New PC build

[kickinit]

Alright so i'm going to be building a new PC. Basically it will be used for gaming and playing blu rays trying to keep it to $900 but I will be building it myself. Just wondering what you guys think and if I should change anything. It looks like I will be going through may they seem to be the cheapest (even cheaper then ebay) unless anyone knows of anywhere cheaper.

i5-3550 $217
AsRock z77-extreme4 mother board $154
GSkill ripjaws-x 8gb 1600 memory $54
1Gb gigabyte gtx 560 graphics $171
Seagate Barracuda 1Tb $95
Thermaltake litepower 700 $77
Thermaltake commander msII $55
coolmaster hyper 212 evo $39
LG asta blu ray combo $54

I already have windows 7 and will be connecting it to my tv and surround. I will also be getting some fans for the case and any cables that I need to get but won't be including them in the price

That comes to $916 I don't mind spending a bit more then $900 if it means i'll be getting something a lot better for a small price increase. Also is there anything else I should look at getting, I was also considering a solid state drive.

[Kahuna]

Probably be better to post your build specs on Whirlpool.Geeks galore.
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum/7

[Psyber]

I had a bad experience with an AsRock mobo a few years ago - but it was its primarily its RAID function that kept falling over.
It went back to the wholesaler (Altech) for repair twice but was never reliable - it would hold up for a while then die again
Later I tried it in another machine I was building for a mate, not using RAID, but it did not cope with having two separate HDDs in it either.
So, I swore off them and I've stuck to Gigabyte or Intel since, though I had a good run with DSI a few years ago.

SSDs?
I'm waiting for improvements in technology and price.
They still don't seem to handle multiple rewrites and seem to be better in a back up role.
I ran WD Raptors in RAID 0 for a while - on the DSI mobo -and that was impressive for 4 years then one HDD spat the dummy.
Then, I couldn't get a matching HDD. ( If I used RAID again I'd go Raid 5 and buy spare HDDs at the time.)

I'm fond of Silverstone Suscool fans as they are fairly quiet.

My current machine built in 2010 is an i5 760 2.8Ghz on an Intel board, Seagate HDD.
I settled for 2Gb DDR3 RAM as I need a 32 bit OS (W7 professional) for some specialised software I don't want to pay to replace - I'll get more RAM if I ever go 64 bit.

I could upgrade the video from the GTS450 cheaply now, I guess, but I'm not a gamer.

[Westsider]

I had a bad experience with an AsRock mobo a few years ago - but it was its primarily its RAID function that kept falling over.
It went back to the wholesaler (Altech) for repair twice but was never reliable - it would hold up for a while then die again
Later I tried it in another machine I was building for a mate, not using RAID, but it did not cope with having two separate HDDs in it either.
So, I swore off them and I've stuck to Gigabyte or Intel since, though I had a good run with DSI a few years ago.

Agree, Gigabyte all the way

SSDs?
I'm waiting for improvements in technology and price.
They still don't seem to handle multiple rewrites and seem to be better in a back up role.
I ran WD Raptors in RAID 0 for a while and that was impressive for 4 years then spat the dummy.

Uhh what the? SSD's are industry standard now. Even web hosts are looking at them for OS work.

[Psyber]

Uhh what the? SSD's are industry standard now. Even web hosts are looking at them for OS work.

I haven't used one
I'm quoting the reviews I've read - they suggest the issue is that performance degrades over time for this reason.

Here are a couple of cautionary reviews I could find quickly:

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/flash_flood

NAND flash is still a relatively expensive technology, limiting the capacities of solid-state drives and making for a high cost per gigabyte. Some manufacturers have managed to lower the cost of SSDs by using multi-level cell (MLC) technology to cram more bits of data onto a single memory cell. The problem is, MLC tech incurs a performance hit over single-layer cell (SLC) technology. The voltage complexities involved in maintaining the multi-bit cells can significantly slow the speed of write operations. ….

… Finally, SSDs can suffer from inferior random write and sequential write times because the data on an SSD is stored in kilobyte-size blocks. Adding more data to a block is a time-consuming process: The SSD copies the entire contents of the block to RAM, changes the data in the block, erases the original block of data on the SSD, and writes the changed block back to the SSD.

http://ssdflashdrivereviews.com/

However you have to be extremely carefully when purchasing a solid state disk drive as there are lots of factors to take into account. If you get the wrong drive you can end up with:
An SSD that is slower than a rotation hard drive.
An SSD with a bad controller can make your computer stutter.
An SSD that doesn't support important features like S.M.A.R.T., Trim, or a Garbage Collector (required for RAID).
An SSD with cheap flash.
An SSD that you can't apply firmware updates to.
An SSD that may have a comparatively short lifespan.

[Westsider]

You are quoting articles from 2008, 4 freaking years ago.

[dedja]

SSDs are standard issue now ... and relatively cheap.

[Westsider]

Maybe they cause cancer in 0.0001% of albino mice - good reason not to use them

[Psyber]

You are quoting articles from 2008, 4 freaking years ago.

Can you post links to any more recent reviews or articles saying the problems have been solved?
I haven't found them, and until I do I suspect the marketers/distributors are just glossing over the issues.
One Melbourne wholesaler I deal with still only stocks Intel SSDs - despite their generally lower specs - claiming they are the only ones they consider reliable.

[Westsider]

You are quoting articles from 2008, 4 freaking years ago.

Can you post links to any more recent reviews or articles saying the problems have been solved?
I haven't found them, and until I do I suspect the marketers/distributors are just glossing over the issues.
One Melbourne wholesaler I deal with still only stocks Intel SSDs - despite their generally lower specs - claiming they are the only ones they consider reliable.

Why should I? From your previous posts it's quite clear once you have made up your mind, then no amount of documentation proving otherwise will change your mind. You are ignorant.

SSD's are use extensively now for OS storage. In fact most medium-high end computers today come with them as STANDARD! Combined with HDD's for file storage it is a very good combination.

If you are curious about the correct brand or type of SSD, then read this, an article from this year, in fact this month! Fancy that.

http://www.storagereview.com/buying_ssd_brand_matters

[Psyber]

Thank you for the link if not for the inappropriate, rather abusive, first line in your post..

My searches had not turned up this one, which is more positive.
However, it doesn't clearly indicate that the old problems have been cured , or how, but seems to focus on support being provided by the makers.
I do wonder why support is so important if the technology is mature.

No, my mind isn't made up against the technology - I am just cautious about embracing something until the reliability is proven.
As I said, one of my company's regular wholesale suppliers of reliable equipment for professional applications is being cautious too.
Admittedly, we have motivation to be cautious, as our business has been the supply of equipment for the medical, legal, and other professions, where stability and reliability is the core issue.

[Westsider]

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2404258,00.asp

[Psyber]

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2404258,00.asp

Thanks, the later pages of this one were a more useful commentary.
However, there are still issues, and the article does not say the problems my first reference posed no longer exist.

Then there is my personal inclination to want to have some real idea how long something will last - especially if it is expensive to start with..
However, that is a personal issue and we can agree to differ in a friendly way over how long is reasonable.

As far as longevity goes, while it is true that SSDs wear out over time (each cell in a flash memory bank has a limited number of times it can be written and erased), thanks to TRIM technology built into SSDs that dynamically optimizes these read/write cycles, you're more likely to discard the system for obsolescence before you start running into read/write errors. The possible exception are high-end multimedia users like video editors who read and write data constantly, but those users will need the larger capacities of hard drives anyway.

[dedja]

It's a simple equation really.

If you want speed and performance, and are prepared to pay more for it, go the SSD.

If you want capacity and reduced cost, go the HDD.

[Punk Rooster]

Long time listener, first time caller...

Looking to build myself a new machine - home/business use.
Fire away

[Alaska]

At the same time I had a games PC built by MSY with about double the quoted specs "MANGO" is huge for about the same price. Look at the MSY site, be sure what u want and specify and they are good!