Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
pabosher

Buying a New PC

Recommended Posts

So i bought a PC

 

I've got this one: http://www.novatech.co.uk/pc/range/novatechblacknta39.html

 

Is it a good one?

 

What it is, is insanely load! I downloaded decibels app on my phone, holding it next on the side of the PC i get around 60dB, is that normal?

 

( it not the big fan at the back, i think its the little square block stuck on the motherboard???? that's making all the noise. i don't know)

 

I'm going to contact novatech customer service see if there's anything I can do to make it quieter, or to replace that part for a quieter one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How are the new AMD processors? I haven't even considered anything other than Intel in years. Used to be an AMD guy but had a few bad experiences and won't go back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been following the CPU market too closely the last couple years, but everything I've heard is that Intel is a better bang for the buck at everything except the lowest end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So i bought a PC

I've got this one: http://www.novatech.co.uk/pc/range/novatechblacknta39.html

Is it a good one?

What it is, is insanely load! I downloaded decibels app on my phone, holding it next on the side of the PC i get around 60dB, is that normal?

( it not the big fan at the back, i think its the little square block stuck on the motherboard???? that's making all the noise. i don't know)

I'm going to contact novatech customer service see if there's anything I can do to make it quieter, or to replace that part for a quieter one.

I don't know huge amounts about computers, but it might be loud due to its location, resulting from bad air circulation; is it jammed in a corner, right up to the wall? There should be plenty of space on all sides.

Heh, I got yelled at last time I got a PC :D! I decided to get a new desktop, and asked if an Alienware X51 would likely run Elite well. SO MANY people told me I was better off building my own system! But the thing had good reviews, and importantly was small and fairly discrete. Plus, I didn't want to faff. I did manage to change my graphics card later on though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, my friends told me to build my own. But....

1) I haven't got a clue what I'm doing

2) I got confirmation on my new job (which is 80% working from home) at 4pm the day before i started. So my first day in the clock actually involved me rushing around buying a PC getting it set up

I'll be moving my 'office' upstairs' when I buy a desk at the weekend. So yeah hopefully it want seem so load when it's under a desk (with plenty of space on each side)

Now I need to buy a bloody laptop as well before Tuesday :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even as a PC building pro, I'm debating between building my own from scratch, or just buying a Dell and putting in a better graphics card. It's only when you get to the high-end gaming stuff that prices for pre-built start getting a bit silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I decided to go ahead and build a new computer since it's been over 5 years now since I built my current one. So far I've ordered most of the components and am off to a great start with every single piece being at least 40% off:

 

Case - $100 $45

500GB Samsung 850 EVO Solid State Drive (with free AC: Syndicate code) - $270 $162

2 X 1TB 7200 RPM HDDs - $200 $104

2 X 8GB DDR3 2400MHz RAM - $227 $87

850W Power Supply - $140 $70

LG Blu Ray Drive - $117 $52

 

The only other components I need to get are the motherboard, CPU, and graphics card. Right now I've got my eye on the I7 6700k and the GTX 980TI and will pull the trigger if I see a good deal pop up. I may end up downgrading the CPU since what I'm looking at is overkill but I'm pretty dead set on that 980TI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have nothing constructive to add except that i feel old

 

I have no idea what new video card tech is called and the hierarchy (the numerical nomenclature has gone bonkers), they ran out of numbers and now are resetting without a clear version control (at least to the uninitiated)

 

Additionally realize my xfire 6870 HD's were ok, but should have gone whole hog instead of half ass twice (2011 timeframe), but looking at the new video cards (980 ti as listed above or a high end amd) i have no idea how i could talk myself (and wife) into jumping into it.  Also see why people just buy a console for $400 and be done with it for years.

 

Especially having just upgraded board, cpu, and ram earlier this year (again should have waited for new processor class  :getmecoat )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the numerical nomenclature on video cards has literally always been bonkers

 

there was never a time when it made sense

 

they reset numbers every few years because reasons

 

the marketing teams for these hardware developers need to be drawn and quartered

 

what i'm saying is i can't help but also go nvidia cause ati/amd still sucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've lost track of AMD's nomenclature (and also hated my experience using an AMD card) but Nvidia's GTX line has been pretty easy to follow for a good number of years now. Each new iteration just goes up by 100 from the previous iteration (mostly). 

  • GTX 400 series - 2010
  • GTX 500 series - 2011
  • GTX 600 series - 2012
  • GTX 700 series - 2013
  • GTX 900 series - 2014/2015 (not sure why they skipped 800)

 

From there, taking the 900 series, 950, 960, 970 and 980 are your lower, medium, medium high, and high end cards. Then the TI version of those cards is usually a bit more powerful and has a bit more memory (for the 980 TI it's 6GB vs the usual 4GB for the 980). 

 

I pretty much just ignore all other graphic card lines at this point. The GTX series seems to have the most consistent nomenclature lately and has been easiest for me to keep track of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so you know the majority of z170 motherboards only support DDR4 memory so if you get that RAM you need to make sure you get one of the very few DDR3 compatible boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, thanks to TheLastBaron's heads up, the i7 6700k is off the table and instead I'm looking at the i7 4790k which seems to be the best option for DDR3 support.

 

But a real question for someone that is more in the know than me: is this just a straight up waste of money and should I just go with a lower end processor? It seems like things have kind of flattened out a lot more over the last several years and it looks like processors from several years ago are still perfectly suited to today's computing needs. My main goal with targeting a higher end CPU is to future proof my system for at least the next 5 years (and hopefully longer) and to make sure I don't end up with a CPU bottleneck in whatever crazy graphics/physics intensive games come out over the next few years. I'm not too concerned with the cost, but at the same time I don't want to waste money on a pricey component that would be completely indistinguishable from a lower end product, even five years down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've lost track of AMD's nomenclature (and also hated my experience using an AMD card) but Nvidia's GTX line has been pretty easy to follow for a good number of years now. Each new iteration just goes up by 100 from the previous iteration (mostly). 

  • GTX 400 series - 2010
  • GTX 500 series - 2011
  • GTX 600 series - 2012
  • GTX 700 series - 2013
  • GTX 900 series - 2014/2015 (not sure why they skipped 800)

 

From there, taking the 900 series, 950, 960, 970 and 980 are your lower, medium, medium high, and high end cards. Then the TI version of those cards is usually a bit more powerful and has a bit more memory (for the 980 TI it's 6GB vs the usual 4GB for the 980). 

 

I pretty much just ignore all other graphic card lines at this point. The GTX series seems to have the most consistent nomenclature lately and has been easiest for me to keep track of.

 

Hey I worked at NVIDIA and can chime in here (since my NDA is long gone)! The numbers are actually similar to how NVIDIA names chips in house, with that first number being the iteration of chip architecture (Fermi, Kepler, Kepler v2, Maxwell, Maxwell v2, etc.). The 700 to 900 difference is actually directly tied into this. NVIDIA launches each new GTX product line with the high end first (*80, *70), and works their way down. Part of this is die size and power draw, the other part is Make That Money.

 

The 700 series is abnormal in this regard! Both 400 and 500 series cards used Fermi arch. 600 and 700 both used Kepler. It stands to follow that 800 and 900 would use Maxwell. BUTTT for reasons (probably tied to mobile but I'm not sure), the GTX 750 actually launched with Maxwell architecture. This was a selling point and everything! It was the first Maxwell card NVIDIA had released, the power/performance was on point for someone looking for a $150 card, etc.

 

NVIDIA skipped 800, and from what I gather that was a combination of Apple/Samsung buying all the available silicon at the time, and also Maxwell being optimized kinda poorly. There was an 800M line released for laptops, but NVIDIA basically skipped 2014 as a "model year." The 980 and 970 dropped in September of 2014, about a year and a half after all 700s had released. So rather than go along with the 800 branding again in 2014/2015, they bumped it up to 900, and that's the first card series with 100% For Real No BS Maxwell arch in all cards. Pascal arch is coming in 2016 (maybe!) in GTX 1000, which I imagine they'll rebrand.

 

GRAPHICS CARDS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent post, thank you! I was wondering what they were going to do when they hit the 1000 series. A GTX 1080 does have a nice ring to it so I hope they stick with the current branding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, thanks to TheLastBaron's heads up, the i7 6700k is off the table and instead I'm looking at the i7 4790k which seems to be the best option for DDR3 support.

 

But a real question for someone that is more in the know than me: is this just a straight up waste of money and should I just go with a lower end processor? It seems like things have kind of flattened out a lot more over the last several years and it looks like processors from several years ago are still perfectly suited to today's computing needs. My main goal with targeting a higher end CPU is to future proof my system for at least the next 5 years (and hopefully longer) and to make sure I don't end up with a CPU bottleneck in whatever crazy graphics/physics intensive games come out over the next few years. I'm not too concerned with the cost, but at the same time I don't want to waste money on a pricey component that would be completely indistinguishable from a lower end product, even five years down the line.

 

I'm still running an AMD FX-6300, a 3 year old CPU that was being beat by multiple Intel options back when I bought it, and I honestly don't see a point in the near future that I will need to replace it (the GPU will need to go before the CPU). Save the money on the CPU, and either just save it or put it towards other components that will pay higher dividends.  Or spend the savings on a quiet cooling system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still running an AMD FX-6300, a 3 year old CPU that was being beat by multiple Intel options back when I bought it, and I honestly don't see a point in the near future that I will need to replace it (the GPU will need to go before the CPU). Save the money on the CPU, and either just save it or put it towards other components that will pay higher dividends.  Or spend the savings on a quiet cooling system.

 

Speaking of which... I have no desire to overclock, but in the past I've always ordered after market coolers out of habit. Is there honestly any noticeable benefit to getting aftermarket cooling stuff aside from getting everything to run super quiet (which probably still makes it worth it in my book)?

 

But yeah, I think on the CPU side I might step it down even further. The more I reason through it, it just kind of seems like a waste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But yeah, I think on the CPU side I might step it down even further. The more I reason through it, it just kind of seems like a waste.

 

The main issue with lowballing the CPU is that, if you guess wrong about your requirements for the next decade or so, it's the most difficult and inconvenient part of your computer to replace (outside of the motherboard, which will also have to be replaced if you're upgrading the CPU).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the NVidia insight!  Perhaps waiting out another year for the 1k series would be best practice, presumably they arent going to do anything wild and a Z97 mobo with PCI-E 3.0 would be fine.

 

 

If you step it down in the same socket (4970K is a LGA1150) at least you could do an upgrade w/o the motherboard replacement.

 

I went with the i7 4970 you are referencing and have been very pleased with it, i wont have to think about overclocking for a while since I am bottle necked currently on the GPU.  

 

 

Even so, the bottleneck doesnt affect hardly any of my current PC usage...but watching people play SW Battlefront and FO4 I know I would be on low res/low graphics to keep up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main issue with lowballing the CPU is that, if you guess wrong about your requirements for the next decade or so, it's the most difficult and inconvenient part of your computer to replace (outside of the motherboard, which will also have to be replaced if you're upgrading the CPU).

 

I build my systems with the intention of upgrading them every 4 years anyways, and I have never hit a CPU bottleneck in that time.  Generally, that 4 year mark is when upgrading is worth it to me.  Not just to run newer games, but because for non-gaming productivity things have improved substantially (faster/more ram, SSDs, supporting higher resolution monitors, etc.) or I figure that components like hard drives are due to be replaced for stability reasons anyways. 

 

That said, I do usually aim for a mid-tier CPU on a motherboard that can support several tiers higher, so that if I were to need to upgrade (or got an upgraded CPU cheap), the system has room to grow if absolutely necessary.  I'd be hesitant about building a socket 1151 system within a few months of it's release anyways.  I prefer to let new hardware have a year or so of public use to shake out some issues before upgrading.  But since my PC doubles as both work and recreation, I care a whole bunch about stability since I cannot afford to have it down for more than a day or two at a time.

 

 

Speaking of which... I have no desire to overclock, but in the past I've always ordered after market coolers out of habit. Is there honestly any noticeable benefit to getting aftermarket cooling stuff aside from getting everything to run super quiet (which probably still makes it worth it in my book)?

But yeah, I think on the CPU side I might step it down even further. The more I reason through it, it just kind of seems like a waste.

I really don't know. I used stock coolers forever, and just started using aftermarket ones on my last two builds (both mine and the lady's current PCs) because I was running into some heat issues with the 6300s. I do know that on my next builds I'll go with quieter cooling options though, as mine is like a jet engine when everything cranks up. The lady's got a water cooler put in it, and I've been very happy with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, on my current computer (built in 2010) I installed an AMD Phenom II 6 core processor that still runs beautifully today and that was about $300 at the time. My totally non-scientific assumption based on that experience is that if I go with a similarly priced CPU on this build, I should be good for at least the next five years. Basically, it sounds like that i7 4970k should fit the bill.

 

Thanks again for all the valuable insight. And especially for saving me all the headaches with having mismatched RAM with my motherboard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not of any importance if you're going for an older cpu, but I the haswell-e and k series skylake chips don't even come with stock coolers anymore (I guess because the idea is anyone buying a multiplier unlocked cpu is going to be using a better cooler).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×