| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Triban
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
Location: Suwon Station
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
eamo
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Location: Shepherd's Bush, 1964.
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:22 am Post subject: |
 |
|
You're right. 'B3' means it has the corrected chips.
Those parts are all good. Go for it.
When you're comparing P67 Asus boards with P67 Gigabyte Boards which are roughly the same price, then there is no bad decision. Both are as good as each other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triban
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
Location: Suwon Station
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eamo
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Location: Shepherd's Bush, 1964.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That case looks fine. A step above the millions of awful 40,000 won cases that really don't give anything more than a place to screw stuff into..
I would recommend, however, stretching your budget a little to a case specialist like Coolermaster or Silverstone.....spend 120,000 to get a case that's a joy to use and will allow your system to run cooler and quieter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triban
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
Location: Suwon Station
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| eamo wrote: |
That case looks fine. A step above the millions of awful 40,000 won cases that really don't give anything more than a place to screw stuff into..
I would recommend, however, stretching your budget a little to a case specialist like Coolermaster or Silverstone.....spend 120,000 to get a case that's a joy to use and will allow your system to run cooler and quieter. |
I can't find a coolermaster on korean websites....and I linked a silverstone earlier but the 3R seems to be the better case with more space and fans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MoneyMike
Joined: 03 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So a P67 mobo should definately say B3 after the name, right? What about the processors themselves, should they now say (B3) as well? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triban
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
Location: Suwon Station
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
The processors won't say B3, just the MOBO.
Also, if I go with a 7200rpm 1TB hdd instead of a ssd will I experience a bottleneck? How much? Just load speed correct, not actual FPS/gameplay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triban
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
Location: Suwon Station
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Should I get a 2x4gb set of CL9 ripjaw 1600 for 156k or 2 separate 4gb sticks of CL9 ripjaw 1333 for 61k each? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vDroop
Joined: 25 Aug 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Get the 1600 mhz sticks if you can afford it and if you want to overclock. There isn't a substantial performance boost but it will make overclocking your CPU less of a headache. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MoneyMike
Joined: 03 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been perusing sites looking at RAM this morning, and I've got a question. What's the difference between the CL9 and CL7 and CL6 G.Skill RAM?
I assume the lower numbers are better, since they're more expensive, but how much of a difference is there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eamo
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Location: Shepherd's Bush, 1964.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MoneyMike wrote: |
I've been perusing sites looking at RAM this morning, and I've got a question. What's the difference between the CL9 and CL7 and CL6 G.Skill RAM?
I assume the lower numbers are better, since they're more expensive, but how much of a difference is there? |
Those are the latency numbers.....lower being better as you say. I don't fully understand the tech behind it.......but it's my impression that a lower latency, which often comes by sacrificing actual mhz speed, can make a system seem more responsive......but IMO it only really can be noticed in benchmarks....not real-world applications.
As for the 8GB of G.Skill 1600mhz RAM in my system......well, If I run the RAM at the full 1600mhz, then I only get CL9 latency.......but if I drop my RAM down to 1333mhz then I can get CL7 latency......and really, for general computing and even gaming, 1333mhz at CL7 is all the RAM performance you need. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vDroop
Joined: 25 Aug 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| eamo wrote: |
| If I run the RAM at the full 1600mhz, then I only get CL9 latency.......but if I drop my RAM down to 1333mhz then I can get CL7 latency......and really, for general computing and even gaming, 1333mhz at CL7 is all the RAM performance you need. |
Yeah but eamo you can manually set your ram timings. It's just part of overclocking. You can get better timings at their full speed if you want to play around in bios a little. 1600mhz is superior in every way for overclocking. And let's face it, overclocking (except for maybe a GPU) is only for benchmarks anyway.
Of course, for "general computing and even gaming" you don't need half the stuff mentioned in this thread. A dual core cpu with 4 gigs of cheap ram will perform the exact same as a quad core with 8 gigs for 99% of games. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eamo
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Location: Shepherd's Bush, 1964.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vDroop wrote: |
| eamo wrote: |
| If I run the RAM at the full 1600mhz, then I only get CL9 latency.......but if I drop my RAM down to 1333mhz then I can get CL7 latency......and really, for general computing and even gaming, 1333mhz at CL7 is all the RAM performance you need. |
Yeah but eamo you can manually set your ram timings. It's just part of overclocking. You can get better timings at their full speed if you want to play around in bios a little. 1600mhz is superior in every way for overclocking. And let's face it, overclocking (except for maybe a GPU) is only for benchmarks anyway.
Of course, for "general computing and even gaming" you don't need half the stuff mentioned in this thread. A dual core cpu with 4 gigs of cheap ram will perform the exact same as a quad core with 8 gigs for 99% of games. |
Sure. After OCing the CPU I'll try to get my RAM timings down manually. Although my mobo seems pretty good at finding the lowest possible timings by itself...I rarely get them any lower than what the mobo has already done.
It's true though......almost all games will be playable with your CPU, GPU and RAM at stock. OCing will usually not make the difference between a game being playable or unplayable with high settings/resolution on your rig.
You can either play Crysis on max or you can't!! OCing isn't going to help much unless you go at it extreme. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MoneyMike
Joined: 03 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmmm, so OC'ing isn't really that beneficial for gaming? I was under the impression that OC'ing your CPU essentially made it a faster CPU. Wouldn't that affect game performance?
I know RAM timings aren't the most important thing in the world, but I thought OC'ing would see at least a small improvement in real world performance. Not so much? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eamo
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Location: Shepherd's Bush, 1964.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MoneyMike wrote: |
Hmmm, so OC'ing isn't really that beneficial for gaming? I was under the impression that OC'ing your CPU essentially made it a faster CPU. Wouldn't that affect game performance?
I know RAM timings aren't the most important thing in the world, but I thought OC'ing would see at least a small improvement in real world performance. Not so much? |
The kind of moderate OCing that guys like us would do might raise your framerates in a game like Crysis from 28 FPS to 30 FPS........not that much. And that would mostly come from the GPU overclock. Not from the CPU OC, which does little to game performance.
To really get a big bump in FPS you need to buy a better GPU! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
