View Single Post
  #23 (permalink)  
Old January 24, 2013, 08:59 PM
Perineum's Avatar
Perineum Perineum is offline
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Surrey, B.C.
Posts: 4,039

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
Myths - 7 of them anyway
1. Z77 is faster than H61. No it is not, and Intel will tell you this. Same CPU on a cheap board will run at the same speed as a 340 board. Z77 has many extra features for enthusiasts and I am one but not much use for anyone with a sub 150 processor.
I would say that yes, for the most part there will be no difference. Higher end chipset may give you other things you want, however, like a more generous CPU overclock if that's your thing, or more PCI-E lanes, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
2. You must have sata3 Why? after all no conventional hard drive can supply sata 2 speed let alone sata 3s speed . SSD can benefit- on a graph- but in real life only folk modded to perceive micro seconds will notice.
I personally wouldn't buy a motherboard without SATA3 unless it's a throwaway build, and then at that point I would just go completely used instead of buying new.

SSDs make a rather large difference to computing and ultimately it would be desirable to have all my clients on one when feasible within size constraints.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
3. USB3 a must have. Fair enough, that one terabyte USB stick you snapped up at CES for 3000 u.s. dollars will transfer the size of file you daily use better via usb3, but for most the small files transferred by usb won't see a difference.
Again, maybe I don't like waiting, but my 16GB USB3 thumb drive fills up in about 3 minutes or so vs the random 20 to 30 minute wait for any of my other of my drives, regardless of how "fast" they thought they were when purchased.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
4. Best Video Card possible. No, it's best card your display can handle. Up to 19 inch 1400x900 is about the best, the majority are 1366x800. Quite a lot of 1280x1024 still out there. Its harder to find low resolution benchmarking but it seems to show a 240 card won't display much better than a 120 card, again if you are capable of visually measuring exact FPS you might detect the difference but it won't look better - no WOW! factor at these resolutions.
Yes, running a game at 240 FPS looks no difference than 30 FPS to most people. No point blowing the budget on a video card that isn't going to do much in it's life and take a lot more out of your overall build budget.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
5. CPU Bottleneck. Nope. Unless the game can use 4 cores Any current Intel 2core inc Celerons will not bottle neck a sub 200 graphic card, maybe even 300.
My Q6600 @ 3.0ghz was severely bottlenecking my GTX560Ti, and got a crazy amount more FPS after upgrading to my 2700K @ 4.5ghz.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
6. The best is future proof. Obvious nonsense. When the above rig gets an upgrade in 2 or 3 years time board and cpu will retain 50% plus of the original purchase price . Even if sooner on Ebay or forums its 60% plus. Try that with a 150 motherboard. By the time the future is here your board ,your cpu, your PCIE3 graphics will all be redundant every time.
The "future proof" concept is certainly not future proof itself. The guys that buy the best rigs continually sell and upgrade before it's obsolete... which is great for guys like me

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
7. Cheap boards don't last. well cheap boards don't get stressed, and as only the incurably stupid use cheap power supplies, you shouldn't need the 3 year g/tee it came with. Chances are it will still be going when socket 1155 is no longer available!
Having seen very few real motherboard failures other than dead caps, I would agree with you. However, I dislike working with cheap boards that require so much effort to get something to work and they have bad layouts to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
If I buy a board with usb3 and sata3 I waste 9 of video card money. What do I gain? ( also when do you read a post advising H61 chipset)
If I buy a sata 2 SSD I can get nearly double the capacity compared to sata3 although it will be a slow one (240GB@ 88) Again , I should notice?
Any SSD is a marked improvement over a HD and providing it's from a reputable company with a good toolbox support then it's the desired item, even if only SATA2. As the builder, you know the budget and the requirements for the system. If they need space over speed, then a "slower" SSD will do nicely in place of a smaller faster one. If someone offered me a 1TB SSD at SATA2 speeds for the $300 mark right now I'd sure find a way to purchase it....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrihim View Post
I replaced a mates 80GB H/D with a 90GB Kingston SSD. Three months later he is still telling people I am a genius and inviting them to see how fast his 5 yr old e5300 is. OK he is not a techie or a good judge of I.Q. , but we both got the WOW factor. Should I have said " well you need a new motherboard Z 77 is the best at the moment then you can use the latest Ivybridge processor etc". Knowing what a computer is to be used for and monitor size is as important as knowing whats available. As per the sticky on this forum.
No, you shouldn't have offered a Z77 chipset motherboard unless the client asks for "the best". As a builder you need to give them best bang for the buck within budget and knowing what they are going to do with the thing. Sometimes that means integrated video is perfectly fine and other times it means having to stick to a regular HD. Sometimes it means SLI'd 680's and triple 3d gaming.....
Reply With Quote