New here, looking for insight.

[Raserei408]

9800 GT vs GT240:
The 9800 GT will pwn a 240 gaming. If you're using one for a primary gaming card, get the 9800. However, the 240 is basically the best PhysX card on the market (due to a combination of power usage and performance), and it even beats the 9800 GT for some reason (drivers, I suspect). Getting an OCed one isn't necessary for PhysX, since it's a light enough workload and the GT 240 does well enough that any OC you can get on your own from a vanilla card should be more than enough.

Since you're running 3 x 1680 x 1050 monitors a 5870 will be a must for gaming, though that's beginning to push it (5/4 the pixels of a 30-inch monitor). I'd say you should plan to get a second relatively soon. As for the PCI-E lanes, as I said, the 790FX only has 32 lanes, so you'll end up running at x16-x8-x8 if you do 2 x 5870 + PhysX. However, since a 5870 doesn't max out the PCI-E 1.0 x16 bus (PCI-E 2.0 x8 equivalent), you won't experience bottlenecking more than about 2% at the most. Who knows, though. Also noteworthy; PhysX doesn't even really need x8 even. x4 is sufficient for it. Just saying. Maybe the 890FX chipset will get you your x16-x16-x8. It's a bit of a ways off, though. I should assume a 6-port 5870 would Crossfire with a 3-port 5870, though I suppose there's no guarantee. Also, bear in mind that if you get the 6-port version you'll need to get DisplayPort -> DVI adapters or cables of some kind.

[Soultribunal]

Originally Posted by MarkOne

ST do they make a model that exhaust outside the case. ( can be interesting for the OP too ) the only thing I can find for my physx is a 250 dual slot with that kind of housing

Don't worry about them exausting outside the case, the Thermals on these cards are so good they won't effect the thermals inside your case to any great extent.

ST

[SaskGoose]

Originally Posted by MarkOne

I"m using 8gb in the rig I'm using to answer you ...when you have more memory you can disable the page file, useful because it degrade the SSD fast... You can also disable the page file with 4gb, 8Gb just make more room for mistake... Martin will tell you that I like to throw the money by the windows,(Linux, or OSx ) 4 Gb probably fit your needThe most important is to give us news , we like to have news... the AMD and Intel will be DAM good sexy cores

I read about pagefiles, can you direct to results with 8GB pertaining to this matter? I thought Trim was fixing SSD degradation. From what i am reading 4GB seems to be the answer everyone is giving and may well be what i need, for today at least.

It is most important and i like to give you news, once its built i will be sure to give pics too.

Lets hear it for sexy cores

Originally Posted by Raserei408

Few comments:
the board you chose - x16-x8-x8. The 790FX chipset only has 32 PCI-E lanes. I recommend that board for a few reasons; it's among the top OCing boards, it has 4 slots (whether you need them or not...and you can run a 5870 on x8 with almost no (if any) bottlenecking), and because it's about the cheapest 790FX board on the market.

Not sure if you can use the 4th monitor for maps, etc. As for the fifth, that could always be run on your 9800 GT. Not doing anything graphically demanding there anyway.

Right, Right, the 790fx only has 32 lanes and the 800 series is set for the same i think(plus i don't want to wait that long).
It feels as if the 790FX-GD70 is more of a gaming board, plus if i populate all the slots i would be unable to add anything else. I suppose i failed to mention but i plan to use the Onboard USB and Firewire for the front jacks. If the ATI cards only need 8x why would it not be the same on the Gig board or ASUS or anyone?

Well i think i could get a use out of the 4 monitor while in game for seaching info or checking emails watching RSS ect...I have a 13" LCD i was gonna use. The Fifth would be ok on the 9800 but I thought the physx hack wanted nothing in there? Maybe that's just cause its not being used. If thats the case i could run the 4th from there too, no?

Originally Posted by Soultribunal

The only Issue I have with MSI's board selection is

Originally Posted by Raserei408

Well, I can't speak for the ASUS's OCing potential, but I've got a friend ...
Also, the MSI has better connectivity and more SATAs; ...

Originally Posted by Soultribunal

But all that Mate means nothing if ...

Originally Posted by Raserei408

I tend to hold performance in a higher regard than RMA...

Originally Posted by Perineum

I certainly don't hold performance higher than RMA service...

Originally Posted by Soultribunal

Thats you though Raserei, why don't you ask the OP what he prefers?
...I would not want to be down a Rig for 2 months while...

Originally Posted by Raserei408

Well, if you look at the title of this thread it's "Looking for insight." I am offering my insight...

Originally Posted by Soultribunal

Touche.
It should be noted to for the OP's consideration that the Chip is more often than not the Limiting Factor...

Originally Posted by MarkOne

touché...

Originally Posted by Raserei408

In the very-high-end that may be true, but often enough in the mid-range boards they'll limit the OC.
I stand by my recommendation of the MSI, but if he decides the ASUS is a better board for him, well, that's his decision.

Originally Posted by Soultribunal

...Just making sure OP has all the Info he needs to the best of my knowledge and the Knowledge of the community.

My Board Choice - I was looking at Giga UD5 because the previous UD5P got great reveiws and the UD5 is coming on strong, it has the Ports and slots i want (including Sata III 6GB & USB 3)and i have had previous good luck with Gigabyte.

I see many people saying ASUS is going down hill and MSI, while i have no problem with em, lacks a board that seems to suit my wants. What is the issue with Gigabyte?

On RMA - I would have to say if a board passes a heavy burn in then RMA is less useful, before then i got the seller RMA.

If some company left me down for 1 month i would buy a new board from a different company...can't say if they would get me back.

On Overclocking - The chip is more often a factor but the 555's have been hitting 3.7-3.9 on four cores with engineering samples. If i get the 4 cores at 3.7 with the ram at 1600 all 24/7 i would be happy.

On HWC- You guys have been very forthcoming with insight and i value the information.

Originally Posted by MarkOne

SaskGoose I forget to ask you about the case ?

What are planing to use

Originally Posted by SaskGoose

---------

Originally Posted by MarkOne

I'm not pretty sure that SSD mix well with raid 0 on the same onboard controller.

This is a question that we should ask to our Own SSD expert AkG ...
...my gaming HD partition will be also on SSD. when you taste them you need a god reason to switch back to raid

AkG would be in the aforementioned storage section then...Will head over there in time.
The Idea was to keep the most played game on the SSD.
I was told Steam needed everything on the same drive, i would worry about running out of space in time.

Originally Posted by Soultribunal

...go EVGA 240SC. Great little card.

I was unaware the 240 had a 6 pin free version. Thanks

Originally Posted by MarkOne

ST do they make a model that exhaust outside the case...

Originally Posted by Soultribunal

Don't worry about them exausting outside the case..

I was not worried about this little guys heat dissipation, More worried i can jam something in next to it.

Originally Posted by Raserei408

...the 240 is basically the best PhysX card on the market (due to a combination of power usage and performance), and it even beats the 9800 GT for some reason (drivers, I suspect)...

Since you're running 3 x 1680 x 1050 monitors a 5870 will be a must for gaming...I'd say you should plan to get a second relatively soon...you'll end up running at x16-x8-x8 if you do 2 x 5870 + PhysX. However, since a 5870 doesn't max out the PCI-E 1.0 x16 bus (PCI-E 2.0 x8 equivalent), you won't experience bottlenecking more than about 2% at the most. Who knows, though. PhysX doesn't even really need x8 even. x4 is sufficient for it. Just saying. Maybe the 890FX chipset will get you your x16-x16-x8. It's a bit of a ways off, though. I should assume a 6-port 5870 would Crossfire with a 3-port 5870, though I suppose there's no guarantee...you'll need to get DisplayPort -> DVI adapters or cables of some kind.

If the 240 is better due to drivers and i got to use old drivers for ATI/physX does that performance go with it?

I would be more likely to drop the Monitor size than to get 2 5870 i think.
Never seen many 16-8-8 reveiws can you point me at one or two?
I know the PhysX only needs 4X and its aggravating to think i am only 4 lanes from bliss.
Won't wait for 800 series.
I think there should be no issue xfire a 6 to 3 as well but i don't want to be the first tester on that one.
The monitors i am looking at are Display Port equipped.

**********************************************

Another long long response post, 3 hours.
If my formatting bothers you please let me know, i am only doing it here because I am the OP and it helps me to keep things strait.

Again many thanks for the help so far, i look forward to it continuing until i pull the trigger, where are those 555 anyways?

[Soultribunal]

@ OP - ASUS in my honest Opinion and Experience is not going Downhill. If anything they are very strong in their Board Selection and Price vs. Performance.
And the Reason I mention RMA is no matter who the Manufacturer is , from low Tier Retail ECS to Top Tier Asus/Giga , stuff happens. That being said Gigabyte gets the most respect from me in their timely RMA Process of one of my Folding Boards.

I have absolutely no issues with GB whatsoever , nor ASUS. I got burned hard on two MSI boards, and that makes me wary. I still have 1 in a build here for my Roommate but I don't appriciate their CS or RMA service.

All GT240's as far as I am aware do not Require 6pin power connectors. They are very strong cards for what they are, and run 20x cooler and quieter due to the die shrink and remake of the GT100 core.
Very good bang for the budget build PhysX (or Folder in my case) card.

Jam whatever you want next to that card, it's heat signature should not effect your Case Thermals to any large/Noticable degree.

EDIT: I ment to add as well, to try and take a Baseline for ES Chip results as sometimes the Retail versions can be a lot different in how they behave under OC circumstances.

ST

[MarkOne]

Originally Posted by SaskGoose

I read about pagefiles, can you direct to results with 8GB pertaining to this matter? I thought Trim was fixing SSD degradation. From what i am reading 4GB seems to be the answer everyone is giving and may well be what i need, for today at least.

Trim will mark(one) the cell as usable, so the OS can write to it the next time. It's for improving the speed.

SSD cells like everything else degrade with time to eventually die, it's what I was talking about, page files make a lot of writing, so better make them an other place for that raison.

I was not recommending 8gb , just reply to you when you say 2 was using 4gb, it was making 100% of them, if you add me they are now 66% using 4Gb but since 4+4 = 8 . they are only 50% ( joke) ,

You can also desactivate the paging with 4 gb , many do it. it work well, until you hit the wall, the application will crash if no more memory available. 8 gb just push the limit of the wall. It's to you not to me or other to know your computer habit and usage, if you the king to open 2 or 3 applications at the time 4Gb is more than enough. The problem is solve with socket 1366, you put 6gb. but you can't do it with other board, without loose the dual chanel, so I go 8gb

[SaskGoose]

Originally Posted by Soultribunal

@ OP - ASUS in my honest Opinion and Experience is not going Downhill.
...Gigabyte gets the most respect from me in their timely RMA Process...I have absolutely no issues with GB whatsoever , nor ASUS. I got burned hard on two MSI boards...

All GT240's as far as I am aware do not Require 6pin power connectors. They are very strong cards for what they are, and run 20x cooler and quieter due to the die shrink...

EDIT: I ment to add as well, to try and take a Baseline for ES Chip results as sometimes...

Well i had read a few places that ASUS was going downhill, hearsay only of course and i understand that.
That said it is good to have someone say a nice word about Gig, as i am most comfortable with them.

There is alot of persons saying the 9800gt is sufficient for PhysX but a few of the games coming out are asking for more, heading forward this can only get more pronounced. I was unaware of the GT240 the fact that they run cooler and quieter may be enough but i still wonder how they deal with the old drivers...Those drivers must predate the cards them self by some time. Would It benifit from 1GB of ram or would 512 be fine. The only cure must be more reading.

Again i understand ES and retail samples differ and one can only hope to see the same result, I take these with a grain of salt and look forward to retail reviews.

Originally Posted by MarkOne

...page files make a lot of writing, so better make them an other place...

I was not recommending 8gb , just reply to you when you say 2 was using 4gb, it was making 100% of them, if you add me they are now 66% using 4Gb but since 4+4 = 8 . they are only 50% ( joke)

...until you hit the wall, the application will crash if no more memory available. 8 gb just push the limit of the wall...

I read a few looOoong articles on SSDs (at Anand?) And i think i get how trim works...its just alot of info to process.

I like your joke, it made me laugh.

So you say even with trim it is better to deactivate the pagefile to reduce cell degradation.
I think i like the idea of having the wall further away, of course you basic apps should be fine to run 2-3 but with more resource heavy stuff like photoshop or trans-coding then this advantage would become apparent?


************

Now that i am caught up i can seek some answers to the many questions you have given me.

Possibly i only need a regular 5870 and can run my 2 other screens off the gt240 or is it the 9800gt (at 512 or 1gb) will i need Xfire.

Got to recheck that power supply issue. TX or HX850. What is needed for 5870 xfire in case i decide/need to upgrade?

While i wait for sata III 6GB maybe i should get a black edition Drive to not raid before i use it as a application drive and should i consider raid 5 over 3 drives for storage or stick with 2 and raid 1?

And the case issue.

Always with the learning in this hobby,sigh.

Off to check some things out.

[Soultribunal]

The only part I can answer right now with any clarity is the Driver issue. You will have to use the First/Second Release nVidia Drives that Supported the GT240 or it will not be seen at all.
That being said, from a power consumption and Thermal standpoint, it is way better than the 9800GT. The GT however does have more processing power, however from the point of PhysX it really is moot.

My thoughts,
ST

[SaskGoose]

Originally Posted by Soultribunal

The only part I can answer right now with any clarity is the Driver issue. You will have to use the First/Second Release nVidia Drives that Supported the GT240 or it will not be seen at all.
That being said, from a power consumption and Thermal standpoint, it is way better than the 9800GT. The GT however does have more processing power, however from the point of PhysX it really is moot.

My thoughts,
ST

A quick check finds that the Hybrid PhysX mod is working with the latest stable drivers (196.21), so i should have no trouble with the GT240 from what i can tell. Still, while most of the info i have found is on the 9800gt. Yet there is seems to be growing consensus that going forward this will not be enough, Games like Cyrostasis are pushing the physX limits, some have gone as far to recommend the gtx280 as a physX card, my wallet and I are not at this point. I would, however, like to see some serious comparisons of the 9800gt and gt 240 in hybrid mode. Even still i think I am leaning more tothe gt240 side of things right about now.

[MarkOne]

Originally Posted by SaskGoose

. Games like Cyrostasis are pushing the physX limits, some have gone as far to recommend the gtx280 as a physX card, my wallet and I are not at this point...

if it's the case, and I don't know, you have the 250 , 260 betwen the 240 and the 280. the 250 will by a good step from the 240 , the 260 will be a huge step, still under $ 200

It's interesting, because someone reply to me that it will be overkill to someone who own a gtx 260 to use it as physx when the Fermi will be release, as an option after i suggest to buy a gtx 260


EDIT: Was thinking about this after take my breakfast, why go the hard way with Hybrid ,

you can buy a gtx 260, and use it latter as PhysX with a Fermi , so you can still play some game the time the new GTX 4xx appear on the market, will fix your problem of PhysX underpower too.. What is your garanty that new ATI drivers will be compatible with old physx driver, you will need new ATI driver with a 5870, the actuel one are not quite a success

In Any case, PhysX look to be something important for you. Put all the cards in your and PhysX + Nvidia

[SaskGoose]

Originally Posted by MarkOne

...It's interesting, because someone reply to me that it will be overkill to someone who own a gtx 260 to use it as physx when the Fermi will be release, as an option after i suggest to buy a gtx 260


EDIT: Was thinking about this after take my breakfast, why go the hard way with Hybrid...Put all the cards in your and PhysX + Nvidia

It is ridiculous currently, i am only stating that going forward it is likely to become less so.

Well there are a few reason, none of them good ones, all of them valid enough for me.

First off, rampant fayboyism for ATI, make no mistake i am from the red camp(don't worry i keep it to my self most times).
Second, eyefinity; going forward i see this as a great advantage for gaming and immersion.
Third, Batman. "Nuff said." <
Next up i sort of like the hardway, like using a thimble to drain a bathtub.

It seems unlikely that the block would come from ATI as they stand to gain from Hybrid Physics.