Best, Most Powerful Hardwar For A New Build?

I'm going to be starting a new build soon, I want the best of all parts I can possibly find, Price isn't an issue.
I would say I am building a gaming rig, even though I will be gaming and want it to be able to play and handle any game out, I do streaming, downloading, graphic design, some 3d rendering- So if I said Gaming only, that wouldn't be true.

Someone on another site suggested http://pcpartpicker.com/list/qJMBr7

 

I don't know that you can do any better than the system you linked to. Some others may have differing opinions though. It doesn't list a monitor though so, someone else will need to advise you on that.

 

I'll be switching between using my 60" 4k tv and a couple monitors of what ever I can find and decide on, I don't know as much about computers as Id like to think I do so I really don't know what "better" is out there but that build seems impressive enough but Then again Idk.

 

4k will be fine for recent games that support a playable SLI mode, most don't and numbers of SLI/Crossfire games seems lower now than 10 years ago. You'd want to drop the resolution down (1440p) to play single-GPU games at a decent refresh rate.

I'd opt for a high quality 850+W Platinum/Titanium rated PSU rather than a bigger Gold one. GPUs are getting ever more efficient, a single 1080 FE in that rig would be fine on a high quality 550w supply. Real World gaming usage is likely to be 425-475W in SLI, 500-600W if you add a lot of peripherals and case accessories (like fan controllers, LCD panels, card readers etc.).

 

Price is always an issue - no matter how deep your pockets are.

Since you like Fractal Design fans (and who wouldn't?) why not go with a decent FD case like the R4 or R5? I am really impressed with my R4 in terms of build quality, cooling options, filters, and of course, the FD fans that came with it.

That Phanteks case you selected is a decent case, no doubt, but do note the placement of the USB, headphone/mic ports, and the reset button. They are on the left side of the case. Where will your case sit at your desk? If to your left, the location of those ports and switch will be very inconvenient. If to your right and near the floor, I would worry about my knee banging into connected devices/cables; perhaps damaging the ports. Note the R4 and R5 have all the ports and switches up top for easy access (at least for cases that sit under a desk or on the floor - as opposed to a case that sits up high on a desk).

I also agree with strow and his advice about PSUs. While the Corsair RM series of PSUs have a decent reputation, not all Corsair PSUs live up to the reputation they once earned. That just does not sit well with me. I happen to really like EVGA supplies and have been using them in all our recent builds here (including in this system) with great satisfaction. If I had to complain about mine, it was that the thing is so quiet, I had to put my ear to the back of the supply and listen to hear if the fan was spinning - even then I think it was more the "feel" of the air blowing on my ear than the fan noise that ensured me it was indeed spinning.

Also, while 16GB is plenty, since price is not an issue, why go with 4 x 4GB? Especially with such a high-end motherboard that supports up to a whopping 128GB? You are wasting the potential of that board!

I say go 4 x 8G for 32GB total for the best future proofing. At the very least, go 2 x 8Gb so you can easily add more in the future without discarding the 4GB modules.

 

"Also, while 16GB is plenty, since price is not an issue, why go with 4 x 4GB? Especially with such a high-end motherboard that supports up to a whopping 128GB? You are wasting the potential of that board!"

Agreed.

 

Why not two cards though? Isn't that x2 the power as well? Really though I've always wanted to run two; But either way id most likely be starting out with one. As well as starting out with just x2 8GB for the ram.

 

RAM prices have begun to creep back up again after 8+ months of rock bottom accessibility, it might mean they're aiming to get as much cash as they can while blaming lower PC sales and having to shift production to memory for portable devices.

Grab more RAM while it's still relatively cheap, the price might double within a few months and stay high for 3 years...

Did I miss the part where someone suggested to sticking with a single GPU?!

 

Nope, you didn't miss that, neither did I. Does one card have enough ports to run dual monitors and a TV? I haven't checked into it with the ones suggested to me so far but I know some have 1 - 2 while others have 2 - 3 or 4 ports.

 

Most modern cards will run 4+ different screens, though exact connection types would differ. That's something you'd need to checkup on, so that your intended cards have the correct connections for your monitors/TVs (or buy whichever card feels best suited to your requirements, check what it has and buy an adapter to suit a port that's 'wrong' for you).

With an SLI setup, you still have the same number of usable connections available as you would with a single card though.

I'd be surprised if any 1080 FE had only 2 output connections.

 

If you are going to be gaming, I'd increase the size of the SSD. If you are going to have movies, i.e., a lot of data, add at least a 1TB drive for data storage. The higher the cache, the better (128MB or better).

One disappointing thing about the board is that the M.2 slot does not support an SSD. However, it does have PCIe boot support for NVMe:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820104545

The speed from a PCIe slot cold boot is simply breathtaking and the app response time is simply insane...

 

thanks for all the help.

 

is there not a card that can handle the full 4k settings without having to lower res?

 

2016 Titan X maybe, if you don't mind dropping below 60FPS: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-x-12gb,4700-6.html

 

I see, think i understand now, id have to choose between quality and performance.

 

I guess so, there are compromises that have to be reached with almost everything.

 

It's too bad you can't get BOTH quality and performance in one card.

 

"Price always matters" - Nope, I have had customers where even a $5,000 rig would be acceptable. With time critical high dollar contracts a gaming rig cost is negligible compared to ahead of time and under budget. I just spec it as the developer's platform.
SSD in raid is how I fly, more capacity and faster.
I am running a ProDuo, water cooling from the factory allowed me a 10% OC. Gaming at 4K is fine with most games although some need eye candy dialed down to maintain 40+ FPS (my personal minimum). Water cooling is almost silent.
TitanX is also a good single slot solution, two slot solutions without water can be a cooling nightmare.

 

I think I care more about being able to watch 4k videos in full 4k without having to lower any settings, gaming with settings slightly lowered wont be too much of a bother; So many options though and dunoo what to do, it's gonna be after January before i even start this build, Any suggestions on exactly what card I should go with? and again I think i mentioned I'd have no problem running two, but if one is enough like they've said then one will do. "a single 1080 FE" has been suggested more than once I believe but when I searched for one I cam up with multiple 1080 FE cards with different specs and brands.

 

Can you name the games you want to play?
A single 1080 of any type will not play 4K games without severe cutting of eye candy or low frame rates.

 

Not sure yet, but i do know that I originally posted this asking what the best hardware was that I could get for a good build. What would handle gaming at full 4k without lowering fps ect? 1080 x2? 2 1080 cards? because what I want is a system that can nearly handle anything.

 

There's some talk developing around what might be the next Nvidia release, the '1080Ti', which might be better than the Titan X (which is really aimed at, imo, nxSLI in 3D cinematic rendering/farm Workstations) for gaming and should be at a lower price too. It's looking like it, if/when it does materialise, will be the optimum single card for high-res. gaming for the following year.

It's likely to be the 2nd generation of that (2080TI?) in a year or so perhaps, that would do what you're currently looking for in a single card at 4k - which would work with all current games (with SLI not being stable/effective in some of the games where its an option now).

 

so i can do one card with lowered settings, or I can do two cards "without having to lower settings" with stability issues.. Is this correct?

 

Roughly, yes - for those games that support SLI, that is, then it's down to how well optimised for SLI the individual games are and how well optimised the drivers for the cards are for those games in SLI. It varies, often - the more complex your PC is, the more likely you are to have issues, per game patch, per driver release.

Example: there's a new Nvidia driver out now, specifically for SLI, a new profile for 1 game:

Yet those 'improved' drivers for that game have crippled many cards. From the Nvidia Sticky thread for this latest driver release:

For the rest of the reported issues, it's a 20 page topic: https://forums.geforce.com/default/...ay-driver-feedback-thread-released-11-15-16-/

See also the Reddit topic:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/5d2v3u/driver_37586_faqdiscussion_thread/

So, if you're happy being able to play some games in SLI sometmes, then go for it - but don't expect everything to work fine all the time. The more complex your setup, the more work/research you need to do beforehand, and during each upgrade cycle.

Sometimes, it's just easier to keep it simple.

 

it seems like game consoles are out doing Pc gaming these days; but when I do my build simple is how it will be for a while at first, then maybe later on if i want the headache of dealing with the advanced stuff, but maybe by then single cards that can handle 4k will be getting produced.

 

Outdoing them at what, SLI!?

It's certainly not performance, must be sales.

Yup, that's what I would opt for had I the need and disposable income, a single card, not necessarily the best, maybe a 1070 for me.

 

You seem to like nVidia so dual 1080's and deal with the heat and SLI issues. Get the Ti's if at all possible.
If you have packaging problems and want a quiet system, go with the AMD ProDuo.
Also consider the G-Sync vs Free-Sync monitor differences. After all, the screen is the end product of all you have built.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2990...o-know-from-pricing-to-performance-needs.html

 

I'll answer that with a question because I'm not sure my self; What's so special/different from the ps4 pro from the original?

 

Nope Ive actually always liked AMD, but Intel / Nvidia seem to have more compatibility with other hardware. Also didn't seem like I could find an amd board with specs as high as most intel boards.

 

I would stick with the Intel MB for gaming. Personally I go for Asus MB as I have never had a problem with them.
I was referring to the AMD graphics. The Pro Duo is expensive, but a very nice one slot solution. Crossfire has a bit better compatibility than SLI, especially on the single card, dual GPU cards. The nVidia fan boy sites will not rank the Pro Duo.
If you have never had a water cooled rig you are in for a treat. They are quiet, cool and stable.
Whatever you buy, go BIG and high quality on the power supply. You are building a hungry beast.

Check my folding@home scores to see how strong the Pro Duo is, keep in mind I only fold 18 hours a day as I game on and off for 6 hours.

 

Another thought on nVidia
https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2016/11/nvidia-made-gpu-newest-spying-device-pc/

 

that is no surprise at all, Nothing you do on the internet is private anymore it's been that way for years now.

 

what are the differences in the memory types the mother board supports?

Memory Type
DDR4-2133 / 2400 / 2800 / 2933 / 3300

Ive noticed higher the number, higher the price is.

Can that board take anything between 2133 -3300 or just those specific numbers?

And do the numbers represent low to high performance? 2133 being the lowest and 3300 being the highest in performance?

Just trying to understand a little better how these things work.

 

Yes, the numbers represent speed which is related to performance.
Check the manufacturers for compatibility and possibly their forums. If a RAM module is not listed by the motherboard or memory manufacturer it will probably not work or only work at limited capacity.

 

The numbers represent the normal xmp steps for memory, it will probably work in between but you might have to tweak the memory/voltage settings to get it stable.

Yes, to some extent the numbers do represent an increase in speed but each step might come with an increase in latency, especially with the cheaper brands/ranges, and higher latency impedes the performance. Better ranges and sub components (and subsequent higher prices) usually mean better performance + relatively low latency.

The main problem with that is that few programs outside of benchmark software can actually make good use of that 'extra' speed, though if you were planning on using a CPU's built in graphics capability only, you might find more software that would work more efficiently - the same improved memory speed drives the GPU.

My rig uses the older DDR3 memory, I originally had 8GB of very good memory running at 1600Mhz (the standard for that chipset) at 1.25v, even when I overclocked it to 2133Mhz/1.65v, it benchmarked fractionally slower overall (partly because I not an overclocker and there's a very large range of different settings to try to get to grips with and test for best results - others would have got more improvement). When I felt my usage would soon require 16GB, I sought out memory that would be an improvement in speed as well, that 's now running at 2,400/1.65v but the real world difference cf. the stock 1600Mhz 8GB is marginal, it benchmarks as ~5% faster overall, for gaming with a 970, it makes no real difference.

Had I been using a CPU graphics (which my CPU doesn't have anyway), the improvement would probably just be noticeable (though, of course, cf. to running a 970, it would still be very poor, almost unusable, for gaming purposes.

Overall, I think it's best to use good quality branded memory, reasonably fast, low latency and plenty of it.

 

http://pcpartpicker.com/product/FGPzK8/asrock-x99-taichi-atx-lga2011-3-motherboard-x99-taichi

so for this board, Not even sure why it was recommended as "the best I could get" There will be no difference at all seeing that I wont be using cpu graphics; between 2400 and 3300?

 

Unless you're doing something like video rendering that does scale well, you're very unlikely to notice a difference in 'normal' usage.