Is this to much?

DST will come around and make it more powerful, for less money.

Great config!! 
My monitor is an ACER AL 2216W and the native mode is 1680 X 1050. Maybe I need to spring for a new monitor, :-)
 I added a couple of things to this config:

Corsair memory
corsair 1000w power supply
Blue ray player (it let me do it)
additional fans
temp display & fan control

Is this a mistake?  Another question, why is noise suppression not available in this config?  Thanks again.

Claude

I forgot to add the new config number - 385407.  Sorry.

DST: U-Da-Man

Ok, I give.  Please don't beat me anymore!

On ram, power supply, optical drive, fans( I did want the cool led fans), and noise suppression I will concede to your expertise.
 
The main reason I wanted the fan control is that it gave me a way to monitor the internal temperature of the components. 

I've always used Nvidia cards so I have some apprehension about going to ATI but the price performance ratio clearly put ATI in the lead.  I am a little concerned that I'll lose  PHYSX processing in some games.  I plan to upgrade my monitor in the next 6 months so that's why I wanted the 5870. 

Is that better?

Claude

right, your gpus temsp and etc can all be veiwed many different ways, you can mintor them with HWMonitor or realtemp

ok so then you upgrading monitor so go with 5870.

I think that is a horrible idea, taking into account that you can't upgrade the cpu with the p55 platform, its basically a dead platform.

plus the i5 sucks at multi gpu. look below, that is with an 870 which is much better then the 750:



in short the gaming performance is not the same, not if you want multi gpu ability.

so lets recap, bad idea for multi gpu, can't upgrade the cpu, don't sound good to me.

also does anybody know why it is that every benchmark with i5 vs i7 done between 750 and 920, is done with the 920 having only 3GB of ram or 4GB vs the 6GB it should have, its at its best when using 3Gb increments, where the i5 has 4GB of ram, which is how its setup to be used, also every test is done at 1600 x 1200, why don't they do 1900 x 1200 and 2560 x 1600 so we can see the real difference, and lastly whey don't they oc the i5 and lets see how it hands with the 920 and then lets test them so we can see the real world use of the chip not just why they decided to do, most of us have 6GB ram, game at 1600 x 1200 and 1900 x 1200.

all the benchmarks I have seen so far were setup to favor the i5.

ok so let me get that straight, he wants you to buy a platform that is very dead since it can't be upgraded. thats called a dead platform.

you want him to be stuck with one gpu because the platform sucks at it.

on top of that he never said he wanted the machine for gaming, he said he wanted a highend machine, a 920 oced here will kick a 750's ass up and down the street in many tasks and in no way shape or form is a 750 with only 4 threads a highend, it won't even take advantage of the win7's performance gain from HT.

telling people to buy a pc that can't have its cpu upgraded, can't do multi gpu properly, is a horrible idea.

why would you tell me to do that for $100 or so differnce?

claude5382 ask yourself this, in 2 or 3 years would you like to have your pc turned into a 6 core cpu with more computing power? in many tasks? and unlike Monstromo I won't pretent to be able to predict the future and what games and apps will come out, so I can't tell you if the 6 core will make a difference in games or not, I do remeber when we had 2 cores everybody said that quad core won't make much of a difference, but put a 920 next to a dual core and you will see 20 to 40% difference in performance in games alone.

both me and justin have build many systems so its not like we are just talking out of air.

I have build many pcs and also everyboyd that knows me here knows that I'm very big on spedning money properly, I dont' call speding less money in teh short run but more money in the long run saving money to get the same perfomrane.

in the big picture with the i5, 3 years down the road, you will either endup with a lesser pc or spend more to get mobo, mobo install and cpu.

sounds to me like you guys assume everybody's pc is only for gaming, you guys also predict the future and decide what power will be needed.


we don't do that here, we make a build that can be upgraded so in teh future you save money and if you need the extra power the option is there for cheap.

I rather upgrade my cpu for $300 in 3 years then to either be stuck with a 750 or spend more money on a mobo and cpu and installation of mobo.

its not a concept its a fact, that is the problem here, you keep offering your opinion and you think the rest of us are offering opinions also, we are not.


you can buy into what ever concept you want, just remember if during the day you happen to think its night time, it does not mean its in fact night time. with 8 threads 920 beasts teh 750 in many benchmarks, encoding, etc, you can ask justing about the performance difference in win7 with 8 threads vs 4 thread also.

this is with an unfair comparison where the 920 had slower ram then the i5 but even with that as you can see the 920 kicks the 750s ass:






so in short the numbers speak for themselves, so what me or anybody else thinks does not matter.

somebody explain to me how being able to upgrade my cpu in 3 years is a sales pitch? again just because you don't think its important it does not mean that its not important to the rest of us, you do understand what is important to you is not necessarily important to us and vise versa right?

the above are simple tasks that any pc users does.


Edited by DST4ME - 17 Feb 2010 at 11:27pm

When I chose my i5-750 over the i7-920 I was thinking that Intel would just come out with something that would make both CPU's irrelevant in 3 years.  I have a hope that the i5-750 will last me up to five years.

This is thrilling, but I have a life outside of this forum.  There is no need to turn a mountain out of every mole hill.  My point is simple and remains valid and I am very cognizant to the point made by Dragoonseal and needlessly repeated by DST4ME. 

ya you just drop in a i7 6 core like the i7 980x or i7 970 6 core which is not going to be an extreme chip like the 980x but it will be 6 core like the 980x and it will have teh same tdp and clock speed as the 980x.

Edited by DST4ME - 18 Feb 2010 at 2:44am

Originally posted by Monstromo You boys need to get your stories straight.  DST4M told me that the i7-920 platform system was only $100 more than a similarly configured i5-750 system and therefore the customer should spend the additional $100 because of the signifficant performance and future upgrade opportunities.   If that was true, then my description of the differential as a regressive pricing structure would be correct.

Call me crazy, but it seems apparent to me that he was just ballparking the $100 figure off the top of his head, or maybe it was even hyperbole, or maybe a little of both. I'm not collaborating stories with him as you suggest, so I couldn't tell you for sure, but that seems like it would be the most obvious answer.


Uh.. I don't really know what to do other than sound like a broken record at this point and repeat what has been said numerous times already. To quote Justin.kerr, Intel's next platform, and platform after that, and platform after that are no mystery, and well documented and common knowledge. Faster, better, higher core count CPUs are coming out for the 1366 socket, not the 1156 socket.

I apologize for breaking up your post so much but I felt there were a lot of issues that needed to be addressed. I'd like to sum everything up and be blunt, especially for others browsing the thread weighing their options who may be getting sidetracked by the misinformation, fanboyism, and rampant venom soaked libel:

A 1156 socket Core i5 system is roughly $168 to $200 cheaper than a 1366 socket Core i7 system. A Core i5 system is slower NOW from lack of hyperthreading, lack of a dedicated northbridge chip, reduced motherboard functionality, less memory channels/bandwith, and issues with overlocking because of the on-die PCIe controler. A Core i5 system is slower LATER from a lack of almost any upgradability whatsoever, not only is it a dead socket with no CPU upgrades but bad SLI/CF support/performance mean you don't benefit from cost efficient SLI/CF configurations and are limited to single video cards. It is only slightly cheaper NOW and has very reduced capabilities, it is much more expensive LATER, to upgrade you have to ditch the whole thing and move up to a new motherboard, CPU, and RAM.

again all you are doing is name calling.

you dont' even understand what you or we are talking about.

I dont' care that you didn't do you homework and could not upgrade your q6600.

as I mentioned the 980x and 970 both are 6cores and boht use 1366 socket, and both will work with current mobos.

in 3 years you can upgrade to one these for dirt cheap.


again people on a budget can't afford to get a new cpu every 3 years, but they would love to be able to get a stronger cpu.

your problem here is that all you offer is your opinions and assumptions and name callilng.

you assume that there is no value to others to be able to upgrade to a 6 core for cheap.

you assume users only use the pc for gaming.

you assume you know what apps. programs and os will be avialbe in 3 years.

you assume you know what every user needs.

you assume everybody is like you and has the same need as you and used the pc as you.

you assume others dont' need to go multi gpu.

that is the problem here, you assume everything.

I said a $100 cause its ballpark, I can config a i7 for cheaper then the difference mentioned.

so good luck to you and anybody that wants to follow all your assumptions.

let me ask you, if anybody listens to you and in 3 years they realize they made a mistake and want to be able to upgrade to a 980x or 970 for other uses, are you gonna pay for their mobo and cpu upgrade and install? the answer is no, so its you that is silly and takeing a gamble with other's money and all based on your assumptions. like below:

The vast majority of people never, ever go all the way to that level. If they don't so what. They aren't trash, stupid morons if they don't empty there bank account in order for bragging rights. Not everybody wants a premier folding home machine or one that runs three or four GPUs and carries a 1000 or more watt PSU.

you assuming people dont game at 2560 x 1600?

you assuming people dont' want to play crysis at that res or lower? with the bells and whistles that you mentioned?

you assume people dont'want folding pcs?

do think you are god? cause you sure know a lot of things about thousands and thousands of people, their needs and their future.

you just need to stop and realize what your needs are has nothing to do with the rest of us. just because you only game on your pc it does not mean that the rest of us do the same, just because you don't see the value in a better cpu, it does not mean that the rest of us don't or won't want to do so.

we showed you i7 build with more ram, better mobo, much better performance then 750 in everything else and you dismiss it.

I have repeatedly asked you to back up what you are saying either with a benchmark where both 750 and 920 have 3GB or 6GB of ram and the same speed ram, so far all I have gotten is bunch of assumptions, name calling and not facts.

every value minded person I know, sees the value in upgrading the cpu in 3 year cause they can't afford to buy a new pc.

teh truth her is that the 750 is perfect for you, the rest of us have different needs and uses for your pc and what works for you has nothing to do with what works for us.

bring your powerful 750 and I will bring a 920, for less then $150, and watch how in every task I will beat your 750, I will be done with my tasks sooner and that means saving time, and time is money. Then in 3 years watch me upgrade to a 6 core for dirt cheap, then watch me get thru the same tasks even faster, saving even more time.

I'm sure time is not money to you and saving it is another silly thing, but thats you, we don't live in your world.

Edited by DST4ME - 18 Feb 2010 at 4:06pm

lol my teacher told me assume is ass u me, so in short when you assume you make and ass out of you and me

instead of all this bs talking, it would be great if he could put forth at least one, just one benchmakr where the 920 and 750 both have 3GB of ram or 6GB and both use the same speed ram also.

talk is cheap, bring forth some facts, with above mentioned requirements.

Edited by DST4ME - 18 Feb 2010 at 4:21pm

Originally posted by DST4ME lol my teacher told me assume is ass u me, so in short when you assume you make and ass out of you and me instead of all this bs talking, it would be great if he could put forth at least one, just one benchmakr where the 920 and 750 both have 3GB of ram or 6GB and both use the same speed ram also. talk is cheap, bring forth some facts, with above mentioned requirements.

Apparently, the name calling is a problem any more for you.  Show me a set of benchmarks were it matters that in gaming with a single GPU solution at 1920X1080 with a single monitor between an i5-750 and a i7-920.  You can't.  Who cares what RAM you have.  Who cares if you have a 32 bit system or a 64 bit system.  This all I have been saying.  You are so desperate to sell i7-920 systems.  It really is pathetic.

Originally posted by Monstromo Originally posted by DST4ME lol my teacher told me assume is ass u me, so in short when you assume you make and ass out of you and me instead of all this bs talking, it would be great if he could put forth at least one, just one benchmakr where the 920 and 750 both have 3GB of ram or 6GB and both use the same speed ram also. talk is cheap, bring forth some facts, with above mentioned requirements. Apparently, the name calling is a problem any more for you.  Show me a set of benchmarks were it matters that in gaming with a single GPU solution at 1920X1080 with a single monitor between an i5-750 and a i7-920.  You can't.  Who cares what RAM you have.  Who cares if you have a 32 bit system or a 64 bit system.  This all I have been saying.  You are so desperate to sell i7-920 systems.  It really is pathetic.

so you want us to disregard that the field is not even and instead you want us to show that even field matters? I don't think so, on planet earth, even field is the basis if you want to prove otherwise then its your burden to prove otherwise and not the other way around.

and again, you don't care what ram you have, most of us do since unlike you we do other things with our pcs.

you don't care about 32bit and 64bit, unlike you we do other things with our pcs where that does matter.

you are the one desperate to sell the 750, asking us assume we know what will happen in teh future thus we know we won't need multi gpu, 64bit os, faster ram, etc.

again, you are the one that just games with his pc and nothing else teh rest of us do things that matters and we don't live in your world and different things matters to your use then yours

--You have plenty of facts that the i5-750 competes well with the i7-920 in games and under the circumstances that I have described. You said yourself that there aren't any fair benches that you have ever seen.

where? show me a benchmark that has the 920 adn 750 with both 3gb of ram or 6GB and the same speed ram for both also. otherwise I got bunch of bs.

most of us here don't ignore the fact that one product has lesser things then the other thus how can you claim an even comparison when the comparison is not even?



Edited by DST4ME - 18 Feb 2010 at 5:09pm