rofl cant deside on new hardware

so i tripped and fell over a pile of loot today and have a 4grand spending limit for a pc moniter and so on i want the best amd stuff and a 27ish led moniter i want the best picture i can get 1080p with a rilly good picture. then i want a nice 7.1 channel system that has the clearest sound. i have mouse and keyboard i dont need those. last i need a head set that doesnt hurt my ears and has to be wireless. for the pc i dont want it built i wanta do it my self i dont want watercooling. so please dont link me the stuff off the web pages from all those highend gaming rigs that ppl built for resale.

i know this is a lot but i cant deside
plz use newegg i hate the other distrubuters

amd phenom II x6 or better
and dont go crazy on ram 12 gig is enough and it doesnt have to be 16666666666 or what ever there at now just a good ram that oc able

if you are looking for a top quality 27" then you are only really looking at 2 candidates:

Dell Ultrasharp U2711
or
Apple 27" Cinema Display

both have IPS panels have similar display output and are top quality - the Dell model has more options of connectivity (the apple only has mini dp input)

you would be looking at around the $1,000 mark for either of these.

OMG i love that dell one wow its amazing but would i need 2 lol cuz i run 4 on a 1920 x 1050 and the dell is like 2600x 1440 so is there a lower end moniter with that resolution?

try looking for the Iiyama ProLite B2712HDS 27" - not as good as the IPS screens, but more within your budget :)

my friend has one, and it is a very nice screen for the price

Why does it have to be AMD? What did intel ever do to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roflstomp

amd phenom II x6 or better
and dont go crazy on ram 12 gig is enough and it doesnt have to be 16666666666 or what ever there at now just a good ram that oc able

---

With AMD right now your choices are 8GB or 16GB, not 12GB.

intel > amd

You have the budget for it :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EaTCarbS

intel > amd

You have the budget for it :)

---

Yeah you have the money spend it on the best processor Intel. Amd is for people who are low on cash.

If you truly have $4000 to spend on a setup, wait until the Sandy Bridge platform comes out in Q1 2011 and then get the best stuff
money can buy unless AMD pulls something out of their ass with Bulldozer/Bobcat.

I will have to agree on Intel right now, Thier 6 core CPU is on the next higher level than anything AMD has. You might pay a higher price to start wtih but you will gain a large performance gain.
So a intel 980x an MB 12 gigs a 470 or two if you need more GPU (you might with the 2 big screens) a 120 gig SSD and all the audio and things you want can be done for well under $4k. Otherwise you can play the waiting game to see what the next year's gear shows up to be. If it were me, I would get the thing done for Cata! :D

i dont like intel is y i want amd ive never own an intel due to there problems and i dont understand them either ive been running amd for years and so far only problem is with my old amd i fryed it when the fan died i kinda amd much more reliable and honestly intel isnt worth the extra 600 for a cpu. and a 470 rilly ummm the 285 is still a better card and im thinking ati for a card now i love my new 5770 but i want the nex step up with my new setup.

Well my advise is a bit different then the others, here is the order in which to spend monies:


SSD (get the revo its a PCIe ssd 50G is only $300)
1-2G video card 460 or better (if you go amd I think they have 2G video)
8G Ram (more no longer needed with 50G SSD)
Win7 64bit
X58 motherboard (or p55 or whatever it is) with 920 chip if you go intel

if you go AMD Im not sure but get the motherboard chip with the fastest data trasfer rate between the PCI buss and the ummm well with the ssd on the pci buss that changes a lot of things I need to find out where the DMA controller is. Anyway you don't need a super fast cpu, 3.0GHz is fine and number of cores, in my opinion, is meaningless.

The slowest part of all systems is getting the textures from the wow folder to the video card. So you want the SSD drive (or system ram) and you want a fast PCI path (but the PCI path speed is the same for Intel or AMD .... ), and you want 2G on the video card if possible because then you obviously need to do less transfers. Getting the $300 revo and a 2G video card is your first priority and then I don't think its going to much matter how fast the processor/mb is.

Your GPU will determine your FPS based upon your effects.
Your Ping will determine if your FPS accuratly shows where characters are.
Your GPU/SSD link speed will determine your FPS in areas where a lot of characters are moving around.

Your CPU dosnt do much fo anything that is limited.

I am going to have to pretty much concur with Sam DeathWalker on most of this stuff.

You do need 8 megs, I would get an good intel quad core too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roflstomp

i dont like intel is y i want amd ive never own an intel due to there problems and i dont understand them either ive been running amd for years and so far only problem is with my old amd i fryed it when the fan died i kinda amd much more reliable and honestly intel isnt worth the extra 600 for a cpu. and a 470 rilly ummm the 285 is still a better card and im thinking ati for a card now i love my new 5770 but i want the nex step up with my new setup.

---

I hear you and AMD will be fine. This chart shows what I was saying about CPU tiers. Only CPUs on Tier 1 are Intel. Price do reflect some of the differences but not all.

Tom's Hardware Gaming CPU chart

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roflstomp

i dont like intel is y i want amd ive never own an intel due to there problems and i dont understand them either ive been running amd for years and so far only problem is with my old amd i fryed it when the fan died i kinda amd much more reliable and honestly intel isnt worth the extra 600 for a cpu. .

---

Why the hell are you saying intel CPU's aren't reliable due to problems even though you've never owned one and will never own one due to "problems".

Seriously, what? Oh, and the only time you'll be paying an extra 600 dollars for a processor is if you're a retard and decided to get an unlocked CPU.

I have had zero issues with my i7 920. My motherboard is a different issue (and that issue stems from me switching between motherboards/configuring boot disks.).





WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OO.

ok so i priced a pc out let me know what u think
http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/8434/36640983.png

The money on the processor is a waste but ....

Plus more then 8G in ram seems a waste IF you have the revo but ....


I am a fan of LL cases but the fact there are no air holes on the side panels gives me a little pause. Still the front fan control and the three 120 fans is great, and all aluminum is a big plus for cooling.

I would still take my TT shark case over that one, cause of the real ease in swaping hard drives and the holes in the side.




But thats gonna be a real state of the art system. Might look into an NIC card later, not sure though.

You need a super CPU cooler also, I use TT Big Typhoon but its old in the tooth nowadays.


Boy it sure is misleading but that video card is worse then the 5000 series .....

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3987/a...ange-market/21


The 480 is faster then the 5870 which is faster then then 6870 .... I thought that AMD was winning but I guess in sinlge CPU Nvidia is rulz now.


One would think that the 6870 is the top of the ATI line but its not.



I'd go with a 920 cpu and 8G ram and get some super video card instead



well ok from this list it seems that after you eliminate all the CF and SLI duel cards the 1.5G 480 is the best:

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2...1200,2489.html

Sparkle Calibre X480

• (GTX 480 1536 MB)

No time to read it all but there is a ton of infos on this card here:

http://www.overclock.net/nvidia/8225...-x480-egg.html

Yeah, I've had this for about a week. At stock clock's it's at 35-38c Idle, and 50c under load. Haven't tried overclocking yet, but I'm sure it can like a beast

and it will have lower noise them most other video cards with stock cooling. LoL you just know that a video card with 3 fans on it has to have something going for it... never used that company but ...

People are going for the 6870 as well (I don't think they know about the reviews showing the 480 kicking it) but I think the extra .5G ram makes the 480 better in this case, for wow.



I'm upgrading to a 460 soon but if I thought it would help Id get the sparkle 480 (I just run one character on my main so 460 is fine).




Here cpu cooler with TWO 120 fans cheap too:

http://www.thermaltakeusa.com/Produc...C=1405&ID=1956

Yes, the Gulftown is slightly overkill, but I'm sure you'll get plenty of use out of it, especially if you overclock it with a good cooler.

As Sam said, the 6870 isn't the best of cards, in fact it's part of the lower end of the new series AMD is coming out with. It's sliiiightly better than a 5850, but not as good as a 5870.

GTX 480 vs AMD's 5XXX/6XXX line: great performance wise, at release it was a power hog that ran very hot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam Deathwalker

I'm upgrading to a 460 soon but if I thought it would help Id get the sparkle 480 (I just run one character on my main so 460 is fine).

---

You don't need a 460 for running one character at maximum resolution. You of all people should know this.

im looking at 25 chars one pc will it work and im holding off on the card becauze of nvideas new 570 thats coming out

I see 25 characters on one computer well .... don't expect to tile them no matter what video card you get I bet. No way will a single card render at full size like isboxer does 25 characters. If you play at full screen like I do though (lots of alt/tab though lol).

Oh well ya then sure 24G of ram and the fastest processor you can get....

I thought you were 5 or 10 boxing sry.


My current 9800 1G card isnt getting me 60fps on one character in Dal at max effects so I gonna try 460, its fine everywhere else though. Plus I think its wise to get ready for Cata, who knows what the requirement will be. If I go to the fountain and just spin (meaning all the textures will be loaded for the most part), I'm not getting 60fps on ultra.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roflstomp

im looking at 25 chars one pc will it work and im holding off on the card becauze of nvideas new 570 thats coming out

---

In that case for maximum performance across all clients get three dual-GPU cards. We don't know how cataclysm is going to effect things.

How many monitors were you wanting to run with that many?

Although I don't doubt it technacally fesible to run 25 clients on one computer, and the computer he is planing is state of the art basically there is good reason that I don't run more then 7 clients on a single computer (well besides the fact mine are junk by comparison).

A simple search of this site will see all kinds of complaints about using CF and SLI multiboxing (although many have done it sucessfully).

I just predict that things are not going to go smoothly, sure you have a 500M read / write SSD, and a really nice 25.6G ran buss

http://www.reghardware.com/2008/11/0..._i7/page4.html

You have 36 lanes, each being 500M. The SSD drive takes up one Lane. Lets say you use 2 video cards at 16 lanes each how do you expect a single SSD drive taking up one lane to feed video cards that are capable of taking in 32 lanes of data? Ya the 24G of ram can deliver 51 Lanes (each lane is 500M in PCIe 2.0) but the SSD drive can only deliver 1 lane ..... If you could get all of wow into the 24G of ram maybe but you can't now since 4.0.1 is more then 20G or so, and each client is going to use about 1/2G so with 25 clients you have 12G of ram just for them.

You can LOAD 25 clients but running all 25 in AV for example or even in Dragonblight at even 1/2 of what I can run 36 (on six computers) I really doubt is going to happen.

If wow was optimized for multiboxers, say allowing each client to SHARE textures from system ram instead of requiring each client to operate seperatly of the others, then maybe, I am almost certian wow isnt set up to accomodate boxers in that fashion at this point though.

Hopefully I am wrong but you are asking a LOT of your SSD, even though its the very fastest SSD made.

Maybe if you add more SSD drives but then you won't have slots for a lot of video cards ....

I hardly tax my systems at all I play full screen not tiled. Im asking my computer to render ONE CLIENT at a time only (but I get a good view with 6 montors). I can't do targeted aoe as a result (well I can do 5 at a time but ..), but thats the only thing I am really missing out on. I switch almost instantanously between clients and I play in 1920 X 1200 on all clients.

I wish we had some data on just how much data a single characters textures is then we can get a better feel for whats needed.

For 100 percent sure though you need video cards with 2G or even 4G on them (if they make such a thing), every texture you dont have to go to the SSD for is a speed improvment.


But still with this system I think 10 is going to be really really easy and if it turns out you only need 2 computers for 25 clients then thats not so bad is it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam DeathWalker

I see 25 characters on one computer well .... don't expect to tile them no matter what video card you get I bet. No way will a single card render at full size like isboxer does 25 characters. If you play at full screen like I do though (lots of alt/tab though lol).

---

If he wants to give up mouse broadcasting, all he has to do is turn off Instant Swap and voila, 24 of them can render at 320x240 or something instead of full resolution. That might even be viable for characters without ground-targeted AOE needs. He might have to have swap disabled anyway if he's going for multiple video cards -- see http://isboxer.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2787#p2787 for multiple card caveats. (There is an alternative to disabling swap, by manually adjusting the Window Layout with some Window Style Actions, but it's not for the faint of heart)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam deathwalker

You have 36 lanes, each being 500M. The SSD drive takes up one Lane. Lets say you use 2 video cards at 16 lanes each how do you expect a single SSD drive taking up one lane to feed video cards that are capable of taking in 32 lanes of data? Ya the 24G of ram can deliver 51 Lanes (each lane is 500M in PCIe 2.0) but the SSD drive can only deliver 1 lane ..... If you could get all of wow into the 24G of ram maybe but you can't now since 4.0.1 is more then 20G or so, and each client is going to use about 1/2G so with 25 clients you have 12G of ram just for them.

---

Que? Why are you assuming that we're going to be maxing out the PCIE bus? First off, the SSD rofls has selected is PCIE x4, meaning four lanes, or 2GB/s bandwidth. I don't see wow using up that much bandwidth, even using 25 clients.

Alternately if lanes are that important to you, get a handful of lesser ssds and raid 0 them.

Assuming the use of three multi-gpu cards, we get an (optimum) bandwidth setup of x16/x8/x8, so the first card gets 8GB/s and the other two get 4GB/s. Again, I don't see that getting pushed to the limit. Even accounting for the four "lost" lanes from the card, (we'll just make every card run at x8 for simplicity), we're left with four "open" lanes of bandwidth.

Furthurmore, regarding "sli/cf" configurations, we WON'T be using that. herp derp. We'll simply be using the extra gpus to render extra instances of wow.

Ok, for additional headway, let's just up the ante and the cost by about...2.8k and switch to to 48GB RAM, dual six core processors, and an EVGA SR-2 motherboard.
I think that's a bit much, but...

just 3 moniters and sam wow rilly....... the pc im on now with new v card will run 15 wows and it isnt even half as good and the one i looked up

It's so fun to think about what you could do/buy.

I would still think about multiple dual-GPU cards to increase overall performance rendering.

I agree with u there but some of sans stuff I agree with to nut some he posts is just rediculous

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/forum-31-322.html

new build forum

The RevoDrive family gets its edge by eliminating the SATA II (3Gbps) bottleneck and leveraging a PCIe x4 interface to exploit the full potential of current flash technology, delivering superior speeds over 730MB/s sequential speeds and random small file writes up to 120,000 IOPS, nearly triple the throughput of other high-end SATA based solutions. Like the original RevoDrive, the X2 uses an onboard RAID 0 design, but it also employs four SandForce-1200 controllers versus two in the original to maximize data access and bandwidth.

Although its 4 lanes (I was thinking of the old revo) its still only 730MB/s, thats about 1.5 lanes.



Well if you don't render at full screen with IsBoxer like lax suggests then that is a Huge difference (320 X 240 instead of your full screen resolution). Ya if you give up mouse broadcasting and instant swaping then I am sure you will be fine. Im only talking about when you use IsBoxer in the mode where it renders all the tiles at full resolution. If you render 24 of them at the low resolution you will be fine. Giving up mouse broadcasting is no big deal but instant swaping? I can get to any of my 36 guys in under 2 seconds (7 clicks as fast as I can press the button), isn't that kind of important?

You run 15 tiled with isboxer at full resolution (i.e. instant swaping and mouse broadcasting) with your current system? In a battle ground or Dal. I find that very hard to belive.


Well again I did say it would be nice to know the exact amount of data that is require for textures for a full player character to exactly know what is needed to transfer.

And again I hope I am wrong but I still don't belive you can get textures fast enough at 730MB/s to feed 25 full screen renders, I guess if you had a video card with 3 outputs and takes up one slot, and had 2 or 4 SSD's in the other slots then ya maybe you could.

Quote:

---

Assuming the use of three multi-gpu cards, we get an (optimum) bandwidth setup of x16/x8/x8, so the first card gets 8GB/s and the other two get 4GB/s. Again, I don't see that getting pushed to the limit. Even accounting for the four "lost" lanes from the card, (we'll just make every card run at x8 for simplicity), we're left with four "open" lanes of bandwidth.

---

Its not that you will run out of lanes its that your SSD is going to deliver 730MB/s (1.5 lanes), Sure the video card will take 8GB/s if it is getting its data from the system ram, but thats not going to be the case given the texturs will be on the SSD drive (unless some really good system ram caching is going on). Again the SSD drive is the bottleneck.

Well you can try these video cards the high end has 6 monitor output and 4G on the card:

http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/WORKS...omparison.aspx

This has three outputs but might not support all three (the above chart says 2 but it clearly has 3 outputs and the discription says 3).

http://www.google.com/products/catal...ed=0CCYQ8wIwAw#

The point being if you can get your 3 outputs on one card you might have enough space for more SSD's.


Well $1000 for 4 monitor support and 2G:

http://compare.ebay.com/like/1304404...=263602_304662



The new build forum isn't planning on running 25 clients ....



To get things in perspective although this revo is TONS better then a HDD, and is the best SSD made (well for under $1000) its less then AGP 4X:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_device_bit_rates

730MB/sec is like .75 of AGP 4X.

Thats a FAR cry from the 25.6 GB/sec of the X58 system ram QPI buss.

Like you can see from my other posts previosly I have always said that if you get 24G and can put the entire wow folder in System Ram you will have zero texture lag becuase you have that 25.6GB/sec transfer from system ram to the video card and before 4.0.1 you didnt need an SSD IF you had 24G of ram (and are 5 or 10 boxing). BUT after 4.0.1 we can't get all of wow into the system ram because its to large .....

If you can go to 36 or 48G ram ya ... lol ... but ...

If blizzard would divide up the texture data into low res textures and high rez or maybe by expansion or somehting and say if you are in Wotlk you just load all the Wotlk textures into ram we could get by with 24G.

The cards you linked are firepro cards, essentially better supported/optimized for various tasks vs the consumer cards. Worth it? Depends.

And are you REALLY that concerned that the SSD is going to be your bottleneck? I could see that possibility running 25 clients on one system/drive. In that case why not just go the route of the SR-2/Dual hexes with 48GB ram and do away with the SSD entirely? Or at the least keep your drive image on the SSD and go with a RAMdisk with the extra ram. That's something you've been wanting to do/touting for a while now, no?


Oooh snazzy. I totally didn't notice the firepro card you linked here was single slot. Makes me consider would it really be worth it to have two of those cards vs a dual-GPU/3/6 output card.

The SR-2 is a waste for WoW. The game is not NUMA aware so after about thirty minutes to an hour the performance drops to below what it would be on a cheaper i7 machine. Go with the 980x (or 990x?) and get a high end single video card like the gtx480 or hd5870.

Not sure if the SR-2 will work, yes its 48G ram but I dont think either of the CPU can get to the others ram:

http://ark.intel.com/chipset.aspx?familyID=32423

http://ark.intel.com/inc/images/diagrams/diagram-17.gif

Still about time they use server chips on a gamer board.


This time next year we might be using 8G chips or at least have gamer boards that can take them:

http://www.eio.com/p-22587-super-tal...er-memory.aspx

Then with 48G in ram we can get rid of the bottleneck from the SSD.


Those small fans on the firepro cards gonna be noisey though but could probably build a sound proof box around you computer at those prices.


Hey maybe it is possible: 32G and a PCIe slot:

http://www.tyan.com/product_SKU_spec...&SKU=600000185

Hey this board DOES take 32G (4 8G chips), 2 slots empty but run at 800Mhz max still so what.

Quad Rank
32GB (4x8GB)
800MHz, 1066MHz
800MHz

You need that board and 4 of these:

http://www.tyan.com/support_download...?model=S.S5502

The 8G Kingstons.

Kingston 8GB
4rankREG./ECC RoHS KVR1066D3Q8R7S/8G Hynix H5TQ2G83AFR-H9C
REG./ECC RoHS KVR1066D3Q8R7S/8G


Ok you can get 3 displays from this single slot card and its PCIe-2.0 X 16 which FITS the above motherboard:

http://www.amd.com/us/products/works...ighlights.aspx



There are you are; the whole wow folder in system ram! No SSD needed. Assuming 32G is enough for the wow folder and 25 clients.... gonna be real close though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fleaplus

The SR-2 is a waste for WoW. The game is not NUMA aware so after about thirty minutes to an hour the performance drops to below what it would be on a cheaper i7 machine. Go with the 980x (or 990x?) and get a high end single video card like the gtx480 or hd5870.

---

Read the thread before posting. We're discussing a system for running 25 clients on a single system, not some normal five-boxing rig.

Quote:

---

Not sure if the SR-2 will work, yes its 48G ram but I dont think either of the CPU can get to the others ram:

---

I'm unsure of how that would work or which CPUs get what, I was just assuming you'd get 48GB of ram( assuming 24 per CPU) of system ram available. How would you differentiate between the two banks within the OS anyways?




Here's an idea sam. Buy me a SR-2, 48GB of ram and two hex Xeons and I'll test it out. :D

For now I'll sit behind my idea of maximum performance for a 25 boxing rig accounting for the (undoubted) increase in graphics for cataclysm stands at:
SR-2
Dual Hexes (also for shits n giggles)
48GB ram (20GB RAMdisk for wow, rest for the system)
Either 6 single slots mono-gpu cards or three dual-gpu cards.

Keep in mind I like to be able to switch between any client at any given point in time. But then, rendering power required could be reduced by reducing the size and resolution of windows. As mentioned previously, requirements could be lessened further by eliminating windows swapping.


oh this is so much fun! Now I want to compare parallel computing of wow instances with nvidia's newer lineup vs amds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sajuuk

Read the thread before posting. We're discussing a system for running 25 clients on a single system, not some normal five-boxing rig.

---

You are right. I did only try ten accounts when I was testing WoW on a multiprocessor machine. It is a shame that it did not perform well and almost astonishing that a single processor machine could perform better. It would run wonderful for a good fifteen to thirty minutes but eventually get to the point where the whole system would freeze as it loaded texture data. My friend explained to me that the application has to specifically be coded for NUMA to run properly on these types of systems, or it eventually will start using memory on the wrong processor and end up with a bottleneck in the system bus. I even tried it with an HD5870 in case the FireGL card or drivers might have been causing the problem.

ok guys this is going abit outa what i want i understand im rofl and i love to hear this but it is getting to the point to order my new pc. what i picked out was a base for you guys to help with since i dont know intel and i was going to try it out.

so please go to new egg build a wishlist SS it and post it for me then after you all post it ill look at them and we will discuss together what would be the best single cpu build.

thanks

roflstomp, just make sure whatever computer you buy can run:

http://www.netrover.com/~kingskid/wr...s_Writing.html

lol saying my grammer and spelling is bad lol. btw im on my cell phone so give me alittle break.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roflstomp

ok guys this is going abit outa what i want i understand im rofl and i love to hear this but it is getting to the point to order my new pc. what i picked out was a base for you guys to help with since i dont know intel and i was going to try it out.

so please go to new egg build a wishlist SS it and post it for me then after you all post it ill look at them and we will discuss together what would be the best single cpu build.

thanks

---

In all reality your build will probably work just fine since (I assume) you'll have the extra windows running at a much lower resolution than the main.

yes i will and is the 470 gtx cards better than the ati 6870

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roflstomp

yes i will and is the 470 gtx cards better than the ati 6870

---

I'm unsure. The 6870 is roughly equal to/slightly better than the 5850 as far as I know.