new computer on its' way

[Rex R]

rather than add this to my other comp thread(where it might get lost)...this is what I'm getting.
Cooler Master HAF 912 Case
1TB HDD
AMD FX Quad Core 3.60GHz Processor
DVD Combo Burner
700W Modular Power Supply
8GB DDR3 RAM
Radeon HD 6670 1GB GDDR5 Graphics Card
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
ASUS Motherboard (4 RAM sockets, 32GB Max, 2 PCI Express x16 sockets
since I didn't see it listed I asked for a sound card too.
opinions?

 

[bjphoenix]

The motherboard should have built-in sound options, unless you want something better.

Looks like it will all work and be pretty fast. I would recommend a good aftermarket CPU cooler. I always use those as well as extra case fans, but I always overclock my cpu's quite a bit. Unless you have a good external backup system now I would recommend putting two drives in the machine so you can use one to backup the other one.

I have 2 desktop computers that I use daily now, both with 32bit OS, 4GB ram. The first one has an Intel dual core E8500 at 3.8GHz, the second has an Intel quad core Q9400 at 3.8GHz. The first has a 300GB Velociraptor for the system drive and a 1TB WD for data backup. The second has a 750GB WD Black with backup and data storage on external drives. I am itching to build a new Intel-based machine for my CAD workstation, the latest Intel processors will be right at twice as fast as my current machines. Since we are using a different software mix these days there is some advantage for me to go with a 64bit machine and lots of RAM, and I would probably use an SSD for the system drive.

I have 2 laptops, I've already converted the workstation laptop to an SSD, I need to convert the other one, as well as my wife's laptop and my daughter's laptop.

And I've got one of those apple things too, but I don't talk about it much.

 

[fox_racing_guy]

No need for a sound card unless you are doing audio production work. I'm sure that ASUS board will have fine sound just the way it is. The bulldozer processors (FX) got crap reviews but it might be just fine for your applications. A 700W power supply is way over kill for a 6670 graphics card and you could get away with a 550-650W supply assuming you are using a Antec, Corsair, or Seasonic.
I'm guessing you play video games with you machine and that's why your going for a dedicated graphics card? You might ask your builder to price you a Intel Sandy Bridge system as well. The Sandy Bridge processors get much better reviews compared to AMD FX. I'm not biased either I run both a AMD Phenom II and Intel I7 2600K systems.
AMD FX review https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8150-zambezi-bulldozer-990fx,3043.html
Sandy Bridge review https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sandy-bridge-core-i7-2600k-core-i5-2500k,2833.html

 

[o1d_dude]

I think you did well for yourself.

The CM HAF 921 gets good marks by most reports as does the Radeon graphics card you chose. I'm assuming you bought the components and will be assembling it yourself.

I've always been an AMD & ATi fan but next time I'm going to try an Intel i5 or an i7 and Nvidia graphics card just for kicks. We'll see what happens.

 

[JDcluster]

The only thing that might be a bit of a bummer is: backward compatibility.
You need Win 7 Pro or better to get the XP Pro via virtual machine.

I have the Cooler Master HAF-X 942 case myself.
Just make sure that the RAM is on the QVL (Qualified Vendors List) and is compatible with the MB.
I've read countless threads on computer message boards where people are crying because their new rig won't boot, because they didn't read the QVL.

Good Luck


JD

 

[CPUTommy]

The motherboard should have built-in sound options, unless you want something better.

Looks like it will all work and be pretty fast. I would recommend a good aftermarket CPU cooler. I always use those as well as extra case fans, but I always overclock my cpu's quite a bit. Unless you have a good external backup system now I would recommend putting two drives in the machine so you can use one to backup the other one.

I have 2 desktop computers that I use daily now, both with 32bit OS, 4GB ram. The first one has an Intel dual core E8500 at 3.8GHz, the second has an Intel quad core Q9400 at 3.8GHz. The first has a 300GB Velociraptor for the system drive and a 1TB WD for data backup. The second has a 750GB WD Black with backup and data storage on external drives. I am itching to build a new Intel-based machine for my CAD workstation, the latest Intel processors will be right at twice as fast as my current machines. Since we are using a different software mix these days there is some advantage for me to go with a 64bit machine and lots of RAM, and I would probably use an SSD for the system drive.

I have 2 laptops, I've already converted the workstation laptop to an SSD, I need to convert the other one, as well as my wife's laptop and my daughter's laptop.

And I've got one of those apple things too, but I don't talk about it much.

I love my raptor, The last 4 I7's ive built all had raptors in them. Benchmarks are usually in the top 1%

I Have an I7 1366 waiting for a motherboard.. Its either a rockets or a motherboard, memory, video card.. Latley its been rockets.. LOL !!!! The chip isnt going anywhere..

 

[Rex R]

well as I explained to the computer guru I haven't been keeping up on computerese...as he eplained that the motherboard has an 8ch audio. most of this list is geek to me . I went to the 'little' store and explained what I thought I needed/use it for and they came up with this. while it may be overkill for open rocket...I do from time to time play 'Tread Marks' & 'Tomb Raider' (and was thinking to see if I could get quake to run) so they are doing the hard part, build and software setup (win7 home premium x64), I get to install everything I want(that might take awhile) and hopefully retrieve the data from my backup drive.
rex

 

[o1d_dude]

It should do fine as long as your not playing these games on your 55" flat panel TV. Up to a 1600x1200 resolution flat panel monitor should be do-able.

 

[Rex R]

lol, the tv is only a 13" (with a crt)...the comp has a 20" flat screen .

 

[o1d_dude]

Then you've got no worries!

 

[sunward]

...opinions?

depends on your use.

I would look at a SSD (solid state hard drive) and place the operating system there. Fast speed.

I would also look at getting a second hard drive and running them in a RAID setup for backup. Or get an external hard drive for automatic backups.

If you are doing a lot or work on the system, upgrade the graphics card to use dual screens

I am not sure of the cost of your RAM, but always nice to have lots of it. (Depends on your OS!)

 

[dave carver]

...and I've been slowly, carefully, upgrading the little $100 HP DC7700 SFF. Had a 1.86 Core 2 Duo now it's a 2.4. Came with 2 gig of memory now there's 4(PLEASE don't tell me XP Pro 32 bit can only access 3.5 gig of it, I know) Audigy SE. And my newly installed MSI 430 GT video card. Hard to get a better card for my comp, the low profile thing limits what I can use.

4 cores, 6 cores, hard to wrap my binary brain around:cyclops:

 

[bjphoenix]

4 cores, 6 cores, hard to wrap my binary brain around

There have been a lot of arguments about this ever since multi-core processors have existed. A lot of apps only make use of one core, so having 2 or 3 or 8 cores really doesn't speed them up at all, the spare cores are just wasted. There are other programs, such as some games and some modern video processing programs that will utilize more cores and you get a benefit from them.

Some websites have done tests with modern games and determined that 3 cores is sort of a sweet spot between number of cores and increase in game performance. In the year or two since these tests were done games may have changed though.

A lot of people say multiple cores are useful for multitasking, and they want multiple cores because they will have 12 tabs open in Firefox. Well this is NOT multitasking. The tabs that you aren't looking at are probably not doing anything, so you only have one tab using one core. If you want real multitasking then you need to have downloads going in one window, virus scans in another, file backups in a third, and be browsing in a fourth.

When I first got a multi core machine I got my Intel E8500 dual core. I figured that the OS would use one core and my CAD programs which I know to be single threaded would use the other core. I discovered that it was pretty easy for me to drag this computer down by doing file copies in one window, or downloads, or background plotting, while I tried to do other things in another window. Then I built myself another machine using an Intel quad core Q9400 at the same clock speed as my E8500. This machine runs well no matter what I am running. It will crank up a virus scan in a background window while I am browsing and downloading and I never know it. So I'm sold on having at least 2 cores and preferably 4. These days for desktop computers it is pretty easy to get 4 cores, but for laptops there might still be some advantage in compromising and getting only 2 cores. The dual core processor will probably run each core a bit faster, it will use less battery power, and it will run a bit cooler.

 

[Tronman]

Looks like a nice configuration, but I see no mention of a monitor.

Being a musician, a good sound card is a must for me. Mine is an Echo Mia that's driving an Onkyo 100w amp powering a pair of JBL 4311 studio monitors. But with powered speakers, there would be no need of an amp.

 

[Rex R]

the afore mentioned 20" flat screen that I bought a while back . it only just fits in the space allotted.
rex