up, how many programs need to be reinstalled, how much attention is given to wire management, etc. Though, if there are a lot of files or programs to be reinstalled I might still be reinstalling several days later (if it's for my own PC), as I'll install things as I remember them.

If no special programs are needed to be installed and there aren't any files to be backed up and transferred to the new PC, I can usually have the PC up and running within two to three hours probably.

I generally don't include backup and prep time in the build time, as ideally those two steps are taken well in advance. Program installation can usually be done in parallel, so it should really only take as long as the biggest program takes to install, plus time for the occupied overhead usually left idle during an install process. This is more true with a multi-threaded CPU such as the 4790K.

 

[afpTeam]

Hi,

Checking in to just update that I'm still looking at the Haswell w/Devil's Canyon vs Skylake w/Z-170 mobo.

Given the core-bound application we're dealing with, the overall sense is higher ultimate clock cycles in multiple cores will still be our best bet, if we run redundant copies of the application on multiple cores, (which appears to limit clock distribution some, compared to slamming a single core top end).

We benefit some in that the core-bound process we're fighting with, (which is only partly core-bound it seems), does not have any graphics overhead during it's processing run, which is mostly just high frequency Quantitative math demands. This seems favorable in terms of overall wattage demands in the on-board graphics aspect.

I've looked at two comparisons CPU-Monkey and Puget, either of which didn't really seem to identify a well resolved comparison, however the Skylake comparison seemed to indicate a harder time with Win10 driver issues inviting testing to fall back to Win 8.1 which negates the instruction set benefits Win 10 may provide.

The one notable benefit with Skylake was DDR 4's faster rate and lower temp profile, but I'm not sure that ends up translating to greater overall compute cycles on Skylake versus Haswell.

Other comparisons I looked at for any affordable versions of X or eXtreme series processors with Intel, don't seem to hold their own next to the 4790K which pretty much says for unlocked clocking purposes the 4790K still leads the pack overall as the right choice.

There was one valid question we seem not to be able to confirm...

The Asus version of the Z97 appears to have a number of preset profiles for clocking which leave the user only having to dial in three specific ratio variables.

Does the ASRock Z97 have similar auto-clocking provisions?

There seems to be a lot of user popularity for the Asus mobo, perhaps only a name brand preference when it's boiled down but possibly stems from Asus support provisions I've had pretty good luck with in the past personally.

This I would say is our last review before we commit to build. There is some thought that purchasing a pre-built rig might give a quicker turn around and benefit from a vendor having parts inventory to know the assembled machine was tested after build, whereas if we do the build ourselves and have any parts related issues, overclocking might stand to void warranties and invite delay in getting to a final running product. My build cost is down to about $200.00 at this point if I don't factor in all the ordering, shipping and prep time so without a fairly competitive custom vendor in sight, (haven't found one yet), the cost still favors doing the build here despite a possible longer overall time to completion.

Thanks if you have any comment further.

Mike

 

[Dlaw]

You don't want to use the auto-overclocking features of any motherboard if you want a high, stable overclock. You're much better off doing it yourself, particularly if you want to do actual work on the system being overclocked. Intel CPUs are simple to clock anyway, so there's no real reason to have a program do it.

The Asrock boards are generally less expensive than the other boards in the same class while still keeping high end features and excellent quality. Unless a more expensive board has a feature that you need or want that isn't included in that one, you pretty much have picked the best option for your build.

I wouldn't go prebuilt for a rig in this caliber, as you will be paying much more for the same or less performance. Plus you won't get the satisfaction of knowing you built it yourself.

 

[afpTeam]

You don't want to use the auto-overclocking features of any motherboard if you want a high, stable overclock [...]

Thanks Dlaw. I guess the build to spec here makes sense but for chance of errors / damage inviting me to want to purchase a running rig.

I assume the actual core-bound app is a defining process to actually find the clock configs with the highest compute result on the app itself but having the lowest voltage / heat value. My concern is that my lack of familiarity in how to safely reach that result without doing damage will take some further tutoring here once the machine is running.

Most likely the only time I'll need to run overclocked is during the core-bound app's operation on weekends as we normally do, so I assume Win 10 should let me profile this or worst case I need to visit the bios and select a "saved profile" when needing to run the core-bound fully boosted.

Do you know if there's benefit in lapping the cpu mounting interface to the heat sync before install?

I've done this before on AMD's we clocked in the past years ago and found the commercial grade CPU's had a considerable lack of flatness. The results were night and day with respect to creating an even paste layer at the interface. We basically used 600 grit black wet sand paper taped down to a flat glass surface and hand honed the surface on that plate. This was done however with standard heat sync with relatively poor seating pressure. Manufacturing today for these higher temp die designs likely produces a much better flatness out the door and the better spec heat sync likely has an engineered clamping force to accommodate same, if you have any experience in that area?

At this point funding is secured for the build and parts / orders will go out next week.

Thanks again,

Mike

 

[Dlaw]

As far as lapping goes, you can pretty much tell how flat your CPU's IHS is by the pattern the paste leaves from the stock heatsink-fan assembly when you swap it out for the aftermarket cooler, but I think most recent CPUs are fairly flat. I'm not sure that lapping a $350 CPU is a great idea if you intend to keep it on ambient cooling, but I'm not the expert here.

 

[afpTeam]

Ok, ready to make order and get under way, but...

Still a bit unclear on the GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 960 getting to multi-monitor mode.

The graphics demands are only vector graphics for the most part and the acceleration demand has no graphic requirement beyond typical VGA. It appears this card can handle a mix of HDMI between 2 to 4 monitors assuming the onboard standard output and HDI digital to analog mix configurations I'm seeing on Google.

Does this mean SLI support is required? The ASRock Z97 states it has "1 x ASRock SLI_Bridge_2S Card" in the packaging spec so I assume it should be compatible regardless if it's necessary in lower demand configuration I'm needing.

Ultimately I'd like to configure for 3 analog VGA capable monitors having HDMI support, if I'm not overlooking any assumptions on SLI and the Mobo supporting same?

Thanks,

Mike

 

[Dlaw]

If you click on the "Specifications" tab on the web page you linked, it says the card supports up to 4 monitors. You can convert the Display Ports to HDMI with one of these adapters, if that's what you need.

To answer your question directly, yes, your board supports SLI, but you don't need it, and it won't do what you want it to do anyway. When you use SLI, the primary GPU is in control of outputting video, and any slave GPUs are tasked exclusively with calculations. You would actually have to not use SLI to use the second GPU to output video.

 

[bob4933]

Does the 960 support hdmi analog? I know the newer radeon stuff does not. If It doesn't, he will effectively have one output via dvi-i, and will need hdmi adapters.

 

[Dlaw]

I couldn't tell you for sure, but if the monitors don't support a digital connection, it's unlikely any current video card will run them without adapters.

 

[afpTeam]

Video patch resolved

I couldn't tell you for sure, but if the monitors don't support a digital connection, it's unlikely any current video card will run them without adapters.

Ok, Thanks for the clarification. The three flat panels I have, all have DVI-D connectors (+ vga). The 960 appears to have one DVI-D output which leads me to believe I need at least two more converters to patch two of the video port standards over to DVI-D. Given the 960 support 3 video port outputs, I'll order three converters and apply them all same likely, leaving the standard DVI-D on the card available for 4th screen later.

Converter located is here

Fairly sure this covers it. I did look at a less expensive 960 model card also, but it didn't support clocking adjustments, so for the few dollars difference the current 960 suggested seems like the best bet, just in case there's ever need to tune the clocking on the video card.

 

[bob4933]

Theres a difference between adapters and converters. DVI-D will let you use an adapter from hdmi. DVI-I/A will not.

Make darn sure they are DVI-D is all. The actual converters are pretty expensive (30-50$).

 

[afpTeam]

Theres a difference between adapters and converters. DVI-D will let you use an adapter from hdmi. DVI-I/A will not.

Make darn sure they are DVI-D is all. The actual converters are pretty expensive (30-50$).

Right, thank you. I grabbed a bad term when I wrote "converter". When you look at the link I noted, it's called a "Passive Adapter Converter cable", which should actually just say "Passive Adapter" I think. The point is that the GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 960 GV-N960G1 has 1 DVI-D output and what appear to be 3 x DisplayPort

Given the three monitors all support DVI-D input, I'm thinking the digital format of the three 960 "DisplayPort" ports should let me use the passive adapters to simply jack straight into the monitors.

I'm really not sure how to make a better confirmation of this as to how HDMI plays into it or if there would be a need to "convert" versus "adapt"

Any suggestions how else to determine it would help, if I knew where else to do the homework unless someone might reply from greater experience. The user manual that comes with the 960 really gave no greater confirmation than the image and specs offered on Newegg.

Thanks,

Mike

 

[afpTeam]

On further effort a friend suggested the following approach...

use DVI-D to DVI-D cables on both DVI ports as the DVI-I port should work universally, then use HDMI to DVI-D for the third monitor, hoping to avoid the chances of conflict on the "DisplayPort" configs and chances of needing converters to do so.

Seems the most logical approach to try first, which completes the last of the questions for now, letting me move forward to the order and build.

Thank you again to everyone at OC helping with so many great suggestions.

Mike

 

[afpTeam]

SUCCESS on build / startup

This posting is from the new Haswell build, up and running!!

Couple of questions near the bottom, following a brief review of process...

The build took about 2 hours owing to mechanical confirmations, couple of mobo mounting spacers added, and just making sure the cpu / heat sink all fitted up secure, followed by sequential device install / startups to get the OS installed and then letting the OS identify peripherals as they were added, in case there were any complications. Gladly, none were found and the startup went as expected. The heat sink fan came with an alternate set of install brackets to reverse which side of the sink the fan mounts to. The alternate was selected to make sure air flow was pulling fresh air across the RAM chips and setting forced output to exit the back of the PC, matching the power supply air flow direction etc.

The tech that assisted in the build has decades of digital engineering experience and being an Asus fan took note of several features the ASRock mobo came with out of the box, remarking a full featured product for the price. Asus may lose a customer on that point. (grin).

I bumped the SSD up to the pro version just as a measure of better reviews but aside from this change in the spec, the only complication with Newegg was an ultra high temp thermal compound that ended up having to ship from Asia, so we installed using the compound that came with the CPU heat sink.

The Win10 install from thumb drive went flawless and took a whopping 20 minutes at most using a keyed install with the OS key provided. Updates backgrounded from auto sensed cable network hard wired Ethernet over the next 30 minutes or so. A couple of restarts were needed to get drivers fully integrated, but no manual driver installs were required.

The 960 Nvidia graphics card did in fact permit 3 monitors to go active straight away on two DVI-D and DVI-I connectors + the HDMI to DVI cable, no converters or passives were required but simple patch cables. All monitors report HD graphics and the 960 showed full 3D capability are present on all. When I first added the third monitor on the HDMI port I found a warning appeared a few minutes later indicating I was running low on RAM (16 Gig). I didn't chase it down but restarted just to be sure the OS could re-acquire any changes for the HDMI. The warning has not returned since.

Win10 is still pretty foreign to me so there's the usual discovery and hunting process to learn the how-to's and get fluid with doing things, but CPU-Z and CPUID HWMonitor both installed and came up with nothing that raised any immediate concerns, other than I'm not sure what would be expected on nominal values if they're reasonably nominal or not. Fan's are completely silent at this point and responses to benching reported 100% for the 4790K standard so it seems baseline didn't trip any issues. In fact the thing runs so damn cool it's almost as if it's not even plugged in. LOL The cheap project case came with only a 2 wire fan if there were any disappointments at all, but for some 27.00 bucks I can spring for a better fan once I know how well cooling sustains under load if it presents any issue later.

Questions:

1. Being a new build, is there a link here that suggests a detailed startup benching or other inventory documentation procedures for new startups? There is a lot of data here and I won't pretend to know what all the values SHOULD read at idle or especially under a known demand if there is a formatted testing process that can be referred? Obviously I don't want to just start jamming gears and tear up a new build, so for now I've just keyed in a few short stress test processes to cycle some heat up and down on the devices and let the heat compounds normalize over a little time since Friday night startup.

2. As baseline or any inventory is completed I should have installed the target application by later today, so the next question is how to proceed to working up the OC profile and if there's a guide for the OC process here, or do we do a hand-holding thing to make sure I don't blow out the new toy by stupidity?

I guess that's it for now short of continued and huge appreciation for all the help and that the startup came off without a hitch.

Materials cost came to about 1480.00 USD including the project tower case, the OS at 200.00, a touch sense Logitech wireless keyboard and dual battery Logitech wireless mouse, plus the SSD upgrade, 3 patch cables and a cheap portable DVD burner in case any media installs were needed. In all the cost is well contained to budget on the bang-for-buck factor. Newegg's delivery was roughly 48 hours, single shipment to Michigan with the special thermal compound being the only mis-fire on delivery out of Asia.

I might just run it through the car wash this afternoon, park it and shine the rims in public so all the other PC's can drool some. Cold starts take about 7-9 seconds and shut down is like 2 seconds flat. This thing absolutely flies Win 10 on typical browser and other desktop activities, mostly a sense of being nearly instantaneous by dual core Win 7 standards.

Mike

 

[afpTeam]

By the way, attached are the HWmonitor results saved after running in CPU-Z stress test for 10 minutes sustained...