Building new comp---Someone please help end my internal debate.

I've spent way too much time pouring through specs and posts about specs and posts about more specs....You get the picture. At this point, I feel like my eyes are burning---no really, I think they are.

I've spent all this time and I still don't have a parts list for a high end game system. Here's my budget per part and a potential parts. Someone please chime in and help me finalize this.

First off, here's a couple general question:

Nvidia 680i or Intel 975 Chipset?
Intel C2D 6300 processor overclocked(save money) or C2D 6600?

On to the parts list:

Case/PSU budget: $150
Ultra Aluminum with Ultra 550 watt PSU $130
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2215103&Sku=TC3J-2145

Mobo budget $275
EVGA 680i SLI $250
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2573809&Sku=E145-2008

Ram budget $220
Mushkin, OCZ, Corsair? I've seem some 2GB sets for about $200 for each brand, but have read good and bad about all of them. (again, too much reading).

Video budget $425 (For now, will go SLI later).
EVGA GeForce 8800 GTS 640Mb $400
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2597918&CatId=28

CPU budget $190-$325
C2D 6300 Overclocked or
C2D 6600

HD -- Already purchased two Raptor 74GB 10K drives for Raid 0. $120 x2

Any recommendations will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,
/JB

 

well...from what i've learned in my processor adventures today...with the cost of cooling and future upgrades and whatnot...you'd probably be better off to just go straight for the best proc. u can afford with the system...rather than going cheap and OC...because it might cost about the same if not more in cooling and stuff for OC...but on top of that...it makes for better upgrades...but..its up to you...im all for saving money...but in the long run...quality..over quantity.

always go by the rule ...if possible.

"wait...and buy what you want..dont splurge and go for cheap satisfaction.."

 

Thanks for the advice Gamefreak. Does anyone have any advice on ram or the motherboard or case/PSU that I have listed?

 

975x chipset = fit core 2 duo, and go.
Most others appear to need a pentium D, or dual core to update Bios, before they are capable of using core 2 duo.
I made the mistake, of not buying a 975x, and had to get an earlier cpu to update my Bios, - seems common.
I do not think you will go wrong with Corsair memory

 

With the CPU-----I went for the Intel Core 2 Duo E6400
2x 2.13 2Mb 1066 MHz LGA775 BX805576400 - Ido not overclock much myself,

FROM WHAT I HEAR THE CORE 2 DUO E4300, SEEMS TO BE VERY CLOCKABLE,
But this information is all I have, from an overclocker.- UP TO 200mhz fsb and a multiplier of x9 with the right m/board
I gather it is an overclockers dream, and will apparently just jack up to 266 , apparently done with 800mhz memory.
The opinion seems to be that it can be clocked to run as quick as the E6600,OR, MORE
You could ask the overclockers, for their input

 

I have a E4300 (stock 1.8Ghz) running at 3.0Ghz using budget DDR2 667 Ram and stock air cooling. It can go much further with better ram and cooling. Some people have claimed a clock of over 3.6Ghz! Saved me a butt load of money and the processor performs just as well as the higher end, and more expensive 6XXX chips.

I also went with a 650i chipset with sli. Asus has a board under $150 and it overclocks my e4300 great. 680i would be nice, but the prices hurt my wallet.

OCZ makes good ram, and if you get a 6XXX chip, try to find some DDR2 ram that can do 1000mhz. You'll appreciate the headroom if you decide to overclock.

8800 GTS is a good choice. Stay away from the cheaper 340MB card. You'll want the extra memory in the GTS. SLI would make this a killer system

 

Well, Overcooked, thanks for that extra information, as an overclocker, I am sure you can give Gopx101 a great deal of info - My new computer (hope to have together and running in next couple of days) has the E6400, my motherboard supports 1066 fsb, and I , too, have, ADATA 667 (4 GB)
I use the Artic Freezer 7 pro, - great cooler.
so, I will watch how this progresses.

 

Can I just say.....Man go with the SLI board or you will regret it. SLI will make this a mean gaming system and you are doing the right thing if you get it and have 1 card and then go SLI a little later. That is a smart thing to do. As far as the processor, if you can afford it you must go E6600. I mean it is $314! Why OC if you can afford to go with that beast at that price? Nothing wrong with OCing, but there are no guarantees with that. Every system is different. You could still clock the E6600 up, but that is a beast out of the box man. I OC when I feel I have to. As far as the PSU...just make sure it is SLI ready! Don't make the mistake of getting an underpowered PSU that will not run SLI setups. I would find something cheap that is SLI ready.

In my opinion, I would say go with E6600, the SLI board, your card looks good and would be nice in SLI, and an SLI ready PSU. E6600 is just a beast man.

*Oh yeah....as far as the case is concerned, what I like to do is get a cheap case and mod the sh** out of it. This can save a lot and will be just as good as some of the high-priced cases out there if you mod it right. I like to skimp in the right places .

One more thing....Compare prices with newegg.com. I have found no one cheaper than them.

 

Because if you can get a processor that is capable of performing better than the E6600 at a fraction of the cost, you can shift your savings towards other components like another video card or more ram.

 

Yeah, I know why people OC, it was a rhetorical question. You are guaranteed to reach what everyone else does and you are guaranteed to be running it that high with stock cooling right (I know 2.4GHz is modest considering E6300's potential)? My point was that if you can afford it, then buy E6600 because there are no guarantees with OCing and it also has 4MB L2 cache, if you didn't notice. You also will need $better$ cooling that may cut into your huge savings and what is 2MB of additional L2 worth to you?

And you are telling me that E6300 is capable of performing better than E6600 at a fraction of the cost. It does cost less. I will give you that. All things considered, though, you can OC E6600 too. Factor in that it has 4MB shared L2 rather than 2MB and you get an edge with E6600. I said it was my opinion that I only OC when I need to. The system will last longer in general. I change and upgrade a lot so for me it isn't really a concern, but for this guy who knows? Maybe it is a factor. I think you are trying to take what I am saying out of context .

 

You're not guaranteed anything when overclocking, there is always a risk and it's not for everyone, but the e4300 is this generation's 'go to' overclocking processor. Mine runs stable at 3.0Ghz with stock cooling at stock voltage. I'm not worried about the processor's life time either as voltage is the major culprit in reducing lifespan and I'm still running it at stock. Many others have reported the same, better, or slightly worse overclock with their processors depending on what kind of memory and motherboard they are running.

I meant to say that the e4300 can perform better than the x6800 at a fraction of the price. As can be seen in a write up at AnandTech.com The e4300 does much better than e6600 at half the cost, and beats out the x6800 at 1/6th its price! The x6800 and E6600 both having the extra 2mb of cache btw.

"....Overclocked, the E4300 truly shines - outpacing the X6800 by a marginal 3.3%. The margin of victory is well within the variance for SYSMark but the point to take home is that we're looking at an overclocked $163 chip, delivering performance equal to a CPU priced at six times its cost...."

Of course if you can afford it, and want a plug it in and work solution, your best bet would be to go with the best processor you can afford. But if cost is a concern, and you want the best bang for your buck a e4300 is a solid choice if you don't mind tinkering with your system a bit.

 

I never argued to the contrary, necessarily. I just addressed what you said to me. We started a new topic as far as I'm concerned because I never talked about anything other than E6300 or E6600.

With that said, yes I saw the benchmarks you provided and I was aware of E4300's potential before you took the liberty of pointing it out. However, the one thing I didn't think to consider was the lower FSB is actually an advantage to OCing it due to the memory considerations. I just haven't thought about it yet until you referred the article. That is a great point-e4300, AS AN OCer ONLY, is the best out there. I am also aware of E6300's potential, as well, which is why I cited it as my other option. However, I am betting if you OC any of the other CPU's you will have similar results. I didn't talk about X6800, but if you want to buy that I believe (correct me if I am wrong) the multiplier is unlocked (what would happen if we pushed that thing?). The comparisons are showing one processor's full potential unleashed vs everybody else at stock. That's fine, but what happens when you do this experiment with the other CPU's potentials unleashed vs the rest at stock? Same result, only how much more do they win by? I don't know, for example, what the full potential people have been getting with, say, E6600 is, but the chip in general is very OC-able. Push that to the limits and you have something that surpasses E4300 in my estimation.

Anyway, like I say, I didn't argue otherwise and I stand by what I said in my previous post. We already knew e4300 is strictly for OCing, but E6300 best bang for buck processor out there (and by no means is it a slouch in OCing). This was a good thread, but somehow I wonder if it is helping the original poster.

edit- I should add that overcooked pointed to the processor as something he didn't worry about because he has it at stock voltage as far as life span. I wasn't referring to the processor either, though. OCing will shorten its life, but those things are built to last 10 years or so, so it wouldn't make much difference. My point was that everything on northbridge is OC'd and at such high FSB, components will die faster. So that is something to consider, if you didn't already know.

 

Agreed and we did get a bit off track. Hopefully the OP and anyone else reading over the read picked up on some new information. I'm off to complete some chemistry homework and then it's bed for me. Have a good night.

 

Goodnight man. That was fun for me to argue that. I hope we do it a lot. Sometimes I get better ideas when people push me a little.

 

I re-read the last post and I should be just a bit more clear again. By no guarantees, I meant that you aren't always guaranteed getting that cpu that goes to 3.4 or whatever. You can't depend on that. Every chip is unique, but C2Duo has shown to really be consistently high. I should also clear up that E4300 can at best match X6800, but who gets X6800 with an unlocked multiplier and doesn't go at it? Just think what you could do with that thing (raise FSB, adjust multiplier as needed, and 4MB L2). Therefore, there is really no way it can really catch it, and the same is true for E6600. That is why, if you can afford it, I still say go with E6600. Either way-clock it or don't- you got a beast for $300. Somehow, Gopx101, I hope this all helps. I think it can. If you decide you are definitely going to OC without doubt, then you can use some of this (maybe go e4300). If you are not, you can use it to weigh what the best bang for buck is. See if overcooked agrees, but for $300, if you can afford it, that is the way to go (if you aren't going to OC). If you aren't sure if you are going to OC or not then maybe go with E6300. Very OC-able, but is the best bang for buck stock at $187, 1.86GHz, 1066 FSB. You don't want to go E4300 stock.

 

Gopx101,
Hope this side discussion does not confuse you more, but as you see, you are well on the right track.
Memory often comes down to individual choice, or, budget , and opinion seems to vary, on which to use.
Video is pointed towards sli, but your choice.
Good luck, - you may get some more follow up on Video choices, from those pushing graphics.

 

I understand what you are saying about not being guaranteed a chip that hit the high end of the overclocks. Fortunately, the C2D chips are great overclockers across the board and the risk of getting a dummy chip are low. You're probably more likely to get a motherboard or some ram that will hold you back before the actual chip does.

Now of course an overclocked X6800 would run over a overclocked e4300. I was arguing from a price/performance perspective with overclocking. A $170 chip that can perform just as well as another chip six times its price is great. A $800 chip that can be overclocked much farther is even better but doesn't make much sense as a choice if you're on a budget.

It seems that we can both agree that if someone is looking for drop in chip that will work great for their money at stock speed, the E6600 is a great choice. I wouldn't recommend the E4300 as a stock chip either since it's at the low end of the current C2D chips available but it's a great choice if you wish to overclock. The E6300 is another great chip, but remember a higher FSB is needed if you wish to overclock so more expensive memory and a decent motherboard is needed to achieve the same speeds of an overclocked E4300.

To the OP, if you are looking to keep your CPU budget around $200, I'd wait till Q2 of this year if you can when Intel releases the E6300 and E6400 with another 2MB of cache. Prices will come down across the board and you can really benefit from the extra 2MB of cache.