Rate my first build, please :)

Brian

I drew this up (with the help of /g/) on hardwareversand.de - how does it look?
Is there anything I need to know about ordering from them? Thanks

cronos

I take it you have a screen, keyboard and mouse.

jetski

most important is to consider the computer backbone is in sync

whats the cpu fsb

what the mobo max fsb

what frequency is your ram

after that you need too look at the quickest hard disk you can afford to feed that system and your video card too.

Brian

cronos wrote: »

I take it you have a screen, keyboard and mouse.

Yep. Not great ones mind, but I'm a poor student so I'll sort them out later.

z0oT

Solid enough build should do you fine for a good while depending on your usage (gaming, etc.). The only thing I would consider doing is to upgrade the motherboard to a better one, maybe one with a 790FX/GX. Something like:
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/973/1/

Many people IMO when putting systems together skimp on the motherboard and regret it later.

Brian

Thanks for the tip. I was thinking I might have to change the motherboard as AM2 mobos don't support AM3 without a BIOS update, and I wouldn't be able to do that without a processor :l

Brian

I've modified it ever so slightly.
Changed the AM2+ mobo for an AM3 one (as well as being the next model up), which means I've had to go for DDR3 RAM. The reason I went for the motherboard is because apparently you have to update the BIOS on AM2+ motherboards to get them to work with AM3 processors, and I don't have a spare AM2/+ processor lying around with which I could do that. Also, the 790 is one up from the 770, which is ... probably a good thing. It's middle of the road, rather than down the bottom of the scale. Not sure if having a DDR3 motherboard is exactly a great measure to take in terms of future-proofing, so if anyone has feedback on that it would be appreciated.

I also swapped the 4850 for the 4770. The 4770 is supposedly newer, cheaper, less power-consuming, and quieter. It uses a smaller nm scale than the 4850 and is GDDR5. In all the benchmarks I looked at it was usually only 1-5 FPS behind the 4850.



Links :

CPU - AMD Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition
Mobo - Gigabyte GA-MA790XT-UD4P
RAM - 4096MB-Kit OCZ DDR3 PC3-10666 Fatal1ty Edition CL9
Case - Coolermaster Centurion RC534 Black
PSU - Corsair VX550W 550 Watt
HDD - WD Cavier [sic] Black 640GB, WD6401AALS
GPU - Club3D HD4770 512MB DDR5
Optical Drive - Samsung SH-223Q

marco_polo

Looking pretty good, that motherboard supports up to PC3-12800 Memory if you wanted to push the boat out a bit more, the OCZ platinum edition is available for about the same price.

The other thing is there are big supply problems wjith the HD4770 for the foreseeable future, while it looks to be a very nice card indeed, it is unknown how long you could be waiting for it. Not even an estimate on the website.

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=18876

TerrorFirmer

I was of the other opinion; that the 4770 isn't a great card - its worth depends entirely on its pricing, and when it's more expensive then the 4850 it doesn't make sense. The 4850 is cheaper and faster with AA. I undesrtand what you're saying about the newer process but the 4850 there has a 3rd party cooler. I suppose it depends whats more important - better games performance or thermal...don't forget as well that it's easy to say 'its only 1-5fps'. If you look at reviews where the resolution is relatively high and AA turned up, the 4850 can be up to 25% faster in some games. Not to mention the stock problems with 4770.

For the few quid that's in it I'd probably take an X4 as well. I'd also probably take a case like this for a tenner extra...as well as a better case it also has more fans installed so it's worth it easily.

Brian

Ah, a victim of its own success... I didn't notice that. Well, I'm in no rush to buy, thankfully.

Actually, could someone recommend to me a monitor around the €200 mark? I was looking at the BenQ E2200HD - thinking of buying the monitor before the computer, since there are other computers in the house that I could use it with. How well a 4770 or 4850 would handle 1920x1080, I don't know... Looking at benchmarks, the defacto resolution appears to be x1200 rather than 1080, but it's difficult to find 16:10 monitors anymore.

Edit : TerrorFirmer - my original budget was 500, and I'm at close to 600 now, I think an X4 would be pushing it

TerrorFirmer

Oops - sorry I though it was 600!

Brian

Well it will be when you include the €30 delivery

marco_polo

Baza210 wrote: »

Ah, a victim of its own success... I didn't notice that. Well, I'm in no rush to buy, thankfully.

Actually, could someone recommend to me a monitor around the €200 mark? I was looking at the BenQ E2200HD - thinking of buying the monitor before the computer, since there are other computers in the house that I could use it with. How well a 4770 or 4850 would handle 1920x1080, I don't know... Looking at benchmarks, the defacto resolution appears to be x1200 rather than 1080, but it's difficult to find 16:10 monitors anymore.

Edit : TerrorFirmer - my original budget was 500, and I'm at close to 600 now, I think an X4 would be pushing it

I think the general consensus is that the likes of the HD 4850 would struggle to play games at the highest settings on monitors with HD resolutions (1080p) and above. You are getting into 1GB HD4870 territory there, Unless you are willing to sacrifice a bit of detail then probably (1050p) is the highest resolution you could go.

For 1050p I would reccomend something like the SyncMasterT220.

http://www4.hardwareversand.de/articledetail.jsp?aid=20704&agid=603

Or if you really want a Full HD monitor and have a budget of 200, what you could do is wait and get everything at once from HWVS, and go with something like this LG and spend the 40 Euro saved on a 1GB HD4870 (Coincidently pretty much exactly 40E more expensive than the HD4770 in your build)

marco_polo

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

I was of the other opinion; that the 4770 isn't a great card - its worth depends entirely on its pricing, and when it's more expensive then the 4850 it doesn't make sense. The 4850 is cheaper and faster with AA. I undesrtand what you're saying about the newer process but the 4850 there has a 3rd party cooler. I suppose it depends whats more important - better games performance or thermal...don't forget as well that it's easy to say 'its only 1-5fps'. If you look at reviews where the resolution is relatively high and AA turned up, the 4850 can be up to 25% faster in some games. Not to mention the stock problems with 4770.

For the few quid that's in it I'd probably take an X4 as well. I'd also probably take a case like this for a tenner extra...as well as a better case it also has more fans installed so it's worth it easily.

Hmm some good points there. I hadn't really looked at prices, I sort of presumed it would cost a little less than the 4850 not the other way around.:). My thinking was that if someone is leaning towards the 4770 then have already made the decision re: performance vs thermal. I didn't think of 3rd party coolers either.

Brian

The other thing drawing me to the 4770 is that it's quieter and uses less power, if I remember correctly...

However, as you say, by the time I actually get all my money together (at least a month), prices may well have changed enough for me to be considering something that is a step up in graphical power.

StopNotWorking

In another month I wouldn't be suprised if the 4770 didn't exist. God only knows what the story is with that card. Are they building up a surplus before they put it back on sale or are they not bothering with it anymore?

marco_polo

StopNotWorking wrote: »

In another month I wouldn't be suprised if the 4770 didn't exist. God only knows what the story is with that card. Are they building up a surplus before they put it back on sale or are they not bothering with it anymore?

Depends what they mean by this (from link in earlier post)

In addition, we are working with our AIB partners to deliver a compelling solution in the same price band that will ensure supply long term.

Does this imply the long term solution is Frankenstein ? If so it implies they have all but given up on the 4770.

Brian

Based on that review, I would be tending towards my original choice of a 4850 over the 4730, that's for sure! Maybe I could hope for a 1GB.

Edit : This one looks pretty good - http://www1.hardwareversand.de/articledetail.jsp?adp=0&aid=25959&agid=1004&apop=1

marco_polo

Here is the verdict regarding the HD4850 ( 512Mb and a 1GB models) and struggling to play Crysis Warhead at 1280 X 1080 resolution. I must be going blind but can't see a link to the actual benchmark page

http://www.custompc.co.uk/labs/247595/ati-radeon-1gb-hd-4850.html

This also implies a limit at around the 1680 X 1050 mark for the HD4850

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/palit_hd4850/7.htm

Shiminay

marco_polo wrote: »

For 1050p I would reccomend something like the SyncMasterT220.

http://www4.hardwareversand.de/articledetail.jsp?aid=20704&agid=603

Just wanted to jump in here, I have one of these monitors, got it a couple of months ago and I'm very happy with it. Will be picking a second one up soon enough.

I'm connecting to a 8800 GTX, plays games (COD4, L4D, CS:S, and most recently Ghostbusters) very well at 1680 X 1050.

GP

or should I just get a DVI splitter ?

Brian

Brian

marco_polo wrote: »

Here is the verdict regarding the HD4850 ( 512Mb and a 1GB models) and struggling to play Crysis Warhead at 1280 X 1080 resolution. I must be going blind but can't see a link to the actual benchmark page

http://www.custompc.co.uk/labs/247595/ati-radeon-1gb-hd-4850.html

This also implies a limit at around the 1680 X 1050 mark for the HD4850

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/palit_hd4850/7.htm

The way I see it, the monitor is more of an investment than a GPU, in that I wouldn't have to replace it every 12 months to keep up - I don't think 1920 x 1080 is going anywhere that soon, even if it is displaced as the top HD res. That's what's made me focus on the E2200HD - it's 22" but has full HD resolution (though unfortunately not 1920 x 1200). That and ... well, it's just bigger res :P