Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

New Rig: i7 2600K

Comments

  • #2
    game4it70
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,125 ✭✭✭game4it70


    Hi,
    Thats a nice rig your ordering there.

    From what i have read you dont need to go with such a high end mobo to reach 4.6ghz (chip dependent anyways).I would get a cheaper mobo and put the savings towards a small ssd.

    Have you used the Ic Diamond before?
    I found it to be a pain to apply and found it not to be as good as they make out.
    There is talk that is also scratches the surface of your cpu which i believe as the writing on mine became worn after a few attempts reseating cooler to compare temps.

    Your link is to a 2600 not a "k" version :P


  • #3
    Sean^DCT4
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 527 ✭✭✭Sean^DCT4


    What are you talking about.. ? It is the 2600K version :D God bless edit..

    Glad you asked why I am going for this mother board.. This UD7 Gigabyte motherboard is the only one that actually supports two PCI Express x16 lanes. The Asus Maximus IV is the top of the range Asus for this chipset and it runs two PCI Express cards at 8x.

    RE: IC compound
    No, I have not used it but apparently it is coolers than any other make by a degree or two. I will look into this a bit more.

    RE: SSD
    I have two Raptors in RAID0 and they are very fast. Not on the same speeds as SSD but still enough for me for a while :)


  • #4
    cgarrad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,611 ✭✭✭cgarrad


    SSD is most important....


  • #5
    Komplett-Tech: Ryan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,002 ✭✭✭Komplett-Tech: Ryan


    I have to agree. The biggest speed boost any system will see is from a SSD boot drive. While 2 raptors in raid are quick, even the most basic SSD will usually be quite a bit faster.


  • #6
    game4it70
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,125 ✭✭✭game4it70


    Sean^DCT4 wrote: »
    What are you talking about.. ? It is the 2600K version :D God bless edit..
    :pac:
    Sean^DCT4 wrote: »
    Glad you asked why I am going for this mother board.. This UD7 Gigabyte motherboard is the only one that actually supports two PCI Express x16 lanes. The Asus Maximus IV is the top of the range Asus for this chipset and it runs two PCI Express cards at 8x.
    Fair enough but the difference between x16 and x8 really isn't that much.
    Sean^DCT4 wrote: »
    RE: IC compound
    No, I have not used it but apparently it is coolers than any other make by a degree or two. I will look into this a bit more.
    Yeah i read good things about it and was dissapointed with results.
    I've tried lots of different pastes and personally i like and found ShinEtsu G-751/Noctua nh1 to be good.
    I'm currently using MX4 (still not decided if its as good as they say).
    Sean^DCT4 wrote: »
    RE: SSD
    I have two Raptors in RAID0 and they are very fast. Not on the same speeds as SSD but still enough for me for a while :)
    I still say SSD :P


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    PogMoThoin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,874 ✭✭✭✭PogMoThoin


    Komplett-Tech: Ryan wrote: »
    I have to agree. The biggest speed boost any system will see is from a SSD boot drive. While 2 raptors in raid are quick, even the most basic SSD will usually be quite a bit faster.

    Its not just the speed, the SSD's have 0 seek time, the few miliseconds a mechanical drive takes to spin up and seek is a very long time


  • #8
    Sean^DCT4
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 527 ✭✭✭Sean^DCT4


    game4it70 wrote: »
    Fair enough but the difference between x16 and x8 really isn't that much.

    Yeah i read good things about it and was dissapointed with results.
    I've tried lots of different pastes and personally i like and found ShinEtsu G-751/Noctua nh1 to be good.
    I'm currently using MX4 (still not decided if its as good as they say).

    I still say SSD :P

    I think the difference between two cards running at 16x and two running at 8x is as low as 5%.

    I might try some of the Arctic Cooling / MX4. Seems to get decent results.

    PogMoThoin wrote: »
    Its not just the speed, the SSD's have 0 seek time, the few miliseconds a mechanical drive takes to spin up and seek is a very long time
    cgarrad wrote: »
    SSD is most important....
    Komplett-Tech: Ryan wrote: »
    I have to agree. The biggest speed boost any system will see is from a SSD boot drive. While 2 raptors in raid are quick, even the most basic SSD will usually be quite a bit faster.

    Lads, I am a firm believer in the "you are only as fast as your slowest device" way of thinking but here's what has me deciding not to go with SSD.
    • Limited number of read/write operations per drive
    • They suffer from write degradation over time because more of the writes require erasing whole blocks.

    I'll stick with my Raptors in RAID0 for the time being :)


  • #9
    Komplett-Tech: Ryan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,002 ✭✭✭Komplett-Tech: Ryan


    They do slow down, no doubt there. But as an example, i have 1 year old 120gig Corsair drive in my PC as the Os drive. Even to this day it will still obliterate a Mechinal raid after probably close to 3000 hours use.


  • #10
    challengemaster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,930 ✭✭✭✭challengemaster


    SSD's are still on the expensive side too, tbh. Considering he already has the raptors, I wouldn't be arsed with a SSD.


  • #11
    Sean^DCT4
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 527 ✭✭✭Sean^DCT4


    challengemaster wrote: »
    SSD's are still on the expensive side too, tbh. Considering he already has the raptors, I wouldn't be arsed with a SSD.

    Another thing I should have mentioned. I need around 200GB for my OS partition. I would estimate around 100GB is essential on the 'fastest' partition. So if I wanted a SSD I would have to fork out serious €. Although I am spending £272 on a motherboard.. hmm.. :) It is really the degradation of the drive over time/writes that is putting me off.

    My OS partition has a lot of usage. 15-20 development DB's at any one stage. A dozen or so web applications under IIS. Not to mention virtual machines and gaming.. I would be very pi$$ed if the drive started to degrade rapidly after spending a lot on it.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Komplett-Tech: Ryan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,002 ✭✭✭Komplett-Tech: Ryan


    I'm curious now, why do you have that much on your OS drive? I've about 50gigs on mine for Win 7, the rest i leave blank. Programs one a small SSD (64gig) Games one one HDD(2 x 1TB), Music on another(1TB), Movies on a third(3 x 2TB), and work stuff i don't even keep local at all. Cloud computing comes in handy for the last part, never thought i'd say it but i love citrix.


  • #13
    challengemaster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,930 ✭✭✭✭challengemaster


    Obviously he's hiding the pr0n in the sys32 folder :pac:


  • #14
    Sean^DCT4
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 527 ✭✭✭Sean^DCT4


    I suppose I have the space. 2x 150GB Raptors in RAID0 gives me plenty of space to put all of my development tools, programs and games. I have about ~100GB free.

    Running the likes of SQL server on a RAID partition really boosts performance and IIS too.

    If I did decide to go down the SSD route I would put Windows on the SSD and probably SQL Server and put everything else on the Raptors. I have TB's of space for movies, music and downloads on standard 7200 RPM drives.


  • #15
    Sean^DCT4
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 527 ✭✭✭Sean^DCT4


    challengemaster wrote: »
    Obviously he's hiding the pr0n in the sys32 folder :pac:

    :pac: :D


  • #16
    Serephucus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,180 ✭✭✭Serephucus


    Sean^DCT4 wrote: »
    It is really the degradation of the drive over time/writes that is putting me off.

    Regular harddrives "degrade" (if you could call it that) over time too. Even with regular defrags and all kinds of optomisations, I don't know how many times I've reinstalled Windows just because my whole system felt just that little bit sluggish. Fresh installs are just snappy. With an SSD, you get that all the time.

    I'm pretty sure it was Anandtech (but not certain) who did some testing with a few of the first SSDs out there, and found that under normal use as an OS drive - assuming people disabled pagefile, hibernation, etc. - and took a second to think before then went on installing a bunch of crap on an SSD, that the drive would last somewhere around five years.

    That's alright by me considering it's only been two years and I replaced my Raptor with an SSD, so odds are I'll be doing something else down the line too. That's also not taking into account the rather massive improvements in SSDs since then.


  • #17
    challengemaster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,930 ✭✭✭✭challengemaster


    Serephucus wrote: »
    Regular harddrives "degrade" (if you could call it that) over time too. Even with regular defrags and all kinds of optomisations, I don't know how many times I've reinstalled Windows just because my whole system felt just that little bit sluggish. Fresh installs are just snappy. With an SSD, you get that all the time.
    Fairly sure that's windows degrading like a POS, not the HDD :p


  • #18
    Sean^DCT4
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 527 ✭✭✭Sean^DCT4


    Hehe, now now, let's not turn this into a Windows Vs Other OS argument :) In fairness Windows 7 is the only one that properly supported SSD from the start :P

    There are some new SSD being released this month and hopefully it will drop a few of the prices on the current ones. I'm looking to get a 250GB+ one.


Advertisement