• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

New Build - Deciding

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

SubGunner256

New Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
I am starting on a new build this year and gonna start saving for the next couple months for this bad *** desktop.
So basically I want to spend no more than $1,500 on the actual PC and then use the rest for Tax/Shipping and other things like perepherals.
I am building this new computer for mainly Youtube video recording because currently on this crappy laptop I barely get good FPS on games off recording...
So ya this computer will mainly be for some heavy games that take up alot of space and for video rendering (thats why my Hard Drive So big :p)

Build Specs:

-MOBO: Asrock Z77 Extreme6
-CPU: Intel Quad core i7 3770k overclocking to 4.2GHz
-GPU: EVGA GTX GeForce 670 FTW Edition 2GB 256 bit
-RAM: Corsair Vengance 16 GB (2x8GB) DDR3 1600 1.5V
-Power Supply: Corsair CX750M 750W ATX 12V Modular 80 plus bronze
-Case: CM HAF 922
-OS: Windows 7 home premium
-CPU Cooler: CM Hyper 212 plus
-Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 7200 RPM SATA 6GBps 64MB cache

And I'm still deciding on my moniter so if you could put a link to a good moniter that would go with the good quailty (IDC about the price) also any suggestions for the rest of the build! Thanks
 
Looks great to me, no SSD is my style.

Good choices overall. What monitor flavor are you looking for? 1440p? 1080p?

Personally I like WD drives over Seagates, I find WD drives to get better reviews/testimonials, but eh never had a personal issue with a Seagate drive (and I have two in my laptop)
 
I'd personally go with a 7970 instead of the 670. Better gaming performance for about the same price.
The build looks good though.
 
I just like the seagate because its cheaper... 3 TB and 6 GB/s soooo ya.
And I'm looking for a 23" moniter and IDK the resoloution.... What would you recomend...?
 
No because an average ssd is 4GB/s mine is 6GB/s and three terabytes

IDK where to start with this statement
just because the sata connection is 6gb/s doesn't mean that is the speed you will get from the hdd. you will get around 100ish mb/s like you do with all HDDs. the 6gbs is the max speed that it could operate @ not what it does .

A SSD is much faster for basically every thing vs 7200rpm hdd .
 
IDK where to start with this statement
just because the sata connection is 6gb/s doesn't mean that is the speed you will get from the hdd. you will get around 100ish mb/s like you do with all HDDs. the 6gbs is the max speed that it could operate @ not what it does .

A SSD is much faster for basically every thing vs 7200rpm hdd .

Believe what you want... and I'll do the same... I just need help on monitors.... I need a good gaming monitor and not sure if to go 1440p or 1080p... and what I'm "looking for" in a monitor for one that has fast responce time... trying to keep it under $200
 
No because an average ssd is 4GB/s mine is 6GB/s and three terabytes
Ooof... no. Doesnt work that way, period. Also, no such thing as '4gb' SSDs. Its SATA so its SATA2(3GB/s) or SATA3 (6GB/s). Its not about what you believe, its about the facts. Just because the pipe gets bigger, doesnt mean the data goes faster. Its only as fast as the item is and a mechanical drive cannot come close to saturating a 3GB/s port or a 6GB/s. Now, modern SSD's get choked to about HALF their performance on SATA2 as opposed to SATA3. With respect, you are just plain wrong in that statement.

Believe what you want... and I'll do the same... I just need help on monitors.... I need a good gaming monitor and not sure if to go 1440p or 1080p... and what I'm "looking for" in a monitor for one that has fast responce time... trying to keep it under $200
Well, you wont find a 1440p monitor at that price. The cheapest decent ones are around $400 (Korean IPS panels, HUGE thread about it at the forums).

So 1080p is where you are at with $200 :thup:. If you manage to get a 1440p monitor, you really would want an AMD card (7970) as it has more vRAM and bus width which is helpful at that resolution. Honestly, I would get a 7950 over the 670 for the same reason... its also cheaper than the 670 with the same performance.
 
Last edited:
Just to add my two shackles (no, not sheckles):

Bus width only matters if the device can cap out the bus. Mechanical hard drives cannot even cap out SATA1 (1.5Gbps, ~130MB/s) for the most part, let alone SATA2 (3Gbps, ~270MB/s). Forget SATA3 (6Gbps (~550MB/s)! They typically cap out around 110MB/s for a good drive. There are a few (Raptors) that justify SATA2. The HDD manufacturers only use the SATA3 chips because they're what is being mass produced, and a few people have incorrect beliefs about HDD performance.
Now if you were talking SSDs, top SSDs cap out SATA3, they have for a while too. Even a SATA2 SSD (capped at 270MB/s at best) is over twice the peak bandwidth of a mechanical drive, and absolutely stomps it into the ground when it comes to small file size stuff.

"Belief" is absolutely the incorrect thing to base a scientific decision on. We're not talking beliefs here, we're talking hard, tested, proven, fact.
 
what am I looking for in a monitor though??? I want it 1080 but is there other parts of the monitor i should specifically look for? like how many pixels/s or something like that?
 
1080p is pixel count... Possibly you would want to look for response time, refresh rate, overall look (fat vs thin borders or something like that), monitor size, led vs lcd, and maybe contrast ratio.
 
I want an Asus 1080p 23" LED monitor but I am asking because I want to know what a high/medium refresh rate and response time is... kinda want a high end monitor for gaming and such.
 
Back