A New PC-What Could I Change?

Hi Everyone,

The PC, that I use for FSX is a little bit old an it's components aren't enough for me, as I get quite low FPs, the system is very slow and uncomfortable in use. It's not self build (Dell Inspirion One 2320, All-in-One). Therefore, I decided to get myself an new PC. I haven't got any parts yet.

Here are the Specs:

CPU: I5-4690K

CPU Cooling:beQuiet! Dark Rock 3

GPU:2GB 256-bit GTX760 (ZOTAC)

RAM: Kingston Savage 8GB 1866MHz

Motherboard: MSI Z97 PC Mate

HDD: 1TB Seagate Barracuda

SSD: Two A-Data SP600 256GB SSDs

PSU:Corsair Builder Series CX600 600W

Case: Corsair 200R

Optical Drive: Some Samsung SH-224

OS: Windows 7 64-bit

Now, I'd like you to give me some suggestions about it, what could I save money on (maybe the CPU cooling), what should be upgraded (I think, that the GPU might be a little weak). I want to use addons like PMDG or A2A airplanes. In case of sceneries, I prefer smaller airport sceneries, or ones that cover big areas (ORBX). I want to overclock the CPU to something like 4,4-4,8GHz.

Cheers,

Jan

Hi cavalierjan19,

Sorry, I don't have time to comment fully but, a quick and dirty piece of advice, if you really are intending on overclocking to 4.4 - 4.8 - DON'T COMPROMISE ON THE CPU COOLER.

 

I've read that the Dark Rock 3 is a "very good," if slightly expensive, cooler, but maybe not completely suited for high overclocks... This is not coming from experience though, as I don't have one.

I'm sure others will have varying opinions though.

 

Good luck,

 

E-Buzz :pilot:

Hi E-Buzz,

Well, I chose this cooler, as I though that for such a price I can get something to overclock the CPU and the CPU would work comfortably, not overheat. The question is, should I go for a cheaper cooler or liquid cooler and get rid of one of the SSDs.

BTW

I see you have an i5-4690k overclocked to 4,7GHz. What cooler do you use?

The Intel CPUs have become better at being overclocked. They also tend to run cooler than a AMD CPU does so a good quality air cooler will be fine. FSX isn't as dependent on a GPU as other games so a mid range GPU will give you similar results as the higher priced GPUs. I would look at perhaps getting a Z99 motherboard with the money you save on a GPU. My reasoning behind that is that you need to try and take as much work off the CPU as possible so a better motherboard chipset will aid in that.

I also don't think you will get much of a performance gain in having the type of RAM you have chosen over 1600Mhz CL9 RAM. Again you would get better bang for your buck in other areas.

Having your OS on a SSD is good, unsure why you need 2 SSDs but you wont get a performance gain with having FSX on a SSD over having it on a HDD. Once again the money you save could go on other areas that will give you a performance gain.

Off the top of my head the money you would of saved on those changes I suggested with the RAM and the SSD would cover the price jump from a Z97 to a Z99 board and you would be well on the way to saving for a i7.

Darryl

The best bang for your cooling buck is the Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO at $40 cdn. It does an excellent job on my i5-2500k at 4.5 ghz. Under load the temps run from high 50's to low 60's. Do some measuring to ensure that it will fir in your case.

Hi cavalierjan19,

 

darryl737's advice is solid. He also builds computers so he's got the experience.

abrussell's choice of air cooler is an excellent one.

 

"BTW

I see you have an i5-4690k overclocked to 4,7GHz. What cooler do you use?"

 

Since you asked :),

In my overclocked i5 rig, I currently use the fairly inexpensive Corsair H55 water cooler and it works (for my needs) very well.

As always, YMMV.

But there's a little back-story as to why I ended up still using it - so it's not that I don't recommend you going with the Dark Rock 3 (I'm really hoping someone who is currently using it can chime in) as opinions vary but, I do understand that some reviews say that the mounting hardware may be a bit difficult and better air coolers are out there at lower or similar prices. If you're satisfied that you've done the research and are confident in your choice, who's to say you're wrong? What works for one may not work for another. In my opinion, it's always the end results that count, not speculation. And please remember, my speculation is as someone who doesn't have or use a Dark Rock 3.

I originally went with the H55 because I was overclocking an AMD rig with a locked CPU (non-Black edition) and the H55 was quickly and conveniently available at a local store. The price ($60) was close to another high-end air cooler, the performance was on par or better, and for me, I needed something very quiet. I never hear the fans on that thing and I set it up in a push-pull config (I added another fan for less than $3).

I transferred it to my i5 thinking it was going to be just temporary until I acquired a custom H2O cooler or higher end AIO H2O cooler.

But when I (foolishly, in hind-sight) tried for an overclock with the i5, I hit the 4.7 easily without overheating and have run it almost 24/7 for over 7 months now - stable. Even during hours-long flights with all my addons in FSX. So I thought, why change? For now, anyway ;)

So for me, I subscribe to the notion that $ for $ (or your local currency, as the case may be ;)), water cooling is more effective at a given noise level.

 

Now I understand that water-cooling isn't for everyone - the thought of having some kind of liquid flowing around inside your case with all those (expensive) electrical components, the possibility of said liquid leaking all over those (expensive) components... can be very, very scary. Air-coolers are definitely safer in that aspect.

 

Good luck,

 

E-Buzz :pilot:

Thanks for replying :)

I think I'm going to remove the second SSD. I'm not sure why I chose one. I haven't found any Z99 chipset motherboard suitable (No shipping to the country I live in), nor in US or British shops. The cooler? Perhaps a Thermalright HR-02? The price is decent and it can keep a stressed i5 running on 4,5GHz at 75C. The RAM? Weel, there's something like 3,5-4 Us dollar difference between them, so I think I'll stick with the 1866MHz version.

I think I could also save some more money on the Case, maybe the PSu (but the PSU is an important part, so I actually wouldn't want it changed as much as the Case).

You certainly don't want to compromise on a PSU or a cooler, its one place you don't want to try and save money on. As far as a case goes there are so many on the market and vary so wildly in price that it can be hard to make a choice. Depending on what functions you want on the front and if you are looking at wanting to create a positive, negative, or neutral air pressure in the case, cable management, and if you prefer your PSU mounted at the top or bottom will dictate the case.

If you check out http://www.komputronik.pl they sell Asus X99 motherboards and I don't know Polish at all but I am sure they will sell other 990 rated boards as well.

The problem is that those motherboards use DDR4 RAM only and the price is to high (I aim for something like 110 dollars max.), and the I5 doesn't fit them at all, so I think I'll stick with the Z97.

cavalierjan19,

The x99 boards are the newest ones out and more or less slated for the Intel 5000 series CPUs, and as being the latest stuff, the prices will also tend to be high. Unless you have your eye on "futureproofing" your rig, you might not need one.

For FSX (and trying to be budget-conscious), you could even consider an H97 board, but as I see you say you intend to overclock, a quality Z97 board should suit your needs. As always, YMMV.

 

Now, not trying to add more confusion to the mix but, the motherboard is the "heart" of your system. Some will say it's the CPU. Maybe that's true, and maybe a better description is that the motherboard is what everything will be built upon. It will dictate a lot of what you can and can't do with your system.

The CPU will dictate the ultimate speed (clock speed) but the motherboard is what allows how fast you can go and how well all your peripherals (GPU, other add-in cards, etc.) will be be used.

 

Here's a (hopefully) simple analogy:

Lets take a high-performance car engine, like one used in drag-racing where how fast you can do the quarter-mile is the measure of performance - the lower the elapsed time, the better.

So you put a 1000 horsepower engine in a car that has all of it's components (transmission, driveshaft, rear end differential, suspension, brakes, wheels and tires, etc.) in place that can handle that kind of horsepower without failing. You get in, "put the pedal to the metal," and let's say said car ends up running the quarter-mile in 4 seconds.

 

Now install same engine into the cheapest, non-performance related, car you can find.

 

While the engine can still output 1000 horsepower, you again "put the pedal to the metal."

The transmission, or the driveshaft, or the rear-end, etc., can't handle the power and blows. The engine is still revving, but you're not going anywhere. You never make it to the finish line.

 

Moral of the story: If you intend to overclock, (or probably even if you don't) and want the best performance you can get within your means, research and consider your component choices carefully to aim for balance. Everything does go hand-in-hand. A little more time invested in this research may save you money, headaches, and disappointment in the future.

 

Sorry, but I'm always a bit verbose...

 

Good luck,

 

E-Buzz :pilot:

E-Buzz is correct about motherboards, they do get overlooked now days and are often chosen more for the colour of the heat sinks than what performance you may or may not get from them.

Motherboards from the same family ( Z97 ) but from different manufactures may all overclock but that's where the similarities end. You will not get the same overclock ability or performance across the different manufactures motherboards.

I have always found Asus to be a good overclock motherboard followed by Gigabyte. Both have a great BIOS and both boards run quite cool under load and cope well when you over volt the CPU. Both have good safety measures in place to protect the chipset, GPU and CPU.

Gigabyte has the advantage of having two on board BIOS chips so if one should become corrupted the other will kick in and tend to be cheaper than Asus boards, at least in my country anyway.

But I have found that I can get a higher overclock and a more stable system on the Asus motherboards at a lower voltage.

So its swings and roundabouts with both boards but you wouldn't be disappointed with either choice.

Thanks for the replies.

Well, I think I'm going to stay with the Z97. I've heard that Asus motherboards are good for overclocking, Gigabyte surprised me to be honest. What about ASRock? I've found a few of their motherboards for a decent price, but they have merley two RAM slots. There's one problem I have. I've found a Palit GTX770 only 35-40 dollars more expensive than the 760. If I get myself the GTX770, I'll have to get a 650-800W power supply. There's a Corsair 750W PSU costing some 30 Dollars more. Does anyone think it's worth the money? I've read a test, and it showed that the only weak aspect of the GTX770 comparing to the 760 is power only consumption. Kind of convincing to me.

That's a tough one, is the 770 new or used?, If its the new price then I suspect because they are so close in price that the only difference is that the 770 is factory overclocked hence the more power hungry it is out of the box. If that's the case you will be better off with the cheaper one, I doubt that you would see any difference in either, performance wise, maybe 5 or 10fps over 60fps and anything under 60fps I would say they would be the same. The cost of spending more on a PSU as well as the GPU makes it in my mind not worth it. You would in fact get less performance per dollar than you would for the other GPU.

Yes, That's the problem with the 770. The GTX770 (A new Palit GTX770) is kind of a weird option, but from the tests I read, I thought that the 770 has 10-15% better performance in games (hence that would probably work in FSX). But the PSU is the biggest problem that disqualifies the 770.

I've also considered the 660 and 670. They have lower power consumption and aren't as noisy as the 760, but that's it. Finally, I think the GTX760 is enough. I've laso found a used GTX780 (used for one year) at a price only 25-30$ less than the 760, but I don't trust a used GPU, however for this price, perhaps that's good choice? I'm not sure.

And finally, what about the CPU cooler that I've chosen (Thermalright HR-02 Macho 120 Rev.A)?

And finally, what about the CPU cooler that I've chosen (Thermalright HR-02 Macho 120 Rev.A)?

 

Sorry, I don't know much about this cooler except that I believe it was originally designed to be fan-less. So I guess it follows that adding a fan(s) to it may show increased performance?

 

Hopefully someone who has one, or have run one in the past, will comment for you.

 

Good luck,

 

E-Buzz :pilot: