Hey everybody! I realized today that I will soon need a desktop computer of my own. Essentially, I'm looking for one thing: SPEED.
Of course the computer must be able to handle SC2, but I don't need anything special in terms of graphics or space.
I'm currently looking at 16gb DDR SDRAM, hexa-core processors by AMD, but am open for other options. My price is hopefully under $700.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jul 24 2010, 10:50 pm by Rantent.

I have a quad core 8GB RAM, and I don't have any problems with gaming speed...graphics card, however, could be a lot better.

My lappy has SSD's in Raid0 (which is apparently dangerous for the data, but I back up occasionally) along with a corei5 processor and 4GB DDR3 RAM, and it can be very, very fast. I start up Photoshop in four seconds, two seconds if it's been opened before (without restarting PC), Word 2010 and Visual Studio C++ in 1-2 seconds and Onenote instantly. Windows 7 starts up quickly too, but I never timed it.

However, I don't think you can get that performance for $700. Before Ex does something nice for you, I'd specify minimum hard drive space.

Additionally.. are you sure you want 16GB RAM? It can be useful for certain things, but I don't believe size is what determines speed unless you're actually going to use that 16GB.

Whatever you do. DO NOT make my mistake and figure a processor, ram, and memory are the things you need first. Everywhere there is a possibility to upgrade or change that. Go straight for the best video card you can find for your budget.

... Except that he doesn't have a lot of video needs, just needs to run SCII decently.

Also: Specify what you're going to be using it for. Different tasks have different bottlenecks.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jul 24 2010, 11:41 pm by Centreri.

Music production software is my big thing, as I'm finally getting a synthesizer/sampler that is worth it's salt.
Essentially I want a computer that won't have problems with having 60 or so music tracks playing at once, while at the same time reacting "instantly" to input from external instruments, namely the synth.
I'm currently using Ableton live, which has so far been really cool, but lags my dual core processor it's on considerably.

And no I probably don't need quite that much ram, thats just what I was looking at at the time.

You probably don't need a hexacore processor depending on what software you're using, do you know how many threads the software runs? Also, I've never known music software to use any huge amounts of RAM(at least compared to 3D editing/video), so I'd probably look into a nice sound card, and a newer processor. For a music system running SC2, I see no need to go on the bleeding edge like your saying, heck, you're wasting your money if you're going cutting edge even. I would get about a generation or two back and save yourself a little cash, rather than blowing it all for some hardware that'll just be outdated in 6 months anyway.


Some info we're gonna need:
1. How multi-threaded is your music software?
2. Do you have any hardware already(monitor, keyboard, HDD, etc.)
3. Do you have or can "acquire" an OS?

Basically, with music your focus should probably be on your hard drive speed, so maybe a small SSD for current projects, and a larger one for long-term storage, and a good sound card and speakers/headphones. Other hardware doesn't need to be incredible to deal with sound, since it's a fairly basic process, in fact, hitting the SC2 requirements will probably be harder than hitting your sound software's needs.

EDIT: From reading a bit up on Ableton, it appears that while it claims multiprocessor support, it actually is still having trouble completely implementing it without any glitchiness, so you may want to go with an i5, that way you have the dual-features of multiple cores when you're doing everyday tasks, and when you're doing music editing, if it doesn't work well with the dual-core setup, you can turn that feature off in Ableton, and the i5 will turn on TurboBoost and actually overclock the demanding processor automatically to meet your needs.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jul 25 2010, 5:29 am by Falkoner.

Yeah, I guess more cores wouldn't cut it...

i5 seems good. Thanks.

Would a good sound card do much? I thought they only really dealt with input/output functions.

Ok Now I'm looking at:
a dual core of 3.46 GHz i5
2x2GB DDR3 memory

Speed?

You need a quad core. Multi-threaded applications be damned. If you're doing anything heavy, you'll probably be multi-tasking, so you can multi-thread the good old fashioned way. Having a quad core practically negates any sort of performance hit from a virus scanner in the background while gaming (not ideal example, but everyone has experienced this on a single or dual core). I recommend either a phenom II 955 or i5 750. You can always disable cores or run a program under 1 core with imagecfg.

If you really want fast, you'll learn CUDA or stream and start using your GPU to do the work for you. $700 is awkward for GPUs, since the 460 is too expensive, and the 5770 is too cheap. Get the 5770.

Grab any old seasonic PSU, though for SPEED this doesn't matter (it's quality). You can use this custom google search to search through all the reputable PSU reviewers. I prefer hardwaresecrets, but there's a buttload of PSUs out there. What you're looking for in PSUs is efficiency, safety protection (usually a max power which is over the rated power, but then shuts off to prevent circuit damage), general quality of components (japanese capacitors, usually chemicon), ripple on the 12 V rail (20 mV is god tier, 40 mV is awesome, 60 mV is meh, 80 mV is poor, 120 mV is exploding), and the reviewer's rating of the PSU. Seasonic is the undisputed best in PSU manufacturing, and they sell to corsair, antec, PC Power & Cooling, and others, though those also buy from other companies like CWT. Don't overpower your PSU either, since it's less efficient. The only people who need an 800W power supply are those running dual GPUs or a really heavy fermi system.

Case doesn't matter for speed. See previous recommendation thread for 2 decent cheap cases. Lian Li is best in quality, but there's tons out there, like Cooler Master, and a few others who make excellent cases. You'll usually get what you pay for unless it's Antec.

CPU cooler (you want speed, so you're overclocking, right?) I'd get the scythe mugen, that big hunking noctua DH 14 or whatever, spire thermax eclipse II, or tuniq 120 extreme. There's another one which is really dirt cheap but really really good too, but I forget what the name was, sorry.

For ram, the actual specs don't matter TOO much. Obviously you want faster ram, but there have been tests with low cas RAM and low speeds vs high cas RAM and high speeds, and they performed equally well, meaning it doesn't matter too much. Make sure you get something affordable and with heat spreaders. I've about given up on recommending any sort of DDR3. 4 GB will be plenty, but 8 GB is even better if you can get it. Remember you can always upgrade it. Music can get pretty heavy, as can image editing, but I have yet to come close to using my 3.5 GB.

Optical drive doesn't matter, get a cheap $20 one, try to find a combo deal, since you can get them for free/50% off that way.

HDD is caviar black or spinpoint f3. If you want speed, it's the spinpoint. If you really want speed, check out passmark for SSD listings. ewiz typically has really good deals on hard drives, better than newegg.

Motherboards I recommend are Asus, Gigabyte, MSI, and DFI. Apparently ASRock=Asus, and Biostar has impressed me with their website and support. Foxconn is sort of notorious for burning up CPUs, and ECS is just poor quality. EVGA makes superbly expensive motherboards, but good just the same. This i5/evga combo isn't too bad with the MIR, but you still have to justify spending $60-$40 more on an EVGA board over a cheaper biostar/asus.

If you're working with sound, you'll probably want a sound card, but I'm not an audiophile, and unless you have the speakers to utilize the sound quality, they're mostly worthless.

If you want me or ex to make you a build on newegg, we can.

If you want the system to last more than 4-5 years, I'd recommend against overclocking, however, if you think you'll be upgrading by that point, by all means, overclock the hell out of it, and with an i5, overclock + TurboBoot = Epic.

I've had an E2140 @ 100% OC since I bought it at launch and it isn't gonna stop anytime soon. 4-5 years is not even reasonable as a conservative estimate. And since we're talking speed, I doubt he's going to keep this build 5 years.

As long as you keep it cool, sure, but even then, you can't have had that core for much more than 3 years at this point, so you can't truly use that as evidence of overclocking longetivity.

CPUs are supposed to last 10 years. I can't see overclocking a CPU cutting that lifespan even in half.

btw, it would cost you at least $400 to get 16 GB of RAM.

I'm getting cheapest at $20/GB.

Overclocking increases the voltage, the frequency, or the temperature, which in turn causes faster electromigration, killing the CPU significantly sooner, it's a fairly accepted fact that overclocking cuts down on a CPUs lifespan significantly, and saying it can cut it in half isn't an exaggeration.



Either way, it probably doesn't matter in this case, or most cases, since most people don't want to use a ten year old system anyway.

Newer processors undervolt and underclock when not in use, greatly increasing lifespan. If an overclocked CPU lasts only 5 years, it's still time to upgrade.